bratticus wrote:7 billion people with no money can't cause oil demand to rise.peripato wrote:OilFinder2 wrote:At any rate, the IEA has now jumped on the bandwagon too, at least for 2008.
--> Bloomberg <--IEA Says Oil Use to Fall for First Year Since 1983
By Grant Smith
Dec. 11 (Bloomberg) -- The International Energy Agency, an adviser to 28 nations, said global oil demand will contract this year for the first time since 1983 and cut its outlook for 2009.
Consumption worldwide will shrink in 2008 by 200,000 barrels a day, or 0.2 percent, the IEA said in a monthly report today. The reduction in demand is concentrated in developed economies in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, where oil use will tumble 3.3 percent. Next year’s growth may be wiped out if the economic slump deepens, the agency said.
[...]
They're forecasting a 400K bpd increase in demand next year. Time will tell whether that forecast holds up.
As long as the population is growing (human and vehicular), and there is economic activity in the world, demand will keep rising. With the oil price so low there will be many willing buyers.
peripato wrote:My focus is solely on the 2008 figures in the EIA report I've linked to which clearly shows that most of the demand destruction for that year has already been.
ki11ercane wrote:200,000 barrels per day drop in consumption = 2.88 minutes less oil consumption per day or 17.52 hours for the year, or about 3/4 of a day DROP IN CONSUMPTION! Does that take into consideration there was 366 days this year vs. 365? If so, then we're in the plus and our consumption drop has been wiped out because of the leap year in 2008! OMG man!
Are you actually saying this is a MEANINGFUL DECLINE? Please wake me up when the decimal moves a little more to the right please, maybe by like 2 spots? A drop in under 3 less minutes of consumption globally PER DAY does not compare to our current economic contraction that is being measured in double digits.
Oilfinder2, you're trying to make up the hype just like the Doomers are.
OilFinder2 wrote:peripato wrote:My focus is solely on the 2008 figures in the EIA report I've linked to which clearly shows that most of the demand destruction for that year has already been.
Uhh, yeah, that's because most of the year itself "has already been." It's already December and they've got data for November. So of course most of the demand destruction "has already been."
OilFinder2 wrote:The fact that it has dropped (or, is about to drop) for the first time since 1983 is significant. That's 25 straight years of increases come to an end.
peripato wrote:OilFinder2 wrote:The fact that it has dropped (or, is about to drop) for the first time since 1983 is significant. That's 25 straight years of increases come to an end.
Yep, growth has to stop sometime. How does contraction square with you, huh?
peripato wrote:What does this mean for all that oil and gas discovery you keep harping on about?
OilFinder2 wrote:peripato wrote:OilFinder2 wrote:The fact that it has dropped (or, is about to drop) for the first time since 1983 is significant. That's 25 straight years of increases come to an end.
Yep, growth has to stop sometime. How does contraction square with you, huh?
Recessions - and even the occasional depression - are inevitable. There is nothing anyone can do to stop the business cycle. So whenever the latest expansionary cycle comes to a halt, usually as a victim of its own excesses, you simply have to wait for the excesses to wring themselves out, and another cycle can start anew. As I posted here, there is nothing new about what is going on. It has happened many times in the past, and it will happen again many times in the future.
peripato wrote:What does this mean for all that oil and gas discovery you keep harping on about?
Hard to say. Obviously it'll affect some companies more than others. But even in cases where a company might scale down exploration activities, whenever the price of energy rises again, exploration activity will pick up again.
peripato wrote:How so if oil is set to peak/has peaked?
peripato wrote:Where will the energy come from in a world of energy contraction?
peripato wrote:Also isn't it true that the last time this sort of shakeout occurred the oil industry was in decline for nearly 20 years, coinciding with sluggish economic growth.
peripato wrote:There were also far fewer people, less infrastructure and a smaller GDP to support back then, so I don't imagine it will be any fun as one after another these elements start to shrink too.
peripato wrote:What does this mean for all that oil and gas discovery you keep harping on about?Hard to say. Obviously it'll affect some companies more than others. But even in cases where a company might scale down exploration activities, whenever the price of energy rises again, exploration activity will pick up again.
Where will the energy and money come from to explore and produce from more and more difficult locations, if these two essentials are shrinking in availability?
OilFinder2 wrote:peripato wrote:How so if oil is set to peak/has peaked?
You don't know for a fact that oil is about to/has already peaked. You merely believe it has.
peripato wrote:Where will the energy come from in a world of energy contraction?
Whenever oil production does peak (whether that be 5 or 50 years from now), this does not mean energy production will peak. There are vast amounts of natural gas. The world supplies of uranium can last hundreds, if not thousands, of years. They can always build huge numbers of solar farms in the Mojave Desert. Etc., etc., etc.
peripato wrote:Also isn't it true that the last time this sort of shakeout occurred the oil industry was in decline for nearly 20 years, coinciding with sluggish economic growth.
The last time the price of oil crashed in 1985-86 was in the midst of a long economic boom which lasted from 1983-1990, which was interrupted by a brief recession in 1990-91, and which was then followed by an even longer economic boom from 1991-2000.
I can't believe I'm explaining recent history to someone. I assume you're not very old.
peripato wrote:There were also far fewer people, less infrastructure and a smaller GDP to support back then, so I don't imagine it will be any fun as one after another these elements start to shrink too.
And there are now more people to look for oil and gas, and to develop and build alternative energies than there was back then. The larger economy now means there is more capital to develop these things.
peripato wrote:What does this mean for all that oil and gas discovery you keep harping on about?Hard to say. Obviously it'll affect some companies more than others. But even in cases where a company might scale down exploration activities, whenever the price of energy rises again, exploration activity will pick up again.
Where will the energy and money come from to explore and produce from more and more difficult locations, if these two essentials are shrinking in availability?
There will not be less energy (see first reply this post). If or when the price of energy goes up due to an economic upswing, energy companies will make more money, and thus have more money to spend on exploration.
mos6507 wrote:joewp wrote:cipi604 wrote:Don't worry it will go to 20$ a barrel, for years maybe. Meanwhile the oil industry will rust.
Yeah, talk about your rock and a hard place. If the price stays high, the economy tanks. If the price stays low, production tanks and the price shoots up and the economy tanks. Then the price goes down and so does production capacity. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Funny how the capitalist market-driven economy contains the seeds of its very demise.
There's more, of course. Oil runs out soon = Mad Max doom. Oil doesn't run out soon = climate doom. We get onto hippie dippie renewables and permaculture = population doom. Limits to growth. It's a bitch.
peripato wrote:No I don't hold an opinion one way or the other about whether oil has already peaked, but supply appears to have plateaued - sustained high prices have not done anything to bring on higher production, and only super-cornucopians think that oil won't peak for another 50 years.
peripato wrote:Super-cornucopian, oil is our biggest source of primary energy. When it declines, ergo there will be less energy available. You can't possibly compare natural gas, with all its constraints, to the supreme fungibility and versatility of oil.
peripato wrote:As for uranium, please let's leave idle speculation about resource size where it belongs. It's still about how much electricity you can reasonably hope to produce at any given time (flows). There are limits. You know, limits?
peripato wrote:peripato wrote:Also isn't it true that the last time this sort of shakeout occurred the oil industry was in decline for nearly 20 years, coinciding with sluggish economic growth.The last time the price of oil crashed in 1985-86 was in the midst of a long economic boom which lasted from 1983-1990, which was interrupted by a brief recession in 1990-91, and which was then followed by an even longer economic boom from 1991-2000.
Umm you're talking about the stock market boom? The one built on debt and derivatives? Oh yeah the economy was really swell for the mega rich, but try telling that to the middle class whose wealth position actually stagnated during all this time, and is now set to fall off a cliff.
Sources: CensusBureau.gov
MeasuringWorth.com
peripato wrote:I can't believe I'm explaining recent history to someone. I assume you're not very old.
I can't believe how deluded and in denial you are. You must be in a lot of pain puppy. All cherished assumptions of the future about to go up in smoke...
peripato wrote:Most of this capital is speculative bullshit, it is being utterly destroyed in the biggest deflationary contraction in modern history. It will take years for this to work through the system and by then there will be a lot fewer companies, a lot fewer employees, and a lot less investment for everything - including renewables.
peripato wrote:All this activity takes money and energy, both of which we will soon have much less of.
peripato wrote:No I don't hold an opinion one way or the other about whether oil has already peaked, but supply appears to have plateaued - sustained high prices have not done anything to bring on higher production, and only super-cornucopians think that oil won't peak for another 50 years.
High prices *did* bring on additional production - eventually. It does take some time for it to come online. Note the rise beginning the middle of last year:
peripato wrote:Super-cornucopian, oil is our biggest source of primary energy. When it declines, ergo there will be less energy available. You can't possibly compare natural gas, with all its constraints, to the supreme fungibility and versatility of oil.
