Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines empty?

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

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 13 Aug 2020, 21:26:32

coffeeguyzz wrote:Over the past several years, I have read umpteen articles on 'peak oil' (many on this site) that were so ridiculously bereft of accurate facts that it would make a sincere truth seeker just fall down laughing (or cringe at the degree of journalistic ineptitude).
That referenced article from Desmog on the Bakken is SO inaccurate regarding facts that anyone relying upon it is simply discrediting themselves from being taking seriously.

On a sentence by sentence level, fully one half that presentation is simply wrong.
Little wonder that that site has gets so little credibility from serious observers.


The article in turn refers to many other articles. The point about a peak in energy comes from a report by ESAI Energy.

Also, the main topic of the site isn't peak oil but climate change.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5600
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 14 Aug 2020, 18:05:39

ralfy wrote:
coffeeguyzz wrote:Over the past several years, I have read umpteen articles on 'peak oil' (many on this site) that were so ridiculously bereft of accurate facts that it would make a sincere truth seeker just fall down laughing (or cringe at the degree of journalistic ineptitude).
That referenced article from Desmog on the Bakken is SO inaccurate regarding facts that anyone relying upon it is simply discrediting themselves from being taking seriously.

On a sentence by sentence level, fully one half that presentation is simply wrong.
Little wonder that that site has gets so little credibility from serious observers.


The article in turn refers to many other articles. The point about a peak in energy comes from a report by ESAI Energy.

Also, the main topic of the site isn't peak oil but climate change.


And you are implying you like the change in topic, lest others realize how poorly you understood oil field basics and geology when you were a father figure seeking pseudo religious groupie of LATOC?
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby Chriz » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 03:03:27

Trying to predict the date of Peak Oil is like trying the date of your death. Interesting if you can do something about it, otherwise…

The question is: when the world will consider seriously the Peak Oil problem? Maybe never… we will just deal with the consequences like we do with the Covid.
Chriz
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat 15 Aug 2020, 02:52:35

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby sparky » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 03:18:22

.








2 AdamB

" Have a link to when you announced these conditions?"

nope just personal guesses
air transport is totally dependent on hydrocarbon it's the fuel with the highest power density ,
there is no other functional air device who can compare with it
airplane use distillate ( the family of diesel ) this is the choice fuel for transport , but rail can use some electricity grid and road will always take priority of supply
my guess at some extractive limit of 100millions B/d is based on the humungous amount of oil needed to raise the extraction above 20% of this number
and the massive depletion rate this would create
IE the extraction rate and the depletion rate are brother and sister
User avatar
sparky
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney , OZ

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 10:24:37

sparky wrote:.
" Have a link to when you announced these conditions?"


nope just personal guesses
air transport is totally dependent on hydrocarbon it's the fuel with the highest power density ,
there is no other functional air device who can compare with it


And in an environment of decreasing overall demand, airlines can certainly keep their share of what they need. It isn't as though anyone is now claiming that the world is running out of oil.

sparky wrote:airplane use distillate ( the family of diesel ) this is the choice fuel for transport , but rail can use some electricity grid and road will always take priority of supply
my guess at some extractive limit of 100millions B/d is based on the humungous amount of oil needed to raise the extraction above 20% of this number
and the massive depletion rate this would create


The "massive" depletion rate is lower this year than last. And in a peak demand environment, the depletion rate only gets smaller in the future.

Peak demand does all sorts of weird things to the outmoded thoughts of peak oil via scarcity.
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 15:45:44

Ralfy
While I am glad you referenced the sources of the Desmogblog article, I winced as that would justifiably compel me to point out the sources' weaknesses/biases-prejudices/factual inaccuracies etc.
While all this is fairly simple and straightforward to do, it can also be very time consuming. ( I just spent well over an hour researching the ESAI Energy Group and its 3 principals ... Reed, Barber, and Emerson, as just 1 example).
Likewise a somewhat superficial dig into 'whistleblower' Paul Lehto, which led to a VERY interesting, recent article (from 'incite'?) dated July 21, 2020 ... reposted 5 days later ... written by one Justin Noble that absolutely excoriated the 3 Percenters nation wide, especially in North Dakota. The article quoted one Basev Sen who - by any metric - cannot be considered an objective observer.
Most telling about that July 'incite' article, ralfy, is the comments in the next to last paragraph which refuted the staus of Antifa as being a terrorist organization.

Ralfy, I will, for the moment, not continue this research but leave you with this ...
The vast majority of my politically progressive relatives and friends are - in every sense of the term - Mensheviks.
That is, sincere, intelligent compassionate people who seek a more just and fair world.
What decent human would oppose that?

Unfortunately, the tragic misconflation of the mythos with the logos continues - both now and throughout history - to wreak an immeasurable amount of both grief and destruction.
Just as their historical predecessors, the Girondins - discovered over a century earlier (American Revolutionary War era icon Thomas Paine, a staunch Girondin, came within a whisker of being guillotined), their blood thirsty ideological cousins, (the Montagnards for the Girondins, the Bolsheviks for the Mensheviks), had NO reservations about slaughtering them when political expediency deemed it warranted.

You, ralfy, I, every other individual engaged on this site, other internet blogs, indeed, across the entire globe, are involuntarily drafted into a global Information War that is raging furiously with data - for the moment - employed as weaponry rather than more ... kinetic ... means.

Please keep informed.
Please continue to self educate with - hopefully - an open heart as well as mind.

With the upcoming trough years of Solar Cycle 26 spanning 2028 through 2032, the effects of the looming Grand Solar Minimum will disrupt decades of ideological/political orthodoxy. (Record SBM growth in Greenland, as just reported by the DMI, should offer just 1 clue).

Coming full circle, that Desmogblog article on the Bakken's demise is unadulterated horseshit, easily disprovable on a line by line basis for ANYONE willing to read the referenced links, and then read the references included in the references, ad infinitum.

Propaganda 101 that should only sway an already entrenched True Disbeliever.
coffeeguyzz
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 16:09:47

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 15:55:57

Adam
Nice to see you still posting.

Just a heads up ...
I have recently been introduced to the world of blue hydrogen, grey hydrogen, and green hydrogen.
Fascinting stuff.

With GE claiming that over 90% of their turbines can operate using hydrogen - or, at least, hydrogen blends - the inexorable build out of Combined Cycle Gas Plants seems likely to pick up pace.
This entire Gas to Power paradigm will continue to stun 'Renewable' power advocates as the downsizing of hardware components, economical conversion and use of older tankers to FSRUs, incredible advances in technology regarding insulation and use of Boil Off Gas for onsite fuel all contribute to the ongoing switch to natty as a (the ?) primary fuel throughout the world.

Interesting times, indeed.
coffeeguyzz
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 16:09:47

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 15 Aug 2020, 21:41:05

coffeeguyzz wrote:Adam
Nice to see you still posting.

Just a heads up ...
I have recently been introduced to the world of blue hydrogen, grey hydrogen, and green hydrogen.
Fascinting stuff.


There seems to be quite an interest about all of those running around reddit on r/energy.

The main problem with it, as best I can tell, is the availability of abundant and not too expensive natural gas. You can do anything with that stuff, including making it into hydrogen, which as it turns out is a popular thing to do with it.
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby ralfy » Sun 16 Aug 2020, 20:39:26

coffeeguyzz wrote:Ralfy
While I am glad you referenced the sources of the Desmogblog article, I winced as that would justifiably compel me to point out the sources' weaknesses/biases-prejudices/factual inaccuracies etc.
While all this is fairly simple and straightforward to do, it can also be very time consuming. ( I just spent well over an hour researching the ESAI Energy Group and its 3 principals ... Reed, Barber, and Emerson, as just 1 example).
Likewise a somewhat superficial dig into 'whistleblower' Paul Lehto, which led to a VERY interesting, recent article (from 'incite'?) dated July 21, 2020 ... reposted 5 days later ... written by one Justin Noble that absolutely excoriated the 3 Percenters nation wide, especially in North Dakota. The article quoted one Basev Sen who - by any metric - cannot be considered an objective observer.
Most telling about that July 'incite' article, ralfy, is the comments in the next to last paragraph which refuted the staus of Antifa as being a terrorist organization.

Ralfy, I will, for the moment, not continue this research but leave you with this ...
The vast majority of my politically progressive relatives and friends are - in every sense of the term - Mensheviks.
That is, sincere, intelligent compassionate people who seek a more just and fair world.
What decent human would oppose that?

Unfortunately, the tragic misconflation of the mythos with the logos continues - both now and throughout history - to wreak an immeasurable amount of both grief and destruction.
Just as their historical predecessors, the Girondins - discovered over a century earlier (American Revolutionary War era icon Thomas Paine, a staunch Girondin, came within a whisker of being guillotined), their blood thirsty ideological cousins, (the Montagnards for the Girondins, the Bolsheviks for the Mensheviks), had NO reservations about slaughtering them when political expediency deemed it warranted.

You, ralfy, I, every other individual engaged on this site, other internet blogs, indeed, across the entire globe, are involuntarily drafted into a global Information War that is raging furiously with data - for the moment - employed as weaponry rather than more ... kinetic ... means.

Please keep informed.
Please continue to self educate with - hopefully - an open heart as well as mind.

With the upcoming trough years of Solar Cycle 26 spanning 2028 through 2032, the effects of the looming Grand Solar Minimum will disrupt decades of ideological/political orthodoxy. (Record SBM growth in Greenland, as just reported by the DMI, should offer just 1 clue).

Coming full circle, that Desmogblog article on the Bakken's demise is unadulterated horseshit, easily disprovable on a line by line basis for ANYONE willing to read the referenced links, and then read the references included in the references, ad infinitum.

Propaganda 101 that should only sway an already entrenched True Disbeliever.


I didn't reference the sources of the article. Rather, they are referred to in the article. In fact, the latter's filled with such, and you argue that it's "ridiculously bereft of accurate facts." To prove your point, you refer to anecdotes about yourself, your relatives, various figures from history, and solar cycles, and then ask others to see the inaccuracies for themselves.

I don't think you understand how arguments work. When you make a claim, you need to prove it.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5600
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 16 Aug 2020, 23:12:37

ralfy wrote:I don't think you understand how arguments work. When you make a claim, you need to prove it.


No father figure seeking, pseudo religious babble spouting ex-LATOCIAN ever gets to say this without an appropriate response.

Image
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Mon 17 Aug 2020, 23:46:48

ralfy
"To prove your point ... (you) ask others to see the inaccuracies for themselves".

That is correct.
Exactly.
Did you go back to the article and "fact check" each of its falsities/absurdities?

Here is a quick breakdown of the first 7 paragraphs - 10 sentences - in the order presented ...
1) Environmental damages refers to the preposterous canard of the 'radioactivity' produced from the tailings.
Hint ... Banana Equivalent Dose (BED) is the one tenth of one percent of a micro sievert of radiation found in a typical banana.
One can do further digging into the specifics to put into context this OMG!!! topic ... or simply hide back under the bed with a blanky.

