"We are all on a capital diet right now, and that means that some of these projects won't be developed unless terms are attractive"
When you put that together with the thread on US military 2015 decline in global overall production
us-army-world-is-sleepwalking-to-a-global-energy-cr-t69155.html it forms an interesting set of circumstances.
Specifically about the near magical ability of capital markets to absorb any cost of production, no matter how much the return diminishes.
Our culture has formed an odd sort of magical thinking when it comes to money and capital, as if it creates itself and has nothing to do with the real world, real matter, real commodities etc.
If I read the above quote correctly, it says that the idea that oil will continue to be developed no matter how much it costs per barrel to put new fields online is already being proven categorically false, even as some insist that markets will bring oil online, by themselves, and their magical hands that nobody but the most obliviously blind to reality can see, aka neo-liberal conservatives etc.
Assuming rough correctness in the US military study where global oil production goes into decline around 2015, probably a bit later, and the current warnings alluded to in the thread linked to above, one can see a point where new production shows so little promise of capital return that it becomes a better option to just go on as is, buying up other companies/resources, etc, sort of cannibalizing the corpse, which still doesn't know it's dying.
There will be some major reliefs to that day, one being that, despite them adding non crude liquids to the total barrels per day counts, the plateau will start to bump its way down, with the inevitable issues caused when each downward move is followed by a blip up, each of which will be highlighted with greater and greater desperation to prove that 'peak oil is not happening' or whatever the mantra the media wants to project at that stage.
Other advantages of things like tight oil development is that so many holes have to be drilled all over that the inane 'drill baby drill' nonsense will not get much traction as people look out over vast fields of rigs dribbling out their few barrels of oil as they traverse the downward sides of their production curves.
On a more macro level, it brings to mind the various EROEI type 'debates' , debates which largely vaporize if you consider capital / money as a symbol for access to commodities, including raw materials, at which point, when you read a seemingly random statement that capital is finding it 'unattractive' to use itself on further risky and expensive oil discovery/drilling, that actually basically demonstrates that the symbol for resources no longer can justify the amount of those symbols required to produce more of that resource, and that's the macro sense I believe that escapes some literalists who have trouble with the concept, ie, nobody is ever going to say it is not energy positive to drill for or develop resource x or y, they will say it's not worth it, it costs too much, the risk is not worth the reward, and that is what I believe in the real world EROEI will look like, all the while allowing people to continue to maintain that there is no connection between decisions to no longer drill for declining resource reserves of increasing complexity and the returns those investments yield to the society as a large, via the tool of 'money' as a cipher for that entire process.
It will however remain vastly amusing to watch when the numbers actually start to go down, as they must do with 6.2% estimated global field decline rates, which means of course that every year, year in and year out of our current plateau, they are having to bring online about 4.5 million barrels a day, a number so staggering that only complete blindness can make anyone think we can keep doing that for many more years. It's already impressive that we are able to do that now, and things are still working pretty well all in all.