[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'I')t might surprise some but I'll have to go along with Adam on this one, And also commend him for using "resources" instead of "reserves". I would go as far to say he's even a bit short on his estimate: my guess is that we've only produced 30% to 40% at best of the hydrocarbons contained in the earth. But there is that huge and unavoidable "IF". Which is "IF" they can be recovered economically. And a good bit could be recovered at $40/bbl. And more at $80/bbl. And even more at $120/bbl. And even still a lot more at $145/bbl.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'I')t might surprise some but I'll have to go along with Adam on this one, And also commend him for using "resources" instead of "reserves". I would go as far to say he's even a bit short on his estimate: my guess is that we've only produced 30% to 40% at best of the hydrocarbons contained in the earth. But there is that huge and unavoidable "IF". Which is "IF" they can be recovered economically. And a good bit could be recovered at $40/bbl. And more at $80/bbl. And even more at $120/bbl. And even still a lot more at $145/bbl.

[tita]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', 'T')he only thing that ultimately matters is price, because there is a price at which any and all known hydrocarbons can be mined.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tita', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', 'T')he only thing that ultimately matters is price, because there is a price at which any and all known hydrocarbons can be mined.

[ennui2]

EROEI still matters up to a point. For instance, diamonds have no EROEI. However, for whatever reason, the market rewards you a lot more money for a finished diamond than the cost of the energy used to mine it. As long as enough surplus energy powers the economy enough to pay that premium price for diamonds, diamonds will continue to be mined.

Since the earth is a closed system, energy elsewhere needs to subsidize the "loss" of the diamond mining.

Likewise, if the market value of oil is greater than, let's say, coal, then converting coal to oil at a huge loss (EROEI negative) will still be done rather than using the coal directly. Those who are hung up on thermodynamics might shudder in horror at the waste, but that's how the world works.

[onlooker]

Yes it works that way because as you aptly stated Ennui of excess or surplus energy and the willingness of society to subsidize and bear that burden to attain that lesser benefit. In a future bereft of excess energy that manner of activity will simply not be possible or at best not worthwhile.

[tita]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'L')ikewise, if the market value of oil is greater than, let's say, coal, then converting coal to oil at a huge loss (EROEI negative) will still be done rather than using the coal directly. Those who are hung up on thermodynamics might shudder in horror at the waste, but that's how the world works.

[ROCKMAN]

tita - True to a point. But "cheaper" is a complicated metric to determine. Even with low oil prices it might still be cheaper to run an EV then an ICE today. But the vast majority of us don't own an EV so until gasoline cost reach a sufficiently high AND long term cost folks will hang onto to their ICE's that are already paid for. Which is why GTL or coal to liquid may still win out over EV's: the fuel from GTL/CTL might cost a good bit more then e- but folks don't need to spend $25k+ to take advantage of that difference.

BTW in another post a new acronym came to me: DRODI as compared to EROEI. Dollar Returned On Dollar Invested. At the other extreme lets say someone develops a great new energy conversion system called Shazam! where EROEI is 20. But if the DRODI isn't sufficient for companies to invest it won't happen. Unless, of course, the federal govt decides to get into the Shazam! business. LOL.

But as the Rockman has pointed out many times: it not possible for any drilling venture to get much below an EROEI of 5 or 6. At that level the DRODI will represent a loss. IOW folks greatly overestimate the amount and cost of energy used in drilling/completing a well compared to the other cost items. In general the fuel cost is one of the lowest factors often representing less then 10% of the total well cost.

[PhebaAndThePilgrim]

Everything I need to know about life i learned from Sesame Street.
When my daughter was little this song played every day, every day!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ABxl46Ovv8

It is ingrained in my brain. The very first time I saw Hubbert's Curve, and I saw the descent as a rocky plateau, this song popped into my brain. (also Bette Midler's "From A Distance"). Beyond all of the arguing over whether Peak Oil is real and happening is the reality of viewing the downside of Hubbert's Curve from different perspectives.

we tend to be an impatient species, not seeing far into the future.
From what I have witnessed, Peak Oil is real, is happening, just not today.
It is like the old saying: 'Someday I will die, but on every other day I will not". It is my opinion that Hubbert's Curve is not a smooth descent. viewed from a distance, the curve looks smooth, viewed up close, one can see the hills and valleys of a slow ratcheting down. This ratcheting down taking place over many years, maybe even decades.

I think fracking, economic downturns, oil gluts, are a normal part of the downside of the curve, just seem from a different time perspective.
Pheba.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '[')b]The only thing that ultimately matters is price, because there is a price at which any and all known hydrocarbons can be mined.

https://www.eia.gov/workingpapers/pdf/trr.pdf

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tita', ' ')This is a dynamic system. There is no simple shortcut between economically recoverable and price of the stuff.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PhebaAndThePilgrim', '
') I think fracking, economic downturns, oil gluts, are a normal part of the downside of the curve, just seem from a different time perspective.
Pheba.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PhebaAndThePilgrim', '
') I think fracking, economic downturns, oil gluts, are a normal part of the downside of the curve, just seem from a different time perspective.
Pheba.

[ralfy]

One important point to consider is the population that feeds on the oil:

http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/201 ... k-oil.html

[ROCKMAN]

Phe - You've seen Hubbert's curves but perhaps never read his full report. He makes it very clear that he's projecting the peak of the developlenty of the EXISTING KNOWN TRENDS both inthe US and globally. He also specifically says his model DOES NOT INCLUDE future trends yet to be developed...such as the offshore and shales. And more important: the huge ME fields were almost completely unknown. If you look at the population he was actually projecting he was amazingly accurate.

[ennui2]

What Hubbert said is one thing. How his work was held up as a way to explain and predict the current energy landscape is another. Peakers did not allow for this uncertainty in their models. Hubbert's curve was presented as a simple and easy-to-follow narrative of "riding the slide".

Maybe if Hubbert were alive to see how his work was used he would have attempted to provide more of a check against peakers who were issuing such arrogant predictions. He was a smart guy and didn't seem to have much of an ideological axe to grind (other than his desire to see a technocracy).

[tita]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tita', ' ')This is a dynamic system. There is no simple shortcut between economically recoverable and price of the stuff.

[ennui2]

"Peak Oil Dynamic" is a buzzword intended to somehow salvage the term from the junkheap. I know it's picking up steam from the remaining peak oil faithful but it just screams "retcon".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity

[tita]

ennui- I agree. I prefer the term "Roller Coaster Oil Dynamic". Much more realistic to the view I have from the market of this ressource actually.

Also, I never really put a date in the calendar and waited for it. I just follow what is happening, that's all. I'm impressed by the actual production levels (96 mb/d!), and just wait to see how events will take place from now.

I agree, IMHO, I think this is not going to be like a quiet river of oil flowing.