[nero]

Thought I would kick off discussion of a thread about this ASPO presentation.

http://www.peakoil.net/iwood2004/pptBer ... perpdf.pdf

My thoughts:

The first seven slides clearly describes factors in reserve growth. And eye balling the figures it looks like the reserves about doubled over 10 years from discovery for the fields described.

The presentation then describes the Arrington aproach to estimating reserve growth. Observing in slide 10 that taking the 77-91 data you could estimate that a fields original reserves might grow by 10 times after 60 years.

This presentation addresses one of the concerns I've always had with the back dating of oil reserves to year of field discovery. That is that the newer data doesn't take into account the reserve growth that has yet to happen for the new field. So on slide 11 it adjusts for the expected growth and shows the discovery trend in the USA.

Then in slide 12 it throws a spanner in the works by saying that the predicted growth really depends on the data set used. The newer data being better than the older data. I think that this could be due to a couple of factors. Technology is getting better at the initial estimate or 2 the companies are depleting their unbooked reserves to keep the financials looking good. (I'm not sure if this is using proved or 2P numbers)

I don't know why the author doesn't update the Attanasi and Root data for the past 13 years. Anybody interested in doing that effort and posting that here (Soft_Landing?)

Slide 13 leads me to think that the unbooked reserves may be a factor in what is show in slide 12 as revisions have decreased in importance in the reserve additions

Slides 14 and 15 show reserves increased much more slowly over the first 20 years for UK and Norway. Doesn't say why though. Could be because the reserves are proved and probable as opposed to just proved. Anyway, it is very interesting. I wonder if the average is the weighted average or not?

Slides 16-20 show how ignoring reserves growth can lead to some missleading forecasts of reserves

Slide 21-22 comes back to the arrington approach to estimating future reserves growth this time for global production. But this time instead of growing by 6 times after 30 years as was shown in US data set the reserves tripled after 30 years. The reason for the difference is unexplained. I would hazard to guess it is a combination of factors, most importantly being different reporting regimes. I wonder a bit how exactly he got the data since (I believe) many countries such as SA don't break down reserve additions to individual fields (at least I wasn't aware that that data was arround). Can anyone correct me on this? Another possible factor is that the data is significantly newer and then would take advantage of the newer imaging technology.

Anyway it shows that the global effort to find oil has probably been much better in the past 20 years than Peak Oilers usually think, and that we are still probably finding a bit more oil than we use, as long as you factor in the predicted reserve growth.


Slides 23-24 repeat the process for global gas production.

All in all I thought this was an excellent presentation and wish I had seen it in person.

[nero]

I hesitate to reply to my own post but I'll add an aditional thought or two.

The data that was used for graphs 21-22 was from IHS Energy(formery petroconsultants) I don't know how well they do at getting data field by field, but I'll guess they probably do the best job of anybody. I looked for anything from IHS to give me an idea of what they are thinking. I came across this presentation from May 2004, that is even more criptic than the BP one.

http://www.ihsenergy.com/company/events/presentations/usgs_resources.pdf

From the fact that he does not mention the Arrington method of estimating reserves growth I'd guess that that was Harper's addition not IHS. The X3 after 30 years reserve growth number that Harper uses is huge. I sure would like to know what Campbell etal. made of that reserve growth factor.

One suprising little tidbit though is slide 3 of this IHS presentation that shows the 1965 water cut was estimated to be 22% and the 2001 water cut was 38%. Do you possibly think this could be a world average water cut. Who could possibly have taken the time to calculate that data.

[DoctorDoom]

I'll have to read over those materials, thanks for posting them. One comment about reserve growth, though: it's dangerous to extrapolate from past growth ratios to new fields. Much of the growth has come from enhanced recovery techniques, as well as better technologies for determining where oil is located and how much there is. The benefits of all this technology are already in the estimates for a new field right from the get-go. This leaves you with (a) better knowledge of the field obtained over time by observing production trends, and (b) future technologies.

[Soft_Landing]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', 'I') don't know why the author doesn't update the Attanasi and Root data for the past 13 years. Anybody interested in doing that effort and posting that here (Soft_Landing?)

[DoctorDoom]

Per Aaron's request, a sticky post with my baseline scenario. Other scenarios gratefully accepted. What we're looking for are models showing production over time, with the production subtracted from reserves so that we can look at the process of the gas tank running dry.

My model still needs some tuning, in particular it behaves badly for the next few years.

The next step, if I can ever get the data, is to add in some data re. alternatives, the main one being coal-to-liquids production, which I'm now convinced is going to start ramping up as the decline sets in.

The step after that is to plug in the consumption, and try to see what policy changes are going to be made (or forced) to deal with the deline without a general collapse.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', '
+----- World ------+ +-- Saudi --+ ME 5
Year Mb/day Gb R/P Heavy R/P Mb/day %world
2004 75.570 1127.9 40.9 0.000 82.7 10.234 28.9%
2005 75.440 1108.9 40.3 0.000 69.8 10.848 30.7%
2006 74.946 1089.7 39.8 0.000 65.1 11.499 32.7%
2007 74.653 1070.2 39.3 0.000 60.7 12.188 34.8%
2008 74.908 1050.2 38.4 0.000 56.5 12.920 36.8%
2009 75.325 1029.6 37.4 0.000 52.5 13.695 38.8%
2010 75.879 1008.5 36.4 1.000 48.8 14.243 40.4%
2011 77.273 987.0 35.0 1.200 46.1 14.812 41.7%
2012 78.073 964.9 33.9 1.440 43.5 15.405 43.4%
2013 78.909 942.3 32.7 1.728 41.0 16.021 45.1%
2014 79.769 919.2 31.6 1.901 38.5 16.342 46.3%
2015 80.241 895.7 30.6 2.091 36.9 16.668 47.7%
2016 80.565 871.9 29.7 2.300 35.3 17.002 49.3%
2017 81.000 847.8 28.7 2.530 33.7 17.342 50.8%
2018 81.497 823.4 27.7 2.783 32.1 17.689 52.0%
2019 81.857 798.7 26.7 3.061 30.6 18.042 53.1%
2020 82.010 773.9 25.9 3.367 29.1 18.042 53.9%
2021 81.899 749.0 25.1 3.704 28.2 18.042 54.9%
2022 81.923 724.0 24.2 4.075 27.2 18.042 55.7%
2023 81.953 699.0 23.4 4.319 26.3 18.042 56.3%
2024 81.771 673.9 22.6 4.578 25.3 18.042 56.9%
2025 81.408 648.9 21.8 4.853 24.4 18.042 57.5%
2026 81.010 624.0 21.1 5.144 23.5 18.042 58.1%
2027 80.698 599.2 20.3 5.453 22.5 18.042 58.7%
2028 80.301 574.5 19.6 5.780 21.6 18.042 59.1%
2029 79.865 550.0 18.9 6.127 20.6 18.042 59.5%
2030 79.335 525.7 18.2 6.494 19.6 17.862 59.6%
2031 78.571 501.6 17.5 6.884 18.9 17.683 60.0%
2032 77.884 477.8 16.8 7.297 18.1 17.507 60.3%
2033 77.273 454.3 16.1 7.338 17.3 17.331 60.5%
2034 76.287 431.1 15.5 7.265 16.5 17.158 61.1%
2035 75.048 408.2 14.9 7.192 15.7 16.987 61.7%
2036 73.680 385.7 14.3 7.120 14.9 16.477 62.0%
2037 71.935 363.6 13.8 7.049 14.3 15.983 62.6%
2038 70.176 342.2 13.4 6.978 13.8 15.503 63.2%
2039 68.439 321.2 12.9 6.909 13.2 15.038 63.8%
2040 66.781 300.8 12.3 6.840 12.6 14.587 64.3%
2041 65.121 280.9 11.8 6.771 12.0 13.405 63.4%
2042 62.395 261.9 11.5 6.703 12.0 12.320 63.5%
2043 59.625 243.8 11.2 6.636 12.0 11.324 63.9%
2044 57.041 226.5 10.9 6.570 12.0 10.409 64.0%
2045 54.508 210.1 10.6 6.504 12.0 9.569 64.3%
2046 52.138 194.5 10.2 6.439 12.0 8.798 63.6%
2047 49.406 179.8 10.0 6.375 12.0 8.090 62.9%
2048 46.584 166.1 9.8 6.311 12.0 7.439 62.7%
2049 43.966 153.2 9.5 6.248 12.0 6.842 61.8%
2050 41.274 141.3 9.4 6.186 12.0 6.293 61.3%
')

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')oes anyone know where I'd get the data from?

EIA publishes production by field each year & year of discovery for each field, however, without reserves for each field, I can't match up reserve adjustments with the source field's year of discovery. EIA publishes reserve amounts and adjustments by state, not by field.

[Pops]

I think Dr’s point shows up on slide 13 with newer fields growing less than old.

On a related topic, I saw the BP quarterly report some time back that had quite a large section entitled “Managing Decline” - that is quite revealing I think.

This presentation goes further in promoting the idea that things aren’t so bad.

There is no doubt more oil will be found, the most pessimistic think we’ve only recovered half of all recoverable.

P.S. I think there is another thread on this topic somewhere.

[Soft_Landing]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Nero', 'I') was looking around the EIA, where is the field by field production data?

[stayathomedad]

quick question, where do you think that production in saudi arabia is coming from? that is a lot they have to pump. just scratching my head over it, but your data, on first look looks a lot like the us government models. so i wonder why there is a discrepancy bteween these models, like aspo vs. regulatory data. do you know? i have been puzzled for a while about this. can you help me, as a matter of fact, all of us understand this.

[pup55]

Happy Graphing!

US-EIA: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/excel/aeotab_21.xls
EE: EnviroEngr per the previous post
Bakhtiari:http://www3.telus.net/public/a6a20277/
ASPO: Aspo website

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'year US-EIA EE Bakhtiari ASPO
2000 75.7 74.0 75.0
2001 76.3 75.5
2002 76.8 77.0
2003 77.9 78.0
2004 79.2 75.6 79.0
2005 80.6 75.4 80.0 84.0
2006 82.0 74.9 81.0
2007 83.5 74.7 80.5
2008 84.8 74.9 80.0 85.0
2009 86.2 75.3 79.0
2010 87.6 75.9 77.5 84.0
2011 89.1 77.3 76.0
2012 90.6 78.1 74.5
2013 92.0 78.9 73.0
2014 93.4 79.8 71.5
2015 95.1 80.2 69.5
2016 96.8 80.6 67.0
2017 98.6 81.0 64.5
2018 100.3 81.5 60.5
2019 102.2 81.9 58.0
2020 104.1 82.0 54.5 65.0
2021 106.1 81.9
2022 108.1 81.9
2023 110.1 82.0
2024 112.4 81.8
2025 81.4
2026 81.0
2027 80.7
2028 80.3
2029 79.9
2030 79.3
2031 78.6
2032 77.9
2033 77.3
2034 76.3
2035 75.0
2036 73.7
2037 71.9
2038 70.2
2039 68.4
2040 66.8
2041 65.1
2042 62.4
2043 59.6
2044 57.0
2045 54.5
2046 52.1
2047 49.4
2048 46.6
2049 44.0
2050 41.3 33.0')

[pup55]

I inadvertently attributed the above forecast to EE rather than Dr. Doom, the rightful forecaster.

Sorry.

[Madpaddy]

I'm a bit stupid

But do those figures show a peak in 2020 and an almost doubling of Saudi output?

Sounds hopeful to me

[Permanently_Baffled]

Why does peak Heavy oil happen so quickly in this model? , even the pessimistic ASPO dont even have heavy oil peaking in 2050!

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('DoctorDoom', 'P')er Aaron's request, a sticky post with my baseline scenario. Other scenarios gratefully accepted. What we're looking for are models showing production over time, with the production subtracted from reserves so that we can look at the process of the gas tank running dry.

My model still needs some tuning, in particular it behaves badly for the next few years.

The next step, if I can ever get the data, is to add in some data re. alternatives, the main one being coal-to-liquids production, which I'm now convinced is going to start ramping up as the decline sets in.

The step after that is to plug in the consumption, and try to see what policy changes are going to be made (or forced) to deal with the deline without a general collapse.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', '
+----- World ------+ +-- Saudi --+ ME 5
Year Mb/day Gb R/P Heavy R/P Mb/day %world
2004 75.570 1127.9 40.9 0.000 82.7 10.234 28.9%
2005 75.440 1108.9 40.3 0.000 69.8 10.848 30.7%
2006 74.946 1089.7 39.8 0.000 65.1 11.499 32.7%
2007 74.653 1070.2 39.3 0.000 60.7 12.188 34.8%
2008 74.908 1050.2 38.4 0.000 56.5 12.920 36.8%
2009 75.325 1029.6 37.4 0.000 52.5 13.695 38.8%
2010 75.879 1008.5 36.4 1.000 48.8 14.243 40.4%
2011 77.273 987.0 35.0 1.200 46.1 14.812 41.7%
2012 78.073 964.9 33.9 1.440 43.5 15.405 43.4%
2013 78.909 942.3 32.7 1.728 41.0 16.021 45.1%
2014 79.769 919.2 31.6 1.901 38.5 16.342 46.3%
2015 80.241 895.7 30.6 2.091 36.9 16.668 47.7%
2016 80.565 871.9 29.7 2.300 35.3 17.002 49.3%
2017 81.000 847.8 28.7 2.530 33.7 17.342 50.8%
2018 81.497 823.4 27.7 2.783 32.1 17.689 52.0%
2019 81.857 798.7 26.7 3.061 30.6 18.042 53.1%
2020 82.010 773.9 25.9 3.367 29.1 18.042 53.9%
2021 81.899 749.0 25.1 3.704 28.2 18.042 54.9%
2022 81.923 724.0 24.2 4.075 27.2 18.042 55.7%
2023 81.953 699.0 23.4 4.319 26.3 18.042 56.3%
2024 81.771 673.9 22.6 4.578 25.3 18.042 56.9%
2025 81.408 648.9 21.8 4.853 24.4 18.042 57.5%
2026 81.010 624.0 21.1 5.144 23.5 18.042 58.1%
2027 80.698 599.2 20.3 5.453 22.5 18.042 58.7%
2028 80.301 574.5 19.6 5.780 21.6 18.042 59.1%
2029 79.865 550.0 18.9 6.127 20.6 18.042 59.5%
2030 79.335 525.7 18.2 6.494 19.6 17.862 59.6%
2031 78.571 501.6 17.5 6.884 18.9 17.683 60.0%
2032 77.884 477.8 16.8 7.297 18.1 17.507 60.3%
2033 77.273 454.3 16.1 7.338 17.3 17.331 60.5%
2034 76.287 431.1 15.5 7.265 16.5 17.158 61.1%
2035 75.048 408.2 14.9 7.192 15.7 16.987 61.7%
2036 73.680 385.7 14.3 7.120 14.9 16.477 62.0%
2037 71.935 363.6 13.8 7.049 14.3 15.983 62.6%
2038 70.176 342.2 13.4 6.978 13.8 15.503 63.2%
2039 68.439 321.2 12.9 6.909 13.2 15.038 63.8%
2040 66.781 300.8 12.3 6.840 12.6 14.587 64.3%
2041 65.121 280.9 11.8 6.771 12.0 13.405 63.4%
2042 62.395 261.9 11.5 6.703 12.0 12.320 63.5%
2043 59.625 243.8 11.2 6.636 12.0 11.324 63.9%
2044 57.041 226.5 10.9 6.570 12.0 10.409 64.0%
2045 54.508 210.1 10.6 6.504 12.0 9.569 64.3%
2046 52.138 194.5 10.2 6.439 12.0 8.798 63.6%
2047 49.406 179.8 10.0 6.375 12.0 8.090 62.9%
2048 46.584 166.1 9.8 6.311 12.0 7.439 62.7%
2049 43.966 153.2 9.5 6.248 12.0 6.842 61.8%
2050 41.274 141.3 9.4 6.186 12.0 6.293 61.3%
')

[Cool Hand Linc]

Perm Baf,


May 2005 ASPO news letter shows

regular oil 2006

Heavy 2021

deepwater 2014

polar 2030

gas liquid 2027

These numbers also include 145 billion barrels of regular oil that have yet to be discovered.

If we keep using 82 million barrels per day. Thats just under 30 billion barrels a year...........

all averaged together 2007

[khebab]

Question: the production numbers seems to be low, are we considering only conventional oil here?

[Cool Hand Linc]

Heavy, deepwater, polar, gas liquid (condensate) are not conventional crude.

The dates I copied from ASPO are for the type listed next to the date.

So the answer to your question is 'no'.

[EnergySpin]

Hi Dr Doom,
which formulas did you use?
SW implementation etc?

[PeakOiler]

Pardon my ignorance, but can anyone tell me where I might download the latest version of ASPO's "All-Peak" spreadsheet?

The version I have has a "Last Modified Date" of January, 2005. ASPO Ireland's website under the "Graphs and Country Profiles" tab relates that new graphs would be available last August.

I am also curious if the data in each ASPO Newsletter's "Country Assesments" tables will be updated, or have been updated elsewhere, and I'm just not looking in the right place.

Thanks in advance.

[Taskforce_Unity]

ASPO doesn't provide detailed data. The latest figures can be found in newsletter 59