Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on December 3, 2015
Peak oil is a reality with serious consequences
Sir, Martin Wolf, in “Cheap oil puts humanity on a slippery slope” (December 2) states: “The emergence of shale oil underlines what was already fairly clear, namely, that the global supply capacity is not only enormous but expanding. Forget peak oil.” He is mistaken. Even the International Energy Agency acknowledges that conventional oil production peaked in 2005. Add other sources of liquid production, in particular tight oil (often misleadingly called shale oil) production from the US, and there has been a modest increase since then, giving a kind of “undulating plateau” as Shell would have it. What the burst of unconventional production from the US has done is to mask the underlying reality of peak oil. This will become apparent as the tight oil potential itself proves limited in time.
Bear in mind the huge scale of the industry and the production infrastructure required. The vast bulk of production is coming from conventional oilfields, the majority of which are past peak and whose production is in decline. A consideration of the discoveries waiting to be developed and the timescale to put them into production reveals a significant gap, apparent even on close consideration of the work of the IEA, which masks this gap as production that will come from as yet unidentified, undiscovered fields. It is totally unrealistic to anticipate future discoveries on the scale required to fill this gap, given the historical record (especially this century) and the fact that most promising oil provinces have already been well explored and developed.
The potential of a future boost in production from Iraq and Iran can be assessed, as can that from unconventional sources including Canadian oil sands and US tight oil, but all of this combined is insufficient to fill a large demand-supply gap when considering the horizon 2020-30. What is actually important is not the date of peak global oil production, but the decades of decline that follow. They imply a continuous global economic contraction until the underlying basis of the global economy — liquid hydrocarbons for everything that moves — is substantially changed. Furthermore, rapid growth in the domestic consumption of the key oil-exporting countries means less will be available for export — oil exports from key exporting countries will decline much faster than their production declines (the so-called “export land effect”). Peak oil and its consequences are as serious for the global economy as climate change.
Nicholas Tobin
Paris, France
52 Comments on "Peak oil is a reality with serious consequences"
makati1 on Thu, 3rd Dec 2015 7:19 pm
The headline is the biggest understatement of the year.
Maybe the decade.
As for the last sentence, no it is not anywhere near as important as climate change. You can live without oil. You cannot live without water and food. It should read:
” Peak oil and its consequences are NOT as serious for the global economy as climate change, but it WILL change your lifestyle.”
BC on Thu, 3rd Dec 2015 11:02 pm
Mak, how about Peak Oil, overshoot, resource depletion per capita, excessive debt to wages and GDP, and climate change are cumulative factors that are self-reinforcing and cannot be disaggregated?
Boat on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:38 am
Conventional oil production is growing while fracked oil is in decline. Look forward to new world records of conventional oil being produced in the near future.
BC,
Don’t worry to much about that resource depletion per capita thing. Most of the population growth is in underdeveloped countries. They don’t use much energy.
makati1 on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:39 am
True, BC. Climate Change is already a sure thing. The others will settle out in their own way. Death in large numbers everywhere, even in the 1st world. Extreme hardship in the 1st world and some extra in the 3rd.
Financial matters will hurt those who have, not so much those who have not, as it should be. Debt is voluntary, not necessary.
Soon all of the ‘factors’ will be untied from one another and those who survive will live in a very different, and very hard, world.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:39 am
Mak said “As for the last sentence, no it is not anywhere near as important as climate change. You can live without oil. You cannot live without water and food. It should read:
” Peak oil and its consequences are NOT as serious for the global economy as climate change, but it WILL change your lifestyle.”
I disagree in apportionment and degree. Who can’t live without oil when most food and water comes to most people via oil? A statement like” Peak oil and its consequences are NOT as serious for the global economy as climate change, but it WILL change your lifestyle.” Mak, whose life has value? We know who you think has value but what about another person’s value? Some people will die from climate change and some from the decay that peak oil causes. Whose life has value is all you are doing in the above statement. Your idea is very different from many others.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:42 am
Boat said “Don’t worry to much about that resource depletion per capita thing. Most of the population growth is in underdeveloped countries. They don’t use much energy.”
Boater, what about the third world where vital commodities come from. You are saying to not worry about the current stability of the global system that is a mutual reliance of most nations on each other?
makati1 on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:59 am
Boat, I restrain myself when I read your less than educated remarks.
China uses more energy than any other country and is growing. Other growing countries are also using more. India, Russia and Japan together use the same amount as the US, and India and Russia are still growing. Japan not so much, but they are switching from nuclear to oil, using a lot more.
US energy use is declining as many people in the US do not have the money to waste as before. When the financial balloon bursts, the age of petroleum will be over for the most part.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:29 am
Mak, I completely agree that Climate Change is a lot more serious problem than Peak Oil is. I have never worried much about PO, I have always considered it nothing more than a temporary economic inconvenience at the most. Overpopulation and Climate Change are on a wholly different level, they are causing permanent, irreparable damage to ecosystems and the global biosphere, in general, and threaten our species’ survival on this planet, in particular.
To claim Peak Oil and Climate Change are equally serious problem is an ignorant and naive proposition. Peak Oil never threatened the biosphere or our species survival.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:31 am
Good morning, Davy! Time to put on your burro hat and sit facing the corner of the classroom! LOL!
Hello on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:56 am
GW is not a serious issue.
For millions of years Co2 got sequestered. It’s good it gets released again. Plants need Co2 to live.
PO is a much more serious issue because it’s a short term ( < 50 year) phenomena which does not leave enough time for adaption.
GW on the other hand will take centuries to play out. Easy to adapt to.
Boat on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:56 am
mak,
Look around the world and see all that military money not being used. I don’t think getting commodities to market will slow much.
Boat, I restrain myself when I read your less than educated remarks.
As for that comment, every day that I come in here and point out the world is functioning just fine is a day that has a long history of me being right.
You doomers roll first to peak oil, since any immediate problem with depletion has been disproved you move to the financial mess. A mess it is and will be for decades but crash? When? Then we move onto climate change which we can agree on will have devastating effects. I say maybe in a couple of decades before it starts actually costing trillions and killing hundreds of millions. So yes Mak, be restrained, I guess I will have to be the expert till proven wrong. Lol
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:01 am
Mak said “Russia are still growing.”
Mak, please do you have any back up? It is well known Russia is in recession. I don’t even have to provide a link.
Boat on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:06 am
Hello,
Nat Gas can run cargo ships pretty easily. Trains can also. If oil gets high again in a few years Semi trucks will start switching. The infrastructure is being built out now in a slow way.
These types of changes need high prices for oil to happen. I figure the transition to start around 2018. By then we may very well have the newest and last peak oil. LOL adds his name to the list of millions who have been wrong.
Hello on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:12 am
Boat.
It’s all true what your saying and I repeat what I’ve mentioned before.
High oil prices are no problem at all. The economy will be doing just fine at 300$ oil.
But the killer is rapid swings. Up or down doesn’t matter. And with system that is close to it’s limit in capabilities one can expect a lot of rapid swings.
But either way, it will certainly take much longer than the average doomer predicts. It will take decades to a century to play out.
makati1 on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:32 am
Hello and Boat are members of a mutual admiration society…lol. Both are about as sharp as jello.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:35 am
Davy, it is well known that you are a delusional American exceptionalist one percenter living in denial of the truth.
Russia is oficially no longer in a recession, and Mak is right and you are wrong, so you shouldn’t correct him. Since I know you are searching for the truth I will provide a few links for you that back up what Mak said. I would really like to see your links proving that Russia is in a recession TODAY, not two weeks or two months ago, http://news.yahoo.com/russian-recession-over-economy-minister-152039589.html
And another, http://www.ibtimes.com/russia-declares-its-recession-has-ended-despite-continuing-low-oil-prices-sanctions-2196600
And another, http://www.businessinsider.com/worst-of-russias-recession-might-be-over-2015-11
Russia is oficially no longer in a recession.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:36 am
Boater I just want to add conceivably NatGas can be used to power space freighters to mine asteroids. Boat if that sounds absurd it is because your ideas on NatGas are absurd. The scale of a change out along with the time needed are gone. I will go so far to say it was never possible anyway. Without oil our modern system collapses “PERIOD”. We can apply the same logic with alternative energy. Both fall under the same category of oil dependent and following oils decline. There is no way either can make a difference except around the edges. The economics alone do not support them or they would be a dominant force now. Our economy is barely functioning currently and you expect it to pay for all this? Come on Boater that is wishful thinking.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 7:53 am
Juan, it is well known that you are a delusional ugly anti-American exceptionalist one percenter living in denial of the truth. There try that Juan.
Juan you have more money than I do. We have talked about this in the past. You have all those real estate investments in Miami Beach. I bailed out of the 1% league. I am now a goat farmer. The family has money but that is not me. Why do you continue to live that kind of life? Hypocrisy is ugly Juan.
https://www.rt.com/business/312171-russia-economy-decline-recession/
Juan you can play the sophisticated economist you think you are but there is no way to tell where they are exactly currently. But as far back as August it was very apparent.
“Russia’s economy suffered a 4.6-percent fall in GDP in the second quarter of 2015 against the same period last year, the worst performance in six years, according to official statistics. A collapse in oil prices and Western sanctions were largely to blame, however improvement is forecast in 3Q of 2015.
The sharp GDP quarterly decline more than doubled the 2.2 percent year-on-year contraction recorded in the previous three months, Russia’s Federal Statistics Service said Monday. The government had previously predicted a Q2 decline of 4.4 percent.”
Juan linked “Russia Declares Its Recession Has Ended Despite Continuing Low Oil Prices And Sanctions” Juan, Russia declaring the recession is over and it being over are two different things. You are letting your agenda get in the way just as the Makster does. If oil goes to $30 we will see some really ugly out of Russia.
Juan it is well known you engage in Putin worship with a Russian agenda. You remind me of Orlov. Move there Juan if you love the place so much. I can’t figure out why anti-Americans continue to live in America when they hate the place so much.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:00 am
Wow, nice rant, Davy! LOL!
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:08 am
Likewise Juan, you give excellent rants. It is hard to top yours!
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:10 am
Are we living in August or are we living today, Davy? I told you not to talk about the past. You used the word “is”, not “was”. It was your word choice, not mine, so your comment does not disprove my accusation that you were telling a falsehood when YOU claimed Russia IS in a recession. You can admit you were wrong or allow your inadvertent falsehood to become a knowing lie making you a proven LIAR. Your comment is one large denialist load of shit that doesn’t contain one single truth in it. Every word in my comment is truthful.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:11 am
Were you wrong or are you a liar, Davy?
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:15 am
Juan like I said Russia current claims are not valid as proof. Recessions are seen in the review mirror. What is wrong about that statement? You are all about protecting your Russian agenda. I believe the US is in recession per real numbers but the manipulated numbers say a different story. Is anything wrong with that statement Juan?
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:16 am
“LIAR”, come on Juan please list my lies.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:21 am
Juan, I think we can get more done and provide a better message on this board if we acknowledge our positions without personal attacks. I will bitch slap you if you bitch slap me. I have no problem with that but I know others do. So Juan, chill out and provide ideas and facts in your battle and quit your childish name calling behavior. Your problem Juan is you are too emotional and connected to your anti-American agenda to show fairness, balance, and objectivity. You are just like Makster and want winners and losers because your hate and resentment is overpowering.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:30 am
If you can’t accept that your “Russia is in a recession” comment was inaccurate, you are denying the truth, and become a liar. Is it really so hard for you to understand what I wrote above? I am certain it is very clear. But, I already proved yesterday that you are a liar. Do you want me to start copying, saving in a file, and pasting later your lies in the future.
Why can’t you just say “Juan, it seems you are right this time and I was wrong. I didn’t know Russia’s recession was oficially over. Russia was in a very bad recession earlier this year, but it oficially is no more as of the last few days. I stand corrected. Thanks for helping me in my search for the truth”
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:32 am
Davy, I am completely immune to your bitch slapping, so feel free if it helps you in any way.
rockman on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:36 am
PO and CC are obviously both serious problems. CC will more significantly impact the lives of future generations for the most. PO OTOH has already impacted the lives of hundreds of millions. In the last 25 years the oil wars have claimed the lives of 100’s of thousands, inflicted great hardships on millions and depleted $TRILLIONS from national treasuries. And those dynamics continue today and will likely get worse in the future.
The situation is somewhat like a person with slowly spreading cancer and a badly damaged and failing heart: just a question of what will kill them first.
shortonoil on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:36 am
2013 is the last year for which we have complete results. In that year the world consumed 32 Gb of petroleum, and discovered 4 Gb. The world is now finding replacements for 12% of the oil it consumes. WTI has fallen to $41/ barrel, a price that is insufficient for producers to replace the reserve that they are extracting; even if the oil was there to be developed. At a 4 Gb discovery rate it obviously isn’t!
Our Model indicates that over 84% of the world’s extractable reserve has already been removed. It also indicates that the price of oil is now on a long term downward trend:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
The entropic decay of the world’s Petroleum Production System is reducing the value of oil to the economy. That decay process has occurred as the industry has been extracting the best reserves it could find for the last 150 years. As a consequence the price will continue to decline. The world is now less than fifteen years away from the end of the oil age; the point where the average producer can no longer make money producing oil. As the production, and consumption of petroleum directly accounts for 38% of the world’s economy a decline in its value will be reflected in that economy. The world has now entered into a deflationary spiral for which there is no escape.!
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:39 am
Juan, you are a waste of time when you seek a winner takes all position. Life is not either or Juan. Grow up this is not the grade school playground.
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:48 am
Wow, Davy! You can’t even admit being wrong once. I am dumbfounded! I find it hard to accept, but it is the truth. We will allow Davy to determine when recessions begin and end from now own. Official government data cannot be allowed to trump Davy’s exceptionalist delusions. You have already proved yourself to be a liar, coward, hypocrite, traitor to your country and people, and now a narcissist in less than 48 hours. Keep up the good work!
Copy, savy, and paste it is then! I have created a Word doc file called “Davy’s lies, falsehoods, exaggerations, distortions, inaccuracies, and delusions”. This is going to be fun. LOL!
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:49 am
“Oil & Ruble Dump, Gold Jumps On Leaked OPEC Decision – “No Cut In Production”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-04/crude-plunges-first-no-cut-opec-leak
“With non-OPEC production bringing about a global oil glut, countries like Venezuela and Iran have called in recent days for an output reduction to bring back the group’s production to its agreed level of 30 million barrels a day. They won’t get it, and the result is that oil may very well trade to Goldman’s near-term target in the mid-$20s on very short notice.”
Not good for Russia Juan!
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 8:52 am
Even worse for the USA, Davy! Shale, anyone?
JuanP on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 9:07 am
Interesting link, Davy, thanks! “… If current production remains unchanged at 31.5 million barrels a day, markets will still be oversupplied by 700,000 barrels a day in 2016—though that would be less than the glut of 1.8 million a barrel a day OPEC estimates for this year.”
It looks like 2016 could be bloody for the global oil industry and oil producing countries. With hedges running out and if these prices last through another year, invesment in exploration and future production will diminish significantly. This will lead to another global economic crisis eventually.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 9:12 am
Exactly Juan but the US is a diversified economy and Russia is a resource driven economy. I admire Russia’s fortitude but they are engaged in a ME military campaign, rebuilding effort in the Crimea, and a new cold war. All this military posturing just as their biggest export earning sources are nose diving. The oil price situation could change quickly and completely change the playing field but I doubt it because demand destruction is likely taking oil prices down. I imagine we will have some short term oil supply shocks with higher prices but nothing sustained and long term. Russia is going down with the rest of us. I will say for the record of all the countries in the world Russia is likely best placed for this descent at least as far as location and resources.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 9:16 am
Juan, you are among the best on this board with knowing oil’s background issues. I read all your post and generally agree with everything you say. Your doom and prep comments are likewise excellent.
shortonoil on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 10:05 am
The simple reason that OPEC will not cut, or anyone else, is that the loss in revenue from from their reduced sales would not be compensated for by any corresponding price increase resulting from the production cut. This result can be deduced from the Etp Energy Model. To bring the price back to the curve, by our calculations would at present, require a production decline of about 4.5 mb/d:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
Because it take energy to produce petroleum, any cut in production will also produce a corresponding decline in demand. At present that would be about half the production decline.
Basically, anyone who cuts production will be in worse financial condition than they were before they cut.
Anyone depending on a price increase in the future that will be sufficient to salvage the now declining petroleum industry is in for a rude awaking. The only option now available to producers is to maximize their individual production potential until they can no longer recover their lifting cost. After that point they will begin shutting in wells. That appears to be exactly what is happening!
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
energyskeptic on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 1:49 pm
Peak oil will kill more people, and kill them much sooner, than climate change. Since peak oil means peak everything else, peak coal and peak natural gas will cause massive food shortages and electrical outages. No doubt this will trigger resource wars and cause financial collapse which will be seen by most to be the causes of all the misery. Right now, cheap oil is also preventing deaths from heat via A/C, water shortages, and other climate change/resource shortages besides food. Patzek, Croft, and the Uppsala scientists in Sweden believe that peak fossil fuels means the lowest 4 IPCC scenarios at worst. My guess is that runaway greenhouse is not guaranteed, but a 6th extinction certainly is, and that probably some people, in several regions, will survive both post-fossil fuels and rising sea level/climate craziness.
Davy on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 2:14 pm
ES, that is my thinking. I would add the financial system is part of your equation because oil is nothing without an economy and vice versa. One or the other or both in tandem will bring an end to our global world leaving an order of magnitude deficit in our global support system. Consumption and population will be forced to rebalance.
This may or may not mitigate climate change but we can cross off the worst case scenarios for carbon levels IMHO. IMA runaway climate events will likely mean a lower carbon emissions from a collapse are too little too late.
PO and economic collapse will bitch slap modern man then the effects of climate change will mop up what is left. In a generation we may have a significantly smaller dispersed populations surviving on the edge of maginal habitation.
Harquebus on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:14 pm
“Modern agriculture is the use of land to convert petroleum into food.” — Prof. Albert Bartlett.
makati1 on Fri, 4th Dec 2015 6:50 pm
Energyskeptic, in the long run, CC will be the winner not PO. PO will kill off the weak. CC will kill off the species and the ecology it needs to survive. At the rate we are killing off the systems that provide us with oxygen, it will not take many more decades.
And, no, I do NOT think humans will survive at all, zip, zero, nada, and will likely be gone before 2100. For that very reason. No oxygen.
BillC on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 12:56 am
Title should be:
“Good news. Peak oil is the fastest way to reverse climate change.”
GregT on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 1:33 am
“Good news. Peak oil is the fastest way to reverse climate change.”
Climate change is not reversible Billy. We either stop industrialization, or we don’t. Even if we do stop industrialism completely, climate change will continue to get worse for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Whether our species will
actually survive or not, is up for intense debate. Unless of course you are from MO, then your flag, and your MIC will save you.
Hip hip hooray for the Red, White, and Blue, cause it’s Red and It’s White and it’s Blue. And we’ve got much better and bigger shit to blow other people up with. Fuck-yah!
Boat on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 3:42 am
Davy,
The scale of a change out along with the time needed are gone. I will go so far to say it was never possible anyway. Without oil our modern system collapses “PERIOD”
This is our huckleberry moment Davy. How can you assume we will be out of oil. How can you assume were out of time.
The world may transition away from FF and to to Renewables and still get eaten up by climate change 100 years later.
We may have large populations living in concrete bunkers away from ocean shores doing just fine. Maybe only those without children are allowed in.
We are to old to see whats going to happen. But as old age envelopes us I will be here with you and Mak listening how tomorrow the day of the crash, is at hand.
peakyeast on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 5:33 am
@mak: I find it unlikely that climate change will get enough time to cause a mass extinction during the humans terror-regime of earth. But if Gus McPherson is right – then okay.
Remember what happenede in Russia during their local semi-collapse and in Greece?
When the food doesnt appear on the shelf in the supermarket – everything edible will be shot, stabbed, scraped off, dug out, cut down and so forth.
Only by a strictly self-regulated suicide – where the masses are kept away from what little nature that is left – is there some hope that other animals will survive us.
makati1 on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 6:45 am
Peaky, only bacteria, virus and maybe a few insects like roaches will get thru the coming extinction event. The oceans and forests that provide our oxygen are dying. I see nothing that can stop that from happening. We upper life forms require a certain percentage of oxygen in the air to live. When it drops even a small percentage below that threshold, we are going to first, be unable to do heavy work, than any work, and then our heart will stop. End of story.
How fast can it happen? Years? Decades? I doubt centuries. The forests are burning all over the world. The ocean is turning acidic and the oxygen producing critters that live there are dying off. When that happens it will not matter who you are, your net worth, location, age or anything else. Game over.
peakyeast on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 7:03 am
The fall from 35% oxygen has definitely made me unwilling to do hard work. 😉
But AFAIK the reduction of the oxygen content takes a long time – even with no new production?
Once the humans are gone – I find it likely that the world will eventually return to its “own” state. And some millions of years later not much evidence of our selfmade catastrophe will be present.
Hopefully a lot of other life will have adapated to the new situation.
If we come to a world with no oxygen – then it will probably take a billion years for new complex lifeforms to develop. I dont find it proven that oxygen is mandatory for larger animals to develop.
But I completely understand your grief at the mad destruction taking place.
Davy on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 7:14 am
Poo widdly Greg getting hot and bothered because his anti-American tabloid agenda is under threat. Are you drinking tonight Greg? That happens when we get retired it is so easy to pick the bottle up! Lol.
Greg, your stance on climate change is likely correct but who knows about the degree and the timing. Greg you are not an expert and the experts are not even sure. We are seeing it happen quicker than we thought but will rate of change continue.
I would say Bill assertion that peak oil will reverse climate change is false in that respect but it will slow carbon emissions if it hits hard enough. That could buy us some time maybe but I doubt save us. The only problem is peak oil will kill off people just as bad as climate change it is just a different delivery system of death.
rockman on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 9:57 am
“Good news. Peak oil is the fastest way to reverse climate change.” Only if one assumes as oil resources decline (or becomes too expensive) economies won’t consume increasing amounts of coal. An undeniable possibility given what we’ve see in coal consumption by China, India et al.
rockman on Sat, 5th Dec 2015 10:20 am
And since I’ve touched on coal let’s remind folks of the FACTS from out friends at the IEA that counter the bullsh*t claims that “King Coal is dead”. Declining oil resources are not likely to be beneficial for the climate:
“Is coal production declining? No, far from it. Since the start of the 21st century, coal production has been the fastest-growing global energy source. The IEA sees global supply increasing at an average rate of 2.1% through 2019.
Will production of coal continue to increase?
Coal was the fastest-growing primary energy source from 2000-10 at 5.5% per year. Economic growth is likely to continue in both China and India at least over the medium-term (five years). Coal remains the key fuel in both countries’ energy mix and since economic growth and energy use are highly correlated, coal demand prospects for both countries and other emerging economies are expected to be strong enough to offset sluggish coal demand in OECD countries. Therefore, global coal demand is likely to grow.
What about coal consumption? Coal consumption increased by more than 70% from 2000 to 2013. Demand grew 2.4% in 2013, up from 2.0% in 2012.
Coal reserves and resources are widely dispersed over the globe and supply is not concentrated to a few regions only, as is the case for natural gas and oil. The key exporting countries, Indonesia, Australia, Russia, South Africa, Colombia, and the United States are politically stable. Around 90% of coal exports come from only these six countries.
{Yes: the US, under the two terms of our “greenest POTUS” ever we’ve been one of the major sources of coal consumption in the world. Such as increasing coal exports by 500% during his two terms.}
And speaking of China: “Its share in global coal production is almost four times that of Saudi Arabia’s in oil output with respect to energy consumption from fossil fuels. China’s share in global coal consumption is more than twice that of the United States for oil. Overall, the Chinese domestic coal market is more than three times that of all international coal trade. In 2011 China became the largest coal importer in the world; however, China’s coal imports make up just 5% of its total coal consumption.”