Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on December 20, 2016

Bookmark and Share

Peak Oil : The real inconvenient truth

General Ideas

The media talks about ” climate change ” all the time but rarely talk about ” Peak oil ” . When most people think of oil they of oil shooting out of an oil well . This is the cheapest form of oil to produce. This type of oil is mostly found in the middle east countries like Saudi Arabia.

In the United states yes there is a lot of oil but the problem is its far more expensive type of oil . Shale oil is not really oil in the first place . Its shale rock that’s turned into oil . We my be the Saudi Arabia of shale oil but Saudis have the cheap oil .

Oil production of cheap oil in the United States peaked around 1970. The largest oil field of cheap oil was discovered in mid 1960s in Saudi Arabia. In order to have access to this oil . We made a deal with the Saudis in 1973 . This was called the ” Petro dollar ”

The petro dollar was an agreement where OPEC countries trade their oil for dollars. In return our military would protect their oil . In a effect the dollar was now backed by the demand for oil in order to trade in oil they needed dollars. The petro dollar allows us to print as much money as we want to fund the government. Also we can just print money to buy the cheap mid east oil .

Many people often say there is plenty of oil . If they were the case why would we be looking for oil is places like the arctic ? Most of the oil that is left is an unconventional form of oil. These unconventional forms of oil have been know about for decades but only to recently have they been profitable. When it comes to oil it’s not about how much you have its about profitability . An example would our shale oil which has profitability around $80 dollars a barrel oil is currently trading around $50. Many oil producers have stopped producing at these low levels due to like of profits.

There is this false idea in America that oil companies drill for America , they don’t they do it for profits. They don’t ” drill baby drill” for America but this myth is spread in the mainstream media. Which is funded by big oil .

People can debate climate change all they want but Peak Oil is an undeniable truth that is largely ignored . We learned the effects of high oil prices in 2008 which played a role in the great recession. Peak oil is here but we could have done something about it but it’s too late.

steemit



40 Comments on "Peak Oil : The real inconvenient truth"

  1. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 7:35 am 

    It will be interesting to see what the impact of PO really is, once it arrives.

    When will it arrive? My guess is as good as yours. In 20 years?

  2. Cloggie on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 7:50 am 

    My guess is as good as yours. In 20 years?

    My guess and that of Trump is better: peak oil, conventional or fracking, is irrelevant for the future.

    With (not so) new technologies you can turn hitherto endless unexploitable coal reserves into gas, diesel, anything. Not by mining them but by burning them underground by controlled injection of O2 and H2O and harvest CO, CH4, H2 and proceed from there.

    These reserves are more than enough to bridge 30-40 years to carry out the transition to renewable energy.

  3. rockman on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:20 am 

    I don’t like knocking any effort to advance the discussion about the energy predicament we’re facing. But: “Shale oil is not really oil in the first place .” But making such asinine statements doesn’t help.

    Also, once again it appears time to reinforce the reality that the actual date of global PO has very little relevance. The world has been dealing with the effects of depleting energy resources for decades. And those effects have grown significantly in the last 20 years including (but certainly not limited to) booming/crashing oil prices and rig counts as well as numerous military conflicts in the Middle East.

    Folks waiting for the effects to suddenly kicking in when that magical PO date can stop holding their breath. It started beating the crap out of the world many years ago. Just as rust never sleeps the Peak Oil Dynamic woke up decades ago and has no intention of taking a nap. The current lower oil prices isn’t the POD going back to sleep. It’s just doing some warm up exercises before it starts kicking the crap out of the global economy. Stay tuned. LOL.

  4. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:22 am 

    We will see Clog, we will see. For some reason I’m not so confident that high tech will provide.

    However one thing I’m confident about. As europe slowly becomes 3rd world by impoting 3rd world, it’s gonna use a lot less energy.
    Which might solve the problem by itself.

  5. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:26 am 

    rockman.

    Oil is strongle linked to GDP. The idea is, that a peak in oil also means a peak in energy which also means a peak in GDP. An ever declining GDP is somehting that will lead us into unpredictable territory.

  6. Dredd on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:31 am 

    the Peak Oil Dynamic woke up decades ago and has no intention of taking a nap” – rockman

    Indeed, the POD is scaring some folks into denial.

    Fear is not the way to handle it … if history is any guide (Etiology of Social Dementia – 15).

  7. Revi on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:32 am 

    I think we are in a predicament. We need an energy source that gives far more than we put in. We have unconventional oil. It doesn’t give enough to live the kind of lifestyle we have become accustomed to. Therefore, call me a treehugger, but the solution is to live a lifestyle that uses less energy. I know it’s shocking, but maybe we need to live within our energy budget. Could we quit doing things like driving around in 6000 pounds of steel box? Maybe get around in a small NEV and take the train when we have to go further? Or am I just talking nonsense?

