nerfer

Oil Supermajors' Resources Might Be Drying Up

Good read, thanks for the info. Is the Bakken field in North Dakota/Montana considered an EOR? It's a pretty rich field from what I hear, but requires horizontal drilling in a narrow layer fairly deep down.

Don't Believe Long-Term Oil Forecasts

You're referring to Jevons Paradox. There's two points I'd like to make on that:
1) This holds well if there is an indefinite supply limited primarily by cost of production. If oil is in decline, the cost of production will be going up, and overall consumption may not rise after all.
2) Regardless of overall consumption, if each unit produced is used more effectively, more work will get done with the same amount of units consumed. More people get to work, more things get made, more relatives are visited, etc. Increasing efficiency is still a good thing and a worthwhile goal, even if overall usage doesn't go down.

On Nov 10 12:59 PM Blair wrote:
> The basic issue regarding oil is that it is a high density energy
> material. No doubt we can reduce consumption per unit, however, there
> will be more units to consume the energy. Consequently, the issue
> is simple - overall consumption will increase, with all of intended
> (and unintended) consequences.

Don't Believe Long-Term Oil Forecasts

Thanks, I agree 100% with your comments. The poster you replied to apparently hasn't looked at oil production & discovery charts. 150 years ago oil was barely relevant, in the 70's U.S. production of oil was indeed peaking, now it's the world's turn for peak oil. There's still oil out there, but pumping it at the rates we want won't be cheap. Since U.S. dollars are backed in oil (no longer gold), any increase in the price of oil makes everything else more expensive for Americans.

"Geology rules, and Mother Nature bats last." That should be a bumper sticker.

Also, I was looking for the article on inflated numbers from the EIA, I heard a comment on the radio, but hadn't seen anything else about this today.

On Nov 10 04:00 PM User 391256 wrote:
> Well, 70% of the petroleum geologists at the Petroleum Geology Conference
> in London believe that peak oil is a concern. (www.theoildrum.com/nod...).
:
> We are heading onto the downslope of oil production just as we headed
:
> there are no scalable alternatives in the way of portable
> transportation fuels available... not talking about hypotheticals
> here or wishful thinking about human ingenuity. The world uses around
> 80 million barrels (=3,360,000,000 gallons) A DAY mostly for transportation.
> The current state of alternatives is a drop in the bucket. The most
> recent figure for global decline in production is between 6% and
> 7% per year with discoveries having peaked about 40 years ago. Price
> will likely go up and down as tight supplies drive it up and then
> recession drives it down in a long stairstep descent into a lower
> energy economy. Geology rules, and Mother Nature bats last.
>

> [Edit] After writing this comment I discovered a reference to this
> article: www.guardian.co.uk/env...
> casting doubt on the IEA reporting even though their forecasts are
> getting more reality based than they have been in the past.

Geopolitical Energy: Centered on the Caspian Sea (Part 2 of 2)

Fitzman, I haven't read the book, altho it definitely sounds interesting, so I don't know the timeline of talks with the Taliban. I'm sure funding for Afghanistan dropped significantly after the Russia pull-out however, and we couldn't ignore the terrorist aspect after 9/11. For the years in between I need more information.

WRT Iranian nukes, it's probably a combination of motivations. Close neighbors (including Israel and Shiite-run countries) are definitely part of it, but upsetting the U.S. would be a good side-affect for them.

Mythbuster - We will still use fossil fuels in the future, but the idea that the U.S. can support its current rate of use by North American supplies (let alone just U.S. supplies) is a dangerous fallacy. Efficiency and conservation are the first two steps we should take for immediate improvement, then renewables, including geothermal and improving the grid to handle varying loads of wind power. Recharge electric cars overnight. Battery R&D. These are things to improve the American economy, not thinking that drilling is our only solution.

Geopolitical Energy: Centered on the Caspian Sea (Part 2 of 2)

Good article, good food for thought. But I disagree on the Talibans - I think they were considered our friends while they were fighting Russia (there is the line of thought that the bankruptcy of U.S.S.R. from low oil prices during the Reagan years and their military defeat in Afghanistan is what allowed Poland and the Communist Bloc countries to break free of Russia). Once we no longer needed the Taliban to fight Russia, we lost interest (see Charlie Wilson's war), in the subsequent vacuum they joined up with Al Qaeda and bin Laden. They always treated their women and history badly, but only after 9/11 did we agree they were really terrorists and actually enemies.

Americans Forget High Oil Prices Too Quickly

Totally agree with a columnist, which is kind of unusual, but I have a couple comments:
1) the good years under Clinton were probably due in large part to the exceptionally cheap oil of that time. I expected a recession to come from high oil prices, but was surprised by the extent of the housing/finance collapse. (This might buy us time with oil supply). Even with today's cheap-ish oil I doubt we'll ever get back to times like the Clinton years in the next couple decades as oil prices cannot sustainably drop any lower than what they are. There was speculation on the top side in summer, now there's speculation on the low side.

2) I am continually surprised by conservatives who think the status quo is patriotic and we need to buy big American vehicles. Putting our economy totally under the will and abilities of unstable and unfriendly countries is so dangerous it should be considered un-American, even treasonous, to use an SUV for commuting to an office job.

Oil Manipulations Exposed

Brian Pursley - The first article trusts the middle east numbers for their oil reserves, even though there is good evidence those are politically manipulated (their country quotas are based on that) and there is no verification of any of those numbers. The last two articles don't argue for abiotic production, but do say there are large, biological sources of oil deeper down. If that is the case, they are feeding the higher sources sporadically or only in certain locations, since most sources of oil have not shown any signs of recovery, in fact many have post-peak production declines sharper than expected (North Sea, Mexico). Certainly not a 'renewable, infinite' resource as you say, and I'm hanging onto my '06 Prius for many more years.

T Stephens - good post, even with the typos. If the hedge funds/futures market were suddenly the cause for the run-up in prices like the author is saying, why not the other commodity markets, and why not ten years ago also? I'm not going to say there is no manipulation or deceit at all in the market place, but that's not the cause of our current high prices. We're hitting peak oil production, and the sooner we accept that, the sooner we can create real solutions.

Oil Manipulations Exposed

Brian - Not sure about your post. Oil is not infinite, even if you buy into the fringe abiotic hypothesis (mostly championed by Russia, which is now in production decline). We didn't take Iraq's oil in 1990, Bush Sr. knew there was no exit strategy if we took out their government, we just kicked them out of Kuwait (which would substantially increase their oil reserves and shipping access for oil, so yes, it was about oil, intelalum).
Timsinoil - price of crude has risen more often than not lately, why single out 2000's election? You could look at the terror alerts in the 2004 election for easier political manipulations.
Mikey - if this is a bubble (and it could easily be froth on top of a fundamental increase) it will hurt us at the pump, then at the grocery store, then in the unemployment line, and that's bad for everybody. That's why this is important, even if you personally can make short-term profits in trading.

We can't drill our way out of this. It can help marginally, but it's not a major piece of the solution. It's things we can do - driving the speed limit, with tires at proper pressure, will reduce our gasoline consumption 10%. Efficient , reasonably sized vehicles will save another 25%-50%. Electric vehicles and living close to work will be a part of our future.

Oil Manipulations Exposed

Interesting article. But the Nymex trading mechanisms haven't changed dramatically in the last four years that I know of, so why is that the cause of the higher prices?

Peak oil is hitting, the demand and supply curves are separating, global demand has increased despite the author's statement otherwise, and supply is peaking and will go down. I am not an oil "apologist" to use the author's biased terms, I am a realist. I've read about the petroleum supply for years. I know Mexico's supply has peaked, the North Sea has peaked, Prudhoe Bay has peaked. Saudi Arabia's king has stated they won't increase production after next year, and give reasons for only minor increases now, indicating they are really peaking but not admitting it. We can definitely drill more here in the states, but it is a drop in the bucket, we peaked a long time ago. What we need is a presidential administration that will support real answers like conservation, cellulosic ethanol and electric vehicles. Efficiency = productivity, it's a good thing for business and the home.