sparky wrote:.
I have a hunch that improvement in recovery of old fields will keep trending up
here in Oz old gold mines tailings were re-processed in a profitable manner
I would keep an eye on old easily accessible wells for pushing the depletion envelop a bit further
it's probably already going on
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
sparky wrote:.
it's a good theory ...but theories can be right an reality be something else again
ralfy wrote:The new resources don't compete with the old ones.
ralfy wrote:Peak oil is not a theory for obvious reasons. Otherwise, there would be no need to look for new resources.
sparky wrote:.
I have a hunch that improvement in recovery of old fields will keep trending up
here in Oz old gold mines tailings were re-processed in a profitable manner
I would keep an eye on old easily accessible wells for pushing the depletion envelop a bit further
it's probably already going on
diemos wrote:sparky wrote:.
it's a good theory ...but theories can be right an reality be something else again
uh huh.
and the amount of fossil carbon in the ground is still finite. I don't claim to know how much that is ... but it's still finite.
ralfy wrote:Peak oil "theory" is part of diminishing returns, which means the long-term trend line is downward, and driven by gravity and physical limitations.
AdamB wrote: Hubbert didn't play with that math all that much..... .
Plantagenet wrote:AdamB wrote: Hubbert didn't play with that math all that much..... .
Actually, Hubbert was an accomplished mathematician and he actually did "play with that math."
Plantagene wrote:All his predictions of the timing of "peak oil" were based on a mathematical approach to analyzing oil production data that today we call "Hubbert Linearization."
Plantagenet wrote:Of course Hubbert's mathematical model has now been falsified by the current attainment of higher levels in oil production in the US then his numerical model predicted.
Cheers!
AdamB wrote: Hubbert didn't play with that math all that much..... .
AdamB wrote:Of course he played with math.
Plantagenet wrote:Hubbert's mathematical model has now been falsified by the current attainment of higher levels in oil production in the US then his numerical model predicted.
asg70 wrote:Plantagenet wrote:Hubbert's mathematical model has now been falsified by the current attainment of higher levels in oil production in the US then his numerical model predicted.
On that score you agree with Adam ...
Plantagenet wrote:AdamB wrote: Hubbert didn't play with that math all that much..... .AdamB wrote:Of course he played with math.
Which one is it? You just switched positions and directly contradicted yourself in two successive posts.
AdamB wrote:Certainly there is a diminishing returns within the discovery process statistics, the discovery process itself (inherently contained within Hubbert's graphs on "yet to be found" resources), was something worked on more by Arps and Roberts and refined by the USGS, but Hubbert didn't play with that math all that much.
asg70 wrote:Plantagenet wrote:Hubbert's mathematical model has now been falsified by the current attainment of higher levels in oil production in the US then his numerical model predicted.
On that score you agree with Adam so why bother attacking him? Oh, yeah, you just enjoy dishing insults...
Now run along and quote others out of context to see if they notice.
AdamB wrote: I recall awhile back the incinerated EV owners that didn't exist
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests