[SoothSayer]

A good read ... what's your take?

Link

[MacG]

I read that piece earlier today. I'm amazed that anyone can be so dead certain about the future. Remind most about tales you tell a frightened child to calm it down. I have a couple of issues:

*If you are going to do GTL, remember that Fisher-Tropsch waste one carbon molecule for each carbon molecule it fixate in fluid. Any calculation of "energy equivalents" must take that into account.

*Hirsch! As soon as we enter decline, the energy needed to build new infrastructure will compete with all other energy needs, creating a possibly horrible situation.

*Even if GTL can be scaled up, then what? It's still fossil energy. It will eventually run out some day. Climbing higher up on the ladder only set us up for a harder fall.

[MfromAmsterdam]

this will be slaughtered with the usual arguments, as it brings forward the usual arguments.

you've either decided we're running out of (cheap) energy, or not.

[gigacannon]

We're not claiming that we're running out of oil. We're claiming that there will be massive economic upheavel resulting from a fall in production with an increase in demand.

We all know the peak will come, but what none of us know is how effective improvements in technology will be in softening the crash. Some will survive, and some won't. But those that do will lead the rest.

[thor]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gigacannon', 'W')e're not claiming that we're running out of oil. We're claiming that there will be massive economic upheavel resulting from a fall in production with an increase in demand.

[Falconoffury]

All I see in the article are cherry picked sources. It doesn't argue against sources that argue that peak oil is now or soon. The article is basically saying that since a few studies place peak oil at around 2025, we should just agree with them and ignore the others.

I also see a lot about what technology "could" do. I prefer to use history to predict the future rather than imagination.

[Leanan]

I was amused at this part:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')echnological breakthroughs such as multi-lateral drilling helped defy predictions of decline in Britain's North Sea that have been made since the 1980s: the region is only now peaking.

[bonjaski]

when you have a strong demand, investements are made
(in whatever)

the story of increasing demand ist a little bit annoying, because with higher prices the demand of oil wouldn't increase;

at least 30% of oil is consumed for heat and in europe since 2,3 years there is a strong trend away from oil to geothermal energy, wood pellets, solar thermal energy.
with a gallon at 3-4 dollars, one pays 50% more for oil then for wood pellets.

That we see a strong sudden decline is also untrue because the risk is distributed on many oil fields and this will prevent any fast decline. If one gets panic when one oil field declines, its his problem.

then there are efficiency gains (again this nees more lavor force) and so on.
So maybe we need a little bit more money for energy, but more demand from industry investments in energy will arise and create economy growth
(we already see it, investements in more efficient technology and new energy plants grow daily).

just biofuels could easily reduce the demand of USA in the next 10 years by 10%.
a investment of 80billions in CTL again by 10-15%.
and more efficiency also by 10%.

then we have to think, that 90% of people, which use the car use the car alone.

When the oil price will double, they will buy a small car with 2 seats for there daily movements. They consume 70% less fuel.

So immagine 30% less oil consumption because we use different energy to heat our homes and a 50% less consume of liquid fuels?
immagine this country per country with alternatives avilable and tell me: will we still have a problem?


and who says that high oil prices will increase transport costs should look how great the part of transport costs are. And again, with special truck trains fuel efficiency could be improved by 30%. Not to mention that with high fuel users, high priced fuel saving or alternative technologies have a chance. To feed a truck which moves only between 2 cities you don't need a large hydrogen infrastructure.


oilpeak is a chance, a chance for more independency, reliability and will bring us to a sustainable endless economic growth. With more wealth for everyone.

[Leanan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'o')ilpeak is a chance, a chance for more independency, reliability and will bring us to a sustainable endless economic growth. With more wealth for everyone.

[Bobbotov]

What difference does it make it there is an infinite amount of oil if the price exceeds civilizations ability to acquire it to run their infrastructures?

No one can argue to me at least that the price of oil is not volatile and subject to all manner of negative influences (hurricanes, political instability, increased demand, insufficient refinement capacity, etc.) So why isn't this the real issue and not how much is in the ground that is recoverable? That seems like a red herring.

The world may not run out of diamonds or gold either but if the price is so high as to be unaffordable then who cares how much is left?

Doesn't anyone remember the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner: "Water, water everywhere but nary a drop to drink."

[Falconoffury]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'o')ilpeak is a chance, a chance for more independency, reliability and will bring us to a sustainable endless economic growth. With more wealth for everyone.

[khebab]

The article is mainly based on CERA and the USGS forecasts. Clearly, there is a misunderstanding about the issue: PO is not about how much oil there is left, the problem is about how fast we can get it in order to satisfy demand:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Colin Campbell', 'T')he term Peak Oil refers the maximum rate of the production of oil in any area under consideration, recognising that it is a finite natural resource, subject to depletion.

[bonjaski]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bobbotov', 'W')hat difference does it make it there is an
Doesn't anyone remember the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner: "Water, water everywhere but nary a drop to drink."

[Leanan]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 's')ustainable endless economic growth is surely possible.
we just have to use regenerative sources.

[thor]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bonjaski', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bobbotov', 'W')hat difference does it make it there is an
Doesn't anyone remember the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner: "Water, water everywhere but nary a drop to drink."

[jato]

According to the chart used in the article the world is currently producing 90 Mb/d. A whole 5 Mb/d greater than reality! It also shows we are on a healthy up slope which will bring us to 108 Mb/d by 2015.

[nth]

The author claims Peak Oil for non-OPEC by 2010 to 2015.

I don't get it. If PO is going to happen to Non-OPEC, then it will happen for OPEC sooner or later. Duh! He claims we got lots of oil, yet he seems to point out that oil will peak in 2025 or around there. WTF???

Isn't PO about oil production peaking? If I am saying I believe in PO, does this mean I have to agree to a date? Does this mean I have to believe post PO mean economic chaos?

What does PO really mean?
It sure does not mean peak oil production according to this author.
Am I reading it wrong?

[Bobbotov]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nth', '
')
Isn't PO about oil production peaking? If I am saying I believe in PO, does this mean I have to agree to a date? Does this mean I have to believe post PO mean economic chaos?

What does PO really mean?
It sure does not mean peak oil production according to this author.
Am I reading it wrong?

[nth]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bobbotov', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nth', '
')
Isn't PO about oil production peaking? If I am saying I believe in PO, does this mean I have to agree to a date? Does this mean I have to believe post PO mean economic chaos?

What does PO really mean?
It sure does not mean peak oil production according to this author.
Am I reading it wrong?

[Bobbotov]

[quote="nth
I already know that definition, but my question is what is the author's definition for PO.[/quote]

Anything else means the author doesn't know what he is talking about.