[cephalotus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Rune', '
')
Thorium-based nuclear power

It has been done and is being done, all over the world.

[ROCKMAN]

dorlomin - Well said. In a way I take some comfort is such statements as "Peak oil may be dead...". PO can’t be dead because it was never “alive”…it’s just a measurable metric…always has been and always will be. It has no breath or pulse. When the cornucopians use such hyperbole it just emphasizes to me how little factual support they have for their arguments. The basic propaganda technique: use emotionally charged rhetoric when you can’t use the facts to support your position.

I’m sure you’ve noticed my obsessive efforts to get folks to completely ignore when PO has or will occur. More and more folks are now focusing on the actual effects of our depleting hydrocarbon base. Been a while since we’ve seen a heated debate here about PO dates. Unfortunately the vast majority of the US public is still hanging on to the “there is no oil problem” theme even with the new normal of higher oil prices. At least on your side of the Pond folks seem to be getting it to a greater degree.

[dsula]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', '�')��there is no oil problem”

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Rune', '
')Peak oil has been pushed off into the future yet again. We are not living in a Mad Max era. It looks like oil and natural gas will be available for so long that it is doubtful whether the subject will ever reach such dire dimensions again. Because now, the price is higher and there is so much going on technologically to
mitigate or eliminate any consequences.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Rune', '
')This is exactly how the rest of the world looks at peak oil doomerism and YOU guys are nutcase truthers!

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dorlomin', '.') But peak oil is here and happening for the consumers of the world.

[dorlomin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'A')s it was in 1989

[ROCKMAN]

John - "As it was in 1989 (Campbell), 2000 (Savinar and Ruppert), 2005 (Deffeyes and Simmons), 2006 (Fatih Birol) and 2008 (TOD)." And don't forget Gary Higgins (1975), He was my first mentor when I joined Mobil Oil that year. He explained global PO (our "reserve replacement problem") to me then and projected it would begin revealing it self during the first couple of decades of the 21st century. So far he appears to be spot on.

So many false gods and only one true Prophet...and his name was Gary. PRAISE BE HIM!

[Rune]

To generate electricity for a city of 1 million people for 1 year:
A. Mine 3,200,000 tonnes of coal - emit 8,500,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases and particulates. Use a landfill to bury 900,000 cubic metres of toxic/radioactive fly-ash.

B. Mine 50,000 tonnes of uranium ore - emit no greenhouse gases - produce 24 tonnes of radiotoxic 'waste'. Store the wastwe for tens of thousands of years.

C. Mine 50 tonnes of equivalent thorium ore - emit no greenhouse gases - produce 0.8 tonnes of radiotoxic 'waste', store it for 300 years.

Which choice did Dr. James Hansen recommend?

[Threepwood]

‘Peak oil’ is alive and well, in the same place it always has been- 10 years in the imaginery future..

[ROCKMAN]

Threepwood - I would guess all those folks who are paying $100/bbl would argue that the peak oil dynamic is alive and well...today. Just as I'm sure the US tax payers who have contributed hundreds of billions of tax $'s and thousands of the lives of our military in effort to stabilize oil producing regions in the Middle East would also agree.

But perhaps you're just referring to that relatively meaningless date of PO that some folks still seem to be foolishly hung up on.

[Threepwood]

oil prod.jpg

[Loki]

Yep peak oil is dead, oil has been found to be both infinite and renewable at the scale of a human life. Oil production will never peak, just go UP UP UP, ad infinitum.

Or it will be soon be replaced by one of Rune's magic perpetual motion schemes for electricity production, and oil will suddenly become irrelevant. In 30 years. If we're lucky. Of course how this pertains to the liquid fuel problem is unknown, as is what we're supposed to do until thorium dominates global energy production.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Threepwood', '�')��Peak oil’ is alive and well, in the same place it always has been- 10 years in the imaginery future..

[Loki]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'T')hreepwood - I would guess all those folks who are paying $100/bbl would argue that the peak oil dynamic is alive and well...today. Just as I'm sure the US tax payers who have contributed hundreds of billions of tax $'s and thousands of the lives of our military in effort to stabilize oil producing regions in the Middle East would also agree.

[ROCKMAN]

Loki - I know I should avoid the temptation but is so difficult to pass up such soft pitches. It like teasing a kitten with a feather: trolls just can't resist coming back for more torment. LOL. I think some of them are actually emotionally masochistic and desire any attention even if it's negative.

Of course there is another approach:
Masochistic to sadist: " Beat me...beat me!"
Sadist to masochist: "Noooooo." LOLLLLLLLLLL

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'J')ohn - "As it was in 1989 (Campbell), 2000 (Savinar and Ruppert), 2005 (Deffeyes and Simmons), 2006 (Fatih Birol) and 2008 (TOD)." And don't forget Gary Higgins (1975), He was my first mentor when I joined Mobil Oil that year. He explained global PO (our "reserve replacement problem") to me then and projected it would begin revealing it self during the first couple of decades of the 21st century. So far he appears to be spot on.

[ROCKMAN]

John – As Yogi said: “Predictions are difficult…especially about the future.” LOL.

I try not to fault folks too much for making any predictions. Where they continually blunder IMHO is not stating the qualifications that their predictions hang upon. Consider what Hubbert was really predicting with his 1970’s PO expectations: it was the peak production from those trends which had been developing over the last 20 to 30 years. Those were his statistical populations he was basing his projection upon. His prediction obvious didn’t include the DW GOM oil fields because they weren’t part of the statistical population he was dealing with.

A more subtle assumption about his prediction many don’t understand: there was an oil price assumption. Consider the hypothetical: at the time he made his prediction the world would go into a deep recession and oil prices cratered. Obviously less drilling would follow. Less drilling means slower field development. And then 10 or 15 years later oil prices run back up and drilling picks up which increases the US oil production rate. Instead of PO happening in the early 70’s it might have happened in the mid 80’s.

Some wonder why we geologists weren’t predicting the boom in the shale plays 10 years ago. I’ve known about the oil in the Eagle Ford Shale for more than 25 years. I’ve known about the ability of frac’d horizontal wells to produce formations like the EFS for 20 years. Drilled a lot of such wells in the Austin Chalk in the 90’s. I could have readily predicted the boom in the EFS 10 years ago…if you told me oil was going to go to $100/bbl. OTOH if you asked me how many EFS wells would be drilled next year if oil dropped to $50/bbl tomorrow you can probably guess my answer. As I’ve mentioned before I developed an idea almost 15 years ago to recover residual oil from certain conventional reservoirs utilizing a horizontal well bore. But I just drilled the first well 6 months ago. Doing nicely thank you…150 bopd. And why did I get to drill it now and not 15 years ago? Again, $100/bbl oil makes a lot of old ideas in the back of my file cabinets viable today.

Folks can predict what they want as far as future US or global oil flow rates. The numbers they offer don’t interest me nearly as much as the assumptions behind those predictions. Someone may say N. Dakota will be producing X bopd in 3 years. That’s great but I can’t evaluate the validity of that prediction if they don’t include the assumptions made. For instance, are they assuming $120/bbl oil or $70/bbl oil? Without offering the underlying assumptions they are merely tossing out an unsupported guess. Which isn’t worth a second look let alone a debate IMHO.

Same thing with the date of global PO: it's of little interest to me. But the future geopolitics, prices, military adventures, supply disruptions, ELM, etc....those are damn interesting to me. And none of them hinge on whether GPO happened a few years ago or not for another 10 years IMHO.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Rune', 'T')o generate electricity for a city of 1 million people for 1 year:
A. Mine 3,200,000 tonnes of coal - emit 8,500,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases and particulates. Use a landfill to bury 900,000 cubic metres of toxic/radioactive fly-ash.

B. Mine 50,000 tonnes of uranium ore - emit no greenhouse gases - produce 24 tonnes of radiotoxic 'waste'. Store the wastwe for tens of thousands of years.

C. Mine 50 tonnes of equivalent thorium ore - emit no greenhouse gases - produce 0.8 tonnes of radiotoxic 'waste', store it for 300 years.

Which choice did Dr. James Hansen recommend?

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Threepwood', '�')��Peak oil’ is alive and well, in the same place it always has been- 10 years in the imaginery future..

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Loki', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'T')hreepwood - I would guess all those folks who are paying $100/bbl would argue that the peak oil dynamic is alive and well...today. Just as I'm sure the US tax payers who have contributed hundreds of billions of tax $'s and thousands of the lives of our military in effort to stabilize oil producing regions in the Middle East would also agree.