Or, perhaps more to the point, to keep up with demand, assuming that it continues to grow at the present rate or somewhere near it.
Peak Oil (was "petroleum geologist explains US war policy")
- Thread starter Bernie_Gunther
- Start date
Or, perhaps more to the point, to keep up with demand, assuming that it continues to grow at the present rate or somewhere near it.
Laws change, consumption patterns change, and even production capabilities change... And the OilDrum doesn't appear to be an un-biased source.
Ho-hum...
david dissadent
New Member
Fields dont tend to fall in straight lines, each one has its own decline profile but it is more like a vaugue sort of bell curve, so after a bit of a steep drop they level of and for years can squeek out some oil at a lower rate. Specialist companies buy out fields when they hit this point and the big IOCs move on. I think this has already happened to Forties and Brent fields in the North Sea.
david dissadent
New Member
Not much sleep last night...? Shouldn't be up all night burning the midnight oil. We're nearly at peak oil, y'know...
Well if we could find oil by burying our heads in the sand we'd be just fine
Hmm... I'd be interested in where I've said that...?
Exactly...!
elbows
Well-Known Member
I didnt say you said that, i was just expressing mild angst that there is too much wishful thinking going on in general.
Anyways Im sure I heard Gordon Brown in a BBC interview at G8 saying that there was agreement between the G8 countries that they must all reduce their oil consumption. This seemed like a shift in position to me, because its mostly all been calls to raise production up till now. He did go on to call for rise in African food production to sort out the food crisis, and this just made the statement about reducing oil use stand out even more, its no longer business as usual.
Anyways Im sure I heard Gordon Brown in a BBC interview at G8 saying that there was agreement between the G8 countries that they must all reduce their oil consumption. This seemed like a shift in position to me, because its mostly all been calls to raise production up till now. He did go on to call for rise in African food production to sort out the food crisis, and this just made the statement about reducing oil use stand out even more, its no longer business as usual.
Might shift away faster than you think:
http://green.yahoo.com/blog/ecogeek/603/mercedes-to-cut-petroleum-out-of-lineup-by-2015.html
Demand growth is currently less than the long term average of just 1.5% p.a. Odell.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Here is a CNN story about Opec's report:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/10/opec.oil.supplies.ap/index.html
Mot of it consists of OPECs usual stance, that there will be large increase in demand, that supply will keep up, and that dollar weakness & speculators are behind a lot of the price rise.
However there was one bit that caught my eye because it seemed to support the view that conventional oil production will not increase beyond todays levels, although it is confusingly worded:
I need to read the full report I guess, not sure if it is free?
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/10/opec.oil.supplies.ap/index.html
Mot of it consists of OPECs usual stance, that there will be large increase in demand, that supply will keep up, and that dollar weakness & speculators are behind a lot of the price rise.
However there was one bit that caught my eye because it seemed to support the view that conventional oil production will not increase beyond todays levels, although it is confusingly worded:
I need to read the full report I guess, not sure if it is free?
david dissadent
New Member
Matt Simmons explains how close the US is to food shortages on CNBC. The other pundits are stumped for answers.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rkzETN8qfzw
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rkzETN8qfzw
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Peak Oil. Real, Immediate and Very Real Threat to Civilisaiton
May be I should apologise for the doom laden title. 'End of the World' Headlines are nothing if not attention grabbing.
Thing is I scared myself half to death last night doing some more reading up on peak oil. If your not familiar with the arguments you really need to be - this article gives is a pretty clear outline http://www.oildecline.com/index.htm -. If other people have got links to other good clear level headed info please post them up.
I first started reading about this three years ago and it seemed pretty scary then - but it was still a relatively fringe concern and looking like it was 15 years off and more optimistic prognosis was that the switch to renewables was difficult but doable.
But the relentless hike in oil prices and the ever more gloomy economic forecasts all point to it being here right now - pretty close to where predicted Hubbert (I think he said 2012) it would be over 30 years ago (Hubber correctly predicted that US oil production would peak in the early 70s and he used the same model to predict global peak production) . Politicians and oil industry spokesmen are openly stating 'the era of cheap oil is over' - but they are not saying what that means.
What it means is this. Absolutely everything depends on a ever increasing supply of cheap oil - including most of the global economy and the ability of the planet to feed a population of 6 billion. Without oil we could only produce a third of the food we do now.
If we are at the limits of oil production it means that the economic growth of the past 200 years goes into steady decline, economic slump mass unemployment, mass starvation and probably inevitable wars over oil producing areas. Place like Iraq and Iran.
The worst case scenario is the collapse of industrial society within the next 20 - 30 years in the face of serious energy depletion and the growing effects of global warming - plus increasingly desperate nation states with nuclear weapons. I mean you can make it as apocalyptic as you want really - right down to all complex life forms on the planet being wiped out. IN OUR LIFETIMES.
But what about those renewables? They are not going to replace oil. They cant. The only thing that will is nuclear fusion (theoretical ‘free’ energy that has been ‘25 years away’ for the past 50 years )
One teacup of petrol can lift move a car to the top of a 1000 meter incline.
Hydro Carbons - especially crude oil - is by far the cheapest most readily available source of energy on the planet. It has created the last 200 years of economic, industrial, population and scientific growth.
Most renewables rely on cheap energy (i.e. oil) for thier own viability and even the best case estimates have renewables still only providing less than half of present global energy needs within any sort of foreseeable future.
Just because the doom mongers have been wrong does not mean they always will be.
Some within the oil industry (and posters like bigfish) will point to various exciting new discoveries of oil. But all the really big finds were made in the 50s and 60s and whats left is the hard to get at and often unviable sources. Yes they're will be lots of effort to try and squeeze more out the ground to try and maintain the presnet unsustainable levels of consumption - but its a denial of reality to pretend that another Saudi Arabia will come on line.
The only possible response is for an unprecedented level of global co-operation to manage the effect of energy depletion. The very best case scenario is a 1930s style economic slump - but much of the worlds media and governments are in a state of denial.
So if what im writing is substantially true (and I really and sincerely hope i'm wrong ) this than we need to act now. We need to convince people of what is happening.
We need to come up with answers and a plan pretty fucking quickly.
We definitely need to cut consumption (and that essentially means an end to economic growth).
Thanks for you time. Please convince me the doomongers are wrong because i like to sleep at night and I don’t want my kids to grow up in a world that’s going down the toilet.
May be I should apologise for the doom laden title. 'End of the World' Headlines are nothing if not attention grabbing.
Thing is I scared myself half to death last night doing some more reading up on peak oil. If your not familiar with the arguments you really need to be - this article gives is a pretty clear outline http://www.oildecline.com/index.htm -. If other people have got links to other good clear level headed info please post them up.
I first started reading about this three years ago and it seemed pretty scary then - but it was still a relatively fringe concern and looking like it was 15 years off and more optimistic prognosis was that the switch to renewables was difficult but doable.
But the relentless hike in oil prices and the ever more gloomy economic forecasts all point to it being here right now - pretty close to where predicted Hubbert (I think he said 2012) it would be over 30 years ago (Hubber correctly predicted that US oil production would peak in the early 70s and he used the same model to predict global peak production) . Politicians and oil industry spokesmen are openly stating 'the era of cheap oil is over' - but they are not saying what that means.
What it means is this. Absolutely everything depends on a ever increasing supply of cheap oil - including most of the global economy and the ability of the planet to feed a population of 6 billion. Without oil we could only produce a third of the food we do now.
If we are at the limits of oil production it means that the economic growth of the past 200 years goes into steady decline, economic slump mass unemployment, mass starvation and probably inevitable wars over oil producing areas. Place like Iraq and Iran.
The worst case scenario is the collapse of industrial society within the next 20 - 30 years in the face of serious energy depletion and the growing effects of global warming - plus increasingly desperate nation states with nuclear weapons. I mean you can make it as apocalyptic as you want really - right down to all complex life forms on the planet being wiped out. IN OUR LIFETIMES.
But what about those renewables? They are not going to replace oil. They cant. The only thing that will is nuclear fusion (theoretical ‘free’ energy that has been ‘25 years away’ for the past 50 years )
One teacup of petrol can lift move a car to the top of a 1000 meter incline.
Hydro Carbons - especially crude oil - is by far the cheapest most readily available source of energy on the planet. It has created the last 200 years of economic, industrial, population and scientific growth.
Most renewables rely on cheap energy (i.e. oil) for thier own viability and even the best case estimates have renewables still only providing less than half of present global energy needs within any sort of foreseeable future.
Just because the doom mongers have been wrong does not mean they always will be.
Some within the oil industry (and posters like bigfish) will point to various exciting new discoveries of oil. But all the really big finds were made in the 50s and 60s and whats left is the hard to get at and often unviable sources. Yes they're will be lots of effort to try and squeeze more out the ground to try and maintain the presnet unsustainable levels of consumption - but its a denial of reality to pretend that another Saudi Arabia will come on line.
The only possible response is for an unprecedented level of global co-operation to manage the effect of energy depletion. The very best case scenario is a 1930s style economic slump - but much of the worlds media and governments are in a state of denial.
So if what im writing is substantially true (and I really and sincerely hope i'm wrong ) this than we need to act now. We need to convince people of what is happening.
We need to come up with answers and a plan pretty fucking quickly.
We definitely need to cut consumption (and that essentially means an end to economic growth).
Thanks for you time. Please convince me the doomongers are wrong because i like to sleep at night and I don’t want my kids to grow up in a world that’s going down the toilet.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
Sorry mate, some of us can largely explain their unwillingness to be parents in the first place for this very reason.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
"We also need to check the search thread facility"...
You're preaching to the choir here on Urban 75 matey. There's about 1,000 threads already on Peak Oil, and one thread with about a thousand pages! ("A geologist explains....")
A thread thats hundreds of pages long and doesn't mention peak oil in the title. I vote its time for a fresh one.
But perhaps not two, eh? Bit dumb really - if it doesn't get merged, it'll be nonsense
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Without a doubt humans could live in harmony with the planet.
Humans are very adaptable - we could adapt to a period of declining population and declining trade, though some bits of the process might not be very pretty at all - still that's the case now as we manoeuvre for resources.
We have at our disposal the enormous leaps in technology that oil gave us - we have only just begun using renewables. Who knows what limit they really have if leaps in superconductivity are made?
We've seen the worst humanity can do - the future would have to go some to beat the 20th century.
This planet is a garden - we don't have to starve.
Humans are very adaptable - we could adapt to a period of declining population and declining trade, though some bits of the process might not be very pretty at all - still that's the case now as we manoeuvre for resources.
We have at our disposal the enormous leaps in technology that oil gave us - we have only just begun using renewables. Who knows what limit they really have if leaps in superconductivity are made?
We've seen the worst humanity can do - the future would have to go some to beat the 20th century.
This planet is a garden - we don't have to starve.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Well I take that point but it doesn't mean its not happening. If so - a mass popular repsonse that re-orders society along principles of human need, global equity and a break up of ruling class power hegonomies is probably essential to the survival of the planet - and how the fuck do we there from where we are now?
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
This planet is a garden - we don't have to starve.
Thats very nice but just saying it doesn't make it so.
The massive growth in food production was only possible on the back of crude oil. You need another equivalnet energy source or mass starvaiton is inevtibale.
And hoping for some magic wand technologiocal solution is a not a vaible plan either
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Oh dear - look I'm really not out to argue with you all the time GG but that's a nonsense.
If you don't wish to have kids that's absolutely up to you.
But not for that reason - you live in a time of excellent health care, low infant mortality and superb primary education. If you aren't dirt poor its just fine being a child in Britain.
A few years back people wouldn't have kids because of the threat of nuclear war - there is always a reason and yet your children would have a future incomparably safer than at any time of most of history.
DON"T LISTEN TO MAD GREENIES - HAVE KIDS IF YOU WANT!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Have a read of the article for some ideas. One of them is to avoid going all apocalytpic and get a serious view of where we are and where we're going and why. And one of the first steps towards that is surely is to strip this debate of many of its essential assumptions. That's what that short article is aiming to do. It's not going to give you a definintive answer but it might help people ask the right questions...
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Don't agree - the planet couldn't take continued increase in population, or continued wasteful use and production - cattle for example. But it could probably produce enough calories for us all right now - in an austere life admittedly.
However there will not be no oil as of tomorrow. The change to harmonius production has time to take place.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
No it doesn't. Food prices are going up becasue oil prices are going up and they will contiunue to go up. That means more and more of the poorest people will be less and less able to buy food. The richer nations need for oil will trump the needs of the poorer nations.
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
We are arguing about different things. I am saying that there can be a way.
I'm not saying the next few years isn't going to be tough.
Economic behaviour can change very rapidly though - who is to say that petrol driven cars will be part of the landscape at all in 20 years for example?
david dissadent
New Member
Err Id argue not at the moment the hikes in food prices have been due to conversion of crops to biofuels, reducing the amount of crop available on the market for food and increasing the number of consumers (ethanol factories), major increases in the amount of meat being eaten in the world due to the new wealth in the east, droughts (especialy Australia and parts of the US) floods (esp the states) and other climatic events reducing production have all taken there toll on the supply\ demand side of things.
But yes increases in the cost of diesel and nitrate fertilisers are playing a role but not the dominate one atm imho.
david dissadent
New Member
Show me the numbers. Sorry but I just do not believe renewables are anywhere near capable of returning the energy return on investment (eroi) to make up for the depleting rates of oil production that are being anticipated over the next decade or two.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Only if people actually do something about it. A solution - or a best case scenario of harm reduction - will not come out of thin air. Your argument seem to be ''oh it'll be alright" with nothing to back it up.
Read the link and please find something that conviningly counters the doom-mongers.
Similar threads
- Poll