Illogical. At one time our biggest source of energy was coal. Does the decline of coal as our primary energy source mean that total energy declined? No. Therefore, it does not follow that if oil declined that total energy would also decline.
Furthermore, your statement concerning natural gas was also randomly pulled out of thin air with no factual backing. It so happens that natural gas makes a perfectly good transportation fuel.
You simply threw in the word "constraints" without having the slightest clue whether NG had such constraints or not. NG is as fungible and versatile as oil, and as discussed in this thread, it is abundant.
peripato wrote:As for uranium, please let's leave idle speculation about resource size where it belongs. It's still about how much electricity you can reasonably hope to produce at any given time (flows). There are limits. You know, limits?
Ah yes, standard doomer response - throw in the word "limits" without even reading the information provided in the article. But yes, you are correct: There could be "limits" to the amount of electricity provided by nuclear power - a "limit" which is likely hundreds or thousands of years away. Not much of a "limit" if you ask me.
I suppose there is also a "limit" on the amount of energy we can ultimately expect to be provided by the sun: Another billion years or so 'till we hit the "limit."
peripato wrote:Also isn't it true that the last time this sort of shakeout occurred the oil industry was in decline for nearly 20 years, coinciding with sluggish economic growth.
The last time the price of oil crashed in 1985-86 was in the midst of a long economic boom which lasted from 1983-1990, which was interrupted by a brief recession in 1990-91, and which was then followed by an even longer economic boom from 1991-2000.
Umm you're talking about the stock market boom? The one built on debt and derivatives? Oh yeah the economy was really swell for the mega rich, but try telling that to the middle class whose wealth position actually stagnated during all this time, and is now set to fall off a cliff.
Sources: CensusBureau.gov
MeasuringWorth.com
An utterly off-topic, strawman reply. The last time "this sort of shakeout occurred " in the early 80's (deep recession, oil price rise then crash) was followed by 17 years of economic expansion and only 1 year of contraction. So much for the "sluggish economic growth" you complained about. And last time I looked the oil companies are still around and doing fine, thank you, rather than being "in decline" as you claimed. Having shown you these facts, you are left to reply with some nonsense about class struggle, evil greedy rich people and other such leftist tripe.
Oh - but wait! Since you seem to guage the health of an economy on how well the middle class does, the economic collapse and decline in energy availability you advocate will make their plight even worse! Beware of what you ask for, you just might get it!
peripato wrote:I can't believe I'm explaining recent history to someone. I assume you're not very old.
I can't believe how deluded and in denial you are. You must be in a lot of pain puppy. All cherished assumptions of the future about to go up in smoke...
Such an effective debating tactic!
peripato wrote:Most of this capital is speculative bullshit, it is being utterly destroyed in the biggest deflationary contraction in modern history. It will take years for this to work through the system and by then there will be a lot fewer companies, a lot fewer employees, and a lot less investment for everything - including renewables.
The deflation you speak of will lower the costs for the needed energy projects, thus lowering the investment needs. You can read about it in JD's blog for starters. I can also show you declining prices for steel, polysilicon for solar panels, and a whole host of other cost inputs to energy projects. It all evens out.
peripato wrote:All this activity takes money and energy, both of which we will soon have much less of.
In your dreams!
U.S. Oil Consumption Flat Through 2030, EIA Predicts
By Tina Seeley
Dec. 17 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. oil consumption will be flat through 2030, as the use of biofuels, rising oil prices and new car efficiency standards temper demand for petroleum, the Energy Information Administration said.
The last 20 years “has been a history of rising oil use,” Howard Gruenspecht, acting head of the agency, part of the U.S. Energy Department, said in a speech today in Washington. The new outlook “projects a break in this trend, with no appreciable growth in oil consumption between now and 2030 and biofuels being all of the growth in liquids.”
Use of liquid fuels, including biofuels, will grow by 1 million barrels a day between 2007 and 2030, the agency said in its Annual Energy Outlook. Ethanol consumption will increase to 12.2 billion gallons, and cellulosic ethanol feedstocks will reach 12.6 billion gallons by 2030, EIA says.
[...]
With overall liquid fuel demand in the AEO2009 reference case growing by only 1 million barrels per day between 2007 and 2030, increased use of domestically-produced biofuels, and rising domestic oil production spurred by higher prices, the net import share of total liquids supplied, including biofuels, declines from 58 percent in 2007 to less than 40 percent in 2025 before increasing to 41 percent in 2030 (Figure 1).
Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests