Peak Oil News and Message Boards

OPEC predicts global oil demand will rise to over 100 million bbls per day in 2019.

opecs-oil-output-jumps-in-june-as-saudi-arabia-opens-the-taps

OPEC's oil production is already being raised to meet 2018 demand, as KSA tries to reach a new all time high in oil production in response to rising global oil prices and Trump's resultant demand that they pump more.

But that raises a question...if KSA and OPEC are already maxing themselves out to meet the increases in 2018 demand, where will the extra oil come from to meet the rising demand in 2019?

Easy, says, OPEC.. The countries outside OPEC will all increase their production in 2019 by 2.1 million bbls/day. And that means the US, because thats where oil production is increasing. And that means the Permian basin because thats the only place in the US where oil production is rapidly rising.

Can the Permian basin oil production go up another ca. 2 million bbls day in 2019?

And how about in 2020? How much more can Permain basin oil production go up? Inquiring minds want to know.....

CHEERS!

On the DPR page of EIA, there is a note that wasn't there before:

NOTE:
Productivity estimates may overstate actual production which could be limited by logistical constraints.

I think they refer to the lack of pipeline capacity in the Permian. Obviously, there won't be much growth possible in the Permian until this is resolved, in a year.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gene ... lines.html

To demonstrate how completely dead this forum (and by extension, peak oil itself) is, pstarr's post above from an entire week ago is the most recent post in this entire section ... which used to be the bread and butter section of this forum! And if that wasn't bad enough, looking through the front page of this forum, this post of mine right here is the only post in this entire forum today!

A new study released by Wood-Mackenzie predicts a major global shortfall in oil production in the mid-2020s.

The-Oil-Industry-Needs-Large-New-Discoveries-Very-Soon

I wonder where the "large new discoveries" will come from?

And if there are no new large discoveries, we're looking at oil demand greatly exceeding oil supply coming up in the next decade---

Cheers!

Plantagenet wrote:And if there are no new large discoveries, we're looking at oil demand greatly exceeding oil supply coming up in the next decade---

Cheers!

Of course, as the price rises, companies will be deploying more resource to do more serious looking, and using better technologies to do so.

But to the extent that's not enough -- good!

If that happens, people might FINALLY be incented to drive far more fuel efficient cars. And within the next decade, there can be a whole lot more HEV. PHEV, and BEV models out there, especially if high oil prices make them far more cost competitive.

Since politicians won't do what's right re a big CO2 tax, let's have the price of crude oil do the trick.

It's not so much that the topic is dead, it's that there isn't much to say at this point, its just a waiting game

shale is the bottom of the barrel (the only thing lower is oil sands), once shale peaks we are officially on the downslope

maybe we will come up with some new energy source but I do not believe so - fossil fuels were an amazing stroke of luck for our species and we squandered them

I've been following this topic for about 15 years now and I've seen nothing to change my mind that our civilization is screwed - and its entirely our fault

tita wrote:On the DPR page of EIA, there is a note that wasn't there before:

NOTE:
Productivity estimates may overstate actual production which could be limited by logistical constraints.

I think they refer to the lack of pipeline capacity in the Permian. Obviously, there won't be much growth possible in the Permian until this is resolved, in a year.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gene ... lines.html

I haven't followed DPR data since last July. Reason is that I found them quite unreliable. I just made a little comparison on July data vs today. Permian production was well underestimated, while Eagle Ford was quite overestimated, the other region being a few kb/d off.

So the logistical constrain of the pipeline capacity wasn't such a deal after all. EFS production is in stagnation. The growth in US production in 2018 came from Permian (+1 Mb/d), while offshore is second (+300kb/d) and Bakken third (+200 kb/d).

Permian is still at the top, and it will probably stay there for 2019...

anarky321 wrote:It's not so much that the topic is dead, it's that there isn't much to say at this point, its just a waiting game

shale is the bottom of the barrel (the only thing lower is oil sands), once shale peaks we are officially on the downslope

Because technology never improves. Because green energy won't happen. Because doomers are never too pessimistic in their assumptions.

The EIA says we're golden re oil and NG through 2040 or 2050, minimum.

By 2050, most transport will be from electric.

You can spend your whole life waiting for the end game. What's the point?

...

And no, I don't agree with BAU growth or think it can last forever. But hiding under my bed and predicting fast crash doom my whole life won't change the eventual evolution of humanity or the earth, either.

anakry said:

It's not so much that the topic is dead, it's that there isn't much to say at this point, its just a waiting game

shale is the bottom of the barrel (the only thing lower is oil sands), once shale peaks we are officially on the downslope

Shale has to produce enough product to compensate for its own legacy decline, and the ongoing decline in conventional to prevent the world from Peaking. The numbers are simple and straight forward. The 2018 legacy decline of Shale will have to be overcome in 2019. That will be 1.43 mb/d (8.03 mb/d * 0.178). Conventional at least 2.4 mb/d, for a total of 3.83 mb/d. At the average 2018 production per rig of 8.7 b/d in the Shale patch the number of rigs needed will fall short by 50%. To prevent Peak the Martins had better supply horizontal rigs, and fast! Peak is here, but the question is: "what does that mean?".

At the average 2018 production per rig of 8.7 b/d in the Shale patch the number of rigs needed will fall short by 50%

Well that number isn’t backed up by the EIA https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/wells/

According to EIA 12% of production is from all wells with production rates below 10 bbls /d which compares to 42% of production with rates from 100 – 800 bbls/d and about 30% with production rates higher than 800 bbls/d

Even if we just look at all horizontal wells only 14% have rates at less than 10 bbls/d and 30% have rates higher than 100 bbls/d.

So unless you have magical math behind you there is no way the average production can be that low.

and as I've said previously you're calculation assumes production decline is not two stage which it has been proven to be in each and every unconventional reservoir as was predicted in rock mechanic theory. But of course you don't want facts to get in the way of your nonsensical rants now do you?

Speaking of nonsense, hows it going with your estimate of peakoil in 2013-2015?
Maybe it would have been ok if you were off by a year or 2, but now the so-called expert oil doctor is faced with being off by at least 3 years. Wonder what excuses you've got lined up for us this year. Or are you hoping everyone here is so dumb they have no memory of the past including your estimates?
The rockdoc is going to need a doc after getting hit on the head by a rock of truth : 2018 is going to set new oil production records. But the IEA messed up this year and aren't getting the data out until their April report. So just have to lay low for a bit longer, but we can watch you sweat. Gives you another month to think of your excuses.

Speaking of nonsense, hows it going with your estimate of peakoil in 2013-2015?
Maybe it would have been ok if you were off by a year or 2, but now the so-called expert oil doctor is faced with being off by at least 3 years. Wonder what excuses you've got lined up for us this year. Or are you hoping everyone here is so dumb they have no memory of the past including your estimates?

as I have said numerous times (but apparently your literacy skills preclude you from reading with any sort of comprehension) my suggestion that the world could peak in that time period was based on global production data and the fields that were lined up to come on stream in and around 2006 or 2007 or so (when I made that prediction) with information coming from WoodMac and IHS Energy/Petroconsultants. I specifically stated that it did not include unconventionals other than the heavy oil that was being produced at that time in Alberta and Venezuela. It did not include shale liquids simply because the whole game was in its infancy. At that point in time companies were just starting to look at tight shale gas in places like the Marcellus and Montney as a means to offset what was deemed to be a pending serious natural gas shortage in North America. There was virtually no liquids other than a very small amount from gas being produced. That all changed as oil prices rose and natural gas prices dropped which focussed the industry on extracting liquids from the Eagleford, Barnett and Bakken and more recently the Permian. So not sure what conspiracy you think you have uncovered here.

peakoilwhen wrote:Or are you hoping everyone here is so dumb they have no memory of the past including your estimates?

2 years ago peakoilwhen wrote:i think peak oil will happen when supply is around 100 mb/d.

So peak is now?
How much higher before we can expect your excuse?

Darian S wrote:

Outcast_Searcher wrote:

Darian S wrote:

Four in 10 Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense, Fed finds-theguardian

A high percentage of Americans have been terrible savers and lived paycheck to paycheck since good statistics have been kept. Let's not pretend this is anything new.

IT is something new, when a single bachelor grad could have a stay at home wife, 6-8 kids well provided for, and life comfortably a few decades back. That's quite impossible now even with a couple of Ph.d grads both working.

A). Complete nonsense. Even 20-30 years ago, when professional peers of mine decided to do the "stay at home wife and one worker" thing, they had to make SIGNIFICANT trade-offs re how they lived. Even if they had 1 to 3 kids.

B). At what standard of living? Back at the time you're talking about, people of modest to moderate means were FINE living in much smaller houses, having one car without a huge pile of amenities, not eating our frequently, not taking fancy vacations frequently, etc. etc. etc.

Just because now people shriek "poverty" if they can't have everything they want or everything their neighbor has, regardless of differences in age, education, behavior, self-discipline, etc., it doesn't mean poverty rules the land. Whining ruling the land -- that's another thing, as you wild assertions without ANY back up data show.

Pops wrote:

peakoilwhen wrote:Or are you hoping everyone here is so dumb they have no memory of the past including your estimates?

2 years ago peakoilwhen wrote:i think peak oil will happen when supply is around 100 mb/d.

So peak is now?
How much higher before we can expect your excuse?

Its already been given implicitly, but here it is explicitly :
With that 100mb/d number I was pretending to be a noob peaker to distance myself from my normal forum character and disarm suspicion that this is my 3rd sock account and avoid being banned again. That should have been obvious from my subsequent posts where I asserted oil is abiogenic and more is created within the Earth than we can possibly consume and our extraction will never geologically peak, but you were asleep so didn't pick up on this, you dozy-ass low iq moderator of a shit forum.

peakoilwhen wrote:Its already been given implicitly, but here it is explicitly :
With that 100mb/d number I was pretending to be a noob peaker to distance myself from my normal forum character and disarm suspicion that this is my 3rd sock account and avoid being banned again. That should have been obvious from my subsequent posts where I asserted oil is abiogenic and more is created within the Earth than we can possibly consume and our extraction will never geologically peak, but you were asleep so didn't pick up on this, you dozy-ass low iq moderator of a shit forum.

With respect, there are so many crazies posting here, re ignoring sanity for economic or oil issues, it can be hard to tell when people are being sarcastic unless you make it clear, at least at times. Do you REALLY think everyone reading here can consistently get into your head on every post? NOT realistic.

Somehow, I don't think that acting like a jerk toward the mods will stand you in any better state re getting banned again at some point than, say, Elon Musk acting like a COMPLETE jerk towards the SEC, and the laws regarding CEO's and corporate information disclosure.

In other words, even if you're exasperated, there are productive and non-productive ways to respond. Guess which ones are more likely to end up resulting in banning?

if i can post this, i don't understand why i haven't been banned. Pops is usually easy to goad into banning, is he playing hard to get?

Guess which ones are more likely to end up resulting in banning?

We don't have to guess, we can experiment with both ways.

Oil is abiotic. That's why rocky will never get his peak oil estimates correct. And his excuse is lame. " Oh my estimates were based on conventional supplies, I really didn't see the unconventional supply factor, how could I possibly ever have imagined unconventional being a factor? "
Why does it sound so lame?
Because it the same excuse we've all heard for the last 60 years. "Peak oil is about to happen! - oh, wait, unconventional supply has filled the demand, didn't that coming, and it doesn't count either ".

Yes, for all his degrees, expertise and all the other trophies he's got in his cabinate, he might as well be the average braindead doomer : because the only line he'll ever need to excuse all his wrong estimates is the same one they use.
Yet somehow he fools himself that he's got higher credibility than them. Nope. At least braindead doomers can be forgiven because they are too dumb to realise how lame the old peaker's excuse is.

man this is no way to live, go out and get some air, look at the sky

Pops wrote:man this is no way to live, go out and get some air, look at the sky

ok. And if this 'no ban' is a pardon, thanks I will try to be nice and bury the hatchett. How about restoring my original account? Can it be done?

meemoe_uk

man I don't do that anymore, too much of people like peakoilwhen
it's no way to live LOL
you'll have to toss some ad homs at Newf or Tanada and see where that gets you