Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Fri 27 Feb 2015, 12:55:54

The original Oil Shock Model with dispersive discovery developed by WebHubbletelescope and presented in The Oil Conundrum is a bit hard for many people to understand, but it is a useful tool for future World output projections of C+C.

http://entroplet.com/ref/foundation/TheOilConundrum.pdf

Link to 700 page pdf above takes a while to download.

I have attempted to simplify the model in a blog post (link below)
http://oilpeakclimate.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-oil-shock-model-with-dispersive.html

A model is presented using a World URR of 2700 Gb (with 500 Gb from oil sands in Canada and Venezuela.)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Paulo1 » Fri 27 Feb 2015, 15:01:30

Man, I don't know how simplified it is Dennis? I have capable math skills and it seems like wading to me, simply because I am a language guy and best communicate and understand concepts that way.

Visuals of past discoveries, overlaid with known URR, trends in modeling, drilling changes, and current useage as well as forcasted use paints a more understandable picture for me than substituting numbers into equations. (For example.....P2=P1+n-e where....)

While I have a somewhat technical background, that model simply doesn't 'speak' to me and I don't want it to if I were to be honest about it.

For me, the story of oil is a story about people and how we live. It is fascinating to imagine it coursing through our veins as it has influenced every aspect of our energy demanding lives. As the soon to be realized declines sets in, the narrative will continue to leap off the page in every way imaginable and in some ways we will not or cannot accept. There will be vast migrations, unending climate change, many losers, and a few winners. Unforseen events, (geo-political events), such is happening in Libya and Nigeria right now, or just about everywhere oil is produced, may absolutely shake production to its very core. Really, one Israli bombing raid on Iran will pretty well plunge us into immediate upheaval.

The point I am trying to make in such a clumsy and infurriating way for pure math thinkers is that the math only works on paper and when all inputs are equal and known. Our dependence on oil, and it's rate of decline and how we use it (life) isn't like that. Just MHO, and no intent to offend.

By the way, I really enjoy your posts and arguments at Ron's cafe!! :)
Paulo1
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun 07 Apr 2013, 15:50:35
Location: East Coast Vancouver Island

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Pops » Fri 27 Feb 2015, 18:12:25

Thanks Dennis, I'm even in worse shape than Paulo because my math skills stop at checkbook balancing. But here is my model for all it's worth

PO=(you can't find it)*(you can't pump it)

With output as such;

Image
(Pops, 2004)

What is different about my model, and if I may say, it's elegance, is that when we've peaked, I can go back and fill in the x & y values. Pretty clever I thought.

:)
(sorry, I'll not mess up your thread any more, LOL)
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Sat 28 Feb 2015, 01:23:23

The straightforward approach is just to convolve the discovery curve with an empirical production curve. What is the rationale for this method (I haven't read WebHubbletelescope's book)?

The extraction rate curve:
Image
looks very similar to the production curve:
Image
up to the present, but is assumed flat in the future. This needs some explanation, since the future extraction rate is an input to the model.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Quinny » Sat 28 Feb 2015, 04:13:17

Thanks
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Mon 02 Mar 2015, 18:16:58

The assumption is that there are limits to how quickly the oil can be extacted. The resources become more difficult to extract over time, and even maintaining a flat extraction rate might be optimistic. If the extraction rate falls, the decline is steeper.
Also note the extraction rate is flat from 1950 to 1960, while output increases. Output is producing reserves times the extraction rate.

We do not know what the future extraction rate will be, we can only guess. So far from 1993 to 2015 it has been increasing. What happens in the future depends on many factors such as oil price and demand for oil. Extraction rates might rise or fall or remain about where they are, my crystal ball is on the fritz so I am unsure :)
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Mon 02 Mar 2015, 18:21:12

Hi Keith,
As we have the empirical production curve and discovery data up to the present, we try to create a model which reproduces the empirical output data, then we can guess what future extraction rates might be and create scenarios for possible future output.
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Mon 02 Mar 2015, 18:36:00

Hi Pops,

Your model is correct in the sense that if we discover 2700 Gb of recoverable reserves of C+C, then we can only pump 2700 Gb of C+C and no more. My model (or really Webhubtelescope's model) shows how the production might play out if oil prices are high enough to justify the assumed extraction rates. Note that this model matches pretty well with Jean Laherrere's 2013 forecast. The difference is that we can play around with future extraction rates to see how this might affect future output.
Through Dec 2014 the world has produced roughly 1250 Gb of C+C so we have about 1450 Gb left to produce if the 2700 Gb estimate of C+C URR by Jean Laherrere is correct. Note that my analysis, using Hubbert Linearization suggests about 3000 Gb for C+C URR and the USGS estimates about 4000 Gb of C+C (including 1000 Gb of extra heavy oil). Decline rates for the model presented are a maximum of 2% per year.
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Fri 13 Mar 2015, 07:58:41

Hi all,

This was also posted at peak oil barrel, I realized there was an error, which is corrected after the link to the excel file at the end of the original post.

http://peakoilbarrel.com/oil-shock-model-dispersive-discovery-simplified/
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Pops » Fri 13 Mar 2015, 10:36:26

Thanks DC, I really was just giving you a ration since I can't follow the maths. I've admired JL for a long time, especially his point that pretending to too much precision is a failing of many models - hence his guess at one point of 3-4 trillion barrels URR - note the large units and no decimals!

But I think you (and web) are right that the most difficult part - aside from knowing the ultimate recoverable - is guessing the economic impact. The task then is merely divining the unknowable and foretelling the unpredictable. LOL
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby phaster » Sun 15 Mar 2015, 20:43:13

Pops wrote:Thanks Dennis, I'm even in worse shape than Paulo because my math skills stop at checkbook balancing. But here is my model for all it's worth

PO=(you can't find it)*(you can't pump it)

With output as such;

Image
(Pops, 2004)

What is different about my model, and if I may say, it's elegance, is that when we've peaked, I can go back and fill in the x & y values. Pretty clever I thought.

:)
(sorry, I'll not mess up your thread any more, LOL)


the basic logic of that "classic" model works, for me...

just hope humanity does not go the way of the dodo bird, or carrier pigeon when it becomes inevitable apparent there is a limit to the amount of "liquid fuels" for that can be extracted from this planet for transportation, manufacturing, ag, etc.
truth is,...

www.ThereIsNoPlanet-B.org
User avatar
phaster
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun 15 Jul 2007, 03:00:00

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby shortonoil » Mon 16 Mar 2015, 12:45:42

If I am reading this right, you assume a URR then use the Shock Model to predict the extraction rate of the assumed URR. Not quit sure what was accomplished here?

URR is a function of price, and production cost. It is fundamentally reliant on the energy dynamics of the petroleum production system; energy is why petroleum is used in the first place. Your function m=k*exp(-k*t) where m=probability that a discovery will become a producing reserve t years after discovery is a restatement of the exponential decline function: Q=Qoe^-kt: where Q equals the amount present at time t; and Qo is the initial quantity. If you are assuming URR to start with, why not use it as Qo and skip the rest of the long drawn out derivation?
User avatar
shortonoil
False ETP Prophet
False ETP Prophet
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 15:39:05

Hi Shortonoil,

The maximum entropy probability distribution in the analysis is used to describe the probablility that it will take x years from the discovery of an oil field to the first production from that field. That function is convolved with a discovery model which is fit to backdated discovery data from Jean Laherrere. The resulting function gives the barrels of new producing reserves which are added to the total producing reserves each year. The 2700 Gb URR estimate by Jean Laherrere is quite conservative in my view.

A Hubbert curve analysis would not allow us to adjust the extraction rates. Using this analysis we can estimate what extraction rates (from producing reserves) were like over the 1960 to 2014 period and we can create scenarios for how output will decline in the future under different extraction rate scenarios for any given URR assumption.

Note that the URR I have used is 2700 Gb, where the USGS estimates technically recoverable resources of 4100 Gb.

If your assumption that petroleum will not be produced if it is an energy carrier proves false. As there are other sources of energy such as coal, natural gas, wind, solar, and nuclear power that can be used in the Petroleum Production system, it is unlikely that oil price will follow the trajectory of your model.
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 16:46:29

As always I admire such modeling efforts even when they are beyond my math skills. But, as pointed out, every model depends on the accuracy of the various assumptions made. IOW if a model is designed correctly it should give a fairly accurate prediction. But only to the level of the accuracy of those assumptions.

And that thusly brings me back to my feelings about models: They are great when one tries to analyze the sensitivity of the model for variations in the range of those assumptions made. IOW there may be 6 key metrics used to input a model. Running multiple times by varying the reasonable ranges of those 6 metrics reveals that errors in 4 of those assumptions result in only minor changes in the model. But two reveal that any inaccuracy by them will yield wildly different model result.

It's a truly great value to know where those sensitive nodes are. But the ability to predict the future? Back to my somewhat off color thought: modeling is a lot like masturbation: there really isn't think wrong with either...as long as you don't start feeling they're the real thing..
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby dcoyne78 » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 18:24:31

Thanks Rockman,

I have no illusions that any model can accurately predict the future.

Based on the assumptions of the model I guess at future extraction rates. Staying the same, increasing or decreasing to see how annual decline rates will play out. In a more recent post I have considered how different URR levels from 3100 Gb to 3700 Gb might play out. See

http://oilpeakclimate.blogspot.com/2015 ... erent.html

Did you see my email?
dcoyne78
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 476
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013, 19:45:15

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Pops » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 19:42:07

Thanks D.C.
Really appreciate your particular projection-sans-prediction style, if that makes sense.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 09 Aug 2016, 11:24:36

Living as we do in such a politically unstable world I am always waiting for the next event and/or war in the Middle East, I think the next one will prove we are at peak. I say that because the world as a whole is getting pretty low on 'spare capacity' outside of storage to make up for any major disruption to supply.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: The Oil Shock Model-Simplified

Unread postby ennui2 » Tue 09 Aug 2016, 13:24:24

pstarr wrote:I consider the world's events now (especially those in the oil producing nations, and in the heavily importing nations like Greece, Italy, Portugal etc.) to be a function of economic-induced peak oil shock. A continuation of the oil-producton plateau which began around 2005. Since then we have dug deeper, gone to distant places, utilized our last magic tricks (fracting) to get at the high-hanging fruit. Well it seems we are on the ends of very fragile branches and they are snapping in mass. :shock:


Yeah, we've heard your schtick many times. You just haven't proven that correlation = causation and restating your conclusion again and again doesn't move the needle.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 10:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Next

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests