Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Have we hit the peak?

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

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 02 Nov 2019, 20:12:35

Daniel Doom wrote:
Daniel Doom wrote:Robert Rapier. August 31, 2017. Oil demand is growing nearly everywhere. Forbes.


"Two years old,"

DD: Which is not very old, since little has changed in the last two years.


Not according to Rystad, WoodMac, Barclays and CSIS. They have published their expectations within the last 6 or so? So yes...old..and demand growth deceleration is quite obvious to those looking..NOW.

Daniel Doom wrote: "and from a former Happy McPeakster. I was talking about data and real analysts"

DD: Rapier has the background and experience to qualify as a "real analyst." He also cites data.


Robert also has already fallen for peak oil. I agree, he has background and experience, and been discredited by reality in that regard. And he does cite data...back when it said something different than it apparently does today.

Daniel Doom wrote:"and whatnot, and you come up with discredited peak oilers doing same-old same-old?"

DD: discredited by whom? You seem to be saying that you can dismiss his arguments because they are wrong, and they are wrong because you have dismissed them!


Perhaps you just aren't familiar with some of his ideas, since discredited?

Peak Oil is here, it just doesn’t look like you expect it to. It reflects an inability to secure the energy supplies you need to keep economies growing. It means that rationing is here, but it will be rationing by price (at least in the beginning).

R. Rapier, April 24, 2006


So does this fit into your vision of peak oil, it having happened? Saudi America doesn't appear to have been considered (lack of geologic understanding I imagine?), haven't seen real rationing, but he appears to think it will be price that does it. This was all some 10+ million barrels a day ago.

David Doom wrote:DD: 1. Production has not just decelerated recently but has actually fallen. If I used your depth of perception, I would be claiming that this is proof that oil has now peaked, but it could just be a slowing economy explaining both the weaker demand growth and the falling production, so I will wait and watch; and--


Robert claimed peak oil has peaked. I'm not certain what your position is. And production has been mostly irrelevant, ever since Saudi Arabia began visibly fighting Saudi America, circa 2013 or so.

Daniel Doom wrote:2. Even if global demand were to instantly, seemingly magically, go completely flat, we would still be headed for a peak oil crisis; it is just a matter of how fast we get there; and--


I said global demand growth deceleration, as presented by folks with far more experience and insight than you, I, or Robert. And according to peak oilers, saying things just like you, we've been having peak oils for like 30 years now. Your claim is different from all those other ones, how?

Daniel Doom wrote:3. No one has been discredited by events simply because he did not look into a crystal ball and foresee the quantity of tight oil which would be rapidly produced and sold at well below the total cost of production. After all, not even the most pollyannish of optimists predicted that scenario back in the nervous years when oil was running up to $147 a barrel.


I have never in my life seen a peak oil caveat their "peak oil is happening now, tomorrow, next year" with "but me not knowing anything about resource economics, oil field completion techniques stretching back into the 1940's, horizontal drilling, or oil resources prototyped in the Appalachian basin the 1800's means I could be full of crap." I accept that if they had included this caveat, they wouldn't all now be hiding under rocks.

Daniel Doom wrote:However, it is universally acknowledged among oil analysts that tight oil will peak relatively soon and then go into slow but irreversible decline.


There has already been peaks in tight oil. So sure, undoubtedly there will be more. The EIA is currently calling for just such a peak, so I agree that this is the most common expected outcome..right now...from the experts.

Daniel Doom wrote:4. A little over the peak oil horizon, other energy sources look to peak in the not too distant future: U235, coal (as measured in joules or BTU's, not just gross tonnage), and natural gas. The farther down the road we can kick the peak oil barrel, the closer together these assorted peaks will cluster. And--


And how many times has these claims been made before, only to drive their advocates under the same rock the peak oilers retreated to? Uranium being a good one, perhaps you missed Hubbert's 1956 seminal work? The hint is in the title, and reason why it matters is inside the paper. I recommend reading it. NUCLEAR ENERGY and the Fossil Fuels. Give it a go, and then we can laugh together about uranium shortages.

Daniel Doom wrote:5. We did not transition from the stone age to the bronze age because we ran out of stones, but if we had in fact run out of stones before we discovered how to make bronze, we would have been really, really screwed.


So now I can accurately mention that you didn't provide a single piece of information to dispute what CSIS, Rystad, WoodMac and Barclays have been saying. You are following a pretty predicable Happy McPeakster outline. Try updating your world view with what has happened since the retreat to under the rock happened perhaps?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby coffeeguyzz » Sat 02 Nov 2019, 23:20:45

Greetings, Adam.
Don't know if you've been tracking the 3rd quarter presentations from the upstream boys, but folks are going to continue to be surprised at just how tough, how resourceful these E&P outfits truly are.
Cost to D&C wells continues to drop with in basin sand (or highly enhanced proppant handling) reducing completion costs.
Blending of flowback/produced water with fresh water has caused water handling expenses to fall both for disposal and for use in frac'ing.
Super spec rigs are still in demand as are the few frac spreads that are using field gas to power turbines for electric frac'ing.
The speed of drilling (along with near 100% accuracy) is bringing the cost of a Bakken well down to the $5 million range.
Appalachian Basin operators are looking to bring Drill/Complete costs down under $800/foot, so a soon to be standard 12,000 footer will be under $10 million. (Production numbers for Marcellus/Utica wells are simply astronomical).
6,000 foot/day drilling is average with 2 outfits having approached or exceeded 10,000 feet in 24 hours.
Chevron in the Eagle Ford and Continental in the Bakken are now claiming 20% primary recovery with their latest completions.
Biggest surprise to me is that several big Appalachian Basin operators are positioning themselves to be profitable at $2.50 HH ... something I would not have thought possible.
With all the incredible advances surrounding the LNG world, US LNG will give global competitors a run for the money ... that includes the pipe supplied or other LNG.
Speaking of global, Pakistan is about to drill/frac 10 onshore pilot unconventional wells targeting their ~200 Tcf TRR resources.
Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.
coffeeguyzz
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 296
Joined: Mon 27 Oct 2014, 15:09:47

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 03 Nov 2019, 17:36:05

coffeeguyzz wrote:Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.


Optimism, particularly that based on empirical examples of increased oil field performance and efficiencies, are not generally appreciated in Doomerville. Are you sure you can't find a way to acknowledge these improvements, but then say "oh yeah, but regardless, we are DOOMED!!" immediately afterwards?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Sun 03 Nov 2019, 19:24:11

coffeeguyzz wrote:Greetings, Adam.
Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.

Gee, it's so refreshing for people to see new technology and lower prices as good things instead of doom around here.
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: 7324
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Daniel Doom » Sun 03 Nov 2019, 23:01:12

AdamB wrote:
coffeeguyzz wrote:Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.


Optimism, particularly that based on empirical examples of increased oil field performance and efficiencies,


Sucking the oil out faster now just means a steeper cliff later. As the late Matt Simmons observed, nearly all the new technology was a superstraw that just drained the wells faster but rarely increases the amount of oil ultimately recovered. That buys some time, for which we should give Heaven thanks, but it is not a free lunch. The crash will be proportionately faster when it arrives.
"You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality."--Ayn Rand
Daniel Doom
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri 01 Nov 2019, 22:00:40

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 03 Nov 2019, 23:33:39

Daniel Doom wrote:
AdamB wrote:
coffeeguyzz wrote:Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.


Optimism, particularly that based on empirical examples of increased oil field performance and efficiencies,


Sucking the oil out faster now just means a steeper cliff later.


Yeah, the ignorant tranche inside the peak oilers said that last time too. You need to learn some of the past claims that revealed ignorance on the part of the user so that you..you know...don't reveal how little you know on this topic. Of about basic reservoir engineering.

Daniel Doom wrote:As the late Matt Simmons observed, nearly all the new technology was a superstraw that just drained the wells faster but rarely increases the amount of oil ultimately recovered.


And you figure that an accountant knows quite a bit about reservoir engineering do you? Your statement is obviously incorrect, if only based on the most recent USGS research on the topic of reserve growth. May I recommend updating nearly 15 year old talking points now? Did you just get out of a time machine or something? Matt was the accountant that thought only nuclear weapons could close blowouts in the Gulf, and if memory serves, methane is a poison gas. Made it sound like H2S damn near.

If you really want to discuss changes in ultimate recovery, read the science on how those estimates are done and how much recovery factors really do change, and we can.

Daniel Doom wrote: That buys some time, for which we should give Heaven thanks, but it is not a free lunch. The crash will be proportionately faster when it arrives.


Except recycling points that didn't work last time should have schooled you on their effectiveness next time. What silly peaker reference nonsense do you want to suppose next, maybe Savinar's claim on AM radio that uranium is a fossil fuel?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Daniel Doom » Mon 04 Nov 2019, 01:18:10

AdamB wrote:
Daniel Doom wrote:
Daniel Doom wrote:Robert Rapier. August 31, 2017. Oil demand is growing nearly everywhere. Forbes.


"
Peak Oil is here, it just doesn’t look like you expect it to. It reflects an inability to secure the energy supplies you need to keep economies growing. It means that rationing is here, but it will be rationing by price (at least in the beginning).

R. Rapier, April 24, 2006


DD: At the time Rapier wrote those words, they were entirely accurate--conventional crude production really did peak about 2006, and oil really was being "rationed" by means of the price mechanism in 2006, 2007, and 2008. I do not understand why you are faulting him for being correct. Maybe you think, "He should have peered into a crystal ball and foreseen the tight oil interlude that would appear a few years later!" Well, nobody else's crystal ball was working back then either, not just the peakists.

AdamB: Robert claimed peak oil has peaked. I'm not certain what your position is.

DD: Conventional crude production, contrary to those who told us for years that it would not happen, has indeed peaked. That is a fact. It is not controversial. Robert pegged it. Peak oil was always very explicitly about CONVENTIONAL oil (and, yes, people in the industry routinely make a distinction between conventional and unconventional, so don't try to obscure the issue by suggesting the difference is so blurry as to be meaningless, that's not true); the one big thing that peakists did not see was that tight oil would be produced in large enough quantities, and at a financial loss, to allow total transport fuels to increase for a number of additional years--but then, neither did their critics! Trying to make an issue of this is just "pleading a case" like a lawyer who is more interesting in persuading a jury than in truth discovery.

AdamB And production has been mostly irrelevant, ever since Saudi Arabia began visibly fighting Saudi America, circa 2013 or so.

DD: "Saudi America," puh-lease, a cheap gimmick by stock promoters who were trying to sucker investors for ill considered and unprofitable enterprises; not that the world has not benefited, but it was never a smart move from a financial standpoint. Our oil is much higher cost to produce, and because the EROEI is much lower, it depletes other energy resources faster. That is not an argument against extracting it, but we should not compare our resources with those of the Persian Gulf.



AdamB: I said global demand growth deceleration, as presented by folks with far more experience and insight than you, I, or Robert.

DD: I never disputed that demand growth is slowing, so this is a bit of a straw man attack. I also noted that even while oil demand was growing slower, production was FALLING. I also said that peaking was not the only possible explanation for the production decline (temporary declines have happened before), but it seems strange that you emphasize slower demand GROWTH so emphatically while glossing over FALLING production. One of these days production will start falling and it will turn out not to be due to slower economic growth. Is this that day? I don't think anyone knows yet, so it deserves attention.

AdamB: And according to peak oilers, saying things just like you, we've been having peak oils for like 30 years now. Your claim is different from all those other ones, how?

DD: I started following peak oil when Laharrere and Campbell published their article in SciAm back in 1998. Their argument was for a peak in conventional oil, and it turned out to be quite prescient. Now we are waiting for the peak in total transport liquids. Last I saw, Laharrere was forecasting 2025 for that date. New developments could justify pushing that date out some, but unconventional oil will no more be unlimited in supply than conventional oil was. The latter has peaked already, the other will peak too, most of us will live to see it--and it will not be because the world simply does not need so much oil anymore.


AdamB: I have never in my life seen a peak oil caveat their "peak oil is happening now, tomorrow, next year" with "but me not knowing anything about resource economics, oil field completion techniques stretching back into the 1940's, horizontal drilling, or oil resources prototyped in the Appalachian basin the 1800's means I could be full of crap." I accept that if they had included this caveat, they wouldn't all now be hiding under rocks.

DD: Your demand that everyone be backward looking is unreasonable. We know vastly more about the extent of the world's fossil fuel deposits than we did in the 1800's or most of the 1900's. There are no more vast undiscovered resources waiting to be found, and the ability to extract what is left behind in depleted fields is limited not by our imaginations but by fundamental physical laws. Oil extraction is not cyclical like climate. It is linear. Every mine, every well, every recoverable resource, is finite, becomes depleted, and then is gone for all practical purposes. If you ever meet a peak oiler who hedges by saying, "Well, maybe we will discover vast untapped resources that we have no idea exists, or invent a miracle technology that will defy the second law of thermodynamics," you should ignore him, because he is an uninformed idiot. The only thing that keeps our global economy out of crisis right now is a supply cushion of costly (to produce) oil with a low net energy return that depletes very quickly and consists of a fairly modest recoverable reserve. There are other low EROEI tight oil resources in Russia and maybe elsewhere, of uncertain size, and similarly expensive to produce, and perhaps combined with EV's they will shift us into a slower crash than we would otherwise have experienced, but the glory days of the industrial age are behind us.

AdamB: There has already been peaks in tight oil. So sure, undoubtedly there will be more. The EIA is currently calling for just such a peak, so I agree that this is the most common expected outcome..right now...from the experts.

DD: Yes, but they do not mean "a" peak, but the all time peak of North American tight oil production. Afterward, production will fall gradually but irreversibly. The industry is out of its infancy. There are not huge unknowns or boundless possibilities. We are not witnessing the opening of a new frontier, but the wind down of an old one.

Daniel Doom wrote:4. A little over the peak oil horizon, other energy sources look to peak in the not too distant future: U235, coal (as measured in joules or BTU's, not just gross tonnage), and natural gas. The farther down the road we can kick the peak oil barrel, the closer together these assorted peaks will cluster. And--


AdamB: And how many times has these claims been made before,

DD: I do not know, and it is not relevant when you are dealing with a linear, not cyclical, phenomenon. What does matter is how good the data are NOW; they were often not very good in the past, but the world is a smaller place now, there are many fewer unknowns, and I think they are good enough at this point to draw reliable conclusions. Reserves are only estimates, and some new deposits will likely be found, and new technologies might improve extraction, but new finds are rarely large any more, and growing demand functions like compound interest, which Einstein called the greatest force in the universe. Depleting resources, a long pattern of declining new discovery, mature extractive technologies (the low hanging fruit is in our rear view mirror), and compounding annual consumption--one must be either barely numerate or deliberately obtuse not to see where this combination is heading.


AdamB: So now I can accurately mention that you didn't provide a single piece of information to dispute what CSIS, Rystad, WoodMac and Barclays have been saying.

DD: Not so. Re-read the post you are replying to. I quoted WoodMac's statement that agrees with what I have said and contradicts your representation of their view. I did not google the other sources because I am taking your word for it that they agree with WoodMac.

AdamB: Try updating your world view

DD: My position is not based on a worldview, but I have begun to think that your's is, and so you assume that my views too must be governed by a worldview. I think you are being guided, like the late Julian Simon, by a worldview that takes the industrial revolution of the last three centuries as a reliable, normative, and predictive paradigm: there are always new resources, or adequate substitutes, or magical (Arthur C. Clark) innovations that will keep us permanently from sliding back into the Malthusian pattern that accurately describes the existence of all other species on earth.

My view is arithmetic-based and can best be summed up in the words of President Gerald "the Veto King" Ford's chief economic advisor, Herbert Stein: "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop," also known as Stein's Law. Or as economist Kenneth Boulding expressed it, deriding his colleagues, "Anyone who believes that exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist." If I could, I would replace all the lawyers, bankers, and economists in Washington with physicists, engineers, geologists, and ecologists.

The peaking of oil (and of other critical resources not long after) is like Hemingway's description of going broke: "How did you go bankrupt?" "Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly." Right now we are running out of oil gradually; but once that supply line drops below the demand line, it will seem sudden. And as coal, gas, and U235 draw down, peak electricity will be next. When? I don't know. As with oil, we will probably find clever ways to kick the can down the road while we grow poorer slowly with falling EROEI energy sources, but when all is said and done, the future will look more like the past than the present.
"You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality."--Ayn Rand
Daniel Doom
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri 01 Nov 2019, 22:00:40

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Daniel Doom » Mon 04 Nov 2019, 02:17:28

AdamB wrote:
Daniel Doom wrote:
AdamB wrote:
coffeeguyzz wrote:Whole new world is unfolding at blinding speed.


Optimism, particularly that based on empirical examples of increased oil field performance and efficiencies,


Sucking the oil out faster now just means a steeper cliff later.


Yeah, the ignorant tranche inside the peak oilers said that last time too.

DD: They were right. It's simple math. Use more today, have less tomorrow. Your arguments remind me of the grasshopper exclaiming to the ant, "You told me in July that winter is coming, but here it is August and we are still warm. That proves winter will never arrive!"

AdamB: .don't reveal how little you know on this topic. Of about basic reservoir engineering.

DD: Engineering does not change arithmetic.

Daniel Doom wrote:As the late Matt Simmons observed, nearly all the new technology was a superstraw that just drained the wells faster but rarely increases the amount of oil ultimately recovered.


AdamB: And you figure that an accountant knows quite a bit about reservoir engineering do you?

DD: I read Simmons' _Twilight in the Desert_ and he clearly knew quite a bit about the technical details of oil recovery. It probably hurt the sales of his book.

AdamB: Your statement is obviously incorrect, if only based on the most recent USGS research on the topic of reserve growth.

DD: The correctness of my statement does not depend on what the size of the recovered resource ultimately turns out to be. Whatever the size turns out to have been when all is said and done, if you remove more of the resource early, you will remove less of it later. Estimates of the reserve may change, but the amount that will eventually be recovered is fixed, even if we do not know what that amount is in advance and must only guess at it.

AdamB: May I recommend updating nearly 15 year old talking points now?

DD: Arithmetic is timeless. Buried treasure is finite, consumption depletes it at a compounding rate, there can only be one outcome. It is really amazing how little sensitive a compounding depletion curve is to variations in the size of the resource ultimately recovered. Double it, triple it, quintuple it, it doesn't push the timeline out very far. On one side of the equal sign lies the equations. On the other side lies the end of the world as we know it.

AdamB: If you really want to discuss changes in ultimate recovery,

DD: As I wrote above, the curve of compound depletion is relatively insensitive even to quite large variations in ultimate recovery, so fixating on changes in reserve estimates is misguided. It produces a relatively small difference in the time table unless you acquire new reserves that are implausibly large.

AdamB: Except recycling points that didn't work last time

DD: Yet the main point that was argued against Simonistas for years DID prove accurate: conventional crude DID peak in the early 2000's and is now on a plateau. And what is next? Either we fall off the plateau of conventional oil (which is still the source of most of the world's annual oil supply) or the supply of unconventional oil peaks. Either one will be very bad, EV's or no EV's. The geological realities of 2020 are not the geological realities of 1820 or 1920. The recent past is not a reliable guide to the near future. We are not in Kansas anymore.

AdamB: What silly peaker reference nonsense do you want to suppose next, maybe Savinar's claim on AM radio that uranium is a fossil fuel?


DD: I don't think I heard the interview, and I thought he retired from peak oil activism years ago. Anyway, I would be charitable enough to presume that it was just a slip of the tongue. At any rate, you are being petty now, as this does not really buttress any important point. You can always find people on both sides of any debate who sometimes say dumb things, so what?
"You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality."--Ayn Rand
Daniel Doom
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri 01 Nov 2019, 22:00:40

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 04 Nov 2019, 22:17:47

Oil demand continues to rise because most of the world is still industrializing. That includes even infrastructure for EVs.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 04 Nov 2019, 22:36:45

Daniel Doom wrote:DD: At the time Rapier wrote those words, they were entirely accurate--conventional crude production really did peak about 2006, and oil really was being "rationed" by means of the price mechanism in 2006, 2007, and 2008.


Conventional oil only wasn't what peak oil was claimed to be.. until AFTER it turned out that peakers were thoroughly unfamiliar with some basic geology. CYA after the fact does not an accurate peak oil claim make.

Daniel Doom wrote: I do not understand why you are faulting him for being correct.


See above.

Daniel Doom wrote:DD: Conventional crude production, contrary to those who told us for years that it would not happen, has indeed peaked.


Here is a list of known oil types, benchmarks and particulars. Can't seem to find this mythical one there. Reread what I said about CYA.

Daniel Doom wrote: AdamB And production has been mostly irrelevant, ever since Saudi Arabia began visibly fighting Saudi America, circa 2013 or so.


I don't recall EVER in my professional life saying production is irrelevant, without a caveat or more context.

Daniel Doom wrote:DD: "Saudi America," puh-lease, a cheap gimmick by stock promoters who were trying to sucker investors for ill considered and unprofitable enterprises


Please google up country level production rates extending back..oh...through recorded history. Tell me who has the record.

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: I said global demand growth deceleration, as presented by folks with far more experience and insight than you, I, or Robert.

DD: I never disputed that demand growth is slowing, so this is a bit of a straw man attack.


Be complete now. You also specifically avoided the analyst types who said more than that, and ran for ex-peak oilers. I provided the names, do you require help with google finding the source material?

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: And according to peak oilers, saying things just like you, we've been having peak oils for like 30 years now. Your claim is different from all those other ones, how?

DD: I started following peak oil when Laharrere and Campbell published their article in SciAm back in 1998.


If you have been around that long, then why haven't you learned anything since the peak was claimed some 15 years and maybe 10 million barrels a day ago? Are you aware that by 1998 Colin Campbell had already declared a global peak oil 8 years prior? Or does that fit into the "why learn anything from the past" concept?

Daniel Doom wrote:Their argument was for a peak in conventional oil, and it turned out to be quite prescient. Now we are waiting for the peak in total transport liquids. Last I saw, Laharrere was forecasting 2025 for that date.


Campbell's "argument" was that after having screwed the pooch for the 1990 global peak oil, he was already into kick the can mode by the time you began learnin'. As far as Laharrere, he seems to have continued the tradition, if his kick the can date is now 2025.

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: I have never in my life seen a peak oil caveat their "peak oil is happening now, tomorrow, next year" with "but me not knowing anything about resource economics, oil field completion techniques stretching back into the 1940's, horizontal drilling, or oil resources prototyped in the Appalachian basin the 1800's means I could be full of crap." I accept that if they had included this caveat, they wouldn't all now be hiding under rocks.

DD: Your demand that everyone be backward looking is unreasonable.


My demand that you have some understanding of the history of the topic you claim to have been following since the last century is reasonable. By understanding how many times peak has been declared, and why, you gain an understanding as to those who are rinsing an recycling.

As you have already demonstrated a penchant for.

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: There has already been peaks in tight oil. So sure, undoubtedly there will be more. The EIA is currently calling for just such a peak, so I agree that this is the most common expected outcome..right now...from the experts.

DD: Yes, but they do not mean "a" peak, but the all time peak of North American tight oil production.


Then why don't they say "oh, but THIS time it is an ALL TIME PEAK, not like all those other ones we declared that made us look stupid". Better yet, why not just give us the NUMBER of peaks to come, rather than pretending with certainty that just the next one in the series is it?

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: And how many times has these claims been made before,

DD: I do not know, and it is not relevant when you are dealing with a linear, not cyclical, phenomenon.


Of course it is relevant. Otherwise you look silly when discussing the topic, not knowing that other peaks have happened, the timing of the CYA oil types, pretending not to understand why Saudi America happened, and not even know that by the time you got involved with peak oil, those who formed an early impression had already gotten it wrong. AND YOU STILL DON'T KNOW WHY. Learn from history, or do as peak oilers do, and keep reliving old mistakes.

Daniel Doom wrote:AdamB: So now I can accurately mention that you didn't provide a single piece of information to dispute what CSIS, Rystad, WoodMac and Barclays have been saying.

DD: Not so. Re-read the post you are replying to. I quoted WoodMac's statement that agrees with what I have said and contradicts your representation of their view. I did not google the other sources because I am taking your word for it that they agree with WoodMac.


You quoted this part? And yes, the others do generally agree with it, although CSIS was hedging.

WoodMac wrote:"At some point in the next 20 years, it's likely we're going to see oil demand peak. Our own view at Wood Mackenzie, is around 2035, 2036," Wood Mackenzie chairman Simon Flowers said in an interview with CNN Business.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Armageddon » Mon 04 Nov 2019, 22:50:02

Conventional oil hasn’t peaked?
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5397
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 18:29:00

ralfy wrote:Oil demand continues to rise because most of the world is still industrializing. That includes even infrastructure for EVs.


Looks like peak oil demand in 3 years, followed by a plateau.

Looks like you Happy McPeaksters can't get it right coming or going ralfy.

Maybe pick something easier, and that won't happen in your lifetime to minimize the riotous laughter you generate when pulling these kinds of stunts? Phosphorous perhaps? Maybe water?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 18:32:15

Armageddon wrote:Conventional oil hasn’t peaked?


List of oil types around the world.

No conventional found. Can you describe it perhaps? Color, density, impurities, where I can buy some and for how much?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Armageddon » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 20:09:50

AdamB wrote:
Armageddon wrote:Conventional oil hasn’t peaked?


List of oil types around the world.

No conventional found. Can you describe it perhaps? Color, density, impurities, where I can buy some and for how much?



Non shale, non tar sands?
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5397
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 21:02:03

The point Adam is making has been made several times on this site. There is no such thing as unconventional oil. There are unconventional reservoirs but the oil from tight formations such as silstones and shales can have the exact same characteristics as oil from extremely porous and permeable sandstones and carbonates (conventional reservoirs).
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7295
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Armageddon » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 21:47:43

rockdoc123 wrote:The point Adam is making has been made several times on this site. There is no such thing as unconventional oil. There are unconventional reservoirs but the oil from tight formations such as silstones and shales can have the exact same characteristics as oil from extremely porous and permeable sandstones and carbonates (conventional reservoirs).



Same EROEI?
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5397
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 07 Nov 2019, 23:51:43

There is no one EROEI for any "type" of oil or reservoir. As I have said numerous times the measure of how energy efficient a given oil well is can be measured in the amount of money made by selling a barrel of oil or a Mcf of gas versus the all in cost to find and produce that bbl or Mcf given that those costs take into account all of the energy expended (no amount of energy is free but if it were it would be of no consequence). It is different for most fields and often in fields it can be different between wells. There are unconventional reservoirs that can be produced at a break even cost well below $40/bbl and there are conventional reservoirs that require $70/bbl, and the reverse is true as well.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7295
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby ralfy » Fri 08 Nov 2019, 01:50:50

Links to definitions and the reports on the peak for conventional sources here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil# ... al_sources

and unconventional oil:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconventional_oil
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 11 Nov 2019, 00:39:13

Armageddon wrote:
AdamB wrote:
Armageddon wrote:Conventional oil hasn’t peaked?


List of oil types around the world.

No conventional found. Can you describe it perhaps? Color, density, impurities, where I can buy some and for how much?



Non shale, non tar sands?


Shale is a rock type, not an oil type. Tar sands might be the only currently producing "unconventional" oil on the planet, as it is more akin to mining. US oil shale development, when and if it comes, would also fit into that category. Not the Texas ROZ though. Hydrates might be the same, "unconventional" gas production.
Everything else is just pretty run of the mill crude oil and natural gas production. Even biogenic gas is just normal gas production, even though it wasn't formed through the same mechanism as thermogenic generated hydrocarbons.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 11 Nov 2019, 00:45:09

Armageddon wrote:
rockdoc123 wrote:The point Adam is making has been made several times on this site. There is no such thing as unconventional oil. There are unconventional reservoirs but the oil from tight formations such as silstones and shales can have the exact same characteristics as oil from extremely porous and permeable sandstones and carbonates (conventional reservoirs).


Same EROEI?


Never seen even the a basic eroei calculated for a well, field, accumulation, or play of any kind. Just the idea of calculating it is a bit amusing, because it means you need to know how much oil and gas a particular well will produce, to match up against first the rig that drilled and completed it (and its embedded energy). Then you somehow divide that out based on all the wells it drilled, and their individual answers, becomes a pretty wild calculation pretty quick.

eroei was created last post peak oil call when it turned out that oil didn't peak, and Happy McPeaksters needed a way to play defense and CYA as a sort of rearguard action to their geologic, economic and oil field operational ignorance.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4794
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests