Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak oil debate

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

Re: A rant about the Peak Oil movement

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 27 Oct 2011, 03:43:39

Bruce_S wrote:Do you have a reference? I haven't seen world GDP figures recently, and just assumed that the world recession ended around the same time the US one did. But a double dip? That is something else altogether.


This might help:

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/3421
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4974
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Off Topic PO Debate

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Thu 27 Oct 2011, 11:26:20

What we have is an employment crisis, while the economy has been slowly expanding and profits are through the roof. The US has been out of "recession" for something like 14 months, but the average person can't tell.
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Off Topic PO Debate

Unread postby Plantagenet » Thu 27 Oct 2011, 12:40:37

PrestonSturges wrote: The US has been out of "recession" for something like 14 months, but the average person can't tell.


Actually the recession officially ended in June 2009-----28 months ago.

The average person can't tell the recession is over because the recovery in the US has been much weaker and slower than that of any prior recession. In fact, the US continues to shed jobs even in the recovery. Just last month the Obama administration reported that the economy created 117,000 jobs, but they forget to mention that they reclassified 130,000 workers as "discouraged"...removing them from the list of the official unemployed.

When you include all the discouraged workers, the actual unemployment rate is 17-20%---i.e. at Great Depression levels.
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22664
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Off Topic PO Debate

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Thu 27 Oct 2011, 13:00:21

Plantagenet wrote:
PrestonSturges wrote: The US has been out of "recession" for something like 14 months, but the average person can't tell.


Actually the recession officially ended in June 2009-----28 months ago.

The average person can't tell the recession is over because the recovery in the US has been much weaker and slower than that of any prior recession. In fact, the US continues to shed jobs even in the recovery. Just last month the Obama administration reported that the economy created 117,000 jobs, but they forget to mention that they reclassified 130,000 workers as "discouraged"...removing them from the list of the official unemployed.

When you include all the discouraged workers, the actual unemployment rate is 17-20%---i.e. at Great Depression levels.
Thank you, Plantagenet
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Off Topic PO Debate

Unread postby vision-master » Thu 27 Oct 2011, 18:37:21

Economic growth can only happen with cheap energy (in our current materialisic system).
vision-master
 

Re: A rant about the Peak Oil movement

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Fri 28 Oct 2011, 23:21:02

Bruce_S wrote:I can now run down to the corner Chevy dealer and purchase something which will put the meaning of the numbers hung outside the gas station into the context of "who gives a crap".
Without the gubmint subsidy you would have to drive that something 1,000,000 km (600,000 US "miles") to break even on fuel cost. (Not even allowing for the gains you could have made by investing the extra cost).

EDIT: And that's assuming you live in a climate where you don't need much heating or air conditioning.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7310
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

Re: A rant about the Peak Oil movement

Unread postby Bruce_S » Fri 28 Oct 2011, 23:36:56

Keith_McClary wrote:
Bruce_S wrote:I can now run down to the corner Chevy dealer and purchase something which will put the meaning of the numbers hung outside the gas station into the context of "who gives a crap".
Without the gubmint subsidy you would have to drive that something 1,000,000 km (600,000 US "miles") to break even on fuel cost. (Not even allowing for the gains you could have made by investing the extra cost).


When peak oil shortages and rationing arrive, the answer is quite different. Sort of a, "in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king" concept.
Bruce_S
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu 22 Sep 2011, 20:45:40

Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby Pops » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 08:08:14

The interesting part of this story is the line that new shale oil/gas in Argentina is profitable at $30/bbl. Looks like big time profits to me.

The debate over whether the world's reserves of hydrocarbons have now peaked and are in decline has lost relevance over recent years as new technology allows oil companies to find and exploit new hydrocarbon sources, the CEO of Repsol Antonio Brufau said Tuesday.

Brufau said progress made in exploring and developing ultra-deepwater areas, unconventional oil and gas sources and the move into remote areas such as the Arctic, have been key to growing global reserves of oil and gas.

"The speed at which technology changes and its consequences have taken us largely by surprise. The peak oil debate, for example, has lost a great deal of its relevance in the past three years," Brufau told the World Petroleum Congress in Doha.

"The possibility that usable resources under commercially viable terms will run out is no longer a concern in the short or medium term," he said.

New technology has given access to "massive amounts" of new resources, Brufau said, adding Repsol is continue to explore in deepwater offshore Brazil, West Africa and Cuba.

Last month, Repsol said it has continued to more than replace its proven oil and gas reserves outside Argentina this year and will accelerate output from 2015 onwards as it converts contingent resources into proven reserves.

Brufau pointed to developments in the US shale gas industry and highlighted Repsol's own plans to develop a huge shale oil and gas area in Argentina.

Repsol has said it estimates the cost of fully developing its Vaca Muerta shale oil and gas discovery in Argentina at some $20 billion. The discovery covers nearly 1 billion equivalent barrels of recoverable shale oil at the Loma La Lata field.

