Peak Oil News and Message Boards

Oily? Auntie? Where are you when we need you?!

-G

What's the margin of error for yearly oil production? 1%? 2%?

I don't think there's a statistically signficant difference between 73,728 and 73,709. The gap is only 19,000 barrels a day out of 73 million or .03%.

Moreover, we're in the middle of a major recession which has slashed global oil demand. We can't know for sure what the real production rate would be if not for the current recession.



We had a pretty big dip in oil production in the 1980s (nearly 15% drop!) that didn't result in a permanent decline.

We need more data to confirm a peak. Come talk to me in 2011-2012.

I don't mean to rain on this parade, I just don't want us to make the call too early and sound like Colin Campbell.

2008 had oil at $147 and had every producer selling all they could produce. The result was and is that even with the price sky high and all economic theory on their side, the result was less than 2005.
Maybe you should become a preacher where beliefs trump facts.

Cyrus wrote:Oilfinder2 care to step in and try to debate this?

The IEA says last year was the record, and the EIA says it was 2005.

*shrugs*

Call it a tie.

dukey wrote:pretty big news.

This from the weekly petroleum status report was also fairly big news ..

Over the last four weeks, motor gasoline demand has averaged about
9.2 million barrels per day, up by 0.5 percent from the same period last year.

especially considering the fact we are in a huge recession right now

That was last week's report. This week the rise was 0%. Or perhaps you haven't paid attention to this thread.

pstarr wrote:Ah. There you are. The point here I believe is that oil demand is somewhat inelastic and that in time of economic decline neither the market, nor conservation, nor efficiencies, nor replacements can stem the flow from declining reservoirs.

It's almost as if we are floating in a vast toilet of petroleum with our own hands on the flusher handle. Do we yank? Or do we just enjoy the float?

It looks like you didn't click on the link. As usual.

OilFinder2 wrote:Source

Gasoline product supplied
First week of August 2006 = 9,620 thousand bpd
First week of August 2007 = 9,659 thousand bpd
First week of August 2008 = 9,410 thousand bpd
First week of August 2009 = 9,144 thousand bpd

That's almost a 5% decrease in 4 years.

Some more information you've consistently ignored who-knows-how-many-times in the past couple years:




Source

gnm wrote:Oily? Auntie? Where are you when we need you?!

-G

I'm being lumped with WHO??? This is the worst news I've gotten all year. *sniff* (maybe you meant Anti-Doomer?)

Hey, all we can really say is that 2005 is the date so far, and that as time passes it gets less and less likely that it will be surpassed. I mean, if TPTB threw everything they had left into one final year of "suck it all up RIGHT NOW", then that year might end up as Peak, numerically. Not very likely though.

I think the precise year of Peak is only significant because our human(oid) brains like to draw clean crisp lines and say "YOU ARE HERE." But reality is that from the perspective of the broader moment in time, it's NOW -- regardless of whether that means 2005 or 2010. Even if something came along that pushed the peak back by a decade or more (oh, ya know, something like a severe economic downturn, or an unsustainable-but-temporarily-profitable tar/shale extraction method), it still wouldn't change the essence of the situation.

And the more we try to stave it off by fussing over symptoms, the harder we'll fall. So -- bring it on!

OMG OF2, you figured out how to host images finally.

Still picking those cherries though.

Oil consumption percentage changes year to year, by region:



The decline in gasoline demand in the US is partially due to the introduction of ethanol, amounting to something like 1.2 mb/d now; plus good old garden variety demand destruction, due to the price runup and the recessiodepression, which may or may not last forever or have ended last week according to Krugman who really cares.

What was your other data point...YOY, oh right. So since the economy will grow once more now, consumption will increase, and we will be right back where we started from. Or not. "Increaseless Recovery," damn, I'm on a roll.

TheDude wrote:What was your other data point...YOY, oh right. So since the economy will grow once more now, consumption will increase, and we will be right back where we started from. Or not. "Increaseless Recovery," damn, I'm on a roll.

PRICELESS!

Here ya go TheDude, not just one, but THREE "increaseless recoveries!"

France



Source

Italy



Source

Japan


>>> Big chart of Japanese GDP growth Q12001-Q12008 <<<
Source

Auntie_Cipation wrote:

gnm wrote:Oily? Auntie? Where are you when we need you?!

-G

I'm being lumped with WHO??? This is the worst news I've gotten all year. *sniff* (maybe you meant Anti-Doomer?)

Sorry to confuse things Auntie_Cip, But you are right - I was referring to Auntie-Doomer....

-G

Oh, and I don't think it really matters whether it was 2005 or 2008 or if it will be 2010 - If you have read the Hirsch report you would know that anything less than 5 years of radical preparation (as a nation) is going to create some serious pain. So even if its 2015 we better bust ass....

gnm wrote: So even if its 2015 we better hurry ....

Yes, very true. But it's going to be 2005, and all we've done since then is start energy wars, convert food crops into gasoline, and talk excitedly about $40,000 to $100,000 electric cars.

In other words, we're collectively barking up the wrong trees.

Must have been quite a chore to find GDP charts that terminate right as the recession started. Japan's number of vehicle registrations decreased by 2.6%
1997-2007; all three of your examples have extensive MT networks.

Transport in France relies on one of the densest and most efficient networks in the world with 146 km of road and 6.2 km of rail lines per 100 km2. It is built as a web with Paris at its centre.[1] France is currently one of the world leaders in railway technology and is also in the forefront of modern tramway developments.

If anything those downturns on Rembrandt's graphs are indicative of the recession kicking in, instead of proving some point about these countries being independent of the need to consume oil.

TheDude, you don't even know what cherry-picking is.

Notice that my charts of oil consumption in Italy, France and Japan began in 2004 and go to the present.

Notice also that my charts of GDP growth in Italy, France and Japan roughly cover the same periods (I couldn't find charts exactly matching the same time periods, but they're close-enough).

In France in 2004-2006, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP was growing.

In Italy from 2004-2007, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP grew during most quarters.

In Japan from 2004-2007, while oil consumption was declining, their GDP grew during most quarters.

Even after the current recession, the economies of all 3 nations is larger than it was in 2004. I can dig up the actual numbers for you if you'd like. In other words:

GDP of all 3 nations > now than in 2004
Oil consumption of all 3 nations < now than in 2004.

Increasing oil consumption is not a prerequisite for economic growth. Really!

OilFinder2 wrote:Increasing oil consumption is not a prerequisite for economic growth. Really!

I'll try one more time: The nations you selected as your examples have vast investments in mass transit, thus have buttressed themselves against increases in the price of crude oil by not having such a great dependency on fossil fuel powered personal transport, which is not the case with other countries who collectively account for more of the gross world economy, hence my graph of change in oil consumption divided by region, which shows that increase in demand proceeds apace, regardless of changes in individual countries.

Hope - and seriously doubt - that helped.

Cherry picking is the act of pointing at individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.

TheDude wrote:I'll try one more time: The nations you selected as your examples have vast investments in mass transit, thus have buttressed themselves against increases in the price of crude oil by not having such a great dependency on fossil fuel powered personal transport . . .

Actually, it would be more accurate to say that the countries I listed are crowded (or in the case of France, reasonably crowded) nations with mature economies. Their transit investments are more a function of their crowded conditions and their relative wealth than a deliberate attempt to wean themselves off of oil.

With population growth making more and more nations increasingly crowded, and with more and more nations seeing economic growth, over time you will get more and more nations whose economies mature amid their crowdedness, and when that happens oil consumption will grow less and less - and at some point begin to decline. And yet, the economies of these nations will still grow.

TheDude wrote: hence my graph of change in oil consumption divided by region, which shows that increase in demand proceeds apace, regardless of changes in individual countries.

This is the bottom line. The only number which matters is overall global demand.

Very interesting news Newman...but I'm still going to say we are in a plateau and won't know the true peak for a few years. I am very interested what will happen when thw world economy really revs up again. Already we are seeing signs of this with a huge increase in oil price.

My guess is that within a year or two, we will see astronomical oil prices again (150-200$/barrel)- again leading to severe economic contraction.

My belief is that we can no longer see sustained growth and cheap or even moderate oil prices ever again.