[Plantagenet]

The US government estimates that there are about 363 BILLION barrels of recoverable unconventional oil left on the planet.

Let's put that number into perspective......let's do a thought experiment.


let's do a thought experiment.

The world consumes about roughly 100 million bbls of oil per day, or about 36 billion bbls per year.

That means that if the world was totally relying on unconventional oil then all the recoverable unconventional oil would all be consumed in only 10 years. AND it means that, for the purposes of this thought experiment, if the consumption rate of unconventional oil corresponded to a bell curve, the peak of unconventional oil production would be reached in only five years.

Thats not the real situation, of course, but the thought experiment is useful because it allows us to put these huge numbers into perspective. 363 billion bbls of unconventional oil sounds like a huge amount, but because the the world is consuming so much oil all the time, even this huge resource could be totally consumed in only 10 years if it was the exclusive source for global petroleum consumption. This suggests that the rate of oil consumption in the world is so great that even in the real world the huge amount of unconventional oil will almost inevitably peak and then be totally consumed in the next few decades......and thats assuming it all gets developed. If much of it is never developed, then it will peak all that much sooner.

Cheers!

[AdamB]

The US government estimates that there are about 363 BILLION barrels of recoverable unconventional oil left on the planet.

Reference please. The EIA has claimed about 416 billion of "tight oil" which folks who missed the geologic definitions might confuse with "unconventional", and this number includes ZERO Canadian honest unconventional which has approx. 170 billion addition barrels of RESERVES, and about another 500 billion of resources. Not that this distinction makes any difference to amateur hour folks who fell for peak oil in 2005 or so (that would be you Plant).

So...which government agency claimed such a small number for global resources within the LTO category (which is what the EIA characterized it as in the study referenced), let alone missed the true motherload of global unconventional oil sitting just north of the L48 border? And I haven't even had to go add up all the other unconventional globally to make not just the government look wrong but you. You being wrong is expected, having not done your homework particularly well on even the definitions involved, but the government at least should be aware of far more than the measly 300+ billion you mentioned for global unconventional "recoverable" oil...whatever amateur hour thinks THAT might be.

[Plantagenet]

The US government estimates that there are about 363 BILLION barrels of recoverable unconventional oil left on the planet.

Reference please. .

The reference and my discussion of this number is in my latest post to the "Conventional Oil" thread ---- thats the very funny thread where you are losing your argument with Rockman over what is and isn't conventional oil.

I find it hilarious that you are now arguing with Rockman over what unconventional oil is and Rockman ---a lifelong scientist in the Petroleum industry--- has now demonstrated once again, as I did somewhat earlier in this thread, that you don't even know what unconventional oil is.

The revelation that you don't know what unconventional oil is reminds of one of your earlier howlers in the EV thread when it came out that you that you didn't know what an EV is, i.e. you thought only Battery EVs were EVs and you didn't know that there are three other kinds of EVs....i.e. hybrid EVs, or HEVs,Plug-in Hybrid EVs (PHEVs) and Fuel cell EVs (FCEVs).



Thats all very funny, actually. It is to laugh!!!

CHEERS!

[AdamB]

I find it hilarious that you are now arguing with Rockman over what unconventional oil is and Rockman ---a lifelong scientist in the Petroleum industry--- has now demonstrated once again, as I did somewhat earlier in this thread, that you don't even know what unconventional oil is.

I wasn't arguing with him, I was making fun of what the AAPG thinks compared to the best geoscientists in the country, you know, the kind of folks that employed Hubbert during the apogee of his career and the like. And Rockman has never claimed to be a scientist, his posts and stories are pretty exclusively industry oriented, the scientist types would be RocDoc and myself.

Do try and keep up.

Any reason why you can't point out those unconventional oils from global benchmark list? I provided it so it would be easy for even a child to just pick off a list. Easey peasey. I'll go look up the sales volumes on a Bloomberg terminal or something. There weren't any labelled unconventional, so I'm counting on your expertise in knowing which ones fit the category you prefer, AAPG's or otherwise.

[Plantagenet]

Oil production from the Permian in Texas remains about 10% below levels reached in 2020, in spite of the fact that for the last two years oil prices have risen to levels ca. 200-300% greater then they were in 2020.



rrc.texas.gov/oil-and-gas/major-oil-and-gas-formations/permian-basin

Normally increasing the price tends to increase the supply of a commodity.

