Tuesday Acronym Open Thread...

Super G has been hard at work compiling those acronyms (Thanks SG!).  If you note in the right sidebar, there is a link to a list.  What else needs to be on there?  (but this is also an open thread beyond an acronym-fest.)
What a nice reference to have! Very helpful for those of us who are not so familiar with the lingo - thanks!
DUET for Deep Universal Eternal Truth

I think we should focus more on DUETs and less on the froth of the day.

Thanks all.

I found a small typo in the OPEC link. Right now it goes to open.org instead of opec.org.

Thanks again.

now there's an irony.
On MSNBC yesterday I saw this guy from Harvard who said one of the year's biggest business ideas is OPIC, an Organisation of Petroleum Importing Countries, to bargain directly with OPEC. This raises the question of what if OPEC holds fast to a price higher than OPIC is willing to pay. How long can these countries refuse to buy from OPEC in order to force a long term agreement on price?  How long can the OPEC countries hold on without petrodollars and euros?
I love these kinds of stories.
It shows how phony the "price" signal is.
Irrespective of supply versus demand, if buyers form a COALLITION of the UNWILLING, the price is one number and if they don't it is another number.

I saw on CSPAN, one lady suggest that unions, in order to counter the "multinational" corporations that outsource work, should form multinational brotherhoods / sisterhoods.

(In either case, a black market would errupt where cheaters trade under the table for private gain. OPEC is a leaky valve to begin with.)

I love the acronym page. We should add some kind of glossary too, for jargon that isn't an acronym. For example: "upstream" and "downstream" as used in the oil industry. I've seem them in context so many time I think I know what they mean. But I've never seen these terms defined anywhere, so I'm not confident I know the true definitions.
AGW - Anthropogenic Global Warming (global warming due to human activity)

BTW (that means By The Way, by the way) I saw a couple of funny news stories juxtaposed today, regarding the price of oil. From CNN:


Will Iran dispute push oil to $130?
While the U.S. imports no Iranian crude, worries about Tehran's nuclear program are boosting prices. It could get a lot worse if the spigot is shut off.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Not a drop of oil from Iran reaches the nation's gas pumps. But escalating tensions about Iran's nuclear program are already being felt in oil and gas prices in the United States....

Simultaneously, from Bloomberg:


Oil Drops to 3-Week Low on Signs U.S. Supplies Jumped Last Week

That's the problem with the journalism business. You just got finished with this nice article all about how the Iran crisis is causing high oil prices, when they go and drop on you to a three week low. Suddenly your insightful article looks stupid.

And you, Halfin, asked me the other day why I disrespect the market prices.
JDH - James D Hamilton, Professor of Economics at the University of California, San Diego, authority on energy economics and co-author of the Econbrowser blog.
also known as "the man."
Bush budget has no money to buy emergency SPR oil:


Congress is requiring the Bush administration to add almost 300 million barrels to the nation's emergency oil stockpile, but the White House on Monday did not seek money to buy the crude in its proposed budget for the 2007 spending year sent to Congress.

Two comments:
1) I wonder if the reason oil is down is due to the CERA conference in Houston today - no doubt they are spinning the bearish case on oil. (Im being facetious regarding market but who knows?)

2)Sign of the times (goes along with Rapture index) Economics is now the most popular undergrad major

The invisible hand contigent grows. "The market will create parachutes after we step off the cliff!" (I guess if it's a really long way down...)
from undergrad major link above:
 "People are fascinated with applying the economic mode of reasoning to a wide variety of issues, and these forces are causing them to study economics more and more," says Lawrence H. Summers, president of Harvard and former secretary of the Treasury.

I can see some of these believers of "just-in-time supply chains" expecting the parachute to be handed to them as they pass the 33rd floor of the Empire State Building. (Overheard at the 34th floor level: "So far, so good.")  

Here are a couple fun links on the history of why "bbl" stands for "Blue Barrels"



I agree with Interloafer's comments about expanding this list into a glossary, beyond only acronyms.  In addition, some of the entries would be even more useful with a sentence explaining the context in which the term is used, etc.

As it stands, the Guide is already a valuable reference.  Thanks.

Uh-oh!  Looks like the Oil Companies want to cook their books in private now!
Slackers / Peak oil burnout - This board isn't keeping up. Here we have a conference in Houston, the oil capitol of the world, today, 2-7-06, sponsored by CERA, making incredible claims, which you can get by an appropriate Google - here's one:


"101.5 million by the end of the decade"


Thanks to a combination of higher prices, increased exploration and production spending, and improved technology, oil supplies are poised to grow much faster than they have in recent years. Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), a respected energy consultant, sees 20 or more major new fields coming on line each year through 2010. Altogether those fields could boost worldwide production capacity 15%, from 87.9 million barrels per day to 101.5 million by the end of the decade, CERA estimates. As a result, supply should exceed demand by 7 million bbl. per day, a huge leap from the current cushion of 1 million bbl. That should take pressure off prices. "OPEC countries have the potential, and [most] are increasing production," says Peter Jackson, a CERA researcher. "Non-OPEC production has increased at quite a lick compared to the 1990s."'


I guess we'll have to wait for Chris Schreblonski, Colin Campbell, and Matt Simmons to respond to this conference...hurry, please
Good find.
Here's the twisted words from CERA

A field-by-field analysis of global oil production and development shows the world is [1] not running out of oil in the near- or medium-term, and a large increase in the availability of [2] unconventional oils will expand global liquid hydrocarbons capacity by as much as one-fourth in the next ten years, Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), testified to a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee .last December

"We see no evidence to suggest a peak before 2020, [3] nor do we see a transparent and technically sound analysis from another source that justifies belief in an imminent peak," CERA Senior Consultant and Director of Global Oil and Gas Resources Robert Esser testified before a House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee hearing on Understanding the Peak Oil Theory.  "It will be a number of decades into this century before we get to an inflexion point that will [4] herald the arrival of an `undulating plateau' of global hydrocarbon production capacity," Esser said.

Expanding Sources

CERA projects that world oil production capacity - including crude oil, condensate, natural gas liquids (NGLs), oil sands, gas-to-liquids (GTL), [5]and other sources - has the potential to rise from 87 million barrels per day (mbd) in 2005 to as much as 108 mbd by 2015, with further growth in capacity continuing after that point.

"A detailed new audit of our own analysis and the enormous scale of reserve upgrades in existing fields, confirmed by the most extensive and complete databases on field production - [6]the proprietary databases of IHS, of which CERA is now part - contradicts those who believe that peak oil is imminent," Esser testified.

And here is your secret decoder ring code book:

[1] "Running out of oil" -very true, as long as there is one drop left somewhere, we have not "run out". See how truthful we are?

[2] "unconventional oils" --good thing we are counting Omega 3 fish oils

[3] they don't know what's underground either --gee that makes your position (CERA's) really strong (especially if you get to conveniently ignore Hubbert's curve and the fact that he was right)

[4] imagery of blowing trumpets and waving flags ("herald" and "undulate"), the word of God, it comes only from CERA's lips and their number [6] "proprietary" databases

[5] "other sources" --this covers the yet to be discovered Philosopher's Stone which some same say is a Zero Point Energy source

Remember kids, this is a SECRET decoder ring. Don't let your friends see it.

OK, here's a few more acronyms - relating to volume measures of oil and gas, frequently used by petroleum engineers (PEs) and Reservoir Engineers (REs) as well as geologists and geophysicists (who never get abbreviated). All these are very "oily"...

stb Stock Tank Barrel (of oil)
scf Standard Cubic Foot (of gas)

The "formal" measures of hydrocarbon volume - nearly always in lowercase. Often the legal basis for sales agreements, always the legal basis of reserves reports. Theoretically the fluids should be measured at 60 degrees Fahrenhit and 14.7 psi (1 atmosphere). The "stock tank" refers to small scale onshore operations and is rarely present in a large-scale modern production facility.

M (Prefix to the above - nearly always in uppercase) Thousand
MM (Ditto) Million (yes, confusing, but that's what they use)
MMM Billion almost never seen, use bn or b or occasionally metric G
T Trillion never MMMM (also matches metric Tera)

e.g. MMscf Million standard cubic feet. Prefixes above T are almost never seen.

STOIIP Stock Tank Oil Initially In Place (in a reservoir before production starts) - reservoir engineers just pronounce it as a word "what's the stoip of this reservoir?". Sometimes it's STOOIP Stock Tank Oil ORIGINALLY In Place. When reading media reports of a discovery (especially reports from 3rd World governments) it is important to determine whether they are referring to STOIIP or reserves volumes.

GIIP Gas Initially In Place (never GOIP)

RF Recovery Factor ratio between recoverable reserves and STOIIP normally expressed as a percentage. Varies widely - typically 20%-50% for oil and 70%-90% for gas

BOE Barrels Of Oil Equivalent - some oil companies like to aggregate their oil and gas reserves so they can report a single number of BOE (or MMBOE) - the conversion factor varies from company to company but is normally about 6000 scf of gas = 1 BOE

I have a lot more of these but the above selection will be ample for understanding even quite technical reports from oil companies, think tanks etc.

BOPD barrels of oil per day. Can be used with a prefix M or MM.  (implies a Standard barrel BBL = 42 US Gallons, measured at STP standard temperature and pressure.
Note:  "standard" temp and press can vary, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_temperature_and_pressure).

API = American Petroleum Institute
API does not = application program interface, unless you work for Microsoft.
APIº = API Gravity is a reference to an oil's SGo, specific gravity oil, relative to water at 60ºF; SGw60 = 1.00

APIº = (141.5/SGo) - 131.5

Light, Medium and Heavy Crude Oils are classified by APIº

Light crude oil = APIº > 31.1
Medium crude oil = APIº 22.3 to 31.1
Heavy crude oil = APIº < 22.3

Water would have an APIº = (141.5/1.00)-131.5 = 10.0


Some acronyms I noticed missing:

PG: Persian Gulf

P5, P90, etc

Cheers, Ian

I suggest a change of:

Fischer-Tropsch process of converting methane or coal to liquid fuels


Fischer-Tropsch process of converting methane, biomass or coal to liquid fuels

Or more elaborate:

Fischer-Tropsch process of converting CO and H2 gas into liquid fuels. The CO and H2 gas can be made from methane, biomass or coal.

FT = Financial Times (London) - British equivalent of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ)
How about F-T for Fischer-Tropsch?
NYTimes is dissing the Prius mileage:


Seems to me Odograph discussed this on his blog.

Regarding the point about auto manufacturers using the non-guzzlers to balance guzzlers under CAFE, I'd rather have the choice to buy one or the other anyway.

Of course I'd also like to have a practical, affordable EV, but that seems to be too much to ask.  Which will be crushed first, the last EV-1 or GM itself?

Does anyone know exactly how the CAFE for each manufacturer is calculated?
If I make cars and have two lines and sell one of each would the CAFE just be the avg of the two cars, or would it be the average fuel efficiency accounting for the different mileage driven by each type of vehicle.

I mean if Car A gets 20 miles/gallon and is driven 100 miles a year, and car B gets 50 miles/gallon and is driven 50 miles a year what would be the CAFE?

35 miles/ gallon or 25 miles/gallon?