[GHung]

......
Just so I understand, so the (often humorous) pictures that various posters use to drive home a point are banned via the COC? (i.e in any format, I presume).

Many if not most aren't related in any way to a "point", unless the point is to be insulting and belittling to other forum members, or to just draw attention to one's-self. I, for one, stopped doing that in about 2nd grade. Charts, graphs, etc., or something humorous directly related to the subject aren't the same thing. If people don't know the difference, maybe they should avoid posting images and animated gifs completely.

[ROCKMAN]

ralfy - "If a global capitalist system involving competition will require the equivalent of more than one earth to meet the basic needs of a growing population plus a growing global middle class, then an energy return of 6 won't cut it." To be blunt: who gives a f*ck what the "global capitalist system" needs? I'm guessing about 99.98% of US citizens don't. And about 99.96% of German citizens don't. Qhich, in general, has been true for all the citizens of the world. IOW who cared if the Greek "capitalist system" was in shambles? No one except for the Greeks, of course.

Same old joke still applies: when a bear is chasing you and your friend what really matters is not how fast the bear can run but how fast your friend can run. IOW an economy can "cut it" with a lower EROEI even if the rest of the "global capitalist system" is getting f*cked to death. In every "competition" there are winners and losers. It is not like t-ball where no one is keeping score and all the players get the same "participant ribbon".

[ROCKMAN]

Yoshua - "Why does an oil well become uneconomic when you get 6 bbl by investing 1 bbl? Sounds like a great deal to get 6 for 1 invested. But that won't cover the total cost of production." I'm not trying to be rude, buddy. But I'm getting a tad tired of explaining the simplicity of the situation. The COST of the energy I use to drill a well is a relatively small portion of the total well cost. Typically less then 10%. The drilling profit isn't based upon the number of Btu's used vs the number of Btu's produced. It's based on the $'s spent vs the $'s received. I just pulled up one of my horizontal well cumulative invoices. The total well cost was $1,258,132.58. The total cost for diesel to run the rig was $88,060.02 (about 53,000 gallons). Of course trucks delivering equipment to the location burned diesel. But 2 points: I pay for the delivery charges...not the fuel and that amount of diesel is tiny compared to the amount of diesel the rig's electric generator burns. The day rates of the services for a horizontal well, like the drill rig and directional drilling equipment, are rather expensive. I could drill a straight hole to the same formation (which I've done) for about $380,000.

I only have to produce about 3,200 bbls of oil to recover the cost of the diesel I burned. But I have to produce about 40,000 bbls of oil just to recover what I spent. And that doesn't make me one penny of profit. So one more time: this is why no drilling decision has ever, is today or ever will be based upon the EROEI of a project because it doesn't matter one f*cking iota. LOL.

[asg70]

I, for one, stopped doing that in about 2nd grade.

When was the last time you contributed something to the discussion besides crying foul on netiquette?

I think you'll find that the worst of the nastiness is largely over thanks to the exit of Short and PStarr. It's just that for some reason Adam hasn't gotten the memo and is beating a dead horse.

Oh, and BTW, I think you'll find that anywhere you go these days people use reaction GIFs. The sooner you get used to it, the better, because that trend isn't likely to go away.

[GHung]

I, for one, stopped doing that in about 2nd grade.

When was the last time you contributed something to the discussion besides crying foul on netiquette?

I think you'll find that the worst of the nastiness is largely over thanks to the exit of Short and PStarr. It's just that for some reason Adam hasn't gotten the memo and is beating a dead horse.

Oh, and BTW, I think you'll find that anywhere you go these days people use reaction GIFs. The sooner you get used to it, the better, because that trend isn't likely to go away.

When was the last time you were actually paying attention? And It seems that most folks who try to contribute have to deal with personal attacks, hence, a site going to crap. As for "getting used to it anywhere I go", I generally don't go there. I prefer adult company. That said, I still think this site has some worth, but that is declining by the day.

[AdamB]

We are experiencing peak oil.

Did. Are. Will. Get with the program, not only don't you know when it happened, you don't even know what kind of oil it is you are talking about when you say "conventional". Does it have an extra carbon or hydrogen in there we don't know something about?

Conventional oil peaked in 2005.

When you can define it, you can pretend it peaked. I think the peaking of "easiest" oil is easier to pin down. 1901. That sub-peak-made-up-like-yours didn't bother you at all did it? Did it bother the world any more or less than the one you claim for 2005, do you think?

The oil price peaked in 2008.

Nominal price Yoshua. We need to be specific here, because in terms of real pricing, Rathbone was selling oil for $30/bbl back during the Civil War, and that price beats 2008's real price all to heck and back. All this time hanging out here, you would think you would have learned something by now. Do you have a philosophical objection to learning, or are you just handicapped in this regard?

Coal peaked in 2013. World GDP in dollars peaked in 2015. All liquids peaked in 2016. Now we are just waiting for peak debt...and the apocalypse.

Channeling pstarr and short now are you? LATOC said we were waiting for the apocalypse circa 2008. You calling REAL experts, with abilities in astrology and everything, a liar? Or their disciples, like Ralfy?

[AdamB]

PO.com credibility is not the topic. For those with ADHD, the topic is that peak oil itself, in its resource depletion context, is an important topic and yet, because of its association with crackpottery, suffers in the credibility department.

Now this deserves the highest praise.... Oh Snap! You go girl!

Adam B Why are you quoting and trying to argue with someone that has been permanently banned from the site back in May 2010??
Stop posting crap just to fill the space up.

You aren't the king of me!!

And besides, my comment was pertinent. People were obviously banned from this place for, as we now know, understanding what was going on. And I'm not arguing with them, I was saluting them in hindsight. Just as I root around in the cellar and dredge up those who were clueless and point it out, it is only fair we recognize those who were not clueless, and refused to cower within the herdthink of the day.

[Tanada]

Alright you two, enough with the cutesy name calling and cursing, keep it up and you will both get a day off to cool down.

Can we ban silly gifs that have nothing to do with the topic and are only designed to taunt and belittle other commentators?

They are already banned in the COC but if nobody flags them I usually don't see them. Just FYI I do not read every post on this website, I actually have a real world life to experience and do not dedicate that much time to reading here.

Just so I understand, so the (often humorous) pictures that various posters use to drive home a point are banned via the COC? (i.e in any format, I presume).

Humor is one thing and we generally let a lot of the political crap er crud slide through because both sides are equally guilty and we try and practice free speech to the greatest extent possible. Memes aimed at another member are a different category and generally you can get them deleted with a complaint, things like personal attacks are definitely not protected speech here.

So if you want to post an anti President Trump, or anti President Obama meme we let it slide, but if you post a 'Because Ghung is an idiot' meme or a 'because you are a fat old white cracker' meme those are not free speech protected in the COC.

[vtsnowedin]

Fair enough.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Thanks Tanada for explaining that. I didn't mean to imply that the humor made any such gifs OK -- I had just seen so much of it so often that I hadn't realized it was an issue re the COC.

[ralfy]

ralfy - "If a global capitalist system involving competition will require the equivalent of more than one earth to meet the basic needs of a growing population plus a growing global middle class, then an energy return of 6 won't cut it." To be blunt: who gives a f*ck what the "global capitalist system" needs? I'm guessing about 99.98% of US citizens don't. And about 99.96% of German citizens don't. Qhich, in general, has been true for all the citizens of the world. IOW who cared if the Greek "capitalist system" was in shambles? No one except for the Greeks, of course.

Same old joke still applies: when a bear is chasing you and your friend what really matters is not how fast the bear can run but how fast your friend can run. IOW an economy can "cut it" with a lower EROEI even if the rest of the "global capitalist system" is getting f*cked to death. In every "competition" there are winners and losers. It is not like t-ball where no one is keeping score and all the players get the same "participant ribbon".

The question isn't whether or not they care but whether or not they are dependent on it.

