Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 20, 2016
Mexico’s oil reserves slashed by a fifth
Platts has a look at Mexico’s declining oil reserves – Mexico’s reserves slashed by a fifth. The article also notes that the West’s biggest integrated oil companies also failed to replace, on average, their production with new reserves for a second year running, with just half of all production replenished over the year.
“ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, Shell and Total saw their combined proved oil and gas reserves slip to 84.6 billion boe last year, the biggest year-on-year drop and the lowest level in eight years.”
22 Comments on "Mexico’s oil reserves slashed by a fifth"
HARM on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:09 pm
Who cares about Mexico –at best a minor regional player on the oil & gas scene? Newly fracked oil in the U.S. alone will more than make up for the (theoretical) shortfall.
As Planter pointed out, Hubbert’s 1950s model did not fully take into account frack/shale/tar/unconventional reserves, and thus could not predict the current double peak in the U.S., the ongoing oil glut in the world, or the fact that the global peak has been pushed out for at least a decade, possibly much longer.
We are in a new era with new data, new variables and, as a result, need new models.
shortonoil on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:12 pm
84.6 billion boe last year, the biggest year-on-year drop and the lowest level in eight years.
Note that they say boe which includes anything that looks like, smells like, or tastes like a hydrocarbon. How much of it was a liquid hydrocarbon that would make “fuels”? That has been running about an 1/8 for the last decade. But, one must keep Wall Street happy who says reserves, reserves, reserves. The oil industry might be better off committing suicide, and going into the freshly painted bridge selling business.
shortonoil on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:21 pm
“As Planter pointed out, Hubbert’s 1950s model did not fully take into account frack/shale/tar/unconventional reserves, and thus could not predict the current double peak in the U.S., the ongoing oil glut in the world, or the fact that the global peak has been pushed out for at least a decade, possibly much longer. “
Nonny, is that you????
And when are you coming up with the $1 trillion you promised to cover the losses in the Shale disaster? Next week you say; you had better, momma Yellen is running out of ink!
HARM on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:26 pm
“…How much of it was a liquid hydrocarbon that would make “fuels”? That has been running about an 1/8 for the last decade.”
And yet… oil is still hovering around $40/BBL, refiners are running out of storage space, idle tankers are creating traffic jams in the Persian Gulf, and the world keeps on hitting new production peaks each month. But, hey, who cares about facts when you have an ideology?
HARM on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:33 pm
@shortonoil,
LOL. No, obviously I am not Nonny, though I could switch to childish name calling and insults if you like.
As far as $1 Trillion in credit goes, have you been paying attention over the last several years? If there’s any danger that the TBTF Investment banks or hedge funds blow up again, The Fed will simply print more “money” and bail them out. And the Fed has an unlimited printing press, and zero qualms about using it. Oh, and don’t forget how ZIRP and the Fed Put basically makes all Wall Street lending basically bulletproof, no matter how reckless. Heads they win, Tails you lose.
The oil majors will certainly get bailed out too, if needed, though of course the small and medium players will be left in the dust –to be scooped up at fire sale prices by the big guys later on. All part of the beautiful cycle of crony capitalism, the system that conquered the world.
Boat on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 2:52 pm
Harm,
Greenspan calls it the Darwinian flush.
geopressure on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 3:02 pm
This story is BS… Mexico Reserves should be going up… This is trick to trigger excess production in the coming cycle…
shortonoil on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 3:05 pm
“As far as $1 Trillion in credit goes, have you been paying attention over the last several years?”
It is interesting that you think that the present depletion situation can be curried by undertaking more of the the worse financial fiasco that has occurred since Pharaoh Imhoteps decided to go into the pyramid building business! Your heart is in the right place – your brain – well!
observerbrb on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 3:23 pm
HARM do you know the meaning of “collateral”?
The FED can print money beyond the infinity… but the currency only has value if it’s backed by collateral. Once the collateral is depleted it will not make sense to continue the money printing scheme.
HARM on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 3:41 pm
@shortonoil,
I don’t believe in infinite growth, and by definition am not a cornucopian.
Nonetheless, the old models were based on some bad assumptions about how much economically recoverable “oil” there really is, and the old peak predictions proved to be wrong.
geopressure on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 4:45 pm
Explosion just occurred @ PEMEX Export facility in Coatzacoalcos Mexico…
Apneaman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 5:26 pm
Massive blast at Mexico oil factory, hundreds evacuated
https://www.rt.com/news/340425-mexico-oil-plant-blast-fire/
geopressure on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 5:26 pm
As of january, we imported +/- 750,000 BOPD from Mexico…
Apneaman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 5:30 pm
Pemex needs $23bn to right itself: Moody’s
http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/02/11/pemex-needs-23bn-to-right-itself-sp/
Apneaman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 5:54 pm
HARM, “Bad assumptions”?
OK go ahead and list these bad assumptions and then show us the documentation.
makati1 on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 6:23 pm
More ‘slashes’ coming all over the world. LOL
HARM on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 6:48 pm
Apneaman,
Sure, np
Bad Assumptions:
1. That unconventional oil would not be a significant factor either in terms of the U.S. or global production peaks, largely due to unfavorable EROEI.
2. That the U.S. would reach a production peak between 1965 and 1970, and decline thereafter (implying that a second peak as large or larger than the first was impossible).
3. That the global peak would occur sometime between 2006 and now.
Sources:
http://www.resilience.org/primer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak_theory
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=WCRFPUS2&f=W
http://www.artberman.com/wp-content/uploads/Chart1_US-Crude-Prod-Imp-Cons.jpg
https://marketrealist.imgix.net/uploads/2015/12/World-Liquid-Fuels-Production-and-Consumption-Balance-2015-12-09.jpg?w=660&fit=max&auto=format
Boat on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 9:31 pm
Harm,
That last chart has been posted many times. Canadians can’t read charts. They do bring out insults and anger. Dunno why, kinda strange ya think?
Apneaman on Wed, 20th Apr 2016 10:05 pm
HARM, doesn’t work that way amateur. Hubberts original work. it’s freely available on-line. You must have a copy right? I wasn’t asking for a bunch of opinions from writers, because we were discussing Hubberts work. That’s what you claim has “bad assumptions” whatever that means (sounds real scientific btw) Show us where it is in his work. You know like a quote to back up your assertion. Why would you use a bunch of articles from writers 50 years later as your evidence in your claim against Hubbert?
And you wonder why I name call? Because you assholes try and pass off your retard pretzel logic, as legitimate debate.
I consider amateurish game playing more of an insult than being told to fuck off.
Face it Jr, you ain’t got what it takes to shit with the big dogs. Didn’t do your homework, so your’re just making it up as you go along. Another Cliff notes barrel counter.
GregT on Thu, 21st Apr 2016 12:32 am
“2. That the U.S. would reach a production peak between 1965 and 1970, and decline thereafter”
Read Hubbert’s paper. He projected a peak in conventional crude oil production of then known estimated reserves utilizing then available technologies.
If you aren’t willing to read the paper which you continually wrongly call out, then you are nothing less than completely full of shit.
Read the fucking report, or shut the fuck up about it already.
george on Thu, 21st Apr 2016 7:40 am
Lmfao
Kenz300 on Thu, 21st Apr 2016 7:49 am
Climate Change is real….. we will all be impacted by it.
The sooner we transition away from fossil fuels the better.
Oil Giants Spend $115 Million A Year To Oppose Climate Policy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-companies-climate-policy_us_570bb841e4b0142232496d97