It isn't totally flat. They have it starting to grow again around 2010 and continuing this modest increase until 2030. A strict policy wrt Carbon emissions would also go a long way towards the EIA's projection regarding oil consumption.AirlinePilot wrote:A nice prediction for cornucopians to be sure. The US economy wont remain in recession/depression unitl 2030 and thats the only way you have demand remain flat.
It depends. The average vehicle lifespan is ~12 years IIRC, so w/ the 25% increase in fuel economy from 2015 to 2027, probably sooner and faster in the case of states that adopt California's Carbon emissions guidelines, the EIA is projecting a ~40+% increase in VMT over the next twenty years, so around 2% per year from 2010 on, would be offset partially by a 25% increase in LDV fuel efficiency w/ the rest manifesting itself as an increase in oil consumption.AirlinePilot wrote:At some point in a few years out we manage some sort of attempt at a recovery and this will mean increased demand. Maybe not towards older predictions but its kind of silly to believe we can manage an alternatives "magic trick" which is what will be required to see demand remain flat.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
AirlinePilot wrote:A nice prediction for cornucopians to be sure. The US economy wont remain in recession/depression unitl 2030 and thats the only way you have demand remain flat.
At some point in a few years out we manage some sort of attempt at a recovery and this will mean increased demand. Maybe not towards older predictions but its kind of silly to believe we can manage an alternatives "magic trick" which is what will be required to see demand remain flat.
This is just more evidence that there is little surety as to where we go with demand and supply. We are in uncharted waters and not a lot of traditional thinking is making sense.
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.
AirlinePilot wrote:A nice prediction for cornucopians to be sure. The US economy wont remain in recession/depression unitl 2030 and thats the only way you have demand remain flat.
This is just more evidence that there is little surety as to where we go with demand and supply.
LinkJapan's new auto sales likely to fall below 5 mln units in 2009
TOKYO, Dec. 18 (Xinhua) -- Japan's new vehicle sales are likely to fall by 4.9 percent year-on-year to 4.86 million units in 2009,sinking below 5 million for the first time in 30 years, the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association said Thursday.
LinkKimiyuki Suda should be a perfect customer for Japan's carmakers. He's a young (34), successful executive at an Internet-services company in Tokyo and has plenty of disposable income. He used to own Toyota's Hilux Surf, a sport utility vehicle. But now he uses mostly subways and trains. "It's not inconvenient at all," he says. Besides, "having a car is so 20th century."
Suda reflects a worrisome trend in Japan; the automobile is losing its emotional appeal, particularly among the young, who prefer to spend their money on the latest electronic gadgets. While minicars and luxury foreign brands are still popular, everything in between is slipping. Last year sales fell 6.7 percent—7.6 percent if you don't count the minicar market. There have been larger one-year drops in other nations: sales in Germany fell 9 percent in 2007 thanks to a tax hike. But analysts say Japan is unique in that sales have been eroding steadily over time. Since 1990, yearly new-car sales have fallen from 7.8 million to 5.4 million units in 2007.
Alarmed by this state of decay, the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association launched a comprehensive study of the market in 2006. It found a widening wealth gap, demographic changes—fewer households with children, a growing urban population—and general lack of interest in cars led Japanese to hold their vehicles longer, replace their cars with smaller ones or give up car ownership altogether. "Japan's automobile society stands at a crossroads," says Ryuichi Kitamura, a transport expert and professor at Kyoto University. He says he does not expect the trend to be reversed, as studies show that the younger Japanese consumers are, the less interested they are in having a car.
JohnDenver wrote:Doesn't jibe too well with the theory of the demand cornucopians.
FWIW, in 2007 world consumption increased as the year progressed, up ~1mbpd at the end compared to the middle. In 2008 world consumption decreased by ~1mbpd as the year progressed. Considering that the price increase earlier this year was the result of a ~.1mbpd shortfall between consumption and production, a ~2mbpd difference in behavior, if sustained, is definitely significant.AirlinePilot wrote:JD,Im still not buying that demand, global demand that is, has dropped very much at all. Yes its down, but the price collapse is only partially driven by this demand drop. I'm with rockdoc on the premise that its more about a speculative downward trend and has very little to do with actual demand numbers. That trend is very temporary and we'll know it soon enough.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
If world consumption declines, the U.S. can increase it's own liquids consumption w/o world production increasing past it's peak. We can also increase biofuel production, and as usual do a bit of both. It's technically possible for the U.S. slightly increase liquids consumption while still seeing a peak in world oil production, even if it's not likely.aahala2 wrote:So if you believe the US will consume much more in 2030 than now, then you must believe peak is several decades away, or peakoil theory isn't true at all.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
This is not true. You can grow your economy and flatline/shrink your oil usage.AirlinePilot wrote:A nice prediction for cornucopians to be sure. The US economy wont remain in recession/depression unitl 2030 and thats the only way you have demand remain flat.
At some point in a few years out we manage some sort of attempt at a recovery and this will mean increased demand. Maybe not towards older predictions but its kind of silly to believe we can manage an alternatives "magic trick" which is what will be required to see demand remain flat.
This is just more evidence that there is little surety as to where we go with demand and supply. We are in uncharted waters and not a lot of traditional thinking is making sense.
Oil Consumption: How does Today Compare to 1980?using less oil does not mean economic collapse. Since 1980, consumption is actually down in the Europe big four by 9.1%
kublikhan wrote:You can grow your economy and flatline/shrink your oil usage.Oil Consumption: How does Today Compare to 1980?using less oil does not mean economic collapse. Since 1980, consumption is actually down in the Europe big four by 9.1%
Secondly, using less oil does not mean economic collapse. Since 1980, consumption is actually down in the Europe big four by 9.1%, and Japan's consumption is up only 4.6%. Despite our consumption rising by 20.7% over that more than a quarter-century span, as a percentage of the world it actually fell.
JohnDenver wrote:I'm not sure why you use the term "cornucopian" for the position that demand for oil will peak and decline, making peak oil manageable. Personally, I think "cornucopian" applies better to the peak oiler position -- i.e. that demand for oil has no limits, and will always increase.
Yes, no, maybe so? Oil increased in price while consumption was greater than production and decreased while production was greater than consumption, less the month lag needed for information from last month to come in. OPEC's recent cut has changed that, but we can at least say that there was a strong correlation between oil prices and demand. Given it's behavior, the drop from $145 to ~$60-80 seems to be associated w/ the drop in consumption, and the drop from $60-80 to $40 is associated w/ speculation regarding the predicted global recession. I bet if you researched it thoroughly you could figure what exactly was associated w/ what but w/o more data I can't separate the two.TheDude wrote:Decreased demand isn't the primary factor in the current suppression of price, deleveraging is.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
For fuel switching away from oil for electrical production, I can't see that as anything but a good thing. Oil is far to valuable to waste generating electricity when there are many other ways to generate electricity. As for fuel efficiency gains, I see no reason why the US can't implement European style reforms in order to bring about a similar reduction in oil consumption.TheDude wrote:kublikhan wrote:You can grow your economy and flatline/shrink your oil usage.Oil Consumption: How does Today Compare to 1980?using less oil does not mean economic collapse. Since 1980, consumption is actually down in the Europe big four by 9.1%
As I keep pointing out, the developed nations did a fair amount of fuel switching for electrical consumption (from oil to NG in the US, oil to nuclear in Europe) that accounted for a substantial part of that reduction. Your man neglects to bring up this point, nor the rapid advances in vehicle fuel economy that also contributed. Whether the latter feat can be replicated depends on the outcome of the major automakers in the next few years, and credit becoming available for loans; a similar advance could come from using our existing auto fleet and optimizing mileage - those storied well-inflated tires. The former savings in oil consumption from fuel switching is a thing of the past - poorer countries' chance of switching over to different fuel stocks would depend on their circumstances and degree of dependency on oil - which in a world of shrinking supply they'd be the first to be priced out.
Fuel Efficiency and Lessons From EuropeRight now, the average fuel economy in the European Union is over 40 miles per gallon. Japan is even better at over 45. The U.S. lags far behind with an average in the mid 20’s.
If you accept that the increase in price was due to supply and demand, according to the EIA's global production and consumption figures for 2007 and 2008, then the decrease must be as well since oil's change in price compared to the difference between consumption and production over the past couple years has a Spearman's rho large enough to make supply/demand the horse to bet on.AirlinePilot wrote:Correlation? Maybe. Im not buying into that right now. A few million bbl/day on the global scale isnt commensurate with the price collapse we have seen. There is no getting around that logic.
Technically speaking it was almost all about supply and demand, since the credit bubble really screwed w/ the income elasticity of demand, but I suppose that w/o the 2.4 trillion bucks in easy credit that popped up we wouldn't have been able to fund $145/bbl, probably falling back more gradually at some lower price. Granted, w/o market transparency, we don't know who took what positions, so it's possible that vested interests did manipulate the market, but without the appropriate data who knows?AirlinePilot wrote:Something else is going on, be it deleveraging, deflation, manipulation, etc. Its probably a bit of all these, but its just not logical to keep pointing to demand being THE reason. Its just silly.
If history is any guide we probably will grow the world economy while decreasing oil use over the next decade or so, but maybe this time will be different.AirlinePilot wrote:I agree its possible to grow economies without increasing consumption. I just dont believe we are going to attempt it, not for quite a while yet. There just isnt enough scalability in any replacement to crude at the moment.
Professor Membrane wrote: Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests