Cool! Quick question...why does any oily organization pitch climate change right there at the beginning of their report?davep wrote:Dr., they've already made their 2009 WEO findings public. Here's a press overview link
Cool! Quick question...why does any oily organization pitch climate change right there at the beginning of their report?davep wrote:Dr., they've already made their 2009 WEO findings public. Here's a press overview link
At a 7% decline rate I come up with a 10-10.3 year period to reach 50% production. (Bartlett: "Do your own math")rangerone314 wrote:If oil declines to 50% in 14 years:Dr. Ofellati wrote:Too little to late. At 7% decline rate overall, we're looking at a 12 year plunge to 50% production. At 5% decline rate overall, we're looking at a 14 year plunge to 50% production.
In either case (the hopeful 7% or the dreaming 5%) we are completely screwed and to attempt to cover the decline with climate change legislation would cause a riot across the U.S.. The CCC will blame it on the Muslims before they lay claim to it.
1) The price range of oil per barrel will be from $___ to $___?
2) What will the price of gasoline be per gallon?
3) What will the US share of that be? (compared to 25% now)
4) How will that distribution of petroleum in the US be? (fuel oil, transportation, agri)
Yeats wrote:now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
They have their reference scenario and the 450 scenario (for reduction of CO2). IMO, they know the reference scenario is complete rubbish, as we'd need four new Saudis by 2030. They're pitching the reality as an attempt to reduce AGW, with all these lovely renewable energy sources. It's Peak Oil mitigation by the back door, IMO of course.shortonsense wrote:Cool! Quick question...why does any oily organization pitch climate change right there at the beginning of their report?
shortonsense wrote:Don't be silly, oil has been depleting for better than a century now. It didn't just suddenly START, how do you think we managed to produce 50% of it already? By depleting it!
I believe the calculation for 7% decline rates, to be true, requires a new Saudi Arabia every 2 years or so. We've been about 4 years on the plateau, I don't suppose you can point at the 2 new Saudi Arabia's which have been added to OPEC since 2004?
shortonsense wrote:Quick question...why does any oily organization pitch climate change right there at the beginning of their report?
davep wrote:And they then keep a straight face when they say we'll discover another 40mb/day by 2030.
Additional capacity of around 2 700 bcm, or 4 times current Russian capacity, is needed by 2030 - half to offset decline at existing fields & half to meet the increase in demand
davep wrote:Here's the Summary & Conclusions from the IEA WEO 2009 abridged press version:
The financial crisis has halted the rise in global fossil-energy use, but its
long-term upward path will resume soon on current policies
-- Tackling climate change & enhancing energy security require a massive decarbonisation of the energy system
> We are now on course for a 6°C temperature rise & rising energy costs
> Limiting temperature rise to 2°C will require big emission reductions in all
regions
-- A 450 path towards ‘Green Growth’ would bring substantial benefits
> Avoiding the worst effects & costs of climate change
> Energy-security benefits, lower oil & gas imports & reduced energy bills
> Much less air pollution & huge health benefits
-- Natural gas can play a key role as a bridge to a cleaner energy future
-- The challenge is enormous – but it can and must be met
> Improved energy efficiency & technology deployment are critical
> Each year of delay adds $500 bn to mitigation costs between today & 2030
davep wrote:Here's the Summary & Conclusions from the IEA WEO 2009 abridged press version:
The financial crisis has halted the rise in global fossil-energy use, but its
long-term upward path will resume soon on current policies
-- Tackling climate change & enhancing energy security require a massive decarbonisation of the energy system
> We are now on course for a 6°C temperature rise & rising energy costs
> Limiting temperature rise to 2°C will require big emission reductions in all
regions
-- A 450 path towards ‘Green Growth’ would bring substantial benefits
> Avoiding the worst effects & costs of climate change
> Energy-security benefits, lower oil & gas imports & reduced energy bills
> Much less air pollution & huge health benefits
-- Natural gas can play a key role as a bridge to a cleaner energy future-- The challenge is enormous – but it can and must be met
> Improved energy efficiency & technology deployment are critical
> Each year of delay adds $500 bn to mitigation costs between today & 2030
By some strange coincidence, these happen to be PO mitigation methods as well.
Maddog78 wrote:davep wrote:Here's the Summary & Conclusions from the IEA WEO 2009 abridged press version:
The financial crisis has halted the rise in global fossil-energy use, but its
long-term upward path will resume soon on current policies
-- Tackling climate change & enhancing energy security require a massive decarbonisation of the energy system
> We are now on course for a 6°C temperature rise & rising energy costs
> Limiting temperature rise to 2°C will require big emission reductions in all
regions
-- A 450 path towards ‘Green Growth’ would bring substantial benefits
> Avoiding the worst effects & costs of climate change
> Energy-security benefits, lower oil & gas imports & reduced energy bills
> Much less air pollution & huge health benefits
-- Natural gas can play a key role as a bridge to a cleaner energy future-- The challenge is enormous – but it can and must be met
> Improved energy efficiency & technology deployment are critical
> Each year of delay adds $500 bn to mitigation costs between today & 2030
By some strange coincidence, these happen to be PO mitigation methods as well.
Maddog78 wrote:My point is very simply, I work in the n.g. industry so it's good news some people think n.g. can help us ease the power down.
A nearly purely selfish point, I admit.
Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 76 guests