[dunewalker]

As I understand it, Hubbert's Peak is sort of a "formula by implication". That is, by calculating the occurrence of 50% of oil extraction, it may be inferred that peak production rate is soon to follow, or has just happened, rather than that Hubbert's Peak literally means "peak production".

Only one of Deffeyes' statements made me nervous. That was where he addressed the potential effects of an Iranian embargo or withholding of their oil. He stated that 4 million barrels/day would have a severe impact globally. From other reading I understand that current Iranian oil production is some 4 million barrels daily, but only about 2.5 million barrels of that is exported. Surely Deffeyes does not imply that Iran would not continue to produce sufficient oil for domestic consumption. This lack of distinction makes me wonder if there might be lapses in his other calculations.

[DantesPeak]

With the chilling recent news from Wall Street Journal, that even the second largest field in the world - Cantarell - is on the verge of a production collapse, Deffeyes in retrospect looks even more correct. However even he is understated in the following comment:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here are calls for embargoing Iranian oil because of the nuclear weapons situation. Pulling four million barrels per day out from under the world energy supply might trigger a severe worldwide recession. In the post-peak era, we're playing a new ball game and we don't yet know the rules.

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sjn', 'I') can see no problem with demand being higher than production.

[MacG]

Well, we'll see pretty soon. Within a year or two. Since there is probably very little *free market* and quite a lot of *management* and *manipulation* around this oil thing, strange things can happen which put sand in our eyes for some time. Initially I would expect more third world countries falling of cliffs before we notice anything here. Weird stuff going on in South Africa for example. The predicted price hikes could also be tame, replaced with outright "out of gas" signs.

[Cynus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MacG', 'W')ell, we'll see pretty soon. Within a year or two. Since there is probably very little *free market* and quite a lot of *management* and *manipulation* around this oil thing, strange things can happen which put sand in our eyes for some time. Initially I would expect more third world countries falling of cliffs before we notice anything here. Weird stuff going on in South Africa for example. The predicted price hikes could also be tame, replaced with outright "out of gas" signs.

[MacG]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cynus', 'H')aven't you been listening to clv101? There is no such thing as "out of gas" signs. There's only, "You don't want it badly enough" signs. If you wanted it badly enough those gas tanks would magically fill. Keep that in mind in the future when you're waitng in a gas line. You can play a little mental game where you try to want it more and more in order to make the gas tanks fill up. It's like believing in fairies in order to make Tinkerbell stay alive.

[shortonoil]

He talks about our financial systems being a house of cards. At somewhere around $80/b the US will be, if we maintain imports of other items at our current present rate, absorbing the entire net savings of the world. From that point on there will be no means for the FED and other Central Banks to create money without also producing massive inflation. Massive inflation with its accompanying interest rate increases will bring down the world’s housing markets and reduce industries ability to invest in new energy infrastructure. Our very monetary system could very well collapse from beneath us. I don’t think he is kidding about a 2025 Stone Age event.

[TheInterloafer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y 2025 we'll be in the Stone Age

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leanan', 'I')t's Def - fays.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheInterloafer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y 2025 we'll be in the Stone Age

[Kickinthegob]

I just can't see 2025 being anything like 1985 TheInterloafer. That would be assuming everything is just going to gradually decline in a nice, tidy orderly way. My worst fear is there is going to be a lot of oil left by 2025 - underneath a glass parking lot!

[MicroHydro]

Deffeyes is more optimistic than I am. His rather high calculated URR of over 2 trillion barrels may not be achieved. There is concern that agressive high tech production of offshore fields might have increased short term production rates at the expense of URR. If this is true, then we are not going to get another trillion barrels out of the ground. That would put our current production status significantly beyond 50% of URR. It implies that production decline will be more rapid than the history of production increase. My best guess is we are past 60% of URR produced, and will face decline rates in the range of 5% to 8% annually when we fall off the plateau - before this decade is out.

[Mesuge]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')60% of URR produced, and will face decline rates in the range of 5% to 8% annually

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cynus', 'H')aven't you been listening to clv101? There is no such thing as "out of gas" signs. There's only, "You don't want it badly enough" signs. If you wanted it badly enough those gas tanks would magically fill. Keep that in mind in the future when you're waitng in a gas line. You can play a little mental game where you try to want it more and more in order to make the gas tanks fill up. It's like believing in fairies in order to make Tinkerbell stay alive.

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheInterloafer', 'T')hat's not quite accurate. By 2025 we'll be at 1985 levels, assuming the slope of the downside is something like the slope of the upside. We won't be at the Stone Age until the the end of the century.

[aldente]

Thanks for the link to Deffeyes homepage, Leanan. His bio is actually quite interesting to read:

http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/about-ken.html

[skeptik]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mekrob', 'H')ow exactly do you pronounce Deffeyes correctly? I can't find a way without some help on this one. Thanks

[TheInterloafer]

Sorry everyone - I was trying to be sarchastic with that 1985 comment. But it's hard to convey sarchasm over the Internets. Of course the downslope is more tretcherous, especially given geopolitical maneuvering. My point was to draw attention to the mathematical linearization of the peak, and to note: Who would want to be at even 1985 levels?? That's 40 years behind where we should but won't be by then.

[UIUCstudent01]

I especially liked this part of his biography:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hile working on his Ph.D. thesis, Ken found millions of tons of erionite, a mineral in the zeolite family, which had previously been known only from a single mineral specimen in the Harvard museum. Ken's first published paper was a redescription of erionite; it was his baby. Around 1980, erionite was found to be associated with a high incidence of cancer in three villages in Turkey. When researchers at Mt. Sinai Hospital injected rats with the same dosage of erionite that they used for asbestos, the rats didn't live long enough to get cancer. At a much-reduced dose, the rats did get cancer. Erionite is probably the most toxic known mineral; a milligram of fibers in the lungs is lethal. Ken's reaction on learning that his baby was a mass murderer was like all parents of mass murderers: "I don't understand it, erionite was such a nice quiet mineral."

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('UIUCstudent01', 't')he rats didn't live long enough to get cancer