Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby MonteQuest » Sun 04 Mar 2007, 18:39:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ClubOfRomeII', 'W')hich is why I pay close attention to Hubberts original work, where alot of this starts. He has his solution built right into the original work, and its very curious that people lift the entire Peak oil piece out ( good or bad ) and then completely ignore the solution he included in the same paper. Matter of fact, he spent more words on the solution than the peak theory itself.


Then you should pay attention to his recanting of that "solution" as well.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he key to making this cultural alteration is to come up with a limitless supply of cheap energy. Hubbert feels the answer is obvious--solar power--and he does not feel more technological breakthroughs are needed before it can be made universally available. His faith is not that of a knee-jerk trendy but that of a doubter who did much studying before his conversion.



$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hubbert', '"')Fifteen years ago I thought solar power was impractical because I thought nuclear power was the answer. But I spent some time on an advisory committee on waste disposal to the Atomic Energy Commission. After that, I began to be very, very skeptical because of the hazards. That's when I began to study solar power. I'm convinced we have the technology to handle it right now. We could make the transition in a matter of decades if we begin now.""


He also addressed population:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hubbert', '"')It is an aberration. For most of human history the population doubled only once every 32,000 years. Now it's down to 35 years. That is dangerous. No biologic population can double more that a few times without getting seriously out of bounds. I think the world is seriously overpopulated right now. There can be no possible solutions to the world's problems that do not involve stabilization of the world's population."


http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/hubecon.htm
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 00:32:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eclipse', 'H')ubbert was wrong?

As we all know, Hubbert accurately came up with the concept of a "double peak" — one in discovery followed by a peak in production — and then in 1956 accurately predicted America's peak oil production peak for 1970. But Hubbert was way off on the VOLUMES of WORLD peak oil. Hubbert predicted total world oil extraction would peak at 1/3 of today's rates.


Yes, but as this 1976 video shows:

Hubbert speaks!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')everal years after his startlingly accurate prediction that the U.S. would peak in 1970 and in the context of the 1970s energy crisis, Hubbert speaks about the theoretical Hubbert curve which suggested a worldwide peak of oil extraction in 1995. In the past several years, Hubbert and his predictive model have been roundly criticized by detractors such as CERA (Cambridge Energy Research Associates) because world oil extraction did not peak in 1995 and still has yet to peak.

Hubbert clearly articulates that the OPEC countries had already by 1976 changed their production profiles such that his world production curve would likely be shifted by about ten years. He also speculates that the growth rate at the time could also be flattened in the future which could also change the curve.


His initial prediction was 1995. 1995 plus ten years =2005.

I think he was spot on again!

http://www.energybulletin.net/26976.html
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby Revi » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 10:00:19

Didn't the latest data show that 2006 was down by over 200,000 barrels per day from 2005? I think Hubbert was right too. We're riding the downslope of Hubbert's Peak now. The dinosaurs don't know it, but their time is short. All these people driving around in monster SUV's are riding on borrowed time. When gas gets to $3 again (which it will) they will start to moan and groan. Will they change, or will they perish?
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby LastViking » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 18:09:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'D')idn't the latest data show that 2006 was down by over 200,000 barrels per day from 2005?

Will they change, or will they perish?


2005 - 84.5 mb/d
2006 - 85.3 mb/d

Sorry Revi, according to IEA's upward revision, you will have to wait until next year for folks to "perish". When you logged in, did you perhaps mix us up with the dieoff forum?
User avatar
LastViking
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon 19 Feb 2007, 04:00:00
Location: British Virgins
Top

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby killJOY » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 20:09:46

Lastviking is the same asshole that pollutes the Oil Drum.

Here he counts everything in the pisspot as "oil," double counting energy inputs to make such lovely fluids as "orimulsion" and Fryolator goo.

He knows as well as anyone else that the crude oil + condensate numbers are DOWN.
Peak oil = comet Kohoutek.
User avatar
killJOY
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2220
Joined: Mon 21 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: ^NNE^

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby Revi » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 21:04:52

"Solar technologies, therefore, currently are “parasites” on fossil fuel systems because they cannot “reproduce” themselves." Montequest

What do you call trees? They are solar and reproduce themselves. Those who don't get into solar may not make it, but solar things have been reproducing on this planet since the first life.

About the world being down 200,000 barrels per day:

I think they came out with the numbers on the Oil Drum didn't they? We may have some more goo in the hopper each day, but it's lower quality. The good stuff has peaked. We're on the downslope now.

Even ethanol which the Prez is so crazy about has less btu's per gallon than gasoline.

Any way you slice it we're in trouble now.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 09 Mar 2007, 21:32:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', '"')Solar technologies, therefore, currently are “parasites” on fossil fuel systems because they cannot “reproduce” themselves." Montequest

What do you call trees?


Organic photosynthetic convertors of sunlight into carbohydrates.

But trees are not solar "technologies."

Not sure why you posted this. Everyone knows what I meant.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Hubbert was wrong? Big deal!

Unread postby Revi » Sat 10 Mar 2007, 22:39:54

"Organic photosynthetic convertors of sunlight into carbohydrates." Montequest's description of trees

They aren't technologies, but they are serving some people. Right now 250 of them are turning sunlight into carbohydrates and those carbs are running down tubes into a tank, where we'll boil them down into maple syrup. What's the matter with that? It's a form of permaculture.

It seems to me that the only way to get ahead (or hold your own) in an energy limited world is to switch as much of your energy supply from fossil fuels to solar and renewable sources of energy as possible. That way you can continue to grow while others shrink. Like a tree.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Previous

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron