Mohandas Gandhi may or may not have said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” But it’s become a truism among activists that, after years of playing to an empty house, it’s actually a sign of progress when the rotten tomatoes start to fly.

For a long time, people in the peak oil community complained that both government and media didn’t pay any attention to their issue.

Well, they can’t complain about THAT anymore, with all the talk about a renaissance of oil and gas from fracking and tar sands.

Now, peak oil has the pleasure of getting too much attention. But it’s jeers, not cheers.

Marketwatch gently points out that “Peak Oil Theory Has a Flaw,” the Wall Street journal predicts that “The U.S. Natural-Gas Boom Will Transform the World,” the San Francisco Chronicle finds “North American Energy Independence Now Possible” and Congressional Republicans even offer a plan to get there.

People who understand how difficult and expensive it is to produce most of today’s new oil sources remain unconvinced that peak oil has been indefinitely postponed.

And they’re right. Environmental damage aside, soon it just won’t be worth the trouble to tear up either Alberta or Appalachia for crude. But when will “soon” arrive — five years? Ten years?

In the meantime, these days in the oil industry it’s Mardi Gras all year round. Laissez les bon temps rouler!

But the rest of us should not be distracted by the oil bubble from the important task for getting ourselves ready for a world where oil will be much more expensive — and where the only time it will be cheap again is when we don’t need it anymore.

And THAT will be a very different kind of world.

So it’s refreshing to see a graphic like The World Running On ‘E’, put out by a site called CarInsurance.org. Send it to your family and friends to remind them of the obvious point that, when it comes to peak oil, the question is not whether, but simply, When?

–  Erik Curren, Transition Voice

15 Comments on "With America distracted by oil bubble, peak oil patiently waits"

TIKIMAN on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 12:59 pm 



Hmmm shale oil and tar sands are just great aren’t they?! Especially when it takes 1 barrel of oil to get 1 barrel of dirty shitty oil from tar sands, thats just awesome. Tar sands have saved us!

Obama is a communist jew fag. I can’t believe the country is so stupid to re-elect that asshole. You will reap what you sow.

Arthur on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 1:48 pm 



“Obama is a communist jew fag. I can’t believe the country is so stupid to re-elect that asshole. You will reap what you sow.”

And his a muslim too! And baptised in the United Church of Christ. And has two children, not bad for a fag.lol And born in Kenia but just in time, three days later, registered in Hawaii, so he could become president select of a group of, ahem, Chicago businessmen.

Anyway, keep being amazed about all these Americans who seriously believe that it matters which puppets is elected, while in reality American politics is made in shady offices in London, Tel Aviv and New York.

Anyway, I think ‘conventional’, Hubbert-style peakoil theory only applies to conventional oil: pipe in the sand and pump. I think the shale business means delay of execution of the carbon age. Question remains: how long? 3 years? 10 years, 20 years or a century? That’s the question. And in case it proves to be a century how much damage is going to be caused by poisoning and entire continent?

BillT on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 2:56 pm 



Don’t worry, Arthur, it will not be a century. Probably not even a decade, and possibly this year. Why?

Economists ignore EROEI or just don’t understand it.

The Petroleum industry ignore economics unless it affects their profits so they don’t see the collapse coming. When that happens, it’s game over for almost all markets for a long time. And for dirty oil and gas, probably forever.

Then there is the Sunni/Shiia war brewing in the oil patch of the other big continent. That could bring all of it to a quick halt with SA oil fields ablaze and the Straits blocked for months or years. With terrorist strikes all over the Us and Europe from the native Muslims turned loose on each other in their adopted countries.

The world of today could not survive that shock. Not with every developed nation in the world already bankrupt and depending on imports to live. No oil = no shipping. No shipping = no food for many areas of the world that would only escalate the warfare to other countries.

So, pull up a chair, pop a can, open a bag of pretzels and enjoy the show. There’s nothing you or I can do at this point.

Welch on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 4:06 pm 



Tikiman,

Your bigotry and racism (not to mention clear lack of knowledge on the issues) is not welcome here. This site is for adults. Run along now.

Welch on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 4:08 pm 



Bill, enjoy your comments, and of course you hit the main issues, but I really think you are deluded if you think the world is going to fall apart in the next decade. As much as you would clearly like to see this happen, I don’t think it is going to.

Cheers!

actioncjackson on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 4:54 pm 



“In a forthcoming peer-reviewed study at the American Journal of Public Health, Nisbet and his co-authors find that 76% of people in a recent survey believe oil prices are either “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to triple in the next five years. A dramatic spike in oil prices is a commonly recognized outcome of peak petroleum.
Even more telling is that 69% of respondents believe a sharp rise in oil prices would be either “very harmful” (44%) or “somewhat harmful” (25%) to the health of Americans. According to the survey, strong conservatives were the most sensitive to these possible risks, with 53% believing that a spike in oil prices would be “very harmful” to human health. Similarly, in a separate analysis of the data, those who were strongly “dismissive” of climate change (52%) were the most likely of any subgroup to associate a sharp spike in oil prices with a negative impact on public health.”

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110808170049.htm

“although Americans are unlikely to be aware of the concept of peak petroleum, the level of expert agreement on the issue, or the potentially significant impacts on society, the public does possess a latent sense of an impending energy problem”

http://oilshockhorrorprobe.blogspot.com/2011/08/public-receptive-to-peak-oil-debate-and.html

We’re living on borrowed time, the peak oil fact is well known, especially by people in power. This train is going to hit the wall at full speed.

bor on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 5:28 pm 



Arthur,

There is a big difference between EROEI = 15 and EROEI = 5 because the smaller portion of energy is available for usage. Also, an oil well has a tendency to produce less and less for the same input after it peaks and therefore it requires higher input of energy for the same output. EROEI is becoming smaller and smaller. Saudis pump water into the largest oil field Ghawar, which has declining rate about 8% per year. It is a speculation, of course, because Saudis guard their data. But reality is – oil fields are declining and their EROEI decline as well.

Our infrastructure is getting more and more sophisticated, and needs more and more energy input. It was initially built with a very high EROEI and now it cannot by maintained with low EROEI. Period. The time of cheap oil is over. And the CHEAP OIL is exactly what we need. OIL cannot be replaced with any alternative.

The simple fact that we, consumers, discuss these issues speaks a volume. The Peak is here, my friends.

Arthur on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 8:32 pm 



“Economists ignore EROEI or just don’t understand it. ”

Bill, that is true, but if not even Heinberg can come up with estimates about the real EROEI value of the current shale business, then we have to be prudent ourselves and not jump to conclusions.

simon on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 8:41 pm 



re EROEI research what the person who came up with the concept, Dr Charles A. S. Hall, has to say about EROEI of shale plays.

btw, where is SOS? He might’ve been delusional but I hope he’s alright; just hopefully having an awakening to realities of living in a finite system.

Arthur on Tue, 20th Nov 2012 8:42 pm 



“There is a big difference between EROEI = 15 and EROEI = 5 because the smaller portion of energy is available for usage.”

I said that there is hardly a difference between 100 (oil from SA in the sixties) and 10 (windturbine).

EROEI is a confusing concept. I repeat what I said before and make a comparisson with potato harvest.

EROEI 100 means that if you put 1 potato in the ground you can harvest 100 next season.
EROEI 10 means that you must put 10 potatoes in the ground to harvest 100 next season.

To put it differently: if you starting capital is 100 potatoes and EROEI is 10, then you need to plant 10 potatoes and you can eat 90 in order to harvest 100 again and the cycle can start all over again sustainable. In case of EROEI 100 you only have to plant 1 potato and you can eat 99 to have 100 potatoes again in the next season.

Comparing EROEI 10 and 100 means incomes resp. of 90 and 99 potatoes, a difference of only 10% and not a factor of 10!

EROEI applied to energy same story.

In case of 15:5 the income difference is 14:12 or ca. 16% difference. Not that spectacular either.

BillT on Wed, 21st Nov 2012 1:58 am 



Guys, You all think I am thinking negative. Nope. I am thinking that if I prepare NOW, then I can be pleasantly surprised when it doesn’t happen.

But, if I am deluded to believe that the world will go on slipping slowly into the future with no drastic change and it DOES happen in the next few years, then I am screwed.

I personally think it WILL happen but there are so many reasons that I cannot enumerate them all here. Intuition happens when there are a thousand little clues and your brain puts them all together to make a vision of what’s up. THAT is what I am going on. I read dozens of articles from about 30 worldwide sites every day. Do you?

GregT on Wed, 21st Nov 2012 6:24 am 



Welch,

“Bill, enjoy your comments, and of course you hit the main issues, but I really think you are deluded if you think the world is going to fall apart in the next decade. As much as you would clearly like to see this happen, I don’t think it is going to.”

The world as we have known it for the last 60 or so years is already starting to fall apart, in a big way. Just because someone can see what is occuring does not mean that they wish it to be so. Bill obviously has wisdom and experience on his side. Delusion is pretending that we are not facing insurmountable problems. Delusion is believing that we can continue on our current path of exponential growth on a finite planet with finite resources.

The “just in time” delivery system that we all rely on is within 3 days of total collapse.

Will you be prepared if it happens or will you rely on someone else to take care of you?

Arthur on Wed, 21st Nov 2012 2:02 pm 



If the world is falling apart in the coming decade it will be because of a financial crash or a war in the Gulf, not because of a carbon crash.

GregT on Thu, 22nd Nov 2012 12:37 am 



We have already seen what 147 dollar a barrel of oil did. What do you think will happen the next time it rises that much?

Arthur on Thu, 22nd Nov 2012 1:57 pm 



“We have already seen what 147 dollar a barrel of oil did. What do you think will happen the next time it rises that much?”

The threat of financial collapse again yes, not the world running out of fuel, exactly my point. There will be carbon fuel in the coming decade. Maybe oil for 200$, but NG will compensate. Recession here to stay? Yes. Depression? Maybe, but no carbon fuel supply collapse.