Peak Oil News and Message Boards

You just asked for any takers on a bet for a new US peak. Now that you have 2 takers you chicken out and instead want to wager on the ups and downs of monthly production.

"Yes, it is the end of oil. The world economy depends on forever growth to pay off forever debt. Without that growth it all comes crashing down. And make no mistake: AI, Tesla, and Sony Robots are no substitute for abundant inexpensive energy."

Well you are right about that, but you are a brave lad to take that bet on production. It takes 50% more Shale to produce a barrel of finished product than it does light sweet crude. They need at least 2.5 mb/d/yr more to just keep even. They are going to be pumping like hell to keep that supply available, and someone with deep pockets is financing it. This is not about running out of oil, its about running out of money. If they have to they'll be selling the population off in the local slave market to keep those funds coming. Your bet seems to be more about when the monetary/ financal system will take a high dive into a shallow pool than about oil, but, Good Luck.

TheHillsInfo

Why are you still talking about volume? The drilling and extraction of oil volumes don't really matter. What it really matters is the final amount of energy that reachs Joe the Plumber.

Oh I don't know Observerbrb. Maybe it's, I don't know, the main purpose of this site and one of the few recent topics actually about peak oil?

Darian S wrote:Can that ramp go up significantly above the previous peak? Can it sustain it for the indefinite future, at least the coming decades? Is the word that the newer wells drop production rapidly wrong?

There can certainly be yet another US peak...just as there was the more recent one. And oil production is never about an "indefinite" future, it always declines, all wells decline as well, and it becomes all about the activity levels, and how much more drilling there is to do.

Darian S wrote:The idea of a peak is not the end of oil, but merely a peak in production, unable to sustain significant increases above the peak for the relative near future.

Peak oil is defined as "terminal decline" after the peak, NOT "unable to sustain increases for the relative future". Rewriting the definition of oil itself was the last stunt to try and avoid the obvious of what happened a decade ago (no peak), rewriting what peak oil is yet again is just so..normal..now I suppose. Rather than accepting the obvious...that bell shaped curves and A peak just doesn't work so well.

Darian S wrote: Can the U.S. increase production significantly above their prior peak and sustain it for decades. If not at least for the U.S. it has peaked.

Sustaining production for decades isn't what post peak is about either. The good news is that peak demand is now the most likely cause of a peak in oil production, and this is a good thing.

shortonoil wrote: It takes 50% more Shale to produce a barrel of finished product than it does light sweet crude.

And when that shale oil is itself light sweet crude....? Let me guess...we get another display of how much you don't know about 2 chemically identical oils when one comes from a source rock and another from a reservoir rock?

My wager to pstarr is the following:

If at any time, during the period between now and December 31st of 2018, the monthly average of 9,637,000 bbl/day is exceeded for US oil production, then you owe me $1000 USD by Paypal. If by December 31st of 2018 the monthly average of 9,637,000 bbl/day is not exceeded, than I owe you $1000 USD by whatever payment method you so choose.

Observerbrb wrote:Why are you still talking about volume? The drilling and extraction of oil volumes don't really matter. What it really matters is the final amount of energy that reachs Joe the Plumber.

Joe is getting all he wants, and because there is so much VOLUME being produced in relation to how much all the Joe Plumbers want, that the price is even pretty cheap!! Joe the Plumber is doing well!

I'll split the difference and go with August 20th, 2018.

I am not a betting person but if I was I would bet on pstarr's position

pstarr wrote:

Observerbrb wrote:Why are you still talking about volume? The drilling and extraction of oil volumes don't really matter. What it really matters is the final amount of energy that reachs Joe the Plumber.

There are several other measures more important than total volume. The oil exporters gain wealth through oil sales and oil-field employment, and then typically subsidize oil consumption among the general population. The Export Land Model demonstrates that exports decline faster than production increases, wealth and the ability to pay for oil is redistributed away from the importers. Hence the collapse of oil prices down from $100/barrel.

The ELM's author used it to predict an export crisis in 2006. Apparently he doesn't have a model that can predict anything either. And, like other discredited folks...has been eerily quiet as of late....

The oversupply wasn't predicted by the ELM, and the ELM didn't predict lower prices either.

pstarr wrote:Not only does ETP show that less energy reaches the consumer, it also suggests that money spent on low quality oil production has less economic value. Less money and oil to add value to the final product. Less oil to convert NGL's into plastic goodies.

The ETP doesn't show anything, except that its authors don't know much about the oil field, its operation or the project economics of it, but boy do they want you to pay for their report!!!

pstarr wrote: Though few are able/willing to admit it, the Greatest Recession ever was sparked in large part by the 2005 conventional oil peak and half-decade of $100/barrel oil (from $40).

Nah. But again, until we know which alternate universe you are in today, we can't fight your phantoms, so we'll just stick with the real reasons of the 2008 recession. But feel free to modify Wiki to stop calling it the "subprime mortgage crisis".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of ... _Recession

pstarr wrote:My plan would lock up each of our monies in a secure account until August 20, 2018 or the 1970 peak is exceeded. That way neither can weasel. I have no idea how to manage such things.

I'll give you 24 hours to mull my wager over in your mind. I'm not locking my money up for a year and four months. I'm a gentleman and do not weasel on wagers. There are three persons on this board, with whom I have made wagers in the past, who can attest to that.

Then we have no bet since I find your terms to be unreasonable.

pstarr wrote:

shortonoil wrote:Your bet seems to be more about when the monetary/ financal system will take a high dive into a shallow pool than about oil, but, Good Luck.

TheHillsInfo

That is certainly a component of my confidence/bet. Though few are able/willing to admit it, the Greatest Recession ever was sparked in large part by the 2005 conventional oil peak and half-decade of $100/barrel oil (from $40). Each year the US sent an additional $300 billion overseas in oil-payments. The world is in debt and broke. Comfortable americans have no idea how low economies everywhere have already sunk.

Pstarr,may lose his bet because sucker investors & Banks keep propping up the Oil Industry and the Govt itself will try to also because the Oil Industry is the Economy so they will continue pumping full out. Remember money can be created out of thin air. That should give nobody comfort as that will mean we will deplete our remaining legacy reserves that much faster and thus reach that much faster the denouement of the Oil Industry