Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 28, 2017
Catastrophism is popular, but not necessarily right.
Catastrophism is popular. I can see that with the “Cassandra’s Legacy” blog. Every time I publish something that says that we are all going to die soon, it gets many more hits than when I publish posts arguing that we can do something to avoid the incoming disaster. The latest confirmation of this trend came from three posts by Louis Arnoux that I published last summer (link to the first one). All three are in the list of the ten most successful posts ever published here.
Arnoux argues that the problems we have today are caused by the diminishing energy yield (or net energy, or EROI) of fossil fuels. This is a correct observation, but Arnoux bases his case on a report released by a rather obscure organization called “The Hill’s Group.” They use calculations based on the evaluation of the entropy of the extraction process in order to predict a dire future for the world’s oil production. And they sell their report for $28 (shipping included).
Neither Arnoux nor the “Hill’s Group” are the first to argue that diminishing EROEI is at the basis of most of our troubles. But the Hill’s report gained a certain popularity and it has been favorably commented on many blogs and websites. It is t is understandable: the report has an aura of scientific correctness that comes from its use of basic thermodynamic principles and of the concept of entropy, correctly understood as the force behind the depletion problem. There is just a small problem: the report is badly flawed.
When I published Arnoux’s posts on this blog, I thought they were qualitatively correct, and I still think they are. But I didn’t have the time to look at the details of the report of Hill’s group. Now, some people did that and their analysis clearly shows the many fundamental flaws of the treatment. You can read the results in English by Seppo Korpela, and in Spanish by Carlos De Castro and Antonio Turiel.
Entropy is a complex subject and delving into the Hill’s report and into the criticism to it requires a certain effort. I won’t go into details, here. Let me just say that it simply makes no sense to start from the textbook definition of entropy to calculate the net energy of oil production. The approximations made in the report are so large to make the whole treatment useless (to say nothing of the errors it contains). Using the definition of entropy to analyze oil production is like using quantum mechanics to design a plane. It is true that all the electrons in a plane have to obey Schroedinger’s equation, but that’s not the way engineers design planes.
Of course, the problem of diminishing EROEI exists and can be studied. The way to do that is known and it is based on the “life cycle analysis” (LCA) of the process. This method takes into account entropy indirectly, in terms of heat losses, without attempting the impossible task of calculating it from first principles. By means of this method we can see that, at present, oil production still provides a reasonable energy return on investment (EROEI) as you can read, for instance, in a recent paper by Brandt et al.
But if producing oil still provides an energy return, why is the oil industry in such dire troubles? (see this post on the SRSrocco report, for instance). Well, let me cite a post by Nate Hagens:
In the last 10 years the global credit market has grown at 12% per year allowing GDP growth of only 3.5% and increasing global crude oil production less than 1% annually. We’re so used to running on various treadmills that the landscape doesn’t look all too scary. But since 2008, despite energies fundamental role in economic growth, it is access to credit that is supporting our economies, in a surreal, permanent, Faustian bargain sort of way. As long as interest rates (govt borrowing costs) are low and market participants accept it, this can go on for quite a long time, all the while burning through the next higher cost tranche of extractable carbon fuel in turn getting reduced benefits from the “Trade” creating other societal pressures.
Society runs on energy, but thinks it runs on money. In such a scenario, there will be some paradoxical results from the end of cheap (to extract) oil. Instead of higher prices, the global economy will first lose the ability to continue to service both the principal and the interest on the large amounts of newly created money/debt, and we will then probably first face deflation. Under this scenario, the casualty will not be higher and higher prices to consumers that most in peak oil community expect, but rather the high and medium cost producers gradually going out of business due to market prices significantly below extraction costs. Peak oil will come about from the high cost tranches of production gradually disappearing.
I don’t expect the government takeover of the credit mechanism to stop, but if it does, both oil production and oil prices will be quite a bit lower. In the long run it’s all about the energy. For the foreseeable future, it’s mostly about the credit
In the end, it is simply dumb to think that the system will automatically collapse when and because the net energy of the oil production process becomes negative (or the EROEI smaller than one). No, it will crash much earlier because of factors correlated to the control system that we call “the economy”. It is a behavior typical of complex adaptative systems that are never understandable in terms of mere energy return considerations. Complex systems always kick back.
The final consideration of this post would simply be to avoid losing time with the Hill’s report (to say nothing about paying $28 for it). But there remains a problem: a report that claims to be based on thermodynamics and uses resounding words such as “entropy” plays into the human tendency of believing what one wants to believe. Catastrophism is popular for various reasons, some perfectly good. Actually, we should all be cautious catastrophists in the sense of being worried about the catastrophes we risk to see as the result of climate change and mineral depletion. But we should also be careful about crying wolf too early. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what Hill&Arnoux did and now they are being debunked, as they should be. That puts in a bad light all the people who are seriously trying to alert the public of the risks ahead.
Catastrophism is the other face of cornucopianism; both are human reactions to a difficult situation. Cornucopianism denies the existence of the problem, catastrophism (in its “hard” form) denies that it can be solved or even just mitigated. Both attitudes lead to inaction. But there exists a middle way in which we don’t exaggerate the problem but we don’t deny it, either, and we do something about it!
Cassandra’s legacy by Ugo Bardi
47 Comments on "Catastrophism is popular, but not necessarily right."
makati1 on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 6:38 am
Some don’t seem to understand the problem. This one cannot be solved. The time to do so is long past. All we can do now is wait for the final grade, which looks like “FAIL”.
Hello on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 6:40 am
>> But the Hill’s report gained a certain popularity and it has been favorably commented on many blogs and websites
That comment speaks volumes about the blogs and website audience, and not in a positive way.
onlooker on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 7:20 am
Seems like professor Bardi, has some sponsors and employers who want to dispel any talk of DOOM. By extension any adaptation to it.
Nobody said the fossil fuel industry would go down quietly and without a fight.
Cloggie on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 7:49 am
Mayhem in the hen house! Controversy, heated debate, name calling! Frontal attack! Ugo Bardi is drawing his knife for the kill!.
What is entropy again? To refresh my memory I looked it up in the collected works of the God-Emperor:
The second law of thermodynamics states that an isolated system’s entropy never decreases.
To put it in laymen’s words: a house of cards crafted on a rainy Sunday afternoon can easily turn into an un-orderly pile of cards by the slightest vibration, for instance by mother bringing in the apple pie.
It is however virtually impossible that an un-orderly pile of cards spontaneously turns into a house of cards, just because of the same slight vibration.
The second law of thermodynamics basically is a posh way of saying that it’s all down Hill.
Which automatically brings us to the Hill’s Group.
I’m not going to claim that I read the article, just the summary:
The Hill’s Group” has been arguing for the rapid demise of the world’s oil industry on the basis of a calculation of the entropy of the oil extraction process
My comment: who needs entropy? Worked several years in engineering and juggled with all sorts of units: kg, m, s, m/s, m/s^s, N, K, kWh, Joule and a host more.
But I can’t remember ever to have calculated entropy of anything. What’s the unit anyway? Had to look it up:
Joule/Kelvin
Big deal. Entropy is more of philosophical concept without much practical engineering significance other than perhaps those working on heat engines, fridges, etc. For me working on solar cells, wind turbines, seasonal storage of heat: never needed entropy.
The basic flaw of the Hill’s Group story is that it pretends that society begins and ends with fossil fuel. End of oil = end of society –> collapse!
Sure.
One glance at this picture shows that the collapse view is BS:
https://oneinabillionblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/renewableenergypotentialvsfossilfuels.jpg
There is a follow-up for fossil waiting in the wings that outstrips current energy demand with a factor 23,000/16. That’s about Spain plastered with solar panels. Admittedly a daunting task, but it can be done and despite the Hill’s Group we still can rely on a “third carbon age” to deliver us the fossil fuel to realize that “solar economy”.
On your marks… Go!
charmcitysking on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:00 am
“But I didn’t have the time to look at the details of the report of Hill’s group.”
And I didn’t have time to read the rest of this article
Davy on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:01 am
Society runs on oil but cooperates because of price. Price is an economic expression of confidence and liquidity. Neither oil nor the economy functions without the other. This is part of the problem with peak oil discussion on both sides. This discussion must include the economic part of the equation. Instead the economic aspect of the equation is often a constant and removed as a variable. Price is dealt with in the vacuum of this constant.
I have to agree with this: “In the long run it’s all about the energy. For the foreseeable future, it’s mostly about the credit”.
I will also mention we are likely in a demand destruction cycle of stagflation. This is not our daddies stagflation of the 70’s this is the end game stagflation of the 21st century when our economic system becomes unworkable. This process will likely lower demand that will allow us to match supply and demand for a time this may happen even though supply is being constantly compromised by depletion both in quantity and quality. Techno optimism can never overcome this in scale and timing. Technology has hit diminishing returns such that it will likely never bring about a transition. This process is a below the surface and systematic. It is also about moral hazard and corruption within the economy. It is about decay, depletion, and dysfunction combining in decline and destructive change.
I have to agree with this: “In the end, it is simply dumb to think that the system will automatically collapse when and because the net energy of the oil production process becomes negative (or the EROEI smaller than one). No, it will crash much earlier because of factors correlated to the control system that we call “the economy”. It is a behavior typical of complex adaptive systems that are never understandable in terms of mere energy return considerations. Complex systems always kick back.”
You have to have an economy to need oil. You have to have confidence and the resulting liquidity to utilize a globally traded resource like oil. We too often take for granted the economy as a constant but it is more than a constant it is the reason we can produce or want to produce. The resources are there it is the application of the resources that produce a return. A return is a species requirement. It can be rabbits or ROI. Fail to make a positive return and you starve. That is a basic of any system simple or complex.
Revi on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:20 am
Mr. Bardi’s statement “In the end, it is simply dumb to think that the system will automatically collapse when and because the net energy of the oil production process becomes negative (or the EROEI smaller than one). No, it will crash much earlier because of factors correlated to the control system that we call “the economy”.
This doesn’t make me feel any better about things.
We live in the “economy”, so if it crashes we go down with it.
That really doesn’t give me any comfort, even if the Hill’s Group is discredited. Same result for those of us who live in the working world.
Davy on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:31 am
Hills group is not discredited. He is making an important point that must be understood as one of the peak oil dynamics. This is the problem with any discussion on complexity and oil especially. Complexity is not easy to nail down especially when you are living it.
onlooker on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:18 am
Whomever is trying to discredit Hills group should at least specify their credentials to do so and cite PRECISELY on what basis they are doing so. Otherwise it is just trollish antics or worse
penury on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:36 am
With my limited knowledge and training in any field of anything to do with science, physics or practically anything I would not argue with either the “Hills Group” or with Ugo. But my feelings run to if you use the best and easiest first eventually quality will degrade, lower quality may lead to less performance per unit obtained which will lead to a decline in the productivity of the product. Perhaps it is like my friend that lost money on everything he sold, but claimed he made it up with volume.
sunweb on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:40 am
There are so many multishaped balls in the air right now it is difficult to tell which one or ones will over stay their welcome in the system and make a mess of things.
There are those who understand the bubbling of economics and the shrinking pie. Some are fired up over the diminishing returns of oil, or of other resources. The rising ocean or its lowering ph level concerns some. Some feel the heat or watch the tumultuous storms. Of course, there is the cry of too many, too many. And the gritty loss of dirt is a concern. And some will say but you forgot . . . . . . .
And there are of course polydoomers, juggling so many ifs.
There are the polydeniers too, they have so much compartmentalized there is rictus about their smile.
When? Now grindingly, and tomorrow perhaps immediately it won’t be pretty no matter.
Cloggie on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:43 am
Overall entropy may increase, but is still possible to create exceptional order. Scary:
http://youtu.be/-7xvqQeoA8c
Cloud9 on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:45 am
Somewhere out there is Liebig’s Law of the Minimum. What I noticed in the recent past was that world oil production was said to have peaked around 2005-2006. The economy had a heart attack in 2007-2008. That trauma gave us TARP and ZIRP and a host of other forms of monetary magic. Lose money gave us the miracle of shale oil with the corresponding oil glut and a drop in prices. What we are seeing on the surface is a common cycle of boom and bust but that cycle may be masking a tipping point. I honestly don’t know if we will hit Seneca’s Cliff before the Hills Group zero sum prediction is fulfilled or it will happen several years after the fact. We may very well be swept away in a political maelstrom that is an outcome of collapsing economic and energy sectors. The resulting war and social upheaval may put off peak oil for a century or more. The die off in such a scenario is unimaginable by most. So, such a possibility seems ludicrous.
Taking the position that collapse is unimaginable and therefore impossible is simply publicly stating that you are a victim of normalcy bias. Nassim Taleb spoke eloquently to those that assume that position. History is full of examples of inflection points. Everyone should hedge their bets.
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 9:53 am
“I won’t go into details”
No, just take my word for it that they are wrong and my position is right.
I have heard similar, lazy, non arguments made against the possible pathways suggested by the club of Rome model.
If something is not “necessarily” right it’s also not “necessarily” wrong either. Necessarily is a weasel word.
Is casastrophism popular? First you need to define some parameters for “popular”, like google searches, then demonstrate that casastrophism falls within them. Well, at least that’s how a scientist would do it. Didn’t Bardi used to be one?
onlooker on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 10:04 am
Now Bardi seems to be a paid hack. Oh your right Penury, from an economic sense it always makes sense to cut costs ie. low hanging fruit oil was picked first
rockman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 10:49 am
penury – Just some observations. First: “While it is true that the oil industry is in trouble…”. Troubled how: oil production is near a record all time high and oil prices (even adjusted for inflation) are about 50% above the historic average. So what’s the f*cking problem? LOL. Oh, there is a huge problem for some companies: huge debt. That and many NEW wells funded with that capex that won’t be profitable. But let’s not forget: prior to the price driven drilling boom that began almost 10 years ago there was 70+ million bopd coming out of the ground generating very nice net cash flows WHEN OIL WAS $35/BBL. Those wells didn’t disappear: most are still producing today and are generating even better net cash flows thanks to $50+/bbl prices.
So again, exactly how will the oil industry crumble in the future? Oh yeah, entropy. An entropy factor that should be much worse the, say 15 years ago. And 15 years ago, in 2002, oil was selling for $25/bbl (vs the entropy ravaged price of $50/bbl today). And the current entropy damaged global production rate is 20% higher then in 2002.
So maybe I’m confused: hasn’t the entropy factor presumably constantly gotten worse over time? Given the oil industry is looking much healthier today with the exception of the debt of some pubcos (and debt not being related to entropy but dumbass management policies) it would seem like entropy has significantly IMPROVED circumstances over the last 15 years.
But I let those much more knowledgeable about entropy then a humble geologist explain that situation. LOL.
Jerry McManus on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 10:56 am
Ugo Bardi is an idiot, and if there was any doubt then just wait until the part where he cites a stupid prick like Nate Hagens.
Neither one of those drooling morons would know what entropy is if it crawled up their arse and died.
GregT on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 11:11 am
“low hanging fruit oil was picked first”
Which is exactly why counting barrels (fruit) doesn’t make any sense. All barrels of oil are not created equal, in their cost to produce, and the energy left available to power society.
shortonoil on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 11:12 am
We have received a number of phone calls as to why this apparent debunking of the Etp Model is taking place. It appears that this is all part of a very complex con job to defraud the Irish Ministry of Transportation out of $6 million. Those monies were to be earmarked for a devise that does not exist, and never did. The Etp Model was being used as part of the justification for the Ministry to finance construction of the imaginary devise. The perpetrators then attempted to rescind their request for the illicit monies as the scheme came to light by claiming that the Model had been shown to be invalid. The online debunkers where hired to add credibility to that claim.
We severed all ties with the parties involved months ago as it became apparent that their overtures to the Hills Group where fabrications. If anyone has additional information please contact us.
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 11:48 am
Drought, That is Caused by Climate Change, is Causing Mass Tree Mortality in Forests Worldwide
http://sciencenewsjournal.com/drought-caused-climate-change-causing-mass-tree-mortality-forests-worldwide/
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 11:49 am
Alt Jesus
https://i0.wp.com/farm3.staticflickr.com/2529/32963604051_00070a16c0_b.jpg
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 11:53 am
First direct measurements of Pacific seabed sediments reveal strong methane source
“The atmospheric concentration of methane has increased over the last few decades and human activities have played an important role in this trend. Scientists are keen to understand the natural production and consumption of methane, which will help to assess the extent of human impact on these natural processes.”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170224111725.htm
The more we put together to-gether to-gether
The more we put together
The deader you’ll be…
rockman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:11 pm
“low hanging fruit oil was picked first”. And once again that completely erroneous perception that oil exploration was much easier decades ago. It wasn’t and the greatly improved success rate over time proves that FACT.
What has significant changed in the last 50+ years is significantly less fruit hanging on those trees. And even though the remaining fruit is lower on the trees and thus easier to find the cost of those fruit pickers used has increased significantly. And now the price of that fruit has dropped and you lay off a bunch of your pickers. But you can still harvest a fair bit of fruit because your remaining pickers have accepted lower wages and thus reduced your total cost. Additionally you have a lot of fruit already picked sitting in the warehouse ready to go to market. And the cost of shipping that fruit is a lot less the picking new fruit and thus generating very nice net income.
And you’re doing much better the the orchard owner down the road that borrowed a lot of money to plant new trees when fruit prices were high. And now many of those trees aren’t even yielding fruit yet. In fact, if he defaults on his loan you might pick up his land cheap. And even though his trees are producing much now they will be down the road when in price of fruit eventually increase. As it has always done in the past.
That’s the correct perception folks should have about the oil patch IMHO.
peakyeast on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:15 pm
The criticism looks a lot like the criticism by various sources of the “Limits To Growth”. Most of it “hearsay” in various forms. I.E. NOT A USEFUL ADDITION TO ANYTHING.
Also Ugo did not substatiate in any way how an economic collapse will not cause any disaster. – Like the food prices did with the “Arab spring”. And the millions upon millions of people that are now in debt for the remainder of their life.
I suppose his reasoning is like the person standing next to a guy who got his hand cut off: “Hey Relax – I dont feel a thing so it cant be THAT bad”…
Sissyfuss on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:25 pm
So to seems to me that Ugo and his Yugo are postulating the argument that he thinks we hit the iceberg in 10 minutes and Hill thinks it’s 5. Well, whoop de doo! I think I got it.
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:36 pm
rockman, I guess once a company defaults they get crossed off you little debt list eh?
Oil & Gas companies account for 57, or 42% of the 136 defaults.
“Of the 136 defaults so far this year, more than half (57%) have come from the Energy and Natural Resources sector. As of Aug. 31, 2016, the global speculative-grade default rate for Energy and Natural Resources was 17.9% compared with the global speculative-grade default rate for all other sectors of only 2.4%.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/spleverage/2016/10/21/sp-global-default-tally-hits-133-as-more-energy-companies-struggle/#29c7f52845d5
Dumb assed management? Is that what you tell yourself to get to sleep at night? By that definition almost every county, municipality, town, city, state, province and country on the planet has some dumb assed management since they all in debt and most of it won’t be paid back. 20 Trillion for the US empire. Cancer capital Huston is so in debt that last year a candidate for mayor ran on a “I will fill the potholes” platform and won. Had a bunch of record breaking, infrastructure breaking Rain Bombs since then eh? Shutting the city down with ever more frequency. Just a management issue huh? I hear they want to raise taxes in a futile bid to engineer their way out of the growing AGW consequences. Good luck. Sounds to me like the techno industrial humans have some dumbassed management predicaments. Won’t be too long until the microbes hang up a sign – “Earth – Under New Management”.
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:37 pm
Exxon Caves to Oil Crash With Historic Global Reserves Cut
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-22/exxon-takes-historic-cut-to-oil-reserves-amid-crude-market-rout
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:38 pm
Oil discoveries in 2015 lowest since 1947 — 2016 likely to be even lower. Bloomberg
http://energyskeptic.com/2017/oil-discoveries-in-2015-lowest-since-1947-2016-likely-to-be-even-lower-bloomberg/
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:40 pm
THE BLOOD BATH CONTINUES IN THE U.S. MAJOR OIL INDUSTRY
https://srsroccoreport.com/the-blood-bath-continues-in-the-u-s-major-oil-industry/
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:41 pm
CONTINENTAL RESOURCES: Example Of What Is Horribly Wrong With The U.S. Shale Oil Industry
https://srsroccoreport.com/continental-resources-example-of-what-is-horribly-wrong-with-the-u-s-shale-oil-industry/
Plantagenet on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:43 pm
Good to see Prof. Bardi debunking the claims of the “Hill’s Group.”
As one of the main leaders of the Peak Oil movement and a follower of the Limits to Growth approach to mathematical modeling, Prof. Bardi is an acknowledged expert in this field.
Cheers!
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 1:45 pm
Shell’s 1991 warning: climate changing ‘at faster rate than at any time since end of ice age’
Critics say public information film shows Shell ‘understood the threat was dire, potentially existential for civilisation, more than a quarter of a century ago’
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/28/shell-film-warning-climate-change-rate-faster-than-end-ice-age
Anonymous on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 2:43 pm
Yes, rockyman, we all know in the early days of the oil extraction industry, that the ~ of multi-billion dollar high-tech drilling rigs and their complex support mechanisms were commonly required to pull oil out of the ground.
Or were all those wooden derricks and simple pipes actually multi-billion dollar wood derricks? No one would dispute that extracting oil has always been a dirty and dangerous job, involving a certain amount of ‘difficult’. But your ‘extracting oil has never been easy deflection’, is getting old.
Oil was in fact, a lot easier to extract overall, in energy and material terms in the past. And your weaselly words and denialism wont change that no matter many time you tell us otherwise. Yes, even today, there is still cheap, easy to produce oil still being extracted, but the opposite is even more true. The uS has long extracted most of its ‘easy oil’, oil you keep insisting never existed. If that wasn’t the case, you wouldn’t need to build rigs and projects that run to the 100s of millions, or billions of dollars. Nor would anyone be talking about the wonders of turning oil-like compounds like bitumen into ‘oil’. I bet you’d much prefer to just stick a pipe in the ground and let natural pressure deliver it to you, free of charge, and effort. Cant really get away with that much anymore though can ya? Those days are pretty much done and gone.
Get it now? (of course you dont-tell us again how uS dollars(ass-wipe) run the world-not energy).
JuanP on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 4:35 pm
I might read what Bardi had to say if he went into the details. LOL! Bardi used to be a good thinker but after he published his book he became a hopium peddler selling solutions that don’t exist. I no longer waste my time reading his crap and I won’t buy his book, either.
Ghung on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 5:01 pm
Jerry said; “Ugo Bardi is an idiot, and if there was any doubt then just wait until the part where he cites a stupid prick like Nate Hagens.”
What, exactly, did you find wrong with Nate’s quote, Jerry? Please tell us lest you be the one that looks like a stupid prick.
Truth Has A Liberal Bias on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 5:28 pm
ETP report is a load of retarded bs. Only morons who don’t understand fuck all would think that entropy controls the price of oil. Does entropy control the price of NatGas or batteries or food? The Etp report is debunked. And what does shortonbrains have to say in response, it’s a conspiracy lol fucking retard.
Truth Has A Liberal Bias on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 5:39 pm
This link contains more debunking of the bullshit Etp report.
First is the post by Dr Bardi then is An analysis of the theoretical foundations of the ETP model By Antonio Turiel
http://energyskeptic.com/2017/ugo-bardi-the-hills-group-report/
Shortonoil is all washed up. Only idiots believe his stupid report.
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 6:18 pm
Here is a real catastrophe, well under way and growing, and there is not a damn thing anyone can do about it.
Massive Permafrost Thaw Documented in Canada, Portends Huge Carbon Release
Study shows 52,000 square miles in rapid decline, with sediment and carbon threatening the surrounding environment and potentially accelerating global warming.
“Huge slabs of Arctic permafrost in northwest Canada are slumping and disintegrating, sending large amounts of carbon-rich mud and silt into streams and rivers. A new study that analyzed nearly a half-million square miles in northwest Canada found that this permafrost decay is affecting 52,000 square miles of that vast stretch of earth—an expanse the size of Alabama.”
“Permafrost is land that has been frozen stretching back to the last ice age, 10,000 years ago. As the Arctic warms at twice the global rate, the long-frozen soils thaw and decompose, releasing the trapped greenhouse gases into the air. Scientists estimate that the world’s permafrost holds twice as much carbon as the atmosphere.”
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/27022017/global-warming-permafrost-study-melt-canada-siberia
“twice as much carbon as the atmosphere”
Daily CO2
February 27, 2017: 407.51 ppm
February 27, 2016: 403.76 ppm
January CO2
January 2017: 406.07 ppm
January 2016: 402.64 ppm
https://www.co2.earth/global-co2-emissions
Add in the methane and other greenhouse gases and the CO2e is approaching 490 ppm. Endtimes for civilisation as we know it.
Ghung on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 6:37 pm
It’s OK, Ap. We’ll just build millions (billions?) of those gizmos they use to keep the ground under the Alaska pipeline from thawing out. Drop them from airplanes.
https://m-secure.wsj.net/video/20091204/120409frost/120409frost_320k.mp4
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704576204574531373037560240
James boags on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 7:57 pm
So far the etp model has been 100% correct so just exept it and start making plans for what’s coming soon .
Survivalist on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 7:59 pm
“We have received a number of phone calls as to why this apparent debunking of the Etp Model is taking place. It appears that this is all part of a very complex con job to defraud the Irish Ministry of Transportation out of $6 million.” – ShortOnOil
That’s laughable. You believe Ugo, Dennis, Ron, SK, et al. are all part of some conspiracy to debunk your report and defraud the Irish Gov? WOW! You’ve really lost it man! How about you address the critique in what is the closest thing to a peer review that your report has ever faced?
Survivalist on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:08 pm
SRSRocco did a post that was heavy into the implications of the ETp report. It was on his own site and was also a guest post on POB. I feel that a lot of interest in a critical analysis of the ETp report began around that time.
Apneaman on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:41 pm
Survivalist, you are correct. It was also picked up and shared/discussed by other obscure doomerish bloggers, like one of my newer friends, Rob the Engineer from Vancouver Island. James the Biologist at megacancer.com is aware of the ETP model and it’s implications and has discussed it for a number of years. Somehow, I don’t think new monkey deity Trump will be discussing the EPT model in his address tonight – just more pandering to the little monkey peoples base emotions. Same as it ever was.
un-Denial
unmasking denial: creator and destroyer
By Steve St. Angelo: The Blood Bath Continues in the U.S. Major Oil Industry
“The carnage continues in the U.S. major oil industry as they sink further and further in the RED. The top three U.S. oil companies, whose profits were once the envy of the energy sector, are now forced to borrow money to pay dividends or capital expenditures. The financial situation at ExxonMobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips has become so dreadful, their total long-term debt surged 25% in just the past year.”
https://un-denial.com/2017/02/08/by-steve-st-angelo-the-blood-bath-continues-in-the-u-s-major-oil-industry/
Sissyfuss on Tue, 28th Feb 2017 8:41 pm
But Juan, would you buy a book entitled ” We Are So Screwed!”. Actually, I might. Could be porno.
Cloggie on Wed, 1st Mar 2017 7:58 am
New EROEI assessment of solar panels from the university of Utrecht and published in prestigious “Nature”:
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13728
The data relates to the Dutch situation, far from optimal for PV.
Energy pay-back times drop from around 5 years in 1992 to around just under 1 year for poly-Si and just over 1 year for mono-Si PV systems currently
On a life span of 30 years this means an EROEI of ca. 30.
Cloggie on Wed, 1st Mar 2017 8:03 am
Same article claims that the total CO2 debt of all solar panels installed world-wide to date has already been “paid-off” by producing an equal amount of “clean energy”.
https://phys.org/news/2016-12-solar-panels-repay-energy-debt.html
From now on it is clean energy party time!
Apneaman on Wed, 1st Mar 2017 10:19 am
clog, nothing the humans do matters now. They were unable to put into practice the precautionary principle and are in the early stages of run away AGW.
Self reinforcing positive feedback loops.
There are literately dozens of them under way now and they can’t be stopped.
According to the various counting agencies, human emissions have been flat the last couple of years, yet atmospheric CO2 is rising and the rate per year is also increasing.
It’s a carbon planet and the humans have radically altered the carbon cycle. There have been plenty of greenhouse gas extinctions on this planet in the past and all due to volcanisim. The humans have outpaced volcanisim by orders of magnitude and that means there is no adjustment period for any living creatures including the humans.
Big flashing sign that says *Positive Feed-back Underway*
Massive Permafrost Thaw Documented in Canada, Portends Huge Carbon Release
Study shows 52,000 square miles in rapid decline, with sediment and carbon threatening the surrounding environment and potentially accelerating global warming.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/27022017/global-warming-permafrost-study-melt-canada-siberia
Daily CO2
February 28, 2017: 407.61 ppm
February 28, 2016: 403.36 ppm
January CO2
January 2017: 406.07 ppm
January 2016: 402.64 ppm
https://www.co2.earth/global-co2-emissions