[Whitecrab]

Based on what I've been reading, the last possible areas of REAL growth are:

1) Half of Iraq's not been looked over, so there's plenty of potential there.
2) Deep-sea drilling (with great great cost).
3) Maybe maybe Saudi Arabia?
4) Expansion of Alberta Tar sands, and perhaps they could finally get shale oil going.

Can anyone expand on these points (with data, perhaps) or provide more growth areas I've missed?

I don't think these will save us from the peak, no, but it helps you look savvy when you can respond to someone's "we'll find more oil though!" protests by saying exactly what's left untested. And of those, which routes will definately cost a lot more, and which are politically unstable.

[pip]

Why has half of Iraq not been looked over? That's hard to believe.

[Doctor Doom]

You forgot Venezuela's very large endowment of heavy crude, much of which can be economically extracted even today (and that's also energy ROI positive).

As for Iraq and the ME generally not being as well explored, that is true, and the reason is that for decades they have had way more production capacity than world demand, and the cheapest production costs in the world, so there has been no incentive to look for any more oil.

Finally, there is the possibility of squeezing more out of existing fields. We are getting 30-45% of the oil out of current finds, the rest just stays in the ground because we don't have the technology to recover it quickly enough. There are people testing things like seeding fields with bacteria that will break down heavier oils and allow them to flow more freely, possibly boosting recovery by another 5-10%

The best argument against "we'll find more" is that the consequences of being wrong are too serious to just "gamble". Ask them, would they fly across an ocean on an airplane that had a broken fuel gauge where the pilot bangs on the wing tanks and says it "sounds like there's probably emough fuel" to make it to the destination?

[Aaron]

My geologist seismic buddy tells me the sweet-spots in SA are swiss cheese. They have drilled them like crazy.

It's the less attractive sites that have had little attention, largely because experts feel that chances of significant finds in these unexplored regions are low.

I understand that Iraq was just poorly managed and we may find some undiscovered fields there.

[Whitecrab]

You forgot Venezuela's very large endowment of heavy crude, much of which can be economically extracted even today (and that's also energy ROI positive).

Oh yeah, thanks.

Finally, there is the possibility of squeezing more out of existing fields. We are getting 30-45% of the oil out of current finds, the rest just stays in the ground because we don't have the technology to recover it quickly enough. There are people testing things like seeding fields with bacteria that will break down heavier oils and allow them to flow more freely, possibly boosting recovery by another 5-10%

Funny, my uncle who's an oil engineer said "currently the average recovery is 20-30% of the original oil in place (OOIP)... " that that cash and technology could increase that a lot. Do you have a source for those numbers, by chance? (Just so I can make a pitch to him).

The best argument against "we'll find more" is that the consequences of being wrong are too serious to just "gamble". Ask them, would they fly across an ocean on an airplane that had a broken fuel gauge where the pilot bangs on the wing tanks and says it "sounds like there's probably emough fuel" to make it to the destination?

Alternate: Due to exponential growth, even if oil doubled past our experts best guesses, it'd still be only 25 (or less) years off. And things like the automobile took 10 years to get introduced, so if we want to wean off, we still need to get cracking. NOW.

[hymalaia]

Thinking maybe we should throw Alaska into this. Does anyone have any idea what's lurking underneath the arctic wildlife refuge?

Of course there is the question of weather or not we have moral authority to drill there. But that seems like a topic for another thread..

[Chicagoan]

What about Antarctica? I know there is a treaty, but if people become desporate enough? Did it ever have the potential for oil formation in the geological past?

[gg3]

I think it's fair to include Alaska and other ecologically sensitive areas in the mix. All-factors-in, the costs of minimizing the ecological impacts of extraction are known and predictable. The risk issues of Middle Eastern extraction involve potentially very high costs that could escalate in a nonlinear manner.

Good analogy about flying across the ocean in a plane with a broken fuel gauge.

[Ender]

1) Half of Iraq's not been looked over, so there's plenty of potential there.
2) Deep-sea drilling (with great great cost).
3) Maybe maybe Saudi Arabia?
4) Expansion of Alberta Tar sands, and perhaps they could finally get shale oil going.

1. I wouldn't say plenty of potential. Remember, the giant fields, particularly onshore, are always found first, so we are not going to find another Ghawar lurking under Iraq. Finds there will be small and will not offset the decline elsewhere given that they will take time to develop. Of course Iraq has some known but undeveloped fields. It will take time to develop them, and I'd question whether that can be done in time.

2) There's not that much deep sea drilling to be done: again, the areas of significant potential have already been identified. And as you say it's expensive and slow going.

3) Doubt it. They keep their cards close to their chest, but they're pretty much producing full speed now. Ghawar is aging, maybe dying, and any new development they can do will just make up the depletion they're facing elsewhere.

4) No way. North America is in deep s*** with regard to its gas reserves, and they can't afford to keep burning all that gas to extract that oil. They'll have to build a nuclear reactor to provide the necessary heat and energy, and that will take some time.

There *might* be some oil to be had in the polar regions, but it's not likely to be a lot.

[JLK]

1. Arctic offshore
2. Central Siberia
3. South China Sea

[lowem]

Not to forget that a discovery of 100 billion barrels will move the peak by maybe a year. That's umm, maybe 2 Ghawar's?

[RIPSmithianEconomics]

Not to forget that a discovery of 100 billion barrels will move the peak by maybe a year. That's umm, maybe 2 Ghawar's?

Let's say hypothetically that at our current rate we are going to peak in 2008. By according to you (I have no idea how credible your research is, but from what I know it sounds about right), to reach the oil companies' claim of a peak in 2035 we would have to find 34 Ghawar's worth of oil!

[smiley]

Ehmm.... Mars?

No seriously over 90% of Saudi Arabia's oil was discovered before 1950. That was well before the 3d seismic. The same applies to Iraq.

If you look at the following maps of the region you can see why. All the oilfields in the region are part of one geological superstructure. Thats why all the oilfields in Iran run in the same parallel direction. They are not that hard to find.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_e ... elds78.jpg

http://web.inetba.com/gregcroftinc/imag ... map_sm.jpg

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/Asse ... s_1992.jpg

If you look at the oil field distribution the chance of finding a very large oilfield outside the explored region is very slim.

It also shows that expat some smaller fields all the Iraqi oilfield are currently in production.

Iraq still has a large production potential, but it's never going to be a second Saudi Arabia. It is never going to produce 10 mbd, not even half of that.

[JackBob]

Based on what I've been reading, the last possible areas of REAL growth are:...
Can anyone expand on these points (with data, perhaps) or provide more growth areas I've missed?

A company called Cairn Energy has just made a very large strike in India and feels there is more there as well. It was reported in last Sunday's Times of London. Will try to add a link later.

JackBob

[JackBob]

Based on what I've been reading, the last possible areas of REAL growth are:...
Can anyone expand on these points (with data, perhaps) or provide more growth areas I've missed?

A company called Cairn Energy has just made a very large strike in India and feels there is more there as well. It was reported in last Sunday's Times of London. Will try to add a link later.

JackBob

Ah yes Sunday Times Business Section page 6 for September 5: Cairn Energy has found 1 billion barrel field in Rajasthan - Shell had owned the field but sold it to them thinking nothing was there. Even the geological oil experts are sometimes wrong. They are also having some luck in Nepal.

And for all you folks who love the conspiracy theories, the CEO Bill Gammell was a childhood friend of - gasp! - President George W Bush and Tony Blair.

JackBob

[Keith_McClary]

Based on what I've been reading, the last possible areas of REAL growth are:...
Can anyone expand on these points (with data, perhaps) or provide more growth areas I've missed?

A company called Cairn Energy has just made a very large strike in India and feels there is more there as well. It was reported in last Sunday's Times of London. Will try to add a link later.

JackBob

Ah yes Sunday Times Business Section page 6 for September 5: Cairn Energy has found 1 billion barrel field in Rajasthan - Shell had owned the field but sold it to them thinking nothing was there. Even the geological oil experts are sometimes wrong. They are also having some luck in Nepal.

And for all you folks who love the conspiracy theories, the CEO Bill Gammell was a childhood friend of - gasp! - President George W Bush and Tony Blair.

JackBob

Here:
UK firm Cairn discovers vast oil reserves in India
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.as ... ueID=27172

they're saying "between 100 and 320 million barrels".

That's 30 hours to 4 days of world consumption.

[pea-jay]

What about Antarctica? I know there is a treaty, but if people become desporate enough? Did it ever have the potential for oil formation in the geological past?

Not too promising. From what I remember, Antarctica was out of geological position to accumulate much of the biomass that the other continents saw 100 million odd years ago. Without that source oil creation would be limited. Then add to that the ice cap that is nearly 2 miles thick in places, extreme cold temps and utter isolation, any potential find would face huge economic obstacles. Forget for a moment any potential operation would consume more energy than it would yield.

[Such]

my understanding is that there is some new fields in Khazakstan and central/east Siberia, central Asia, some in Mexico's portion of the Gulf of Mexico, Greenland has been mentioned, little bits in Africa here and there, as well as some areas of the Antartic shelf... (probably very expensive, and useful only to anage the post-peak world)

I doubt that there are any Ghawir fields left.