Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak oil debate

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby MD » Sun 30 Sep 2007, 07:03:01

The currency of flow gave us our "go".
It's ebbing away, soon all will know;

we must now dig to feed our pig,
soon to discover, it's too damn big!

What else to do, but make a stew!
A hungry pig will feed a huge crew!

So light the fire, a funeral pyre
The feast will be hosted by our new town squire!

When we are done, well have some more fun
More pigs next door, did you bring your gun?
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4951
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 02:00:00
Location: On the ball

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby NoFreeSpeech » Sun 30 Sep 2007, 17:40:41

chumley wrote:I enjoy persecutedgadflies posts. I would like to be exposed to information that is contrary to the theory of peak oil. I find his posts to be informative and well spoken. And he has the all important links to back his theory.

Forums are set up in order for people of differing views to argue their position.

From reading this thread it appears to me the ad hominem attacks are being carried out by the PO crowd.

Refute his argument if you can.

You are not a troll just because you argue against popularly held views on a discussion board and post reason's why.

Unfortunately the thought police don't agree with you.
User avatar
NoFreeSpeech
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun 30 Sep 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 30 Sep 2007, 18:27:22

Armageddon wrote:
A secretive gathering some of the world’s biggest oil companies has concluded the industry will discover far less oil than officially forecast, meaning global oil production may peak much sooner than many expect.


Global oil production peaked in late 2005. Thats why the price of oil has tripled since then and is continuing to rise to new highs. 8)
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22893
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby NoFreeSpeech » Sun 30 Sep 2007, 19:36:39

User avatar
NoFreeSpeech
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun 30 Sep 2007, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby Jack » Sun 30 Sep 2007, 20:13:36

NoFreeSpeech wrote:You probably recognize his face


If one is alert, there is much one can recognize.

Like a fly upon the wall - gad, there is so much to recognize. :lol:
Jack
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4929
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 02:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby OilIsMastery » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:08:54

MattSavinar wrote:40,000 oil fields across the world and not a single one shows any sign of refilling.

http://www.geotimes.org/june03/NN_gulf.html

Below the Gulf of Mexico, hydrocarbons flow upward through an intricate network of conduits and reservoirs. They start in thin layers of source rock and, from there, buoyantly rise to the surface. On their way up, the hydrocarbons collect in little rivulets, and create temporary pockets like rain filling a pond. Eventually most escape to the ocean. And, this is all happening now, not millions and millions of years ago, says Larry Cathles, a chemical geologist at Cornell University.

"We're dealing with this giant flow-through system where the hydrocarbons are generating now, moving through the overlying strata now, building the reservoirs now and spilling out into the ocean now," Cathles says.

He's bringing this new view of an active hydrocarbon cycle to industry, hoping it will lead to larger oil and gas discoveries. By matching the chemical signatures of the oil and gas with geologic models for the structures below the seafloor, petroleum geologists could tap into reserves larger than the North Sea, says Cathles, who presented his findings at the meeting of the American Chemical Society in New Orleans on March 27.


http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

Deep underwater, and deeper underground, scientists see surprising hints that gas and oil deposits can be replenished, filling up again, sometimes rapidly.

Although it sounds too good to be true, increasing evidence from the Gulf of Mexico suggests that some old oil fields are being refilled by petroleum surging up from deep below, scientists report. That may mean that current estimates of oil and gas abundance are far too low.

Recent measurements in a major oil field show "that the fluids were changing over time; that very light oil and gas were being injected from below even as the producing [oil pumping] was going on," said chemical oceanographer Mahlon "Chuck" Kennicutt. "They are refilling as we speak. But whether this is a worldwide phenomenon, we don't know."


http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20an ... _fraud.htm

Kennicutt, a faculty member at Texas A&M University, said it is now clear that gas and oil are coming into the known reservoirs very rapidly in terms of geologic time. The inflow of new gas, and some oil, has been detectable in as little as three to 10 years. In the past, it was not suspected that oil fields can refill because it was assumed that oil was formed in place, or nearby, rather than far below.

According to marine geologist Harry Roberts, at Louisiana State University ... "You have a very leaky fault system that does allow it (petroleum) to migrate in. It's directly connected to an oil and gas generating system at great depth."

... "There already appears to be a large body of evidence consistent with ... oil and gas generation and migration on very short time scales in many areas globally" [Jean Whelan] wrote in the journal Sea Technology ...
Analysis of the ancient oil that seems to be coming up from deep below in the Gulf of Mexico suggests that the flow of new oil "is coming from deeper, hotter [sediment] formations" and is not simply a lateral inflow from the old deposits that surround existing oil fields, [Whelan] said.
User avatar
OilIsMastery
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Manhattan - U.N. Occupied

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:27:08

Welcome back, OiM.

Those are very interesting ideas about the refilling of oil fields. Its notable that they are coming from mainstream academic scientists. 8)
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22893
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby OilIsMastery » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:29:31

Plantagenet wrote:Welcome back, OiM.

Those are very interesting ideas about the refilling of oil fields. Its notable that they are coming from mainstream academic scientists. 8)

Thanks, I have a feeling I won't be around long now that I'm bringing facts to the table again.

The National Academy of Sciences

And the US State Department
Last edited by OilIsMastery on Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:32:04, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
OilIsMastery
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Manhattan - U.N. Occupied

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby jboogy » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:31:25

It's all really just academic quibbling at this point isn't it? The people who matter , the energy companies , the ones who supply the energy , all are spending HUGE amounts of money to find new sources of oil , and coming up dry about half the time . They pay and charge a lot more for crude and refined than they have in the past . This means supply is tightening , these points are not arguable by rational people it seems to me . In actual concrete real terms , we are peaking . Does a family struggling to put gas in the tank to get to work care where his gasoline comes from ? They care about how much more it's been costing them lately . That's ALL that matters to them . I welcome dissenters and skeptics of all stripes , they're fun . PO would be a boring echo chamber without Plantain , airplane driver , Holmes for sure , even oily/offshore /gadfly and whatever other aliase he has make PO a more interesting place . Don't forget it's just talking on the internet.
Perhaps the population would be less swayed to socialism if we had fewer examples of socialism from our "Free Market Capitalists". -----fiddler dave
User avatar
jboogy
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Mon 06 Jun 2005, 02:00:00
Location: the place where smartasses dwell

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:42:20

OilIsMastery wrote:
Plantagenet wrote:Welcome back, OiM.

Those are very interesting ideas about the refilling of oil fields. Its notable that they are coming from mainstream academic scientists. 8)

I have a feeling I won't be around long now that I'm bringing facts to the table again.


The information and the facts are very welcome-----thanks.

If I could make a suggestion about posting style......just don't get into it with the moderators .

Sites like PeakOil.com are private property and the owner and the moderators have full latitute to run it the way they want to. This a great site...there is a great deal of tolerance here at PeakOil for all kinds of viewpoints. The mods themselves are quite diverse in their viewpoints, and do a great job of keeping things reasonably civil and organised at this site and even manage to enter discussions without stomping all over the participants (and thats rare on the internet). But if a mod makes a decision to delete a post or moves a topic or merges a topic....then its done and over and there is no point in appealing or arguing.

Welcome back, OiM. :)
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22893
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 12:45:43

jboogy wrote:It's all really just academic quibbling at this point isn't it?



Hardly.

New scientific models of oil formation may suggest new targets for oil exploration or new strategies for engineers to develop and produce existing fields.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22893
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby jboogy » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 13:00:06

Time is of the essence Plantain , and it seems that is a commodity that is in even shorter supply than oil . Storm clouds are gathering on the horizen whichever way you look . Perhaps what's left of us will pick up the pieces down the road and develop new energy sources or maybe even find a gazillion barrels at the center of the earth . Who knows? I however find the prospects of this current crop of humans finding a way out of this labyrinth to be poor at best .
Perhaps the population would be less swayed to socialism if we had fewer examples of socialism from our "Free Market Capitalists". -----fiddler dave
User avatar
jboogy
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Mon 06 Jun 2005, 02:00:00
Location: the place where smartasses dwell

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby threadbear » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 13:04:08

jBoogy, Supply may be tightening, but much of the price rise could be the result of the politics of the situation. It can be read several different ways. You've pulled back one layer of the onion and think you've reached the ultimate truth here? Maybe, but maybe not.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak oil debate

Unread postby jboogy » Tue 02 Oct 2007, 13:21:42

Threads you sweet thang you , perfect example of politics is the OPEC situation in the 70's , the major producers of the world collectively hiking prices to punish the West for supporting Isreal over Palastine . Nowadays we source from a wider variety of nations and most other oil importers diversify their suppliers . Price is truly a result of market driven demand now , tight supplies = higher prices. If there was a surplus of oil then producers would be undercutting each other in order to move product . Hugo Chavez----"What you say ...King Abdullah Faud Saud says he's got a tanker he'll let you drive out the door for 72.00 per barrel?"...."Hmmm , I got a million barrels of heavy I can let you have for 68.50 per and that'll include tax , tags and that tru-coat rustproofing I was telling you about ". There are a lot of consumers right now , and supply is tightening .I gotta go.
Perhaps the population would be less swayed to socialism if we had fewer examples of socialism from our "Free Market Capitalists". -----fiddler dave
User avatar
jboogy
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Mon 06 Jun 2005, 02:00:00
Location: the place where smartasses dwell

IDA study on Peak Oil debate

Unread postby Graeme » Fri 19 Jun 2009, 17:40:31

IDA study on Peak Oil debate

The Institute for Defense Analyses released its very thorough “Review and Analysis of the Peak Oil Debate” authored by Brent Fisher last summer, but I only discovered it today (thanks to a link at DTIC, below). This 50-page study is detailed, balanced in its determinations, carefully worded and thoroughly sourced.

The study’s executive summary ends with these two sentences:

“We conclude from these reviews that the most alarmist of the peak-oil claims are likely false. Still, we see some convincing reasons to think that global oil production could peak within 20 years, with demand outstripping production indefinitely.”

But almost no-one from this list (including Fisher) has addressed the subsequent questions and concerns which arise from an awareness /acceptance of the peak oil concept:

•export decline (please see Armed Forces Journal Forum posting #7)
•fuel poverty: how will sustained high oil prices affect the global economy, “globalization” itself, public revenues & public services, low-income families, etc? (please see Jeff Rubin’s recent book, Why Your World Is About to Get a Whole Lot Smaller)
•Agri-food: this sector may be squeezed from both ends (by family farmers who can’t afford fuel, and by a faltering import/export system, Armed Forces Journal Forum posting #17).
•Emergency planning: how might a severe fuel (& food) emergency be best planned for and administered? (Armed Forces Journal Forum postings #9, #10, #15, #16, #17)
•Domestic security: are there foreseeable problems which warrant military analysis & planning?


energybulletin
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: IDA study on Peak Oil debate

Unread postby kjmclark » Fri 19 Jun 2009, 20:43:31

Some of my favorite lines:

Every year oil industry around the world has to add at least 5–6 Mbpd of gross production capacity just to break even with the 5–6 Mbpd gross capacity is lost. Any additions to world capacity are on top of the 5–6 Mbpd capacity turnover each year. These figures are much larger than the drops in production capacity contemplated by Simmons, which would be on the order of 500 kbpd YoY. Thus, Lynch concludes that non-Saudi Arabian oil production is capable of making up losses in Saudi Arabia (Lynch 2006, pp. 1–32).

"Lynch concludes that non-Saudi Arabian oil production is capable of making up losses in Saudi Arabia." Because the other OPEC countries all say they can, and we can trust them, right?

On the question of water cuts, Lynch compares Ghawar, whose water cut is around 37%, to the world average, which is 75%, though it is not specified how the 75% average is calculated (volumetric average or average overall wells) (Lynch 2006, pp. 1–32).

"Whose water cut is around 37%", presumably from Aramco. We can trust them, right?

In addition to the foregoing three main points, optimists provide a series of facts that they claim show Saudi oil production to be under no stress at all. Hence they conclude that there is no reason to expect a peak in Saudi production. Chief among these is the famously low cost of oil production for Saudi Aramco. Production cost estimates ranging from $1/bbl to $5/bbl are cited by Lynch 2006, pp. 1–32, which are much lower than those almost anywhere else in the world.

"Production cost estimates", presumably from Aramco. We can trust them, right?

... And looking really hard at the end of the first half of the report, they really don't conclude much beyond 'and if we make some assumptions that there's no particularly good reason to make, the problem goes away for another decade or two.'

It's worth reading, but I hope others at the DOD are reading between the lines of this report a little critically. Also, as noted at Energybulletin, the IEA pulled the rug out from under this report shortly after it was written.
User avatar
kjmclark
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Fri 09 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Old Faithful Peak Oil Debate

Unread postby peeker01 » Wed 24 Aug 2011, 20:04:29

More good news on peak oil, and you'll never believe where I read it!

http://peakoil.com/production/the-old-f ... il-debate/
peeker01
permanently banned
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri 24 Jun 2011, 17:19:54

Re: Old Faithful Peak Oil Debate

Unread postby Sixstrings » Wed 24 Aug 2011, 20:30:04

It is a well known refrain: Peak Oil is always now !


A lot of the articles posted on the front page here are strangely written.. I think it's all SEO nonsense. Some guy in India or China probably wrote this, or someone off elance for twenty-three cents an article.

Off topic gripe, but I really hate SEO style writing. It's like the whole Internet is being consumed by a bacteria of spam and SEO filler, ugh..

(in other words, a lot of the articles on the front page are goofy since they changed things over.. I've seen cornie stuff on the front page.. it's not worth serious discussion, this is for SEO purposes)
Last edited by Sixstrings on Wed 24 Aug 2011, 20:35:04, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15161
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Old Faithful Peak Oil Debate

Unread postby peeker01 » Wed 24 Aug 2011, 20:34:35

Well strings, had you read that article, you'd see it was written by Andrew McKillip of the
Market Oracle. I thought it was rather good.
peeker01
permanently banned
 
Posts: 725
Joined: Fri 24 Jun 2011, 17:19:54

Re: Old Faithful Peak Oil Debate

Unread postby Sixstrings » Wed 24 Aug 2011, 20:39:11

peeker01 wrote:Well strings, had you read that article, you'd see it was written by Andrew McKillip of the
Market Oracle
. I thought it was rather good.


Well I don't know who "Andrew McKillip" or the "Market Oracle" is but I followed the link and the whole site is search engine optimization crap.

I can smell it a mile away and as someone who appreciates well written English it really bothers me. What's next, are we going to begin speaking pig latin SEO? :twisted:

And how do you know someone off elance didn't write this? It reads like SEO filler material. If you don't see what I'm talking about peeker then you know nothing about writing, this writing style is bad on purpose -- it's for search engine optimization.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15161
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: microsofthelp1, MSN [Bot] and 21 guests

cron