[asg70]

IMHO the world is going to keep drilling for oil and using it until there is so much CO2 in the air the whole planet cooks.

All the better to power your travel habits.

[RepublicanfromEngland]

Having read books like the party's over and the last oil shock, like others would of mentioned, efficiency, and technology has delayed any real change in supply.

The virus has dented demand.

[ralfy]

Scarcity is painfully obvious as seen in the use of shale.

[AdamB]

When I look at the dynamics of peak oil I see scarcity created from the demand side as economic peak oil.

If demand was cratering because of price...sure. But that isn't what the pandemic caused, or that EVs will. That is just just folks using less. Peak oil demand, straight up, without any price driven component.

Call it the "doing the right thing" angle.

The picture is economic scarcity makes certain oil types non-recoverable.

Only if lower prices are what you are calling economic scarcity. Tough angle to defend.

[AdamB]

I've got no beef with peak oil demand at all.

I do. It is sidestepping the issue, just like when 'BLM' is confronted with 'ALM', which is utter bullshit, so the same.

There have always been two possible components of peak oil. Supply, OR demand. PO has always been ASSUMED to be scarcity driven, 5 years ago Amy Jaffe began talking about peak oil demand, and the reasons why. Since then, others have joined in, and by "others", I'm not referring to the faith based believer types that always spring up around an hot Rapture scenario.

King Hubbert elucidated the nature of peak oil in the 1950's and fitted bell curves to the data.

Marion Hubbert declared US peak oil by the year 1950. Made that call in 1938 I believe. And he first published on peaks and whatnot in 1949, you apparently are referring to his seminal 1956 US and world peak oil calls.

And bell shaped curves have since been dispatched to the dust bin of history, as any peak oiler laughed out of imploding web forums over the years can tell you.

He was exactly right for American peak oil (in 1972) until the current shale oil boom.

By definition he couldn't be EXACTLY right, as he laid down two different scenarios, spaced apart in time. I recommend you read seminal work prior to misrepresenting it.

So, the shale oil boom was a technological triumph, probably ecological disaster, definitely a financial boondoggle,
which distorted these curves and put the lie to 'peak oil', or did it?

As you assigned to Hubbert, he called it a LONG time ago. Didn't work out. Some folks, like me, have been asking why we aren't predicting how MANY peak oils we'll have, before finally we get THE peak oil, seeing how often the claims have been dicredited by history.

So, getting back to my point, is that 'Peak Demand' is utter bullshit because Oil is an extremely valuable commodity.

Come back when you can explain how Amy Jaffe, CSIS, Rystad and Woodmac were so easily misled then. And there are plenty of valuable commodities, perhaps you are discounting the environmental angles, lower oil use per capita, folks like me driving EVs? In either case, you can claim whatever you'd like, or you can round up some data, maybe some analytic experience, and explain why the listed folks are wrong?

The key point is that there ALWAYS will be demand, so there will be no such thing as peak demand unless the human population is decimated repeatedly.

Of course there will always be demand. One day, a couple centuries from now, a Swiss watch repairman will advertise that he uses original, produced from the ground oil just like his ancestors, to lube them up prior to customer delivery. The stuff will be crazy expensive, but that will be perfectly alright, as there won't be much global demand for the stuff.

[AdamB]

Scarcity is painfully obvious as seen in the use of shale.

Can you reference where Matt told you to say something that stupid, so we won't have to assign it to you?

Shale didn't cause production to go down Ralfy, it made it go up. Duh.

And I don't recall you whining about how shale was going to do anything when you were on LATOC, seems like you are now including revisionist history in your repertoire?

[asg70]

The arguments keep running over the same ground.

Peak oilers have been insisting that unconventional is uneconomic since before the shale boom actually got underway. It was actually a pillar of The Oil Drum and its debunking was why TOD went away. Today the only addition is the rationalization that easy credit played a part. And it's TRUE but only up to a point. The reason why shale has been such an unstable business is because of competition from conventional oil. If the Saudis hadn't declared war on shale then we'd see a truer picture of shale profit and loss, and then you had COVID driving demand down. But as always, peakers will ignore factors that don't fit its narrative.

If one concedes that shale can be profitable in isolation and still sell finished product at a BAU-friendly price, then the only thing left that matters is how much of it is in the ground. It's generally assumed that oil exists in a pyramidal configuration with the conventional reserves being the least plentiful (at least the remaining reserves) and untapped unconventional the most common. That is just crustal abundance, not recoverability. The shale boom was about finding a way to recover what was once thought unrecoverable.

So it's not so much the classic peak oil curve to be concerned with anymore as much as it's the shale curve. On that front I have seen wildly differing estimates. The initial exuberance around shale suggested that it would last long enough for nobody to be concerned about depletion. Pessimists are talking about how it's already post-peak.

What I do know is that shale has added a lot of supply to total global oil availability, therefore prolonging BAU. The more shale consumed, the less crude need be consumed from conventional reservoirs. The more convention is produced in defiance of a glut, the more periodic shuttering of shale drilling, the longer shale will remain as a viable resource. So even though both oil supplies seem to be fighting they are in effect prolonging each system. To oil companies, it wreaks havoc with their balance sheet, but as far as industry-wide lifespan and joe public goes, it's beneficial.

Then you add COVID and a potential long-tail economic depression from it, and AFTER that the wave of EVs that are in the pipeline if and when consumers can afford it, and you can see that the world as we know it, otherwise known as BAU, is likely to continue apace. There is little from the standpoint of geologic depletion (which should be the key talking point of peakers) that is likely to factor in over the near to medium-term.

Those who concede (if they aren't ETP nuts) then pivot their argument over to the House that Jack Built. I.e. Peak oil DYNAMIC in which all factors of civilization are linked, Glenn Beck chalkboard style, to oil. This is a spurious argument driven by a need for peakers to hold onto their chosen religion.

[AdamB]

There is little from the standpoint of geologic depletion (which should be the key talking point of peakers) that is likely to factor in over the near to medium-term.

Should be. But probably can't be. There are few enough organizations that have a complete inventory of this number, and they don't tend to put it out there.

Also, we can't forget history. Jimmy Carter did the "running out of oil by the end of the 1980's" routine once, and peakers after that time period in part LOVE peak oil because it allows them to take a big number that seem pretty silly to worry about in this half century, and make it suddenly smaller, in order to begin the entire fear mongering exercise. This is the conversion from Jimmy's "running out" to "no! Much sooner than that, when there is only half left!!".

Those who concede (if they aren't ETP nuts) then pivot their argument over to the House that Jack Built. I.e. Peak oil DYNAMIC in which all factors of civilization are linked, Glenn Beck chalkboard style, to oil. This is a spurious argument driven by a need for peakers to hold onto their chosen religion.

The good news being, they now hide their Sunday morning church going sessions under a rock, and the congregations are much smaller.

[jedrider]

Come back when you can explain how Amy Jaffe, CSIS, Rystad and Woodmac were so easily misled then. And there are plenty of valuable commodities, perhaps you are discounting the environmental angles, lower oil use per capita, folks like me driving EVs? In either case, you can claim whatever you'd like, or you can round up some data, maybe some analytic experience, and explain why the listed folks are wrong?

Plenty of valuable 'commodities', like Natural Gas, I presume. Of course, that complicates the narrative of Peak Oil greatly, but doesn't erase it. Yes, it is a multi-variant analysis that is required, but the two 'commodities' crude and NG are intimately linked I think (energy people, please chime in). Yes, NG maybe hasn't even peaked yet, I don't know, but it's just another fossil fuel, maybe, just as limited although not quite as versatile, but with it's own set of advantages/disadvantages.

We might as well say Peal Fossil Fuels. When will that happen? Ten years out? I don't know.

Peak Bridge Fuel
https://peakoil.com/alternative-energy/the-inevitable-death-of-natural-gas-as-a-bridge-fuel

It's always COMPLICATED, but not so much as we cannot understand the forces that are shaping our eventual boxing ourselves into a corner of no good options left.

[jedrider]

Well, I guess the pipelines ARE 'empty':

Pipeline built to survive extremes can’t bear slow oil flow
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/16/trans-alaska-pipeline-future/

[ROCKMAN]

Jed - To be honest I've never spent much time thinking about if we had reached PO or when we will reach it. Before I retired I focused on where I would drill my next well. Now retired and use very little fossil fuel myself I could care less. My income is completely disconnected from the US/world economy it's everyone else's problem. LOL.

The world typically makes its own problems. Luckily I've been able to isolate myself from most of them. Including the pandemic. I am not nor have I ever considered myself my "brother's keeper". Don't mean to sound so cold but way too many folks keep making bad choices. Like pissing away natural resources...just because they have "a lot of them."

[Outcast_Searcher]

Scarcity is painfully obvious as seen in the use of shale.

Seriously?

Technology advances. When technology gets CLEARLY better and more can be done, better and cheaper, then using the new technology is an OBVIOUS choice.

Example: Fuel injection. It's so much better than carburetors, that (unless I missed exceptions), fuel injection has been massively dominant in middle class cars since the mid 80's. Not only is it more fuel efficient and consistent, cars also start much better with the various sensing their systems provide.

Just because something gets better doesn't mean you can automatically claim "scarcity", even as supplies trend better, and prices overall trend flat to lower, re crude oil.

[AdamB]

Come back when you can explain how Amy Jaffe, CSIS, Rystad and Woodmac were so easily misled then. And there are plenty of valuable commodities, perhaps you are discounting the environmental angles, lower oil use per capita, folks like me driving EVs? In either case, you can claim whatever you'd like, or you can round up some data, maybe some analytic experience, and explain why the listed folks are wrong?

Plenty of valuable 'commodities', like Natural Gas, I presume.

...and uranium and bauxite and so on and so forth.

We might as well say Peal Fossil Fuels. When will that happen? Ten years out? I don't know.

We could. Don't know about you, but my original attraction was primarily academic, and oil related. Natural gas came later, and my interest in coal is meager at best.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Well, I guess the pipelines ARE 'empty':

Pipeline built to survive extremes can’t bear slow oil flow
https://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/16/trans-alaska-pipeline-future/

So A pipeline. In the scheme of things overall, not exactly a crisis.

[REAL Green]

Crude Oil Production
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/PET_CRD_CR ... BLPD_M.htm
Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20
12,866 12,813 12,755 12,748 12,730 12,061

[AdamB]

Crude Oil Production
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/PET_CRD_CR ... BLPD_M.htm
Nov-19 Dec-19 Jan-20 Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20
12,866 12,813 12,755 12,748 12,730 12,061

Your point is....that the US has peaked? Again? Could be...not like its the first time though, right?

[REAL Green]

Your point is....that the US has peaked? Again? Could be...not like its the first time though, right?

It could be peak if the economy does not recover IMO. My main point is I expected a larger drop than the figures indicate. Maybe that larger drop will show up in a month or two.

[jedrider]

Your point is....that the US has peaked? Again? Could be...not like its the first time though, right?

It could be peak if the economy does not recover IMO. My main point is I expected a larger drop than the figures indicate. Maybe that larger drop will show up in a month or two.

That's my feeling and expectation, too. If the economy doesn't becoming superheated again in the next few years, we may never again revisit peak because a lot of that oil was uneconomical to begin with as it was financed by debt which I suspect can hide the fundamentals for a while.

[AdamB]

Your point is....that the US has peaked? Again? Could be...not like its the first time though, right?

It could be peak if the economy does not recover IMO.

Well...so far all US recessions/depressions have been followed by a recovery, so not withstanding "past performance does not necessarily indicate future results", odds are, the economy will recover.

Oil production, and peak oils (past, present or future), are certainly related to more than just geology, without someone wanting to invest...well...new oil just doesn't appear like a genie from a bottle, right? Combined with the ongoing peak demand fears/reality, there is really no requirement of a new peak, here in the US or globally.

My main point is I expected a larger drop than the figures indicate. Maybe that larger drop will show up in a month or two.

The EIA has US oil production declining through the end of 2021 so you are in good company, in terms what the real live experts with proprietary data think on the topic.

[mousepad]

what the real live experts with proprietary data think on the topic.

Those guys have been badly wrong in the past, too. Similar to doomers, just in the opposite direction. I'm wondering why you put so much trust in them?
Are you one of them predictors?