Peak Oil News and Message Boards

Revi wrote:It seems like the cost of extracting liquid fuel from anything other than petroleum is too high to create anything like the $2-3 gas we're used to getting.

I think this is key. It isn't so much that there are no alternatives, it's that there are no replacements.

Economists divide the economy into sectors; primary, secondary and so on. The primary sector is that which extracts basic raw materials, and there is none more basic than fossil energy. Oil is the master resource, conventional was basically too cheap to meter. One can tiptoe around the fact but it remains.

Scavenging the waste stream of fossil fueled agriculture as in TDP, methane digestion, etc is part of the secondary industrial sector—and if there is a "secondary" secondary, recycling would be that. As are all such processes to create synthetic liquid fuel, they rely on a cheap energy primary stream and the built infrastructure of waste enabled by decades of that same cheap fossil fuel.

That we have a waste stream at all is due to fossils. You can't lose step one and expect step three to continue apace.

Even the non-conventional, energy intensive sources of fossil fuel that are highly mechanized don't really belong in a primary category, CTL, tar-sand flushing, SAGD, and LTO are more akin to manufacturing. I don't know what the dividing line is, it's the old question of drawing EROEI boundaries I suppose. But at some point their need for vast quantities of actual raw materials; water, sand, steel, diesel, disposal space, etc will likely reveal their dependence on cheap primary energy.

The only real solution is to reduce use to the point we can meet our need with dispersed sources.

That is an infinity of life change in one sentence. My horizon is maybe 20 years plus or minus and I don't really have a clue as to how much of that change I might see. The next year or two will give me some insight as to whether I need to hunker down again. The EIA is forecasting evermore production, right up 'till the arrival of the Jetsons makes fossils obsolete.

.

Pops wrote: The EIA is forecasting evermore production, right up 'till the arrival of the Jetsons makes fossils obsolete.
.

And considering they are the only folks who's peak oil estimate hasn't been discredited by reality, you figure the old retreads might have gotten a clue in the meantime? Heinberg, Savinar, the eggheads from TOD that ended up on the Peak Oil Barrel, still polishing their data, hoping that the battery on the clock will run out right when the hand points to their 17th claim of peak oil?

For the record, I'm not a Jetsons future fan. But years ago, someone on this website pointed out that ever since humanity began sending off its robot explorers and miners off to begin searching other worlds, it might behoove us all not to forget that expansion of humanities influence was once predicated on brave new worlds, even without the "new world" part...but only an extra continent or two.

Im fully aware that Fracking tech and procedures are not new. My older brother did a paper on it back in the 80's, he is an Earth Science's major. Digging into crude I got my recent data mostly from the EIA and Platts. Im tired of providing links for things most anyone here can find for themselves.

AirlinePilot wrote:Im fully aware that Fracking tech and procedures are not new. My older brother did a paper on it back in the 80's, he is an Earth Science's major. Digging into crude I got my recent data mostly from the EIA and Platts. Im tired of providing links for things most anyone here can find for themselves.

So you were well informed enough to not fall for any of the Happy McPeakster drivel earlier in the century as well? Good for you! From an earth science major no less! Do you think the suckers who did just needed talented older brothers to avoid their Harold Camping moments throughout the past couple decades, or was it just too difficult for them to navigate the basics of logical thought and a splash of critical thinking to figure out something so obvious?

Ive never been in the real Doomer camp. Im a realist. I can acknowledge also when I am wrong. I saw the fracking thing as a more short term solution based on high oil prices. I was wrong in not placing as much credibility on where that has led us in the last 8 or so years, but it too will have its day. I think that story will be mostly over sooner than later. It has bought us time, but so has a global pandemic and a very large recession so it remains to be seen how the near term future plays out. Im betting on higher oil prices and doing fairly well I was never under any strong belief we had or have reached peak...yet. Maybe when I first began paying attention back in the early 2000's, but not since the last 8-10 years have I entertained any realistic collapse scenario. Fracking and application of good technologies buoyed by price signals is exactly where a lot of us more realistic PO followers/students understood we would be as we approach and move past any "peak".

AirlinePilot wrote: I was never under any strong belief we had or have reached peak...yet. Maybe when I first began paying attention back in the early 2000's, but not since the last 8-10 years have I entertained any realistic collapse scenario.

That's about the time frame when all the doomer and ASPO sites began collapsing. ASPO once had a lobbying office in Washington, in 2011 they stood on the steps of the Forrestal biulding and proclaimed no significant oil from the shales in the US. Needless to say, the "egg on face" problem took them out in about the time frame you mentioned. LATOC vanished, Ruppert self selected to not be around any more to make fun of, Savinar became a substitute teacher because Amazon sales of solar ovens and his palm reading business didn't work out so well, TOD imploded when their contributors and editors started getting called out in front of the national professional organizations with pointed "egg on face" comments from the professionals. So your timeframe coincides with when most of the "once thought to credible before becoming a punchline to resource economic jokes" folks bailed.

AirlinePilot wrote: Fracking and application of good technologies buoyed by price signals is exactly where a lot of us more realistic PO followers/students understood we would be as we approach and move past any "peak".

Name another realistic PO follower who mentioned this, at the time. Because those of us who knew better back and dared to say so were being banned to keep the echo chamber pure, and even wafflers, as you sound like you are describing yourself back then, weren't generally appreciated either.

Here in the US we haven't noticed what's going on. We just keep driving around. I am guilty of it myself. Today I am driving 15 miles south, 25 miles north and then 10 miles back today. Got stuff to do. I know it won't be possible in not too long. I try to live one day at a time nowadays.

Revi wrote:Here in the US we haven't noticed what's going on. We just keep driving around. I am guilty of it myself. Today I am driving 15 miles south, 25 miles north and then 10 miles back today. Got stuff to do. I know it won't be possible in not too long. I try to live one day at a time nowadays.

Your statement seems completely reasonable. And has nothing to do with a chart describing claimed peak oils that isn't correct. If supply and demand are basically in a state of balance, peak oil is irrelevant, past, present or future.

I do the same kind of driving around you do, just yesterday. No liquid fuels were harmed while doing so. You, as such an early EV adopter that you like had to build your own before Elon did, why does it matter if you were driving around? You are EVing, right? You and TheToeCutter are like the OGs of EVs around here. I'm a johnny come lately, but even I know that right now, I don't even know what the price of gasoline is as of late. Leave obsolescence behind and stride bravely into the new world that guys like you were advocating before anyone else knew what a good idea it was.

Revi wrote:Here in the US...

Your map is outdated by several years as most everyone knows, latest peak was just before the pandemic and it was due to soft price. IOW, There isn't anything to notice yet.

But I can relate to that out of body sort of feeling, I get it sometimes on the rare occasions when I'm in the thick of suburbia or out on the interstate. Even in my little rural town sometimes. Here the average age is about 7-8 years older than the norm, there is very little industry, most retail is chain stores like walmart, workers either commute in or commute out, average commute is 20 min and a large number drive 60+ min. Unleaded is about $3.50, jack up double or triple or more and it would put the hurt on lots of folks. Rationing would be worse because there are few local jobs or shops.

Hmm, looking at city data just now, the population here increases by over a thousand during work hours, that's about 25% of the bedtime population. Pretty surprising, not sure where they all work or if their jobs would be here in a peak depression but better than I thought.

The world peak was in November 2018. Demand was down in 2019 and 2020, and now it's roaring back. How's it going to work?

Revi wrote:The world peak was in November 2018.

It is indeed the current peak. Would you like to speculate on whether or not it is the last, rather than just the 6th one that has happened or been claimed this century?

Revi wrote: Demand was down in 2019 and 2020, and now it's roaring back. How's it going to work?

The same way the first 5 this century went down? You hang in there Revi, there is always a chance that THE peak demand/supply will arrive before you or I pass from this world. The problem is we'll have to wait a chunk of time AFTER we're gone to know for sure.

Revi wrote:The world peak was in November 2018. Demand was down in 2019 and 2020, and now it's roaring back. How's it going to work?

From what I've read both the EIA and IEA still expect energy demand and production to grow 50% by 2050. At which time oil will still be on top.




By end next year production will return to the pre-pandemic level, and price will be between $40 & $140



OPEC apparently can't pump to quota, dunno why, but the much vaunted "spare capacity" could be of hot air.

