Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Michael C. Lynch Thread Pt. 2

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby sjn » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 05:15:52

TonyPrep wrote:
JohnDenver wrote:Oil production *was* roughly 88 mb/d in 2008, as you can see from the IEA stats:
The IEA has 2008 production currently estimated at 86.53 mbpd. The EIA estimates it at 85.38 mbpd. I suppose you could call either of those "roughly" 88 mbpd, if you wanted to believe that Lynch was right (assuming he was talking about the same class of liquids).

That's a chart of World Oil Production, that's C&C not "All Liquids". The clue is in the title, and the fact that C&C production was 60Mbbl/d in 1990. Nice work JD, it looks like Campbell was the one on the money. 8)
User avatar
sjn
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: UK

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby JohnDenver » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 09:55:30

sjn wrote:
TonyPrep wrote:
JohnDenver wrote:Oil production *was* roughly 88 mb/d in 2008, as you can see from the IEA stats:
The IEA has 2008 production currently estimated at 86.53 mbpd. The EIA estimates it at 85.38 mbpd. I suppose you could call either of those "roughly" 88 mbpd, if you wanted to believe that Lynch was right (assuming he was talking about the same class of liquids).

That's a chart of World Oil Production, that's C&C not "All Liquids". The clue is in the title, and the fact that C&C production was 60Mbbl/d in 1990. Nice work JD, it looks like Campbell was the one on the money. 8)


Yes, examining the graph/figures more carefully, I have to concede that you're right. Lynch is talking about C&C. Another clue is the legend item which says "IEA/CC (1996)".

Of course, TheDude's claim that Campbell was "right" is stretching it because Campbell has two predictions on the chart, one of which is off-the-charts wrong. So a reasonable person could argue either way. Personally, I think I'll go with wrong. :)

And isn't this just a pyrrhic victory anyway? Yes, one of Colin's numerous dart throws actually got near the center, for one sub-category of oil that only peak oil nerds pay attention to.

Back here in the real world, the IEA says 2008 "oil production" was 86.5 mbd, and Lynch predicted 2008 "oil production" of roughly 85 mbd according to The Dude's improved chart. Sounds like a bullseye to me. Over the years the definition of oil changed. Liquids are king now.
JohnDenver
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Sun 29 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby AirlinePilot » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 13:46:52

JohnDenver wrote: Over the years the definition of oil changed. Liquids are king now.


Over the years the definitions have changed to mask the reality in which we find ourselves. Face it, it's sugarcoating for the masses. To me it's a small signal of desperation.
User avatar
AirlinePilot
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4378
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South of Atlanta

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby BigTex » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 14:25:45

AirlinePilot wrote:
JohnDenver wrote: Over the years the definition of oil changed. Liquids are king now.


Over the years the definitions have changed to mask the reality in which we find ourselves. Face it, it's sugarcoating for the masses. To me it's a small signal of desperation.


The way that money is devalued is an interesting analog to this process of expanding the definition of oil.

With monetary devaluation, It's still called money and it has the same nominal value, but the underlying process of devaluation is the tip of an iceberg of institutional deterioration.

As AP notes, the mere act of expanding the definition of oil suggests that the old definition was giving us data that we didn't want to see.
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby jeromie » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 20:41:58

The definitions never changed and were always limited to conventional oil. That definition was crude oil generally under API 20 recovered by primary and secondary means. All other oil , including Tertiary recoveries in former conventional oil basins is considered unconventional oil and was not part of the curves presented by Campbell , Deffeyes and others. When these curves were presented 95 % of oil cumulatively produced was conventional oil. For example , Deffeyes uses 1055 bn bbl as cumulative conventional oil extracted. Around the same time as Deffeyes was presenting his prognostications CERA presented the total picture of all oils. Total cumulative production of all oils used by CERA was 1078bn bbl. Within narrow reconciliation limits , cumulative unconventional oil produced was around 23 bn bbl. The CERA numbers aggregated the unconventional oils. They were EOR from former conventional pools, Deepwater, Extra Heavy, Shale and all future discovery. There is some lapping over of a minor nature from gas liquids considered as produced oil and such.

Campell and Roger Bentley allude to this in various writings. A great summary piece of the problem of peak oil is Roger Bentley's intro piece on the Hubbert Peak site.

http://www.hubbertpeak.com/ bentley.

The definitions have always been consistent. When you think about it , only conventional oil could be used in the curves because of the paucity of unconventional production. Hubbert himself only used conventional oils because fifty years ago very little unconventional oil had been produced.

