i think a 2-3% decline after 2015-2020 is probable.
Our new, field-by-field analysis of production capacity
linlithgowoil wrote:interesting read, but of course they dont share their data, unlike the other mega field project update which does.
id certainly be surprised if we saw 100+ mb per day by 2010-2015.
whatpeak wrote:dmtu wrote:Someone remind me. I recognize the letters IHS but can't remember why the name is ominous.
Ominous to some
IHS is a Greek abbreviation
nth wrote:linlithgowoil wrote:interesting read, but of course they dont share their data, unlike the other mega field project update which does.
id certainly be surprised if we saw 100+ mb per day by 2010-2015.
You talking about this report?
Report
This report lists some 12mbpd of new production!
This does not include enhance recovery systems being invested in existing fields. Also, does not include sub100kbpd, which can add up to a couple hundred kpbd.
Not that I support Yergin, but your pessimism for 100mbpd seems to be very pessimistic. For people who believe in PO before 2010, they are saying Saudi Arabia will hit Peak by 2010 or before!
Simmons claims once Saudi hits peak, we all will, and he also believes we will hit peak soon. Please be advised that Simmons disputes Saudi data that is shown to the public. I am on Simmons side when demanding more data and third party validation, but I do not agree with him when he disagrees with Saudi data- this is data and not oil claims. Data that is provided by Saudi hired engineers. If these numbers are not what the engineers are seeing in the field, I think we will see a media leak by now- after all, these engineers are non-Saudi. And also, a few of these engineers no longer are on Saudi payroll! Of course, I can be wrong, but engineer data are believable to me unless proven otherwise. Remember this is different than Saudi claiming they have enough oil to keep production for next 50 years or whatever- that is not backed up by data that we can see.
ohanian wrote:
You have made one BIG assumption. You assumed that the foreign engineers saw all the numbers.
That's not true. Each foreign engineers only saw a small part of the total numbers. To get the big picture , you need to put together all the small numbers to get the total numbers. By your logic, all the accountants in a big bank will know the bank's true financial situvation, whereas in real life only the chief accountant of the bank does.
Leanan wrote:They are extremely optimistic. I suspect they have that capitalist/economist mindset: invest enough money, and technological solutions will be found. They don't understand that technology tends to slow down as it matures, and that the kind of advances we saw in the '70s and '80s are unlikely to be repeated.
The big question is how much depletion will we see on the older fields?
seahorse2 wrote:Aaron or someone, spell out for me the significance of IHS Energy buying Cera. I understand the thought is it makes or taints CERA's opinions. But, I don't know anything about IHS Energy.
Leanan wrote:
Yes, that's the big question. No doubt some big fields are coming online in a few years. The question is whether they can offset the depletion of the aging giants. My guess would be "no," but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.
But just looking at the limited data we have...I think Simmons is right. That expensive technology does increase production rates, but it doesn't really increase the total amount produced. A lot of oil people are still in denial about this, despite what happened with Yibal. But more and more, it's looking like Simmons was right. High-tech methods accelerate depletion, so decline for newer wells will be much steeper than it was for the old, American ones many models are based on.
Return to Open Topic Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests