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 Doly » Sat 18 Dec 2021, 15:56:55

Your work on explicitly modeling the fossil fuel component, were the resource volumes in your work modified from the original (somewhere near page 57 I think)?


Obviously I had to put updated information on resource volumes, because the original had all "nonrenewable resources" aggregated.

And if so, what was your rationale in those modifications, data sources available, the basis for them?


I used the estimates published in The Oil Drum at the time (this was around 2008).
What are you doing about peak oil?
I am doing this
(click on the www button) v
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 18 Dec 2021, 17:20:37

Doly wrote:
Your work on explicitly modeling the fossil fuel component, were the resource volumes in your work modified from the original (somewhere near page 57 I think)?


Obviously I had to put updated information on resource volumes, because the original had all "nonrenewable resources" aggregated.


Not obvious to those not expert on the model of course, but admittedly, the idea of boning up on the complete documentation of the original LTG didn't seem necessary after examining carefully the estimates they originally used of non-renewables. I presume then that the aggregation, originally, was in the form of energy content, such as total in-place BTUs or something similar? I recall the quantification contained in the LTG original previously mentioned table, but didn't realize that uranium might be smashed together with oil and gas and the like to just get one big number.

Doly wrote:
And if so, what was your rationale in those modifications, data sources available, the basis for them?


I used the estimates published in The Oil Drum at the time (this was around 2008).


I see. And quite unfortunate. Thank you for your response.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Doly » Tue 21 Dec 2021, 17:15:10

I presume then that the aggregation, originally, was in the form of energy content, such as total in-place BTUs or something similar?


Actually, no. "Nonrenewable resources" was originally given what seemed to be an arbitrary value of 1e12 at the start, with no units. I think you (like most people) probably misunderstand the purpose of the LTG model, which was more to be a proof of concept rather than a model able to make predictions with any precision.

Am I or is anybody else supposed to be able to make sense of your "unfortunate" comment? Because it doesn't make any sense to me. It isn't as if changing resource volumes and running the model again would take more than a minute or so in a modern computer. Or as if I have any personal objections to tinkering with the model to see what the output would be. I'm an independent researcher, which is to say, my total lack of credibility due to not having any backing from any official institution is perfectly compensated by my ability to study whatever I like and say whatever I think.
What are you doing about peak oil?
I am doing this
(click on the www button) v
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Tue 21 Dec 2021, 19:46:58

Doly wrote:
I presume then that the aggregation, originally, was in the form of energy content, such as total in-place BTUs or something similar?


Actually, no. "Nonrenewable resources" was originally given what seemed to be an arbitrary value of 1e12 at the start, with no units. I think you (like most people) probably misunderstand the purpose of the LTG model, which was more to be a proof of concept rather than a model able to make predictions with any precision.


As a modeler myself, and while unfamiliar with the the detail you have explained for the LTG (thank you by the way), I am completely comfortable with a particular model's precision, within the context of "all models are wrong, some are useful".

It seems quite a bit of unwarranted attention has accrued to the LTG if the concept was only to prove that multiple equations can come to an equilibrium.

Doly wrote:Am I or is anybody else supposed to be able to make sense of your "unfortunate" comment? Because it doesn't make any sense to me. It isn't as if changing resource volumes and running the model again would take more than a minute or so in a modern computer.


If I understood you correctly before, you updated the random resource quantity in the original LTG, and substituted in particulars for a new, non-aggregate portion? The "unfortunate" relates to the precision of TOD numbers.

Doly wrote:Or as if I have any personal objections to tinkering with the model to see what the output would be.


Oh, no, I don't think you have personal objections to tinkering, but I am under the impression that you now have specific resources categories, with your update? Crude oil, natural gas, coal, etc etc? This appears to be quite a conceptual change from the originals "insert any number" type idea. Perhaps I misunderstand exactly what information you used from TOD to substitute for some portion of the total non-renewables resources within the original LTG?

Doly wrote:I'm an independent researcher, which is to say, my total lack of credibility due to not having any backing from any official institution is perfectly compensated by my ability to study whatever I like and say whatever I think.


