[0mar]

I'd say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[Sencha]

The U.S. is too set in its ways, and too dependent on modern technology. Innovative people who have ingenuity and resourcefulness, are most likely working for companies that contribute to the peak oil problem, and are directing their efforts in the entirely wrong direction.

We have very few people who actively work toward making survival in a post-peak world possible. Americans will have to learn fast or they'll be a die-off. I'm sure they will, but probably not after there's been plenty of bloodshed over remaining resources. In the beginning, you'll probably just have thousands upon thousands of people waiting on government handouts of rations and necessities. (if they should be so generous).

[savethehumans]

JINGLE BELLS
JINGLE BELLS
PEAK OIL'S ON THE WAY!
OH, WHAT FUN
IT IS TO RIDE
ON A CAMEL-PULLED DUNE SLEIGH!
JINGLE BELLS
JINGLE BELLS
ECONOMIES DECLINE!
SAY, CAN YOU SEE
WHAT LIES AHEAD--
IT'S AN "IT'S ALL OVER" SIGN!

Thought a little levity (dark as it is!) might be in order here....

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I')'d say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[dolanbaker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I')'d say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolanbaker', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I')'d say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I')'d say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[ROCKMAN]

When? How about today? There are a countless number of folks on the planet living substandard lives due to a lack of affordable oil/NG. There may be an abundance for those who can afford $45/bbl oil but hundreds of millions (if not billions) who can't.

Compare the US (69 bopd per 1,000) to India (2.5 bopd per 1,000). So what? The 1.3 BILLION Indians are that much more environmentally conscious then the 330 million Americans since they CHOOSE to use one 4% as much oil per person as Americans do? Or is it because the people of India are suffering from a "big and lasting oil shortage"? A big and lasting shortage of oil they can afford. There are actually more then a few Americans in the same boat: the Rockman's wife periodically gives a neighbor (single mom with 3 kids) a ride to the grocer store to save on gas. Local gas that's running $1.90/gal there days. Fortunately she has mass transit to make it to work.

Affluent folks (like many Americans) need to remember: it isn't always just about them. LOL.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', 'I')'d say within 5-8 years after the peak will real consequential effects of depleted oil hit us. This is because by then the number fudging game will be over and the reality will hit us that oil is not plentiful anymore.

[onlooker]

Good post by Rockmam about how 'cheap oil' is such a relative term. Kep in mind that cheap oil is not a cause for celebration currently for marginal producers

[KingM]

I'm someone who has been around since about 2005. Back then it seems like it was about 1/3 hard doomers, 1/3 cornucopians, and 1/3 cautiously optimistic, but aware that there was an issue. I was in this latter category, although to a doomer, anyone who doesn't see cannibalism in the future looks like a cornucopian.

I would still say we're not over the hump. I'd be a lot happier if we were making a faster, more aggressive push to de-carbonize, and not only for PO concerns. There's global warming, of course, but also, leaving some of those FFs in the ground gives us a civilizational reset. Sooner or later there will be a collapse. It might be in 100 years or a 1,000 or 10,000 (hard to imagine). But if we've burned every scrap of coil and drop of oil, how will we ever rebuild industrial civilization? Straight from Dutch-style windmills to nuclear power? Unlikely.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'W')hen? How about today? There are a countless number of folks on the planet living substandard lives due to a lack of affordable oil/NG. There may be an abundance for those who can afford $45/bbl oil but hundreds of millions (if not billions) who can't.

....

Affluent folks (like many Americans) need to remember: it isn't always just about them. LOL.

[onlooker]

Well the marginal plays seem to be going from boon to bust
http://calgaryherald.com/business/energ ... ion-leases

[ROCKMAN]

Outcast - "...I know, we need to bash anyone with the temerity to have been financially successful via working hard in school and on the job." So I take it you feel rightfully proud of being part of the 5% of the global population that consumers more then 20% of the world's petroleum.

As a seller of petroleum I fully support your efforts. But you should try to drive more. LOL.

BTW the excess consumption of petroleum by affluent Americans is a significant portion of the reason those needy folks need financial help given the resultant higher cost from our glutinous consumption. Also a shame those same needy folks aren't benefiting from the economic growth provided by all that ff consumption.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('KingM', 'I')'m someone who has been around since about 2005. Back then it seems like it was about 1/3 hard doomers, 1/3 cornucopians, and 1/3 cautiously optimistic, but aware that there was an issue. I was in this latter category, although to a doomer, anyone who doesn't see cannibalism in the future looks like a cornucopian.

I would still say we're not over the hump. I'd be a lot happier if we were making a faster, more aggressive push to de-carbonize, and not only for PO concerns.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', 'W')ell the marginal plays seem to be going from boon to bust
http://calgaryherald.com/business/energ ... ion-leases

[onlooker]

Btw, what Rockmam stated, I myself do not begrudge what we relatively rich have in rich countries as we earned our money working hard. But let's be blunt and sincere as Rockman has been and admit we get more than our fair share of the pie thus leaving less than a fair share for others. Afterall, only so much pie exists

[ROCKMAN]

looker - Which is my point about my MADOR protocol: Mutually Assured Distribution Of Resources. Just like the MAD protocol of the potential nuclear war days. Those economies that have the financial ability to dominate the ff market will do just that. But it does not serve their mutual interest to battle (either financially or militarily) each other: like MAD there's really no winner. Those powerful economies will instead take an even larger portion of future energy resources...to the detriment of weaker economies. Just as it happens today...just as it always has.

One can judge that situation as unfair but short of a truly effective communistic designed global commerce how can it be otherwise? Those strong economies might try to offer some minimal assistance to the weaker. But the obligation of each govt is to conduct iitself primarily for the benefit of its citizens. In a democracy a govt will have to do so or suffer being replaced by its voters. Venezuela is a good example of that NOT HAPPENING.

But consider the current US export profile. And not focusing on oil exports which have never actually been banned. Those are relatively small compared to refinery products. Products made from almost 5 million bopd. A fact many Americans are unaware of. The US has become THE refinery for the world. Which is OK with the voters...today thanks to relatively low motor fuel prices.

But what when those prices double...or triple? Given such a potential political weapon it's difficult to imagine politicians not using a potential ban (or at least limits) of such exports. The same can be said for any country exporting products. Consider the top 5 countries that account for more then 40% of those exports:

United States: $64.1 billion (12.7% of total refined oil exports)
Russia: $46 billion (9.1%)
Netherlands: $37.4 billion (7.4%)
Singapore: $36.1 billion (7.2%)
India: $27 billion (5.3%)

Not only will those exports become political issues they'll also become potential leverage to use against importing nations. Consider the EU which has been losing refinery capacity for years. Folks can appreciate oil embargoes but I don't many have contemplated product embargoes...and which countries, like the US, that would have the upper hand in such a dynamic.

And here's an indication of how little anyone is paying attention to potential product embargoes compared to restrictions of oil imports: while there are dozens of compilations of oil imports by country on the web I could not find a single one for refinery products. IOW which are the top 5 importers? And how susceptible are they to future restricted US exports? Sure, one could search each country individually. But interesting that perhaps no one has thought that to be worthwhile. And not just the big importers are of interest: what about small countries that import 70% or more of the products the consume? Countries that product exporters, like the US, would see little value in supplying during a future crunch time.

BTW: In 2015 the UK’s reliance on imported oil products reached its highest level in 32 years as rising demand for fuels continued to outstrip what domestic refineries produce.