  8. onlooker on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:37 am 

    Revi, one way or the other we will be downsizing but it is better to do it voluntarily than be forced too.

  9. Cloggie on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:52 am 

    For some reason I’m not so confident that high tech will provide.

    Try to figure out what that reason could be and come back to me and I’ll show you why it is wrong.

    As Europe slowly becomes 3rd world by importing 3rd world, it’s gonna use a lot less energy.

    European Russia and Eastern-Europa are virtually white. The EU of 500 million had 44 million Muslims in 2010; projections are 8% for 2030. In other words, even in 2030 Europe will still be whither than America was in its best days. I am touched by your concern for European civilization but I must remind you that your (?) US demographic problems are far worse.

    For starters even these less than 10% Muslims are causing a real stir in Europe and the rise of right-wing parties everywhere. Won’t be long until these parties get the upper hand and Fortress Europe will be a fact.

    Furthermore, these Muslims are so outlandish different, so right-wing extremist that they can’t behave anything other than making themselves impossible, as Berlin has shown again for the umpteenth time. Muslims go berserk for instance if they see woman behaving freely. For these camel jockeys Europe is one giant provocation, one giant middle finger. And if they get really nasty… well, we have our ways with trains. Europe has thrown out Islam three times before on a massive scale. Just wait for the fourth time to happen. Europeans have meanwhile overwhelming force to defend themselves and if necessary fry them three times over.

    As things stand now, 43% of the Turks say they would like to go home to Turkey, where all the action is.

    Muslims, the perfect excuse of getting regime change in Europe organized after the end of Pax Americana.

    Map:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Islam_in_Europe-2010.svg

    Article:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe

  10. paulo1 on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:54 am 

    No Revi, you are expressing wisdom.

  11. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:58 am 

    Cloggie,
    I’m sorry. You make the wrong assumption that I’m american. I’m europeen. And I have seen and experienced with my own eyes what decades of open door did to my nation. It ain’t pretty.

    With the high tech, let’s just leave it be at the moment. Not sure what you do for a leaving. But I’m working in highest high tech doing high tech engineering. And although I have no proof, this insight gave me a good gut feeling of what high tech is actually capable of and what not. Let’s wait and see…

  12. Rockman on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 10:17 am 

    Hello – Understood. Now with oil prices half of what they were a few years ago then you’re expecting a better global GDP. IOW despite getting closer to GPO we’re seeing improving GDP. Is’t that just the opposite of the proposition you just put forward? And like hearing from folks on the other side of the Pond…good for a non-US centric perspective .

    But to continue: did oil going to $100+ per bbl hurt the EU GDP? And now with lower prices it is recovering, right? And given that for all we know we may actually be at GPO today if some of the producers actually reduce production in order to increase the oil price. So it would appear the global GDP isn’t very dependent upon the date of PO. OTOH the POD (the complex relationship and feedback loops of the energy reality) seems to be much more the determinant IMHO.

  13. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 10:43 am 

    rockman,

    GDP is dependent on the amount of available energy. Not on its cost.

    We’re still around 90 Mb/day of oil, pretty much independet of price.

    It’s a comon misconcpetion that high oil price kills the economy. That is not true. Fluctuations (up as well as down) kill the economy.

  14. Cloud9 on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 10:58 am 

    I realize from studying a little history that when economies fracture that scarce resources may temporarily become cheap. In the depression farmers were pouring out milk because of low prices while people in the cities starved. Under normal circumstances demand coupled with availability very much affects price. I think what we are now experiencing is similar to the dynamics of the great depression. I’m beginning to think that failed economies will leave a lot of oil in the ground.

  15. Plantagenet on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 11:31 am 

    @Hello

    Of course high oil prices kill the economy. Look at what happened in 2008 when oil hit $148 bbl—the entire world went into a “Great Recession.” Academic economists have published studies showing that most post WWII recession have occurred as a consequence of upward spikes in the oil price.

    Cheers!

  16. penury on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 11:43 am 

    The world operates on “energy” and it does not matter what the source is, the energy must be in a usable form. Currently the major source is liquid. Food, housing, transportation, even wars are dependent upon liquid energy. Currently I see no source of energy which will return the energy required to prolong this economy.

  17. onlooker on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 12:26 pm 

    Of course high oil prices kill the economy.—And low oil prices can now kill the Oil Industry. No Oil Industry no Economy. Oh and Penury so right, no fuel source capable of replacing the value and capacities of OIL.

  18. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 12:35 pm 

    I;m sorry Plant. You’re wrong.

    High prices do NOT kill the economy.

    It’s the rapid rise that kills. (as does the rapid decline)

    The economy needs many years of stable prices to be able to adapt to it. If stability is not there, the economy suffers.
    Nothing to do with high price.

    An econmy with stable $400 oil will perform better than an econmy with unpredictable fluctuating price between $10 and $100.

  19. GregT on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 12:49 pm 

    Thanks Hello. Spoken like a true eCONomist. Never let physics, mathematics, or just plain common sense get in the way. May the force be with you.

  20. penury on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 1:07 pm 

    Neither high prices nor low prices will kill the economy. What kills the economy is the requirement that more energy is expended to obtain your energy source than your energy source is able to re-produce. Any energy source must return more energy than it took to obtain it which is why fusion, will always be a dream.

  21. Apneaman on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 1:34 pm 

    “The media talks about ” climate change ” all the time”

    Really?

    In the last year what’s the ratio of Trump pussy grabbing stories to CC stories? 10,000 to 1?

    CNN – I am forced to listen to it when I go to my moms (seniors citizen law = must watch newsOtainment stations all fucking day on max volume) and I can’t remember hearing any climate change stories. Plenty of “OMG!!!” sensational Trump stories and every third commercial was from the API – “I’m a Cancer voter!”

    Never heard or seen any MSM peak oil or peak any resource stories.

  22. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 1:41 pm 

    penury

    Very true.
    But that is such an insignificant number. It’s not even worthwhile to talk about it.
    The energy that needs to be expenden to lift oil from a certain depth is P = mass*g*heigth.

    All other expenses, like equipment, pipes, computers, man power, tools, beer and hookers for the workers. That is THE ECONOMY !

  23. Plantagenet on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 1:53 pm 

    @Hello

    The oil market tends to be in balance except when it isn’t. When the market goes out of balance prices move rapidly, with gluts causing the oil price to fall rapidly and shortages causing the oil price to go rapidly higher. Spikes in oil prices cause recessions. Virtually all the post WWII recessions have been caused by jumps in oil prices. Your contention that high oil prices don’t cause recessions if the rise is sufficiently slow may indeed be valid, but since oil markets don’t operate that way for very long we’ve never seen that happen. What we’ve seen over the last 70 years are rapid price changes when the market is out of balance, and when the oil price price jumps up recessions usually occur.

    CHEERS!

  24. Hello on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 2:14 pm 

    Thank you Plant for agreeing with me that high oil prices don’t cause recessions. You are clearly one of the cleverer posters here.

    Fluctuating oil price is a point of discussion on its own.

    Many a poster here constantly claim that marginal and expensive oil is not able to power the economy. That is simply not true. Even $400 oil will be perfectly fine to power to global economy. Important again is, the price remains stable and enough volume can be produced at that price.

  25. Anonymous on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 3:43 pm 

    “Thank you Plant for agreeing with me that high oil prices don’t cause recessions. You are clearly one of the cleverer posters here.”

    Now Ive heard it all. Plantard is fucking moron, a low grade imbecile stuck on ‘obama did it’. And the rare times he goes off his ‘obama’ schtick, he makes even less sense.

    Note sure where that puts you in the scheme of things.

    adjective, cleverer, cleverest.
    1.
    mentally bright; having sharp or quick intelligence; able.

    Plantatard is none of the above. Nor are people that believe $400.00 oil is good for ‘economy’. Thankfully, no is ever going put you, or plantard in charge (of anything). Nor is anyone going putting that crackpot theory of yours to test anytime soon.

  26. rockman on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 4:17 pm 

    Thanks for all the reasonable responses to Hello. I was busy freezing my nuts off while pulling tubing on a well and enjoying these “stable” oil prices. LOL.

  27. brent on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 4:22 pm 

    Hello yes even at 800 dollars a barrel their will be an economy, but only the 1% will be able to afford it.

  28. DerHundistlos on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 5:14 pm 

    @ Rocky, “Obama was a lair about his environmental concerns.”

    Oh really……. In a joint announcement with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, President Obama permanently protected nearly the entire Arctic Ocean and a part of the Atlantic Ocean.
    Over 118 million acres of America’s Arctic and Atlantic Oceans will now be off limits to fossil fuel exploration and drilling.

  29. Anonymous on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 5:52 pm 

    What part of amerika borders the arctic oceans?

    And what is the source for this ‘announcement’. If you are going to make such a claim, how about providing a legitimate reference for it? Rather than just asserting it….

  30. CondensatevsCrude on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 5:53 pm 

    I recently read that up to 70% of shale oil is condensate(butane, propane) and that 100% of Eagle Ford shale production is condensate.
    How much energy is required to refine this stuff into gasoline? And doesn’t this make a mockery of the claims of the resurgence of US crude oil production?

  31. GregT on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 7:04 pm 

    “Even $400 oil will be perfectly fine to power to global economy.”

    The global economy is barely limping along with $45/bbl oil, and it would already be long since dead if not for central bank policies.

  32. IPissOnApneaman on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 7:51 pm 

    Condensate oil has to be purify and in order to get clean butane and propane. Google Condensate oil purification .

    I could not find good figures about the net energy returned toward society form propane and butane produced from condensate.

    My guess is that propane and butane return a more net energy toward economical active then shale oil and tar sand.

    During summer in the Montreal ared the garbage truck are running using propane and compressed natural gaz.

    You can run a fleet truck with compressed propane and natural gaz.

    My suspicion is that the net energy provided to society by natural gas is higher then tar sand and shale oil. Propane should not be used as product to upgrade crappy tar sand unto some form of crude synthetic oil. This upgrading probably kill the net energy advantage that propane has.

  33. Hubert on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 8:08 pm 

    Maybe another Dark Age (2.0).

  34. Joe Clarkson on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 9:16 pm 

    What part of amerika borders the arctic oceans?

    Huh? How about Alaska.

  35. Dooma on Tue, 20th Dec 2016 9:36 pm 

    Cloggie. Could you please tell me how aviation is going to transition to renewables please? And heavy transport and agriculture (super phosphate included).

  36. Theedrich on Wed, 21st Dec 2016 1:37 am 

    Now that the jungle bunny has imported so many creatures that look like him, we can expect raucous and increasing demands that every one of them be given what they all came to America for:  a so-called “better life.”  In other words, the rapid exhaustion of every human and natural resource left in the country.  Whenever Trump talks about any “extreme vetting” of the invaders, more wailing about “racism,” etc., bellows forth from the Left.  On the economic front, there is incessant talk about how we need more globalism to advance “innovation” — another word for complexification and its diminishing returns.  Forbidden is any talk about reducing the number of useless eaters, dysgenic mutants and low IQs on the planet.  Even serious discussion about stopping the deadly narcotics plague is considered uninteresting.

    Maybe the incoming change agent will in fact effect change.  If so, we can expect Sörös & pals to unleash a civil war against him.

  37. Cloggie on Wed, 21st Dec 2016 2:19 am 

    Cloggie. Could you please tell me how aviation is going to transition to renewables please?

    The last thing the future world needs is aviation. It brings too many people to places where they don’t belong. Or throw bombs on cities.

    As far as I am concerned, I hope that all these Airbuses and Boeings drop out of the sky.

    And heavy transport and agriculture

    Liquid fuel.

    If necessary you can store electricity in liquid carbon fuel or hydrogen. It is not very energy efficient but it can be done. But for niche applications like heavy transport or agriculture there will always be enough carbon fuel produced from gasified coal, for which centuries of reserves exist.

    But in a localized economy there won’t be that much need for heavy trucks. And besides there is always the electrified train.

    In the middle of next year the entire heavily used Dutch railway network will be powered by 8 dedicated wind parks for 100%, the first in the world to do so. The biggest windpark, “Westermeerwind” is already operational and provides 1/3 of the energy:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BkyTBE7d8E

    http://www.electrans.co.uk/netherlands-railways-green-electric-fleet/

    (It takes roughly one large wind turbine to propel a train.)

    List of dedicated windparks for Dutch Rail (NS):

    http://www.ns.nl/en/about-ns/energy/sustainable-energy.html

    By 2017, all of our trains will run on sustainable energy. This will provide passengers with access to climate neutral travel over longer distances. The energy will come from newly constructed wind farms belonging to our energy supplier Eneco. This will also stimulate the energy market and help the growth of available sustainable energy. By 2017, all electric trains in the Netherlands will run on sustainable energy.

  38. Mr. Pockets on Wed, 21st Dec 2016 7:48 am 

    “It is not very energy efficient but it can be done.”

    Attempted point officially self-destructed.

  39. volleyguy on Thu, 22nd Dec 2016 10:01 am 

    Peak oil already happened. Dr. Hubbert was correct.

    I can not believe more are not giving him incredible accolades. Instead people point to different forms of energy than he was ever talking about like shale. (wet farts:))

  40. volleyguy on Thu, 22nd Dec 2016 10:08 am 

    All I look at for peak oil what the good Dr. was talking about is C+C production.

    Not bio fuel, not shale, not tar sands.

    Maybe the world’s runs on shale? If the U.S. can afford all the losses in trying? Most of the world can not afford a shale money losing industry… Thank goodness for vast capital markets in the U.S. and low interest rates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *