Peak Oil News and Message Boards

According to the IEA, production from all oil and gas sources online will increase by around 9 pct for the next two decades, and this assumes that conventional sources won't follow historical flow rates. This is partly confirmed by various sources showing an increase, for example, of 4 mb/d for the same period for NA production. There are more details in reports linked here, including several from oil companies:

http://ralfyman.blogspot.com

The problem is that energy demand will have to increase by around two pct each year to maintain global economic growth, which means the 9-pct increase will be wiped out in only four years or so. And if conventional sources follow historical flow rates, then the increase will be even lower. And if energy (and in general, resource) demand has to go up due to increasing population or if production is damaged further due to pollution and climate change, then the situation worsens.

The IEA adds that in order to maintain global economic growth, we will need the equivalent of one Saudi Arabia every seven years. In which case, one should not argue that "the oil industry has buried the idea of 'peak oil'." Rather, it sprinkled a bit of dust on top of it.

Considering their track record (the IEA is a great example of "don't worry, be happy" if there ever was one), let alone their claims that peak oil happened years ago, why pay any attention to them at all? They have obviously missed the boat before, and just because they happen to appear with us today doesn't mean they won't pull an about face tomorrow?

Shorty?

seenmostofit wrote:Considering their track record (the IEA is a great example of "don't worry, be happy" if there ever was one), let alone their claims that peak oil happened years ago, why pay any attention to them at all? They have obviously missed the boat before, and just because they happen to appear with us today doesn't mean they won't pull an about face tomorrow?

Indeed, which is why you have the rest of my post. With that, and following your points, we should see a worst-case scenario, i.e., no 9-pct increase in production but a decline coupled with increasing demand.

ralfy wrote:

seenmostofit wrote:Considering their track record (the IEA is a great example of "don't worry, be happy" if there ever was one), let alone their claims that peak oil happened years ago, why pay any attention to them at all? They have obviously missed the boat before, and just because they happen to appear with us today doesn't mean they won't pull an about face tomorrow?

Indeed, which is why you have the rest of my post. With that, and following your points, we should see a worst-case scenario, i.e., no 9-pct increase in production but a decline coupled with increasing demand.

Yeah, but I was thrown by the idea that if they haven't been worth listening to for the past decade or two, why would anyone pay any attention at all to anything they said. Ever. Doesn't matter what scenarios they dream up one way or the other really.

vision-master wrote:Shorty?

Good call, If I meet you someday Vision I will buy a drink

Is anyone going to let me in on the joke, or do I have to figure it out all by myself?

seenmostofit wrote:Is anyone going to let me in on the joke, or do I have to figure it out all by myself?

Shorty was a former ghost turd that won't flush.

This is an ancient tradition of this forum - when the sinister omens of a permanent ban are waving in the air, the mysterious word Shorty transpires on the scripts posted on the board.

Lore wrote:

seenmostofit wrote:Is anyone going to let me in on the joke, or do I have to figure it out all by myself?

Shorty was a former ghost turd that won't flush.

Aye, and to troll, he likes to mix selected bit of facts, misinformation and all sort of logical fallacies. Also He/She has a penchant for names such as: ReserveGrowthRules, shortonsense and ...seenmostofit??

eXpat wrote:

Lore wrote:

seenmostofit wrote:Is anyone going to let me in on the joke, or do I have to figure it out all by myself?

Shorty was a former ghost turd that won't flush.

Aye, and to troll, he likes to mix selected bit of facts, misinformation and all sort of logical fallacies. Also He/She has a penchant for names such as: ReserveGrowthRules, shortonsense and ...seenmostofit??

Sorry, but if I was doing a word association test for the SATs, for the life of me I wouldn't link those three names. My username is based on what I consider to be an overall jaded outlook on life, how that links with the nonsensical and whimsical is beyond my powers of perception.

dsula wrote:

rangerone314 wrote: In any event, in 15 or 20 years when there are multiple massive resource wars,

Exactly, it's always next year, or in 5 years, or in 20 years.
Listen to Kunstler, he's predicting doom next week, for how long now?

I'm not Kunstler. And would it make you happier if I predicted doom in 3 years and it didn't happen.

I sure as hell hope it doesn't happen in less than 15 years; my preps won't be completely done until about 12 years.

rangerone314 wrote:

dsula wrote:

rangerone314 wrote: In any event, in 15 or 20 years when there are multiple massive resource wars,

Exactly, it's always next year, or in 5 years, or in 20 years.
Listen to Kunstler, he's predicting doom next week, for how long now?

I'm not Kunstler. And would it make you happier if I predicted doom in 3 years and it didn't happen.

I sure as hell hope it doesn't happen in less than 15 years; my preps won't be completely done until about 12 years.

Don't tell me you expect to somehow "survive" the bottleneck and arrive into a better an brighter "after doom" life.
There's 2 options:
1. (not likely) There will be a TSHTF event. In that case it doesn't matter where you are and what you do, chances you get out of it alive are slim. Maybe you don't die the first day, but you'll die after a few years of hardship and once your 'supplies' run out.
2. (likely) It's a slow grinding process towards a miserable life. Nothing can be done. Everything cost more to buy each year, but your salary stays the same. Then you loose your job, you can't afford your health insurance, then you loose your house and before you know it you go thru garbage to find food. And in the end you die.

Some people here have the illusion that once the big bang arrives, society will rebuild into a fair, beautiful system where there's no corporation, no evil government, only integrity, hard-work and old-fashioned honest Amish life.
Think more like living in mexico city slums moving towards even worse. And that will take decades. An then after maybe 200 years of misery and famine some other type society will emerge.

It's a slow grinding process towards a miserable life. Nothing can be done. Everything cost more to buy each year, but your salary stays the same. Then you loose your job, you can't afford your health insurance, then you loose your house and before you know it you go thru garbage to find food. And in the end you die.

Surely being able to grow your own food in a place you own outright would help mitigate that? So something can be done, but I agree it won't necessarily be pretty.

davep wrote:

It's a slow grinding process towards a miserable life. Nothing can be done. Everything cost more to buy each year, but your salary stays the same. Then you loose your job, you can't afford your health insurance, then you loose your house and before you know it you go thru garbage to find food. And in the end you die.

Surely being able to grow your own food in a place you own outright would help mitigate that? So something can be done, but I agree it won't necessarily be pretty.

That's the problem with 'own outright'. You always owe property tax. I own more than 100 acres outright. However with the money I spend on property tax I could buy food to feed me a year.
What if there's no food anymore to buy, you say? Well in that case you probably also not be able to grow much anymore. Think of all the tools, machines (small and large), spare parts, fences, seeds, processing, glas, pots etc. you need. Once you can't get that no more you're in dire straits, even with 100 acres of land.

And on top of that you get yourself into a defense nightmare. A succesful farm will surely attract hungry visitors. Sometimes I think it's best to actually not own anyhting at all but skills and flexibility. Having a 'homestead' is just an enormous burden and once supplies run short it will start falling apart.

Think of all the tools, machines (small and large), spare parts, fences, seeds, processing, glas, pots etc. you need. Once you can't get that no more you're in dire straits, even with 100 acres of land.

It depends if you're looking at a conventional farm or one requiring far less in the way of mechanised input, using heirloom seeds and perennials.

And on top of that you get yourself into a defense nightmare. A succesful farm will surely attract hungry visitors. Sometimes I think it's best to actually not own anyhting at all but skills and flexibility. Having a 'homestead' is just an enormous burden and once supplies run short it will start falling apart.

That also depends. I've personally gone from "OMG, I need lots of guns!" to "There are plenty of hunters around here. If we needed to, we could form a militia". Reloading is relatively easy and inexpensive too (and you can get yourself many many years worth of powder, primers etc).

pstarr wrote:dsula, you apparently do not understand property tax . A municipality can not afford to tax all property beyond the owners ability to pay, otherwise the tax base disappears.

Yeah, you would think so. But I wouldn't count on it. Especially not in a slow crash. Every year 1% or so more in taxes. You go delinquent, your property is up for auction. The local big farmers scoop it up, you're done. As long as this only happens to a few residents a year it will go unnoticed.
I would especially not count on you (as a subsistance guy) to be able to outrun big money.

Don't count on collapes, but make sure you're the best at what you do, no matter what it is. The future is much more diverse than only subsistance farming. And to think you can do everything on your own on a subsistance level is foolish.

You go delinquent, your property is up for auction.

Not in France. They can't take your primary residence off you.

I agree about the diversity thing though. Subsistence farming on its own would be very dull too.