[rockdoc123]

Rather than jumping on the ole "oh that is just peak denier bullshit" bandwagon let's look at what he is talking about in detail.

The seismic imaging to look at water channeling etc. is called 4D seismic (the fourth dimension being time). Basically what happens is a 3D seismic grid is layed out over a producing field and data is acquired at different phases of production. It is possible to monitor movement of different fluid phases in this manner. 4D is currently being used in Saudi and other mature areas. Not real new technology but is an tool that has not yet seen widespread application.

In terms of improving the quality of seismic signal this is something that is a continually evolving process. I am always amazed to see recent reprocessing of a seismic line acquired say 5 years ago that had the state of the art processing thrown at it at the time. Usually there is a phenomenal improvement due entirely to better signal processing algorithms. My experience with this over the past 30 years is the only limits is peoples imagination.

The drilling technology thing is a bit over the top I think, reminds me somewhat of that really awful scifi film where they drill through the earths crust to the mantle/core interface using this huge articulated train like contraption with a drill consisting of a rotating cavalcade of laser beams. Good fun to watch but don't wait on the patent to appear.

As to the microbe thing....this is already used in bioremediation efforts. Basically we have always known that it is bacteria and other little gremlins that cause otherwise good oil to become heavy through biodegradtion, a natural event that occurs up to temperature ranges of about 70 - 80 C. This notion has been used to clean up oil spills through seeding bacteria in high quantities in a given area and providing a lot of fertilizer to speed the reaction.


As to what improving recovery can do for the earth's reserves...think about it. Campbell made a generalization that is correct as long as you think of it as being somewhere in the ballpark but the ballpark is really, really big..that being average field recovery is 30%. But what we are seeing is that through application of various technologies recovery factors in fields such as Abaqiq will be over 70%, in California at Kern River up to an unheard of 90%. If by some continued effort they could do this to all of the big fields in the world the affect on ultimate recovery would be astounding. My first pass thought on this would be it would extend a peak out for quite a ways but would be unlikely to actually affect the ultimate level of production.

[seahorse]

Rockdoc,

Your best guess, how soon could this new technology be used to extend the average recovery rate to 70%? Are we talking within the next five years?

Hypothetically, if PO were to occur in 2012 (based on known technologies) could these new technologies be brought in use soon enough to extend that date significantly?

[dinopello]

Sounds like more ideas to extend the plateau, but then could be a really nasty cliff at the end.

Extending the plateau could be good, if we will use that time to build a parachute for the fall off the cliff. Sounds reasonable - preparing for a sharp discontinuity that we all know is coming...

Right?

[sicophiliac]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('auscanman', 'N')o technologies in the article sound like they are anywhere near being commercially feasible. The stuff towards the end of the article really sounds like a pipe dream. It'd be great if microbes could actually chop off long hydrocarbons, but that's got a long way to go.

I almost hope none of these developments pan out, since they would lower the price of oil, act as a disincentive for development of alternative energies and eventually lead to cliff oil with a presumably much larger population and worse environmental and climatic degredation, rather than the slow dropoff currently expected within the next few years

[Frank]

Not much sense worrying about global climate change then, is there?

The issue is much broader than PO - it's about sustainability in general. More oil = larger footprint = harder fall but further down the road.

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'S')ounds like more ideas to extend the plateau, but then could be a really nasty cliff at the end.

Right?

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zardoz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'S')ounds like more ideas to extend the plateau, but then could be a really nasty cliff at the end.

Right?

[RG73]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('auscanman', 'I')t'd be great if microbes could actually chop off long hydrocarbons, but that's got a long way to go.

[thor]

I don't see how these new technologies can be timely implemented on such a scale that peak is pushed forward significantly. This is not to say new technology will never work, but I expect decades for commerically viable paradigm shifts to come online while we frantically pump 84 mbpd as we speak.

[evilgenius]

I agree with the cliff oil hypothesis. This sounds like what horizontal drilling is doing, providing more but with a sudden expiration rather than a sloping depletion.

Cliff oil is a serious problem because it doesn't work with the way that the world has chosen to address peak oil. The world has chosen market forces as its means of dealing with po. Market forces don't work well with sudden expiration.

Does anybody think that these emerging tech ideas will provide more oil on a daily basis? If so how much more per day? Do any of the ideas potentially limit the amount per day that can be extracted while lengthening the reservoir's life span? I mean, can't you just see someone saying, "If we just expensively heat up the ground we can accellerate the rate of the chemical reaction and get more oil faster."

[shakespear1]

Capillary forces and rock heterogeneity it locking up a lot of oil. Crack this nut and you are an instant billionaire.

The boys at MIT need to get out in the field AND STAY there for a while to truly understand the problems. It is good that they are thinking though.

[cudabachi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', 'D')oes anybody think that these emerging tech ideas will provide more oil on a daily basis?

[XOVERX]

Well, these new technologies will be a godsend . . . maybe.

If we can push out the Peak Oil plateau, and couple that time savings with a serious all-out effort to implement alternative energies, then that is a truly great situation. Perhaps civilization saving.

OTOH, if we don't implement an alternate energy strategy during the new grace time, or if we implement an insufficient strategy, then welcome to the Olduvai Cliff. It's that simple.

So the "good news" is "bad news." Americans still need the pain. The pain of ever-higher gasoline prices. The pain of oil constrictions. Because people so steeped in capitalist mentality (selfishness and social noncooperation) and US style democracy (uninformed herd mentality) are moved only by pain. Lots of it, and in extreme ways. Make the cars too expensive to drive and American folks will scream.

Happily, I can see no way to avoid oil constrictions even with new technologies coming on-board. Energy wars are already in progress. US / China tension becomes more palpable everyday. Civil wars in Nigeria, backwards oil production in Venezuela, and so forth.

The base problem is mankind is essentially irrational. I agree with Thomas Hobbes on this point. But if a core of humanity can get enough traction (the Peak Oil-ers), then maybe some kind of strategy to preserve civilization can be accomplished over time. That is, maybe a serious effort to develop alternative energy can be implemented that will succeed.

And the new technologies may just give us that time. It is hard to be optimistic with the gravity of the problem facing mankind, but these types of technologies do lend a small degree of optimism.

[Spartan2]

Note that the article says: "The amount of accessible oil worldwide could eventually be increased by roughly 30 percent".

That is not doubling accessible oil. For that to happen the increase would have to be 100%.

[InformedEJ]

LOL..I always get a kick out of this "We will double the supply with new tech" or "We have found new tech. like a laser been to produce more oil"... Bull@#$^. Supply is Supply just because we COULD have this new method of extraction we still only have so much in the ground. I bet when the market realizes that the prediction from MIT is bull#@$% then we will see the oil prices start to go up and up an up!! Gold will go up and up and up because it will cost so muc US$ to buy it.. Then the USD will go down and down and down!! "Good Luck and Good Night."

[shakespear1]

These guys have not been to the field but it is encouraging that FINALLY they find the subject interesting.

[seahorse2]

Based on this MIT article found for Brobak, MIT agrees that there are no simple solutions to the energy problem.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('brobak', 'M')IT issues call to arms on energy
http://news.com.com/MIT+issues+call+to+arms+on+energy/2100-1008_3-6068262.html?tag=nefd.top

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')AMBRIDGE, Mass.--The Massachusetts Institute of Technology issued a preliminary report on Wednesday that calls for technology development and government policies to avert a "perfect storm" forming around energy.

MIT's Energy Research Council report (click here for PDF) was the result of a year-long study. It concluded that industrialized nations need to accelerate a switch to cleaner and more efficient sources of fuel, a transition that could take 50 years.

During a presentation at the university on Wednesday, MIT President Susan Hockfield said that addressing the world's energy problems "is one of the most urgent challenges of our time."

The university intends to create a permanent energy laboratory or center within five years, which it will do over several phases. Its report calls for the creation of several multidisciplinary programs, each requiring up to several million dollars in funding per year.

Hockfield said that interest in energy is higher than it has been in a generation, and she expects that interest to remain high in the coming years.

She said a combination of rising energy demand around the world, security issues related to energy, and environmental problems--notably global warming and climate change--from pollution "are not going away."

"I think the energy challenge is far more pressing than the energy challenge that presented itself 20 years ago," Hockfield said.

In her inaugural university address last May, Hockfield called for the creation of the 16-member Energy Research Council, which involves all of MIT's schools.

Council co-chair Ernest Moniz, from MIT's physics and engineering systems divisions, said that the worldwide energy picture is very complex and resists a single solution.

Instead, during a presentation on Wednesday, he called for research in a broad range of topics, including nanomaterials to improve the conductivity of fuel cell catalysts as well as improvements in renewable energy and energy storage.

"There is no silver bullet," said Moniz. "All of this is really about options, technologies and policies to provide to the marketplace to respond."

Moniz said the council will involve faculty from several different disciplines and will work with both government and industry partners.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')ockdoc, your thoughts on this? It seems the likely scenario, I would think. "Cliff Oil", indeed...

[grabby]

in 6 months they will either be pumping 84 MBD, more than that or less than that.

Each of those three ways makes the situation worse.

Think about that.

It is easy to get Joe Bob to consume less. When he runs out of cash he consumes less.

Like a lawyer supporting you in prison, as you pay him he works hard, but the minute you run out of cash you can't find him any more.
.