However, so far this isn't happening with oil production from the Permian basin.

The lack of growth in oil production from the Permian is part of a larger overall trend towards lower US oil production over the last couple of years, even as oil prices go much higher.

Cheers!

[ROCKMAN]

"I was making fun of what the AAPG..." Very convenient to be able to make fun of what 38,000 petroleum geologists believe in one swipe. The vast majority in the oil capital of the world...Houston. A very scientific approach. LOL

[jawagord]

The fact that unconventional oil production hasn't gone up in spite of a dramatic price increase demonstrates that the oil producers can't easily increase the amount of unconventional oil being produced right now even though there has been a large increase in the price of oil.

The US doesn't do much unconventional, so you can ask the Canadians about why they have chosen to not increase that production.

Canadians have been doing their part to increase oil production. Of course if we did not have the political impediments of Obama, Biden, Trudeau blocking export pipelines and creating onerous new regulations we would be doing a lot more. When the TMX pipeline expansion is complete in 2024 and assuming the climate crazy Trudeau Liberal government is replaced there should be a sustained increase in Canadian production until 2030. Canadian production has always been limited by politics not geology.

I think this is true for much of the world where oil is located. There are the crazy countries that politically the world doesn’t want their oil used or developed - currently Venezuela, Iran, Russia, (previously Iraq, Libya) and then the ESG limited countries like Europe that outright ban production or partially limit production like Canada, Australia, USA. Remove politics and the world would be awash in crude. And given we can make diesel fuel out of coal, it doesn’t much matter if “conventional” oil has peaked, retooled refineries make unconventional oil, conventional.

Canadian crude oil production has grown considerably over the last 30 years, from 1.7 million barrels per day (b/d) in 1990 to 4.7 million b/d in 2019.

https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analy ... ar-review/

The report projects a constrained outlook for Canadian oil production from 2019 to 2035. Although production will increase by 1.27 million barrels per day (b/d) by 2035, that growth rate is about 6% less than CAPP’s 2018 forecast.

https://www.capp.ca/resources/crude-oil-forecast/

[AdamB]

"I was making fun of what the AAPG..." Very convenient to be able to make fun of what 38,000 petroleum geologists believe in one swipe.

Indeed. But I wasn't making fun...I stated an observation related to their claim of technology being a determining factor in the definition. Rather than it being, ...you know....geologic? Not convenient, just a fact. Are you aware of any reason why they need to reach outside their geologic expertise to define...you know...these "unconventional" things? The USGS managed to do it decades ago...maybe the AAPG are just slow learners?

The vast majority in the oil capital of the world...Houston. A very scientific approach. LOL

What does Houston have to do with AAPG? They are headquartered in Tulsa.

[AdamB]

Canadians have been doing their part to increase oil production. Of course if we did not have the political impediments of Obama, Biden, Trudeau blocking export pipelines and creating onerous new regulations we would be doing a lot more. When the TMX pipeline expansion is complete in 2024 and assuming the climate crazy Trudeau Liberal government is replaced there should be a sustained increase in Canadian production until 2030. Canadian production has always been limited by politics not geology.

Yup. Canada could bury the planet in crude if they wanted to. But ES&G is grabbing them by the short hairs even quicker than it is the producers in the States.

[Plantagenet]

...maybe the AAPG are just slow learners?

Why not face facts?

Rockman is 100% right on the definition of unconventional oil and you are 100% wrong.

A big part of science is defining terms. Its important to accurately define terms so that people can communicate clearly. And the people who define technical and scientific terms are the scientists and engineers who originated and now use these terms in their scientific and engineering work.

The tens of thousand of scientists and engineers who make up the earth science community have already clearly defined what unconventional oil is.

You are not an expert or an authority or even a credible person to challenge the existing scientific definition.

I noticed you had this problem and I explained to you earlier what unconventional oil is. I even posted a US Government slide with the correct definition to help you understand. Now Rockman is nicely telling you again that you've got the definition of unconventional oil wrong. So now We've both separately and patiently explained these facts to you. In fact since you still don't get it we've repeated our explanation to you several times now, -- but you still don't get it.

Why is that?

No offense, but this is getting weird. Why can't you learn these simple facts?

Could it be that you have dyslexia or some similar problem? There must be some explanation as to why you can't learn these simple facts even though Rockman and I have explained them to you multiple times now?

Good luck to you, AdamB.


No offense----but could it be that you are dyslexic? You don't seem to be able to learn some basic things.....

Cheers!

[yellowcanoe]

...maybe the AAPG are just slow learners?

Why not face facts?

Rockman is 100% right on the definition of unconventional oil and you are 100% wrong.

I do wonder why so much energy is being put into defining a strictly black/white categorization of production technologies when they clearly encompass a broad spectrum of complexity/cost.

[AdamB]

No offense----but could it be that you are dyslexic? You don't seem to be able to learn some basic things.....

None taken Plant.

[Plantagenet]

THANKS to the MODS for correcting the title of this thread.



Cheers!

[Plantagenet]

China is opening up again and they are expected to need a lot more oil.

How much more oil? China just raised its import quotas for oil by 20%



china-signals-surge-oil-demand-20-increase-oil-import-quotas

Presumably this will lead to higher oil prices, allowing us to test whether even higher oil prices will finally lead to higher oil production in the Permian, or whether the Permian has now peaked.

Of course even if the Permian has peaked, there are still other sources of oil to be tapped.....for instance Joe Biden hasn't used up all the Strategic Petroleum Reserve yet!

Cheers!

[ROCKMAN]

As always predicting future (peak or otherwise) will hinge on oil prices. Increases in production will always depend on oil prices AS LONG AS THERE ARE ECONOMICLY VIABLE TARGETS TO DRILL FOR. Thus, PO in a trend, a state, a country or the world will happen when oil prices NEVER reach a level to justify developing the remaining reserves. That is not an easy dynamic to predict. Especially when it requires a prediction of the budgets of the oil companies. From: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/T ... -2022.html

"Total hydrocarbon production in the Permian Delaware Basin, the top-producing play in the Permian, will hit a record 5.7 million barrels of oil equivalent per day (boepd) average in 2022, according to Rystad Energy research. Spurred on by high oil prices and appealing well economics, total production is set to grow by around 990,000 boepd, almost half of which – 433,000 boepd – is new oil production. Investments in the basin are also expected to jump, surging more than 40% from 2021 levels to reach $25.7 billion this year. A significant contributor to this growth is the majors – ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP and ConocoPhillips – who last year cut Permian Delaware investments by 33% vs. 2020. This year, the majors are expected to raise investments in the basin by 60%, bringing their total to $7.4 billion. Private operators’ share is also set to balloon in 2022, rising 50% from $5.8 billion in 2021 to nearly $9 billion in 2022. Cost inflation on the services side, which is expected to range between 10% and 15% this year, is also a contributor to the higher spend levels.

The operator-specific findings are based on Rystad Energy’s research of a peer group of 61 operators in the basin. The forecasts are based on a scenario in which West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil futures averages $106 per barrel in 2022 before dropping to $70 per barrel next year and to $50 per barrel towards 2025.

“The Permian Delaware has emerged as the top oil-producing play in the US shale patch, outpacing growth in other oil-rich regions. With oil prices expected to remain elevated, 2022 promises to be another outstanding year for production growth in the region,” says Veronika Meyer, Rystad Energy vice president."

Of course, for some folks here, it's a very simple answer. I certainly wish I was that smart after working in the oil patch for 40+ years. A span during which I've witnessed a number of trends and basins reach PO. Trends and basins which will never see their former PO reached again no matter how high oil prices reach.

Always difficult to tell when a party is over and time to head for the door before you get stuck helping to clean up. LOL.

[AdamB]

As always predicting future (peak or otherwise) will hinge on oil prices. Increases in production will always depend on oil prices AS LONG AS THERE ARE ECONOMICLY VIABLE TARGETS TO DRILL FOR. Thus, PO in a trend, a state, a country or the world will happen when oil prices NEVER reach a level to justify developing the remaining reserves. That is not an easy dynamic to predict. Especially when it requires a prediction of the budgets of the oil companies. From: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/T ... -2022.html

Capital investment doesn't need to be in the mix, you can just stick to building a resource cost curve, which dictates some minimum price as you indicate and covers the economically viable target size. When companies decide to drill, the resources available under a given profitability point would be the logical targets, assuming you've got the leases and not someone else of course.

Of course, for some folks here, it's a very simple answer. I certainly wish I was that smart after working in the oil patch for 40+ years. A span during which I've witnessed a number of trends and basins reach PO. Trends and basins which will never see their former PO reached again no matter how high oil prices reach.

Seems like the faith based and geologically ignorant thought just this "which will never see their former PO reached again no matter how high oil prices reach" about the US until...you know...it turns out just opening up source rock that is also reservoir rock was all that was needed.

I wonder what the price point and volume realization of the oil shales in the Greater Green River Basin might be, or full scale development of the ROZ in Texas?

Want to bet that the geologically uninformed, upon claiming the next peak in the US as the continuous plays deplete, won't have done a seconds worth of thinking on the rounds of development that could come next? Faith based folks just want to call the peak and sing the dogma in the pews Rock, they don't want to waste a second on understanding the most basic things about currently undeveloped resource concepts.

[theluckycountry]

At the end of the day they can just start converting all the coal into oil, that works. And since oil is just made of Hydrogen and Carbon, two elements that are abundant on the planet, it should be a simple matter to combine them to form oil, with the aid of a few hundred Fusion Reactors.

Cheap oil, flowing or even pumped from the ground is what built the world we live in. Converting source rock into oil is an exercise in tail chasing and the Great Unconventional Oil boom of the last decade hasn't added one iota to the living standards of the Average American. In fact living standards, on average, have fallen since the conventional oil peak in 2007~2008.

Discussions about unconventional oil are of importance to the corporations gleaning off whatever profits there are there and the wall streeter types who made huge profits peddling the stock in the plays. For the man in the street this oil is meaningless though, in fact it is toxic! Just look at all the environmental degradation linked to it. The poisoning of water tables etc.

[AdamB]

Cheap oil, flowing or even pumped from the ground is what built the world we live in.

Clever monkey ingenuity is what built the world we live in. Our ability to generate power is the thing that ingenuity gifted us with, regardless of the source of the energy utilized to generate that power.

Any country that has built nuke subs knows this, the Neanderthal ones running around using silly diesel/electrics might not, lacking previously mentioned talents necessary to understand the power of the atom.

Converting source rock into oil is an exercise in tail chasing and the Great Unconventional Oil boom of the last decade hasn't added one iota to the living standards of the Average American.

Producing oil and gas from a shale reservoir rocks isn't converting source rock into anything. Source rock just sits there, staying right where it was. And America becoming the largest producer of oil and gas on the planet with run of the mill American exceptionalism and whatnot is certainty a cause for your apparent jealousy, but have no fear, the King will protect you, and if not him, then us exceptional Americans will. While the Chinese might own you and your countrymen, we won't let them invade regardless of how much you folks are cowering under the whips of their corporate oppressors.

[yellowcanoe]

Any country that has built nuke subs knows this, the Neanderthal ones running around using silly diesel/electrics might not, lacking previously mentioned talents necessary to understand the power of the atom.

Just FYI, a number of Air Independent Propulsion systems have been developed that enable better submerged performance than a basic diesel/electric submarine. While not as good as a nuclear submarine it is certainly a cheaper option. Some AIP systems such as fuel cell based units can provide quieter operation than a nuclear submarine which requires pumps in the reactor system to operate all the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-indep ... propulsion

[AdamB]

Any country that has built nuke subs knows this, the Neanderthal ones running around using silly diesel/electrics might not, lacking previously mentioned talents necessary to understand the power of the atom.

Just FYI, a number of Air Independent Propulsion systems have been developed that enable better submerged performance than a basic diesel/electric submarine. While not as good as a nuclear submarine it is certainly a cheaper option.

Can it be manufactured by countries with citizens so limited in their intellectual and manufacturing capability that they can't build automobiles for their people? And when America builds state of the art, top notch and mostly incomparable to anything else in the world military hardware, it doesn't tend to worry about cost.

Some AIP systems such as fuel cell based units can provide quieter operation than a nuclear submarine which requires pumps in the reactor system to operate all the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-indep ... propulsion

Yup. I watched a story about some Scandavanian sub captain in war games against a US carrier task force that was able to penetrate its sub screen and score hits on the carrier, a non-nuke boat. There are alternatives out there, are you aware of any with the kind of global reach nuke boats have?

And if it isn't rude, is there a significance to your username? Just curious.