dcoyne78 wrote:Hi AdamB,
The cost curves are interesting, but eventually output will decrease because there won't be enough demand at the higher oil price to allow profitable extraction of the resource as higher oil prices will make alternatives more competitive.
That is exactly what those cost curves say. Which is why they aren't just interesting, but can be used in economic models of resource development. The folks who have the information build such things, are. Peakers can't compete, can't even talk intelligently about the issue unless they can figure out how to make their own.
dcoyne78 wrote:I expect based on peer reviewed literature that a reasonable guess for oil URR is 3000 to 4000 Gb, if the middle of this range is correct (3500 Gb) then peak may be between 2020 and 2030.
The modelers using these techniques on resources at the International Energy Workshop back in July had this information down at the sub-basin level, and they weren't guessing at URR, and the answer to that question is dependent on $$...which is exactly what those resource cost curves nail down.
Figure 16 was the only thing that was even in the same ballpark as to state of the art modeling and resource cost curves, and it really wasn't even a resource cost curve. The curves demonstrated at the IEW were also probabilistic in nature, the accepted form of measure for reserves and resources. The authors of your paper looked to be doing nothing more than some generalizations for profiles and there didn't appear to be any interactive economic trigger for activation, I didn't see the CapX delay for projects, no discovery process complexities necessary to utilize USGS estimates of undiscovered, the entire concept of field growth at the field level didn't have an explanation, and it should as the
geoscientists have built one.dcoyne78 wrote:https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... by_countryDetailed projections of world fossil fuel production including unconventional sources were created by country and fuel type to estimate possible future fossil fuel production. Four critical countries (China, USA, Canada and Australia) were examined in detail with projections made on the state/province level. Ultimately Recoverable Resources (URR) for fossil fuels were estimated for three scenarios: Low = 48.4 ZJ, Best Guess (BG) = 75.7 ZJ, High = 121.5 ZJ.
Couldn't see the full article, but of interest was the idea that these folks are doing scenarios. Not full on probability calculations. I wonder why? Also, the current work isn't going on at the country level, but the sub-basin level. And there doesn't appear to be an indication in the abstract that they have built something based on the obvious, and something that caught the peak oilers by surprise.
URR is $$ dependent.The EIA knows this, and they are just a bunch of analysts. How long do you think it'll be before the academics catch up? Nobody gets to say "URR" nowadays without attaching a cost to it.
Even niche market economic companies are doing this.Time for peakers to get dragged into the current century, even if it is kicking and screaming! They screwed the pooch on the other peak oils (going all the way back to Campbell's 1990 claim) because they just couldn't see the economic tie in, they really need to get it nailed down prior to doing the entire wolf is coming routine all over again.
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."
Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"