Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Doomers and Bad Assumptions

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 15:36:56

Outcast_Searcher wrote:
Plantagenet wrote:And just look at climate change....my prediction that the Paris Accords wouldn't do a thing to stop CO2 emissions was 100% right, and the main global warming predictions---accelerating sea level rise, accelerating ice loss, heat waves, forest fires, drought---are all right on schedule as advertised.

Yes, the doomers got ONE right.


Thank you.

Outcast_Searcher wrote:Things are getting worse and expensive and inconvenient on the scale of decades. But that's not doom.


Actually, if things get bad enough and expensive enough it IS doom. And the assumption that the rate at which things are getting worse will always be the same gradual rate of change as it is now is just as open to question as the assumption that the rate things are getting worse will greatly accelerate. We don't precisely know the rate at which things will be changing in the future .....but we definitely know for many enviornmental and economic problems in the US and the world the current trend is not our friend.

Outcast_Searcher wrote:Also, we're talking long term doom, on the scale of centuries. Not the next week/ next month / next year predict and re-predict on failure nonsense the short term Cassandras love to engage in for many years on end.


Thats what called a "straw man" argument, i.e. when you create a silly opposing point of view and then decisively demolish your own straw man.

I don't think there are a whole of doomers on this site calling for doom to occur "next week" or "next month" or even "next year." So the whole question of doom happening "next week" really isn't even an issue worthy of rebuttal.

Image
Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21511
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby tita » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 15:39:47

mmasters wrote:What other bad assumptions did the peak oil doomers make?

That mankind would hear them and change its behaviour (the BAU) to avoid whatever consequence bring peak oil. (this apply also to the IPCC)

The rate of extraction increased, the rate of consumption increased. We are more or less in the same dynamic of the beginning of the 2000's (but we have now smartphones, facebook and fancy electric cars). Still, americans are looking at rising gas prices as most of them can't afford EVs. The POTUS call on OPEC (and Russia) to increase production to ease prices. Michael Lynch is back at telling how Peak Oil is nonsense. India is set to increase its oil consumption at a fast rate... Crisis touch several oil producers (Venezuela, Lybia)

Yeah, it looks a lot like 2005, with small variations.
User avatar
tita
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 16:01:27

PS: This is the 20th anniversary of the first slick water frack job. The WSJ has written a nice bit on Nick Steinsberger---the man who invented the FIRST SLICKWATER FRACK JOB and changed the world.


Well, Rockman can jump in here and correct me if I'm wrong but so-called slickwater fracks were actually the first fracks ever done many, many years ago. They fell out of favor when the industry went to gels and high viscosity frack fluids which were the norm for many years. What Steinsberger did was essentially "reinvent the wheel" i.e. he simply got rid of most of the gels and polymers which was, in fact, the way fracks were done many years before (we were doing clean up fracks with very little additives to water 15 years before they were deployed in the Barnett). Of course, it hadn't been tried at that point in the Barnett so he gets credit for that and the surge of activity that it brought back to the shale industry but he didn't invent the technique. My bet is Rockman did a few slickwater or slickwater look alike fracks in his days in the Austin Chalk.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6126
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 16:30:47

The WSJ has written a nice bit on Nick Steinsberger---the man who invented the FIRST SLICKWATER FRACK JOB and changed the world.


we were doing clean up fracks with very little additives to water 15 years before they were deployed in the Barnett.


Perhaps you should contact the WSJ and see if you can get in on the credit. They seem to think the modern fracking revolution started with Nick Steinsberger who then was with Mitchell Energy.

DISH, Texas—Twenty years ago this month, a well was drilled here that changed the world.

Nothing at the time suggested the unassuming well in this rural town north of Fort Worth would hobble OPEC, the powerful oil cartel that had governed prices of the world’s most important commodity for more than a generation. Or that it would help turn the U.S. into a global energy exporter, or shuffle the geopolitical deck.

But it did all of that—and more. The well used hydraulic fracturing to crack the incredibly tight shale rocks below. It fired the first shot in the fracking revolution—a blast soon felt in Riyadh, Tehran and Moscow.

“I had no idea it would cause so much change. I was just trying to keep my job,” said Nick Steinsberger on a recent visit to the well pad. He was the engineer who obtained permission to try a new approach to completing the well that had been drilled a mile and a half deep into a thick grey wedge of rock known as the Barnett Shale.

Mr. Steinsberger, now 54, called the experiment “my slick-water frack.” It was the first commercially successful use of sand, water and chemicals, pumped into the shale under high pressure, to break open the rock and unleash the natural gas trapped inside. It was the beginning of modern fracking.


Image
Nick Steinsberger----the man who started the fracking revolution and changed the world

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21511
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 16:39:54

Michael Lynch writes (again) about the death of Peak oil
what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil

Mr. Lynch notes (for the umpteenth time) that the predictions that peak oil would occur in 2005 were wrong.

He goes on to tell us we can rest assured that all is well now, and the specter of peak oil need trouble us no more.

Mr. Lynch does make one boneheaded mistake---he used to post here occasionally and in his new article he refers to this very website as peakoil.net instead of peakoil.com. Its good to know the man is not totally perfect and not always right in all he says, as his latest article would lead one to believe.

Cheers!
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21511
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 17:59:22

Mr. Steinsberger, now 54, called the experiment “my slick-water frack.” It was the first commercially successful use of sand, water and chemicals, pumped into the shale under high pressure, to break open the rock and unleash the natural gas trapped inside. It was the beginning of modern fracking.


this is classic reporter not knowing the subject they are talking about.
slick water when it was first used by Steinsburger was just the original frack fluid sans large amounts of gel. As a consequence, it was basically water and a bit of soap which is exactly what was used for fracks back in the eighties and nineties prior to gel polymers and low vis fluids. If you don't believe me do a bit of research. I know I'm right....I was there when we used water with little in the way of additives to do clean up fracks.
And when they say "It was the first commercially successful use of sand, water and chemicals, pumped into the shale under high pressure, to break open the rock and unleash the natural gas trapped inside"
slickwater does not have sand in it. In the frack described by Steinsburger back then he was not using any propant just the regular fracking fluid with less and less gel and more water and no where near the pumping rates of modern fracks. The fact it is "slickwater" means it has very little in the way of "chemicals", basically just soap suds to reduce viscosity. It wasn't until much later that other chemicals were used to lower viscosity and help penetration which is when slickwater fracs really came into their own. Originally they were mainly used to lower costs (gels were expensive) but through time with the introduction of friction reducers wells could be pumped at much higher rates which allowed for larger sized fracks and greater IP rates.
Now they may be right that this was the first time water was used without gels as a fracking fluid in shales, but it had long been used without gels for carbonates and sandstone reservoirs both to clean up damage zones as well as in enhancing permeability in tight reservoirs. It was generally avoided in shales in the early days due to worries about the prescence of smectites (swelling clays).
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6126
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby GHung » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 18:15:20

Plantagenet wrote:Michael Lynch writes (again) about the death of Peak oil
what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil

Mr. Lynch notes (for the umpteenth time) that the predictions that peak oil would occur in 2005 were wrong.

He goes on to tell us we can rest assured that all is well now, and the specter of peak oil need trouble us no more.

Mr. Lynch does make one boneheaded mistake---he used to post here occasionally and in his new article he refers to this very website as peakoil.net instead of peakoil.com. Its good to know the man is not totally perfect and not always right in all he says, as his latest article would lead one to believe.

Cheers!


There is a peakoil.net (http://www.peakoil.net) which has been around for years:

Peakoil.net has expanded to be one of the leading green voices throughout the internet. Covering all topics green over the past few years, we recognized that more focused attention was needed to be put on new and expanding markets that prioritize sustainability.

We are the flagship blog that started it all. We focus on delivering green news and tips with a down to earth approach that anyone can apply to their daily life.

Our green tips have grown substantially over the past few years, and we’re proud to have so many tips that people can apply in their daily life.

Our blog became a great resource for anyone that has questions in the environmental area.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2386
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby pstarr » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 18:31:49

Peakoil.net. Blah.

WTF does greenwashing have to do with overshoot and decline? Not just oil, but phosphorus cobolt rare earth metals H3 and a host of other critical minerals and nutrients that are used up and gone. All the permaculture dreams will not bring back the earth
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby GHung » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 21:28:08

pstarr wrote:Peakoil.net. Blah.

WTF does greenwashing have to do with overshoot and decline? Not just oil, but phosphorus cobolt rare earth metals H3 and a host of other critical minerals and nutrients that are used up and gone. All the permaculture dreams will not bring back the earth


Just sayin' ......
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2386
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby pstarr » Fri 29 Jun 2018, 22:57:28

It's like this place, anything but peak. Just more blather re AGW and AI
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 30 Jun 2018, 05:59:32

Some assumed that oil price would soar and stay high but didn't realize that economies would crash if that happened.

Also, others select one crisis and ignore the others, not realizing that they amplify each other.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4876
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 30 Jun 2018, 06:02:02

mmasters wrote:I can think of two.

1) Ghawar is tapped out and (2) technology couldn't help us get past peak oil.

What other bad assumptions did the peak oil doomers make?


The effects of peak oil take place even before oil sources are tapped out. Also, technology hasn't helped us get past peak oil, especially given the point that oil production per capita (which is a more logical metric) peaked back in 1979.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4876
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 30 Jun 2018, 06:56:58

Also, technology hasn't helped us get past peak oil,

No, in fact it has sped up the depletion process and thus reduced the time period at which we arrive at the stage when the production of oil is not economically viable
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9570
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby asg70 » Sun 01 Jul 2018, 11:50:33

Plantagenet wrote:Michael Lynch writes (again) about the death of Peak oil
what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil

Mr. Lynch notes (for the umpteenth time) that the predictions that peak oil would occur in 2005 were wrong.

He goes on to tell us we can rest assured that all is well now, and the specter of peak oil need trouble us no more.


Good article. For once, Plant has made a valid contribution to the site.

BTW, with so little activity here it's hardly worth mentioning this site exists anymore.
[space to store bad short-term prediction currently vacant]
asg70
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 01 Jul 2018, 13:06:57

asg70 wrote:
Plantagenet wrote:Michael Lynch writes (again) about the death of Peak oil
what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil

Mr. Lynch notes (for the umpteenth time) that the predictions that peak oil would occur in 2005 were wrong.

He goes on to tell us we can rest assured that all is well now, and the specter of peak oil need trouble us no more.


Good article. Plant has made a valid contribution to the site.


Thank you, asg/mos/ennui.

But I think Mr. Lynch and also those posters here endorsing the idea that "technology has helped us get past peak oil," are celebrating prematurely.

There is no doubt technology has DELAYED peak oil. The predictions by Hubbert that the US peaked in 1970 and by Colin Campbell and Ken Deffeyes and others that global peak oil would occur ca. 2005 are clearly wrong, and the development of tight shale oil resources using improved technology get the credit for proving them wrong.

But DELAYING peak oil isn't the same as "getting past it." DELAYING peak oil just means we've postponed peak oil to some future date thanks to developing tight shale oil resources. But we're still going to hit peak oil. Its a finite resource and we're using it up. We're not past peak oil at all......its inevitable that it is going to occur sometime in the future.

Cheers!
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21511
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 01 Jul 2018, 15:09:54

Mr. Lynch, Plant?

Excuse me. I always had him penned as Mikey or Spike or . . . the Duderino or something? :P (I think he now posts here now as AdamB/Mos/whatever) Anyway, here is a just a bit of his prognosticating blunders. All from our short time here at peakoildotcom.

pstarr wrote:
yportne wrote:Michael C Lynch pronouncements 1999. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... 1N5fEGjZvg

Nice find yportne. So what do you take away? I scanned his posts, found this doozy:

It is getting cheaper and cheaper to find, produce, transport, refine and deliver oil, despite ever growing taxes and stricter environmental restrictions.

Boy was mike/spike ever wrong. 1999 was the precise year that crude oil began it relentless climb from $17.44 to $147/barrel (with one minor short correction in late 2001). Crude Oil Prices

And notice the all-to-obvious dig at government regulation. The mainstream media has yet to call out this industry flack for the partisan he/she is.
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 02 Jul 2018, 13:47:27

Plantagenet wrote:But DELAYING peak oil isn't the same as "getting past it.


The world really is about to end because I actually agree with this as well.
[space to store bad short-term prediction currently vacant]
asg70
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 02 Jul 2018, 14:54:55

So how about Spike's assertion that oil will always be cheaper? What happened to that brilliance? How about those bad assumptions? Pretty bad, huh?
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby kublikhan » Mon 02 Jul 2018, 17:56:56

pstarr wrote:So how about Spike's Shortonoil's assertion that oil will always be cheaper? What happened to that brilliance? How about those bad assumptions? Pretty bad, huh?
Yep. Pretty bad indeed.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 4222
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: Doomers and Bad Assumptions

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 02 Jul 2018, 18:30:06

kublikhan wrote:
pstarr wrote:So how about Spike's Shortonoil's assertion that oil will always be cheaper? What happened to that brilliance? How about those bad assumptions? Pretty bad, huh?
Yep. Pretty bad indeed.

who's that? I forget
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests