Peak Oil News and Message Boards

pstarr wrote:

onlooker wrote:You get magically more oil then none then bankruptcy haha
O I hear Rockdoc footsteps.
It depends on your definition of URR.

Given enough economic value, the entire planet is ultimately recoverable oil.

First the Orinocco Extra Heavy (1 trillion barrels of resources) are produced. Then everything plastic and rotting (especially organic matter, including turkey guts) is sucked up and converted (via thermal depolymerization) in light sweet crude. There's another 100 trillion of oil reserves.

Finally ITER is applied to planet earth and every molecule, atom and electron (Mom, Dad, little Barf and Debbie included) is converted (via Paradigmatic Virtualization) into more OIL! FOR EVERY BODY Except there is no one left, as they have been converted into oil

One of the best summaries of the BAU mentality I have seen.

consummatio ad nihilum

Don't be talking bad about Bankruptcy, the Rockm will kick your ass.

Yes, Dissident it is the mentality of the cancer cell !

Yes, Dissident it is the mentality of the cancer cell!

It looks like two cancers cells playing Russian Roulette!

Plantagenet wrote:

AdamB wrote:So if you don't think it is newly discovered oil, what is the best term for it? Just reserve growth?

Yes, its called reserve growth.

Oil isn't newly discovered if its already been discovered.

Think about it.

Cheers!

I did think about it. I just wanted to make sure I knew which way you swung on the issue before using it against you later when you decide to troll someone with a different definition.

Cheers!

pstarr wrote:Reserver Growth was much ballyhooed around here by JohnDenver who later became ennui and then AdamB. (he's the abiotic JohnDenver).

Reserves growth[edit]
Experience shows that initial estimates of the size of newly discovered oil fields are usually too low. As years pass, successive estimates of the ultimate recovery of fields tend to increase. The term reserve growth refers to the typical increases in estimated ultimate recovery that occur as oil fields are developed and produced.[4]

It all dates back to this paper: The Intricate Puzzle of Oil and Gas “Reserves Growth now archived at wiki. Hint: the puzzle was never was never put together. It remains in pieces.

No, it doesn't date all the way back to Dave's paper. Hubbert's reserve growth equations circa 1968 were already being used by the USGS in 1975, in Bulletin 725. Pre-dating him was Arrington. A reasonable analysis was done here, which goes back all the way to Arrington and describes how things changed over time, and also just so happens to quote and answer some of those questions from Dave Morehouse.

I recommend you google better next time.

pstarr wrote:It's a normal geologic process of depletion, followed by EOR methods and terminating with increased debt and liabilities. As the field depletes and production costs increase (expensive secondary/tertiary production methods) you get magically get more oil. Then bankruptcy.

If you can read, I provided a reasonable reference. Warning, it does contain big words, and numbers and stuff, and some logic, so odds are unless you find a talented 2nd grader to explain it to you, you'll never get it, but I am an eternal optimist.

This was made by AdamB who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Do you really believe that one person can generate that much crap? It looks more like a herd of pack mules that found the grain bin.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/could-curve- ... 45688.html
Could the 'curve' be warning of a US recession?

shortonoil wrote:

This was made by AdamB who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Do you really believe that one person can generate that much crap?

And quite telling that you aren't able to refute any of it.You just don't know anything, and aggravate the situation by saying something you made up, or taking a single example you don't understand and extrapolating into nonsense.

Well, I'll just let you boys beat on each other with your stats and curves. Nothing personal but I couldn't care less. I've hunted oil/NG for a tad more then 4 decades. When I started in 1975 there was a serious concern of no major onshore trends left to explore. And you can keep your rebuttals to your self: the Barrnet, Bakken, Eagle Ford and the "new" hot plays in the Permian Basin ARE NOT new discoveries. The hydrocarbons contained in those formations were known many decades ago. What was missing was the DEVELOPMENT TECH (frac'ng/hz drilling) and higher prices. Not pure development fields but certainly NOT EXPLORATION DISCOVERIES as the oil patch uses the term. Oil/NG...not exploration projects. The last major new trend discovered was the Deep Water Gulf of Mexico. And while new fields are still being discovered the trend itself is more then 30 years old.

New fields in PROVEN TRENDS are fine. But what the US needs is the discovery of significant NEW TRENDS. And at the moment none appear on the horizon.

onlooker wrote:https://www.yahoo.com/news/could-curve-warning-us-recession-053245688.html
Could the 'curve' be warning of a US recession?

We can hope so. We're overdue for one, and the last one was probably the best equity buying opportunity in a generation. Wouldn't mind another before retirement.

New fields in PROVEN TRENDS are fine. But what the US needs is the discovery of significant NEW TRENDS. And at the moment none appear on the horizon.

as I've said a few times where the big impact will be over the next few years in the US is improvement in recovery factors in the unconventional reservoirs. Currently they are quite low 2- 7% I believe. Just raising recovery a few percent through various tweaks on completions will be a significant impact.

rockdoc123 wrote:as I've said a few times where the big impact will be over the next few years in the US is improvement in recovery factors in the unconventional reservoirs. Currently they are quite low 2- 7% I believe. Just raising recovery a few percent through various tweaks on completions will be a significant impact.

Sounds good in theory.

But because the sweet spots get drilled first, the remaining undrilled parts of TOS reservoirs is of poorer quality, and oil production per well is going DOWN in places like the Bakken. No doubt the technology will continue to be tweaked to improve recovery, but its not clear this will result in higher rates of production because the quality of the TOS being drilled in places like the Bakken is getting worse and worse through time and the productivity of wells is getting worse and worse.

the-beginning-of-the-end-for-the-bakken-shale-play

Cheers!

What this is a surprise?

Our energy slaves are fatigued and about tapped out. Better get that fusion stuff working pretty quick, or hydrogen conversion, or desert solar farms, or some damn thing. and be quick about it. The clock is indeed ticking.

And skip the rhetorical bullshit. Bunch of goddam idiots in charge. Stupid fuckers the whole lot.

I am in such a mood.... lol.


goddam bullshit ever whar

Back in my lurking days everyone was screaming about how oil was stuck over $50/bbl forever and we were doomed. Well folks, 2017 is averaging over $50/bbl again just like 2009-2014 and looking out my window this feels a lotmore like prosperity than doom.

rockdoc123 wrote:as I've said a few times where the big impact will be over the next few years in the US is improvement in recovery factors in the unconventional reservoirs. Currently they are quite low 2- 7% I believe. Just raising recovery a few percent through various tweaks on completions will be a significant impact.

I'm no expert on the question. But isn't it a bit easier to say than to do? The US went through various EOR techniques after what was considered a peak in production rate in 1970. But until recently (40 years after this "peak"), the production rate was decreasing, even with the more recent discoveries and exploitation of offshore production.

LTO had a really fast and impressive growth, soon to let US production rate exceed the record of 1970. This was, from what I understood, peculiar geologic structures with one specific recovery technique (fracking) applied on a large scale that enabled this impressive result. We can refine the technique, make it last longer... But is it enough to make a second boom?

The first wave (Bakken an Eagle Ford) seems to have reach a limit (or are about to). Increasing their production rate will require other recovery technique to improve the recovery factor. They'll give us an hint of what will come next.

But I would not exclude another peak with a slow depletion, after the exhaustion of the first wave of frackable fields.