Michael Lynch - Disputing Peak Oil

pstarr · **Posted:** Thu May 29, 2008 10:42 am

woodsman wrote:

Hi I'm new to this forum....enjoy your posts...I am in the oil/gas well service business....I was thinking of all the fuel required to bring a well to production and I am blown away....I'm sure I has missed many uses of fuel but the ones that come to mind are : seismic trucks,pickups,4 wheelers, helicopers----doziers for roads,location developement, backhoes, trucks to bring in location gravel for rig bases,moving the rigs, trailers, potable toilets, filling mud pit, water , water wells,and water handling pumps cement,down hole chemicals, delivery of diesel for generators, delivery of drill pipe, production tools,casing,b.o.p., flare ,rig welders,,lighting generators , catering,rig relocation, frac tanks, filling of frac tanks, well stimulation,tank batteries, fences,pipeline clearing,digging, laying, ...many of these engines are run 24 /day while at the well locations....Are we using yesterday's production to power today's production? This does not even touch water usage, and pollution..

Sounds like you understand the idea of EROEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) and the concept of Net Energy.

It obviously requires a lot of petroleum to get petroleum. There have been nearly endless arguments regarding the economic and thermodynamic wisdom of investing in shale oil, tar sands, ultra deep etc. when we perhaps might want to put that effort into weaning ourselves off petroleum.

Welcome. Looking foward to more stories from the oil patch.

ROCKMAN · **Posted:** Thu May 29, 2008 11:23 am

Tin,

Thank you so much...I have seen the light and can now put the whole picture together:

It was the Bilderberg group that sank the Titantic. I've discovered the original name of the group was the "Build-a-berg" group but the name was eventually altered by the distortion of speaking though black hoods.

Don't be mad...you have the right to your theories. I don't agee with the general theory any great hidden hand truly controlling all aspects of society but that's just my dumb opinion.

But it was impossible to resist teasing you. Hang on to your beliefs...until you replace them with others. That's what I do.

TonyPrep · **Posted:** Thu May 29, 2008 12:34 pm

Meanwhile, back in Lynch land ...

In response to the news of a big fall in US oil stocks, with the EIA saying that the fall was influenced by delays in unloading tankers, Lynch had this to say:

Quote:

"The bearish demand outlook is starting to weigh on people,'' said Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy & Economic Research in Winchester, Massachusetts. "The note about temporary delays means that the crude number is meaningless.''

The report from the EIA was followed by a $4.43 fall in the oil price, though it's since recovered almost a dollar of that.

VMarcHart · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:09 am

Woodsman, I'm new too, and also work in the oil and gas industry. Welcome!

Pstarr brings up EROEI. Thanks! People often forget that oil is not energy. Energy is --or "was"-- the trillions and trillions of solar energy units used to grow the vegetation eaten by the "dinosaurs" and the dinosaurs that ate dinosaurs, and again, the trillions and trillions of solar energy units used to decompose the dinosaurs into oil. We often measure the energy content of a barrel, often calculate how much energy it takes to extract the barrel available, but we seldomly calculate how energy took to make the oil inside the barrel.

DantesPeak · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:13 am

TonyPrep wrote:

Meanwhile, back in Lynch land ...

In response to the news of a big fall in US oil stocks, with the EIA saying that the fall was influenced by delays in unloading tankers, Lynch had this to say:

Quote:

"The bearish demand outlook is starting to weigh on people,'' said Michael Lynch, president of Strategic Energy & Economic Research in Winchester, Massachusetts. "The note about temporary delays means that the crude number is meaningless.''

The report from the EIA was followed by a $4.43 fall in the oil price, though it's since recovered almost a dollar of that.

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record. In addition, the temporary tanker delay farce has been thoroughly debunked in our US Weekly Inventory thread.

TonyPrep · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 1:46 pm

VMarcHart wrote:

trillions of solar energy units used to decompose the dinosaurs into oil.

Not dinosaurs; plankton, mainly.

FreddyH · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 6:18 pm

DantesPeak wrote:

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record.

Lynch doesn't need to be correct all the time ... just correct more often than amateurs like yourself...

DantesPeak · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:44 pm

FreddyH wrote:

DantesPeak wrote:

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record.

Lynch doesn't need to be correct all the time ... just correct more often than amateurs like yourself...

Moderators: Please remove FreddyH's post.

It is wrong and insulting to me, and other posters here who want to contribute.

Thanks.

Troyboy1208 · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:17 pm

Freddy is just jealous because he is not an expert

TonyPrep · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:45 pm

FreddyH wrote:

DantesPeak wrote:

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record.

Lynch doesn't need to be correct all the time ... just correct more often than amateurs like yourself...

And has he been? Anecdotally, he's been worse than a coin toss.

pstarr · **Posted:** Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:57 pm

TonyPrep wrote:

FreddyH wrote:

DantesPeak wrote:

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record.

Lynch doesn't need to be correct all the time ... just correct more often than amateurs like yourself...

And has he been? Anecdotally, he's been worse than a coin toss.

Hey.

Don't argue with Freddy because he is an expert. It says so on this web site.

TonyPrep · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:42 pm

I see this discussion has been un-stickied. Still, I'm sure it'll provide many "I told you so" moments, in the future.

A quote from Lynch (in 1998) came to light in another discussion:

Quote:

Lynch expects the world to have enough oil for the next 300 years

Doomsayers predict new world oil crunch

It explains why it was so hard to get him to give an estimate of when oil will peak and why he often gave the impression that he thinks oil will never peak.

PraiseDoom · **Joined:** Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:00 am **Posts:** 296

pstarr wrote:

TonyPrep wrote:

FreddyH wrote:

DantesPeak wrote:

Lynch seems to get a free pass in the media, whom don't ever seem to review his track record.

Lynch doesn't need to be correct all the time ... just correct more often than amateurs like yourself...

And has he been? Anecdotally, he's been worse than a coin toss.

Hey.

Don't argue with Freddy because he is an expert. It says so on this web site.

So...when one website expert contradicts another websites expert...which website wins?

ROCKMAN · **Posted:** Thu Jun 19, 2008 6:04 pm

There's not much FreddyH will likely ever agree upon but I'm glad he's here. Diversity doesn't mean we will all agree. So I will jump on his side of the fence for a moment (kinda). If you look at in from a stone cold perspective there will never be PO.

There will always be enough oil for those that can afford it or who are strong enough to take it away from the weaker. Thus supply will meet demand.

Not the sort of existance I'd care to be a part but it's one way of looking at the future

ROCKMAN · **Posted:** Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:16 am

Thanks for the update PD. I'm often a sarcastic smartass myself so it took a lot out of me to try to be cordial to him.

I feel much better now.

Michael Lynch - Disputing Peak Oil

Who is online