Independent research also means you are limited to information available to your budget, and the training and expertise you bring to the table, or can acquire in discussing/dealing with others. I understand you exactly about the restrictions that come with not being an independent researcher. And the disadvantages as well.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Armageddon » Tue 21 Dec 2021, 21:10:10

Of course we haven’t hit peak yet. Oil keeps being replenished and will last forever. And by the year 2025, we will have cars that run on water.
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6963
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Tue 21 Dec 2021, 21:37:21

Armageddon wrote:Of course we haven’t hit peak yet. Oil keeps being replenished and will last forever. And by the year 2025, we will have cars that run on water.


IEA 2018 Peak Oil is Here, Oil Crunch by 2023
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Revi » Fri 24 Dec 2021, 04:25:54

There are hints that it may not be as rosy a picture as Adam B thinks.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-supp ... p_catchall
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7414
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 24 Dec 2021, 11:06:05

Revi wrote:There are hints that it may not be as rosy a picture as Adam B thinks.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-supp ... p_catchall


You and I were around for the last real energy crisis the US suffered in the 70's Revi. And I only have the 6 claimed or occurred peak oils this century to decide whether or not the crisis they caused were any better or worse than that.

To me, none of them have approached the consequences of the 1979 global peak oil. Might the most recent peak oil FINALLY cause some trouble? Possibly. But don't forget, when oil prices first crashed back around 2015 or so, people were saying the same kinds of things, lack of investment leads to scarcity, blah blah blah, <fill in your doom> ensues. While repeating peak oil dogma ad infinitum is part of the game, we all should really know it is a wee bit more complex by now.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Doly » Sun 26 Dec 2021, 17:22:41

It seems quite a bit of unwarranted attention has accrued to the LTG if the concept was only to prove that multiple equations can come to an equilibrium.


What LTG was trying to prove was a little beyond that. Basically, that under realistic assumptions of how the world works, you'd expect trouble as soon as you run out of non-renewable resources.

I do agree that a lot of attention still seems to be going to that model when, by today's standards, you could reasonably say that the model sucks. I suspect it keeps getting attention because nobody has come forward with anything that looks like an updated version of the concept that deals with the issues of the original LTG model. And you can reasonably wonder why. It isn't as if it would be particularly difficult to make the attempt.

I am under the impression that you now have specific resources categories, with your update? Crude oil, natural gas, coal, etc etc?


Correct.

Perhaps I misunderstand exactly what information you used from TOD to substitute for some portion of the total non-renewables resources within the original LTG?


I considered that the only truly non-renewable resources are non-renewable energy resources, because given enough energy, any other type of material resource could be recycled as much as required. So I substituted non-renewable resources for fossil fuels and nuclear fuels, disaggregated.

I also eliminated the equations that related directly to non-renewable resources, because they were essentially proof-of-concept and I considered that a model with actual information about energy resources would be a better model.

In the original LTG model, the cluster of equations about non-renewable resources only connects with the rest of the model in the calculations that relate to industrial capital, and they are about the fraction of industrial capital allocated to extract non-renewable resources. I used EROEI estimates for that.

Independent research also means you are limited to information available to your budget, and the training and expertise you bring to the table, or can acquire in discussing/dealing with others. I understand you exactly about the restrictions that come with not being an independent researcher. And the disadvantages as well.


As I said, I have no credibility, and I know it.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 26 Dec 2021, 18:00:28

Doly wrote:
It seems quite a bit of unwarranted attention has accrued to the LTG if the concept was only to prove that multiple equations can come to an equilibrium.


What LTG was trying to prove was a little beyond that. Basically, that under realistic assumptions of how the world works, you'd expect trouble as soon as you run out of non-renewable resources.


It strikes me that this is as easily proven with logic as anything else. What happened if we run out of oil? List of bad things. What happens if we run out of bauxite. List of bad things. Perhaps back then, when computers were all cool and neato and only told the truth, it punctuated the point better than an obvious litany of "if this, then that" statements.

Doly wrote:I do agree that a lot of attention still seems to be going to that model when, by today's standards, you could reasonably say that the model sucks. I suspect it keeps getting attention because nobody has come forward with anything that looks like an updated version of the concept that deals with the issues of the original LTG model. And you can reasonably wonder why. It isn't as if it would be particularly difficult to make the attempt.


Seems like about everybody talking about lifecycle analysis of what we humans are doing to the biosphere means we don't need to update it, as if the point is only as you mention above, big chunks of the world have already figured it out otherwise.

Doly wrote:
I am under the impression that you now have specific resources categories, with your update? Crude oil, natural gas, coal, etc etc?

Correct.

Perhaps I misunderstand exactly what information you used from TOD to substitute for some portion of the total non-renewables resources within the original LTG?


I considered that the only truly non-renewable resources are non-renewable energy resources, because given enough energy, any other type of material resource could be recycled as much as required. So I substituted non-renewable resources for fossil fuels and nuclear fuels, disaggregated.

I also eliminated the equations that related directly to non-renewable resources, because they were essentially proof-of-concept and I considered that a model with actual information about energy resources would be a better model.

In the original LTG model, the cluster of equations about non-renewable resources only connects with the rest of the model in the calculations that relate to industrial capital, and they are about the fraction of industrial capital allocated to extract non-renewable resources. I used EROEI estimates for that.


Thank you for the explanations.

Doly wrote:
Independent research also means you are limited to information available to your budget, and the training and expertise you bring to the table, or can acquire in discussing/dealing with others. I understand you exactly about the restrictions that come with not being an independent researcher. And the disadvantages as well.


As I said, I have no credibility, and I know it.


There are advantages and disadvantages to both positions, as with most things.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Doly » Mon 27 Dec 2021, 14:50:29

To me, none of them have approached the consequences of the 1979 global peak oil. Might the most recent peak oil FINALLY cause some trouble? Possibly. But don't forget, when oil prices first crashed back around 2015 or so, people were saying the same kinds of things, lack of investment leads to scarcity, blah blah blah, <fill in your doom> ensues. While repeating peak oil dogma ad infinitum is part of the game, we all should really know it is a wee bit more complex by now.


Sure, it's a bit more complex than the standard version of "supply and demand just works as advertised in textbooks".

The difference between global peak oil and any previous peaks in oil production is that global peak oil just goes down from the top and can never go up to the peak again, by definition of global peak oil.

I don't think this necessarily means that oil prices then keep going up, or even that they go terribly volatile, because global finance by now is well aware of the issues related to oil prices, thanks to the events around the last peak in oil prices. I think probably measures have been taken at the highest levels of global finance to ensure that oil prices keep some sufficient level of stability. I base this opinion on just looking at charts of oil prices and that they have the appearance to me of something that's been kept stable at particular price bands. But maybe there is some other explanation that somebody with deep knowledge of finance can offer.

However, I think that peak oil will definitely have some very noticeable consequences, and that it isn't something that will come and go without being noticed. Because keeping prices stable is only part of the picture. Price stability may make things easier in terms of finance, but the fact that there is less oil to go around will remain, and it will have real-world consequences, including economic consequences.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 27 Dec 2021, 16:10:44

Doly wrote:The difference between global peak oil and any previous peaks in oil production is that global peak oil just goes down from the top and can never go up to the peak again, by definition of global peak oil.


You are perfectly describing THE peak oil. The problem being, people have claimed 6 THE peak oils this century, and didn't pretend the first 5 were anything else other than THE peak oil either. And those of us who knew better than to fall for any of them, are still surprised that circa 2002-2005 (2 claimed global peaks already occurring this century) folks didn't look backward in time and see the same pattern, stretching back to 1886. And not just the pattern, but the WHY folks got it wrong. And in that small bit of historical knowledge realize that the odds of folks who couldn't even be bothered to learn from history, would be doomed to repeat it.

Doly wrote:I don't think this necessarily means that oil prices then keep going up, or even that they go terribly volatile, because global finance by now is well aware of the issues related to oil prices, thanks to the events around the last peak in oil prices. I think probably measures have been taken at the highest levels of global finance to ensure that oil prices keep some sufficient level of stability. I base this opinion on just looking at charts of oil prices and that they have the appearance to me of something that's been kept stable at particular price bands. But maybe there is some other explanation that somebody with deep knowledge of finance can offer.


No need to stretch into finance. Cartel behavior, as least post 1970, works just fine to create the effect you believe you have observed.

Doly wrote:However, I think that peak oil will definitely have some very noticeable consequences, and that it isn't something that will come and go without being noticed.


Currently, THE peak oil is late 2018. What noticeable consequences would you contend are visible from a 3 year old THE peak oil now, that are perhaps different than run of the mill consequences we've been experiencing for the past half century because of wars, recessions, changes in industries, finance, geopolitics, run of the mill economic mayhem and bad actors, etc etc?

