Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE International Energy Agency (IEA) Thread pt 1 (merged) A

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.
Topic locked

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby Taskforce_Unity » Wed 31 May 2006, 05:05:48

Thanks rockdock123, this raises the question of North America for me. FSU estimates are a little bit too optimistic to my taste but quite possible.

I don't grasp where increasing north american production will come from.
User avatar
Taskforce_Unity
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 479
Joined: Mon 22 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Holland
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby SoothSayer » Wed 31 May 2006, 05:48:19

I suspect that the nearer we reach production limits, the more LOCAL and TRANSIENT the problems will become.

A cash poor country will suddenly be unable to import sufficient oil.

A country which relies on say a mix of declining natural gas and crude oil could be hit by the "double whammy" of both sources declining and/or becoming more expensive.

Bad winters could disrupt areas for a few day, weeks or months a year ... but then everything would be OK again for Summer.

And during all this mayhem there will still be people & governments saying "Peak Oil won't arrive until 2020-2030"
Technology will save us!
User avatar
SoothSayer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1167
Joined: Thu 02 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Location: England
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby eric_b » Wed 31 May 2006, 07:53:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RdSnt', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('malcomatic_51', '
')
The post 2013 peak jives perfectly with the data which I've accessed from the Upstream service. In order to make it occur earlier either some of the projects have to crater or demand needs to increase at a rate greater than predicted.


Are you kidding? The most optimistic estimates that reach out 20 and 30 years before peak, are too close for good solutions..


That's just it. We are arguing irrelevancies here. Even if Wood's assessment
is correct it really doesn't change the big picture. I tend to think we are
peaking now, especially when you factor in the increased demand from Asia.
But even if the peak is not until 2020 it doesn't change anything. We're still
screwed.

Perhaps we will not be facing peak for another decade, but all future
generations will be dealing with it. If you have kids they most definitely will
be feeling it.
User avatar
eric_b
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Fri 14 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: us
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Wed 31 May 2006, 09:58:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '1')) I believe CTL's (coal to liquids) have the potential to a significant impact in the coming decades. Am I correct in assuming CTL's are not accounted for in these graphs?


Not sure on that, the unconventional piece is mainly shale oil so probably not. I'll try to dig a bit though.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2')) Looks like Latin America is predicted to increase somewhat between now and 2010 but I haven't been able to locate any information on big upstream projects. Are there major upstream expansion projects that I am missing with regards to this?


I believe this would be deepwater Brazil. Again I can probe the database a wee bit more.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '3')) Looks like their overall assessment of OPEC if fairly pessimistic. Assuming Iraq becomes stable enough in the coming years to attract foreign investment, what do you think their overall potential is in the next decade from a barrels per day standpoint?


I think this is a real wild card given that some of the fields have been badly damaged by poor production practices and noone knows for sure how much was actually produced from some of the fields "illegally" throughout the sanctions period and hence how much is left. It might come down to limitations on investments, my understanding is all of the facilities are in bad need of maintainence and upgrades. I have considerable information on Iraq from the days after the first Gulf War where we all thought it would be opened to foreign oil comapanies. If I get time this week I'll dig around as it is an interesting question.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby Terrapin » Wed 31 May 2006, 10:15:11

Rockdoc, as a long time lurker here I would like to comment that your contributions are among the most appreciated I have read. Your objectivity and clarity are outstanding, along with your willingness to educate and avoid petty insults.

Thank you.
User avatar
Terrapin
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed 11 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: NW California
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby nth » Wed 31 May 2006, 10:47:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RdSnt', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('malcomatic_51', '
')
The post 2013 peak jives perfectly with the data which I've accessed from the Upstream service. In order to make it occur earlier either some of the projects have to crater or demand needs to increase at a rate greater than predicted.


Are you kidding? The most optimistic estimates that reach out 20 and 30 years before peak, are too close for good solutions..


That's just it. We are arguing irrelevancies here. Even if Wood's assessment
is correct it really doesn't change the big picture. I tend to think we are
peaking now, especially when you factor in the increased demand from Asia.
But even if the peak is not until 2020 it doesn't change anything. We're still
screwed.

Perhaps we will not be facing peak for another decade, but all future
generations will be dealing with it. If you have kids they most definitely will
be feeling it.


Isn't that assuming the downhill slope of PO is a bell curve or some accelerated drop?

If it does not drop rapidly, then it does buy time to power down and to find a solution, imo.
Anyways, it looks like we are heavily dependent on technology to save us to find more fossil fuel and to find alternatives. Right now, we don't have the political muscle nor the technological breakthrough to continue sustaining our lifestyle for very long. political muscle, I meant politically opening up all our resources to drilling or to alternative energy. We are doing neither, right now.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby wowpleasewakeupalready » Wed 31 May 2006, 20:17:59

nth, good points


Rockdoc, I'll be curious to see what you find on Iraq. Some of the stuff I've read seems very promissing - including only that approximately a quarter of the discovered fields have even been developed, and that the recovery techniques used on their developed are a couple of decades old.
User avatar
wowpleasewakeupalready
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri 12 May 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Texas
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby nth » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 13:01:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wowpleasewakeupalready', '.').. the recovery techniques used on their developed are a couple of decades old.


This is the argument that IEA uses to state that we are okay on oil for the next few decades. Most of the world's oil fields are using old production technics and that modern enhanced oil recovery techniques will prolong oil production.

I know for a fact that many here things that is bogus.

As for me, I don't see the investments into these technologies happening fast enough to offset declining productions in brown fields. Actually, I see major oil firms abandoning old fields and instead going after new fields.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 13:33:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ctually, I see major oil firms abandoning old fields and instead going after new fields.


True for the major firms such as BP who sold off many of their old fields in the North Sea but not so true for the Independants who have made hay with those old assets.
The major firms seem to be increasing exploration slightly but seem more interested in investing in non-conventionals such as LNG and heavy oil/tar sands.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby nth » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 13:57:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ctually, I see major oil firms abandoning old fields and instead going after new fields.


True for the major firms such as BP who sold off many of their old fields in the North Sea but not so true for the Independants who have made hay with those old assets.
The major firms seem to be increasing exploration slightly but seem more interested in investing in non-conventionals such as LNG and heavy oil/tar sands.


rockdoc123,
These independants you talk about had bought some brown fields from the majors. They had concentrated on enhanced recovery on brown fields. They are buying some old fields, but not all, and that is the kicker. There are about a few hundred thousand barrels of oil per day of lost production by abandonment. Meaning not even these independants are buying. From interviews, it seems independants would love to buy more of these brown fields, but they are constrained by resources.

It is one thing to see the super majors like BP, Shell, and Exxon abandon fields. But even Marathon and other mid majors are abandoning fields. To me, that is not a good sign.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 15:26:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')eaning not even these independants are buying. From interviews, it seems independants would love to buy more of these brown fields, but they are constrained by resources.


not sure what areas you are talking about. My experience has been over the past 5 years that every last set of assets that has been put up for sale by majors or Independants has been bought up at fairly high prices. I am not aware of any fields being abandoned that are still producing cashflow above operating costs. Some examples?
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby nth » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 17:29:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')eaning not even these independants are buying. From interviews, it seems independants would love to buy more of these brown fields, but they are constrained by resources.


not sure what areas you are talking about. My experience has been over the past 5 years that every last set of assets that has been put up for sale by majors or Independants has been bought up at fairly high prices. I am not aware of any fields being abandoned that are still producing cashflow above operating costs. Some examples?


I am not talking about fields put up for sale. I don't have access to sales contact. They don't list fields for sale on a public website or research library. I have no idea if they put up the fields for sale prior to abandoning it. I know it is a practice to sometimes not put things up for sale when discussing oil refineries as California had a case where there were buyers, but Shell refused to sell at first, and then ask for too much, before pressured by the state to sell or keep operating.

I don't have data to know if it is operating over cashflow or not. I thought that was proprietary data. They list those in databases you can access?

I know for a fact that GoM has some abandon after hurricane.
North Sea has some fields abandoned too like North West Hutton field.
I definitely cannot get the data nor name the fields like you want.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 18:01:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') don't have data to know if it is operating over cashflow or not. I thought that was proprietary data. They list those in databases you can access?

I know for a fact that GoM has some abandon after hurricane.
North Sea has some fields abandoned too like North West Hutton field.
I definitely cannot get the data nor name the fields like you want.


Without doing some significant data mining it is pretty hard to come up with what fields have been abandoned in a given basin. In IHS Probe I would have to interrogate the database field by field which without being specific about an area is too large in scope. As far as I know the fields abandoned in the GOM were just temporary abandonments. Yes there are fields abandoned in the North Sea but none that I can think of had production in the 100's of thousands of barrels as this would still generate revenue above and beyond operating costs.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 18:09:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')ockdoc, I'll be curious to see what you find on Iraq. Some of the stuff I've read seems very promissing - including only that approximately a quarter of the discovered fields have even been developed, and that the recovery techniques used on their developed are a couple of decades old.


OK I was able to dig through my files and find what I have from a few years back and updated with what I could find more recently.

According to IHS Energy Iraq had total 2P original reserves of 93.4 GBbl with 63.5 GBbl remaining which means 2P reserves are 67% depleted to date (assuming recovery factor does not rise from the original estimate). Of the original 2P reserves 27% is in Rumaila and 21% in Kirkuk. In comparison Rumaila makes up 22% of the remaining 2P reserves and Kirkuk only 8% of remaining. Of the total remaining reserves about 38 GBbl comes from fields with very little or no production to date. A number of fields were identified by the Iraqi’s after the Gulf War I which they planned on having foreign operators take over. IHS Energy notes that the projects waiting in the wings will be expensive to bring on-stream but not technically difficult and could account for an additional 2.0 MMBpd of production above and beyond current capcity.

Image

The above lists the top projects which have been talked about.

According to IHS current liquid production is around 2 MMBpd

Image

With regard to potential exploration upside IHS Energy noted that of about 525 prospects which had originally been identified prior to the first Gulf War only 114 have been drilled. A volumetric study of the various basins suggests that the Western Desert could hold 60 GBbl of which 19 GBbl has a “good chance” for discovery. In the Mesoptamian basin an estimated 90 GBbl might be present with a “good chance” for discovery of 13 GBbl. In the Zagros basin 64 GBbl might be present with a “good chance” for discovery of 14 GBbl.

So for remaining reserves (at estimated recovery) 25.5 GBbl of 2P reserves discovered and producing ; 38 GBbl discovered non-producing; “good chance” for discovery of an additional 46 GBbl. So potential for slightly more than 100 GBbl potential remaining.

Of course none of this takes into account possible reserve growth in existing fields from improved recovery techniques, which using Saudi Arabia as an example should be possible.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Wood Mackenzie Energy Outlook

Unread postby nth » Thu 01 Jun 2006, 19:26:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') don't have data to know if it is operating over cashflow or not. I thought that was proprietary data. They list those in databases you can access?

I know for a fact that GoM has some abandon after hurricane.
North Sea has some fields abandoned too like North West Hutton field.
I definitely cannot get the data nor name the fields like you want.


Without doing some significant data mining it is pretty hard to come up with what fields have been abandoned in a given basin. In IHS Probe I would have to interrogate the database field by field which without being specific about an area is too large in scope. As far as I know the fields abandoned in the GOM were just temporary abandonments. Yes there are fields abandoned in the North Sea but none that I can think of had production in the 100's of thousands of barrels as this would still generate revenue above and beyond operating costs.


You misunderstood me.
I did not meant a single field with over 100kbpd in production, but in total. This is not counting on needed investments for enhanced recovery to boost production aka California Bakersfield. Many fields were abandoned, but brought to life with continuous steam injections.

As for names of fields, I have given you one name in the North Sea. North Sea has several fields that were abandoned when only 28-35% of the oil is produced. Enhanced recovery will easily boost that by a few percentage points. The complex geological structures will mean more horizontal drilling, too. Of course, there are reasons for abandonment. But, it goes to show that they are willing to abandon low profit for new production which are higher profits.

GoM are abandonment are not temporarily, unless they got sold. I believe that no one wants to buy them as hurricane frequency is pretty high not worth the risk.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

IEA: 'Asia biggest consumer of oil in 2011'

Unread postby Sleepybag » Wed 12 Jul 2006, 08:51:48

Asia biggest consumer of oil in 2011
In 2011, Asia will consume more oil than North America. This is the result of the strong growth of the economies in the region.

Expansion
This is stated in the monthly report of the International Energy Agency (IEA). At the moment, North America is the biggest consumer of oil. But the fast growing Asian industries will need a lot of oil to expand.

Middle East
According to the IEA the demand not only grows in Asia. Also in the Middle East a lot more oil will be consumed by 2011.

Demand
The IEA has calculated that the worldwide demand for oil will grow 1.8% next year. In the years after next year, this will be 2% on average. This trend will continue to 2011.

Source: RTL Holland
User avatar
Sleepybag
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon 17 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Netherlands
Top

Plateau, or no? IEA supply chart says ABSOLUTELY

Unread postby Zardoz » Wed 26 Jul 2006, 10:25:10

The IEA just updated its "World Supply Chart", showing the total for the second quarter of 2006, and revising the first quarter figure up to 85.1 MBPD (from 84.7):

World Oil Supply

So we've finally struggled over 84, for an increase of less than a million barrels a day since we hit 84.3 in the fourth quarter of 2004.

You tell me: Are we on the "undulating plateau" of global oil production, or not? Are we peaked, or is there a bit more to be wrung out of the sponge? Let's hope there is, because according to their latest demand chart, we're rapidly approaching the point where TSHTF:

World Oil Demand

Merry Christmas...
Last edited by Zardoz on Fri 27 Jul 2007, 08:46:06, edited 3 times in total.
"Thank you for attending the oil age. We're going to scrape what we can out of these tar pits in Alberta and then shut down the machines and turn out the lights. Goodnight." - seldom_seen
User avatar
Zardoz
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri 02 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Oil-addicted Southern Californucopia
Top

Re: Plateau, or no? IEA Supply Chart says "maybe"

Unread postby dukey » Wed 26 Jul 2006, 10:44:40

let me get this straight
even though non opec oil has peaked
and opec oil seems to have peaked .. if i read all the latest reports correctly. Saudi arabia down half a million barrels per day etc

we somehow magically made it to 85.1 million barrels per day ?
Where is the extra oil coming from. The moon ?
User avatar
dukey
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2248
Joined: Sun 20 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Plateau, or no? IEA Supply Chart says "maybe"

Unread postby Fergus » Wed 26 Jul 2006, 10:55:51

{long, meaningless quote removed - Falconoffury}

Looks like we are approaching that time when supply can not meet demand by a significant amount in the 4th quarters of this year and next year.

Genrally last 3 years we met demand, just barely. When that stops, look out. Things are gunna get interesting in very soon. Hope everyone has there seat belt on, it could be a bumpy ride too.
User avatar
Fergus
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Plateau, or no? IEA Supply Chart says "maybe"

Unread postby Armageddon » Wed 26 Jul 2006, 11:04:10

4.00 per gallon will slow it down enough to keep up with supply, unless canterell and SA really drop off , then all bets are off.
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7450
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo
Top
PreviousNext
Topic locked

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests



cron