 | I guess this is discourse...? (or Levitt of Freakonomics on today's Maass piece) | The Oil Drum | Welcome to the New Digs...(an open thread...) |  |
Deffeyes on Book TV (CSpan2) Tonight
Posted by Prof. Goose on August 21, 2005 - 4:35pm
On the weekend, C-SPAN2 becomes Book TV. At midnight EDT (Sunday/Monday Aug. 21/22), Kenneth Deffeyes will be on Book TV giving a talk titled "Beyond Oil: The view from Hubbert's Peak."
The Book TV schedule can be found here:
Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak
Kenneth Deffeyes
Description: Geologist, author, and Princeton University professor Kenneth Deffeyes writes that world oil production is no longer increasing in his new book, "Beyond Oil: The View From Hubbert's Peak." The title of the book comes from petroleum geologist M. King Hubbert, who formulated that the world's oil production would reach its peak in 2000 and begin to decline rapidly until the global fossil fuel supplies went dry. Mr. Deffeyes believes that the world's oil production would peak at the close of 2005 and that the eventual absence of fossil fuels would have a devastating and potentially catastrophic effect on world economies. The book also lists the potential replacement fossil fuel energy sources and the ways in which they can be utilized effectively.
Author Bio: Kenneth Deffeyes is a geologist and professor emeritus at Princeton University. He is also the author of "Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage."
Technorati Tags: peak oil, oil
Description: Geologist, author, and Princeton University professor Kenneth Deffeyes writes that world oil production is no longer increasing in his new book, "Beyond Oil: The View From Hubbert's Peak." The title of the book comes from petroleum geologist M. King Hubbert, who formulated that the world's oil production would reach its peak in 2000 and begin to decline rapidly until the global fossil fuel supplies went dry. Mr. Deffeyes believes that the world's oil production would peak at the close of 2005 and that the eventual absence of fossil fuels would have a devastating and potentially catastrophic effect on world economies. The book also lists the potential replacement fossil fuel energy sources and the ways in which they can be utilized effectively.
Author Bio: Kenneth Deffeyes is a geologist and professor emeritus at Princeton University. He is also the author of "Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage."
Technorati Tags: peak oil, oil
“Government is too big and too important to be left to the politicians.”
—Claire Huchet Bishop
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.
One thing that I always hear goes like this "current oil prices are way lower than 79's prices if you adjust them by inflation".
So, please, could someone tell me where I can find the oil prices adjusted by inflation of, say, the last 30 years?
The current price of 65$, adjusted by inflation, how many times has happened before?
Thanks
Fernando
http://theoildrum.blogspot.com/2005/08/repost-gas-tax-increases-revisited.html
- US oil production peaked in 1971, followed by the OPEC embargo early in the 1970's and the Iranian Revolution in 1979.
- In 1982, US dependency on imports was very heavy and new supply, which was not yet developed at the time, had not come online.
- As new supply came online in the 80's and 90's, oil prices fell. US oil import dependency was ignored.
Now, in the year 2005, world oil production is peaking, not just US production. No new supplies of the magnitude of those produced in the 80's are coming online any time soon. The best example of this is the North Sea production, which is now in decline.Therefore, although prices are still well below their (adjusted for inflation 1982 peak), there are no large oil fields coming online to save us and the problem is world-wide (China, India). Oil discoveries peaked decades ago and new fields coming on line are relatively small. To give you an idea of this, imagine a new field with reserves of 20.7 billion barrels of oil (that would be very large). That is 1000 days of current US demand if we got it all. So, oil is still cheap in the USA because prices are kept artificially low to stimulate the economy. However, this strategy will no longer work in the future as demand outstrips supply.
It is currently around 11:00 p.m. and I will watch the event at midnight and even some reactions. I hope every one else will watch the event as well and we can all discuss it after midnight.
though the chick that just introduced him absolutely butchered about every word she said, including his name, Hubbert, and just about everything else she said. Moron. Nervous moron, but moron either way.
Counting the water and some downstream costs for transportation after retorting, and discounting the environmental damage, it appears that oil shale EROEI gets very close to 1.0. As I've said before, I doubt with Duffeyes that we'll ever develop oil shale.
When questions came up about future oil prices or what the effect would be on the price of gasoline at the pump, he simply was honest and stated that those issues all depended on government reaction and what happened to the demand side of the equation.
It continues to amaze me how many layers there are to Peak Oil Theory!!!
You start with the Geology behind the theory. "Once half of all Oil is depleted, production reaches a peak." Then you can go further into the Geology and discuss the possibility of using unconventional tar sands, shale oil and coal to replace conventional oil. Once, you think you have a handle on the geology side of things, you realize that you have not considered the economic impacts of this theory.
So you start with the Economics behind the theory. "Once we reach the peak of oil production, demand starts to out strip supply." Then, you can go further into the Economics and discuss how, "when oil prices rise, it may or may not cause demand destruction." Once you think you have a handle on the economic side of things, you realize that you have not considered the political sub text of this theory.
So you start with the Politics behind the theory. "Most likely, OPEC has largely overstated it's total oil reserves and the major oil companies have slightly understated their total oil reserves. Then, you can go further into the Political issues and discuss the fact that, almost none of the OPEC members have had their reserves audited by an independent third party. Finally, once you think you have a handle on the Geology, Economics, and Politics involved in the Peak Oil Theory, you are still left with the "2 Trillion Barrel Question".
When will we hit Peak? 2005? 2007? 2010?
And more importantly, will we be able to adjust to the Post Oil World???
It really is true. "The more you know, the more you understand you know nothing."
But, hey...I guess that's what happens when you run into the largest problem that humanity will probably ever face. :|
Were it not for our unstoppable population growth and desire for economic "prosperity" in the form of SUV's and other large consummables, PO would not be such a problem. Global Warming is the Godzilla that will make PO into a peep squeak side show in the over all, "step back" scheme of things. If we have runaway methane release from the melting permafrost bogs, PO will be the non-event of the century; humanity's last century. Where is your market now, "economy" boy?
(Translation: Who's yo mamma now, economist? Mother Nature? Don't mess with her Mr. Market Captain Ahab. She going to take you down and out on the first count of your silver coins.)
I know more than I admitted about oil.
My point is that even if you take the numbers in the
Maass article as true, there is no reason to think
disaster is near.
Steve
----------
Thank god everything will be ok. I feel so much better.... :)
"The late Stephen Jay Gould used to recommend this book to his undergraduate students, because it presents the role of contingency in evolution so clearly and amusingly." http://www.bureau42.com/view/2738
His second book ignores battery cars and methanol synthesis from coal. It's probably because these are not things that he knows about like he knows about geology. He is a bit elderly and may not want to do the work of looking at alternatives to oil.
But relax. We can mine lower grade lead and zinc sources and build lots of giant lead acid batteries for our cars. Probably about five years from now, if we start right away. Hey, have you heard that they are on back order for big tires for mining vehicles? We've invested so little in mining that the companies can't ramp up production fast enough after the famine they went through for the last twentyfive years.
Synfuel plants are also capital intensive long lead time items. Again, it's about five years till we can ramp up production. We in America are importing iron ore, steel shapes, construction equipment, cement even, and to be a bit blunt, a lot of our labor supply in construction is EAASL, mostly spanish.
You may not drive as far or as fast as you have in the past, for the next five years. Deal with it. It's going to happen. But not forever, just for five years.
And I couldn't agree more about the need to look at the broader energy issues and alternatives, not just the oil situation. Restricting your focus to just oil willfully makes you one of the blind men touching the elephant, and reaching laughably absurd conclusions.
But things will be OK after five years? I'll respond the same way I do to the doomsayers who think we'll all be living in caves and eating grubs: Proof, please.
This is not meant to be sarcasm or a bid to start an argument. My contention all along has been that both ends of the optimism scale are wrong, and that they bring too many preconceived notions to the table. The doomsayers have this barely hidden desire to see mankmind get its comeuppance, while the rosy scenario crowd can't or won't deal with change (and economic and therefore human pain) on a massive scale.
My personal belief, which I've expressed numerous times here and on my own site, is that peak oil is real, it's imminent (within the next 5 years, likely in 2007 as per ASPO), and it will be a royal bitch. But it won't be the downfall of industrialized civilization; the people predicting that are, in my opinion, grossly underestimating the flexibility and ingenuity of the human race and, yes, the market. And the people who are predicting we will continue with "business as usual" are overlooking at least some of the facts and/or their ramifications.
How dare you!
We are short of high octane and high cetane liquid fuels. We have plenty of coal and plenty of power plants, and we can build more power plants and coal mines for baseload power and more line focus solar power plants for peaking power. We can also build more windpower plants.
This is not a problem with energy, but with transportation.
We can increase energy production much more quickly than we can build synthesis plants for liquid fuels and base metal mines for batteries for electric or hybrid cars.