[EnergySpin]

Wikipedia's article on peak oil has them all, in a convenient graph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tren ... s41211.png
In the accompanying article there is a link to someone out there who claims that he can recover 95% of all oil from an oil field but he is afraid they will still his industrial process.
Hope he is just a trickster ... cause this is bad news for planet Earth

[EnergySpin]

More graphs from Trendlines: http://www.trendlines.ca/economic.htm

[OilsNotWell]

Great posts. Thanks.

[venky]

More graphs from Trendlines: http://www.trendlines.ca/economic.htm

Yes, Fred Hutter. Essentially a Peak Oil sceptic, used to post a lot on the energy resources yahoo group last year.

Good article though. Although I am still a believer that the peak will occur in the relatively near future, I am getting rather sceptical of Colin Campbell's constant revisions and peak by the end of this decade.

[EnergySpin]

More graphs from Trendlines: http://www.trendlines.ca/economic.htm

Yes, Fred Hutter. Essentially a Peak Oil sceptic, used to post a lot on the energy resources yahoo group last year.

Good article though. Although I am still a believer that the peak will occur in the relatively near future, I am getting rather sceptical of Colin Campbell's constant revisions and peak by the end of this decade.

I do not think that Hutter is a sceptic ... he seems to think that PO might happen in the next decade but dismisses CC's methodology as hocus pokus. The more I read about his (non-)existent methodology and Lahererrere's almost superstitious/metaphysical treatment of mathematics the less I'm inclined to believe them.
Food for thought (a tiny example in probability). Even with CC's horrible record for predicting peak oil, do you think that his previous (wrong) prediction makes it more or less likely for his next prediction to be true?
Think about it carefully ... the result can be surprising .

[MacG]

Irrelevant chaff! Peak in 2005? In 2040? Big deal? I simply don't understand this obsession with the exact year or even date. Coal, oil and NG is of fossile origin and WILL go in decline some year, much as we all will die one day. The problem I see is denial, both concerning the coming decline of fossile energy and concerning our own deaths from high age.

Everything could be so much easier if more people could accept these simple facts.

[Taskforce_Unity]

In all my communications with Hutter (Gee my prediction is in his graph... ) i see him as an objective person concerned with peak oil trying to bring the modellers together to come to the most reasonable estimate for the peak oil date.

As such, his work is very valuable.

[EnergySpin]

Irrelevant chaff! Peak in 2005? In 2040? Big deal? I simply don't understand this obsession with the exact year or even date. Coal, oil and NG is of fossile origin and WILL go in decline some year, much as we all will die one day. The problem I see is denial, both concerning the coming decline of fossile energy and concerning our own deaths from high age.

Everything could be so much easier if more people could accept these simple facts.

Yes MacG ... this is the problem. That's why they are called non-renewable And from my high horse , even if the peak were to happen in 2140 It would not make a difference. Climate change is the big bad wolf ... even the idea that we are still left a little bit more than we have already burned gives me the (bird) flu

[sticky_rocks]

Irrelevant chaff! Peak in 2005? In 2040? Big deal? I simply don't understand this obsession with the exact year or even date. Coal, oil and NG is of fossile origin and WILL go in decline some year, much as we all will die one day. The problem I see is denial, both concerning the coming decline of fossile energy and concerning our own deaths from high age.

Everything could be so much easier if more people could accept these simple facts.

Yes MacG ... this is the problem. That's why they are called non-renewable :roll: And from my high horse , even if the peak were to happen in 2140 It would not make a difference. Climate change is the big bad wolf ... even the idea that we are still left a little bit more than we have already burned gives me the (bird) flu :twisted:

Actually, i quite agree that a civilization bent on consumption and prolonging life is actually the root of the problem. We have lost sight of what it is we are striving for; do you want to live forever and surround your life with greed? If so, the natural system around us will respond correspondingly regardless of whether we turn climate change around, or tame bird flu.
So from your vantage point high upon your horse you will see the horizon coming towards you, but is it the future that is going to kill US, or the fall?