[raizcapoeira]

For all the talk about peak oil allegedly being dead, there's very little talk about the fact that, while the sensationalistic collapsenik predictions made by idiots like Michael Ruppert & perpetuated by people like Matt Savinar are bunk, the more level-headed peakists' predictions have been uncannily accurate. As pointed out on TOD, if we were to use mean absolute scaled error as a metric for accuracy, Jean Laherrere, Rembrandt Koppelaar, & the ASPO have been incredibly accurate compared to the likes of the utterly horrendous CERA forecasts & the IEA's mediocre forecasts. Not to mention, Deffeyes had the last laugh when it came to conventional production.

I swear, the only reason that the IEA can maintain its legitimacy is because it churns out forecasts faster than anyone can point out how mediocre they invariably are in the long-term, so, as a result, collective confidence in their permissibility is retained, regardless of how many times they and the EIA all the sudden downgrade reserves estimates by upwards of 40%, add caveats to their completely and utterly preposterous estimates regarding tight oil in Argentina & Europe, etc, etc.

Yes, I know. Economics 101 works, and I myself have never been a fan of the whole economics-bashing characteristic of the peak oil crowd (Hubbert & the technocrats believed that nuclear would replace oil 2 times over, obviously we all know how that turned out), but at some point, the IEA's predictions become worthless and they lose validity through time.

[ralfy]

From what I gathered, what the IEA gives are forecasts based on various conditions met, e.g., strong government policy needed to maximize oil and gas production, regulate businesses so that they use more renewable energy, and coordination between economies. FWIW, some of its people believe that these conditions won't be fulfilled.

I think similar applies to doomer forecasts, e.g., a war that escalates to worse, leading to economic collapse, etc.

For the middle ground, it's what has been taking place during the last decade.

Thus, we have an optimistic, worst-case, and moderate scenario.

[Arthur75]

The IEA "tried" to be more realistic, in 1998 in particular, but the political pressure are clearly there :
http://petrole.blog.lemonde.fr/how-the- ... ts-mission

As to Ruppert, what are you refering to exactly ? I don't remember any precisely dated scenario or forcasts from him.

[Pops]

Welcome RC. I agree but all predictions on all sides of the "argument" are either political or profit motivated.

Whether it's someone selling a book or OPECs paper barrels or tight oil land speculators or projections of the Tupi field, everyone "has a dog in the fight" as they say up here.

Can't really blame the IEA, though, for 30 years, about the length of an entire forecaster's career, the best formula to predict oil production has been:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'population*4bbls')



Don't mess with success they say...

.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'W')elcome RC. I agree but all predictions on all sides of the "argument" are either political or profit motivated.

Whether it's someone selling a book or OPECs paper barrels or tight oil land speculators or projections of the Tupi field, everyone "has a dog in the fight" as they say up here.

Can't really blame the IEA, though, for 30 years, about the length of an entire forecaster's career, the best formula to predict oil production has been:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'population*4bbls')



Don't mess with success they say...

.

[rollin]

The IEA has been generally feeding the policy makers what they want to hear, a great way to continue in the job. Oh, occasionally they feed out some warning or other but that seems to disappear from view and get shuffled off to the background. Oil production looks fairly rosy when viewed through corporate colored glasses.

Here is a mystery that even Sherlock Holmes could not solve:
"The Case of the Ever Expanding Oil Reserves and Oil Production"

Or maybe it is a case of what we don't see and what outrageous conclusion is left.

[Pops]

I just plucked that one out of the aether. I did this last year - 2011 data from BP I think... I can't remember the population source



The reason we aren't in worse shape is we've increased global per capita primary energy by "transitioning" to that breakthrough sustainable alternative source - coal. Per capita use up a third in the last few years. But oil is still about the same in the overall scheme.

[MD]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('raizcapoeira', ' ')...the more level-headed peakists' predictions have been uncannily accurate.

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rollin', 'T')he IEA has been generally feeding the policy makers what they want to hear, a great way to continue in the job. Oh, occasionally they feed out some warning or other but that seems to disappear from view and get shuffled off to the background. Oil production looks fairly rosy when viewed through corporate colored glasses.

Here is a mystery that even Sherlock Holmes could not solve:
"The Case of the Ever Expanding Oil Reserves and Oil Production"

Or maybe it is a case of what we don't see and what outrageous conclusion is left.

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'I') just plucked that one out of the aether. I did this last year - 2011 data from BP I think... I can't remember the population source



The reason we aren't in worse shape is we've increased global per capita primary energy by "transitioning" to that breakthrough sustainable alternative source - coal. Per capita use up a third in the last few years. But oil is still about the same in the overall scheme.

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'W')elcome RC. I agree but all predictions on all sides of the "argument" are either political or profit motivated.

Whether it's someone selling a book or OPECs paper barrels or tight oil land speculators or projections of the Tupi field, everyone "has a dog in the fight" as they say up here.

Can't really blame the IEA, though, for 30 years, about the length of an entire forecaster's career, the best formula to predict oil production has been:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'population*4bbls')



Don't mess with success they say...

.

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('raizcapoeira', ' ')...the more level-headed peakists' predictions have been uncannily accurate.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('raizcapoeira', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'W')elcome RC. I agree but all predictions on all sides of the "argument" are either political or profit motivated.

Whether it's someone selling a book or OPECs paper barrels or tight oil land speculators or projections of the Tupi field, everyone "has a dog in the fight" as they say up here.

Can't really blame the IEA, though, for 30 years, about the length of an entire forecaster's career, the best formula to predict oil production has been:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'population*4bbls')



Don't mess with success they say...

.

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('raizcapoeira', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'W')elcome RC. I agree but all predictions on all sides of the "argument" are either political or profit motivated.

Whether it's someone selling a book or OPECs paper barrels or tight oil land speculators or projections of the Tupi field, everyone "has a dog in the fight" as they say up here.

Can't really blame the IEA, though, for 30 years, about the length of an entire forecaster's career, the best formula to predict oil production has been:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'population*4bbls')



Don't mess with success they say...

.

[ROCKMAN]

r - Think one of the reasons Hubbert's model worked so well was the relative stability of oil prices between 1946 (when many of our big domestic oil fields began development) and 1973. Thanks much to the efforts of the Texas Rail Road Commission acting as a better cartel than OPEC ever did prices held in a very narrow range: $22 - $25 per bbl (inflation adjusted). If the TRRC had not forced oil companies to reduce production the market may have been flooded with cheap oil which would have slowed the exploration process. That could have moved the US peak a number of years different than it did occurs.

Again a simple question with an equally simple answer IMHO: had oil prices remained in the $20's per bbl range as they were in the late 90's would we be seeing the current aberration in the US oil production rate? Another question: had not the world slide into a recession and reduced oil down to around $10/bbl in 1986 what would the global oil production curve look like today? Not as easy an answer IMHO.

[Pops]

RC & Diss,
Honestly, my math skills are limited to about 7th grade level so I can't really argue models, my only point is the best predictor of production the last 30-something years was BAU; production meets demand; 4bbl/capita/year. Obviously 30 years of a flat line would make most any forecaster that forecast anything other than a flat line look kind of out there it seems to me.

--
ROCK, you keep saying "what would production be if prices were still $25?" as if price were some independent factor plucked out of thin air. Are you saying that we should be happy that Brent is at $114 because it means there are lots of beer and portable buildings being sold in N Dakota? LOL Aside from that little bit of tight oil in there and Texas, production of crude hasn't budged since '05 when oil was $40.

Price is a result of supply/demand, a higher price is supposed to raise production and lower the price, that is the rule. The fact that oil price has been at the highest average levels ever for going on 3 years now kind of indicates to me that something has changed. I'm pretty sure the price no longer being $25 indicates that we've reached the worldwide equivalent of the TRRC setting allowables to 100%

[dolanbaker]

All those global per capita figures look quite steady, but what about the regional variations, it would be interesting to see just how much of a variation there is between a mature western region with declining consumption (outsourcing of jobs, improved efficiency etc) and an emerging region (rapidly rising population increased production of goods for export etc).

[raizcapoeira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'R')C & Diss,
Honestly, my math skills are limited to about 7th grade level so I can't really argue models, my only point is the best predictor of production the last 30-something years was BAU; production meets demand; 4bbl/capita/year. Obviously 30 years of a flat line would make most any forecaster that forecast anything other than a flat line look kind of out there it seems to me.

--
ROCK, you keep saying "what would production be if prices were still $25?" as if price were some independent factor plucked out of thin air. Are you saying that we should be happy that Brent is at $114 because it means there are lots of beer and portable buildings being sold in N Dakota? LOL Aside from that little bit of tight oil in there and Texas, production of crude hasn't budged since '05 when oil was $40.

Price is a result of supply/demand, a higher price is supposed to raise production and lower the price, that is the rule. The fact that oil price has been at the highest average levels ever for going on 3 years now kind of indicates to me that something has changed. I'm pretty sure the price no longer being $25 indicates that we've reached the worldwide equivalent of the TRRC setting allowables to 100%

[ralfy]

If no accurate models can be made, then the question of how organizations like the IEA can be taken seriously becomes irrelevant. Given that, the logical view will involve looking at a worst-case scenario, i.e., a slow decline with the possibility of collapse.

[Pops]

I think the biggest problem is not the models but the data.

Laherrere has been saying since way back that all data is political and realistically I don't see that changing anytime soon. Are all those barrels OPEC added P5 or P99? Have they actually not seen a decline in reserves in 30 years? Who knows?

The US under the leadership of Haliburton helped out by relaxing reserve reporting rules - with guidance from such as CHK. Who, coincidentally, immediately oversold the reserves held in their Granite Wash Trust - requiring a "Revision of Quantity Estimate" lowering reserves 26% only a year later.
(before you say anything rockdoc follow the link, lol)

Even the total amount extracted globally is obscured in the political and economic morass, over the last 8 years there is more variation between the different estimates of production than there is change in the value itself!