Brufau said Repsol's shale reserves in Argentina are currently profitable to develop at $30/barrel finding, development and operating cost.

http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNe ... as/8666877
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 18480
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby Fishman » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 10:46:59

At this moment WTI at 100.56, Brent at 109.71. Despite Europe's growth of less than 1%. The flaw in the article
New technology has given access to "massive amounts" of new resources
. New resources yes, massive amounts, compared to the world demand, not even close. We'll see lots of articles like this, apply the same standards that always should be used, EROEI, production vs demand. The article quote 1 billion barrels of production, less than 15 day of world demand. Sounds like the proverbial smoke up one's behind
Obama, the FUBAR presidency gets scraped off the boot
User avatar
Fishman
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2138
Joined: Thu 11 Aug 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Carolina de Norte

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby dorlomin » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 11:04:13

Repsol has said it estimates the cost of fully developing its Vaca Muerta shale oil and gas discovery in Argentina at some $20 billion.
"We have shedloads of fossil fuels. Um going to need some money. Anyone want to join invest in a guarenteed cash bonanza?"
User avatar
dorlomin
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5193
Joined: Sun 05 Aug 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby dissident » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 12:12:49

Vaca Muerta shale oil and gas


What an appropriate name: dead cow. Nothing to liven anything up with this discovery.
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 12:44:46

$30 bbl? Delivered by the Tooth Fairy?
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby Schadenfreude » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 20:24:57

U.S. on Pace to Become Net Fuel Exporter Despite High Gasoline Prices at Home
For anyone bummed out about the United States' dependence on foreign oil, try this forecast on for size: The U.S. is on track to be a net exporter of petroleum products this year for the first time in 62 years -- and yet, domestic gas prices remain at or close to record highs for this time of year.

Data released last week by the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows that the U.S. sent abroad 753.4 million barrels of gasoline, diesel and other oil-based fuels in the first nine months of 2011, while taking in only 689.4 million barrels.

The reason? To put it simply, Americans are relying on less, while emerging markets are demanding more.
Schadenfreude
 

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby Schadenfreude » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 20:28:56

Fracking Shale Pummels Peak Oil Against the Ropes w/ Punishing Body Blows

Not so long ago, it was possible to talk about peak oil with a straight face at cocktail parties. But lately, rapid developments in petroleum production technology has knocked peak oil from the speaking circuit to the circular jerkular echo choir set.

Of all developments most concerning to peak oil devotees, is the possibility that China (and India) may be able to supply most of their own energy and fuel from domestic sources. Discoveries of large shale petroleum resources, plus the discovery of "another Saudi Arabia" off China's shores, suggest that China's petroleum future may be secure for a few decades. If you add China's rapid build-up of nuclear power plants, China may not need to buy so much oil from OPEC after all.

The debate over whether the world's reserves of hydrocarbons have now peaked and are in decline has lost relevance over recent years as new technology allows oil companies to find and exploit new hydrocarbon sources, the CEO of Repsol Antonio Brufau said Tuesday.

Brufau said progress made in exploring and developing ultra-deepwater areas, unconventional oil and gas sources and the move into remote areas such as the Arctic, have been key to growing global reserves of oil and gas.

"The speed at which technology changes and its consequences have taken us largely by surprise. The peak oil debate, for example, has lost a great deal of its relevance in the past three years," Brufau told the World Petroleum Congress in Doha.

"The possibility that usable resources under commercially viable terms will run out is no longer a concern in the short or medium term," he said.
Schadenfreude
 

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby radon » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 20:36:05

Interesting to know how these 30$ per bbl add up. They need to invest $20b to "develop" 1b bbl of recoverable reserves, taking it to $20 per bbl. So the remaining $10 per bbl is all that they have for operations, delivery, environmental etc. It is realistic at all with that kind of oil fields?

Brufau said Repsol's shale reserves in Argentina are currently profitable to develop at $30/barrel finding, development and operating cost.


Does this mean that the shale reserves do cost $30/bbl, or that they are profitable in Argentina at $30/bbl, i.e. become unprofitable at say $35/bbl for whatever reason?
Last edited by radon on Tue 06 Dec 2011, 20:40:38, edited 2 times in total.
radon
 

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby Kristen » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 20:37:27

Arent there serious consequences to using shale gas? What about the amount of water needed? Even if there is an over abundance, kicking the can farther down the road is hardly solving the problem
User avatar
Kristen
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Mon 17 Jul 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby copious.abundance » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 23:31:00

Ooo, this is rich! Argentina has been one of the poster children of the peak oil arguments. :lol: For example, check out page 35 of this document!
http://mazamascience.com/Presentations/ ... umbers.pdf
:razz:
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9571
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby copious.abundance » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 23:34:12

Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9571
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby copious.abundance » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 23:37:03

And last - but certainly not least! - from the "authority" on peak oil itself, Argentina appears on this 2009 list of "countries that are past peak."
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5576

:lol:
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9571
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: Peak oil debate losing relevance?

Unread postby copious.abundance » Tue 06 Dec 2011, 23:39:50

^
And a bit off-topic, check out footnote #2 at the bottom of that list:
But in some of these cases, it will be difficult to pass an old peak because decades of depletion have occurred since that peak. Iraq peaked in 1979, making it all the more difficult to pass that now.

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9571
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests