Peak Oil News and Message Boards

Cog wrote:Onlooker has been infected with the ETP bug and it has affected him badly. An injection of supply/demand is the only thing that can save the poor lad.

Don't worry

ROCKMAN wrote:P - As explained before the long term prediction of future drilling is dependent upon acuurately predicting the long term price of oil. A feat no one has yet been able to do consistently. So what are they predicting for the oil prices that will support their production prediction?

Of the major energy agencies, the EIA is about the only one that publishes a price path with their projections. I've seen some resource cost curves from the IEA recently, so arguably you can back into an implied price path year by year if you wanted to, but it is a bit of work.

onlooker wrote:How about this for shocking or at least realistic
https://www.thestar.com/business/2017/1 ... gests.html

U.S. vastly overstates oil output forecasts, MIT study suggests

The culprit, they say, lies in the Energy Information Administration’s premise that better technology has been behind nearly all the recent output gains, and will continue to boost production for the foreseeable future. That’s not quite right. Instead, the research suggests increases have been largely due to something more mundane: low energy prices, which led drillers to focus on sweet spots where oil and gas are easiest to extract.

Perhaps if you had read the article you would know that there isn't even an MIT forecast to compare the EIA work to...therefore...what does "vast" mean? 2 barrels? Perhaps 5?

Plantagenet wrote:

ROCKMAN wrote:... the long term prediction of future drilling is dependent upon acuurately predicting the long term price of oil. A feat no one has yet been able to do consistently.

Thats partly true. Certainly an increase in the price of oil triggers off an increase in drilling.

But the world is very close to running out of untapped giant conventional oil to find. Drill all you want, but it isn't there.

At the IEW conference back in July, there were people who most certainly demonstrated not only the where, but the quantities, and the related CapX. One of the interesting points they made was that the USGS was right, 2 decades ago when they began research into what they deemed the most important topic in this regard...reserve growth in existing fields.

Plantagenet wrote:And the projections for ever-increasing oil from TOS in the US are just nonsense.

Can you point to a better geologic source than the USGS to refute, as just one example, their Wolfcamp estimate released just last fall? Projections are based on just such estimates, be they Rystad, EIA, or whomever.