Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

Off-topic => The rest => Topic started by: Tom_Mazanec on May 22, 2019, 01:05:53 AM

Title: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 22, 2019, 01:05:53 AM
I used to think PO would save the Earth's climate.
Now I'm not so sure.
Here is Greenpeace's take:
https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/20026/will-peak-oil-save-earths-climate/
What's yours?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Neven on May 22, 2019, 10:20:46 AM
I also had high hopes for PO, but alas, I underestimated human ingenuity insanity.  ;)
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 23, 2019, 06:54:31 PM
Shale Oil Companies taking a beating:
https://srsroccoreport.com/sea-of-red-majority-of-u-s-shale-companies-took-a-beating-q1-2019/
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: gerontocrat on May 23, 2019, 08:00:39 PM
Shale Oil Companies taking a beating:
https://srsroccoreport.com/sea-of-red-majority-of-u-s-shale-companies-took-a-beating-q1-2019/
The business model was to borrow 100% of the capital required. Any surplus cash paid out as share buybacks dividends management payouts etc. If oil price stays up or increases and borrowing costs stay stable or decrease the game can continue until....

The break-even price quoted is perfectly sensible if the business is properly capitalised with equity.

BUT.....  Greed and stupidity rule, OK?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Neven on May 23, 2019, 10:03:25 PM
I always thought that the irony of reducing energy use and switching to renewables as much as possible (on a personal level), is that demand for oil is reduced and thus the oil price goes down. In a way, mitigating climate change, delays peak oil, causing more climate change. Carbon fee-and-dividend would eliminate the irony, of course.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on May 24, 2019, 12:25:58 AM
To the peak of oil is still very far. In most major countries of the production oil is growing steadily:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/saudi-arabia/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/iraq/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-arab-emirates/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/kazakhstan/crude-oil-production
https://tradingeconomics.com/brazil/crude-oil-production

In total, these eight countries account for 61% of global oil production.

In other major countries (Venezuela, Iran and Libya), production is constrained either by sanctions or by political instability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves
These three countries alone account for 30% of the world's oil reserves.

Every year the reserves of technically recoverable oil grow:

(https://oilindustryinsight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Proved-Oil-Reserves-Distribution-1997-2007-and-2017-1170x591.png)
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on May 24, 2019, 12:31:30 AM
Even further peak depletion of natural gas and coal. Human civilization is going into the abyss of greenhouse disaster.

https://blankspaceproject.com/fairy-tales-2019-winners/

Quote
Second Prize goes to Nick Stath, for his story “Monuments of the Past” Nick is a concept artist, designer and illustrator based in Melbourne, Australia. Upon receiving his Masters in architecture from RMIT University, he has pursued working simultaneously as a designer in both Architectural Practice and the Entertainment Industry. His passion lies in creating visual stories of science-fiction that depict the relationship between the built and natural environment. His work is the continuous exploration of  space, scale, composition and atmosphere, intending to evoke emotion that allows the viewers’ imagination to traverse.

“My story was inspired by climate change and how we currently take the beauty of our planet for granted. My desire was to represent this issue through a story that makes us wonder what life could be like in a future where mother nature and her resources have diminished before our eyes. A world where parents have to tell their children stories of what forests, mountains and grass fields where once like. My vision for this future environment was a series of over-scaled structures that hoist man made landscapes into the sky. These structures represent the monuments of our past.”

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 29, 2019, 04:08:45 AM
Gail Tverberg on Peak Oil and Climate Change:
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/04/30/the-climate-change-story-is-half-true/#more-43718
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on May 29, 2019, 03:05:10 PM
Gail Tverberg on Peak Oil and Climate Change:
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/04/30/the-climate-change-story-is-half-true/#more-43718

Very nice.  The conclusion, for those who do not wish to read the report in its entirety:

The climate story we hear tends to give the impression that climate change is a huge problem compared to all the other resource and environmental problems we are encountering. Furthermore, a person gets the impression that simple solutions, such as wind, solar, carbon taxes and voluntary cutbacks in fossil fuel use, are available.

This is a false picture of the situation at hand. Climate change is one of many problems the world economy is facing, and the solutions we have for climate change at this time are totally inadequate. Because an increase in energy consumption is required for GDP growth worldwide, even voluntary cutbacks in fossil fuel usage tend to harm the economies making the reductions. If climate change is to be addressed, totally different approaches are needed. We may even need to talk about adapting to climate change that is largely out of our ability to control.

The benefits of wind and solar have been greatly exaggerated. Partly, this may be because politicians have needed a solution to the energy and climate problems. It may also be partly because “renewable” sounds like it is a synonym for “sustainable,” even though it is not. Adding electricity storage looks like it would be a solution to the intermittency of wind and solar, but it tends to add costs and to defeat the CO2 benefit of these devices.

Finally, IPCC modelers need to develop their models more in the context of the wider range of limits that the world is facing. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to model the expected impact of all limits combined, rather than limiting the analysis to climate change. In particular, there is a need to consider the physics of how an economy really operates: Energy consumption cannot be reduced significantly at the world level without increasing the probability of collapse or a major war.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on May 29, 2019, 03:36:17 PM
Quote
cutbacks in fossil fuel usage tend to harm the economies making the reductions

Allow me a remark, Kat.

Germany's energy regulations require machines to be very efficient. This is one of the reasons German machinery is so popular all over the world and why we export this stuff so much.

Cutting down on energy use also means efficiency gains. Something you like to have as a customer of heavy machinery.

This example can be applied to many other products.

In recent years, energy consumption is going down in Germany even though we are growing. This is a direct effect of this regulation.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: gerontocrat on May 29, 2019, 04:02:05 PM
There is much to agree with in the analysis, and also some criticisms.
Quote
Because an increase in energy consumption is required for GDP growth worldwide, even voluntary cutbacks in fossil fuel usage tend to harm the economies making the reductions.
The point is to replace energy from fossil fuels with energy from renewables.
Quote
Adding electricity storage looks like it would be a solution to the intermittency of wind and solar, but it tends to add costs and to defeat the CO2 benefit of these devices.
Yes, battery storage adds cost but LNG and other partly used facilities to cover peak demand is also additional cost, and the cost of batteries is quickly declining while conventional generation costs are going up.

Battery storage does not defeat the CO2 benefits of renewable energy facilities. It adds to them by creating a place to store surplus energy acquired during low demand periods.
Quote
Finally, IPCC modelers need to develop their models more in the context of the wider range of limits that the world is facing. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to model the expected impact of all limits combined, rather than limiting the analysis to climate change.

I certainly agree with that. Environmental degradation is a product of many different dumb things humans are doing. I thought that was happening, i.e. reports on the state of the planet widened to cover many topics and more attempts to provide holistic (hate that word) solutions?

Quote
In particular, there is a need to consider the physics of how an economy really operates: Energy consumption cannot be reduced significantly at the world level without increasing the probability of collapse or a major war.

Who is talking about reducing energy consumption? Not enough people. Energy efficiency measures are shamefully neglected. Energy from the sun, (PV and wind) can provide vast quantities of additional energy above existing levels.

Finally, what is the writer getting at ? What is her solution ? That economic growth must be maintained at all costs? And how the hell can that be in a world of finite resources?


Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tor Bejnar on May 29, 2019, 06:17:49 PM
Further to what Gerontocrat wrote …

I skimmed her transcript and read those conclusions.  I felt her tone was a little off-putting and maybe prudish.  For example:
Quote
The climate story we hear tends to give the impression that climate change is a huge problem compared to all the other resource and environmental problems we are encountering. Furthermore, a person gets the impression that simple solutions, such as wind, solar, carbon taxes and voluntary cutbacks in fossil fuel use, are available.

This is a false picture of the situation at hand. Climate change is one of many problems the world economy is facing, and the solutions we have for climate change at this time are totally inadequate.
She thinks that AGW is not a huge (the biggest) problem.  Well, it is.  Period.  She's flat wrong in her assessment!

She is right that the listed "simple solutions" are not adequate.  As G. wrote just above, "Who is talking about reducing energy consumption? Not enough people."

She went on with
Quote
Because an increase in energy consumption is required for GDP growth worldwide, even voluntary cutbacks in fossil fuel usage tend to harm the economies making the reductions.
We in the West (and many other places) have to figure out how to 'thrive' with shrinking GDP - well OK, only if we want to survive!  I think she's right that we don't have a clue how to prevent anarchy with a sustained shrinking GDP.  We need other economic models to get us to a 'sustainable' future.  I get that her 'foundation' (economic understanding) has 'worked' for a (or two) hundred years - what she doesn't get is this economic understanding is killing us.

So, thanks, Tom, for sharing her talk.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 29, 2019, 07:04:12 PM
Gail Tverberg on Peak Oil and Climate Change:
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/04/30/the-climate-change-story-is-half-true/#more-43718

This author writes as if they are telling anyone something that is not already known. Growth in our economy tracks with energy consumption. Really! I did not know that.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Shared Humanity on May 29, 2019, 07:14:57 PM
The simple fact is that this growth system (capitalism) cannot grow indefinitely when it is constrained by a finite resource (the planet). The only solution is to devise a new way to organize human civilization. Given their finite nature, this absolutely requires a more equitable distribution of these resources.

We may even need to talk about adapting to climate change that is largely out of our ability to control.

 :o Words fail me but I will try to respond to this.

Please try to read up on what a 4C or 6C warmer world will look like. There is simply no adaptation possible and to suggest this is beyond belief.

http://climateye.org/compilation-4c-global-temperature-rise-plausible-by-2060s-or-sooner-catastrophic/

The latest IPCC report got it right. We need to be carbon neutral by 2050.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on May 29, 2019, 09:54:07 PM
People who believe that peak oil is far away don't look at the right graph. I found this one on the  aspo France website.

I don't care about the prediction, that is not my point. If you look at the production extraction side, you see that :
- without LTO (light tight oil or shale oil), production is flat since around 2005
- without  LTO and deep water, production is flat since 1995.
- between 1975 and 2000, offshore production has increased more that global production.

Extra heavy oil is not on the graph, don't know why, buy it is with LTO our only possibilities to keep production going up, but nobody knows for how long, but probably not for so much time because LTO has a very high depletion rate and extra-heavy doesn't allow very high production rates.

Few years ago, it was possible to hope that peak oil would solve the climate change issue, but that was before LTO, XH and deep water.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on May 29, 2019, 10:05:55 PM
Furthermore coal production has also increased a lot since 1990.
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/energy/yearbook/default.htm

The only good news is that coal production extraction is now going down, electricity is now more produced with shale gas and with renewables.

I don't know if shale gas is a good news, but renewable is.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on May 29, 2019, 11:10:59 PM
It is not obvious that peak oil will occur anytime soon.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on May 30, 2019, 03:15:22 AM
It is quite obvious that peak human will occur in the next few decades, as a result of ignoring AGW, carrying capacity issues, and resource depletion.

Regarding peak oil, per the "Limits to Growth" approach, it's not about peak resource extraction per se, it's about the need to spend more and more resources on said resource extraction.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 30, 2019, 03:28:36 AM
It is quite obvious that peak human will occur in the next few decades, as a result of ignoring AGW, carrying capacity issues, and resource depletion.

Regarding peak oil, per the "Limits to Growth" approach, it's not about peak resource extraction per se, it's about the need to spend more and more resources on said resource extraction.

Yes, as a former Peak Oiler, I well remember EROEI (Energy Returned On Energy Invested).
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on May 30, 2019, 04:05:37 AM
etienne's graph above shows this nicely. Each type of oil is progressively harder to extract, and peaks at some point while a new type is introduced.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on May 30, 2019, 07:14:36 AM
It is not obvious that peak oil will occur anytime soon.
I don't know what "soon" means in this context.  I believe that it will occur for sure before the end if the century, but probably before 2050, and maybe during the next decade.  Too late for climate change, but soon enough for my personal comfort.
Do you really believe that governments invest in electric cars because of climate change?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on May 30, 2019, 07:34:11 AM
etienne's graph above shows this nicely. Each type of oil is progressively harder to extract, and peaks at some point while a new type is introduced.

Only, for fossil fuel, there is no room to get more expensive anymore. On the other hand, solar and wind are getting cheaper year by year. It's only a matter of time before other energy sources become so cheap, relative to oil and gas, it just can't compete anymore. This started to happen in 2016, and it's getting direr and direr for the fossil industry. If you have any shares, get rid of them now.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Sleepy on May 30, 2019, 07:47:27 AM
Our footprint growth must stop. Full stop. Adding the four real messages of limits to growth, as presented by Jørgen Randers at the 50th Anniversary Summit of the Club of Rome on 17-18 October last year.

THE CLUB OF ROME CLIMATE EMERGENCY PLAN.
Out now, have at it:
http://www.clubofrome.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate_Emergency_Plan_Final.pdf (http://www.clubofrome.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Climate_Emergency_Plan_Final.pdf)
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on May 30, 2019, 01:41:02 PM
Gail Tverberg on Peak Oil and Climate Change:
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2019/04/30/the-climate-change-story-is-half-true/#more-43718

This author writes as if they are telling anyone something that is not already known. Growth in our economy tracks with energy consumption. Really! I did not know that.

I think it is somewhat of an over-simplification.  Much of the energy consumption can be tied to population growth.  Both start to skyrocket after 1920.  Energy efficiency (as mentioned by others) appears to have slowed the energy consumption compared to the population growth.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 04, 2019, 06:59:37 PM
Video series on PO and AGW:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gqhul0PTt-w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOzHFOEfuWo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipiKY4Qk8fU&t=164s
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 06, 2019, 08:09:08 PM
Sorry but I don't have the needed patience to listen to that BS. Peak oil is real, but it is not a collapse, just like climate change is not a collapse, it is a slow degradation of our living standards. Energy return on energy invested is going down and if you find that Tar sand are ok in Alberta just like conventional oil was in Pennsylvania, I'm sorry to tell you that you are wrong.  For a long time, there was no price increase but a lowering of the quality. I feel that now we have both together, higher prices and lower quality, that's an example of the impact of peak oil, the energy part gets more expensive, so costs can't stay the same, just like the worsening working conditions I feel in my everyday life.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on June 07, 2019, 04:17:34 PM
New record for oil production in the United States.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCRFPUS2&f=W

01/04    11,700
01/11    11,900
01/18    11,900
01/25    11,900             
02/01    11,900
02/08    11,900
02/15    12,000
02/22    12,100             
03/01    12,100
03/08    12,000
03/15    12,100
03/22    12,100
03/29    12,200   
04/05    12,200
04/12    12,100
04/19    12,200
04/26    12,300             
05/03    12,200
05/10    12,100
05/17    12,200
05/24    12,300
05/31    12,400

On average, a new record is set once a month.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on June 07, 2019, 04:23:16 PM
Natural gas also set a new record in the USA in March.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2m.htm

2018-01 2,415,266
2018-02 2,221,695
2018-03 2,484,793
2018-04 2,413,092
2018-05 2,520,538
2018-06 2,453,118
2018-07 2,585,214
2018-08 2,640,147
2018-09 2,590,628
2018-10 2,702,825
2018-11 2,656,724
2018-12 2,756,314
2019-01 2,750,677
2019-02 2,500,719
2019-03 2,770,814   
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 07, 2019, 04:28:19 PM
Records are easy to achieve in a growth context. The ultimate record will be the day before peak oil becomes real.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on June 07, 2019, 04:31:09 PM
Records are easy to achieve in a growth context. The ultimate record will be the day before peak oil becomes real.

For which year do you forecast peak global oil production?

Do you think humanity will have time to stop before the collapse of civilization, as in this film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5skn-tZTTc
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 07, 2019, 04:34:23 PM
You can always go further, the problem is that, excepted if you believe that the earth is flat, one day you will be back on your starting point, just going all the way forward.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 07, 2019, 04:36:34 PM
Records are easy to achieve in a growth context. The ultimate record will be the day before peak oil becomes real.

For which year do you forecast peak global oil production?

Do you think humanity will have time to stop before the collapse of civilization, as in this film:
I don't believe in collapse, I believe in constraints. I don't do predictions, too many people have failed before.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 07, 2019, 04:51:03 PM
Many people see oil as the blood of our civilization. I don't agree with that image, I see it more as its food, so I see peak oil as a diet.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: interstitial on June 07, 2019, 09:49:12 PM
Many people see oil as the blood of our civilization. I don't agree with that image, I see it more as its food, so I see peak oil as a diet.
If oil is food it is pure sugar. Sure its got a lot of empty calories but what the body really needs is nutritious food like renewable energy.


or maybe
Energy is the blood of our civilization and oil is poisoned blood?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 08, 2019, 08:57:11 AM
Colapsology is a weird science. Maybe it is because things take more time to be created than to be destroyed and because of the way history is taught, we learn one single date for the collapse of Rome, the French or Russian revolution, the discovery of the American continents, the American independence... but these are all events that took many years, but when we look at it 500 years after, we feel that it happened quite fast.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on June 08, 2019, 02:26:49 PM
Colapsology is a weird science. Maybe it is because things take more time to be created than to be destroyed and because of the way history is taught, we learn one single date for the collapse of Rome, the French or Russian revolution, the discovery of the American continents, the American independence... but these are all events that took many years, but when we look at it 500 years after, we feel that it happened quite fast.

Why do you think climate catastrophe is impossible?

Didn't you hear about summer in the Arctic in 2007 and 2012, when records were suddenly improved by a million square kilometers? Or the fall of 2016, when the global ice area unexpectedly dropped at an by an unprecedentedly large amount in 40 years observations?

Are you sure that huge methane emissions from permafrost or the ocean floor are not starting tomorrow?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ArcticMelt2 on June 08, 2019, 03:06:02 PM
The most unexpected was the disaster of 2007, when in just 2 summer months half of the multi-year ice was destroyed. The summer cyclones were so strong that the spring of 2008 was the only time when only one-year ice was observed at the North Pole.

Nothing foreshadowed such an event . So there are climatic disasters.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: gerontocrat on June 08, 2019, 04:06:19 PM

Why do you think climate catastrophe is impossible?

Are you sure that huge methane emissions from permafrost or the ocean floor are not starting tomorrow?
I  am living in a climate catastrophe. Like jokes, it's just a question of timing.

Methane ppb in the atmosphere is increasing at a fast rate compared with history, but not at catastrophic rates yet. My guess is that the acceleration in methane ppb will continue to accelerate, as it will only take a few months for increased emissions from permafrost and e.g. the ESAS to show in the NASA? NOAA? sensors. Again,  it's just a question of timing.
___________________________________________________________
Off-topic, but what the hell.

Going, Going               Philip Larkin, January 1972

I thought it would last my time—
The sense that, beyond the town,
There would always be fields and farms,
Where the village louts could climb
Such trees as were not cut down;
I knew there’d be false alarms
 
In the papers about old streets
And split level shopping, but some
Have always been left so far;
And when the old part retreats
As the bleak high-risers come
We can always escape in the car.
 
Things are tougher than we are, just
As earth will always respond
However we mess it about;
Chuck filth in the sea, if you must:
The tides will be clean beyond.
—But what do I feel now? Doubt?
 
Or age, simply? The crowd
Is young in the M1 cafe;
Their kids are screaming for more—
More houses, more parking allowed,
More caravan sites, more pay.
On the Business Page, a score
 
Of spectacled grins approve
Some takeover bid that entails
Five per cent profit (and ten
Per cent more in the estuaries): move
Your works to the unspoilt dales
(Grey area grants)! And when
 
You try to get near the sea
In summer . . .
       It seems, just now,
To be happening so very fast;
Despite all the land left free
For the first time I feel somehow
That it isn’t going to last,
 
That before I snuff it, the whole
Boiling will be bricked in
Except for the tourist parts—
First slum of Europe: a role
It won’t be hard to win,
With a cast of crooks and tarts.
 
And that will be England gone,
The shadows, the meadows, the lanes,
The guildhalls, the carved choirs.
There’ll be books; it will linger on
In galleries; but all that remains
For us will be concrete and tyres.
 
Most things are never meant.
This won’t be, most likely; but greeds
And garbage are too thick-strewn
To be swept up now, or invent
Excuses that make them all needs.
I just think it will happen, soon.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 08, 2019, 06:16:37 PM
Why do you think climate catastrophe is impossible?
We are in a catastrophic situation, with extinction of many species, with sea level that is below what it should be with the actual CO2 concentration, but it not a collapse, it is one storm after another, refugees leaving less viable places... But still not enough for everybody to acknowledge climate change. It will get worse, but I don't believe in a collapse. Just like when you are sick and have 3 years to go, it's a slow way down, it's not that you can dance until you fall dead.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 08, 2019, 06:24:37 PM
Agreed. We will not have a 1000 C warmup in one second and everybody dies of SHC. But in a historical framework it is going to be fast.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on June 09, 2019, 12:06:18 AM
The problem is of course not the climate, the resources and the finite planet, all of which take decades to play out, but the humans who react in violence when some threshold is crossed, thus triggering a fast collapse over a few years.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: josh-j on June 14, 2019, 11:47:08 PM
The problem is of course not the climate, the resources and the finite planet, all of which take decades to play out, but the humans who react in violence when some threshold is crossed, thus triggering a fast collapse over a few years.

True and insightful. Its not like it would be impossible to distribute resources fairly enough for almost everybody to survive as the climate changes. Will we ever grow up as a species I wonder...
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 16, 2019, 09:03:45 PM
As a student of economics and economic history, while I have little to say about climate science, I have many thoughts to offer about Peak Oil, "Limits to Growth" style thinking and "Population Bomb" claims:
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: mabarnes on June 16, 2019, 09:59:12 PM
This is a work document from Mobile Bay, AL.  I'm posting it because it triggered a gestalt - one of those moments when you "see the big picture" regarding this subject (Peak Oil) but more so the entire topic of Ice, AGW, Climate, and Life On Earth.

I'll admit my "insight" was very simple, stuff we all learned in junior high, not grad school.  Still, since I found it connected a few dots (in particular, something I'd only recently learned on continental drift) I thought I'd share....
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 16, 2019, 10:36:56 PM
  • In conclusion, Peak Oil/"Limits to Growth" thinking is, in a sense, optimistic from the perspective of environmentalists who wanted to see us "go back to nature" - humanity can prosper for decades to come on the basis of extremely cheap energy, a long-term disaster for the planet and humanity.
I  always wonder why people see decades as a long time. Our industrial civilization is only 20 decades old, middle age  was there for 100. I can't believe we have so much oil.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Neven on June 16, 2019, 11:37:31 PM
I can't believe we have so much oil.

It doesn't matter how much there is, the current psychopath ideology will make sure every drop is taken out of the ground. Limits are discredited, you know. They simply don't exist. Death doesn't exist. It must not exist.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Sebastian Jones on June 17, 2019, 03:08:01 AM
As a student of economics and economic history, while I have little to say about climate science, I have many thoughts to offer about Peak Oil, "Limits to Growth" style thinking and "Population Bomb" claims:
SNIP
Well, perhaps if you were to study some climate science, and while you are at it, some ecological economics and systems thinking (you could do worse than start on this forum), you would get a rather more nuanced view of those topics.
If I thought you were serious, and not simply trying to be disruptive, I'd go down your list and offer some refutations of your assertions, but I'm afraid that at the moment, it will be futile.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 17, 2019, 05:26:10 AM
As a student of economics and economic history, while I have little to say about climate science, I have many thoughts to offer about Peak Oil, "Limits to Growth" style thinking and "Population Bomb" claims:
SNIP
Well, perhaps if you were to study some climate science, and while you are at it, some ecological economics and systems thinking (you could do worse than start on this forum), you would get a rather more nuanced view of those topics.
If I thought you were serious, and not simply trying to be disruptive, I'd go down your list and offer some refutations of your assertions, but I'm afraid that at the moment, it will be futile.

I have little to say about climate science because it isn't my field. It's a hobby of mine and I follow it with a lot of interest but I can't increase your understanding of it and there's no point in pretending otherwise. Instead, I argue that if you're interested in dealing with climate change, you should learn something about economics, a science that has something to say about economic growth, which is the single largest predictor of carbon emissions in a contemporary world where most human activity, in one way or another, is powered by fossil fuels.

What I can say is that peak oil is nonsense. Yes, there will be some "peak" of oil production and oil production will decrease after this peak but that is not Peak Oil, it is something else. Oil production continues to increase, it shows no signs of waning and the break-even price of oil production in the shale field is roughly around the current price of oil - this was unthinkable 5 years ago. Saudi Arabia attempted to flood global markets with oil around the end of 2015 and it ended in disaster for them - the extraction of shale oil remained viable, even as oil prices plunged.  Again, oil fields in Venezuela and Iran have been taken off of global markets and oil prices are at ~50 dollars a barrel. This is about as low as oil prices have been over the past 40 years when you adjust for inflation, during a period of economic growth, when oil demand is robust!

This does not make me a "climate denier" or a right-wing neanderthal or anything like that. I am actually a socialist and I believe that climate change poses an existential threat to the species in the long-run - what I am saying is that things are worse than you think they are because fossil fuels will be much cheaper and easier to extract than anyone anticipated ten years ago. I am arguing that all of this is bad insofar as it influences climate change.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on June 17, 2019, 05:42:06 AM
Welcome to the forum FlyingLotus. While I agree with some of your points I disagree with others, but I'll leave that for another day.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 17, 2019, 05:50:36 AM
I can't believe we have so much oil.

It doesn't matter how much there is, the current psychopath ideology will make sure every drop is taken out of the ground. Limits are discredited, you know. They simply don't exist. Death doesn't exist. It must not exist.

More or less, yes. There is a limit to the amount of oil that there is in the ground but you can underestimate the human capacity to make this oil last or to produce this fuel in an efficient manner as it's a convenient fuel - large pools of capital are invested in developing cutting edge engineering solutions and advanced industrial equipment to ensure that this is so. The amount of R&D spending that went into developing hydraulic fracturing boggles the mind.

All of this effort and energy could have been redirected towards wind/solar or, more generally, building infrastructure compatible with a future where we successfully mitigate the effects of climate change. It was not and here we are...
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 17, 2019, 08:10:24 AM
FlyingLotus, in your opinion, how does the fact that renewables are now cheaper than fossil fuel fit into your calculation?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 17, 2019, 04:07:02 PM
FlyingLotus, in your opinion, how does the fact that renewables are now cheaper than fossil fuel fit into your calculation?

Wind/solar electricity is cheaper than natural gas or coal generated electricity in many, if not most, circumstances now but wind/solar couldn't singlehandedly power a city unaided by some baseline source of electricity so natural gas plants will continue to be build, especially as nuclear power plants are mothballed.  The only optimistic news on the climate front stems from this above fact: we might be on the steep upward sloping part of the S Curve for adoption of wind/solar. Sadly, Jevon's Paradox probably applies - if solar/wind become cheaper but there is still a substantial need for natural gas, a lot of the anticipated emissions reductions could be attenuated by increased electricity use as prices drop. 

This trend, of course, is of limited relevance to the transportation sector, which is the sector most relevant to petroleum products - electric vehicles remain expensive, though their price is falling fast, and adoption rates by consumers, while impressive compared to rates even five years ago, aren't sufficient to make rapid progress. Again, there's a kind of Jevon's Paradox at play here - insofar as oil demand is curtailed by improved fuel efficiency and increased adoption of EVs, oil prices are held down and that shifts incentives for other uses of oil or for increased car usage among those who do not have EVs. I certainly wonder if Amazon's growth would have been held back in oil was at 150 dollars a barrel! 

Without aggressive carbon taxation that ratchets up every year, we'll find that markets aren't very useful mechanisms at limiting climate change.

Stated different, the CO2 intensity of economic growth is plummeting due to these advances, a wonderful trend, but this is not sufficient. For every dollar of US GDP, 0.32 kg of CO2 is emitted. In 1950, for every dollar of US GDP, 1 kg of CO2 was emitted. However, due to the growth of the US economy, for emissions to drop to 1950 levels, we'd need 0.14 kg of CO2 to be emitted per dollar of US GDP (and this required intensity rate falls every year) - it took 35 years for carbon intensity to be cut in half between 1979 and 2014. We'd need this to happem again and then some to limit emissions to 1950 levels - this is a very difficult task and the US cannot be assisted by offshoring dirty industries this time...
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tor Bejnar on June 17, 2019, 04:51:10 PM
After we meet the challenge to get CO2 emissions back to 1950 levels, then we must get them back to 1850 levels.  Will 'we' do this with civilization or without it?  It is our choice!
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 17, 2019, 05:04:32 PM
but wind/solar couldn't singlehandedly power a city unaided by some baseline source

This is really odd! Funny you would say that. It strikes me new people coming here recently pushing this agenda deliberately.

This myth is debunked by experts all over the place and everyone can look this up themselves. But for some reason, nobody seems to do that. Not even you, who, given what you write otherwise, seems to be an informed person.

So here is my blunt question to you: Are you interested in sea ice or are you here because your employer told you so?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 17, 2019, 05:21:14 PM
but wind/solar couldn't singlehandedly power a city unaided by some baseline source

This is really odd! Funny you would say that. It strikes me new people coming here recently pushing this agenda deliberately.

This myth is debunked by experts all over the place and everyone can look this up themselves. But for some reason, nobody seems to do that. Not even you, who, given what you write otherwise, seems to be an informed person.

So here is my blunt question to you: Are you interested in sea ice or are you here because your employer told you so?

I believe that fact is supported by all of the available evidence. Energy generated via solar/wind fluctuates in substantial ways that does not vary with fluctuation in electricity use patterns, right? You could somehow align the way people live with solar/wind, of course, that's not impossible but is it plausible in democratic societies where people have come to expect comforts without sacrifice? We need to be on war-time footing now and the public is delusional about this.

I am interested in sea ice and I am not sure why this is a niche interest given how critical sea ice is to our broader climate system! If I wanted to spread disinformation for an oil company or whatever, my message would downplay climate change.

Edit: appears that Skeptical Science makes the argument that solar/wind can provide baseload power but they say this might require some natural gas plants that are switched on at times, which seems right to me. Intermitancy of renewables is a big challenge that can be surmounted but it'll require big changes!
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 17, 2019, 05:26:38 PM
After we meet the challenge to get CO2 emissions back to 1950 levels, then we must get them back to 1850 levels.  Will 'we' do this with civilization or without it?  It is our choice!

That's the basic challenge. Pulling this off would require an epochal transformation of civilization that we haven't seen in the developed world since WW2 - it would reorder our lives and require a great deal of sacrifice. We can choose to do this or keep putting it off but, no matter what we do, humanity will be forced to change its behavior in radical ways over the next century.

People are incapable of saving for retirement so it makes sense that we'd keep ignoring this existential threat...
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 17, 2019, 08:24:07 PM
Well, as engineer, I know that for each technical problem, thete is a technical solution, but I also know that all technical solutions are not affordable. ERoEI is a very important concept, and it is the one to be used when thinking more than 3 months in the future, because you can't have a good ROI with a bad ERoEI. Maybe renewables are now getting better faster than we think because their ERoEI goes up and the one of fossil fuels goes down.
Fossil fuels have 2 main advantages : they are easy to store (have already been for many years) and they don't take much space (kWh per square meter is extremely high for storing and for extracting), but even with these advantages, if kWh per kWh is too low, it doesn't make sense anymore.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: sidd on June 17, 2019, 08:28:14 PM
Re: basepower

Jacobson and others have pointed out that to rely solely on wind/solar, you need to overbuild by a factor of three. Which wipes out the cost advantage of wind/solar ...

Of course, costs of storage are plummeting, so the numbers are getting better.

sidd
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 17, 2019, 08:43:28 PM
I wonder how many times the not renewable infrastructure is overbuilt. Failure are most of the time related to network problems. Furthermore, right now the aim is not a full renewable world, but a reduction of the use of fossil fuels. I don't believe in a fully renewable world because the last % are almost impossible to achieve, at least not in a greenBAU context,, but a 50% coverage on the bad days would be a great achievement.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 17, 2019, 08:46:29 PM
Sidd, do you have a link for me about that 3 times overbuild number?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 17, 2019, 09:02:40 PM
If you need a 3 times overbuild for a full coverage, 1,5 overbuild for a 50% coverage on the bad days. Once we have that, load balancing and storage could make miracles.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 17, 2019, 09:21:18 PM
With interconnected grids overbuilding is not needed. It's not expensive to connect countries and continents. It's just cables. Interconnecting grids is throwing a cable over the border.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 18, 2019, 07:07:26 AM
With interconnected grids overbuilding is not needed. It's not expensive to connect countries and continents. It's just cables. Interconnecting grids is throwing a cable over the border.

Well, it's not that the border changes weather.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: sidd on June 18, 2019, 07:18:00 AM
I think the 3x number (no storage, with lotsa new interconnects covering lower 48 USA) is in one of the Jacobson papers, but i shall have to check. Unfortunately, i am stressed for time right now.

sidd
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 18, 2019, 07:21:19 AM
Ho hurry Sidd. :)
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: interstitial on June 18, 2019, 07:55:15 AM
Similar to previous post but not identical

My point is overcapacity is already required now. Most utilities seem to be targeting 25% even though only 15% required. Without hard numbers increasing it a bit more for renewables seems very reasonable because they are cheaper to begin with.
Storage can be very profitible as well a 50 million dollar battery plant in australia earned 810,000 dollars in the first few weeks of operation. Buy low sell high like any other market. https://greenerideal.com/news/australia-tesla-solar-battery-turns-a-profit/ (https://greenerideal.com/news/australia-tesla-solar-battery-turns-a-profit/)
FERC targets a 15% (varies a bit per region) peak use overcapacity to provide reliable electric distribution now. Most seem to maintain 25% overcapacity.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: sidd on June 18, 2019, 08:10:25 AM
As I suspected, I have posted the references before here and elsewhere. I recollected incorrectly, what i was thinking of is the Budischak paper given in the comment below, not Jacobson.

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,256.msg110079.html#msg110079

From the Budischak abstract:

"We find that the least cost solutions yield seemingly-excessive generation capacitydat
times, almost three times the electricity needed to meet electrical load." 

and the discussion following. A realclimate comment is also referenced, might be useful.

Apparently my memory is quite faulty, Budischak does include storage ...but refuses to include pumped storage because " Hydropower makes the problem of high penetration renewables too easily solved,"

The MacDonald paper is quite good too.

Now i really gotta run.

sidd

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 18, 2019, 08:32:55 AM
Thanks, Sidd.

From that paper:

Quote
We model many combinations of renewable electricity sources (inland wind, offshore wind, and photovoltaics) with electrochemical storage (batteries and fuel cells)...

Meaning, they assume there wasn't any existing storage infrastructure already. I don't know the motives for this but it's not a realistic scenario.

So yeah, in this unrealistic scenario you would need overbuilding. In the real world though, this is just not applicable.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: sidd on June 18, 2019, 09:44:19 AM
Allrite, I got a break waiting to unload and i see that Jacobson(2011) has an overbuild of about 4 (40 TW for 11 TW consumption) in his controversial 2011 papers doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040 and doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045

I still think Budischak is roughly right as I stated in my realclimate post and here, but of course, storage cost is plummeting, so LCOE will be lower. And as he admits, he doesn't even consider hydro, because it makes the problem too easy.

The reason i think overbuild (in nameplate capacity, watts rather than joules of course; recall that all these papers are talking about satisfying instantaneous demand in watts but looking at LCOE in joules) will be necessary is simply that capacity factor of wind and solar is substantially lower than 1. Overbuild  might not be as high as 3, but not much lower.

As for overbuild in actual energy generation (joules instead of watts), that entirely depends on how much storage you put in the equations. And how much demand response (another battery if you like) you can muster.

This discussion should really go back to the renewable energy threads at least as far Budischak and MacDonald
papers are concerned. Jacobson does talk about transport, heat and such, the the other are all talking about electric.

sidd
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on June 18, 2019, 04:37:25 PM
When we talk of overbuilding of non renewable generation capacity, Belgium has 7 nuclear reactors, but last November (2018), only one was running, and there was no shortage.
Overbuild is needed just to be able to manage unexpected technical problems. Belgium didn't plan to have only one reactor available.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: kassy on June 18, 2019, 05:53:57 PM
I hope they are planning on taking at least some of them off line since they are old crap.

When driving from the Netherlands into Belgium at night the first thing you would notice was a crap ton of lights. Much more then we had and basically much more then needed.

Years later i read an article that explained why. Local politicians are also in some local energy council which decides on energy uses and that pays well so they squander their tax payers money on these useless lights.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/12/world/europe/belgium-electricity.html 

From 2017 so they can probably still gain a lot with just efficiency.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 19, 2019, 05:27:05 PM
Shale oil Ponzi scheme about to end:
https://srsroccoreport.com/global-economy-propped-up-by-u-s-shale-oil-ponzi-scheme/
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 06:13:00 PM
From Toms link:

"...of the total global oil production increase in 2018 over 2017, the United States accounted for a stunning 84% of that growth. ..."

Wow! Thanks, Obama i guess?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: FlyingLotus on June 19, 2019, 07:44:21 PM
Yes, one of Obama's grand compromises with the GOP was opening up foreign markets for US oil. This has been extremely influential. He deserves no credit for being a "Green" President - his approach failed. America is now more like Saudi Arabia or Russia than ever before - as our economy becomes more driven by oil, it'll become more difficult to turn the tide as more people will have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 10:48:09 PM
America took the wrong turn when they never followed through Nixons Project Independence.

Quote
Project Independence was an initiative announced by U.S. President Richard Nixon on November 7, 1973, in reaction to the OAPEC oil embargo and the resulting 1973 oil crisis. Recalling the Manhattan Project, he stated that the goal of Project Independence was to achieve energy self-sufficiency for the United States by 1980, through a national commitment to energy conservation and development of alternative sources of energy.
Link >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Independence

This would be a very different world now. The US would be CO2 free by now, perhaps even have a very big renewables sector. Many wars with millions of deaths would have never happened. And, of course, a lot of money could have been saved.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Sebastian Jones on June 20, 2019, 02:41:54 AM
Tom's linked article is accurate as far as it goes, but it did not explore what drives the N. American shale ponzi scheme.
The shale industry as a whole has lost an amazing amount of money- which is why it is called a pozi scheme; only the firs players are making any money.
The question then becomes- how come? Why would a money losing enterprise persist?
The short answer is that money became super cheap in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The longer answer is that central bankers and their ilk realized that the global economy would collapse if oil production peaked, and decided that a decade or two of artificially stimulated production might buy enough time to find another solution.
I've not heard that a solution has been found yet, but if one is found, it may well be even more destructive than fracking.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tor Bejnar on June 20, 2019, 04:48:11 AM
Some people think (fear) that oil sands are the next 'best' thing.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Bob Wallace on June 20, 2019, 07:24:27 AM
Quote
Overbuild  might not be as high as 3, but not much lower.

My modeling for CAISO found that to be about the case.  But that's for fixed demand.  Convert ground transportation to battery power, charge with the 'overbuild' and the actually curtailed falls much lower.  As we find more "opportunistic loads" we'll have market for the overbuilt which will lower the cost of electricity back closer to the cost of generation.

An example:  Rock crushing plants.  My experience is that the local plants that sell gravel, sand, and concrete do large runs of a given size gravel.  They'll mill a large 'hill' of material and they work that down over time.  The hill could be built any time of the day or night and could probably skip weeks at a time when fixed demand was the highest.

Desal plants might make a good dispatchable load if the infrastructure is inexpensive enough.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 20, 2019, 07:41:12 AM
Right Bob! We could be also way more intelligent when it comes to locations of high energy consuming industries.

How is it that not all aluminium plants are in Iceland? Here you have 100% renewables 100% of the time. There is enough geothermal energy. If all aluminium was made there, we would, by default, lower our CO2 footprint.

The list of ways to make energy usage more efficient is endless. The best energy is the one you don't produce.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 20, 2019, 02:01:01 PM
I thought oil sands were already a “thing” (at least in Canada).
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tor Bejnar on June 20, 2019, 06:05:18 PM
Tom,
Oil sands are being mined, for sure :'( , but some think oil sands will be the major source of hydrocarbons for industry in the future.  :'( :'(

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
 (https://www.canadasoilsands.ca/en/explore-topics/our-energy-future)
Quote
Canada has the third-largest oil reserves in the world. Of the 170 billion barrels of Canadian oil that can be recovered economically with today's technology, 164 billion barrels are located in the oil sands. The IEA says Canada is expected to be third in oil production growth over the forecast period, after Brazil and Iraq.

With consumption rising worldwide and conventional oil supplies declining, the need for a secure supply of oil from unconventional resources like Canada’s oil sands will continue to increase. With the majority of reserves located in the oil sands, the resource has potential to become a key global supplier. As the IEA reports, Canada has the energy the world needs – our challenge is to move it to new customers in new markets in the years ahead.
[Where's the "I'm sick" icon?]
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: SteveMDFP on June 20, 2019, 06:27:02 PM

The question then becomes- how come? Why would a money losing enterprise persist?
The short answer is that money became super cheap in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
The longer answer is that central bankers and their ilk realized that the global economy would collapse if oil production peaked, and decided that a decade or two of artificially stimulated production might buy enough time to find another solution.
I've not heard that a solution has been found yet, but if one is found, it may well be even more destructive than fracking.

Somewhat tangentially, I don't think it's at all true that the Federal Reserve is artificially keeping interest rates low.  It may well be propping up interest rates.  Interest rates have dropped because of a vast surplus of investable funds--a direct effect of widening wealth inequality across the globe.  See:

Federal Reserve Actually Propping Up Interest Rates. . .
https://seekingalpha.com/article/1514632-federal-reserve-actually-propping-up-interest-rates-what-this-means-for-mreits (https://seekingalpha.com/article/1514632-federal-reserve-actually-propping-up-interest-rates-what-this-means-for-mreits)
"Paying interest on reserves combined with the subsidy to the banks of providing free unlimited deposit insurance on non-interest bearing demand deposits is keeping t-bill rates positive. Absent those policies the rate on t-bills would be actually negative."

Regardless, it's true that low interest rates have permitted the frackers to continue business, despite very high debt.  But bankruptcies won't end the fracking--the assets will be purchased, and the debt and stock will be erased.  Exxon and Chevron will likely purchase the assets.  The status quo of fracking will likely not end soon.  Unfortunately for the planet.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on July 16, 2019, 04:00:33 PM
This guy still thinks PO will be what kills us:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xGi5D0OyBU
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on July 29, 2019, 10:55:20 PM
Is this Peak Oil approaching?
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4276550-u-s-shale-peak-oil-finally-arrives?fbclid=IwAR1Y3eNLbJUe_Q5J62P3N8dRevtgxy51bA3EXuI_7mhNOCLctCJnt9KapUA
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 23, 2019, 03:44:10 AM
Peak Oil - Future Oil Production for Various Countries + World Total
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xirVusIFXA0&feature=youtu.be
World peak oil production graphs + those of US, Russia, Canada, Iraq, Brazil, Guyana & Kazakhstan. Also projections for Gold & Silver productions as well.

He predicts world peak mid-Twenties.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: DrTskoul on August 23, 2019, 03:46:50 PM
World without US and Canada has already peaked....
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 25, 2019, 11:43:47 AM
US because of shale oil and Canada because of oil sands.
Also, the video said Iraq may rise considerably in the future, because of political factors previously holding down production.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on August 28, 2019, 06:42:50 AM
I wonder each day how comes prices are so low. We are politically in an unstable situation with somehow overproduction. It doesn't need much for shortages, but it just doesn't happen. Maybe it is the instability that promotes overproduction.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 01, 2019, 02:45:41 AM
The Real Reason Why US Oil Production Has Peaked
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Real-Reason-Why-US-Oil-Production-Has-Peaked.html
Quote
My conclusion is that upstream companies in the U.S. are not completing enough new wells to offset the increasing decline rate. My "guess" is that U.S. oil production peaked sometime in April or May. If this is confirmed by a few more months of actual production data provided by state agencies on a 90-day lag, I think there may be a big “Paradigm Shift” that causes a lot of investors to add more energy to their portfolios.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on September 03, 2019, 08:14:18 AM

Quote
My conclusion is that upstream companies in the U.S. are not completing enough new wells to offset the increasing decline rate.

The article also says that the reason why this doesn't happen is because prices are too low. I believe that some people will try to keep prices as low until the next US presidential elections. So we have some times to go.  I guess somebody find out that it is not possible to win a war and get the Iranian Petrol before 2020. It's better to keep that oil available and if needed reduce sanctions to keep prices down.
Reduced number of new wells because of low prices also means reduction of sweet spots that can be drilled with low prices. That's one of the aspects of peak oil. Since production takes time to start, this creates price instability, not permanent high prices.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 03, 2019, 02:36:16 PM
And you get into this situation where a price high enough to frack oil is too high for consumers, and a price consumers can pay is too low to allow frackers to make money, making things even worse.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 04, 2019, 10:30:48 PM
Global fossil fuel and US gas production and forecasts
http://patzek-lifeitself.blogspot.com/2019/08/global-fossil-fuel-production-and.html
Quote
Global climate change continues to accelerate. The environmental carnage inflicted by the human hordes, 7.7 billion strong, on the planet's major ecosystems is staggering. Very likely, humanity may be beyond the point of no return to biological and financial self-destruction. The ever-cautious scientists, bullied by the influential global fools, have consistently underpredicted the impacts of climate change on the future fate of humanity. (We don't really care about all other species, do we?)

In this series of nine** posts, I have investigated whether humanity will sober up and transit to the less power-intensive lifestyles everywhere. To do so, will require a strong global control of birthrates in India, most of Africa, and many other places. Our survival also depends on depowering the richer countries and a wise transition to renewables everywhere. There is scant evidence that any of these globally-coordinated actions can happen, given the political reality in so many countries. If you still don't understand what I am implying here, let me clarify: Humanity is on a straight short path to committing global suicide by massive social unrest, financial collapse, war and ensuing starvation.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 02, 2019, 11:30:39 PM
This blogger was one of my favorites back in my Peak Oil days. A look back at peak oil and a look ahead:
https://www.ecosophia.net/waiting-for-the-next-panic/
Quote
Does that mean that the long-awaited energy transition will finally happen then, or that the global economy will get around to collapsing at last? No, we’ve been here often enough now that it’s not at all hard to predict what will happen. The price of oil will spike to jawdropping levels, dealing a body blow to the world’s economies; then demand destruction will cut in, and the sky-high oil price will make it economical for some other low-grade, high-cost oil source to be brought online and bring prices back down again. (My guess is that other countries that have substantial shale oil deposits, and sensibly held off on developing them until the US ran through its tight oil reserves, will jump on the fracking bandwagon in turn.)
The price of oil will go down, though never as low as it was before the spike, and yet another round of activists will have to go running after whatever the next fashionable cause du jour happens to be. Meanwhile, without more than a few of us noticing, the industrial world will have taken another step down that prolonged process of decline I’ve named the Long Descent.
In the meantime, while we wait for the next panic to hit, there’s a good deal that can be done, and there’ll be even more to do once the price of oil starts to climb in earnest. Before we can talk about that, though, we need to discuss what’s going on with the global climate…and what’s going to happen when the current fad for climate change activism finishes jumping the shark.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on October 03, 2019, 04:27:07 AM
A. Lots of self-admiration on the blog. Very tiring to read.
B. Taking turns shooting at climate change activism, renewable energy, and nuclear energy, although making sure to acknowledge that AGW is "a real and serious issue". Strongly smelled of disguised denialism.
C. A whole blog post about the catastrophe of Peak Oil yet not a single mention of the remote possibility that electricity could be an alternative to oil, or of the very existence of Battery Electric Vehicles (even managed to take a potshot at Elon Musk without mentioning EVs).
D. Freely mixing energy consumption and oil consumption, with not a single mention of natural gas as a possible alternative to oil for some uses.

I am deeply unimpressed. While the blogger seems to have the economic cycle of oil prices and production analyzed and understood properly, and the finiteness of the planet etc., all the rest is contrived IMHO. Ignoring EVs is such a serious flaw in the analysis of demand destruction that it has to be intentional. And the disguised denial overtones made me sorry I clicked the link.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on October 03, 2019, 01:13:52 PM
I wouldn't be so negative about this blogger, but just that I didn't learn anything new. I feel that, I can be wrong, he still believes that peak oil could solve the climate change issue which unfortunately is wrong because there are enough others fossil fuels as alternative, and if needed we have so many forests to produce pellets. Sometimes I feel that we are like caterpilars or slugs on a plant. The ones who produce some of their vegetables know what I mean.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 03, 2019, 05:53:24 PM
He implied he will soon post on AGW. If so, I will link.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: kassy on October 03, 2019, 08:16:03 PM
Often when people are passionate about a certain issue it becomes their answer to everything.

Does he ever write about the powergames behind the supply and demand?
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 03, 2019, 08:23:46 PM
He writes about a lot of stuff.
Actually, his obsession is occultism...he is actually an Archdruid in a neoPagan Church. Of course, this does not mean that he is either right or wrong on anything else by itself, any more than my Catholicism means I am right/wrong about astronomy or whatever.
His coverage of PO and AGW is mostly about how the great mass of "Joe Publics" don't change their fundamental beliefs about things, no matter how much evidence they encounter.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 16, 2019, 08:48:24 PM
Well, I promised to link if he discussed climate change, so...
Heating Up The Political Climate
https://www.ecosophia.net/heating-up-the-political-climate/
Quote
So there’s an obvious way for the people who are most concerned about climate change to take drastic action concerning it:  they can change their own lifestyles.  One ingenious blogger has launched a campaign to encourage exactly that under the hashtag #BanPrivateJets.  It’s a great plan and it would do a lot of good; private jets owned by the rich and famous dump millions of pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and all of that could be done away with easily by banning private jets; what’s more, the people who would be inconvenienced by the ban are the wealthiest among us, and thus have ample resources to adapt.  So can we expect celebrity activists to voluntarily ground their jets anytime soon?  I don’t recommend holding your breath.
Au contraire, the behavior of climate change activists, and of the corporate media and multinational business interests that fund and promote them so lavishly, makes sense only if you assume that they want everyone else to stop using fossil fuels so that they don’t have to. The shrill claims of impending doom, the insistence that we’re in a climate emergency and everyone has to accept drastic restrictions that climate change activists show no trace of willingness to embrace in their own lives, make perfect sense if the game plan is to buffalo most of the people in the world’s industrial countries into accepting a sharply lower standard of living “for the planet,” so that the upper twenty per cent or so can maintain their current lifestyles unchanged.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on October 16, 2019, 10:47:34 PM
This is a denier stance IMHO, just as I suspected. If "the people most concerned about climate change" would change their own lifestyles, climate change would still happen. It would not be drastic at all. There are not enough such people, and their lifestyle is already less consumerist and wasteful compared to the society around them.
Not that I support private jets, but they should be banned for everybody, not just for bleeding heart environmentalists.
And to focus the whole climate change stance on this, is denial in disguise. Ignoring the message and flinging it at the messenger.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Bruce Steele on October 17, 2019, 12:50:42 AM
Oren, That last bit about the elite “20%” who would sell us austerity to maintain their lifestyle has a note of truth in it however.  Economically we are of course the 20% as is Greer, his readers and most everyone in Europe and the U.S.  Populism without someone else to step on is a no starter so we invent enemies and surprise surprise it is those damned elites !  A familiar ring, and wait until we do hit a bad spot in the growth model. 
 
Edited , don’t forward bad thoughts.reminder to self.
 
 
 



Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: wili on October 17, 2019, 05:33:44 AM
oren wrote: "...denial in disguise..."

That's why I've long called him a 'crypto-denialist'
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: sidd on October 17, 2019, 06:59:49 AM
Greer may be many things, but i do not think he is a climate denialist.

As to:

"The shrill claims of impending doom, the insistence that we’re in a climate emergency and everyone has to accept drastic restrictions that climate change activists show no trace of willingness to embrace in their own lives, make perfect sense if the game plan is to buffalo most of the people in the world’s industrial countries into accepting a sharply lower standard of living “for the planet,” so that the upper twenty per cent or so can maintain their current lifestyles unchanged."

he might find more traction replacing "twenty per cent" by "0.1 per cent"

He seems quite impressed by Spengler and various mystics like Crowley. If you have the patience to read his fiction (although i would not recommend it) he spells out his preferred futures. They seem about as simplistic as Heinein's though less readable. Not that Heinlein is very readable ...

That said, he did predict Trump victory about a year in advance. I suppose even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.

sidd
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 17, 2019, 01:08:44 PM
He is no denier, his novel about America half a millennium from now has a seaport at Nashville.
His point is that “ Do as I say, not as I do” is a nonstarter at getting people to change their behavior.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: etienne on October 17, 2019, 09:04:42 PM
Maybe he is not a denier, but he minimises risks in a way that I can't agree with. His little ice age theory that would have happend because of trees in excess in the Americas also gives false hopes.
He is also wrong when he says that climates activists just want to be able to continue their oil consumption. Many make a real effort to reduce their carbon footprint.
I also believe that the very rich are rich because of our consumption, if we reduce our needs, it would reduce their incomes, so they have no interest in the degrowth concept.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 10, 2019, 04:49:44 PM
Many signs of peak oil and decline
Posted on November 1, 2019 by energyskeptic
http://energyskeptic.com/2019/failing-oil-and-gas-companies-a-sign-of-peak-oil/
Quote
Recently the IEA 2018 World Energy Outlook predicted an oil crunch could happen as soon as 2023.  Oil supermajors are expected to have 10 years of reserve life or more, Shell is down to just 8 years.
Political shortages are as big a problem as geological depletion. At least 90% of remaining global oil is in government hands, especially Saudi Arabia and other countries in the middle east that vulnerable to war, drought, and political instability.
And in 2018, the U.S. accounted for 98% of global oil production growth and since 2008, the U.S. accounted for 73.2% of the global increase in production (see Rapier below).   What really matters is peak diesel, which I explained in “When trucks stop running”, and fracked oil has very little diesel, much of it is only good for plastics, and yet America may well be the last gasp of the oil age if production isn’t going up elsewhere.
And you can't do most transportation with other energy sources, at least until EVs using renewable energy comes fully on line, which is likely to take the whole decade at least.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: wdmn on November 15, 2019, 06:43:53 PM
Saudi Aramco, the world's most profitable company, is going public this weekend.

In the prospectus released for the IPO they predict that peak oil demand will occur in 2035. In one scenario it occurs as early as 2025, and in another as late as 2045, but 2035 is the date given as expected.

https://www.saudiaramco.com/-/media/images/investors/saudi-aramco-prospectus-en.pdf?la=en&hash=8DE2DCD689D6E383BB8F4C393033D8964C9F5585

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on November 15, 2019, 10:33:44 PM
I cannot tell you many times peak oil has been predicted in the past.  No one knows.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: wdmn on November 16, 2019, 12:08:13 AM
Yes, I am aware of the uncertainty.

It is, however, interesting to hear when peak demand (which is not the same as peak oil) is being predicted by the world's largest producer of oil.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on November 16, 2019, 02:46:03 PM
Actually I missed that part - demand.  Thanks for clarifying.  I can see that as green energy increases and population growth slows.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 16, 2019, 02:53:16 PM
KK, there will definitely be PO someday. Oil will run out in the 21st, or 22nd or whatever century. It is a finite resource. The only debate is about the time and the reason (exhaustion or replacement or termination of industrial civilization).
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 16, 2019, 03:16:15 PM
This is a denier stance IMHO, just as I suspected. If "the people most concerned about climate change" would change their own lifestyles, climate change would still happen. It would not be drastic at all. There are not enough such people, and their lifestyle is already less consumerist and wasteful compared to the society around them.
Not that I support private jets, but they should be banned for everybody, not just for bleeding heart environmentalists.
And to focus the whole climate change stance on this, is denial in disguise. Ignoring the message and flinging it at the messenger.

oren, he wants to ban private jets for everybody.
He wants to ban all air travel.
He is just pointing out that "Do as I say and not as I do." is not the way to persuade people to change their habits.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Klondike Kat on November 16, 2019, 08:04:56 PM
KK, there will definitely be PO someday. Oil will run out in the 21st, or 22nd or whatever century. It is a finite resource. The only debate is about the time and the reason (exhaustion or replacement or termination of industrial civilization).

There will be, if we keep using oil.  This meme keeps resurfacing every 20 years or so, and then fades.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: TerryM on November 16, 2019, 08:42:50 PM
KK, there will definitely be PO someday. Oil will run out in the 21st, or 22nd or whatever century. It is a finite resource. The only debate is about the time and the reason (exhaustion or replacement or termination of industrial civilization).


Then all that we'll be left with will be abiotic and biotic natural gas.


We'll either continue to make use of this for heating, generation, transportation or whatever, and reduce it to CO2 and water, or we'll allow it to continue to pollute the atmosphere as the much stronger GHG, CH4 (Methane).
Terry
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on November 23, 2019, 02:02:18 AM
An explanation of Peak Oil (it is the possible rate of production, given that as you pick the low hanging fruit the amount of energy obtained from expending a fixed amount of energy in extraction goes down):
http://crashoil.blogspot.com/2019/11/explicando-el-peak-oil-de-manera.html

Note: If it says it can't translate, just try again.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 09, 2019, 12:28:19 AM
Peak diesel:
The diesel peak: 2019 edition
http://crashoil.blogspot.com/2019/12/el-pico-del-diesel-edicion-de-2019.html
Quote
Everything indicates that we are, indeed, reaching that critical moment for industrial civilization that represents the gradual decline in diesel production. Diesel is essential not only for a part of private automotive (mostly diesel in Europe, but not in the rest of the world), but especially for trucks, heavy machinery, tractors and ships. Diesel is truly the blood of our civilization and if he begins to lack our economy, he can suffer a true ischemia.

Again, you may have to ask it to translate a couple times.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: kassy on December 09, 2019, 02:31:25 PM
When even the low hanging fruit is deadly you might not want to eat it...

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on December 13, 2019, 01:46:22 PM
Hidden and in sight of all
http://crashoil.blogspot.com/2019/12/escondida-y-la-vista-de-todos.html
Quote
In fact, if the oil companies continue their increasing divestment, the oil production situation by 2040 could be catastrophic.




It should not be forgotten that oil represents one third of all primary energy consumed in the world, that coal (second source in importance, with almost 30%) is also in decline , that exactly the same happens to uranium and that Natural gas will probably peak next year. The energy sources that provide us with 90% of all the energy consumed today are touching their maximum production, and in the coming decades they will give us less and less energy, in a fall that will sometimes be more gradual and other times It will be faster. And despite so many exaggerations advertised in the media, renewable energies are not in a position to produce so much energy , much less in such a short time.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on May 24, 2020, 06:00:05 PM
Giant oil field decline rates and peak oil
http://energyskeptic.com/2020/giant-oil-field-decline-rates-and-their-influence-on-world-oil-production/
Quote
Since giant oil fields dominate oil production, the rate they decline at is a good predictor of future world decline rates. In 2007, the 261 giants past their plateau phase were declining at an average rate of 6 % a year. Their decline rate will continue to increase by 0.15 % a year, to 6.15, 6.3, 6.45 % and so on. By 2030 these giants, and the other giants joining them, will be declining at an average rate of over 9 % a year (Hook 2009; IEA 2010).  At this exponentially increasing rate, it will take just 16 years to have just 10% of the oil that existed at peak production.

Dittmar (2016) estimates an annual production decline of 6 ± 1% which implies that after ten years, production will be only 54 ± 6% of what it was at the beginning of those ten years.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on May 26, 2020, 04:04:20 PM
And yet global oil production has increased every year for the past decade. 
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on May 26, 2020, 04:20:01 PM
And yet global oil production has increased every year for the past decade.

At higher energy costs.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on May 26, 2020, 04:53:07 PM
And yet global oil production has increased every year for the past decade.

At higher energy costs.

Not true.  Crude oil prices have generally declined.  In 2010, it was around $80/bbl, rising to $100 in 2013, but dropping to the $50-60 range in 2019.  While production experienced an average annual increase of 1.7%, process dropped by an average of 2.6% per year.

https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-chart
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Bruce Steele on May 26, 2020, 06:09:27 PM
At a higher energy cost of extraction ?  EROEI
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: interstitial on May 26, 2020, 06:23:00 PM
specify money or energy. I think one of you is talking energy and the other money
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: blumenkraft on May 26, 2020, 06:25:23 PM
It's both.

I mean, how is it not a no-brainer that after all these years, the low hanging fruits are gone. Now you have to drill deeper, pump harder, move mountains to extract tar sands, fracking, ...

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: kassy on May 26, 2020, 06:32:09 PM
Poison the water level, emit some methane here and there...
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: interstitial on May 26, 2020, 07:20:24 PM
It's both.

I mean, how is it not a no-brainer that after all these years, the low hanging fruits are gone. Now you have to drill deeper, pump harder, move mountains to extract tar sands, fracking, ...
I don't disagree that oil gets harder to find and extract as easier sources get used up. They also can and often are interrelated.

Money is tied to economics and influenced by many factors. Fracking used to have a higher break even point. Innovation, market forces and regulation are some of things that change the dollar costs. Now fracking is much cheaper than it once was.  so even though wells are deeper dollar costs can and do go down.  I suppose if you attach a dollar value to environmental costs, though no dollar value replaces what is lost, that is less true.

In general overall energy costs just increase. Though here too some efficiencies are possible.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on May 27, 2020, 03:35:19 PM
For the consumer, the only thing that matters in the price they pay.  Individual drilling, extraction, and transport costs are irrelevant.  As can be seen from the following chart, the price of retail gasoline fell significantly from 2011 to 2019.  This ecludes the much larger drops due to the 2009 and 2020 recessions.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=emm_epm0_pte_nus_dpg&f=m
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 12, 2020, 05:44:58 AM

Not true.  Crude oil prices have generally declined.  In 2010, it was around $80/bbl, rising to $100 in 2013, but dropping to the $50-60 range in 2019.  While production experienced an average annual increase of 1.7%, process dropped by an average of 2.6% per year.

https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude-oil-price-history-chart

What you need to look at is not price but energy cost, energy return on energy invested, and net energy.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 12, 2020, 05:49:01 AM
For the consumer, the only thing that matters in the price they pay.  Individual drilling, extraction, and transport costs are irrelevant.  As can be seen from the following chart, the price of retail gasoline fell significantly from 2011 to 2019.  This ecludes the much larger drops due to the 2009 and 2020 recessions.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=emm_epm0_pte_nus_dpg&f=m

It doesn't matter to them but that doesn't reverse diminishing returns.

The gist is that you refer to money which can be created easily, but that doesn't reverse peak oil.

That's why oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s, if not earlier, why oil production per capita peaked in 1979, why conventional production started peaking in 2005, and why we're resorting to shale even though we have around four centuries' worth of oil underground.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 12, 2020, 02:23:32 PM
For the consumer, the only thing that matters in the price they pay.  Individual drilling, extraction, and transport costs are irrelevant.  As can be seen from the following chart, the price of retail gasoline fell significantly from 2011 to 2019.  This ecludes the much larger drops due to the 2009 and 2020 recessions.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=emm_epm0_pte_nus_dpg&f=m

It doesn't matter to them but that doesn't reverse diminishing returns.

The gist is that you refer to money which can be created easily, but that doesn't reverse peak oil.

That's why oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s, if not earlier, why oil production per capita peaked in 1979, why conventional production started peaking in 2005, and why we're resorting to shale even though we have around four centuries' worth of oil underground.

You may want to read the following as to why your numbers are out of date.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2018/06/29/what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil/#3988b74d731a

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 13, 2020, 04:50:07 AM

You may want to read the following as to why your numbers are out of date.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2018/06/29/what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil/#3988b74d731a

The problem with the article is that the chart mixes conventional and unconventional production. As the IEA correctly admitted, conventional production peaked after 2010:

https://www.postcarbon.org/new-u-s-record-level-oil-production-peak-oil-theory-disproven-not/

U.S. conventional production also peaked in 1970:

http://thenextturn.com/years-decades-shale-oil-gas/

Both of these were raised by Hubbert in the 1970s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImV1voi41YY

That is, a peak in U.S. conventional production between the late 1960s and the early 1970s, and a peak in world conventional production after 1995 + 10 years, or after 2005. His latter forecast was off by 6 years.

Oil discoveries peaked in 1947:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-29/oil-discoveries-at-a-70-year-low-signal-a-supply-shortfall-ahead

World oil production per capita peaked in 1979:

https://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2013/07/peak-oil-what-peak-oil.html

That's why for many years the oil industry has been experiencing diminishing returns, i.e., increasing amounts of capex in exchange for decreasing amounts of new oil produced unconventionally:

https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/events-calendar/global-oil-market-forecasting-main-approaches-key-drivers

To cover that more expensive oil, they've had to take on increasing amounts of debt:

https://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1503f.htm

That's why the needed oil prices to go up just to cover part of that debt:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-26/oil-industry-needs-to-find-half-a-trillion-dollars-to-survive

And they need to borrow even more. You'll find lots of recent news on these, including additional debt of around $170 billion made just last March. Meanwhile, the EIA was warning that shale production won't last because depletion rates are too high in exchange for capex, among others.

Thus, the point of the article don't make sense: peak oil is a scientific phenomenon driven by physical limitations and gravity, and similar takes place for mining.

The only way to deal with a peak in production is to find new sources of oil, but oil discoveries peaked around 70 years ago for the same reasons. And new sources plus technology and additional credit (which is what we're seeing with unconventional production) can only mitigate peak oil temporarily as every source of oil eventually reaches a peak in production. Worse, additional credit leads to more debt, and higher oil prices needed to cover that debt lead to economic recession.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on August 13, 2020, 01:22:12 PM
Quote
His latter forecast was off by 6 years.
And four or five of those years were because of the Oil Shocks of the Seventies, which brought about conservation and efficiency, stretching out the curve.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 13, 2020, 02:48:48 PM

You may want to read the following as to why your numbers are out of date.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2018/06/29/what-ever-happened-to-peak-oil/#3988b74d731a

The problem with the article is that the chart mixes conventional and unconventional production. As the IEA correctly admitted, conventional production peaked after 2010:

https://www.postcarbon.org/new-u-s-record-level-oil-production-peak-oil-theory-disproven-not/


That is not a problem.  The chart distinguishes between conventional and unconventional, both of which are continuing to rise (at least through 2015).
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 14, 2020, 03:52:56 AM

That is not a problem.  The chart distinguishes between conventional and unconventional, both of which are continuing to rise (at least through 2015).

It's a problem because it contradicts his argument. When one type of production is employed to make up for lack in another, that doesn't disprove peak oil but proves it.

Given that, what happened to conventional production will take place for unconventional, too, and given debts needed to maintain the latter, prices needed to cover those debts, and the effects of prices on the global economy, probably prematurely.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 14, 2020, 03:37:21 PM

That is not a problem.  The chart distinguishes between conventional and unconventional, both of which are continuing to rise (at least through 2015).

It's a problem because it contradicts his argument. When one type of production is employed to make up for lack in another, that doesn't disprove peak oil but proves it.


Yes, it is a problem for ralfy, in that it contradicts his argument.  I was stating that it was not a visual problem, because the graph does not mix the two, but keeps them separate.  Both are still increasing, which contradicts his argument that conventional peaked in 2005.

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 15, 2020, 07:47:49 AM

Yes, it is a problem for ralfy, in that it contradicts his argument.  I was stating that it was not a visual problem, because the graph does not mix the two, but keeps them separate.  Both are still increasing, which contradicts his argument that conventional peaked in 2005.

Global production will always go through an undulating plateau because there are many sources involved:

http://crudeoilpeak.info/latest-graphs

That is, any gains for some years are negated by lower production during subsequent ones.

What's important is that other sources are needed to make up for the lack of production, whether or not it is increasing. That makes the title and the point of the article meaningless and invalidates the ridiculous implication that peak oil somehow disappeared. It never did and never will.

More important, the effects of peak oil can take place even before production reaches a peak, which is what happened after 2005.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 15, 2020, 01:58:12 PM

Yes, it is a problem for ralfy, in that it contradicts his argument.  I was stating that it was not a visual problem, because the graph does not mix the two, but keeps them separate.  Both are still increasing, which contradicts his argument that conventional peaked in 2005.

Global production will always go through an undulating plateau because there are many sources involved:

http://crudeoilpeak.info/latest-graphs

That is, any gains for some years are negated by lower production during subsequent ones.

What's important is that other sources are needed to make up for the lack of production, whether or not it is increasing. That makes the title and the point of the article meaningless and invalidates the ridiculous implication that peak oil somehow disappeared. It never did and never will.

More important, the effects of peak oil can take place even before production reaches a peak, which is what happened after 2005.

The effects of peak oil were predicted to be rising prices, due to scarcity.  The production actually declined due to falling prices (as shown in your graph), caused by reduced demand.  Oil production never did peak, and I cannot say if it ever will.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 16, 2020, 05:41:08 AM

The effects of peak oil were predicted to be rising prices, due to scarcity.  The production actually declined due to falling prices (as shown in your graph), caused by reduced demand.  Oil production never did peak, and I cannot say if it ever will.

Oil prices have been going up and down for more than 150 years:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/155-years-of-oil-prices-in-one-chart/

At least from 1900 onward, production has been on an uptrend:

https://transportgeography.org/?page_id=5944

Meanwhile, as shown in my previous posts, oil discoveries peaked before 1950, oil production per capita peaked in 1979, and the IEA acknowledged that conventional production is peaking as well.

These plus others

http://theoildrum.com/node/5576

makes the claim that oil production didn't peak and never will questionable.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 16, 2020, 01:37:04 PM

At least from 1900 onward, production has been on an uptrend:

https://transportgeography.org/?page_id=5944


With this I can agree.  According to those in the industry, production is still on that uptrend.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/spectrum.ieee.org/energy/fossil-fuels/peak-oil-specimen-case-apocalypic-thinking.amp.html

It may peak at some point in the future, but any claim that it has occurred in past, is refuted by the actual data.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 18, 2020, 03:03:57 AM

With this I can agree.  According to those in the industry, production is still on that uptrend.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/spectrum.ieee.org/energy/fossil-fuels/peak-oil-specimen-case-apocalypic-thinking.amp.html

It may peak at some point in the future, but any claim that it has occurred in past, is refuted by the actual data.

I think that article combines conventional and non-conventional production. If you read Hubbert's paper, you will see that he specifically refers to the former. For the latter, he gives only estimates because there were fewer details about them back in the 1950s. See for yourself:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080527233843/http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/1956/1956.pdf

In short, the increase is attributed to tight oil needed to make up for conventional production. That doesn't disprove peak oil but prove it: at some point one source will peak in production and has to be replaced by another.

This is also happening on a global scale, but this time revealing another aspect of the scientific phenomenon: the effects of peak oil take place even before production peaks. That is, if demand is high enough, then production won't be able to catch up and other sources will be needed:

https://www.postcarbon.org/new-u-s-record-level-oil-production-peak-oil-theory-disproven-not/

And Hubbert predicted that, too. He stated in 1976 that because of the previous oil crunch peak oil was pushed by around a decade, leading to a peak in conventional production after 1995 + 10:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImV1voi41YY

The IEA believed the same in its 2010 report:

https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2010

Hubbert was off by around five years because conventional production still recovered in 2011-2012, and then went down after.

What is more important than that is demand. Back in 2006, the IEA predicted that demand would reach 115 Mbd by 2015 thanks to a robust global economy, and that oil producers would easily meet that because there's no peak oil, only above-ground problems. In 2008, a global financial crash led to weak global economic growth across a decade and demand that's barely reaching 100 Mbd today. And to meet even that demand we still need unconventional production.

Thus, we avoided one of the effects of peak oil--a resource crunch--that would have led to a global economic crash because of soaring debt which led to the 2008 crash. Ironically, part of that debt went to the oil industry which needed increasing amounts of money to get more expensive oil. That's why according to the BIS they now have accumulated debts of at least $2.5 trillion, and in order to pay only $500 billion of that, they need oil prices to go up to around $80. Worse, they have to borrow more because capital expenditures have been going up, and to play for that plus the remaining $2 trillion in debt, oil prices have to go up even more.

Guess what happens when oil prices go up.

Finally, peak oil took place many times in the past:

http://theoildrum.com/node/5576

Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: The Walrus on August 18, 2020, 04:41:24 PM
Here is an insightful article on peak oil. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629618303207

"So, the peak oil idea was based on solid theoretical foundations. The quote “when I have new data, I change my interpretation, what do you do, sir?” is attributed to John Maynard Keynes and one wonders why it was not applied to the peak oil theory. With new data in input on the consistency of the non-conventional oil resources, the theory could still provide useful information on the future of fossil fuels, but this was not done."

Yes, peaks have occurred in the past.  Prices peaked in 1979 and 2008.  Before COVID, crude oil prices (adjusted for inflation) were below levels from 1976.  Recent levels are lower, similar to 1990 levels.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: ralfy on August 19, 2020, 01:26:40 AM
Here is an insightful article on peak oil. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629618303207

"So, the peak oil idea was based on solid theoretical foundations. The quote “when I have new data, I change my interpretation, what do you do, sir?” is attributed to John Maynard Keynes and one wonders why it was not applied to the peak oil theory. With new data in input on the consistency of the non-conventional oil resources, the theory could still provide useful information on the future of fossil fuels, but this was not done."

Yes, peaks have occurred in the past.  Prices peaked in 1979 and 2008.  Before COVID, crude oil prices (adjusted for inflation) were below levels from 1976.  Recent levels are lower, similar to 1990 levels.

Ugo Bardi is part of the group that discusses Limits to Growth and even ASPO:

https://clubofrome.org/member/bardi-ug/

which explains the points raised before the quote you gave:

Quote
These were serious problems, but it must also be said that the weakness of the theory ceased to exist when it was understood that the bell shaped curve is just a simplified version of the general theory of mineral depletion [33] based on the concepts developed first by J. Forrester [34] and by the authors of the 1972 “Limits to Growth” report [35] (For a modern version of these models, see the recently developed MEDEAS model at www.medeas.eu). In short, the basis of the bell shaped curve is in the decline in the net energy of extraction, a concept often expressed in terms of “Energy Return On Energy Invested” (EROI or EROEI) [36,37]. So, the peak oil idea was based on solid theoretical foundations.

And if you look up the point of net energy, you will discover that it refers to Bardi's "Seneca cliff":

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-03-12/the-real-energy-return-of-crude-oil-smaller-than-you-would-have-imagined/

The term refers to Seneca's statement: "Fortune is of sluggish growth, but ruin is rapid."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seneca_effect




Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 03, 2020, 06:45:50 PM
Off The Cuff: The Coming Oil Shortage Of June 2021
https://www.peakprosperity.com/off-the-cuff-the-coming-oil-shortage-of-june-2021/
Quote
In this week’s Off The Cuff podcast, Chris and Art Berman discuss:

US oil consumption is down ~15%, a good proxy of GDP shrinkage
Why US oil production will be dramatically lower by next June
Why the US may never produce as much oil as it did between 2016-2019
Why oil, not interest rates, will be the limiter of economic growth going forward
For many years on this website we’ve warned of the coming crisis of “Peak Cheap Oil”. We may now be entering a new, accelerating stage of that story.

Petroleum geologist Art Berman returns to the program to explain why he predicts US oil production will be materially lower by next June, and why it will likely never return to its 2016-2019 highs.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 03, 2020, 12:51:05 PM
Welcome To Easter Island
https://www.peakprosperity.com/welcome-to-easter-island/
Quote
The current ‘plan,’ such as it is, centers on growth, growth and more growth.  If we wait until it’s brain-dead obvious that oil is a dwindling resource because that’s what a decade’s worth of data says (sometime around, say, 2030 to 2040) then it will be too late. By then we’ll have another 1-2 billion people on the planet to worry about.  And quite possibly, ruined ecologies that no longer support as many people, to boot.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on October 03, 2020, 03:43:49 PM
Who cares that oil is a dwindling resource? I wish it was dwindling faster. Humanity is committing suicide by fossil fuels, and the peak oil folks are still blathering about oil running out at some point, as if that would be a bad thing.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 03, 2020, 03:55:10 PM
It would be a bad thing for humans, but good for other living things.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: SteveMDFP on October 03, 2020, 04:06:06 PM
It would be a bad thing for humans, but good for other living things.

Existing proven reserves are more than sufficient, if we don't dawdle about the transition to renewables.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 03, 2020, 06:34:42 PM
That's a pretty big if, Steve.
Title: Re: Peak Oil and Climate Change
Post by: oren on October 04, 2020, 12:34:29 AM
Even if we don't transition fast enough, it's far better to run out of oil than to run out of habitable climate.