[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LateGreatPlanetEarth', 'h')ttp://business.financialpost.com/2013/07/22/the-oil-drum-website-set-to-close-as-peak-oil-fears-vanish/?__lsa=fab1-2848

[John_A]

Peak oil is always being deferred. That is one of the problems with it as a concept. I say we just use Rockman's POD and be done with the rest of it, otherwise the world will continue playing kick the can and the more generations of peak claimers who come along without ever learning a little history on the topic and starting the entire episode up again just make it that much harder for the newest group to be taken seriously.

[ralfy]

More than three decades too late:

http://earlywarn.blogspot.com/2011/09/p ... apita.html

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'P')eak oil is always being deferred. That is one of the problems with it as a concept. I say we just use Rockman's POD and be done with the rest of it, otherwise the world will continue playing kick the can and the more generations of peak claimers who come along without ever learning a little history on the topic and starting the entire episode up again just make it that much harder for the newest group to be taken seriously.

[sparky]

.
Peak oil keep being made obvious by a rush to the rubbish ,
hard to get and hard to keep crude production
fracting has a depletion rate which is quite eye watering
Canada boil sands and add natural gas
corn juice is touted as the good stuff

yeeeh no peak of no oil , ....no problem

[ROCKMAN]

Sparky – To stir the pot a little a thought has popped to mind: not only has PO not been deferred but we are at global PO right now. Grant me that OPO is that point where actual oil production rates are never exceeded. That’s actual rates…not capable rates. It would appear that the KSA does have the capability to increase production. Maybe even a few other countries could also. The US and Canada certainly have in the last few years.

But given that current KSA production combined with current high oil prices are delivering record incomes to the KSA do they have a need to increase production? Several hundred % higher revenue than just 6 years ago. Since the world is paying for all the oil it can at current prices the only way the KSA could sell more oil would be to offer it at lower prices. In fact, with increased US/Canadian production, it might make sense for the KSA to cut production a tad to keep oil prices high. OTOH with increased consumption by China et al there may be no need to cut production.

So what would be their motivation to increase production? To lower prices? To more quickly deplete their reserve base? To give a boost to their income which is already at all-time record highs?

So if the KSA and OPEC chose not to raise production and the increase in production by the US et al is just enough to offset global decline rates then perhaps the world will never see significantly more oil flowing out of the ground then we have today. PO…no? Not because the world isn’t capable of producing more but because the swing producers choose not to.

[Pops]

A good point ROCK. There is just no way to know where "physical peak" is/was/might have been in a perfect Hubbert world. Obviously the shape of the curve has cut the top off of ol' Mt Hubbert

Maybe the theoretical peak is 5 years from now but because of years (centuries) of strife in Iraq, O's sanctions on Iran, Silly American teenagers playing Grand Theft Auto instead of getting off their duffs and getting out in the real world (and stealing some cars LOL) instead peak happens this tuesday.

Or out of my other ear, maybe actual physical peak unaided by the inertia of overshoot was 5 years ago and where we're at now will come to be known as the beginning of the Wile E Coyote cliff!



Or consider this for a little spice, my drawing is not to scale but it represents how the actual vs the hubbert model overlap. what if the anomaly from Hubbert's isn't now but back in the 50-60s? what if that little notch back in the 80's was there not because of OPEC putting on the choke but was production returning to the bell curve after a whole lot of production was pulled forward?

Get that?

What if the deviation from Hubbert was producing way more that the model predicted in the 60s and we haven't really cut the top of the peak off but merely stolen it from the future?

Hmmm

[rockdoc123]

Pops
I think everyone takes Hubberts curve way too verbatim. He was most concerned with ultimate reserves, defined it as the peak of production but that was for theory convenience I believe. Calculus tells us the area under the curve yields what the ultimate reserves are (I believe it should be the integral of the curve), whether it be a beautiful peaked Gaussian distribution like shown or a bumpy looking plateau like thing.
If one were so inclined they could take current production, speculate on how long it bumps along at current rate and then see what the reserves are (I would do it myself but being retired and having not actually done much in the way of integration since I was a young pup it aint' going to happen). It would be interesting to see sensitivity to years "bumping along". Maybe a group think project here would be to speculate at what politcal/economic events might happen globally over the next decade or so and then use that as a means of predicting the length of the bumpy plateau?
Hey I'm full of ideas, just lacking in energy!

[dcoyne78]

Rockman,

We may be at peak oil now, or not. It depends on both geology and economics, I know a little about the latter, you seem much better than me (and most everyone else) at the former. Consider the following chart using EIA data, there have been a couple of mini plateaus since 1985, clearly things changed a lot around 1972-73, I don't have a chart handy, but the trend went from exponential to linear for C+C around then.

DC

[ralfy]

The problem isn't just production in terms of an undulating plateau. It's production not meeting demand. In which case, peak oil can only be deferred as long as production meets demand. Otherwise, the effects can be felt even before production drops.

[Plantagenet]

We may still get a good peak. The rate of growth in oil production is now so slow that it can't be long now now until global oil production bends over and starts slowly back down.

Here is a prediction Gale made in 2011 on her website:

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'W')e may still get a good peak. The rate of growth in oil production is now so slow that it can't be long now now until global oil production bends over and starts slowly back down.

Here is a prediction Gale made in 2011 on her website:

[Pops]

Looking at any one country in isolation means nothing in a global market. Except for the top few producers the rest of the world seems pretty certain to have peaked in 2005:



Half of the 7.7 additional since 2001 was Russia (which has flatlined), KSA=2, Canada=1, US=1

We may get a bump when something happens in Iran, the US may come up with another 1 or 2 for a while, maybe IRaq will get it together, but beyond that it don't look so good.

http://crudeoilpeak.info/excluding-the- ... an-in-2005

[Beery1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'P')eak oil is always being deferred.

[ROCKMAN]

Tanada - Perhaps the pubcos may do all they could to increase oil production but I'm not sure I would hold the same expectations for the NOC's. Their goal isn't to grow stock market value but to generate the max income from oil sales OVER TIME. Again lets use the KSA as an example. They are making record revenue today. They might increase that by selling more. But wouldn't such an effort fall into that "diminishing return" fuzzy area: more income but at a lower per bbl price since they have to lower prices to sell to markets that can't afford current prices. And do so by depleting their reserves faster.

Good point about the KSA et al allowing prices to get too high and increase development of other energy sources. But what alternativesu are economically viable at today's prices are being developed. And bump oil prices up X% and others would become viable. But they'll only stay viable at the higher oil price which could mean the oil exporters can continue high revenues while selling less oil which again prolongs the life of their reserves. Not a sure thing but I can imagine the KSA making a conscious decision to not ever produce more oil than they are today. If the world ( i.e. China) were to slip into recession and demands dips KSA might be tempted to lower prices to help recovery. Or maybe not: if they clearly see their PO coming in sooner than later maybe they don't increase exports, continue increased domestic consumption and preserve their reserve base.

Just one theoretical future.