There are a bunch of good charts by OVI at POB regarding the "recovery" in LTO production in the US. The numbers are all over the place.

I think one big part of the story is the LTO DUCs. Producers are completing (fracking) shale wells previously drilled at a fast pace, even while not drilling that many new ones. Apparently they are trying to look profitable for investors by drawing down the DUCs and not"wasting" money drilling replacements. Just another scam. They'll be through them before long and will need to start drilling again... if there are any good locations left.





That is what I think is coming in general, institutions and public funds rejecting fossil investments out of either real commitment to fight GW or the PR value of pretending, along with gov good intentions will impact production in a few years. Sooner of course in LTO where wells come and go in a year. OTOH, the longevity of the investment discipline may not be much when prices climb and easy money awaits. Meantime the lag in capital investment will get us in a bad place.


https://www.iea.org/reports/oil-2021
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/mark ... rce-us-eia

Here is DC's latest (linked from POB)



Dennis uses ERRs from various agencies and applies various cost/price assumptions to make a guess.

"Oil markets get another bullish jolt as Saudi Arabia cranks up crude prices for global exports"
https://www.rt.com/business/539536-saud ... -increase/

"Saudi Arabia’s state-run energy giant, Saudi Aramco, has increased the official selling price of the Kingdom’s crude to Asian and US buyers. Global oil prices reportedly saw a smaller weekly loss as a result.
In particular, Aramco increased pricing for its key Arab Light grade of crude for Asian customers in December to $2.70, up from $1.40. The world’s biggest oil producer set the Arab Light official selling price (OSP) to the United States at plus $1.75 per barrel over Argus Sour Crude Index, and to Northwestern Europe at a discount of 30 cents a barrel over ICE Brent."

Oil is around $80 per barrel right now. I think that is a very reasonable price. It would be nice if it stayed there for some time.

The current surge in prices has nothing to do with supply constraints. It is due to the insane money printing by the USA. The M2 money supply has jumped from 14 trillion dollars at the beginning of 2018 to 21 trillion dollars as of September 2021 with most of the surge starting early in 2020.

Dementia patient Biden wants oil producers to flood the market to lower the price. Why should they oblige? To lose money for Biden? Maybe Biden can throw up some more windmills and solar panel farms.

The oil market has been under supplied for over a year, look at the bottom of the chart, the red bars show how much under...

Pops wrote:The oil market has been under supplied for over a year, look at the bottom of the chart, the red bars show how much under...

Not undersupplied. Just storage at first, and then withdrawals. Exactly as the chart says. And as withdrawals continue, and storage decreases, the market does exactly what it is supposed to do...reflects it through price. Until supply does the same thing it did all those other times peak oil supposedly had arrived.

And folks in the US build up huge cash piles rather than getting immediately back into capital expenditures. Balance sheet and continuing capital discipline. Hoo-Rah

dissident wrote:The current surge in prices has nothing to do with supply constraints. It is due to the insane money printing by the USA. The M2 money supply has jumped from 14 trillion dollars at the beginning of 2018 to 21 trillion dollars as of September 2021 with most of the surge starting early in 2020.

Dementia patient Biden wants oil producers to flood the market to lower the price. Why should they oblige? To lose money for Biden? Maybe Biden can throw up some more windmills and solar panel farms.

The surge in M2 that you’re wringing your hands about happened under Trump. M2 was 19.4 trillion when Biden was inaugurated. But, hey, never let facts interfere with your opinion!

Dismayed wrote:

dissident wrote:The current surge in prices has nothing to do with supply constraints. It is due to the insane money printing by the USA. The M2 money supply has jumped from 14 trillion dollars at the beginning of 2018 to 21 trillion dollars as of September 2021 with most of the surge starting early in 2020.

Dementia patient Biden wants oil producers to flood the market to lower the price. Why should they oblige? To lose money for Biden? Maybe Biden can throw up some more windmills and solar panel farms.

The surge in M2 that you’re wringing your hands about happened under Trump. M2 was 19.4 trillion when Biden was inaugurated. But, hey, never let facts interfere with your opinion!

What are you going on about? The very text you quote states the expansion began in early 2020 when Trump was President.