 | Peak Energy Oz: Peak Oil and the Philosopher's Stone | The Oil Drum | Listening to the cacophony and trying to make some sense |  |
Rigzone: 'Peak Oil' Argument Does Not Account for Nontraditional Sources
Posted by Prof. Goose on December 7, 2005 - 8:35pm
The world is not running out of oil, and fears of "peak oil" are prompted more by outdated reserve reporting requirements than anything else, an industry analyst told a U.S. House panel today.
Robert Esser, senior consultant and director of global oil and gas resources for Cambridge Energy Research Associates, said his firm's field analyses and experience with geology shows "a substantial buildup of liquid capacity over the next several years," from so-called nontraditional petroleum sources that will become more common over time.http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=27580CERA projects world oil production will rise from 87 million barrels a day this year to 108 million barrels by 2015.
Esser told the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee that production would reach an "undulating plateau" followed by a long, slow declining profile similar to that which individual countries and producing regions have experienced.
Robert Hirsch, senior energy program adviser for SAIC and proponent of the "peak oil" theory, noted that peak oil assumes that there will be significant resources still left in the ground. "But it won't be the oil we and the rest of the world needs as the lifeblood for our economy and our civilization," he said.
While several lawmakers at the hearing noted promising advances in coal-to-liquids, alternative fuels and hydrogen technologies, Rep. Roscoe Batlett (R-Md.), the major congressional champion of peak oil, asserted that at an annual increase of 2 percent of coal consumption, the much-touted 250 years of domestic resources would shrink to 85 years. And by using the coal-for-liquid fuels, it shrinks further to 50 years, he added.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
I have a bet for Mr Esser: my life verses his (no point pussy-footing, and I think we can chuck in a billion or more random lives too), on: global oil production never, ever, reaches 108 mbpd in 2015 or any other year.
LOL, I would love to see him say in detail where he thinks it is coming from. Heck, I want his life so bad that I would take less than 95 mbpd peak by 2010. His soul would be forfeit if it hadn't been sold already, Grrrr!
what does he mean by this?
What he means by this statement, which is good in a way, is that Alternative sources will come on line that will replace traditional petroleum sources. Now hopefully these new sources will include Biomass and other organic and renewable sources instead of digging, mining, or pumping a non-renewable and environmentally destructive resource out of our planet.
One way to look at it is what if next year someone discovered that we could generate 200% more energy globally each year by draining the blood from 1 million people a year, would the world signup for that? Probably. What if that number was 10 million or 100 million? That might be pushing it.
Now, what if there was a Natural, Organic, and Renewable Energy resource that could be produced in any amount required to generate practically Unlimited and Clean Energy that wasn't made of human blood? Would you sign up for it?
Just about everyone would except for the greedy bastards running the corporations and this country, it would impact their bottom lines. Funny how it all comes down to money.
There is a solution that solves all our energy problems and their associated environmental issues as well. It can also solve the economic crisis in this country by replacing all petroleum based products and their associated environmental restrictions that have forced numerous industries to foreign countries that have no EPA or Environmental Laws. In other words, they can destroy the environment with those countries governmental blessings.
What is the answer? Cannabis, Hemp, Marijuana.
End of story.
Quote:
Over the past two years I have made an uncomfortable discovery. Like most environmentalists, I have been as blind to the constraints affecting our energy supply as my opponents have been to climate change. I now realise that I have entertained a belief in magic.
In 2003, the biologist Jeffrey Dukes calculated that the fossil fuels we burn in one year were made from organic matter "containing 44 x 1018 grams of carbon, which is more than 400 times the net primary productivity of the planet's current biota". In plain English, this means that every year we use four centuries' worth of plants and animals.
You're joking right? If you grow the plants indoors, that doesn't mean they no longet need N, P, and K. Now you've got to mine for the P and K and use natural gas to create the Nitrogen. You've just shifted the "negative issues" to someplace other than where the plants are grown.
-BiologyFool (who thinks MJ should be legalized for other reasons)
From the best case,{10years leadtime and thats if we get some real leadership in the whitehouse.}To the worse case.{we are at peak now and kadie bar the door}...No attempt has been made ,or commitment of resource made at this time, for the infrastucture neccesary to convert to alternitive fuels.
The only actions that have been taken were to secure the resource by millitary means
Its always easier to steal/control than build.
Until I see a dozen coal gasification plants,a nuke sitting up on the tarsands of canada,and reseach prizes for energy efficiency,and conservation as a national priority,I will remain of the opinion that we ,as a civilzation ,are in grave peril
Assuming everything goes just perfectly above the ground geopolitically and declines in existing megafields are not significant. Perhaps it is reasonable to call these questions into assumption? See Burgan in Kuwait.
Maybe a bit of a rant, but....
Never, never, underestimate the human capacity for self-deception. The way it is now (exponential growth notwithstanding) is the way it will always be. The sun rose yesterday, it rose again today, always has, always will, what's the problem?
Well, I'll tell you what the problem is in a nutshell:
- Events in Earth's Geological history changed constantly (admittedly over large timescales)
- This analogy applies to the smaller timescales we are experiencing now regarding oil depletion and climate change.
As I've said before, "Jesus Wept".http://tceconomist.blogspot.com/2005/12/testimony-on-peak-oil_07.html
http://tceconomist.blogspot.com/2005/12/testimony-on-peak-oil.html
REP. TOM UDALL
http://tceconomist.blogspot.com/2005/12/testimony-of-rep-tom-udall.html
Robert Esser, CERA Senior Consultant
http://tceconomist.blogspot.com/2005/12/oil-industry-growth-challenge.html
While statements of his like "peak oil... is not a helpful concept" and him forseeing rather "an undulating plateau 3 or 4 decades from now" raise some questions regarding his sanity, this was the clincher for me:
"All regions except US and North Sea will show strong growth to 2020."
I listened to that bit three times to be sure.
The only conclusion I am left with is: he must be on a different planet. Perhaps there really are two Earths which only coincide on the internet or in my deranged mind.
All these excuses about "urgent" and "important" and the urgent trumping the important are just that, excuses. Mother Nature pays no heed to excuse noises made by human critters or any other critters.
The reindeer on St. Matthews Island probably made similar noises which in their understanding distinguished between the "urgent" and the "important".
You can see it unfolding like this:
As I have pointed out before: Taking the trouble to systematically dissect the weaknesses of the case made by one's intellectual opponents is a very efffective way of strengthening one's own case.
Maybe move this to the Open Thursday Thread?
Background:
http://tceconomist.blogspot.com/2005/12/oil-industry-growth-challenge.html
Opening salvo:
Esser: "As a nation, we have previously gone through periods of deep concern about the adequacy of energy supplies."
translation: Ha Ha. Chicken Little was always wrong before and sound logic therefore assures us the Peakists are flat out wrong this time also
Esser: "Rather than an imminent "peak," we envision an "undulating plateau" two to four decades away.
translation: Ha Ha. Even if there ever will be a problem, which trust us there won't be, it is far far away in a distant galaxy and it's nothing more than a few minor bumps in the road
That or quantum uncertainty has made a sudden leap to the macro (human sized world) in which case reality will be very confusing or I have gone stark raving mad.
But seriously...
He's saying 2.0 to 2.5 mbpd supply increase per year for the next 5 years from the 10 biggest projects per year, plus, presumably (my presumption), a similar amount per year from smaller projects, and a decline rate of less than 5% for FIP (interpolated).
2.5 + 2.5 - 2.0 = +3 per year = 100 mbpd in 2010
Easy wasn't it? I wish I were on his planet.
My gloomy Earth suggests:
1.7 + 1.0 - 4.0 = -1.3 per year = 79 mbpd in 2010
Hopefully these two quantum Earth states will collapse into a reality close to their mid point which will be near 95 mbpd in 2010. I can see no way of realistically conjouring the numbers higher.
[From O&GJ]
OPEC production capacity rising, IEA report says
Bob Tippee
....In its November Oil Market Report, the International Energy Agency increased its estimate of sustainable production capacity among members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries by 100,000 b/d to a total of 31.8 million b/d.
IEA expects further increases: to 32.1 million b/d by the end of this year and to 33 million b/d by the end of 2006.
The November increase accounts for expected gains by yearend of 50,000-100,000 b/d each from northern Kuwait, deepwater Bonga field off Nigeria, and onshore expansions in Abu Dhabi. They're offset by a 100,000 b/d reduction to 4 million b/d in the estimate for Iran, where there have been problems in the offshore Soroush-Nowruz heavy oil fields.
IEA expects that, net of assumed field declines, OPEC production capacity will increase by 2 million b/d during all of 2005-06.
Key gross additions during the period will be Algeria 255,000 b/d, Indonesia 85,000 b/d, Iran 370,000 b/d, Kuwait 300,000 b/d, Libya 150,000 b/d, Nigeria 485,000 b/d, Qatar 100,000 b/d, Saudi Arabia 450,000 b/d, the United Arab Emirates 200,000 b/d, and Venezuela 175,000 b/d. IEA also expects gains in OPEC members' capacities to produce NGLs and condensate totaling 600,000 b/d during the period.
Much of the new production capacity will yield fairly light, low-sulfur crude, which refiners favor. Capacity coming on stream recently has tended to be ...
Indonesia--+0.85/mbd? (they've tipped over into Type 3 depletion) or what about Kuwait--+0.3/mbd? (given Burgan peak) or Iran--+0.37/mbd? (given large decline rates) or Saudi Arabia--+0.45/mbd (of what, heavy sour crude nobody can refine right now?).
Questions, questions, I have problems with these numbers.
IMO it will be NG and not peak oil that will awaken the folks in the US to our energy problems. With fertilizer, chemicals, and plastics production moving to foreign locations this may temporarily ease demand for NG in the US, however it will be the farmers that really bring the problem to everyone's attention. I grew up during the 30's and 40's in the corn belt on a typical 160 acre farm, and I have a lot of contact back there with in-laws, nephews and etc. This past fall listening to there conversation was an earful. One farmer says: The way chemicals and fertilizer prices are increasing, If I stopped fertilizer application for a couple years I sure could dig myself out of this hole. The first year I could nearly maintain my corn yields, and the second year I could rotate them with beans and alfalfa. Maybe if we all do this we could knock down the surplus and bring up the price by the third year. Second farmer: Ya well with all the ethanol production coming on line the next few years the surplus is gone. If I can hang on a few more years your going to see big changes in cattle, hog and poultry prices, even eggs and milk, Ya corn prices are going to get the ball rolling for us. Third farmer: Ya but after a few years of high meat prices, all the welfare and fixed income people will be back on pancakes and cornbread, and all the burger eaters will be on peanut-butter and jelly, and we'll all be back in the same old fix again. First farmer: Na it don't work that way, I been reading about NG. This country's running short of NG and when they do look out. Everybody in the world will want it, That's when fertilizer prices will skyrocket and food prices also. That's when the government will step in and try to protect us. When food prices shoot up they'll pass a bunch of crazy laws wait and see. This'll not be like the 30's we may finally get our just reward. Show me somebody that works from sun up to sun down 7 days a week and then some, and I'll show you a BS artist. Second farmer: Ya well you ain't been talking to them diesel mechanics, and you ain't worked on Sunday since your kid started feeding the cattle, and further more you know we still all love it.