Yes, very true. But it's going to be 2005, and all we've done since then is start energy wars, convert food crops into gasoline, and talk excitedly about $40,000 to $100,000 electric cars.

In other words, we're collectively barking up the wrong trees.

Must have been quite a chore to find GDP charts that terminate right as the recession started. Japan's number of vehicle registrations decreased by 2.6%
1997-2007; all three of your examples have extensive MT networks.





If anything those downturns on Rembrandt's graphs are indicative of the recession kicking in, instead of proving some point about these countries being independent of the need to consume oil.

TheDude, you don't even know what cherry-picking is.

Notice that my charts of oil consumption in Italy, France and Japan began in 2004 and go to the present.

Notice also that my charts of GDP growth in Italy, France and Japan roughly cover the same periods (I couldn't find charts exactly matching the same time periods, but they're close-enough).

In France in 2004-2006, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP was growing.

In Italy from 2004-2007, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP grew during most quarters.

In Japan from 2004-2007, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP grew during most quarters.

Even after the current recession, the economies of all 3 nations is larger than it was in 2004. I can dig up the actual numbers for you if you'd like. In other words:

GDP of all 3 nations > now than in 2004
Oil consumption of all 3 nations < now than in 2004.

Increasing oil consumption is not a prerequisite for economic growth. Really!

I'll try one more time: The nations you selected as your examples have vast investments in mass transit, thus have buttressed themselves against increases in the price of crude oil by not having such a great dependency on fossil fuel powered personal transport, which is not the case with other countries who collectively account for more of the gross world economy, hence my graph of change in oil consumption divided by region, which shows that increase in demand proceeds apace, regardless of changes in individual countries.

Hope - and seriously doubt - that helped.

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that the countries I listed are crowded (or in the case of France, reasonably crowded) nations with mature economies. Their transit investments are more a function of their crowded conditions and their relative wealth than a deliberate attempt to wean themselves off of oil.

With population growth making more and more nations increasingly crowded, and with more and more nations seeing economic growth, over time you will get more and more nations whose economies mature amid their crowdedness, and when that happens oil consumption will grow less and less - and at some point begin to decline. And yet, the economies of these nations will still grow.

This is the bottom line. The only number which matters is overall global demand.

Very interesting news Newman...but I'm still going to say we are in a plateau and won't know the true peak for a few years. I am very interested what will happen when thw world economy really revs up again. Already we are seeing signs of this with a huge increase in oil price.

My guess is that within a year or two, we will see astronomical oil prices again (150-200$/barrel)- again leading to severe economic contraction.

My belief is that we can no longer see sustained growth and cheap or even moderate oil prices ever again.

The discussion is good for all of us. First, Europe and Japan has been on a oil diet for 40 years. The problem is that with all the massive investment in efficiency,high oil taxes, nuclear etc. they still need a huge quantity of imported oil for their societies. If it has taken Europe 40 years to reach this result, when should we start to do what Europe and Japan have done? Growth in oil producing countries some other countries is largely based on subsidizing domestic oil. So we have different parts of the world taking contradicting courses towards oil usage. Cheery picking is a universal sport in this type of environment, which is why I try to rely principally on world data for demand data as flawed as it probably is. Supply is the sum of parts that are easier to discuss on a regional basis.
Another part of this discussion should be "What is the implication if each side of the debate is wrong?" And in this regard, shouldn't a discussion about "minimizing maximum loss" be included under various scenarios.

dude;notice how your graph has "double tops"

looks like only germany had a higher peak than
the early 70's

sorry italy did too
and then very flat

OK I've split off the discussion of multiple peaks to here,
http://peakoil.com/peak-oil-discussion/ ... 55372.html

Lets try to keep this thread a little more on the line of what next or however newman wants to go.

I tend to think we are still too close to say with any confidence that we are at the top. Especially since the highest price and the highest production month was last year.

But that guess just came straight out of my ear. What I'd like to see is no clear peak, the world just bumping up against the ceiling until we get the hint, and maybe scrape along till the population goes over the top.

Hey, a guy can wish can't he?

I know, wish in one hand and spit in the other and see which fills faster...

It's at least a number that matters. What matters is per capita oil consumption compared to per capita real GDP. As a whole, per capita real GDP has increased a bit more than per capta oil over the past few decades, and I expect that trend will continue with higher oil prices.