[Pops]

People are such a tribal lot, we beat our chest and mark our territory and cut off our nose. The interesting thing about this place is we don't seem to go in so much for the "plea to authority." I think that can be both good and bad. Good because we are not so inclined to go along with whatever the guru of the moment is preaching but bad because we don't get much chance for the gurus to respond directly to our questions.

I'd love to see more collaboration between the "academic" world of conferences and white papers and the grassroots world of anonymous forums like PO.com. I don't see why it is so hard. Westexas seems to get along fine here, he makes his points, others ask questions or challenge him and he responds. Same as others with authoritative credentials like the Rocks (doc & man), oilystuff, etc.

Such a collaboration between ASPO (or whatever) and PO.com would be great. Really all it takes is for the folks there to show up and participate and give us a reason to contribute to their efforts.

.

[John_A]

There are a number of things in the post by Sam in Nebraska regarding ASPO-USA that need to be cleared up.

First, I think Sam mis-characterizes the situation with The Oil Drum. I am not privy to all the details, but it was not the external force of a "drain" that led to the decision to put the TOD website on hiatus, but a deliberate assessment by the TOD board that something needed to change. You can disagree with the decision, but it was made for good reason.

Did Sam characterize the lack of participation of ASPO/TOD members at conferences like the recent Unconventional Resources Technical Conference in Denver correctly? Did you have a booth, or give presentations, or fight the ideas being discussed? Maybe Sam just missed them?

And the TOD board is apparently speaking in what could be easily viewed a forked tongue. So does ASPO/TOD believe that peak oil is dead because of exactly the reasons the scientists and economists already knew about even before ASPO-USA and TOD were formed:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/10093

or because it was such a wild success...even if it can't even stop traffic jams (a relatively obvious consequence of a lack of liquid fuels that even the layman could see):

http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/201 ... ncept.html

ASPO-USA is also effecting deliberate changes to how we approach our work. The simple fact is that the term "peak oil" has worn out much of its usefulness and become a liability.

Sam seems to indicate something similar, and mentions the consequences at a substantial meeting of professionals. He didn't name names, perhaps you could find out from your members who were there why this even came up?

After narrowly focusing attention on VOLUME of oil supply for so long, we should not be surprised that an uptick in supply volume in some places is now tripping us up.

Perhaps another way of putting this would be: we should not be surprised that an uptick in supply volume....."causing the dissolution of multiple online forums on the topic, stopping the annual conference in its tracks, generating negative publicity for the professionals involved, and fleeing the field of battle and changing the name and topic as fast as possible to disassociate ourselves from how poorly this has gone"?

To be clear, oil and gas are still central to the story that we are trying to tell, but we must tell that story in a broader context and connect with the things that most people understand and care about--in particular, how oil and energy relate to the economy.

People care about the price of oil, they don't give a rat's behind about how it relates to the economy other than that they can commute to work, heat their homes, use their jet skiis on the weekend, and the price of doing this isn't outrageous. Certainly the "enough" issue has been settled.

Sam may have created some other misperceptions about ASPO-USA. We are a primarily a volunteer network of allied professionals and concerned citizens organized to share information and help people understand and adapt to a new energy reality. We are based in Washington DC, but at present we do not focus on "lobbying."

Sam said that no one from TOD or ASPO was at a national conference of petroleum engineers, petroleum geologists and geophysicists in August in Denver. Are you saying that your allied professionals aren't petroleum engineers, petroleum geologists,and geophysicists who go and participate in technical meetings of this national significance and caliber?

This is easy enough to answer I suppose, how many ASPO personnel were there? Gave talks? Ran a booth handing out the materials of ASPO? Did a POSTER?

As far as not focused on lobbying, perhaps you don't consider this "lobbying", but making press releases on the front steps of Forrestal and trying to convince the professionals on the topic of doing...something....sure looks like lobbying.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 12318.html

https://www.facebook.com/aspousa/posts/364718940290366

Interesting that the link to the article on what was learned while pitching the EIA doesn't work at your website. Any reason for that?

Hosting an annual conference has been the most visible part of our work. But the effort required and value of holding a "peak oil" conference reached a point of diminishing returns. If our goal is to reach beyond the peak oil community, we needed to re-think the conference and develop our capacity in other areas. Consequently, we elected to not host a conference this year.

And so Sam didn't mis-characterize this one at all either. Speculated about it before you even announced it. Interesting that after Sam mentioned your website hadn't been updated in months, it also has been updated.

Sounds to me more like you've confirmed nearly every single thing he speculated about in the other thread.

Better luck with the reconfiguration into a financial angle thing I guess, certainly it is much easier to mess around and spin a tale in the social science of economics rather than the hard sciences of geology and engineering.

[SeaGypsy]

Talk about intellectually thumping Lol! "Left hook, 2 left jabs right straight punch- and a kick to the nuts!" Reminds me of Thailand...

[americandream]

There are a number of things in the post by Sam in Nebraska regarding ASPO-USA that need to be cleared up.

First, I think Sam mis-characterizes the situation with The Oil Drum. I am not privy to all the details, but it was not the external force of a "drain" that led to the decision to put the TOD website on hiatus, but a deliberate assessment by the TOD board that something needed to change. You can disagree with the decision, but it was made for good reason.

ASPO-USA is also effecting deliberate changes to how we approach our work. The simple fact is that the term "peak oil" has worn out much of its usefulness and become a liability. After narrowly focusing attention on VOLUME of oil supply for so long, we should not be surprised that an uptick in supply volume in some places is now tripping us up.

It is not easy for an organization named the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas to move beyond peak oil, but that is what we must do to bring our work to broader and more influential audiences.

To be clear, oil and gas are still central to the story that we are trying to tell, but we must tell that story in a broader context and connect with the things that most people understand and care about--in particular, how oil and energy relate to the economy.

We have been planning a new website called The Energy Xchange that will focus on the energy-economy nexus and positive actions to reduce the economic risks of America's oil dependence. The site is aimed at audiences beyond the so-called peak oil community, but when TOD announced it would cease regular operation, we thought it would be appropriate for ASPO-USA to offer to serve as a home for TOD refugees.

The Energy Xchange, however, was not ready for launch, so we created a minimalist INTERIM site (as noted on the homepage) that would provide continuity for the TOD community. The TOD community may scatter regardless, but we thought it worth an effort.

Sam may have created some other misperceptions about ASPO-USA. We are a primarily a volunteer network of allied professionals and concerned citizens organized to share information and help people understand and adapt to a new energy reality. We are based in Washington DC, but at present we do not focus on "lobbying."

Hosting an annual conference has been the most visible part of our work. But the effort required and value of holding a "peak oil" conference reached a point of diminishing returns. If our goal is to reach beyond the peak oil community, we needed to re-think the conference and develop our capacity in other areas. Consequently, we elected to not host a conference this year.

...Spam Deleted...

With regards,

Jan Lars Mueller
Executive Director, ASPO-USA

It is not simply an economic issue. In fact to look at economy in exclusion to the culture that gives life to the particular economic forces, is to miss the elephant in the room. As capitalist culture spreads worldwide, the hands of the peak resourcing clock inexorably approach midnight. Explaining this in a user friendly manner is the challenge as it is largely a political message at odds with the status quo.

[dorlomin]

imitate Americans, we have more than enough gumption and originality in all sorts of arenas for our know-how to spill over to those paying attention.

You really have no clue, do you.

[SeaGypsy]

We have a thread for the progress of steady state economics- it reflects the actuality: economists aren't interested. Growth is the great world religion- unquestionable to the vast majority of political economists. A website about peak oil economics?- More like a blog on steady state economic theory development- or a wolf in lambs clothing.

[John_A]

imitate Americans, we have more than enough gumption and originality in all sorts of arenas for our know-how to spill over to those paying attention.

You really have no clue, do you.

I know that America had declining production as recently as a few years ago. And not now.

I recommend that the Brits stop worrying about this:




stop being cry baby whiners and go find some of this to frack:

[Loki]

Lastly, some of you interpreted my statement that the TERM "peak oil" had reached a limit in its usefulness as a dismissal of the CONCEPT of peak oil and/or a slight of the peak oil community (how would I even be associated with ASPO-USA if that were the case?).

Fair enough. If you think "peak oil" is not a useful term in your efforts to educate/evangelize, that's fine. I appreciate pragmatism.

But I don't bother to educate or evangelize. I act as an example best I can. Peak oil is an obvious fact, but I don't bother to try to convince anyone about it. There's only one thing that will spur action among the populace at large, and that's reality. And it's knocking on the door.

Good luck in your efforts. Hope the moshpit here in your first thread here won't put you off contributing more.

[ralfy]

FWIW, one can read a short and clear explanation of the idea here:

http://theconversation.com/peak-oil-is- ... arth-17542

and for more details:

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/take/pe ... at-way/963

[John_A]

FWIW, one can read a short and clear explanation of the idea here:

http://theconversation.com/peak-oil-is- ... arth-17542

An explanation of what idea? That ASPO is swapping out its website name to better hide from bad production rate calls? That ASPO can't do a conference because no one might show up, peak oil being so earth shattering and all? That increasing production in the US has made it difficult to sell only declining oil production prognostication when it has been going the other way at rates never before seen in the history of the country in question? You mean those ideas?

and for more details:

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/take/pe ... at-way/963

Yeah, that link didn't have any details on why ASPO might be wise in doing all those things I listed above either.

[SamInNebraska]

There are a number of things in the post by Sam in Nebraska regarding ASPO-USA that need to be cleared up.

Jan! Excellent!

First, I think Sam mis-characterizes the situation with The Oil Drum. I am not privy to all the details, but it was not the external force of a "drain" that led to the decision to put the TOD website on hiatus, but a deliberate assessment by the TOD board that something needed to change. You can disagree with the decision, but it was made for good reason.

And saving ones professional credibility is a "good reason". It is one thing for a retired academic with a little lead left in their pencil to want to play savior, quite something else for a working professional to be branded as someone who didn't consider the obvious forces of economics in their analysis.

ASPO-USA is also effecting deliberate changes to how we approach our work. The simple fact is that the term "peak oil" has worn out much of its usefulness and become a liability. After narrowly focusing attention on VOLUME of oil supply for so long, we should not be surprised that an uptick in supply volume in some places is now tripping us up.

"Become a liability", a nice way to say "when you declare a peak and the silly information just keeps going up, it is time to change the subject".

A professional suggestion so you don't go down this path again, any serious discussion of peak oil is just a subset of the more important conversation about resource depletion in general, and that issue cannot be discussed without having some resource economists involved, and to be honest, the board of ASPO looks a wee-bit light in that regard.

It is not easy for an organization named the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas to move beyond peak oil, but that is what we must do to bring our work to broader and more influential audiences.

And there are other advantages as well, such as ducking any comparisons to the more rabid enthusiatists who want to use peak oil as the trigger for their favorite "what the world must look like in 5 years because of it". As far as influential audiences, like who? The lobbying you did of DOE and EIA were aimed at the organization which handles not just oil issues but all sorts of estimates of energy efficiency, advocacy for both LNG exports and nuke design, all sorts of "broader" energy issues. Unless you are referring to altering your pitch to incorporate the "greens" more?

We have been planning a new website called The Energy Xchange that will focus on the energy-economy nexus and positive actions to reduce the economic risks of America's oil dependence. The site is aimed at audiences beyond the so-called peak oil community, but when TOD announced it would cease regular operation, we thought it would be appropriate for ASPO-USA to offer to serve as a home for TOD refugees.

Probably didn't hurt that ASPO board members are contributors to the ASPO-USA website and conferences either, right? As far as "refugees", that is again a nice way to put it. Would "rats fleeing the inking ship" be about the same idea, with a more accurate connotation?

Sam may have created some other misperceptions about ASPO-USA. We are a primarily a volunteer network of allied professionals and concerned citizens organized to share information and help people understand and adapt to a new energy reality. We are based in Washington DC, but at present we do not focus on "lobbying."

Really? Misconceptions? What did your "allied professionals" tell you about the comments made during the URTeC opening session a few few weeks ago? Why weren't the TOD members mentioned there by name defended vigorously? Where was the ASPO booth, explaining to all those petroleum engineers, petroleum geologists and exploration geosphysicsits how they had gotten it all wrong? Did I miss your booth, me being admittedly lazy when it comes time to wander the exhibition hall and talk to everyone. And certainly I can't be at every talk given, or poster explained. So just let me know where ASPO was and I'll run back and check the proceedings and examine how well you held up your organizations values to the people who do this for a living.

If your organization can't be bothered, doesn't have the professional depth, or lacks the scientific background to hang with the core professionals who is left for you to talk to...the janitors in the building?

Hosting an annual conference has been the most visible part of our work. But the effort required and value of holding a "peak oil" conference reached a point of diminishing returns. If our goal is to reach beyond the peak oil community, we needed to re-think the conference and develop our capacity in other areas. Consequently, we elected to not host a conference this year.

I guess I didn't mis-represent this either then, did I? So as your organization "diminshing returns" into the sunset, that URTeC conference was holding its first annual meeting, and collecting thousands of people. So...the volunteer "allied professionals" dry up and blow away...the real professionals fire up new conferences and have already scheduled next years.

I have to ask Jan, did I get ANYTHING wrong at all? To heck with just mis-representing, it sounds like I scored 5X5 in ferreting out what was going on. And thanks for updating the website, although it has become quite a bit more difficult to find all those older comments about your non-lobbying efforts with DOE and EIA, those stories were fascinating. One question....if I recall correctly it was mentioned that the EIA offered to let you see their models, or ASPO had planned a review of them in some way, that you might critique them and come back with suggestions for improvement. How did that go, with the crack allied professionals of ASPO on the case? Did their cost and supply equations hold up to ASPO scrutiny? Was their well level buildout in OGSM appropriate, considering the comments made by the likes of Berman and Hughes?

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/assump ... il_gas.pdf

Did Jeff's net export razz-a-ma-tazz stick as a good substitute for the kind of bottom up detail present in NEMS?

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/overview/

It has been months since you visited the place, by now you must have a working alternative, or perhaps even a replacement? Income elasticities and expected changes in refinery capacity and transportation assumptions to model CAFE and all those sorts of things that those guys do, and according to ASPO need help with from well informed citizens and all? That was the slant on those reports which are becoming more difficult to find, that well informed citizens should be advising lest those real professionals do something shady. So...how has the citizen board recommendations worked out? Do they have a summary of improvements to the EIA models, perhaps coding suggestions, different econometrics meant to improve when and if LNG exports take place, or the onset of different types of production in Alaska, or...anything really. How did it all go?

[sparky]

.
The oil drum was good , R.I. P.
certainly the economics of depletion are what it's all about ,
that's what will make people ( and politicians ) wince.
My concern is not with a barrel meter per se , it's only a metric easy to follows
what make me blanch is the food situation , peak oil , I suppose , mean peak food
the black stuff is only an index
@ Tanada... "discussions of posts made by others in the style of rational argument"

Here !! rational !! , someone should have told me !

[dorlomin]

I know that America had declining production as recently as a few years ago. And not now.

I recommend that the Brits stop worrying about this:
*****
stop being cry baby whiners and go find some of this to frack:

You are just shouting gung ho slogans and posting picture you have googled. This is not really forming an argument.

In the real world, the realities of trying to drill in a densly populated island are a world away from North Dakota or south Texas.

To be frank you come across as dim and uniformed, little more than a regurgitator of slogans.

Almost as if you were a little short on sense.

[Plantagenet]

any serious discussion of peak oil is just a subset of the more important conversation about resource depletion in general

Actually no.

Scientific studies of ecology and population dynamics show that animal and plant communities are typically constrained by one key factor---this is the LIMITING FACTOR. For some plankton the limiting factor is the amount of Fe dissolved in seawater, for wolves the limiting may be the supply of bunnies etc etc

There is good reason to think the limiting factor in modern industrial society is energy with oil constituting a key part of the energy supply

[ROCKMAN]

dorlomin - Drilling in urban areas can be done. But it isn't easy and it’s that much more expensive. Look up oil development in downtown Los Angeles. And it certainly won't be pleasant for the folks living in the area. Even in our spacious south Texas the Eagle Ford boom has been difficult for many locals as well as ripping up the road ways. In fact in one county they’ll replace about 80 miles of asphalt road with gravel because maintenance has gotten too expensive. But OTOH Texas is making a lot of money in the process and we are adding to our energy supply.

It’s never going to be an easy trade-off for us or our Brit cousins. Someone will be forced to involuntarily pay a price. The only question is when that price will become acceptable to the commons…not if IMHO.

[John_A]

In the real world, the realities of trying to drill in a densly populated island are a world away from North Dakota or south Texas.

Agreed. And as anyone in California might mention, it isn't the drilling in North Dakota or Texas you use as an example, but that of Southern California. And yes, you can use that American know-how to drill in densely populated areas. The pictures were necessary as a demonstration for those who can't be bothered to find out for themselves that America has already solved the density problem and want to play strawmen games with North Dakota and Texas.

[John_A]

dorlomin - Drilling in urban areas can be done.

And produced as well. But you can't expect someone in a country which would prefer to sit around and complain about how awful their situation is, or spends all their time guessing at the names and sex of royal babies to actually open their eyes and find out that the problem isn't the drilling and production, but the lack of can-do attitude. Heavens no! It's the Russkies fault! It's the politicians fault! It's the frackers fault! Just whatever you do, DON'T look in a mirror, you might realize that because it isn't an American looking back at you, you won't ever get it done.

[John_A]

any serious discussion of peak oil is just a subset of the more important conversation about resource depletion in general

Actually no.

Scientific studies of ecology and population dynamics show that animal and plant communities are typically constrained by one key factor---this is the LIMITING FACTOR. For some plankton the limiting factor is the amount of Fe dissolved in seawater, for wolves the limiting may be the supply of bunnies etc etc

There is good reason to think the limiting factor in modern industrial society is energy with oil constituting a key part of the energy supply

Lebig's Law of the Minimum is quite reasonable, and plays right into the hands of the economists in this regard. Why? Because oil isn't the "key" part of the modern industrial society, gasoline, diesel and jet fuel are. And those are manufactured from various chemical feedstocks, an important part of which just happens to be crude oil. But just because it is important doesn't mean it is even necessary, and that is price and resource size dependent.

I recommend table 15 on page 87 for those who weren't able to take Stauffer's economic geology course at Harvard. Apply the rule of the penny and folks, it becomes obvious real fast that the issue AIN'T the problem of where that chemical feedstock comes from.

http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/BOEM/ ... 08-004.pdf

[sparky]

.
Yes , certainly conventional crude is not used ,it's only the major feed for all those gorgeous products
other feeds are suitable for substitution , unconventional , coal , bio-fuels ....basically anything which can provide usable carbon

the issue is not so much with extraction , depletion is a given ,
within the limit of his comprehension Marion Hubbert has be proven right.
Now the Earth is scoured from poles to mid oceans for more of the stuff
As Rockman has pointed out often , the critical metric is the price.
the price is the result of the supply-demand , supply-demand determine growth
on can suppose negative supply will give negative growth by demand destruction

[SeaGypsy]

The last scrapings will eventually be nationalized and set aside for emergency (Government) purposes only. How expensive it gets before then is anyone's guess; but the last bits won't be for sale- they will be for the Police State to use enforcing the last shreds of public order- (protecting the elite).