Doly wrote:Because keeping prices stable is only part of the picture. Price stability may make things easier in terms of finance, but the fact that there is less oil to go around will remain, and it will have real-world consequences, including economic consequences.


According to current peak oil claims, we've been at less to go around for 3 years now. And really, it doesn't require less for all sorts of real world consequences to happen..well..anytime. $20-$30/bbl oil in 1860 dropping to $1-$2/bbl by late 1861 and 1862 caused Dr. Wilson and Mr. White to have a personal confrontation over their ownership in the Lewellyn well in the Burning Springs oilfield in Wirt County WV. The son of Dr. Wilson discharged both barrels of a double barreled shotgun at Mr. White, grazing the side of his face and head. Real world consequences indeed, as reported by the Marietta Republican on April 12, 1861.

Obviously, we could start there (unless I want to go dig up some of the history of what Drake managed to cause in his neck of the woods as well), but your statement is a bit blanket, and hardly requires either a fake peak oil, or THE peak oil, to apply across the entire span on the modern industry. Doesn't even need there to be LESS oil. Just someone who thinks there is less. Other than peak oilers I mean, they just do it all the time, regardless of the truth of it.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Pops » Mon 27 Dec 2021, 17:57:28

Actually supply/demand does work exactly like in the textbooks for oil as much as everything else. The ramifications are greater but the rules are the same. I'd be interested to see where it doesn't.

OPEC and before them the Texas Railroad commission limited supply to control price. Biden and others have tried to lower price by releasing supply from the SPR, CAFE standards attempted to control demand by improving mileage but succeeded only in increasing miles driven. Nixon limited oil price with the predictable result of lower supply.

Oil is a global market even more so now that we have a bunch of light oil to export, so no one authority can affect price much or for long by decree.

Just like in books, higher demand/price can buy more supply, if more supply is possible, in the short and long term. Lower demand/price can reduce supply long and short term.

Vice versa, lower price can increase demand, higher price lower it.
Demand is "sticky" short term, only over longer periods do significant changes happen. This causes the price of oil to affect spending on everything else short term as well because or driving habits can't be easily changed.

If peak oil is proceeded by peak demand due to transitioning to non-fossil fuels there may be no great displacement, that is if the replacement(s) turns out to be self supporting and sufficiently versatile.

In the last peak, 2018, supply was higher than demand except 3Q 2019, price fell and so did supply prior to a global pandemic lockdown, which, not surprisingly, caused lower demand and low price for several quarters... until demand came back raising price and supply.

Image

The story is right there in the implied stock build or draw.
Don't know whether supply will peak again, my plans (hopes) are on it continuing higher for a couple more years, a decade would be nice, but who knows?

It ain't rocket surgery, and there are a lot of moving parts but it all is explainable by supply and demand. The tricky part is the soothsaying.

The rapidity of decline vs the speed of transition will determine the doom quotient of peak oil.

.
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: 19626
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby phaster » Mon 27 Dec 2021, 18:04:04

stumbled across a peak oil comic,...

https://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comic/peak-oil/

so thought I'd drop by see what was going on in the peak oil forums
truth is,...

www.ThereIsNoPlanet-B.org
User avatar
phaster
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 504
Joined: Sun 15 Jul 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 27 Dec 2021, 20:39:44

phaster wrote:stumbled across a peak oil comic,...

https://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comic/peak-oil/

so thought I'd drop by see what was going on in the peak oil forums


Spotted that one on reddit recently. Doesn't seem to have learned anything in terms of how particular ideas have since been discredited during the past peak oils, and the website seems to jam up on some weird how to get around popup.

Just post the youtube video End of Suburbia, in light of what they claimed in that, and what happened instead, it is funny as hell.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Doly » Thu 30 Dec 2021, 11:30:00

And those of us who knew better than to fall for any of them, are still surprised that circa 2002-2005 (2 claimed global peaks already occurring this century) folks didn't look backward in time and see the same pattern, stretching back to 1886. And not just the pattern, but the WHY folks got it wrong.


All right, enlighten me: why do you think that people got it wrong?

Because as you are saying it now, your argument sounds much like a person that has got very sick and has been in hospital several times, and concludes that because they survived six times, they will also live the next time around. The right answer is to say that each of the times the person really could have died, but they got lucky six times.

What noticeable consequences would you contend are visible from a 3 year old THE peak oil now, that are perhaps different than run of the mill consequences we've been experiencing for the past half century because of wars, recessions, changes in industries, finance, geopolitics, run of the mill economic mayhem and bad actors, etc etc?


The main difference is a consequence of the fact that you can't allow oil to be a very small fraction of the economy, because it's essential in our current economy. All essential products have a floor on their price, because otherwise somebody could corner the market, and nobody wants to allow that. If you have a limited supply of oil that can't possibly grow, it stops the whole economy from growing, for as long as oil continues to be essential. Wars, recessions, geopolitics, etc., tend to be more temporary stuff.
What are you doing about peak oil?
I am doing this
(click on the www button) v
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Thu 30 Dec 2021, 12:49:41

Doly wrote:
And those of us who knew better than to fall for any of them, are still surprised that circa 2002-2005 (2 claimed global peaks already occurring this century) folks didn't look backward in time and see the same pattern, stretching back to 1886. And not just the pattern, but the WHY folks got it wrong.


All right, enlighten me: why do you think that people got it wrong?


They don't have a complete understanding of the problem. That statement applies to their understanding of the history of not just the same claims in the past themselves, but why those claims didn't work out. If they HAD understood all of that, and thought that their idea accounted for why such claims hadn't worked out in the past, they would still have had a devil of a time getting it right. That one, the technical side, I can discuss voluminously, but don't want to volunteer a tome unless someone is actually interested in details.

Doly wrote:Because as you are saying it now, your argument sounds much like a person that has got very sick and has been in hospital several times, and concludes that because they survived six times, they will also live the next time around. The right answer is to say that each of the times the person really could have died, but they got lucky six times.


That might be one perspective. But not a scientific one. And you missed a component in your example, the PREDICTING of going to the hospital. I predict I go to the hospital. I predict why....heart disease. I get hit by a bus and go to hospital. Heart still sketchy of course. I predict the next time, it will certainly be heart disease. I trip over cinder block in back yard and break hip, go back to hospital. I predict the next time, it can only be heart disease, it runs in the family! Hit by a bus again, I go to the hospital And finally, because of the trauma done to my body by the bus, my heart does indeed stop beating, and I die, in the hospital. As predicted. The 4th or 5th time anyway.

There is no argument that peak oil will occur, regardless of whether or not it was in 2018, or is still in the future. The math on this is absolute. But if you want to make the best guess at when and why, you have to do more than just endlessly proclaim it to be so tomorrow afternoon, cross your fingers, and begin the broken clock is always right twice a day routine. That isn't science. That isn't learning from past mistakes and events. That is run of the mill Doom-mongering because less oil screwing up the world is a far cooler scenario for the Happy McDoomsters than the slow, grinding along of decaying economies or climate change.

Doly wrote:
What noticeable consequences would you contend are visible from a 3 year old THE peak oil now, that are perhaps different than run of the mill consequences we've been experiencing for the past half century because of wars, recessions, changes in industries, finance, geopolitics, run of the mill economic mayhem and bad actors, etc etc?


The main difference is a consequence of the fact that you can't allow oil to be a very small fraction of the economy, because it's essential in our current economy. All essential products have a floor on their price, because otherwise somebody could corner the market, and nobody wants to allow that.


All essential products have an X/Y supply/demand location to their price (Z). Can you define your concept of "price floor"? Because there are many prices, and costs, and I want to make sure that the definition of price we are discussing isn't different.

Doly wrote:If you have a limited supply of oil that can't possibly grow, it stops the whole economy from growing, for as long as oil continues to be essential. Wars, recessions, geopolitics, etc., tend to be more temporary stuff.


If oil supply cannot grow, the usual actors come into play. Conservation and substitution immediately jump to mind....think....1979 global peak oil, not to be matched for 15 years. Yet the world economy certainly continued to grow. We substituted good fuel mileage cars for crappier ones, we used less for 15 years.

If oil cannot grow, today, demand for that product can no longer increase, therefore price skyrockets, it doesn't floor. That market signal then tells, as just one example, consumers that they can't afford their monster trucks, so they buy EV Hummers. It tells airlines that they can't afford crude oil based fuels, so they substitute GTL technology from natural gas (breakeven of around $125/bbl) to get cheaper fuels. Bunker fuel burning consumers to heat their homes are bankrupted, or pay to replace those furnaces with electric ones. World economies are thrown into turmoil trying to adjust, just like the real energy crisis in the 1970's when cartel behavior jumped into the public lexicon, followed soon thereafter by a global oil peak that might just be a good example of peak demand, so often dismissed around here.

In order to have any hope of discussing peak oil consequences, you've got to employ the full suite of known economic action/reaction effects of supply/demand interactions. That is one of the reasons peak oilers have gotten it wrong on quite a few occasions. Economics being a social science, it makes one feel all....dirty.... to apply the basic precepts, but those precepts are quite valuable in explaining what happens next. Rather than just the common refrain of "stuff runs out...world ends (because I don't know how economics works, or it is just fru fru crap science)...buy guns and ammo and MREs". That is all so...2005....
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Doly » Sat 01 Jan 2022, 10:19:13

Oil is a global market even more so now that we have a bunch of light oil to export, so no one authority can affect price much or for long by decree.


Even central banks? Since their job is to keep inflation levels steady, they may choose to target a certain price of oil. We know from the 70s crisis that inflation can correlate with oil prices, and a way to avoid that would be to target oil prices.

In the last peak, 2018, supply was higher than demand except 3Q 2019


I don't understand how those calculations are made. The only thing anyone knows for sure is that some barrels of oil got sold at a certain price. How do they deduce supply and demand from that?
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby Pops » Sat 01 Jan 2022, 11:07:23

Doly wrote:Even central banks?

Ours did in the teens, you're right. They threw money at the economy and some of it wound up financing shale —which wound up losing billions. Even now with "positive cash flow" they have additional billions in liability for plugging tens of thousands of wells that will be running dry.

I don't think oil was the target but of course I don't know. Anyway government borrowed trillion to keep the balls in the air and fracking was the result.

Since their job is to keep inflation levels steady, they may choose to target a certain price of oil. We know from the 70s crisis that inflation can correlate with oil prices, and a way to avoid that would be to target oil prices.

But how do they do that? Oil IS the economy so any thing that stimulates the economy is going to stimulate oil demand. It is a hard thing to distinguish, oil price almost always goes up before a recession, does an oil price spike cause the recession or does an overstimulated economy cause higher oil demand and price?


In the last peak, 2018, supply was higher than demand except 3Q 2019

I don't understand how those calculations are made. The only thing anyone knows for sure is that some barrels of oil got sold at a certain price. How do they deduce supply and demand from that?

I'm no expert but here is how I think it works.
Oil is priced based on demand for the last barrel produced. Most is sold on long term contracts but some is sold on the spot market.

If demand is low, the spot price falls and producers start putting oil in storage waiting on a better price, as well, speculators jump in and store it too. Really it is the same for all stable commodities, hence those big grain bins on commodity crop farms.

Then when the spot market price goes up because demand is up, that stored oil gets sold into the market, hopefully at a profit.

So by watching whether storage increases or decreases you get a sense of demand relative to supply. There isn't much other way because all the measures of production are at best delayed by months or complete fabrications.
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: 19626
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Have we hit the peak?

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 01 Jan 2022, 13:54:31

Pops wrote:So by watching whether storage increases or decreases you get a sense of demand relative to supply. There isn't much other way because all the measures of production are at best delayed by months or complete fabrications.


Your take on watching storage is exactly correct. But not the part about the quality of measures of production. You are probably unfamiliar with the information available for purchase, or its quality, if you have never worked with it. And you wouldn't see it in the public domain, because those that do use this information are forbidden by contract for redistributing that information, sometimes even aggregations of it at the global level. It is frustrating to know, but not be able to speak, but those are the rules of the game.

I would heartily agree with you though that storage is a far cleaner number to watch over the raw production input/transshipping information on crude oil.

As Doly once mentioned, there are advantages to being an independent researcher. Availability of this information without a budget isn't one of them.
StarvingPuutyTat says: I'm so confident in my TOTAL COLLAPSE is IMMINENT prediction that I stake my entire reputation on it. It will happen this year. - Aug 3-2020

Mustang19 says: Mods, I am just here to troll the trolls. I mean no harm.
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests