[nero]

oil_rocks,

The more you write the clearer it is you don't know very much about the topic. I don't mean to be harsh, not knowing much about a topic isn't a cause for embarassement. Not knowing that you don't know much about a topic while a bit embarassing, happens to everyone once in a while. It's on the scale of having your fly open at a social gathering. A bit embarassing but hopefully your buddy will come along and whisper in your ear to examen your zipper.

so in that spirit: "psst, XYZ, your ignorance is showing"

[thuja]

Hey I'm sorry you guys. I've read all the research by those so called "Petroleum Geologists", and studied all the graphs by the "experts", and I used to agree with them. But after reading what Oil Rocks has to say, I now know I was completely deluded. Oil will last at least half a millenium more and we have nothing to worry about.

I thought I was fully prepared with my 20 bottles of extra water...but I'm throwing them out! All you doomsday types are all alike. But I'll be driving my Hummer into the next century while you all whine about Armageddon.

Oil Rocks...You rock!

[KhanCEO]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '
')3) The theory assumes we are drilling it as fast as we can. The entire oil crisis theory is based on the idea that a lack of oil will force us to slow down production, as if every oil well it simply pumping out at 100% and we just sit and hope we don't run out. The reality is that OPEC and other companies routinely cut back their output for various reasons. They are no where near 100% output.

[mekrob]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')The saudi oil fields contain 261.9 B barrels of oil. They are currently extracting at a rate of 3.6 B barrels per year. If i have done my math right, then that would be about 72 years before that field runs dry. If you add in other known, but not tapped reserves (canada, alaska, russia, gulf of mexico, pacific ocean etc) we could probably get another 50 years of oil. Now lets add in unknown oil deposits that will inevidably be found over the next 50 years. Plus lets add in the fact that new technology developed over the next 50 years will likely make extremely deep drilling possible at a relatively low price. We are now up to about 220 years.

[JPL]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '
')you are joking right? this made me laugh when i read it. exactly what preparations have you made? stored some bottled water? Your thoery predicts arrageddon and a total end to the human race. what preparations could you possibly do for that.

The reality is... even if you guys are right about running out of oil. we are still talking 200, 300 maybe even 1000 years from now. I don't see what you are doing today to prepare for a disaster that will happen hundreds of year from now. perhaps you can list some of these things you are doing? I may want to join you.

[oil_rocks]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')hen they would last about 8 years, not 72

[dbruning]

Just wanted to offer a pat on the back to those that showed such incredible restaint in their replies. Good Job!

Just making sure I got the facts straight.

Unlimited oil as long as we drill deeper.
And 700 years or so before we run out?

Why not "drill deeper"?

I think what we have here is a fundamental difference of opinion.

You are entitled to yours naturally.

But I will respectfully disagree.

[Ancien_Opus]

Drill deeper! Deep does not equal more oil.

The closer you get to the mantle the higher the temperature. This is why natural gas deposits are found deep but seldom oil. Oil is broken down to its most simple molecular components under heat and pressure ending up as natural gas.

[firestarter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '
')actually saudi supplies 25% of the owrlds oil, so i do have my facts right

[Eddie_lomax]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he more likely reason is that the sludge they are pumping isn't selling

[gego]

If during the early years of production in Saudi Arabia one would have taken the reserves and divided by the then annual production rate the results would have told you that you had a huge number of years of oil left at that production rate; I don't know what the answer would have been, but maybe it was 1,000 years or more before it would run out at that rate.

But the rate of production did not stay constant; it increased; it increased in a pattern. Hubbert, being an oil insider, had access to the data and studied it for US production. He came to the conclusion that oil fields had a life cycle; production started off slowly, increased, peaked, and then declined in a gaussian curve. So your assumption that there are 72 years of oil left in SA does not match what is known about oil production; the rate of production will change. The reality is more complex than your simple calculation. Hubbert's curve has been repeatedly been confirmed by actual in field experience.

As to your assertion that we will find more fields, drill deeper and pump faster does not match reality either. The pattern of discoveries is one of diminishing discoveries. All the easy big fields were discovered first because they were big and easy to find. Look at the historic record.

You completely do not understand the separate EROEI curve, which even without peak oil will result in the end of oil production long before all the oil in the ground is pumped. At some point the 3.5% rate of growth in the energy cost of obtaining oil will make it impossible to extract; the estimated date where it takes more oil investment than the that returned is about 2050, but we will never get there because as we approach 1:1 the industrial system will fail from the increasing costs.

You also do not understand what technology is. It is knowledge applied to resources. Technology may help here and there to the extent it can be used to save resources, but this is not what history shows that technology does. Technology has a history of using resources faster, not saving them. Look at the rate of resource use that technology has brought us over the last 400 years. It is not magic and cannot defy the laws of nature.

Finally, you assert that new forms of energy will substituted for oil. If you know of one, then you need to get to the patent office quickly, because everything known today is inadequate to replace oil and prevent the consequences of less oil available to us.

[jeezlouise]

...Still patiently waiting for an answer to a very simple question:

why does the US have to import two thirds of the oil it needs?

If you can't answer this, your whole argument falls flat. I mean, why didn't the Texans just drill deeper? Why didn't the market provide the technology to keep production rates going up and up? Why buy the majority of your oil when you should be able to just pump it? As far as I know, people who pump oil like to pump oil. If they could have pumped more than in 1970, they would have, but they couldn't, so they didn't.

Are you trying to tell us that every country that produces oil has either peaked or will peak in the future, and yet the world production rate will never peak? What kind of sense does that make?

Oh yeah... none.

[mekrob]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'a')ctually saudi supplies 25% of the owrlds o

[mekrob]

Do you know that OPEC's reserves are not backed up by research done by 3rd parties? What that means is that they say what their reserves are and thus they are able to pump what they want. For instance, in the mid '80's, each OPEC nation overnight raised their "proven" reserves by hundreds of billions of barrels. Saudi Arabia alone raised their reserves from 160 billion to 260 billion barrels in one night. Not a single oil field was found. Not a single one during those announcements. You don't find hundreds of billions of barrels appearing out of thin air a bit suspicious?

[JPL]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '
')and i fully understand the different between running out of oil and reaching "peak rate". My only point is that if you look at the facts, and look at them with a realistic mind, you will realize that the impending disaster is not so impending. But that's not as much to talk about, is it??

[Windmills]

oil_rocks,

The fact that you listed hydrogen as an energy source is making you a laughing stock. It tells everyone who knows better that you've only paid superficial attention to hydrogen information. It also screams loudly that you don't even understand the differences between energy sinks, sources, and carriers. Perhaps you have done a bit of reading, but it's completely obvious that you haven't understood most of what you've read. The longer you claim hydrogen to be an energy source, the longer you'll be walking around with a dunce cap and a "kick me" sign taped to your back.

I think that you making everyone laugh by your profound ignorance is probably the main reason anyone is even bothering to waste their time posting responses to your laughably uninformed scribblings. Your ideas are providing some needed comic relief around here. Please do keep posting. Every court needs its twisted idiot jester. Just remember, though, we aren't laughing with you, we are laughing at you.

[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', 'a')ctually saudi supplies 25% of the owrlds oil

[denverdave]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('oil_rocks', '
')and i fully understand the different between running out of oil and reaching "peak rate".

[clueless]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')i all,
I have read quite a bit about the peak oil theory have found it to be highly flawed in many regards. Its an interesting theory, but the truth is, it simply isn't based on facts, but instead politics.

People who believe in this theory basically see oil extraction as a giant Easter egg hunt and that some day we will wake up to realize all the Easter eggs have all been found. Here are my problems with this method of thinking. perhaps someone can help shed some light on it:

Fatal flaws in the peak oil crisis theory: ................