2) "oil transport without regulation" should not even merit a serious response from a genuine Truth seeker, but as it refers extensively to the Lac-Megantic tragedy ... here ya go ...
Several hours prior to this horrific event, a TWO MAN crew left the loaded unit train UNATTENDED, on an incline (!!!), being held in place ONLY by air breaks which were kept engaged via a line that LEAKED !!
While serious students may wish to more fully read of this incident to better glean how industrial accidents are frequently a series of mishaps culminating in tragedy, I take umbrage when this event quickly transmorgifies (in the referenced article ) that DOT-111 rail cars are only different from the new DOT-117 cars as the new paint covers up the graffiti !!!
.This is an outrage (or should be) to any reader relying upon this "author" for edification.
The 1/2 inch steel, full height head shields, the increase in jacket thickness from 7/16 inch thick to 9/16 inch thickness (also incorporating thermal protection of 100 minute duration from fire without rupture. The new valves (top and bottom) enhance prevention of spills in the event of derailment ... all may be akin - to this "author" - as mere painting, but career engineers, safety experts, professionals of all stripes may differ
3) Failure to produce profits ... One might think that the Marxists would gladly ascribe this aspect as a positive. While the capital destruction has been both real and large this past decade, the results being increased hydrocarbon production of ~7/8 million barrels/day, natgas increase of nearly 40 Billion cubic feet/day (that's billion, but most here would struggle to place that in context), the ongoing viability should NOT (!!) be in the slightest of doubts. Rather, the regimes and governments across the globe who are facing imminent existential threat due to revenue shortfall are the REAL issues at play here.
4) 2008 USGS Bakken assessment at 3 to 4.3 billion barrel TRR.
Well, yeah.How about the more recent (2013) assessment that included the Three Forks to give a total TRR of 7.4 billion?
The 2013 assessment, btw, used archaic paradigms (by 2020 standards) and the new assessment (expected shortly) will be much larger and may incorporate the Red River, Madison, Spearfish Formations (amongst others) as new processes enhance the recoverability factors in these horizons.

Second post may shortly follow.
coffeeguyzz
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 16:09:47

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 00:31:41

Brief follow up/continuation on the absurdities in that desmog article ...
The Oneok debacle (leaking ~262,000 bbls condensate) is an unacceptable fuck up. No question.
As at least half has been recovered/removed, one would think the expensive lesson will strongly prompt better practices.

It would be dubious to present a 'whistleblower ' in an unchallenged heroic light as many factors - including questionable integrity, motivations, etc. regularly come into play. A case could easily be made that this fuck up has introduced more stringent oversight, operations, and - much to the chagrin, seemingly, to environmentalists - FAR more efficient modes of clean ups.
Huge advances being made using microbes as the Aliso Canyon leak has shown this.

'Area not prepared to deal with produced Bakken oil'.
Production has run uninterruptedly from the Bakken since 1953.

Moving large amounts of oil on trains never done before. (Use of weasel words here ... light volatile oil ... no NEW regulatory oversight ... transported in tank cars designed to carry corn oil. All rank propaganda. Do you think she means highly flammable ethanol?
Sacre bleu!
Tell JD Rockefeller and the Texas Railroad Commission about the novelty of moving earl by rail. (SMH).

'Most supporting infrastructure was never built'.
Not even worthy of a rebuttal.

'Clean ups being foisted upon the public'.
Again, the ND regulators will ensure the cementing/restoring of these wells will be done properly.
They take their environment very seriously up that way. Boogeyman visions of oil leaks emanating from tubing the size of a man's fist 2 miles underground are simply overblown.

This grotesque misrepresentation (aka fucking lies) surrounding all the "health issues" from nearby wells really, really pisses me off as I have been encountering this horseshit for almost a decade in the Appalachian Basin region.
As simply one example (they are ALL fraudulent), this premature baby statistic was pushed in Pennsylvania bigly a few years back.
Digging deeper, the number of premature babies born in Wayne county was pretty high.
There are ZERO wells in Wayne county.
Nearby, highly prolific Susquehannah had a statistically much lower number.

Ralfy, here ya go ... as someone concerned about fracturing having negative impacts on water, have you read the 2016 EPA Assessment on this topic?
You know, the report from the Obama EPA that studied over 1,200 OTHER studies and papers and the ~2 million frac'd wells in the US going back to the 1940s?

It is only 666 pages/48 MB download.
Appendices are 572 pages/10 MB download.
Executive summary 50 pages/8 MB download.

Spoiler alert ... with the qualified exceptions of Dimmock, Parker county, and Pavillion (since published, Pavillion was found to have been blameless), there has been NO, say again, NO systemic issues with hydraulic fracturing.
None.

When will desmog write an in depth article (factually correct, HA) on that?
coffeeguyzz
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 16:09:47

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby jedrider » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 17:15:51

What we do to fill those pipelines:

FRACKING CONTAMINATES GROUNDWATER: STANFORD STUDY
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2016-04-15/fracking-contaminates-groundwater-stanford-study/#:~:text=Drilling%20photo%20via%20shutterstock.,of%20hydrocarbons%2C%20can%20contaminate%20groundwater.

Albeit, it is an old article dating from 2016. But fracking doesn't contaminate ground water, really?

Scientific studies have documented contamination of freshwater aquifers by fracking or fracking chemicals since 1984. Fracking into water zones has been an issue for the technology since the 1950s.

Patents filed by industry note "it is not uncommon during hydraulic fracturing for the fracture to grow out of the zone of productive interest and proceed into a zone of non-productive interest, including zones containing water."

Industry has repeatedly covered up abuses of groundwater by offering landowners money and then demanding that they sign non-disclosure agreements.
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3107
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 10:10:44

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby ralfy » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 19:02:26

coffeeguyzz wrote:ralfy
"To prove your point ... (you) ask others to see the inaccuracies for themselves".

That is correct.
Exactly.
Did you go back to the article and "fact check" each of its falsities/absurdities?

Here is a quick breakdown of the first 7 paragraphs - 10 sentences - in the order presented ...
1) Environmental damages refers to the preposterous canard of the 'radioactivity' produced from the tailings.
Hint ... Banana Equivalent Dose (BED) is the one tenth of one percent of a micro sievert of radiation found in a typical banana.
One can do further digging into the specifics to put into context this OMG!!! topic ... or simply hide back under the bed with a blanky.

2) "oil transport without regulation" should not even merit a serious response from a genuine Truth seeker, but as it refers extensively to the Lac-Megantic tragedy ... here ya go ...
Several hours prior to this horrific event, a TWO MAN crew left the loaded unit train UNATTENDED, on an incline (!!!), being held in place ONLY by air breaks which were kept engaged via a line that LEAKED !!
While serious students may wish to more fully read of this incident to better glean how industrial accidents are frequently a series of mishaps culminating in tragedy, I take umbrage when this event quickly transmorgifies (in the referenced article ) that DOT-111 rail cars are only different from the new DOT-117 cars as the new paint covers up the graffiti !!!
.This is an outrage (or should be) to any reader relying upon this "author" for edification.
The 1/2 inch steel, full height head shields, the increase in jacket thickness from 7/16 inch thick to 9/16 inch thickness (also incorporating thermal protection of 100 minute duration from fire without rupture. The new valves (top and bottom) enhance prevention of spills in the event of derailment ... all may be akin - to this "author" - as mere painting, but career engineers, safety experts, professionals of all stripes may differ
3) Failure to produce profits ... One might think that the Marxists would gladly ascribe this aspect as a positive. While the capital destruction has been both real and large this past decade, the results being increased hydrocarbon production of ~7/8 million barrels/day, natgas increase of nearly 40 Billion cubic feet/day (that's billion, but most here would struggle to place that in context), the ongoing viability should NOT (!!) be in the slightest of doubts. Rather, the regimes and governments across the globe who are facing imminent existential threat due to revenue shortfall are the REAL issues at play here.
4) 2008 USGS Bakken assessment at 3 to 4.3 billion barrel TRR.
Well, yeah.How about the more recent (2013) assessment that included the Three Forks to give a total TRR of 7.4 billion?
The 2013 assessment, btw, used archaic paradigms (by 2020 standards) and the new assessment (expected shortly) will be much larger and may incorporate the Red River, Madison, Spearfish Formations (amongst others) as new processes enhance the recoverability factors in these horizons.

Second post may shortly follow.


Probably only a tenth of your posts is connected to the topic, and sadly even that is based on speculation.

Another addition to my ignore list.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5600
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 19:06:38

But fracking doesn't contaminate ground water, really?


From the Colorado oil and gas site

The Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas (2017): “Direct migration of contaminants from targeted injection zones is highly unlikely to lead to contamination of potential drinking water aquifers.”

United States Geological Survey (2017): Unconventional oil and gas operations, such as fracking, did not affect drinking water quality.

Duke University (2017): “Based on consistent evidence from comprehensive testing, we found no indication of groundwater contamination over the three-year course of our study.” (From press release)

University of Cincinnati (2016): Water quality not affected by fracking or natural gas drilling in Ohio.

University of Texas-Austin (2016): Groundwater not affected by fracking in Parker County, Texas.

Syracuse University (2016): No evidence that fracking altered water quality in Appalachian Basin.

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (2016): Scientists show fracking had no impact on water-supply wells in Pavillion, Wyoming.

Susquehanna River Basin Commission (2016): “To date, the Commission’s monitoring programs have not detected discernible impacts on the quality of the Basin’s water resources as a result of natural gas development, but continued vigilance is warranted.”

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Yale University (2015): “We have found no evidence for direct communication with shallow drinking water wells due to upward migration from shale horizons. This result is encouraging, because it implies there is some degree of temporal and spatial separation between injected fluids and drinking water supply.”

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2015): “[H]ydraulic fracturing activities have not led to widespread, systematic impacts to drinking water resources.”

U.S. District Court, Wyoming (2015): “[E]xperts and government regulators have repeatedly acknowledged a lack of evidence linking the hydraulic fracturing process to groundwater contamination.”

Syracuse University (2015): No evidence of fracking contaminating groundwater in heavily drilled areas of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio.

California Council on Science & Technology (2015): “The study found no releases of hazardous hydraulic fracturing chemicals to surface waters in California and no direct impacts to fish or wildlife.”

Stanford University (2015): Scientists find no evidence that fracking chemicals seeped into drinking water.

U.S. Department of Energy (2014): “Current findings are: 1) no evidence of gas migration from the Marcellus Shale; and 2) no evidence of brine migration from the Marcellus Shale.”

U.S. Geological Survey (2014): “The comparison of groundwater data from this study with historical data found no significant difference for any of the constituents examined and therefore warrant no further discussion.”

Duke University, U.S. Geological Study (2013): Fracking and other gas-production activities had no effect on groundwater quality in Arkansas.

University of Michigan (2013): “The often-postulated percolation upward of fracking water used in deep, long lateral well extensions to contaminate drinking water aquifers near the surface through the intervening impermeable rock formations is highly unlikely and has never reliably been shown to have occurred.”

National Groundwater Association (2013): “[T]hese findings suggest that the methane concentrations in Susquehanna County water wells can be explained without the migration of Marcellus shale gas through fractures, an observation that has important implications for understanding the nature of risks associated with shale-gas extraction.”

Cardno Entrix (2012): Fracking has not caused groundwater contamination in Los Angeles.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (2012): “[R]egulatory officials we met with from eight states – Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Texas – told us that, based on state investigations, the hydraulic fracturing process has not been identified as a cause of groundwater contamination within their states.”

And most recently the EPA released it’s 2020 report Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas: impacts from the Hydraulic Fracturing Water Cycle on Drinking Water Resources in the United States.

That report makes it pretty clear that normal fracking operations are not responsible for groundwater contamination. Oil and gas operations where they have a surface spill that seeps into shallow groundwater and over-pressuring of old damaged or faulty casing are potential areas they identify it could happen but neither of these are pointed to as a major problem for all operations. This is in keeping with those of us who are involved in the industry have been saying for many years. You really have to be a complete screw-up to have frack fluids enter an acquirer...most acquifers are at less than 1000' and most oil and gas reservoirs are down below 7000'. Induced fracks penetrate no more than 150m radius from a wellbore...do the math.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 21:11:33

jedrider wrote:What we do to fill those pipelines:

FRACKING CONTAMINATES GROUNDWATER: STANFORD STUDY
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2016-04-15/fracking-contaminates-groundwater-stanford-study/#:~:text=Drilling%20photo%20via%20shutterstock.,of%20hydrocarbons%2C%20can%20contaminate%20groundwater.

Albeit, it is an old article dating from 2016. But fracking doesn't contaminate ground water, really?


Based on the Pavillion study? No...water spilled on the surface from a pit isn't a completion contaminating ground water in the sense used by the advocates, no. No, water being extracted from an oil and gas producing formation isn't groundwater being contaminated...it is water wells being drilled into a producing formation, and then acting surprised that they didn't know they had done so.

2/3's of all hydraulic fracturing took place in the 20th century, not this one, according to the EPA and USGS. Amazing that no one noticed all these problems back when it was mostly happening, and poor studies such as the one referenced in the article showed up only after the advocates got involved and demonized the very hydrocarbons that they themselves use on a regular basis. Hypocrisy abounds!
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Tue 18 Aug 2020, 21:16:32

ralfy wrote:Probably only a tenth of your posts is connected to the topic, and sadly even that is based on speculation.


Says the father figure seeking and quasi-religious based LATOCian.

ralfy wrote:Another addition to my ignore list.


Undoubtedly chock full of anyone worth listening to because....father figure seeking groupies can't admit that not only are they wrong, but they never knew what right was in the first place?
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby jedrider » Wed 19 Aug 2020, 16:00:19

AdamB wrote:2/3's of all hydraulic fracturing took place in the 20th century, not this one, according to the EPA and USGS. Amazing that no one noticed all these problems back when it was mostly happening, and poor studies such as the one referenced in the article showed up only after the advocates got involved and demonized the very hydrocarbons that they themselves use on a regular basis. Hypocrisy abounds!


Additionally, wells plugged prior to 1953 are not considered effective, even by industry standards. Prior to 1950, wells either were orphaned or plugged and abandoned with very little cement. Plugging was focused on protecting the oil reservoirs from rain infiltration rather than to “confine oil, gas and water in the strata in which they are found and prevent them from escaping into other strata.” Of the wells with drilling dates in the regulatory data, 30% are listed as having been drilled prior to the use of cement in well plugging.

With a total of over 245,000 wells in the state database, and considering the lack of monitoring prior to 1950, it’s reasonable to assume there are over 80,000 improperly plugged and unplugged wells in California.


Literally Millions of Failing, Abandoned Wells
https://www.fractracker.org/2019/03/failing-abandoned-wells/
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3107
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 10:10:44

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 19 Aug 2020, 17:20:10

jedrider wrote:Literally Millions of Failing, Abandoned Wells
https://www.fractracker.org/2019/03/failing-abandoned-wells/


Maybe. Maybe not. You certainly don't ask advocates anything about the technical aspects of plug jobs. I've had more issues related to safety of dumbass landowners building houses on top of (yes....on TOP of) a high pressure gas pipelines than any particular old abandoned well.
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)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 9292
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: If Peak Oil has already arrived, why aren't pipelines em

Unread postby REAL Green » Sun 30 Aug 2020, 07:11:44

“Australia Looks To Take The Lead In The Hydrogen Boom”
https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy ... -Boom.html

“Dubbed the Asian Renewable Energy Hub, the $20B project is set to become the world’s largest wind-solar hybrid with the vast amounts of renewable energy generated used to produce hydrogen for export. It is a classic example of the hydrogen economy finally taking off, with some experts predicting that hydrogen could soon become a globally traded energy source, just like oil and gas… However, given the challenges of transporting hydrogen, the first phase of the Kalbarri project at first aims to blend the hydrogen directly with natural gas in order to lower its carbon footprint… Phase one of the project could be complete in just two years. The second phase of the Kalbarri project will see the gas compressed and supercooled, just like LNG, and then exported to Asian nations like Korea, Japan, and Singapore. The hydrogen exports could kick off in four years and take another three years to scale. The third phase of the project actually has the local residents most excited: Using the hydrogen to manufacture green steel for export. Given that steel production accounts for ~7% of global carbon emissions, steel made from renewable energy is expected to become a multi-billion industry as countries move to decarbonize. Kalbarri could be exporting green steel in a decade or less.”
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1080
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests