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.

Reasons to Love 3-Digit Oil

sharksm, I agree with your basic points (We shouldn't mandate XOM, BP, etc. to do or not do certain things, though they may do it on their own, and we should invest in alt. energy R&D and production).
But we can't drill our way out of this problem. We simply don't have enough oil in our control (ANWR, off-shore, etc) to raise production enough to lower prices. I'm sure eventually we'll drill there anyway., but let's save it for the real crisis yet to come.
And your original post suggested electric cars are expensive & unrealistic, which I disagree with. We are going to see an explosion of new cars (finally!) in the next 4 years - hybrids, PHEVs, BEVs, due to market forces. CARB, PNGV and other government mandates tried to lead companies here proactively, but it took market reaction to get real movement. Unfortunately American companies were slower to react than others.

Reasons to Love 3-Digit Oil

Stockpikr has a point. Fuel cells in particular are not a magic bullet. But electric cars are more efficient than ICE, they haven't been used because of entrenched beliefs and perception about battery needs. We need to make rational changes when faced with a coming crisis (it isn't here yet, folks!). Electric cars are part of the solution, but not the only part. Unfortunately, Brahm might be more correct than we want to think.
PaulK, even if abiotic oil is true (definitely not a mainstream idea), it would be so hard to find and so far to drill to these ultra-deep sources that oil prices wouldn't be any lower than they are today. Read the above story about Brazil's ultra-deep wells.

Reasons to Love 3-Digit Oil

Sharksm, the energy companies (XOM, CVN, etc) are in the energy business. Their oil supplies are drying up or being taken over by nationalized corporations. They need to come up with new energy sources to stay in business, BP is not promoting itself as 'Beyond Petroleum' for nothing. Get informed.
Electric cars do not need to cost $45K, with mass production they will be equivalent to cars on the market, with a lot less maintenance and repair needed. They can be powered by unused electric capacity at night, with a very minimal increase in CO2 - saving CO2 by reducing (by attrition) the number of inefficient gas guzzlers on the road. An existing ICE vehicle is <30% efficient (converting fuel to motion), electric vehicles are about 90% efficient.
Last point - our own oil supplies will be fully tapped, I'm sure, but why not wait until we need the oil to keep our farms running, no reason to use our own oil now just to keep John Doe driving to the grocery store in his Chevy Tahoe. We don't have enough to keep ourselves powered for long at all, or we would already have done this in the oil embargo of '79.