[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'T')ell you what. URTeC abstracts for the August 2014 meeting in Denver are due tomorrow. Mine goes in this afternoon. Put one of your own in ...

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('step back', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'T')ell you what. URTeC abstracts for the August 2014 meeting in Denver are due tomorrow. Mine goes in this afternoon.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')ow John, that's impressive and we are excited for you accomplishment. Why not share your abstract with us? We could peer-review it.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'T')ell you what. URTeC abstracts for the August 2014 meeting in Denver are due tomorrow. Mine goes in this afternoon. Put one of your own in ...

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('step back', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '.').. maybe I'll stay up late and do [an abstract entitled] "Hydrocarbons from Titan - ERoEI Considerations".

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'O')dd thing John. You posted an old version of the submission invitation URTeC abstracts for the August 2014 meeting in Denver rather than this, the current updated version. I can't figure out where the old one is parked, seems hidden on the website. That cool. You must be an insider there. Are those the guys who employ you?

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')ow John, that's impressive and we are excited for you accomplishment. Why not share your abstract with us? We could peer-review it.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'N')ow we are truly moving down that infinite "Resource Pyramid". ... The bottom of that pyramid is already being discussed by the likes of the folks who study such things. 33rd Annual Oil Shale Symposium at Colorado School of Mines back in October. You must have missed it, because they discussed the bottom of your resource pyramid example. But no, no Saturn methane yet.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')ow John, that's impressive and we are excited for you accomplishment. Why not share your abstract with us? We could peer-review it.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'N')ow we are truly moving down that infinite "Resource Pyramid". ... The bottom of that pyramid is already being discussed by the likes of the folks who study such things. 33rd Annual Oil Shale Symposium at Colorado School of Mines back in October. You must have missed it, because they discussed the bottom of your resource pyramid example. But no, no Saturn methane yet.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '&')quot;Five years ago we got the energy crisis wrong."

"But while our understanding of the energy crisis five years ago may have been flawed (or more correctly, less than prescient), our appreciation that there was a crisis was not. We just misunderstood its details.

The real energy crisis is neither a geologic crisis nor a strategic crisis. The real energy crisis is a slow growth crisis. Although the oil industry has figured out a way technologically to recover large quantities of unconventional oil, the cost of doing so will be staggering. Conventional oil, which may cost $4-6 per barrel to lift out of a Saudi Arabian well, may cost more than $100 per barrel to lift out deep water deposits off the coast of Brazil. And the lift costs will only go up, as each barrel of oil becomes progressively more difficult and expensive to recover.

The result is a hyper-inflation of energy costs, as the fixed, structural cost of petroleum spirals ever higher. As more and more resources must be invested in petroleum production, fewer and fewer resources will be available for other productive parts of the economy."

Really? Five years ago YOU got it wrong, along with the rest of the world that seemed to find it impossible to get past the "we're running out" strawman. Today you've written a very nice definition of peak oi. Welcome to the club!

[ROCKMAN]

"Conventional oil, which may cost $4-6 per barrel to lift out of a Saudi Arabian well, may cost more than $100 per barrel to lift out deep water deposits off the coast of Brazil." The GREAT news: someone is finally using the correct terminology: lifting cost as compared to "production cost". IOW what it cost per bbl to produce existing wells. The BAD news: he has no f*cking idea what he's talking about. LOL. But really. I've explained it in great detail before that while Deep Water operations are truly very expensive when you work in the very high volumes of oil produced the PER BBL cost is rather low. Often much lower then low rate onshore producer.

If you don't understand go search the web. I've grown tired of repeating for newbies.

[Subjectivist]

As we get further away from 2015 we will gain evidence whether it really was world peak.

The thing is, how to define peak oil? Peak light sweet? Peak conventional? Peak all liquids? If we count tar sands and Extra Heavy there is still a huge growth potential before those sources peak.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he thing is, how to define peak oil? Peak light sweet? Peak conventional? Peak all liquids? If we count tar sands and Extra Heavy there is still a huge growth potential before those sources peak.

[ROCKMAN]

Doc - even more then the fungibility issue there's a more important factor: no consumer buys conventional oil, unconventional oil, heavy oil, etc. As such the distinction matters not at all to them. They buy refinery products at some price. As long as there's X amount of any of those commodities at a price that consumer can pay the origin of the oil is not relevent. And the cost to develop, produce and refine that oil is also not relevant TO THE CONSUMER. Of course those factors are critical to the industry. But that isn't the important issue issue with PO. It's the effect on the economy...local and global.

The world is currently producing and consuming more refined oil products then ever before at a price considerably lower then just 3 years. And because of those lower oil prices the EROEI of any new projects will be significantly higher then those developed 3 years to compensate for the lower monetary value of the energy return.

By focusing on the bottom line, the end results seen by the economies, eliminates the need to break down the details with respect to predicting the future. Of course with respect to a time frame of serveral decades it does make a difference. OTOH neither the consumers, the fossil fuel industry nor the govts have ever planned on the basis of such an extended period and none show the least bit interested in doing so today.

In reality it's PP that is the critical factor...Peak Product. And just like when PO (any or all liquid hydrocarbons) is reached "oil" prices may be higher or lower the prices of refinery products may be higher or lower. Can't predict the future but even with the amount of unconventional oil still in the ground we may actually be at or near PP today.

[aldente]

MD, it is not an easy concept - why would we be posting here otherwise..

Carl Gauss at the end 1700's did nail "statistics" with the utmost simple concept of the mathematical bell curve.

Since Peak Oil did not happen in 2005 (at the latest) abiotic oil took over - meaning neither is there a shortage, nor a limit.

This opens the door to way more spooky observations - such as - there is no space -or space is liquid...fluid...
other thoughts can creep in which make ancient aliens or wishful alien intervention obsolete...

welcome to our NEW universe - it is upon YOU - reading this - to forming it!

Are you up to the task? Skip the NeoCortex and go straight for pictographs for instance