The only way winners can remain winners is if they can gain more market share, and that means selling more goods and services to losers. But for that to happen, losers will have to be winners as well, as that's the only way they can buy more goods and services to losers. That's why we're seeing a growing global middle class and oil consumption for the rest of the world growing even as that of the U.S., EU, and Japan went down.

That's also why the t-ball reference is ironically spot on. The "participant ribbon" in such a system is called "credit," and is extended by banks that can only earn more by lending more. Beyond that are the rich who want to create more credit through speculation.

Your bear joke is also correct. The catch is that after it eats one human being, it will go for the other.

In the end, there will be "winners", but not in the way you imagine.

[ralfy]

Yoshua - "Why does an oil well become uneconomic when you get 6 bbl by investing 1 bbl? Sounds like a great deal to get 6 for 1 invested. But that won't cover the total cost of production." I'm not trying to be rude, buddy. But I'm getting a tad tired of explaining the simplicity of the situation. The COST of the energy I use to drill a well is a relatively small portion of the total well cost. Typically less then 10%. The drilling profit isn't based upon the number of Btu's used vs the number of Btu's produced. It's based on the $'s spent vs the $'s received. I just pulled up one of my horizontal well cumulative invoices. The total well cost was $1,258,132.58. The total cost for diesel to run the rig was $88,060.02 (about 53,000 gallons). Of course trucks delivering equipment to the location burned diesel. But 2 points: I pay for the delivery charges...not the fuel and that amount of diesel is tiny compared to the amount of diesel the rig's electric generator burns. The day rates of the services for a horizontal well, like the drill rig and directional drilling equipment, are rather expensive. I could drill a straight hole to the same formation (which I've done) for about $380,000.

I only have to produce about 3,200 bbls of oil to recover the cost of the diesel I burned. But I have to produce about 40,000 bbls of oil just to recover what I spent. And that doesn't make me one penny of profit. So one more time: this is why no drilling decision has ever, is today or ever will be based upon the EROEI of a project because it doesn't matter one f*cking iota. LOL.

Decisions are not based on EROEI but are ultimately affected by it. This was explained to you in other threads.

[Yoshua]

Rockman

It is the energy cost of the science, technology, equipment, workforce, infrastructure, delivery and all other energy costs that I was referring to. It is those costs that the EROEI 6:1 at the wellhead won't be able to cover.

If you calculate the total cost in dollars to drill your hz well and convert those dollars to gallons of diesel you will get a clearer picture of the total energy cost to drill that hz well.

Total cost $1,250,000 / $2.5 gallon diesel = 500,000 gallons diesel

[asg70]

...it seems that most folks who try to contribute have to deal with...

Enough already. Be the change you seek otherwise you're just whining.

Seriously. There is such a yawning void of actual new insights that the only thing left is to get lost in the weeds of these endless and pointless meta-discussions, petty arguments, and distractions (ala 911 trooth).

To answer the original topic, there is NO WAY to increase peak-oil credibility when the data suggests that the day of reckonining is well beyond anyone's fight-or-flight time-horizon.

Everyone here can be as polite as you want them to be but it won't change the above.

By my reckoning what's going on is David Holmgren's blended future scenario of brown and green tech. Brown leads the charge in extending BAU as well as facilitating green tech on top of it.

Brown = Shale
Green = EV/renewables

The one out-and-out loser in the last decade has been powerdown as advocated by Heinberg, the Transition/Permaculture movements, and Kunstler.

Society may be nostalgic for older, simpler times, it doesn't want to actually go back there. Society wants its gadgets, its creature comforts, and its strawberries in January.

Now, doomers can sort of retreat back into a bitter stance of saying "Well, fuck em. My lifestyle is better than your lifestyle and I'm not missing out on any of these goodies." I'm catching a lot of those vibes while some people (you included) just don't want to face up to coming across this way. But that's really how it comes across, nothing but crude culture-warrior bullshit. Kunstler is definitely knee-deep in it, as is what's left of Greer when he strikes an ideological tone.

At that point is there any reason for anyone who isn't already a cultish back to the lander to even both communicating? The walls of the silo go up and you're really not welcome unless you know the secret handshake.

So THAT kind of thing, perhaps epitomized by how much of an obnoxious asshole PStarr was on a daily basis, only takes what is left of the peak oil brand and drags it into the gutter.

[marmico]

It is those costs that the EROEI 6:1 at the wellhead won't be able to cover.

Bakken EROI at the well head is 30:1, according to Brandt's engineering based model.

https://econpapers.repec.org/article/ee ... 1-2198.htm

Saudi is closer to EROI 50:1. Being a former acolyte of the ETP CRAP you should be familiar with an engineering based model.

The EROI from the well to the gasoline tank is 4-5:1 (depending on boundary) and has been at that level for 50+ years. The drillers use more energy today but the transporters from the well to the refinery, the refinery processors and the distributors to the gasoline tank consumers use less energy. And the consumers of gasoline get 80% more work out of a gallon (fuel efficiency) than they did 50+ years ago.

For practical purposes EROI is bunk.

[Yoshua]

"For practical purposes EROI is bunk."

Fine, then why even bother improving fuel efficiency?

Since with increased energy efficiency it's possible to get more work done with less energy and make more profits? Every business is trying to make more than they use to produce a surplus? Every investor is seeking to receive more than he invests in a project?

If Rockman's hz well actually makes it to ERoEI 6:1 after all energy costs, but the $Ro$I is 1.1:1 after all dollar costs, then at least Rockman is energy efficient...so that we on the economy side can continue to be wasteful.

The refineries are the only consumers of Rockman's crude oil and will of course consume some energy before it reaches us end consumers. The refineries receive $Ro$I 1.1:1 as well.

Everybody is trying to make a profit on petroleum: Oil service companies, operators, transporters, traders, refineries, distributors, miners, farmers, constructors...I don't know where I'm going with this...but everybody is consuming energy and trying to make a profit by trying to produce as much as possible by using as little as possible.

[asg70]

Marimco saying EROEI doesn't matter I don't think means that efficiency in general doesn't matter. He's just saying that constant innovation has yielded more and more efficiency which has managed to keep EROEI high enough for BAU to continue apace.

It's reasonable to believe that efficiency gains can and will reach a point of diminishing returns, but 10 years ago peak oil doomers completely discounted unconventional, which was a mistake. In retrospect, one can infer that doomers made this call out of a very strong bias towards doom. Many blog posts were written about the limits of technology, that our culture is sick for looking towards technology as our savior, magical thinking, etc... I remember that rhetoric well.

The moral of the story is that we still have at least a few tricks up our sleeves before we reach that point of diminishing returns. Also, whenever a doomer talks about the limits of technology one should assume that he's grinding a luddite axe of some kind.

[Yoshua]

In other words: We are fighting falling EROI by improving fuel efficiency.

[rockdoc123]

"For practical purposes EROI is bunk."

Fine, then why even bother improving fuel efficiency?

well lets see....perhaps because it will make it cheaper to operate vehicles, easier to sell vehicles to more people when fuel efficiency is better, more fuel to go around.....a whole host of reasons that don't require someone trying to calculate the nebulous EROEI

[vtsnowedin]

In most businesses a $Ro$I of 1.1 to 1 or a ten percent profit margin after all expenses (including all taxes) are paid is a good result and many large corporations work for years on much slimmer margins. In their balance sheets energy used is just one entry on the debit side of the ledger out of many. If energy used is a large part of their debit side a large increase in the price of that energy either the price per gallon or the number of gallons used can easily wipe out that slim profit margin.
An oil company such as Exxon gets hit on both sides of the ledger when the price of oil changes. It both changes their cost to operate and the price they receive for the products they sell. As the energy they use is still a small fraction of the volume of products they sell a higher oil price is always in their favor.
I notice that in their last quarterly report they did very well with the tax law changes. Having the ex CEO as Secretary of State paid off nicely.