The really big problem in oil is that the jargon is not standardized very well. For most of the history of oil only primary and secondary produced oil was sought. The rest was ignored. So, in short, we have half remaining of what was considered oil plus everything else that was ignored.
jeromie
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed 29 Jul 2009, 14:58:31

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby DantesPeak » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 21:21:25

jeromie - are you associated with Lynch or some type of energy analytical company?
It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
User avatar
DantesPeak
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6277
Joined: Sat 23 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Jersey

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby jeromie » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 21:55:21

No association at all with oil. I am a retired Tax Manager of a large commercial/ industrial construction company. I have long had an interest in energy subjects.

What I posted can be taken as a summary of even Colin Campbell's understanding. This quote is solely to show Campbell's understanding of oil definitions and not the paper he was critiquing . Taken from " An open Letter to Mr. Porter, Author of, " are we running out of oil?" Discussion paper #081 by the American Petroleum Institute " Dated 8 April 1996


The relevant item showing his understanding of oil terminology is....

5. Failure to distinguish conventional and non conventional oil.

" More than 95 % of all oil produced to-date , as well as that to be produced over the next decade or so, is what can be called conventional. Once it has peaked and shortages appear,more non-conventional oil will be produced by tapping large heavy oil deposits,and undertaking more enhanced recovery techniques,infill drilling,etc. But this kind of oil has a very different depletion pattern, rising only slowly to a long low plateau, and is costly to produce, also in environmental terms. It may amount to about half of all production by 2050, but by then the total will be less than half what it is today if the two trillion number consensus number is about correct. We are of course not running out of oil, the question posed in the title:only cheap and abundant supply."


Campbell's two trillion number is that used for plotting peak conventional oil and excludes all other oils a new discoveries. Deffeyes used 2.011 trillion bbl for example of conventional oil.

In the intervening 13 years an awful lot of new facts have come to light. One of the most spectacular is recognition of the Residual Oil Zone in many fields due to tilting in the area.
jeromie
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed 29 Jul 2009, 14:58:31

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby MD » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 22:42:03

jeromie wrote:No association at all with oil. I am a retired Tax Manager of a large commercial/ industrial construction company. I have long had an interest in energy subjects.

.


and very well informed. Thanks for posting and please keep coming.
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby BigTex » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 22:44:23

BTW, jeromie, welcome to the site.

You seem to have sincerely held views, and perhaps you will be able to help move some of the discussions here forward, whether or not you are able to change many minds.

I do think that your point of view needs to be represented in these discussions, though (sort of like the Harlem Globetrotters needed the Washington Generals :-D).

MD beat me to it, but welcome again.
:)
User avatar
BigTex
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3858
Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Graceland

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby jeromie » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 23:21:47

Thank you. Conventional oil has peaked. We are past 50 % of Original Oil In Place recoverable by primary and secondary recovery. That is, known pools only engaged in primary and secondary recovery. The back half of conventional oil recovery should be generally just as cheap, excluding higher maintenance costs, as the first half, Thus, for the next 40 years or so using Campbell's date of 2050, cheap oil will blend with far more expensive Tertiary Recovery oils and all unconventional oils. But, another parameter has entered the picture. One can do almost anything today with natural gas and the world is swimming in unconventional stranded gas. The stuff can be converted to high quality distillate directly at small stranded sites via processes like Syntroleum or massive GTL processes as Chevron Sasol or Shell. In effect, gas could become virtually interchangeable with high grade conventional crudes. The same could soon be said about Syncrude after they finish the Alberta/ Superior pipeline and upgraders now under construction. These process are all talked about as being fundamentally profitable for LNG gas trains at even $5mcf. The GTL processes eat 50 % or thereabouts so the real price is around $10.That is the same as the fundamental price of crude oil per boe according to Fadel Gheit of Oppy in his testimony to Congress a year ago. ( $60)

It is this blending aspect of future oil type prices that got me into the whole problem a dozen years ago. The big guy at work wanted to understand the issue. I usually got tapped for those kinds of assignments. We had oil patch construction operations and the big guy did not want to appear dumb.


Realistically, the focus should really be studied from some new kind of standard. What is bought by the refiners. For example, very heavy oil now has processes that turn heavy to light oil well within the price differential between light oil and heavy oil. One such process , for example is that of Ivanhoe Energy. This is on site and the heat supplied as a by product may be used in SAGD ( Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage) and other heavy oil production processes. A huge payback here is lowered transportation costs, as well.

All in all, just about the most fascinating thing imaginable.
jeromie
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed 29 Jul 2009, 14:58:31

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby DantesPeak » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 23:39:44

MD wrote:
jeromie wrote:No association at all with oil. I am a retired Tax Manager of a large commercial/ industrial construction company. I have long had an interest in energy subjects.

.


and very well informed. Thanks for posting and please keep coming.



Ok, thanks. I just wanted to know if Mr. Lynch had actually returned (and no longer the poster 'spike').

As for myself I never worked for an energy company, just a well known Wall Street firm that traded energy futures and stocks, and a brief time at an international (waterborne) shipping agency.

My WAG is that not only the days of cheap energy are past, but today's energy prices will seem cheap in just a few years. The natural gas situation is somewhat of a short term fluke, ironically caused by over-investment in an energy area thought to be in short supply just two years ago. Mainly I am so pessimistic is that I believe that many companies and governments, by looking at only the marginal costs of increasing oil output in their our situation, are ignoring the global impact of their actions. For example, the US financially subsidizes ethanol, which in the process of making consumes a lot of oil. That oil used to produce ethanol is lost for good, and will not be available in the future. So called great discoveries in Brazil and Central Asia have a very high total cost. A tell tale sign - Curiously the famous "Jack" discovery in the Gulf of Mexico isn't even making much headway. And so on.
It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
User avatar
DantesPeak
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6277
Joined: Sat 23 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: New Jersey

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby Carlhole » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 23:44:55

jeromie wrote:All in all, just about the most fascinating thing imaginable.


How much of all the military activity/pipeline-building in Central Asia do you think is motivated by competition for depleting resources? Or don't you think that depletion has anything to do with it at all?
Carlhole
 

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby TheDude » Thu 27 Aug 2009, 23:55:31

Ditto the welcomes extended by others, jeromie.

Won't the spread narrow of its own accord? This doesn't have to make sense, after all, that's what you get pricing at the margin. Also the fallout of the last year hit oil sands operators heaviest of all, from the sound of things anyway, I'm still waiting for a detailed report on how much production has really been canceled/delayed/curtailed, past the occasional report from Reuters. Somebody published a more meatier rundown a few months ago, but I forgot to bookmark it.

Isn't one of the Midwest US upgrader projects canceled?

These factors make me wonder about unconventional's prospects over the long haul, if we're facing a series of short term cycles of boom and bust. These spikes in price curb demand of course, but the fallout is a bit severe to say the least. Drillers that have posted here (and elsewhere) say that's all part of doing business, but many of these duffers are old, and ready to retire, without much new manpower to fill their shoes. And demand will, you know, demand what it wants.

One thing I've seen is that rather mundane solutions tend to get the job done, often more than flashy stuff. One recent paper pointed out how the Danes have achieved what measure of energy independence they have not from their much vaunted wind farms, but through implementation of cogeneration:Never put off until tomorrow... Exactly how mundane GTL is, now there's a good question. I assume the plants are multi million dollar by definition, does that exclude them? Could we achieve the same end by just not laughing at Obama and keeping our tires inflated? Not wanting to spar politically - at all - but our Dem Pres Elect was right all the way about that.
Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
And let me tell you something: I dig your work.
User avatar
TheDude
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4896
Joined: Thu 06 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 01:23:01

jeromie wrote:Thank you. Conventional oil has peaked. We are past 50 % of Original Oil In Place recoverable by primary and secondary recovery.


Well, we might be sumptin, but we ain't used 50% of OOIP, although maybe when you qualify that with primary and secondary you aren't really referrring to THE OOIP?

You would nearly have to mine, crush and clean the actual grains to get 100% recovery efficiency in a conventional field. Which maybe the tar sands qualify for in some cases, but certainly not conventional oilfields.

This references about 7-8 trillion OOIP.

http://www.spe.org/spe-app/spe/jpt/2006 ... illion.htm

And speculates on the next trillion, which sounds like your comment on primary and secondary recovery, let alone the extreme stuff like mining it.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby Kristen » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 02:56:28

There's no way Lynch indeed " lynched" the peak oil theory. There's really no other logical reason why we have been colonizing the middle east. Not too mention the gas spikes of the last seven years.

We didn't find any weapons and clearly the nations of Iraq and afganistan were never charged with orchestrating the attacks in New York. A good example is if the Klu Klux Klan (KKK), an American minority group, did the same thing in China, would they have a right to overthrow our government?

As far as spectators go, they would have already tried such a scheme.
User avatar
Kristen
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Mon 17 Jul 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby AirlinePilot » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 04:04:26

Welcome jeromie, good to have you aboard.

One of the things I believe will be a major stumbling block to any synthetic operations or GTL/CTL etc is going to be the current paranoia surrounding GW. Its going to be mightily expensive and prohibitive to do anything which liberates lots of carbon. I dont claim it's impossible but the momentum is building to really put the brakes on just this sort of concept.
I think the current price crash since last year has had a major effect on both the NG and Oil industries. We wont really know the extent of the damage until demand comes back with perception of economic growth. That's when we all find out what the present state of depletion is and how long it takes the industry to catch up....or not.

I tend to agree with Dantes view and remain pessimistic about the unconventional possibilities. If crude prices can remain low the impetus wont be there on a large enough scale. I believe we will wait until more significant oil decline sets in to move in the direction you see. Not enough leadership is either aware or willing to move ahead while there still could be some time. In the current economic environment it makes it just that much more difficult.
User avatar
AirlinePilot
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4378
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South of Atlanta

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby Frank » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 08:16:40

AirlinePilot wrote: One of the things I believe will be a major stumbling block to any synthetic operations or GTL/CTL etc is going to be the current paranoia surrounding GW. Its going to be mightily expensive and prohibitive to do anything which liberates lots of carbon. I dont claim it's impossible but the momentum is building to really put the brakes on just this sort of concept.


...as well it should, especially when there's cleaner technologies available and still time to move towards them. Why invest in GTL/CTL etc. when we know that ultimately we need to go in a different direction? If we don't do it now, when will we?

(Not aiming this at you AP, just throwing out a somewhat rhetorical response.)
User avatar
Frank
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Wed 15 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Maine/Nova Scotia

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 09:20:26

Kristen wrote:There's no way Lynch indeed " lynched" the peak oil theory. There's really no other logical reason why we have been colonizing the middle east. Not too mention the gas spikes of the last seven years.


Lynch didn't say anything about "colonizing the Middle East", and I suppose its too much to notice that for all the clamour of "colonizing the Middle East" its unreasonable to mention that we're getting ready to pack up and leave....again,,,,,after having had the run of the place twice now, and we haven't even gotten around to stealing the oil yet.

And gasoline is now cheaper than when peak oil happened in 2005....so while gas spikes are certainly irritating, I'll take a cheaper trend with time any day of the week.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Michael Lynch: New discoveries keep pace with depletion

Unread postby jeromie » Fri 28 Aug 2009, 12:47:53

Of course , we have not used 50 % of OOIP. We have produced about 50 % of that portion of recoverable oil based on a percentage of OOIP that is recoverable by primary and secondary methods of production.

I have an interesting Power Point Presentation used at the 7th Saudi Engineering Conferance at King Saud University a year ago.

One of the lead screens was as follows.

* The average primary recovery rate is around 10-15 % of the Original Oil In place, depending on the oil and rock properties as well as drive mechanism

*The ultimate recovery factor can be increased to around 40% by employing the secondary recovery method


Therefore, oil left in the reservoir after the primary and secondary methods is the potential target of enhanced oil recovery methods
( EOR-methods)


The very next screen presents a graph " EOR Oil Production Worldwide".

United States EOR production starts in 1980 and was 12 % in 2002.

World wide production starts in 1990 at 2 % and is 4 % in 2002.

Absent United States production and the EOR in 2002 outside the US was minimal indeed.

A lot of sources in EOR talk about Ultimate Recovery Ratios of up to 70 % So, using the US average cumulative recovery to date of 33 $ that leaves quite a spread of 37 %. My own view is that North American success in achieving that added 37 % will certainly be at least half as a minimum or 18.5 % and a high level achievement of 90 %. Somewhere in between.

There are factors totally ignored though that might well tend to the upper limit of achievability in North America and not necessarily elsewhere in proportion.

First , the bulk of US early basin production was done in the days of " Rule of Capture". Rule of capture ruinously dissipated primary recovery by loss of pressure. Waterflooding did not make up the difference. Thus, many pools have total cumulative production percentages in the mid twenties/

Second, the now known recoverable oil in Residual Oil Zones may well average half of original pay zone estimates or more. Just for sizing purposes, that would be 16 % of OOIP if cumulative US production of OOIP is 33 %.

No estimates yet reflect the ROZ in recovery numbers according to DOE material , I have read. No estimates , yet reflect State of the Art CO2 recoveries either since the vehicle for raising ROZ oil will be by EOR methods.

Apparently, Iran has now found a multiple level ROZ based on their announcement this past week.

As to unconventional gas, obviously only the " Sweet Spots" will be produced first. That alone would provide generations of gas. I speak here again of North America. Certainly other nations will do the same.
Last edited by jeromie on Fri 28 Aug 2009, 14:28:33, edited 1 time in total.
jeromie
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed 29 Jul 2009, 14:58:31

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests