[asg70]

Rockdock AND peakoilwhen are BOTH wrong.

Oil is not abiotic. There's just more recoverable oil than peakers predicted.

[AdamB]

New annual record supply set : 96.9 Mb/d ave - 2016, previous record 96.6 Mb/d ave 2015
New quarterly record supply set : 97.9 Md/d ave - 2016, previous record 97.4 Mb/d ave 2015

Well...obviously the answer is we just choose to count SOME of the oil, based on color, density, or under who's land it sits (sitting under water doesn't count I think). That is how people have claimed peak oil all those times before, and still think they are right.

Turns out that 42 degree API light sweet crude coming out of the unconventional oi fields of North Dakota isn't the same as 42 degree API light sweet coming out of a field in Texas...well..some claim that, but I don't think they know much about organic chemistry I think.

Rockdoc was beaten by me, an industry outsider, with no XP, with no PHD or degree in oil.

Says you! RockDoc knew Matt Simmons was full of crap and couldn't even regurgitate SPE papers correctly, if he says you were full of the brown stuff, it must be so! But it sounds as though you were both wrong, because real experts said peak oil was 2005 or 2006. Some died suspiciously afterwards, which signifies that they must have been right and were silenced, according to some peak oilers.

[AdamB]

ask rockman or study my sources if you don't trust my word.

Peak oil debunked isn't a reference, it is a blog from someone who knew that peak oil was a crock as it was happening, got banned from this place at one point in time, and decided to lay out why peak oil was wrong where he couldn't be censored. And he was right. Despised at the time.

Plus, if you want to argue with rocdoc, how about you quantify the geologic reasons why you were right and he were wrong, that would be FUN to watch, if only because I'm betting you don't know anything about geology, and your mistake is somehow equating a question that is grounded in economics as needing a geologist to answer it. You aren't even in the right field of science when it comes to this question.

[peakoilwhen]

>says conventional peak is 2005
>posts graph saying conventional peak is 2011

seems legit reasoning.
You haven't changed pstarr

[Cog]

Unconventional oil burns just as bright as the conventional stuff. Who would have thunk it? LOL

[Yoshua]

Conventional crude oil peaked in 2005 and has been on a plateau since then plus minus 4 percent. By keeping the production on a plateau for 12 years there is a enormous risk that the production will fall off the cliff and start to collapse. The plateau will not last forever.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Unconventional oil burns just as bright as the conventional stuff. Who would have thunk it? LOL

So little wonder the consumers using oil products couldn't care less about the source. They just want the products at an affordable price.

And despite the claims of many on this site that oil at current prices is "unaffordable" and will "crush the economy" etc, the world continues to enjoy burning more of it every year even as the global economy continues to slowly grow.

[Cog]

Are those numbers supposed to me something to me? Lottery numbers?

[peakoilwhen]

New annual record supply set : 96.9 Mb/d ave - 2016, previous record 96.6 Mb/d ave 2015
New quarterly record supply set : 97.9 Md/d ave - 2016, previous record 97.4 Mb/d ave 2015

Well...obviously the answer is we just choose to count SOME of the oil, based on color, density, or under who's land it sits (sitting under water doesn't count I think). That is how people have claimed peak oil all those times before, and still think they are right.

Turns out that 42 degree API light sweet crude coming out of the unconventional oi fields of North Dakota isn't the same as 42 degree API light sweet coming out of a field in Texas...well..some claim that, but I don't think they know much about organic chemistry I think.

Still stuck playing the game ' not all oil is equal, but some oils is more equal than others '. Its a typical response by peakers when their PO deadlines fail. Peakers have been doing it for over a hundred years. Move the goalposts by changing what convention is. Used to be surface mining by hand with bucket and spade. That peaked, so went on to pickaxed surface mines, that peaked, so moved onto hand drill mines, that peaked.... etc... so on for >100 years, and now its shale fracking, that too will peak one day, and then the next convention will come and go.
Guess what, the economy or geology doesn't care about conventions of acquisition. The finished products are the same.
Said this many times 5 years ago. No one listened then, no one will listen now. And in 100 years when peakers are hyping the expected year 2105 oil peak, no one will listen there either.

Rockdoc was beaten by me, an industry outsider, with no XP, with no PHD or degree in oil.

Says you! RockDoc knew Matt Simmons was full of crap and couldn't even regurgitate SPE papers correctly, if he says you were full of the brown stuff, it must be so! But it sounds as though you were both wrong, because real experts said peak oil was 2005 or 2006. Some died suspiciously afterwards, which signifies that they must have been right and were silenced, according to some peak oilers.

Choose a high priest, be it RockDoc or Matt Simmons, or whoever. But don't look at the evidence, because then you'll learn to think for yourself.
Given that rockdoc hasn't made an appearance on this thread yet, I'd say the 1st indication is he's running scared, but I'll give him more time.

>" Some died suspiciously ". Complete crap. I was in the middle of the debate in 2005 to 2012. No one died suspiciously. So post evidence or it didn't happen.

[kublikhan]

I'm pleased to see the truth is finally getting out and about. While I've been away from here for the last few years, I've been able to research the origins of oil, and there is no doubt - oil, like all mineral hydrocarbon, is abiotic, created in the deep Earth. It continues to be created in colossal quanitys every day. Geologic peakoil can never happen, because humans cannot extract oil faster than the Earth makes it. There is a greater reserve of oil in the ground today than ever before, and tomorrow there will be more.

If this was true we would be drowning in oil by now. Have you done the math on this? We are extracting about a cubic mile of oil every year. The Earth is a little over 4.5 billion years old. So if the Earth is really creating more oil every year than we are extracting, then just to equal our extraction rate that would be 1 cubic mile every year, or 4.5 billion cubic miles of oil over the age of the earth. That would be an order of magnitude more oil than all of the water on earth. It's more than the entire volume of Earth's crust. I can understand being frustrated at people who "know" oil peaked in 2005, 2010, etc. But latching on to ridiculous theories like abiotic oil is even more erroneous.

[peakoilwhen]

hi kub. nice to read your rational posts again.
you know rockman, arguably the 2nd most respected petrologist on PO.com has converted to abiotic theory. How have you 2 got along recently?

Yes, a cubic mile of oil. Today the deep Earth can replace that. But half a billion years ago it probably wouldn't have. The rate of new mass output has increased greatly in the last hundred million years. Today its more than ever, and continues to increase.

The new material output of the deep Earth is around 2740 cubic miles of mass per year. Not all of it is oil, but a small part is.

[Subjectivist]

I'm pleased to see the truth is finally getting out and about. While I've been away from here for the last few years, I've been able to research the origins of oil, and there is no doubt - oil, like all mineral hydrocarbon, is abiotic, created in the deep Earth. It continues to be created in colossal quanitys every day. Geologic peakoil can never happen, because humans cannot extract oil faster than the Earth makes it. There is a greater reserve of oil in the ground today than ever before, and tomorrow there will be more.

If this was true we would be drowning in oil by now. Have you done the math on this? We are extracting about a cubic mile of oil every year. The Earth is a little over 4.5 billion years old. So if the Earth is really creating more oil every year than we are extracting, then just to equal our extraction rate that would be 1 cubic mile every year, or 4.5 billion cubic miles of oil over the age of the earth. That would be an order of magnitude more oil than all of the water on earth. It's more than the entire volume of Earth's crust. I can understand being frustrated at people who "know" oil peaked in 2005, 2010, etc. But latching on to ridiculous theories like abiotic oil is even more erroneous.

I am not a big beliver in abiotic oil, but the theory of the oil flooded Earth is also goofy. To get oceans of oil there would have to be zero oxygen in the atmosphere, if you had oil all over the air would oxidize it back to water vapor and CO2.

IT doesn't need fire either, the reason LaBrea Tar Pits and that big asphault lake in the Carribean exist is the lighter components have evaporated and oxidized over thousands of years.

[kublikhan]

hi kub. nice to read your rational posts again.
you know rockman, arguably the 2nd most respected petrologist on PO.com has converted to abiotic theory. How have you 2 got along recently?

Yes, a cubic mile of oil. Today the deep Earth can replace that. But half a billion years ago it probably wouldn't have. The rate of new mass output has increased greatly in the last hundred million years. Today its more than ever, and continues to increase.

The new material output of the deep Earth is around 2740 cubic miles of mass per year. Not all of it is oil, but a small part is.

Rockman does not agree with your position that the rate of oil accumulation is high enough to offset our extraction rates. IE, Peak Oil is still a problem regardless of how oil is generated: abiotic or organic.

So, if I understand the RM right, we can look at oil kind of like ground water in California. It doesn't matter if the aquifer is filled solely with "fossil" water that was trapped millennia ago or if it is also recharged yearly via rain, snowmelt, or horizontal groundwater movement from other surface sources. If the reservoir is pumped faster than it replenishes (if it is replenished at all) and eventually depletes to the point you have to back off or stop production, you got a peak water problem, at least in that reservoir, regardless of the "source" of that reservoir's ground water. Add up all the known reservoirs - if the sum total of all is in reduced production status - you got a regional or global peak (fill-in-the-blank) problem.

Hman - Good analogy with one qualification: ground water can replenish in a time scale usefull for humans. Oil, be it abiotic or organic, won't. In none of the MILLIONS of wells drilled in the last hundred years has a single oil reservoir been shown to have accumulated any more recent then a few million years.

Has the danger of Peak Oil passed?

[ROCKMAN]

POW/70 - You're bringing good energy to the game...keep it up. Now pay f*cking attention. LOL.

I think somewhere here there's been a mix up with who said what. But not a big deal. OK, the date of global PO: the Rockman doesn't give a crap because it has little importance. But the wildly volatile events encompassing the Peak Oil Dynamic are very important. Enough said about that here. See details elsewhere if interested.

And now for some hair splitting about. I have an oil field producing 10,000 bopd in Jab 2017. As it depletes production drops to 900 bopd on Jan 2018. Thus the field's PO date is Jan 2017. But during Feb 2018 oil prices crash so by March 2018 I crank my pumps up to 1,100 bopd. That's well above the MER...Maximum Efficient Rate. That's the production rate above which one MIGHT reduce ultimate recovery and perhaps even damage the wells.

But I need the f*cking revenue to pay my bills. So is Jan 2017 the PO date for the field or is it now March 2018. Statistically it's March 2018 but if one takes that info to imply that I will recover more oil from the field you would be wrong. In fact, it might even imply a decrease in ultimate recover. This is a real aspect of current situation and not theoretical: seen it done numerous times in my career.

But the impossible answer is to what degree has happened due to new wells being drilled? IOW how much of the recent oil production increase is from newly discovered reserves and how much from pumping old reserves harder? No way to tell. But the good news: again it still isn't important. Virtually every other factor in the POD has much greater potential impact on our lives then the GPO date. So for Dog's sake stop the f*cking arguments. LOL.

Now abiotic oil. Some time ago the Rockman acknowledged that he had come to the realization that ALL OIL HAS AN ABIOTIC ORIGIN. And why? So we could stop wasting more f*cking time arguing about it just like we were doing over PO dates. LOL. For more then 40 years the Rockman searched for potential oil accumulations. The depths/temperatures of those accumulations would be restricted by physical laws. The geological setting (trap morphology, rock type, etc) also define limits where such accumulations might exist. What has no effect on the location of those potential accumulations is how that oil was created. Which is why the Rockman and the vast majority of explorationists have never been concerned about the creation of oil. Just a very few geologists have been: those exploring in new areas where the presence of oil had yet to be detertmined. They look for SOURCE ROCKS and not the actual accumulations.

This was a hot topic decades ago about the potential off the east coast of the US as well in our Arctic waters. The US govt actually allowed consortiums of companies to drill "strat tests" in those regions for free. The primary goal of those stratigraphic tests was to determine if oil (regardless of its origin) had migrated through those areas. Secondary goal was to determine if rocks capable of accumulating commercial deposits of oil (regardless of its origin) were present in those areas. Not many strat tests are drilled now since few "pioneer plays" remain.

IOW 99.79% of the industry's effort today is focused on finding oil accumulations...regardless of how the oil was created. And 0.19% are focused on finding any undiscovered petroleum basins. And the other 0.02%? They are wasting their time arguing about abiotic oil. LOL.

[peakoilwhen]

I am not a big beliver in abiotic oil, but the theory of the oil flooded Earth is also goofy. To get oceans of oil there would have to be zero oxygen in the atmosphere, if you had oil all over the air would oxidize it back to water vapor and CO2.

Is the theory \ evidence that Titan is flooded with hydrocarbon goofy too?
If Titan can mass produce hydrocarbon seas, so Earth can do something similar. Classic text book oil formations, oil spills, and associated salt has been IDed on Mars too.

Titan, world of hydrocarbon seas and atmosphere.


Mars oil formation


Any oil prospector that dismissed this formation and oils signs on Earth would be fired on the spot

PO.com crops this image, use google Mars to look yourself

Asphalt on Mars


just another oil seep on Mars... amongst thousands


Hydrocarbon is found globally on Pluto. All worlds have potential to mass produce hydrocarbon.

[ROCKMAN]

k - "Rockman does not agree with your position that the rate of oil accumulation is high enough to offset our extraction rates." But the Rockman could be wrong...that did happen once very long ago when he was young and inexperienced. LOL.

But it doesn't matter if oil (abiotic or biotic) is accumulating quickly or not. As explained above we still have to find it. If oil is currently accumulating in any field I'm producing I would know about it. Maintaining a clear picture of where oil is concentrated in a reservoir OVER TIME is the primary job of a PRODUCTION GEOLOGIST as opposed to an exploration geologist. The Rockman has been a production geologist much of his career. And we have some rather sophisticated tech to do it. In fact the Rockman's current hot project (drilling hz wells in a 70 year old oil field) was based solely on his work proving oil existed in areas in the reservoir where others assumed were depleted.

IOW over the last 4 decades the Rockman has found beaucoup oil in areas of reservoirs others thought did not exist. The Rockman's first promotion came in the late 70's for doing such a good job in offshore Louisiana for Mobil Oil. I have to stop typing now...shoulder sore from patting myself on the back.