[Twilight]

Don't count me as a LATOC subscriber just yet...

I agree that some will survive, but the point I am making is it will be according to local good fortune and not as a result of national initiative. Some communities will be well-positioned with the requisite cooperation, teamwork, motivation and resources, but most will not. Our foreknowledge will give us better odds of choosing wisely than the average case. But on aggregate, we are looking at collapse, and the prevailing thrust of human behaviour is likely to positively reinforce the process.

So there is every incentive to do something for yourself and your little group, but I wouldn't waste my energy trying to get the country to follow. Nor am I advocating duck & cover as the mythical nukes fall. Just realism about what is achievable.

[Twilight]

No great loss; people gullible enough to be led on by some guy on the internet are a cut below the hundreds of millions being led by some guys on the TV. Truth is it will be different everywhere and you have to gauge local risks and opportunities, not worry about the Tom Clancy stuff.

[Zardoz]

Yet another example of how BushCo knows precisely what is coming, and has all along:

2006 State Of The Union address

Breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach another great goal: to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. (Applause.) By applying the talent and technology of America, this country can dramatically improve our environment, move beyond a petroleum-based economy, and make our dependence on Middle Eastern oil a thing of the past. (Applause.)

Sure, sure. We'll do it with corn ethanol. Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Of course, their real strategy is to initiate wars of occupation against Export Land, but what else can we do, since, as we all know, the American way of life is non-negotiable?

[PeakingAroundtheCorner]

I showed some of the town planners End of Suburbia, and they watched it.

So, how did they react? What's up with that?

[TheDude]

For those who are curious: I banned this guy from the LATOC forum for posting links to illegal copies of Crude Awakening.

He spends a disturbing amount of time and energy obsessing over me now here at PO.com. He should know I'm heavily armed and prepared to defend myself should he get any wise ideas about taking his beef with me off the forum and into real life.

"Two men enter...one man leaves!"

"TWO MEN ENTER, ONE MAN LEAVES!"

I only brought up the extra-added Doomerosity in your forum to show that I would understand where you're coming from in the future. Didn't expect you to go all Charlton Heston on us. If you sincerely think we'll all be choking on fallout within a year you're not going to pull any punches anymore, eh?

I know it sounds a bit silly but I just watched the movie "The Postman" and it struck me that a generation after any worldwide collapse this is the sort of thing one could envision evolving from PO.

Or the kids in Beyond Thunderdome. Or Lord of the Flies. I was watching a flick about worldwide resistance to globalism, Argentinians breaking down doors in banks to get at their frozen assets, South Africans boobytrapping roads with spikes and burning tires. As is always the case anymore, I just kept thinking "Oil. Oil. There's some more oil. Look at the bright fabric in these shirts - oil. Nice face shields and body armor on these Mexican troops. More oil." It's like some global version of the frickin' Truman Show!

Postman, that took place in both book and movie in Oregon. Also these books by SM Stirling, Dies the Fire etc. Couldn't finish that one, too many visible puppet strings on his plot. Postman in the book has to deal with a lot of crazies in Southern Oregon, which is where Dennis From LATOC calls home. They considered forming their own state in the 1930s: Jefferson .. Fine, take your Madrone trees and your Shakespeare festival with ya! I'm with Twilight that you can't convince the populace at large about anything coming down the pike soon. With enough crashing countries likely will fracture along natural lines of geography or intact agriculture/commerce zones. Or simply break down into isolated city-states.
Maybe the first few big shocks will jar people out of their sleep, though. It'll be interesting to hear the official response. Probably something along the lines of We have Always Been at War with Russia.

[Revi]

Please quit the feuding and let's talk about the Export Land model. It seems like one of the clearest pictures we can imagine of what the future holds. I think if we start planning for what it says we may have a shot at making it through what's coming. I wonder if a place like Sweden is planning on that kind of a drop in available petroleum? Is there any place that's planning on making it through a drop of 2/3rds or more? 12 and a half years is right around the corner. It could get nasty. Time is running out. Peak oil is coming pretty quickly.

[Cyrus]

This is why I have absolutely no hope of a steady transition. The data is there, and instead of discussion the implications (which are absolutely insane even by "doomer" standards) we sit here and argue about personal issues. There is no hope for an easy transition, don't kid yourself.

[Zardoz]

Another take on this:

Prediction #1 (of 4) from Oil Geologist Jeffrey Brown: Producers’ Own Consumption Rising, Exports about to Plummet

Simply put, Brown says the world hasn’t been taking into account the rapidly rising consumption of oil in the very countries the world depends on to export large quantities of crude – places like Saudi Arabia and Russia. With oil consumption rising in these oil-producing states – and with production looking like it is declining – Brown says the amount of oil available for export globally is about to plummet, setting off what he calls a net export crisis that threatens the global economy and will lead to sweeping social and economic changes in the United States.

[Revi]

I'm seeing the implications around here.
A lot of people here in Maine have a car or truck that is about twice what they can afford (and need) and live in a house they can't afford to heat. They are becoming painfully aware now. Unfortunately this is still "vacationland" so there are all sorts of people who come up here in their SUV's and flaunt the fact that the rising price of everything bothers them not a bit. It's going to be hard for people to face reality. They should be getting around in a Ford focus, and not an F-350. Unfortunately they won't be switching until it's too late. Then they'll drive a pair of shoes.

[AirlinePilot]

We wont get the masses o do anything on a meaningful level until there is large scale shortage and economic pain. Thats the bottom line I think.

We all know that by then (which is probably very soon) it will be far too late. This Export land model just means sooner rather than later.

I think another good analogy of what can happen is the world presented in Cildren of Men.

[Twilight]

Over a week ago I mentioned this, but the thread sank.

Now I have time to elaborate. Here is what I was referring to.

Under the first of the new contracts announced today, GE will supply 20 Frame 9E gas turbines to Kharafi National of Kuwait for the Sabiya Power Station, which will add more than 2.5 gigawatts of power capacity for the State of Kuwait. The new power plant will be owned and operated by Kuwait’s Ministry of Electricity & Water.

This will be an emergency power, fast-track project with an aggressive delivery schedule. The gas turbines will be manufactured at GE’s facilities in Belfort, France, with shipments to the project site planned for October 2007 through June 2008. The commissioning phase for the new units is expected to begin in May 2008 and be completed in September 2008.

The Sabiya plant will operate in simple-cycle base load mode, initially using liquid fuel with plans to switch to natural gas when it becomes available in approximately three years.

I trust you understand the implications.

Subtract 70 kb/d from exports? I'm taking a wild guess (my rule of thumb for large diesel generators is the best I can do), but can anyone put a sane number to this from personal experience? One which is softer and gentler than -3% in Q4 2008 production extended into 2011 at the earliest?

That's a 25% capacity expansion in just one year, from just one supplier of several selling into the market right now (you can probably up that with another 5-10%). And that's reflected in the setup - jet engines fed from the refineries, blasting hot air into the desert with a thermal efficiency of 35%.

Why the panic?

Let's see what Reuters have been saying.

KUWAIT, July 10 (Reuters) - Kuwait on Tuesday stepped up a campaign of text messages to its inhabitants to conserve electricity, warning power generation was nearly at breakpoint.

"Only 4 percent electricity remains!!," Kuwait's Ministry of Water and Electricity told inhabitants in text messages in English and Arabic, advising people not to use some electrical appliances before evening.

Call centres have been calling offices and apartments in the past two weeks and urging them to turn down air conditioners.

"Do you know that you should switch off your A/C in unused rooms. Please do it," a woman told the Reuters office.

Now imagine ConEd or PG&E making the same demands. I'm talking mass texting an order with exclamation marks. Hmm? Not likely, is it?

By the way, in that same release above, seems Qatar wants an aluminium smelter, although it's going for the full NG-fired CCGT setup. In practicality, that's an improvement on Dubai's ambitions, but that's still gas not arriving at a port near you.

Isn't it strange how the markets can celebrate energy technology exports and double-digit growth in the sector, yet in another breath make demands for oil output increases? A double-edged sword not being priced in?

This sort of thing replicated across the ME Gulf is going to wipe out any increase OPEC could credibly pull off.

EDIT: Again, I would like to know, can someone make an educated estimate for the rate at which this specific OCGT gear is going to burn liquids, and maybe a boe/d or something so we have an idea of how this compares to crude volumes? I know the refinery balance in the ME Gulf produces kerosene / jet fuel for export, so I am assuming that gigawatts'-worth of guaranteed new demand showing up in 13 months is not going to be negligible.

[aflatoxin]

The Frame 9 machines are the big ones....Usually about 200-225 Mw each in simple cycle mode. The 2.5 GW total number seem way low, but based on 125 MW each.....

A conservative guestimate of fuel consumption would be something like 8500 btu/bhp-hr, so these ~167,000 horsepower engines will use somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.42 e+9 btu/hour. This translates to approx 10,000 gallons per hour per unit. times 20. So, running all 20 units balls out is going to use something like 200k gallons per hour, or a little less than 5k barrels an hour.

I've seen a lot of Frame 7 turbines(125-150 MW), and they burn, from memory, about 25 pounds of either NG or fuel oil a second. Given that these units are different, but the fuel usage is about the same per MW of output, I think the 5k per hour for the frame 9 units running at 125 MW is pretty close. If I was at work, I could look up the real values, I will if there is real interest. We have done a lot of performance tuning on GE turbines over the years, and I have access to a lot of information on them.

Just think, they can burn 120,000 barrels a day at this place. Wow.

When they go to NG, this place will burn something like 25 million CF a day per unit, or 500 Million CF a day total. Might actually be a lot more, though.

Simple cycle gas turbines are fuel pigs, usually ~30% efficient. Must really need the juice. Iraq maybe.

[Ayame]

You are right to be worried over this. The Export Land model is very troubling. I nearly dropped my lunch when I read a recent article about how if as many cars are sold in 2008 as this year in Venezuela that it will have no surplus fuel production for export and may even have to import. Not looking good.

[Twilight]

I think the 5k per hour for the frame 9 units running at 125 MW is pretty close. If I was at work, I could look up the real values, I will if there is real interest.

Just think, they can burn 120,000 barrels a day at this place. Wow.

Thanks, that's exactly the sort of information I was looking for. All the little snippets I have found online about the 9E point to it being a 125 MW unit (project examples vary 110-130 MW). Confirmation of power output and fuel consumption would be very useful.

Based on the above, my 70 kb/d was an underestimate and we could be talking 115 kb/d. I am very interested in knowing for sure.

Surreal.

[MD]

In the simplest terms, the "export land model" means that the rest of the world will no longer allow the United States to consume more that its share of energy inputs. This pressure will continue to build.

The other point this thread demonstrates so well is the need to watch capital flows. Watch the money and you'll see where we are headed.

I've made these points a few times over the years and the threads typically sink. It's nice to see activity in that direction. Thanks Twilight.

[Twilight]

I looked up the 9E gas turbine: page and brochure.

It is a 126.1 MW unit, so 2.5 GW from 20 units is correct.

Heat rate is given as 10100 Btu/kWh (10653 kJ/kWh). That is indeed 10,000 gallons per hour - aflatoxin was spot on. That is nearly 4,800 barrels/hour for all 20 units, which is 115 kb/d.

Kuwait's 2006 oil production rate was 2,535 kb/d according to US EIA IPM Table 4.2, but Table 1.2 shows a steady decline through the year, with the 2007 average 2,428 kb/d so far. An all liquids table shows 2006 production of 2,674 kb/d, demand of 524 kb/d and net exports of 2,150 kb/d. I will take that data as reliable, though it is only a snapshot and the ratio will not stay that way for long.

Note also that half of Kuwait's (significant) refinery output is kerosene and distillates. It is not going to import the fuel, it already produces it for export.

What this shows is that the Sabiya Power Station project, indeed an emergency addition of baseload (simple cycle no less!), will from Q4 2008 remove over 5% of Kuwait's exports in a step change, until 2011 at the earliest. Thereafter it may switch over to natural gas as planned, or the "temporary" compromise may become permanent, with an addition of steam turbines closing the cycle.

Given this earlier revelation, I believe this is a big deal. Not only because the duration of Kuwait's production plateau has already been greatly shortened (that's the bigger picture, if you will), but because it confirms that significant capacity additions to compensate for internal demand growth are out of the question.

I agree with MD, news of energy-intensive capital investment is coming in regularly from all over the world, and every project makes a contribution to local energy and other commodity demand growth. For example, a new plastics plant in Qatar or KSA removes the opportunity to supply a new plastics plant in the US or France, however lucrative the one-off sale of equipment. However, it is not every day that you get an example with an effect so easy to estimate and so quick and easy to verify.

This particular news snippet was not supposed to happen, internal demand growth projections would not have included it, and it dropped in everyone's lap a week and a half ago out of the blue. This project is in addition to existing demand growth in transport and manufacturing.

Therefore I would like to bring this to people's attention as an Export Land Effect case study validating the Export Land Model, and also as an interesting unexpected event which I believe will be felt. We at PeakOil.com may in fact be the first to put a number to it, and it will be worth revisiting this in 18 months to check whether it shows up in EIA data. I will be surprised if it does not.

[Zardoz]

Therefore I would like to bring this to people's attention as an Export Land Effect case study validating the Export Land Model, and also as an interesting unexpected event which I believe will be felt.

I second the motion. Great work, Twilight. This is a big deal, indeed, and is yet another piece of data indicating that we are in for some unpleasant surprises in the very near future.

[DantesPeak]

Thanks Twilight for the the summary.

Based on reports from the oil tracking service, Oil Movements, which is no Chicken Little as far as expecting OPEC production to fall, OPEC shipments over the last few months have fallen faster than production (see Oil Movements - OPEC Shipments Falling ).

In June, this was partially explained by the impact of Typhoon Gonu. However as we go from July to August, we hear some suspicious sounding second hand reports that OPEC is accumulating inventories instead of exporting. This doesn't sound correct to me for two reasons - 1. Prices are at all time highs, so why hold back now? 2. The Saudis are selling oil to the US at a $1 discount to Europe and at an even larger discount to Far East countries, but US imports are starting to fall.

I also posted in the Saudi production thread that new production and refinery capacity of 400,000 bpd coming on line about 2010/2011 will be used entirely for internal purposes.

These are troubling signs that we should soon stop paying less attention to OPEC production reports and pay more attention to actual OPEC exports.

[Starvid]

What is so very hot with the Export Land model anyway? I never understood that.

Okay, we all know that in the next couple of years supply of liquid fuels will either stay flat or increase or decrease a little. Right. We also know that, barring a global recession, demand will keep growing, especially in the developing world, which includes many oil exporting countries who are getting rich not only by the current great globalisation-fanned global growth, but are also supercharged by the high price of oil and who might also be subsidising domestic oil consumption. Hence the famous "alligator jaws" graph.

The result is as ever higher oil prices on the world market.
Did I miss anything?

Ps. Edited a little.

[Twilight]

...Hence the famous "alligator jaws" graph.

To summarise what follows, it is important because it gives us a context in which to discuss actual examples, an economic context which does not scare off most potential readers.

Yes, it is simple and elegant; oil exports will be crushed between a static production ceiling and rising domestic demand, so oil importing nations' imports will decline faster than the overall world oil production decline rate. That the only escape on offer is a global recession which destroys demand in exporting countries only underlines the severity of the implications. Also, a severe recession in exporting countries is not in the interests of international stability.

Yes, that is the basic idea.

Its importance is that it is one of those ideas which need to be understood before the observer understands peak oil, or maybe has a fair chance of learning about it initially.

At present, the treatment of peak oil in the media is unsatisfactory - that it is a "theory" (in the incorrect derogatory sense - they should consult a dictionary, any dictionary before they type it), and that this theory says that we will "run out of oil" or "production will fall" at some date and at some rate the theory's advocates can't even agree on, hence a range (2005-2040 where quoted, percentage decline rates never quoted) so wide it can be disregarded as akin to throwing darts at a chart. Whenever OPEC reserves are mentioned, the before/after numbers and dates of revision are never listed, certainly never tabulated. The heavy clustering of projected peak dates around the end of this decade is never shown. This is one reason why Kuwait's reserve restatement is a slow-burning local political story which did not lead to any follow-up questions about the rest of OPEC.

When the media finally does start to give statistics alongside mentions of peak oil, it will have a very hard time convincing anyone that a rate like 2% is important. And that will be the rate pushed by the industry, not the 5% that is actually more likely. Maybe that is where we will be next decade, pursuing a public education effort in compound interest.

The Export Land Model's strength is that it pushes the discussion into the economic realm. It is hard to get a business news reader excited about rock permeability, that will never grace the pages of the financial press, let alone the general press. But the consequences of certain capital expenditure on commodities markets? Now that is a different story. This particular one has a press release, a ticker, a country and a traded commodity. It has a life outside the peak oil debate. The same questions may well be asked about where new polymer plants are being built and what that's going to do with shipments, and so on.

This is why the Export Land Model is important, it is more than just a projection or a dry academic debate, it has the potential to furnish the peak oil debate with actual examples of wider interest. If the world does not accept peak oil, eventually it will still start to make the connection between what is being built out there, and what is arriving. As DantesPeak wrote above, for these and other reasons, what is actually being shipped will increasingly be given greater attention.