The US Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) Thread (merg

[Pablo2079]

They do the switch from barrels to gallons to barrels in the document. That should help muddy the water.

The info on Oil Shale seems particulary optimistic.

[Bas]

Such a peak may be involuntary if supply is unable to keep up with growing demand. Alternatively, a production peak could be brought about by voluntary reductions in oil consumption before physical limits to continued supply growth kick in

BWAHAHAHahaha!

[killJOY]

Summary:

"Peak oil is coming. The timing is very uncertain. This could be very bad. We need to find ways to keep things running as they are."

I don't see anything new or interesting here. I'm going to re-read it tonight.

[Leanan]

EB has the highlights:

http://energybulletin.net/27919.html

[simontay78]

Nasdaq Article on Gao's Report

US Auditor: Energy Dept Should Develop Plan For Peak Oil Era

By Ian Talley, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Department of Energy and other federal agencies need to develop a strategy to mitigate the effects of a peak in oil production, which studies show could occur by 2040, a federal oversight body said Thursday.

While there was a great deal of uncertainty over the timing of peak oil because members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries don't open up their crude reserves for audit, the U.S. would be one of the hardest hit by a such a peak due to the nation's dependency on oil for transportation, according to a report issued by the Government Accountability Office.

more at Nasdaq Article on Gao's Report

Hey...I found out that Nasdaq's article had somehow changed the tone of Gao's report...2040? haa...Energybulletin version is better.

Congress' attention to the potential problem of peak oil illustrates how worries over energy prices have come to the forefront, especially after gasoline prices rose past $3 a gallon in many parts of the nation last year. The GAO recommendations come amid other government initiatives, such as targets for biofuel consumption, aimed at reducing U.S. dependency on crude.

Targets for Biofuel consumption?? Very bad reporting indeed...the energy bulletin report shows much more substance.

[simontay78]

United Press International report on Gao's finding is better but energy bulletin version is much more detailed.

The GAO report also says the push toward alternative fuels and transportation technologies face challenges, including cost, that may hurt their ability to mitigate the consequences of a decline in production.

"For example, although corn ethanol production is technically feasible, it is more expensive to produce than gasoline and will require costly investments in infrastructure, such as pipelines and storage tanks, before it can become widely available as a primary fuel," it says.

It notes that key alternative technologies supply only about 1 percent of U.S. consumption of petroleum products, and by 2015, they could displace 4 percent of projected U.S. annual consumption.

Gao's Report by Energy Bulletin...

[Leanan]

The report is now up at the official GAO site:

http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/pastweek.html

You can download an abstract and highlights, as well as the full report.

[seldom_seen]

studies show could occur by 2040

I think we need a name for the common occurrence of authors writing about peak oil to recognize peak oil but conclude that its arrival date does not fall within the lifespan of the author.

[MonteQuest]

CRUDE OIL:Uncertainty about Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a Peak and Decline in Oil Production

The U.S. economy depends heavily on oil, particularly in the transportation sector. World oil production has been running at near capacity to meet demand, pushing prices upward. Concerns about meeting increasing demand with finite resources have renewed interest in an old question: How long can the oil supply expand before reaching a maximum level of production—a peak—from which it can only decline?

GAO (1) examined when oil production could peak, (2) assessed the potential for transportation technologies to mitigate the consequences of a peak in oil production, and (3) examined federal agency efforts that could reduce uncertainty about the timing of a peak or mitigate the consequences. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed studies, convened an expert panel, and consulted agency officials.

What GAO Found

Most studies estimate that oil production will peak sometime between now and 2040. This range of estimates is wide because the timing of the peak depends on multiple, uncertain factors that will help determine how quickly the oil remaining in the ground is used, including the amount of oil still in the ground; how much of that oil can ultimately be produced given technological, cost, and environmental challenges as well as potentially unfavorable political and investment conditions in some countries where oil is located; and future global demand for oil. Demand for oil will, in turn, be influenced by global economic growth and may be affected by government policies on the environment and climate change and consumer choices about conservation.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07283.pdf

[Loderunner]

There was really no talk about conservation. They are basically going with the assumption that alternatives will simply replace all the oil we currently use. That it's only a matter of timing, and not to worry, you can still have your suburban lifestyle. There were really no details explaining the enormity of the problem.

Coincidentally, oil is now up to $2.01 to $66.09 as I write this.

[MonteQuest]

The report is now up at the official GAO site:

http://www.gao.gov/docsearch/pastweek.html

You can download an abstract and highlights, as well as the full report.

I have added this .pdf file report to the list at the top of the Peak Oil Discussion Forum.

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic27958.html

Detailed critiques of this report would be best posted there for newcomers to the site.

[MonteQuest]

Cliffnotes version from EnergyBulletin.net of the 82-page report.

GAO: U.S. needs a peak oil strategy

http://energybulletin.net/27919.html

[killJOY]

1. There is no attempt in this report to enlighten the reader to the difference between "reserves" (how much oil in the ground) and anticipated RATES OF EXTRACTION. The reserves fallacy quietly rules.

2. There is no mention of the problems of GROWTH. Future growth is simply assumed and not counted as part and parcel of the problem.

3. There is no mention that although EOR (enhanced oil recovery) accounts for about 12% of US production, EOR HAS NOT REVERSED THE DECLINE IN THE US.

4. Definite supply side bias. Albert Bartlett's ironic words quietly haunt me: "The faster we extract the oil and burn it, the better off we'll be."

5. Natural gas peak and decline is simply IGNORED--even in the section about GTL.

6. Any studies by the near-term peakers--Deffeyes, Campbell, Bahktiari, Jeffrey Brown, et cetera--are simply ignored in the body of the text (although, interestingly, Richard Duncan appears in one note).

7. I simply cannot get over the fact that natural gas supply decline in the us is IGNORED.

There is nothing here to incite interest or action, I'm sorry to say.

[chuck6877]

From the GAO study:

In addition, in response to growing peak oil concerns, DOE asked the National Petroleum Council to study peak oil issues. The study is expected to be completed by June 2007.

So we'll have to look forward to the National Petroleum Council study in June 2007 now I guess.

This one is a major disappointment.

Chuck

[Jack]

Now, KillJOY - you know we can't upset the proles or outer party members. That would be double-plus ungood.

Anyone doing that would need to report to Mini-Love for treatment, just like a certain Winston Smith. And you know what happened to him.

[pup55]

Well, let's see:

Appendices III and IV detail the potential increases in nonconventional supply, and also possible transportation alternatives, etc. as follows:

Code: Select all

Item   Effect on Production/Consumption   page
Enhanced Oil Recovery   1 mbpd by 2015, 2.5 mbpd by 2025   54
Deepwater Drilling   .7 mbpd by 2015   56
Oil Sands   1.9 mbpd by 2030   57
Heavy Oil    50,000 bpd in 5 years   59
Oil Shale   1 mbpd by 2015    60
Ethanol   9-18 billion gallons by 2015, 60 billion gal by 2025   63
Biodiesel   increase 2.5 billion gallons by 2015   64
Coal GTL   80K bpd by 2015, 1.8 mbpd by 2030   65
Biomass GTL   1.4 mbpd by 2030    (none by 2015)   66
Natural Gas displacement   1500 million gallons per year (current)   67
Advanced Vehicle Technologies   20K b/d by 2010, 1.07 mbpd by 2025   68
Hydrogen vehicles   .28 mbpd by 2025   70

So if everything goes perfectly, we might be able to find another 6-7 mbpd by 2025-2030 time frame using the above technology stuff and nonconventional supplies.

It also says that the EIA thinks consumption will increase about 7 mbpd by that time, to 27 mbpd. If you do the calculation on this, it means they are assuming only 1.1% annual demand growth. Thus far this year, the reality has been more like 2.5-3.5% most of the time.

So this means that if existing production constant (which it's not) and demand growth being about half of what it is, we might be close to avoiding any sort of shortage situation in that time frame.

So it never does come out and say "if oil peaks in this time frame we are hosed" but in essence, this is what the numbers say, because there is no way to scale up the alternatives fast enough.

The bibliography is on page 53, by the way, and includes all of the PO regulars, balanced by a similar number of cornucopians.

[dinopello]

From the GAO study:

In addition, in response to growing peak oil concerns, DOE asked the National Petroleum Council to study peak oil issues. The study is expected to be completed by June 2007.

So we'll have to look forward to the National Petroleum Council study in June 2007 now I guess.

This one is a major disappointment.

Chuck

Yea, I would say disapointing but not all that much. The GAO now has their oar in the water saying hey this is an issue. Its up to other parts of the government to come up with policy. It does emphasize the uncertainty and the need to reduce this.

[JPL]

Damn-it I was pinning a lot of hopes on this one (

Even my own government could have done it better, I read a French govt. report about a year ago (sorry I have lost the URL) that put a tenative date for global oil Peak at about 2013. I think our government is trying to put some plans together, based on the report, but all I have seen so far is plans to build some more nuke-stations & subsidise bio-diesel (sigh).

Of course there is very little that France can do about the global situation. But I guess we were hoping that the Americans would take a lead at some point. A bit like Carter did in the 70's. I guess we're all on our own, from this point on then (unhappy...)

JPL

[chuck6877]

Yea, I would say disapointing but not all that much. The GAO now has their oar in the water saying hey this is an issue. Its up to other parts of the government to come up with policy. It does emphasize the uncertainty and the need to reduce this.

When I say I was disappointed it's because I thought this report was going to do a study of when Peak Oil will occur like Chris Skrebowski's Megaprojects Analysis.

By saying the peak could occur from now until 2040 fails to cause much urgency.

I do agree calling on other government agencies to study peak oil more is valuable.

Chuck

[NEOPO]

Good points Mike yet ultimately I agree with Stuart Staniford in that "just the legitimization of the debate is a big deal" and that this may be the best we can hope for on this level at this time.

Of course many peakers will define this as alittle too little alittle too late yet I cannot help but think of it as the something that is better then nothing.

Not very powerful as many had hoped yet not powerless either.
A knife is not a sword but it still cuts.