[kublikhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Xyricolev', 'A')s I said before, I SHOULD BE a natural ally to the doom crowd. Conservation is hugely important to me, as are sustainable, resilient communities (local, sustainable power generation, locally sourced food and manufacturing, etc)....those are big things for me. And as I've said before...I'm on board with the idea that if you have a limited amount of a thing, and you use it (at any rate), the day's gonna come when the limited resource isn't there any more (I'm not really sure who would disagree with this, but maybe some fruitcake somewhere would...I don't pretend to know).

[kublikhan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Xyricolev ', 'a')ctually...been reading that thread...it would seem (to me) that opinions are about evenly divided based on the comments there...sure, there are more voices of moderation than there WERE (and your'e one of those...thank you for that!), but I think it's a bit of a stretch to say the fast crashers are dead and gone...at least based on that thread, they're not.

[Dybbuk]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', 'h')ttp://www.math.duke.edu/~wka/math135/central.pdf

In the above proof of the CLT it is clear that there is no restriction of the sort you are claiming. It is irrelevant that oil field production curves are time series. At the end of the day they can be treated as distributions since the math does not care where the distributions come from as long as they don't have infinite tails.

http://math.uchicago.edu/~may/VIGRE/VIG ... okhmal.pdf

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') random variable is a function X that assigns a rule of correspondence for every point z in the sample space S (called the domain) a unique real value X(z).

[sparky]

.
Recent development in hydrocarbon extraction , plus some economic heavy weather
have disturbed the smooth curve story

global production IS up ,increase in efficiency IS up
those facts are beyond questioning

where do this leave the peak oil paradigm ,
my answers is .....exactly at the same place , in the near future ,
the "when" is a bit of a head-scratching

we have the porn-doomsters schedule ....next week the Apocalypse.. the movie .
could happen , but in my mind it would require unlimited nuclear warfare to start it

then there is the deniers , we are past the peak , it's all a lie
it turn into arcane technical discussion on relative price and definitions

there is the Mac-peaksters ..... within ten years
walking the production plateau on the way up and walking the plateau down for ten more years
( that's my church )

the fourth group think those smart and greedy oil companies will pull another rabbit
out of the ground , as they always have ,
It could cost you but we should be OK well past the mid century

Finally the full blown cornucopians , named for the ever giving horn of plenty
there will be crude oil forever and ever , the law of supply and demand can overcome any obstacle

all those ideas have some good arguments and not so good
all of them have some seriously flaky followers , me included

Take your pick , but never forget the old saying
"things are never as bad as you fear and never as good as you wish "

[sparky]

.
@ Pstarr.... "processing gains are not separate petroleum products, but book keeping tricks?"

Well they are not separate products but they are real enough ,
if one distillate a barrel of oil one get a bit more than a barrel of products
book keeping come in because the books must balance

[Buddy_J]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'ve previously suggested that assigning all the processing gains to US production is factually incorrect, instead the processing gains resulting from refining imported crude should be added to the total for imports.

[Dybbuk]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sparky', '.')
we have the porn-doomsters schedule ....next week the Apocalypse.. the movie .
could happen , but in my mind it would require unlimited nuclear warfare to start it

then there is the deniers , we are past the peak , it's all a lie
it turn into arcane technical discussion on relative price and definitions

there is the Mac-peaksters ..... within ten years
walking the production plateau on the way up and walking the plateau down for ten more years
( that's my church )

the fourth group think those smart and greedy oil companies will pull another rabbit
out of the ground , as they always have ,
It could cost you but we should be OK well past the mid century

Finally the full blown cornucopians , named for the ever giving horn of plenty
there will be crude oil forever and ever , the law of supply and demand can overcome any obstacle

[sparky]

.
Dybbuk, I totally agree
the list is hardly more than a rough sketch , certainly some more outlooks could be fitted in
the black swans are always a good case in point .
By the way , I'm not prescient and would certainly concur that the world feel quite fragile now
sudden rupture might be a minor probability but not to be dismissed none the less

I would listen with care on the porn-doomers argument of possible triggers scenarios

The field is open for submissions ,In my experience the bloggers have as much credibility
as any other "experts" after all
crash , fast , slow and "forever at a price" are only general concepts

Once we got a range of probabilities maybe a poll

[Buddy_J]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sparky', '.')
The field is open for submissions ,In my experience the bloggers have as much credibility
as any other "experts" after all

[Econ101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dybbuk', 'T')he category I belong to is the Talebites...fans of Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the author the The Black Swan and Antifragile. The energy situation is ripe for some kind of Black Swan. It could be the good kind or the bad kind. Either the doomers or cornies could be right.

[Econ101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Econ101', 'I') thought the list was funny too. I also think we have seen the black swan in the form of advancements in drilling technology. Another aspec is the breakdown of supply control. Technology is now providing for us outside off-limit federal lands where conventional production methods would have provided for us over many generations, and in other places around the world in ever growing abundance. At some point the federal government is going to have to cash in too.

[Econ101]

You mad braugh?

[Econ101]

Anwar and the Arctic region in general will be open to production. The reserves are being expanded and developed now by the soviets with EXXON at the helm. That should be reassuring to anyone concerned about future oil supplies.

The Alaska pipeline was designed to last for a hundred yrs and deliver the crude that is up there. Crude that would have been produced, and would be under orderly development right now if peak oil politics hadnt shut it down. So the pipeline is running on extremly low volume right now. Not because there is no oil to be brought up rather the oil is off limits politically in the USA. Fortunately the soviets and the other 6 nations will use the pipeline when their arctic production picks up.

The unintended consequence of peak oil politics was fracking. These drilling technologies and well design advancements wouldnt have been necessary if the planned development of other areas like the Arctic hadnt been stopped. As the realization begins to sink in that peak oil politics can no longer stifle supply in North America there will be a political rush to cash-in by developing those resources formally off limits.

[Dybbuk]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Econ101', 'I') also think we have seen the black swan in the form of advancements in drilling technology.