Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

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

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby dirtyharry » Wed 20 May 2020, 09:24:33

Ibon , thanks for the explanation .
dirtyharry
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri 07 Apr 2017, 10:53:43

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 20 May 2020, 18:03:53

Ibon wrote:
asg70 wrote:. Oh, and HIV is for the most part a non-lethal disease now. Progress marches on.


Let's remember how pharmaceutical companies decide which direction to take research. A vaccine is a one time injection with maybe an additional booster or two. That means 3 shots at the most. In the case of HIV it is a non lethal disease today because those testing positive are on a lifetime cocktail of anti viral medications that have to be taken daily.

Now if you are a pharmaceutical company CEO with your R&D team deciding on where to invest your research which path would you take, a one time vaccine or antivirals that are taken for a lifetime?

The Covid19 pandemic has been so disruptive to the global economy that the pressure is on for a vaccine and they probably will succeed. If there was not so much disruption though pharmaceutical companies would focus more on anti virals.

Pharmaceutical companies act a lot like pathogens. They are parasites that want to debilitate but not cure or kill their customers. You know, keep them chronic but not kill them. This is exactly what the most successful pathogens do.

I find that strangely ironic.

Disclosure: I was in the medical field in sales for almost 20 years in senior management.

Given your theories on opening up re the real world data, your claims aren't exactly easy to believe.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 8499
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby tita » Fri 29 May 2020, 13:55:12

Ibon wrote:Now if you are a pharmaceutical company CEO with your R&D team deciding on where to invest your research which path would you take, a one time vaccine or antivirals that are taken for a lifetime?

I have another theory... Tell me if I'm wrong.

A vaccine is billions potential customers, that could be paid with big international programs, so there's could be an interest. And big pharmaceutical companies don't do the inital fundamental research. It's a process where public research make a discovery, which end up in start-ups, which make further studies to prove a potential, which, if it's interesting, is bought by a bigger company that has the capacity to do bigger research. But the biggest cost is not the research, but the speculation that surrounds a potential treatment or vaccine that increase the value of a company.

Both yours and mine can also work. Like, there is not much incentive to develop a vaccine for Malaria, because the population affected is too poor.
User avatar
tita
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 29 May 2020, 19:13:29

This thread is really veering off-topic. Can we get back to our regularly scheduled discredited oil theory?

BOLD PREDICTIONS
-Billions are on the verge of starvation as the lockdown continues. (yoshua, 5/20/20)

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3979
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 14:17:28

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby tita » Sat 30 May 2020, 03:35:50

asg70 wrote:This thread is really veering off-topic. Can we get back to our regularly scheduled discredited oil theory?


Every subject of forum was veered off-topic with this discredited oil theory. And it's not an oil theory, it's economical nonesense. Short doesn't understand the basic equations like debt = money or Expense = revenue.
User avatar
tita
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby REAL Green » Sat 30 May 2020, 06:52:08

tita wrote:
asg70 wrote:This thread is really veering off-topic. Can we get back to our regularly scheduled discredited oil theory?


Every subject of forum was veered off-topic with this discredited oil theory. And it's not an oil theory, it's economical nonesense. Short doesn't understand the basic equations like debt = money or Expense = revenue.


There is a thermo dynamics of oil and we see through peak oil dynamics a reduction in energetics. That part of the equation is understandable. What I always had a problem with having been in business was putting a dollar price on that process. That's where the science went pseudo.

There is thermodynamics of oil to describe in decline and we see through peak oil dynamics a reduction in energetics properties pointing to lower value over time in depletion. That part of the equation is understandable. What I always had a problem with putting a dollar price on that process. That's where the science went pseudo.
realgreenadaptation.blog
User avatar
REAL Green
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 496
Joined: Thu 09 Apr 2020, 05:29:28
Location: MO Ozarks

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby tita » Sun 31 May 2020, 02:47:39

REAL Green wrote:There is thermodynamics of oil to describe in decline and we see through peak oil dynamics a reduction in energetics properties pointing to lower value over time in depletion. That part of the equation is understandable. What I always had a problem with putting a dollar price on that process. That's where the science went pseudo.


I made a very basic calculation one time, the share of oil in the global GDP. Just very basic, multiply quantity of oil consumed with the average price, and what percent it is from total GDP.

Assuming that oil require more energy to be extracted, that would also mean that this share would also increase. Oil is a significant part of global GDP, something around 3% in 2018, and it was 2-2.5% between 2015 and 2017. It's actually way lower than between 1979 and 1985. Before 1970, that was around 1.75%, and between 1993 and 1999, it was also even lower than that. For me, 1998 is the record year of low oil prices ever.

So, IMHO, the whole "cheap oil is behind us" is not so obvious. In the last 5 years, there was not the slightest problem for consumers to get all the oil they needed. We know that we increase air traffic, the number of cars on the roads, production of goods and services in general, all this with an increase of oil consumption. Thinking of oil below $25 for a long time doesn't make much sense, that would mean it is cheaper than historical prices.

There's a problem, of course, but it's not the availability of energy. Not yet. It's the slow growth in 1st world countries that can't provide new jobs and new opportunities. We're not building things at a fast rate anymore.
User avatar
tita
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Sun 31 May 2020, 19:09:06

tita wrote:
REAL Green wrote:There is thermodynamics of oil to describe in decline and we see through peak oil dynamics a reduction in energetics properties pointing to lower value over time in depletion. That part of the equation is understandable. What I always had a problem with putting a dollar price on that process. That's where the science went pseudo.


I made a very basic calculation one time, the share of oil in the global GDP. Just very basic, multiply quantity of oil consumed with the average price, and what percent it is from total GDP.

Assuming that oil require more energy to be extracted, that would also mean that this share would also increase. Oil is a significant part of global GDP, something around 3% in 2018, and it was 2-2.5% between 2015 and 2017. It's actually way lower than between 1979 and 1985. Before 1970, that was around 1.75%, and between 1993 and 1999, it was also even lower than that. For me, 1998 is the record year of low oil prices ever.

So, IMHO, the whole "cheap oil is behind us" is not so obvious. In the last 5 years, there was not the slightest problem for consumers to get all the oil they needed. We know that we increase air traffic, the number of cars on the roads, production of goods and services in general, all this with an increase of oil consumption. Thinking of oil below $25 for a long time doesn't make much sense, that would mean it is cheaper than historical prices.

There's a problem, of course, but it's not the availability of energy. Not yet. It's the slow growth in 1st world countries that can't provide new jobs and new opportunities. We're not building things at a fast rate anymore.

oil cannot be extracted with dollars. Coal is peaking, natural gas will peak soon, and nuclear takes decades to be approved and come online.

The giant oil fields producing most of the oil were artificially propped up with new technologies, technologies that allow you to pump more out but at the cost of faster decline in the near future.

Shale bought time but not enough. And an energy deficit cannot be made up with more dollars. The entire economy functions because of the free energy provided mostly by oil and other fossil fuels that is not accounted for in their price. It has been compared to having 100s of slaves, energy slaves. And that is what it is. The work of hundreds of men per person, working 24 7, that would take millions of dollars for just several barrels if what it can do was properly priced in.

The wealth is generated as a result of this cheap energy slave labor, and you cannot use dollars to replace energy slaves, only energy sources can replace energy sources.

The other fossil fuel sources would have to significantly increase production to provide for oil extraction outside of their other uses. With them peaking, this excess of necessary energy is unlikely to exist.
Darian S
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 16:47:02

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sun 31 May 2020, 23:52:26

oil cannot be extracted with dollars


Jesus wept….what do you think they use pigs and cattle as barter? I spend $4 MM to drill and complete a well and another $250K to tie it in. That is dollars (or euros or ringgits or pounds etc) spent to extract oil. Give your head a shake.

The entire economy functions because of the free energy provided mostly by oil and other fossil fuels that is not accounted for in their price.


Oh please. The price of any commodity is determined by supply and demand. That is what has always determined the price of oil. When demand increased beyond the view that there was enough supply then price increased. When supply increased as it did in 2014 regardless of demand increasing, price dropped. When you got the double whammy of supply increasing and a Covid induced demand decrease price dropped precipitously. And price will rise to whatever demand and supply balance we end up with after the Covid nonsense gets settled down. And when you start tossing around statements about “free energy” you better make sure that you understand what that terminology means in the context of physics.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7667
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Baduila » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 02:08:50

The world economy runs with energy, not money.
Money can created by central banks out of thin air endlessly, energy not.

If you look on an energy producing process from a pure money perspective, you are not at all able to recognize the problem. With infinite amounts of money there are no limits for the capability to produce oil.

If you look from the energy (thermodynamic) perspective, at some point in time the energy necessary to produce oil is a high as the energy content of oil.

At that point in time the world economy will stop to spent any energy for oil production. The price of oil will drop to zero. Watch the price per barrel to see what is coming !
Image Take care of the second law.
Baduila
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri 26 Jun 2015, 12:44:17

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 11:43:09

If you look from the energy (thermodynamic) perspective, at some point in time the energy necessary to produce oil is a high as the energy content of oil.


don't know how many times it has to be said here.....there is nobody out there in industry who does a calculation of how much "energy" they are expending to get a certain amount of "energy". That situation only exists in the fantasy world of those who falsely consider themselves "great thinkers" and who have never been involved in the industry so as to understand how things actually work.

The calculations that are made are simply ....how much money do I spend to produce, develop, tie-in, and transport my oil to the point of custody transfer and then how does that stack up against the total revenues net of all taxes and royalties that I will receive. The goal has always been to seek some economic hurdle, some companies use an NPV(10) and seek a 15% IRR as a minimum, some look to get a certain value of NPV(10)/bbl others use formulas such as Discounted Profit to Investment or NPV(10)/DC (discounted costs) to look for a sweet spot of say 0.3. But it is always about value, always has been and always will be. When you can't make money getting oil out of the ground and selling it, well, you stop doing it. Looking at oil production from a value perspective takes into account everything in the cost and revenue chain. As I have said numerous times there is no free lunch just as there is nothing in the petroleum E&P chain that is free, hence it can all be accounted for in terms of monetary value. The money you pay for drill pipe, as an example, takes into account how much it cost to produce it including manpower costs, material costs, fuel costs etc along with some level of profit returned to the producer. The drilling contractor buys that drill pipe and utilizes it to drill your wells and the rates that he charges companies to drill wells includes all of his own costs including that paid for the drill pipe....and it continues down the chain.

Did the energy return from oil increase in the period from April 1979 to March 1980? No, it did not yet the value of that oil increased by 116%. What about from October 2003 to June 2008...again the energy returned from oil did not increase as measured by BTUs/bbl yet the value of that oil increased by 260%. Did the energy return from oil suddenly drop from November 1985 to January 1986? No, it did not yet the value of that oil dropped by 65% and it dropped a similar amount between June 2014 and January 2016 again with no measurable decrease in energy output/bbl. This is simply supply and demand, which has governed oil prices from day one and will continue to govern them going forward.

The BTU value of a barrel of oil separated and sold from say the Eagleford Shale today is exactly the same BTU value of a barrel of oil that was produced from the Austin Chalk 80 years ago. How do I know? It's because they are exactly the same the oil. The source rock for the oil in the Austin Chalk was the Eagleford shale and the source rock for the Eagleford shale is, of course, itself. Now over the years the cost of getting that barrel out has increased and decreased as technology changes and that is reflected in the price sold. What also is reflected in the price is demand which has more or less steadily decreased over time.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7667
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 13:29:42

Jesus wept….what do you think they use pigs and cattle as barter? I spend $4 MM to drill and complete a well and another $250K to tie it in. That is dollars (or euros or ringgits or pounds etc) spent to extract oil. Give your head a shake.

What is used to pave the roads? energy. What is used to mine the minerals used to build the machinery? Energy. What is used to build the machinery used to extract and transport? Energy. What is used to transport the extracted oil? Energy. What is used to transport the workers? Energy. What is used to create the food that feeds the workers? Energy. What is used to transport the food the workers eat? Energy. Etc Etc Etc Etc and so on the rabbit hole goes.

Dollars are mere lipstick on the energy pig.

don't know how many times it has to be said here.....there is nobody out there in industry who does a calculation of how much "energy" they are expending to get a certain amount of "energy". That situation only exists in the fantasy world of those who falsely consider themselves "great thinkers" and who have never been involved in the industry so as to understand how things actually work.


It doesn't matter that they don't. They have provided climate change CO2 emission data that allows others to do the calculation. And many are under 10 EROEI, propped up by over 10 EROEI of the remaining high EROEI declining sources.

It has been stated once overall average EROEI of energy sources goes below 10 EROEI civilization will not have enough free energy to function.

You seem to not understand this. You can say food only costs X billions of the global economy. But if food disappeared, dollars could not replace food only food could replace food, and without food the world would collapse. Similar happens with energy dollars cannot replace energy, and dollars are only a symbol used to ration available energy. Deep underneath they stand for energy.

Every real economic action takes energy, that cannot be done away with supply and demand. You have energy scarcity and the ability to increase supply, supply of any and all goods will decrease. Printing money won't change that.
Darian S
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 16:47:02

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Baduila » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 14:45:08

@Darian

It is not possible to change rocks opinion, he always follows his agenda. And he never admits errors.

If you want to understand the thermodynamics, read this:
https://limitstogrowth.de/wp-content/up ... _EN_09.pdf
Image Take care of the second law.
Baduila
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri 26 Jun 2015, 12:44:17

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 15:26:10

What is used to pave the roads? energy


Not in this world. It is graters and pavers that burn gasoline or diesel and tar that is made from petroleum. In order to obtain any of that you have to pay money for it, it all has a price.

What is used to mine the minerals used to build the machinery? Energy.


Nope what is used is drag lines and drills all of which consume petroleum products and again all which have a price.

Dollars are mere lipstick on the energy pig.



Good God man. Do you somehow think this is all free? Please show me one of the things you mentioned that did not cost money whether it be dollars, pounds, Ringgat, Rupiah or whatever.

t doesn't matter that they don't. They have provided climate change CO2 emission data that allows others to do the calculation. And many are under 10 EROEI, propped up by over 10 EROEI of the remaining high EROEI declining sources.


Doesn't make sense in the real world. If I am making a profit on producing a barrel of oil at what point in the whole process is someone not being paid or is something free? It has to be for the sorts of ridiculous EROEI numbers you are coming up with. If EROEI was so low the profit returns on a barrel would have decreased considerably over the years....they haven't.

Every real economic action takes energy, that cannot be done away with supply and demand. You have energy scarcity and the ability to increase supply, supply of any and all goods will decrease. Printing money won't change that.


In your attempt to somehow appear knowledgable you have confused the subject of total availability of energy with the subject of EROEI. The two are not the same. Energy is indeed limited in its availability otherwise it would be free and it isn’t. But trying to come up with a ridiculous analysis that results in spending more energy to get less doesn’t work. Please demonstrate to us where a barrel of oil produced in 2050 had more energy than a barrel of oil produced now. I was in the industry for 30+ years and remember the energy requirements to drill a well back then (measured in cost for tubulars, rent of rig, manpower, fuel etc) and on a per barrel basis it was not much different than it is currently when time value of money is taken into consideration.

It is not possible to change rocks opinion, he always follows his agenda. And he never admits errors.


Well I’m not wrong as 30 years of successful oil and gas E&P demonstrate and as is demonstrated by the success of the industry over the past hundred years through many times when folks such as yourself said….oh, it can’t work. People on this thread were wringing their hands over EROEI of oil production when the US was producing ~3 MMBbl/d and last year it was producing at more than 3 times that level. I'll admit I'm wrong on this subject when you show me one oil and gas company in the world that cares one little bit about EROEI or pretends to analyze the subject by drawing straight lines on oil price curves and making up fanciful stories to explain it all.

I actually have taken lots of physics in University and applied it over the years through geophysics. I have a graduate background that includes organic geochemistry and hence a decent working understanding of thermodynamics. It is an interesting way of analyzing something but it does not drive what makes things happen. I don’t consciously lay down on the couch because I want to lower Gibbs Free Energy, I do it because I’m tired. Thermodynamics could be used after the fact to explain things but it is not the reason for it happening. The same thing can be said as it applies to oil and gas. If I was wrong on this then oil and gas companies long ago would have hired theoretical physicists to run their business and not engineers and geoscientists.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7667
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 01 Jun 2020, 21:13:47

Baduila wrote:The world economy runs with energy, not money.
Money can created by central banks out of thin air endlessly, energy not.

If you look on an energy producing process from a pure money perspective, you are not at all able to recognize the problem. With infinite amounts of money there are no limits for the capability to produce oil.

If you look from the energy (thermodynamic) perspective, at some point in time the energy necessary to produce oil is a high as the energy content of oil.

At that point in time the world economy will stop to spent any energy for oil production. The price of oil will drop to zero. Watch the price per barrel to see what is coming !

OTOH, in the real word (drum roll please) ALTERNATIVES EXIST!!

When solar, coal, NG, nuclear, geothermal, etc. don't exist, be SURE and get back to us.

Meanwhile, in the real world, things like EV's powered (at least partially) by things OTHER than oil, appear to be on a definite rise. Not to mention solar installations, geothermal installations, etc.

Babbling the word "thermodynamics" endlessly, doesn't change that. Nor does it change basic facts about economics, like supply and demand.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 8499
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby marmico » Tue 02 Jun 2020, 04:49:33

@baduilla

Ask Berndt Warm what the energy expenditure percentage calculations in the year 1960 were for the 3 major energy waste heat items in his check of plausibility:

1. oil drilling & production
2. refining
3. bitumen & naphtha (non-combustible refined products)

TIA
marmico
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1112
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 14:46:35

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Darian S » Tue 02 Jun 2020, 11:09:09

Not in this world. It is graters and pavers that burn gasoline or diesel and tar that is made from petroleum. In order to obtain any of that you have to pay money for it, it all has a price.

What do you think gasoline and diesel are? They are fossil fuels, a form of stored energy.

Good God man. Do you somehow think this is all free? Please show me one of the things you mentioned that did not cost money whether it be dollars, pounds, Ringgat, Rupiah or whatever.

In a communist regime without money, energy would still limit what can be done.
If EROEI was so low the profit returns on a barrel would have decreased considerably over the years....they haven't.

There's a reason why 90% of shale is unprofitable and there are vast bankruptcies
Analysis shows U.S. shale drillers still not profitable
In fact, roughly 9 out of every 10 U.S. shale companies are burning cash, according to Rystad Energy. The Oslo-based consultancy studied 40 U.S. shale companies and found that only 4 of them had positive cash flow in the first quarter of 2019. In fact, the number of companies with positive cash flow was lower than it was previously, and total cash flow from the group fell from $14 billion in the fourth quarter to just $9.9 billion in the first.-ieefa


More than 200 North American oil and gas companies already went bankrupt between 2015 and the end of 2019. By that measure, the shale industry was in financial distress even prior to the global pandemic and oil market meltdown.-energyfuse

Keep in mind that this is with artificially low interest loans that would normally not even be available. Even with these, +sucking up gullible investor money, they still fail.

Please demonstrate to us where a barrel of oil produced in 2050 had more energy than a barrel of oil produced now. I was in the industry for 30+ years and remember the energy requirements to drill a well back then (measured in cost for tubulars, rent of rig, manpower, fuel etc) and on a per barrel basis it was not much different than it is currently when time value of money is taken into consideration.

The barrel of oil doesn't have to have less energy, but if you consume more energy to produce it, in general it is the same as if it had less energy available.

The companies that produce oil many give out CO2 emissions reports as part of climate change information. This information the CO2 emissions can be used to calculate the amount of energy used to extract the oil. The higher the energy used the lower the EROEI. For example it could come a day where CO2 emissions exceed that which could be produced from the extracted oil. We are far from that but we don't need to approach that. Once EROEI falls below 10 and it has in many cases, that's a problem.


Image


https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019 ... -imagined/
Darian S
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon 29 Feb 2016, 16:47:02

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Baduila » Tue 02 Jun 2020, 15:31:37

@marmico

Why are you interested in 60 years old data ? What has that to do with the current oil price ?

@searcher

Why should anybody produce oil if large amounts of solar and geothermal energy are available ? Do you search to contradict or to confirm me ? Your words are clouded.
Image Take care of the second law.
Baduila
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri 26 Jun 2015, 12:44:17

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Tue 02 Jun 2020, 16:05:15

What do you think gasoline and diesel are? They are fossil fuels, a form of stored energy.


Yes and we measure their value monetarily. It costs me X amount to produce a gallon of gasoline and I sell it for X+Y and I’m happy, do not care what EROEI is as it is not important. That gallon of gasoline provides exactly the same BTU’s as it did 30 years ago. Back then I also made the same calculation. That is how the industry works.

In a communist regime without money, energy would still limit what can be done.


Have you ever lived in a communist regime? I haven’t but I have worked in a couple and had some pretty good friends when I worked in Russia that were scientists who had to survive after the wall came down. They did so through barter. They chopped wood and traded that wood for potatoes or they grew potatoes and traded those for wood or they did both and traded that for petrol. The energy was all measured in “currency” just not paper currency.

There's a reason why 90% of shale is unprofitable and there are vast bankruptcies


Yeah it is if you keep reading blogs published by idiots who can’t read a balance sheet and haven’t a clue about oil and gas E&P. Yes with oil prices low nobody is doing well and certainly not the conventional players in the offshore where breakeven costs are double what they are in the unconventional plays. But your quotes show that you don’t understand what is going on either as you have misinterpreted what Rystad means. Profit on a balance sheet is measured after all costs including Exploration and Acquisition costs. Oil and Gas companies that are publically traded have the goal imposed on them by their shareholders to grow and there are only two ways to do that, re-invest your cashflow and/or increase debt/equity. All companies as a first plan take the cash they make after taxes, royalties and costs and either reinvest all of it in new wells or acquisitions meaning that on a balance sheet they show zero positive cashflow or a combination of dividends and investment. This is very obvious if you ever bothered to read a 10K or annual report issued by one of the players who doesn’t have other underlying issues. Yet these companies share price still rose before the main drop in oil prices and that was because they were growing reserves and growing production which is what the shareholders wants. Some companies choose to reinvest a portion of that cashflow as equity and the remainder is paid out to shareholders as dividends. The end result is the same on the balance sheet, zero positive cashflow but the company is still a going concern and growing.
Please show us a list of the “vast bankruptcies”. I stay on top of this still and can tell you there are not many and as Rockman has pointed out on this site a couple of times most companies that declare Chapter 11 come out with a stronger company that is successful.
The barrel of oil doesn't have to have less energy, but if you consume more energy to produce it, in general it is the same as if it had less energy available.


OK, that’s just incorrect and can be demonstrated quite easily by looking at breakeven costs in the unconventionals. Not many years ago they were well above $60 everywhere and now they are largely under $45 and in some places down in the low thirties. If it costs less (and unit costs have risen) that means you consumed less to extract the hydrocarbons. As an example previously it might take me 30 days to drill a well I can now drill in 15. That means I have expended 50% less fuel and electricity and 50% less manpower. That is measured in cost but is in fact some form of “energy”. We are definitely not spending more (taking into account inflation) to get a barrel of oil out of the ground, the statistics are all there if you care to look.

The companies that produce oil many give out CO2 emissions reports as part of climate change information. This information the CO2 emissions can be used to calculate the amount of energy used to extract the oil.


Complete and utter horseshit. I can drill a MRC well in Saudi Arabia in rock that has in excess of a Darcy of permeability and porosities up above 25% and see flow rates in the thousands of barrels per day range. I can drill a horizontal long reach well in the Permian basin and frack it for the same cost but see production in the hundreds of barrels per day. Both wells took the same amount of energy to get to production (as measured by costs accumulated through the E&P chain) but one would see 10 times the CO2 output. What about a well that was drilled to 7,000 feet and because of problems took 20 days to drill and complete versus the normal 10 days and also required the use of a contingency casing string and vast amounts of barite and loss control material versus a well drilled to the same depth in the same formation with no problems. Both produce at the same rate so have the same CO2 output but one consumed much more energy to produce that amount (measured through cost) than the other? As to ranking companies by EROEI based on whatever calculation you want to do the results are completely ridiculous according to that graph. I’ve worked with Pertamina and Petronas as partners in the past, they are extremely successful and fund their respective countries' finances to a large extent. Shell and Exxon are without doubt the most successful companies of any in the Western world and you are suggesting they are failures. Tell that to the people who have made millions owning their shares or the hundreds of thousands of people who have profited from working directly or indirectly for them.

The fact of the matter is if it was costing companies more to produce a barrel of oil than they made by selling it for any length of time more than a few months they would look for something else to do. The only reason companies currently will operate at a loss is they see it as short term. And once those companies walked away (which they largely haven't) supply would drop and demand being the same price would rise. Same as it ever was.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7667
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Mid-Year ETP MAP Update Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Fri 05 Jun 2020, 16:34:29

Baduila wrote:@Darian

It is not possible to change rocks opinion, he always follows his agenda. And he never admits errors.

If you want to understand the thermodynamics, read this:
https://limitstogrowth.de/wp-content/up ... _EN_09.pdf

Never mind, of course, that rockdoc, unlike you, tends to be right. And speak from actual experience / expertise. :roll:

If the best you have is empty cartoons and claims that oil profits are "extinct", even as profits overall were quite STRONG in the majors through 2019, well, good luck convincing objective, data driven folks with that.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the trajectory of oil prices recently clearly says that IF the world recovers from COVID within a few years, there will be PLENTY of demand for oil. And if not, the world will adapt to a moderate extent (through partial reopening), same as it ever was.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 8499
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests