Interesting. So Tupi represents something more real than Jack. However it still

represents globally, at its peak ... less than half a percent of the world oil production

which is the key metric.

If you were to reverse the marketing spin effect, that suggests you would need to hear claims of reserves in the +20Gb range to relate to a find which could hit the 1Mbpd level needed to make a change to the price of fish?

Plus "800 Km long by 200Km wide" suggests a fragmented field, pushing up costs.

Regarding "I then explained to him what the largest oil field in the world was like, ...," I would like to read your explanation. What was the largest oil field in the world like?

http://science.reddit.com/info/61799/comments/

thanks for your support...

I guess it would be wishful thinking on our part to hope that the MSM would gain the expertise and wisdom to put these discoveries in context. As long as our discovery rate is not keeping up with our production rate and given our continuing increase in demand, perhaps at an accelerated rate, narrowly focusing on each discovery just serves to confuse the issue and confuse the public. Until we discover another easily accessible planet with lots and lots of oil, we should proceed under the conviction that oil cannot keep up with demand, leaving aside the eternal debate about whether we have peaked or when we will peak.

We are left, however, to drunkenly stagger and swagger into the future under the apparent conviction that divine intervention will give us the oil necessary to, for example, fuel automobiles for at least half of the Chinese population and much of India and the rest of the world. The Chinese, Indians, Americans, and others need to be given the message:

With a nod to Kunstler "Above all else, make other arrangements"

But nooooo!!!

An excellent piece, Luis. Thank-you.

It's natural that most folks don't want peak oil to happen. So they look for hope in the oddest places. Americans will demand oil from those horrible oil companies because there is obviously lots of oil in the ground and those companies are just hiding it to jack the prices up. After all, it is there for the taking only 3 miles deep through water, salt and rock. Peak oil is part geology, part economics and a lotta politics to come. There may be huge deposits of oil available which will not be tapped because the costs will exceed financial returns. A going rate of $500/barrel may be inadequate to recover the cost of drilling deep.

God I hope we find a bunch of North Seas!!

That will help us to kill off the planet in STYLE!!!

I see these people who wish for more and more oil as nothing less than arms dealers, enablers of mass murder, cheerleaders of planetary death.

No, Cherenkov, tell us what you really think!! Okay, I will.

People who wish for more oil may as well be pleading for all serial killers and child rapists to be released from prison, be given immunity from prosecution, and relocated into housing near schools.

Wishing for more oil is shamelessly sociopathic behaviour given what we know about fossil fuel's effect upon the global environment.

If not for all the decent people out there who truly want to stop this runaway train, I would simply say, good enough, let the humans kill off the human plague. Perhaps the rest of the Earth's biota will be able to carry on in this world we have so successfully damaged.

http://www.populistamerica.com/stop_calling_me_a_doomer

Since we are discussing Brazilian oil production, I thought I would post a reminder of this 2003 article quoting Wood MacKenzie saying Brazilian oil production was likely to peak in 2007:

"In the short-term Brazil is still on the map, but something has to be done in the tax area to make new discoveries commercial, plus technological advances are needed to pump heavy oil from extreme depths," she said.

Geddes added that under present conditions, Brazil's output was likely to rise in the next few years and peak in 2007. But the increase only was "masking the bad news that it will enter a steep decline post-2007," she said.

Looking at the latest production figures, published today it does seem that Brazilian production has stagnated, and in fact it has now fallen for four months in a row.

Of course, Tupi may make a big difference, but it could be that when the field does start to produce, other Brazilian production will be declining.

Petrobras is the most profitable private company (of all commercial sectors)

Isn't it controlled by the Brazilian government?

Composicao capital social

A final question should be answered, was Petrobras needing this kind of media attention?

In fact, yes. Even more so, the government, which has a tight control over Petrobras, does to.

The problem is gas. Petrobras had a contract in which it paid for a certain amount of gas to be imported from Bolivia no matter how much gas it actually needed. So the government spent a few years trying to get internal consumption up, in cars, industry and eletricity generation.

It was successful in that. And then, Bolivia government changed, Bolivian gas became more expensive, it's supply meager, and, on top of that, this years' rains have beens scarce.

And with the water reservoirs low, the government had no choice but to power up a few thermoeletric generators, for which Petrobras had no gas. And, thus, Petrobras was ordered to redirect gas to those generators, in detriment to all the people who had migrated to gas.

And, finally, with gas scarce and Bolivia jacking up it's prices, the price of the gas will go up to.

So, yes, Petrobras, and it's owner, the Brazilian government, was looking for good news.

Recycled news, too. This reservoir was announced one or two years back. At that time, the quality of the oil was unknown. They now know more, and re-announced the discovery.

Daniel Sobral

I have made a summary on http://forums.oleocene.org/viewtopic.php?t=6448&postdays=0&postorder=asc...
Oleocene.org, of the technicalities of Tupi - why the Brasilians threw $1 bn at a deep-sea adventure many specialists thought hopeless. It seems to me the situation is a bit different :
- the Brasilians knew what they were looking for
- what they found (proved) is merely the beginning.

Brasil President Lula made a big annoucement of it, with good reason : this find is both a world class achievement, and a world class reservoir.

No reservoir, whatever its size, will cancel the final depletion of the earth oil ; but this "kid" will change a few world figures.

"A final question should be answered, was Petrobras needing this kind of media attention?"

Petrobras surely didn't need the attention. But it is hard to not notice the coincidence that this announcement was made shortly before a big crunch at Bovespa. A crunch that was easy to anticipate because the American stocks were already losing value by the time.

So, did Petrobras investors need that kind of media attention? Yes, they did. Did Petrobras just discover that field by the time of the announcement? No they knew it long before the announcement, but how well isn't published info.

so, to sum up:

Its a real find, unlike Jack last year, but what it will produce per day is, at best, about what the US alone burns in about half an hour.

Naïve question time:

With respect to the salt layer, why can't they just send a rigid tube down along with the drill bit?

Sure, that tube would be at least 2 km long, would have to be carefully inserted through the rock layer, and be able to withstand pressure from the depth and the encircling salt, among other things.
And I could foresee bad things happening if the tube were ever to break...

As usual, M. King Hubbert had the best observation on reserves versus the peak. In 1956 he used two estimates for Lower 48 URR, a low case of 150 Gb and a high case of 200 Gb, resulting in his projected range for the Lower 48 peak of 1966 to 1971.

In other words, a one-third increase in URR delayed the projected peak by five years.

Considering that we are now producing around 288 mpd of water to produce around 80 mpd I now question the reliability of our reserve estimates in general. On average wells today are producing at a 80% water cut. I cannot fathom how anyone can consider given this that we are at 50% URR and still have 50% of the worlds oil to produce.

http://www.touchbriefings.com/pdf/2590/Ferro.pdf

Now consider this current discovery it will eventually be booked I'm sure as some multi GB discovery and will be included in future URR estimates for world resources.

But lets say they finalize with a cliam of 6 GB full production at best is probably 2015 considering the technical issues 2020 is reasonable give it at least 10 year s at peak capacity and your out to about 2030 before we would see the field in decline.

Now lets calculate URR a differnt way. Lets assume that the project wont proceed unless they are assured of a production of between 200-400kb for ten years.

So 200 kb a day for ten years gives a production of 0.75 GB
and 400 kb a day for ten years gives a production of 1.5 GB
after then years even assuming the field lasts 20 years gives 1.5-3GB given that the average lifetime for most offshore fields at peak production is less than 20 years most often 10 or less we can conclude that even the low estimate of 5GB may be 2-4 times what is actually recovered.

Indeed North Sea fields with these sorts of production rates have URR around 2 GB or so much less than 5GB claimed.

http://www.hubbertpeak.com/blanchard/

In this you can also see that my assertion of a lifetime of 10-20 of peak production seems true.

So how many of the trillion barrels of oil we supposedly have left or real ? My conclusion is most are a complete work of fiction.

Great article Luis thanks very much.
Just one point - I believe the timescale for meaningful production is too optimistic; one only has to peruse the Megaprojects list to see how most major projects seem prone to on-going slippage. I would wager it would be a year or two more than envisaged before the targetted amount of oil really flows.

Luis, thanks for this great overview of Tupi - and especially the view for the Brazilian media.

The main point I'd make is that we need to hear this story once every 3 months forever - cos that's how long the 5-8 Gbs will last based on Global consumption.

So the MSM face a dilema here. If they truly believe in a BAU model for our future world economy, then they really need to ignore news such as Tupi - cos this is run of the mill - once every 3 months non-news.

So when was the last super-giant discovered? Jack - maybe - but we're all holding our breath. Kashagan - well yes - but we're still all holding our breath (hoping not to inhale SO2) - or to be caught holding stock in any of the equity holders.

Its worth noting that BG group, who hold 25% of Tupi, were also involved in Kashagan - but sold out - a very smart company.

Another nail:

Frontline is re-asigning 28 VLCC this year,40 in 2008 to other types of cargo.Scrapyard next?

Nice find but in the scope of things, won't make much difference. As I watch energy, I am continually reminded of what the last couple of hours on the Titanic must have been like. Some, from the get go, saw reality. Others had lots of wishful thinking and hung on every rumor. The pumps are handling it, I think we've stopped sinking, there are enough life boats, etc, etc. Others wouldn't believe it even as the ship sank beneath them. We are going to have lots of false hopes, lots of rumors and rumors of rumors. Maybe, could be, should be, oughta be, on and on. The nice thing about rumors is they get exaggerated in the telling. For me, levels of consumption and predicted consumption answer the question. That and the inability of the human animal to move until the fire is burning it's butt.

Up the string, Cherenkov said,

"God I hope we find a bunch of North Seas!!

That will help us to kill off the planet in STYLE!!!"

That is one aspect I was pointing out the other day in my post, "What if thing DO get better?", when I asked, exactly what is BETTER?

Cherenkov is expressing outrage, but just as much seems to be expressing real fear. What if....there are another few North Seas out there?

One would hope of course that the oil found will be used wisely, i.e., to help provide the energy needed for the transition to renewables and advanced "efficiency" technology. But what are the odds? The truth is, there is a danger of an oil price collapse and a new burst of wasteful consumption...what I once called "the last great carbon luxury bath."

As long as good oil is around, trying to get people to convert to efficiency is pretty much like asking a meth addict to convert to beer....it just don't give the same buzz does it? :-(

We still have no idea, and I mean NO IDEA how much oil is in the Brazil coastal region, the offshore areas of China, the offshore areas of West Africa, the "empty quarter" of Saudi Arabia, offshore in the Persion Gulf area.....despite claims to the contrary, there are vast areas of the world that are virtually non explored (I won't even mention the OCS (outer continental shelf) area of the U.S., which would be a political hot potato)

My point is the same as I often make: There may be virtually no oil in ANY of these regions, and peak may be HERE NOW. We simply don't know.

Or, we may hit a few regions that dwarf the old "North Sea". We simply cannot know. It is the complete blindness that presents the greatest danger.

Many here say "well, we shouldn't be betting our whole existance on the idea that these "miracle finds" will save us." That is EXACTLY CORRECT.

But, likewise, we would be foolish to bet our whole economic and cultural future on the idea that no more oil will be found, and we are facing complete catastrophe NOW. (Heinberg/Kunstler theory, we'll call that)

Be very, very careful. Be ready to move in any direction as much as possible. Stay flexible. Do not marry your future to one agenda. It could be a very very expensive error. As I said in times past, been there, done that

RC

Very interesting article Luis, thanks.

One thing that might throw a monkey wrench in the works here is the salt. The salt, 2000 meters deep, is one and one quarter mile depth of salt. Does that salt flow? We know that salt does flow. Such a salt deposit in East Texas, in historical times, flowed upward and formed salt domes. The salt in the flat deposites would have flowed toward the domes. But of course that salt was much deeper, about 20,000 feet.

But a salt deposit of 1.25 miles thick, would have a much different temperature at the top than at the bottom. This could cause very slow convection flows. Worse yet, the salt appears to be on an incline. This would mean that the salt, being much lighter than the overlying rock, might be flowing up the incline, with the the salt toward the top getting deeper while the lower salt layer gets shallower.

Of course any massive shift would take place over geological time and one would think it would have little, if any effect. But a flow of only a centimeter a year could prove disasterous. After only four or five years the well bore could be broken and salt could intrude into the bore and cut off the flow of oil.

Just a thought and I wonder if the petroleum engineers have investigated it?

Note, the ice in the Antarctic always flows, but it flows at different rates, depending on the location and depth. Might very warm salt, under great pressure, behave in a similar manner?

...an area in the West Antarctic ice sheet where 150 years ago the ice suddenly stopped flowing in one area in the lower part of the stream. This so-called "sticky spot," currently flowing at a rate of 2 meters per year (about 6 feet), greatly differs from its neighboring streams, flowing at approximately 400 meters (1,300 feet) per year.

And for this very obvious reason, there can never be an oil well drilled through the Antarctic ice.

Ron Patterson