[AirlinePilot]

The dumbest thing in the world we can do is spend money, time, and energy to figure out how to turn food into fuel.
This assumption seals it for me. Its a giant game and they are trying to figure out how to keep BAU going for as long as possible. Those who dont understand what that kind of biofuel increase mean think its all going to be ok. Go back to your TV's and stop worrying. This is where all the shortfall in oil is planned to come from once decline sets in? I just cant wait to see how this all is going to play out.

We got front row seats though!

[DoomersUnite]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', '[')b]BP says biofuels growth will outpace oil in 2011-2030 period

[dinopello]

BP may be correct and that would be pretty scary. They predict the need to double biofuel output every 10 years just to bridge the gap due to fossil fuel depletion.

[eXpat]

Booming Ethanol Consumption in the U.S.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat happens to the amount of ethanol consumed by Americans when the federal government simultaneously mandates that an ever-increasing percentage of ethanol be added to gasoline while also subsidizing its production?
...
The dividing line is 1993, following the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which required specified car fleets to purchase alternative fuel vehicles capable of operating with E-85, an 85%/15% blend of ethanol and gasoline. In addition, the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 required the wintertime use of ethanol in 39 major metropolitan areas and full-year use in 9 others that had not satisfied the Environmental Protection Agency's imposed standards for carbon monoxide.

After that, it was off to the races for the ethanol-government industrial complex! Simply projecting a straight line from the trend between 1981 and 1993 would place 2010's ethanol consumption level below 5,000 thousand barrels per month. Instead, thanks to the federal government's subsidies and mandates benefiting ethanol producers, it has risen to be over 25,000 thousand barrels per month.

[TheAntiDoomer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AirlinePilot', 'T')he dumbest thing in the world we can do is spend money, time, and energy to figure out how to turn food into fuel.
This assumption seals it for me. Its a giant game and they are trying to figure out how to keep BAU going for as long as possible. Those who dont understand what that kind of biofuel increase mean think its all going to be ok. Go back to your TV's and stop worrying. This is where all the shortfall in oil is planned to come from once decline sets in? I just cant wait to see how this all is going to play out.

We got front row seats though!

[peripato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Graeme', '[')b]BP says biofuels growth will outpace oil in 2011-2030 period

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n the UK, BP published for the first time a summary of its forward-looking analyses. In Energy Outlook 2030, BP projects that primary energy use will grow by nearly 40% over the next twenty years, with 93% of the growth coming from non-OECD (Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development) countries. Non-OECD countries are seen to rapidly increase their share of overall energy demand from just over half currently to two-thirds. The report projects that, between 2010 to 2030, the contribution to energy growth of renewables (solar, wind, geothermal and biofuels) is seen to increase from 5% to 18%.

Global liquids demand is forecast to reach 102.4 million barrels per day (mmbpd) in 2030. The net growth of 16.5 mmbpd over the next 20 years comes exclusively from the emerging economies of the non-OECD. Biofuels production is expected to reach 6.7 mmbpd by 2030 from 1.8 mmbpd in 2010 and will contribute 125% of net non-OPEC supply growth over the next 20 years. Continued policy support, high oil prices, and continued technological innovations all contribute to the rapid expansion. The US and Brazil will continue to dominate biofuel production with 76% of total output in 2010 but falling to 68% in 2030 as output from Asia-Pacific begins to rise.

The complete BP Energy Outlook 2030 can be downloaded here.

[Quinny]

Hi-This has just been covered in mainstream news in UK. BP announced 32 megaprojects next year. Ditched the beyond petroleum strapline and said the future is oil. Aims to profit specifically targetting deep water exploration and drilling. Guardian

[bratticus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'd')eep water exploration and drilling.

[Oilguy]

I’m currently looking through the BP statistical review of world energy http://www.bp.com/productlanding.do?cat ... Id=7044622
A few of the figures in there confuse me and i think i’m reading them incorrectly.

Total wind production for 2009 – 160,084 Megawatts
Total Solar production for 2009 – 22,929 Megawatts
Total Geothermal production for 2009 – 10,710 Megawatts

The problem i’m trying to solve is how many Btu’s these figures calculate into – but i believe i am using wrong conversion figures.
I’m using the conversion of: 1 Megawatt = 3,410,000 Btu

So the figures are:
Wind production 2009: 545,886,440,000 Btu
Solar Production 2009: 78,187,890,000 Btu
Geothermal production 2009: 36,521,100,000 Btu

I realise Alternatives total contribution is small – but these figures seem far too small to me.
The reason i may have it wrong is that i’m using 1 Megawhatt hour = 3,410,000 Btu and by megawatts you may not mean megawatt hour.

Should i then multiply these figures by 24 and then by 365?

This would then give a wind production of: 4,781,965,214,400,000 Btu
Which seems more in line with general concensus.

For example EIA figures from 2008. The below numbers are all in quadrillion Btu’s

Nuclear 27.159
Hydroelectric 30.735
Geothermal 1.27
Wind 2.075
Solar, Tide, Wave 0.088
Biomass and Waste 2.620

Comparing these to the 2009 figures given by BP something is clearly wrong as BP have wind as only 500 billion in 2009 – yet in 2008 the EIA have wind as over 2 quadrillion – so there has to be something wrong with the calculations i’ve made.

I was wondering if you know whether this is the case and if i’m using the wrong conversion figures?

If i look at Hydroelectric Production the figure is: 740.3 Million tonnes of oil equivalent.
And using the conversion of one tonne of oil equivalent = 40 million Btu

The total figure is: 29,612,000,000,000,000 Btu

I realise that Hydro production is much more than wind, solar, etc – but not by this much – which is why i’m worried my figures are very incorrect.

Any advice you could offer on this would be greatly appreciated as i’m completely stumped.

[aahala2]

The first wind solar and geo figures in your post are for
capacity not production. From the report alone,
one can not calculate the production, it's only a guess.

The average world wide load factor for wind is probably somewhere
between 20-30% of capacity. If 20% then it's about 32,000 MW per
hour.

I don't know what the conversion to btu should be in your analysis but
the 3,410 per kilowatt is a widely used figure in other settings.

As far as your discussion of hydro from the stated tonnes units, I haven't
a clue. However I do know that hydro is in the 14-16% or so of total
world electrical production. So perhaps you can check this with your
calculations and the BP electrical chart.

[eXpat]

BP lawyers may be working overtime. BP is suing Halliburton for $42 billion:
BP sues Halliburton in latest oil spill claim
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')ONDON (Reuters) - BP Plc filed a lawsuit for more than $42 billion (25 billion pounds) against Halliburton (NYSE: HAL - news) , which cemented the blown-out well which caused the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, after claiming a similar sum from rig owner Transocean (NYSE: RIG - news) .
Analysts said BP had little chance of winning the cases and was more likely trying to force the companies to settle. Management experts said pursuing the lawsuits could further damaged BP's already battered reputation as well as reveal yet more embarrassing details of the way the disaster was handled.

[ritter]

As much as I dislike the oil companies, it would be nice to have somebody bitch slap Halliburton.

[dorlomin]

Link Blames GOM disaster.

[babystrangeloop]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]BP production down but profits up
Andrew Hobbs / Upstream Online / July 26, 2011

... Oil and gas production in the second quarter was 11% lower than during the same period in 2010, falling to 3.43 million barrels of oil a day on the back of a suspension of drilling in the Gulf of Mexico as well as BP’s continuing divestment programme. ...

[dorlomin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')
The improvement in profits came despite a 1 per cent dip in production volumes for the period to 117.1m barrels of oil equivalent (boe). Volumes were held back by a poor first quarter in which BG cut its full-year growth targets citing civil unrest in north Africa and flooding in Australia. Overall revenues were up 17 per cent to $9.9bn

[dorlomin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')il giant Royal Dutch Shell has reported a 77% jump in second-quarter profit, thanks to higher energy prices.

Shell's profit for the three months to June came in at $8bn (£4.9bn) on a current cost of supplies basis, up from $4.5bn in the same period last year.

[dorlomin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')xxon reported a 58% surge in capital spending to $10.3 billion for the quarter, of which 43% was spent in U.S. operations. About $2 billion were spent buying two companies with assets in the natural gas-rich Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. Exxon's domestic spending is remarkably high for a company that once preferred to tap giant oilfields in exotic locations than in North America. But a technological revolution in U.S. onshore oil and gas production, combined with diminished opportunities abroad, caused a major shift in Exxon's strategy, which began in 2009 with the announcement of the $25 billion purchase of Fort Worth-based XTO Energy Inc.

The XTO deal and other purchases helped ExxonMobil's second-quarter production to rise 10% to 4.4 million barrels of oil equivalent from the same quarter a year earlier. Some analysts said that the increase in domestic production and spending is coming at the expense of profitability, as U.S. natural gas generates less returns than oil. But Exxon's spending pace makes it seem unflinching.

"In buying XTO, Exxon made a bet in North America, primarily on natural gas," says Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond James. "For better or for worse, after having acquired those assets, Exxon is drilling them out."

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Exclusive: BP poised to sell 'stranded assets' even if oil prices rally

LONDON (Reuters) - BP (BP.L) is preparing to sell a large chunk of its oil and gas assets even if crude prices bounce back from the COVID-19 crash because it wants to invest more in renewable energy, three sources familiar with BP’s thinking said.

The strategy was discussed at a BP executives meeting in July, the sources said, soon after the oil major lowered its long-term oil price forecast to $55 a barrel, meaning that $17.5 billion worth of its assets are no longer economically viable.

But even if crude prices bounce back to $65-$70 a barrel, BP is unlikely to put those assets back into its exploration plans and would instead use the better market conditions as an opportunity to sell them, the three sources said.

Major oil companies typically hold assets for the long term, even when crude prices plunge, with a view to start bringing more marginal production online when market conditions improve.

However, BP’s new divestment strategy, which has not previously been reported, means there will be no way back for the British energy company once it has offloaded its so-called stranded oil and gas assets.

BP did not respond to requests for comment.

The new strategy also sheds more light on chief executive Bernard Looney’s plan to reduce BP’s oil and gas production by 40%, or at least 1 million barrels per day, by 2030 while expanding into renewable energy.

“It is a simple calculation of natural production decline and planned divestment,” said a BP source, explaining how BP became the first big oil company to pledge a large cut in its oil output.

For decades, BP and rivals such as Royal Dutch Shell (RDSa.L) and Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) have promised investors that production would continue to rise.

But as climate activists, investors, banks and some governments raise pressure on the industry to reduce emissions to help cool the planet, European oil firms are changing tack and pledging to invest more in renewable energy sources.

U.S. rivals are under less government pressure and have not made similar commitments on renewables.

“As we look at the outlook for BP over the next few years and as we see production declining by 40% it is clear we no longer need exploration to fund new growth,” Looney said this week. “We will not enter new countries to explore.”

He said BP would continue to explore for oil near its existing production infrastructure as those barrels would be low cost - and help boost BP’s cash flow to fund its transition to cleaner energy.
FROM CANADA TO ANGOLA

BP also raised its target this week for returns from asset sales to $25 billion between 2020 and 2025, of which about $12 billion has already been lined up.

It has yet to name the other assets it wants to sell.

Sources have previously told Reuters that BP has identified Canadian oil sands assets and projects in deep water off Angola as being uneconomical under its new oil price scenario.

For a graphic of BP's stranded assets, click on tmsnrt.rs/3fNShQX

One of the three sources said BP’s divestment targets could easily be exceeded if it sells most of its assets currently viewed as stranded.

Parul Chopra, analyst at Rystad Energy, said in addition to Angola, he expected BP to move out of Azerbaijan, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and Iraq.

“In Iraq, the rates of returns are quite low. That fits into that profile, with high greenhouse gas emissions, they would want to exit that,” he said.

BP is planning a 10-fold increase in investment in low carbon energy sources to about $5 billion per year by 2030 and wants to deliver a 20-fold increase in renewables capacity to generate 50 gigawatts through new projects and acquisitions.

But with debt of close to $50 billion, BP will essentially be moving from one capital intensive business - oil - to another capital intensive business with lower margins - renewables.

At the moment, such a shift might be attractive to BP investors demanding the company move away from fossil fuels, but analysts say they should be prepared for lower margins.

Oil majors generally target a 12% to 15% return on their investments in oil. BP has said it is aiming for a return of 8% to 12% for renewables.

“Investors are pushing for a faster transition, but weak balance sheets mean the pivot is a challenge, leading companies to dismantle core businesses in order to facilitate the ramp up in capex (capital spending),” said Biraj Borkhataria at RBC Capital Markets.

Borkhataria said he expected BP to divest as much as 500,000 barrels a day of production while losing a similar amount through the natural decline in output from oilfields.

[Subjectivist]

How far the mighty have fallen!