[Plantagenet]

Hermaphrodite.... I'll own it.....it is completely natural

Yup. About 1 in 2000 people have characteristics of hermaphroditism....the modern PC term is "intersex."

You are good, that is very insightful.

Thank you.

HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!

Cheers!

[ralfy]

Actually, consumption is a peak oil angle, and for obvious reasons: without increasing demand, there will be no need to increase production as much, which means a production peak can be postponed significantly.

That's also why it's a waste of time to discuss these issues with AdamB and others who lack common sense. Best to use the ignore function.

[Tanada]

But I wouldn't have it any other way. By Jove, I am not covetous for gold, Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost; It yearns me not if men my garments wear; Such outward things dwell not in my desires. But if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive.

God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour As one man more methinks would share from me For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more! Rather proclaim it, That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; We would not die in that man's company That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This website is call'd Peak Oil dot com. He that outlives this day, and comes safe home, Will stand a tip-toe when this website is nam'd, And rouse him at the name of peak oil. He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours, And say "To-morrow we feast for Peak Oil dot com." Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars, And say "These wounds I had for Peak Oil dot com." Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember, with advantages, What posts he made on Peak Oil dot com. Then shall our names, Familiar in his mouth as household words—
Plant, Psarr and Onlooker, SeaGypsy and Tanana, Cog and Dissident—Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red. This story shall the good man teach his son;And Peak Oil dot com shall ne'er be forgotten,
From this day to the ending of the world, But we in it shall be rememberèd-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers. We posters at Peak Oil dot com.

Cheers!

Nicely done, William Shakespeare's, Henry V, Act IV Scene iii

[spike]

"Indeed, the number of people and organizations who have embraced the peak oil story grows each year, while the ranks of the denialists steadily shrink." From http://www.resilience.org/stories/2009- ... il-denial/ by Randy Udall.
There have been quite a few disagreements about oil market trends and the outlook, and some of the peak oil 'people' (not sure the appropriate noun, theorists, advocates?) have made thoughtful comments and criticisms, any number of others have been astonishingly certain about the future of oil and seriously derisive of those who disagree. Few have acknowledged that they were wrong or seem to understand why and how they were wrong. Needless to say, those who have been most insulting have generally gone quiet.
The point that I have made repeatedly is that too much of the debate has been dominated by rants and raves, platitudes and anecdotes. It's all too common in policy debates, but we should try to avoid it.

[GHung]

"Indeed, the number of people and organizations who have embraced the peak oil story grows each year, while the ranks of the denialists steadily shrink." From http://www.resilience.org/stories/2009- ... il-denial/ by Randy Udall.
There have been quite a few disagreements about oil market trends and the outlook, and some of the peak oil 'people' (not sure the appropriate noun, theorists, advocates?) have made thoughtful comments and criticisms, any number of others have been astonishingly certain about the future of oil and seriously derisive of those who disagree. Few have acknowledged that they were wrong or seem to understand why and how they were wrong. Needless to say, those who have been most insulting have generally gone quiet.
The point that I have made repeatedly is that too much of the debate has been dominated by rants and raves, platitudes and anecdotes. It's all too common in policy debates, but we should try to avoid it.

An interesting aside from your link:

Yergin and Lynch are simply wrong. Crude-and-condensate are declining, and even if you expand your definition, as CERA does, to include corn ethanol, algal biodiesel, Canadian tar sands, Estonia oil shale, and a million barrels a day of Qatari ethane, global oil production will never exceed 92 million barrels a day. In the past, we have personally challenged Yergin and CERA to a $10,000 bet about peak oil. We reissue that bet here, and extend it to Michael Lynch: to wit, we wager $10,000 that all-liquids production won’t exceed 92 million barrels a day by 2020. This time, we hope Yergin and Lynch will put some money where their mouth is.

I wonder if Yergin or Lynch ever took that bet. Randy died in 2013 so we'll never know what his take is on the LTO boom.

[asg70]

"Indeed, the number of people and organizations who have embraced the peak oil story grows each year, while the ranks of the denialists steadily shrink." From http://www.resilience.org/stories/2009- ... il-denial/ by Randy Udall.

Is there a glitch in the database or something because this article is from 2009. I only see irony here in retrospect.

[Darian S]

We already have. Obviously. You might not remember the heady days when, in it became obvious that the US was growing oil production faster than at any time in its history, these chowderheads were proclaiming an upcoming oil energy crisis. You couldn't have timed the crumbling of their credibility any better. Nowadays, ASPO-USA has become the deniers of the past, shouting into the wind how it isn't fair, that some people could see reality and didn't pay attention to their delusional zealotry instead.

You don't mean the shale revolution? Where wells drop production to a few single digit percent within a few years, and hundreds upon hundreds of new wells need to be constantly brought online one after the other just to maintain production.

See sig line. Geez...do you read ANYTHING posted on this site nowadays? Some of us don't even use the stuff for transport anymore, where have you been living? In a cave?

I've heard some say those electric batteries take more fossil fuel to produce than would be consumed during the lifetime of a conventional automobile, haven't checked if that's true though

I'm a doomer because I think people are unable to understand that our economic paradigm is far closer from a cancer in an organism than from a civilisation on a planet.

What are the lowly beasts of this planet? What is their worth? They can't produce higher art or science, their consciousness pales to ours and they can't enjoy the richness that this world can produce as much as we can.

Humanity is now close to the final levels of technology. Living machinery able to last indefinitely and perform all functions needed by society.

Progress has not been halted by two world wars, it will not be halted now.

Actually, consumption is a peak oil angle, and for obvious reasons: without increasing demand, there will be no need to increase production as much, which means a production peak can be postponed significantly.

The rest of the world wants to be U.S middle class, with their McHouses, their McJobs, and their Mceverything. You can't tell them no, especially when they have nukes.

I don't know how a production peak can be postponed much, they say conventional peaked and has been constantly declining for years now. Shale wells were said to peak and rapidly much more rapidly drop production to a few percent within a few years. So say they supplied say 25% of current oil, that would turn to 2.5% within a few years, only drilling thousands upon thousands of new wells has kept the music going.

Shale wells didn't buy you decades but years.

[marmico]

I wonder if Yergin or Lynch ever took that bet. Randy died in 2013 so we'll never know what his take is on the LTO boom.

spike is Lynch. Udall would have lost the bet on or about his death. Udall was a gentleman and knowing the all liquids production trend would have paid his wager before his death.

Can't say the same for the ETP Bozo.

[dissident]

1) We have passed peak conventional oil around 2007, the reason why we experimented the worst economic crisis since 1929.

Nope. Credit crisis.

So where are all the other such credit crises over the last 70 years? As if a credit crisis is a stand-alone phenomenon.

High gasoline prices killed off the ex-urban development in the USA. It has not recovered. This housing bubble bursting around 2008 was one of the prime "causes" of your "credit crisis".

I dunno where you live but in Northwest Ohio and Southeast Michigan (the west shore of Lake Erie territory) Exurban construction is booming once again. Not to the heights it reached in 2007-2008 but around 2005 levels so far.

Nothing above undermines my point. Gasoline is dirt cheap again so some ex-urban housing construction revival is inevitable since humans never learn. I will claim that if gasoline prices jack up again, then this new housing bubble will implode as well.

None of the rabid claimers about a pure financial crisis emerging out of nothing in 2008 in this thread have produced a single piece of evidence to back up their claims. Only certifiable idiots would expect the current low gasoline prices (or oil prices) to remain in perpetuity. But then it is exactly these people who totally ignore the energy pricing situation in 2007/8.

As to where I live, the gasoline prices have not returned to their 2005 levels and are not that far from the 2008 levels. The urban sprawl really has compacted to more rational corridors considering the ridiculous plans of the early 2000s.

[asg70]

Nothing above undermines my point. Gasoline is dirt cheap again so some ex-urban housing construction revival is inevitable since humans never learn. I will claim that if gasoline prices jack up again, then this new housing bubble will implode as well.

In the grand scheme of things, monthly expenses from long-distance commuting never come close to mortgage payments. ARMs in 2008 shooting up are what caused the foreclosures. That these were centered around exurbs had more to do with the the fact that as population and urbanization continue, the only place left to build new subdivisions is in further and further flung suburbs. Even if the world wanted nice walkable 19th century style Kunstler-villes, mere mortals would never afford to live there. Blame population growth, urbanization, gentrification, but it ain't changing anytime soon. Peakers always overplay the financial burden of living in the exurbs when in reality it's not that big of a deal. The stress from the long commute is worse than the cost.

[AdamB]

Shale wells didn't buy you decades but years.

You need to brush up on your history as to how long shale wells have been producing. Devonian shale to be exact. Doesn't anyone here go to AAPG conferences to get real information anymore, people just say stuff without knowing anything?

http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/pdfz/ ... h.pdf.html

[AdamB]

I wonder if Yergin or Lynch ever took that bet. Randy died in 2013 so we'll never know what his take is on the LTO boom.

spike is Lynch. Udall would have lost the bet on or about his death. Udall was a gentleman and knowing the all liquids production trend would have paid his wager before his death.

Can't say the same for the ETP Bozo.

Is Shorty still welshing?

[spike]

Clarification: the link to the 2009 Udall article was to contrast the then-claim that 'deniers' were vanishing with the current reality that believers are doing so.

[spike]

First. theoilage.org is still active, although they mainly publish articles/journals. Second, Steve Andrews at some point had extended the $10k bet to me for, I think it was, 95 mb/d, but by the time I got around to considering it, it had become so clear that I would win it didn't seem fair. Matt Simmons and I had some wagers (with one of his friends). The only one that was really peak oil related was whether C+C would ever surpass the May 2005 'peak' that Matt called. When I pointed out to him we had passed that (2007, I think) he claimed the numbers would be revised downwards and passed before the resolution became clear. It was not a large wager and I wouldn't bother his family claiming it.
Funny thing is that I keep finding posts in various places over the years claiming to have debated and defeated me, or to have refuted my work, but I can't find any substance behind it. (Sometimes don't know the pen name being used.) But the core arguments against the early work still stand: oil production trends in a field, country or region are not symmetrical, and do not follow a bell curve. The peak is not at the midpoint, and does not mean half of the resource base has been produced. Many factors besides geology affect production trends, and the trend cannot simply be extrapolated. The resource base is much bigger than 2.5 trillion recoverable, with most recent estimates being around 3.5-4 trillion which means (with a 35% recovery factor) that oil-in-place is above 10 trillion. Technology is improving recovery rates, not accelerating production.
Most of the problems described by US peak oilers, focusing on the above-ground elements, are real, but are not new and there is no reason to assume they won't be overcome in the future, as in the past. Mike Lynch aka Spike the Evil Vampire (according to Oxford)

[dissident]

First. theoilage.org is still active, although they mainly publish articles/journals. Second, Steve Andrews at some point had extended the $10k bet to me for, I think it was, 95 mb/d, but by the time I got around to considering it, it had become so clear that I would win it didn't seem fair. Matt Simmons and I had some wagers (with one of his friends). The only one that was really peak oil related was whether C+C would ever surpass the May 2005 'peak' that Matt called. When I pointed out to him we had passed that (2007, I think) he claimed the numbers would be revised downwards and passed before the resolution became clear. It was not a large wager and I wouldn't bother his family claiming it.
Funny thing is that I keep finding posts in various places over the years claiming to have debated and defeated me, or to have refuted my work, but I can't find any substance behind it. (Sometimes don't know the pen name being used.) But the core arguments against the early work still stand: oil production trends in a field, country or region are not symmetrical, and do not follow a bell curve. The peak is not at the midpoint, and does not mean half of the resource base has been produced. Many factors besides geology affect production trends, and the trend cannot simply be extrapolated. The resource base is much bigger than 2.5 trillion recoverable, with most recent estimates being around 3.5-4 trillion which means (with a 35% recovery factor) that oil-in-place is above 10 trillion. Technology is improving recovery rates, not accelerating production.
Most of the problems described by US peak oilers, focusing on the above-ground elements, are real, but are not new and there is no reason to assume they won't be overcome in the future, as in the past. Mike Lynch aka Spike the Evil Vampire (according to Oxford)

The symmetry aspect is what the cornucopian ninnies utterly fail to grasp. We are in a regime where ever-increasing demand is skewing the production curve. The all-time global production curve can only be a symmetric Gaussian-like distribution if demand falls off after some peak likely not overlapping the production peak. This way residual reserves are developed progressively slower in a pattern mirroring history (the field development around 1900 was much smaller than today). Instead what we have is the future tail being compacted towards the present by full-bore field development extending into the dregs (e.g. Bakken). This demand-driven skewing produces a plateau that will transition into a cliff collapse instead of a gradual tail attenuation.

So all the smug pronouncements about how "peak oil" is dead are plainly retarded. Nobody had a clue that they were dead passengers riding on the Titanic. Humans are incapable of properly responding to delayed reaction cataclysms. They can only respond to immediate pain stimulus. The vaunted human intelligence is a bottomless reservoir for denial and delusion.

[asg70]

Wow, I just read the myriad definitions of hermaphrodite...That's scary

I am a 100% male person who likes music and wild flowers. Get over it

Here is the proper term for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgyny

Peak oil is dead alright.


Talk about topic drift.

[AdamB]

So all the smug pronouncements about how "peak oil" is dead are plainly retarded.

As are the strawmen assigning "peak oil is dead" when THIS was peak oil...and for some reason...didn't seem to happen as claimed? THAT peak oil IS dead, but the zealots have a tough time admitting that their church led them astray.

Nobody had a clue that they were dead passengers riding on the Titanic. Humans are incapable of properly responding to delayed reaction cataclysms. They can only respond to immediate pain stimulus. The vaunted human intelligence is a bottomless reservoir for denial and delusion.

Which has nothing to do with peak oil, but your misanthropy is also a common part of the peak oil religion.