Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Sci Am says 100 years

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.
Post a reply

Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Pops » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 13:15:45

About ten years ago these clowns convinced me of Peak Oil Pretty Soon, now...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ogether with new discoveries, the increased productivity could make oil last at least another century.

Crap, guess it's back to suburbia!

Double crap, I forgot the link.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby mos6507 » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 13:36:27

The question isn't how long oil will last. It's how long it will remain affordable.

I mean, after all, oil was still available, to a select few, in the world of Mad Max. It was still doom.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby dinopello » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 15:12:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'A')bout ten years ago these clowns convinced me of Peak Oil Pretty Soon, now...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ogether with new discoveries, the increased productivity could make oil last at least another century.

Crap, guess it's back to suburbia!


That's about right assuming symmetric production down to the last drop. 100 years on the upswing and 100 years on the downswing.
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6088
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Urban Village
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby rangerone314 » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 15:14:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'A')bout ten years ago these clowns convinced me of Peak Oil Pretty Soon, now...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ogether with new discoveries, the increased productivity could make oil last at least another century.

Crap, guess it's back to suburbia!

So we'll be at 74,000,000 bbl per day for 100 years, or we'll be down to like 100,000 bbl per day in 100 years?
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby TWilliam » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 15:32:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'T')he question isn't how long oil will last. It's how long it will remain affordable.

I mean, after all, oil was still available, to a select few, in the world of Mad Max. It was still doom.

Shhhhh mos. Quit trying to confuse the public with relevant issues... [smilie=eusa_shhh.gif]
"It means buckle your seatbelt, Dorothy, because Kansas? Is goin' bye-bye... "
User avatar
TWilliam
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2591
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby ian807 » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 16:26:12

Yeah, I read the article. Very hopeful sounding. I hope the facts are as hopeful.

As has been repeated ad nauseum on this board, we're in no danger of running out of oil any time soon. What we will be running out of is oil that is:

1) inexpensive
2) minimally polluting (light sweet crude vs. heavy sulfurous oil)
3) very energy positive (i.e. it takes less energy to get the oil than the oil produces)
4) easily accessible (see item 1)

The new finds are interesting, but lately have tended to be deepwater finds with fields in scattered areas. This is expensive to drill. Moreover, the types and distribution of oil in these finds hasn't been very well assessed yet. All I see is estimated quantities of oil, which, by itself, is meaningless. I don't see either production costs or energy ratios (i.e. how much oil does it take to produce 1 barrel of new oil) for this new oil.

The problem isn't as much energy as it is money and complexity. Right now, our society and the many complex technological tasks needed to keep it functioning depends on inexpensive hydrocarbons. When they get too expensive, things start breaking down. If we don't adapt quickly enough, many folks on planet earth will be getting hungry. If governments will not deal with this effectively, we've got problems. Big ones.

Suppose everyone in Mexico couldn't get their produce to market next year or get fertilizer at a price they could afford. What do you think would happen there? And in the US? And central America?

I hope technology can help us get past this. Unfortunately, innovation doesn't happen on schedule.
User avatar
ian807
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 899
Joined: Mon 03 Nov 2008, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby heroineworshipper » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 17:59:26

Ubuuuba will make sure it either runs out in 3 years through SUV stimulus plans or is not available anymore.
People first, then things, then dollars.
There will be enslavement, cannibalism, & zombie invasions.
User avatar
heroineworshipper
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 890
Joined: Fri 14 Jul 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Calif*
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Pops » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 18:08:11

Sorry I forgot the link.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby yesplease » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 22:21:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'T')he question isn't how long oil will last. It's how long it will remain affordable.

I mean, after all, oil was still available, to a select few, in the world of Mad Max. It was still doom.
What do you consider to be affordable? TOD already had a couple articles on where oil could go and where it was likely to go. For the most part I expect it to stay below $150/bbl because prices that high will cut demand (personal transportation) significantly.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s others have pointed out, energy costs and the oil price are limited by the size of the global economy. For example Francois pointed out that $590 / bbl was the theoretical upper limit for the price of oil and that the practical limit was more likely less than $200 / bbl.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby yesplease » Wed 30 Sep 2009, 22:29:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'A')bout ten years ago these clowns convinced me of Peak Oil Pretty Soon, now...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ogether with new discoveries, the increased productivity could make oil last at least another century.

Crap, guess it's back to suburbia!

Double crap, I forgot the link.
That's the funny thing about reserves. Higher prices tend to reduce demand, so what's available lasts longer, and increase reserves, so now there's more available. What we really need to know is the change in reserves/production wrt the change in price. If oil can go quite high w/o increasing reserves/production then we're effectively at peak in the sense that we'll probably see consistent significant declines in production soon after. If not, then we're still probably on the same bumpy plateau we've been on since ~1970.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Thu 01 Oct 2009, 00:25:39

Since honesty and credibility are not common virtues in the oil industry; the 'answer' as to when HSD's formulaic peak has been reached is unlikely to be detected via his formula. More likely as Orlov and others have been saying the speeding up of demand destruction cycles will be the obvious manifestation of peak. Right now it seems that inertia in the west and eastern growth can be sustained at $70 bl.
How long this will last?
If it were possible to get accurate information from the sources, it might be possible to answer this question.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Blacksmith » Thu 01 Oct 2009, 05:48:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'S')ince honesty and credibility are not common virtues in the oil industry; the 'answer' as to when HSD's formulaic peak has been reached is unlikely to be detected via his formula. More likely as Orlov and others have been saying the speeding up of demand destruction cycles will be the obvious manifestation of peak. Right now it seems that inertia in the west and eastern growth can be sustained at $70 bl.
How long this will last?
If it were possible to get accurate information from the sources, it might be possible to answer this question.



How long will $70 be worth $70?
Employed senior
Blacksmith
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: Sun 13 May 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Athabasca, Alberta
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 01 Oct 2009, 06:50:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'S')ince honesty and credibility are not common virtues in the oil industry; the 'answer' as to when HSD's formulaic peak has been reached is unlikely to be detected via his formula. More likely as Orlov and others have been saying the speeding up of demand destruction cycles will be the obvious manifestation of peak. Right now it seems that inertia in the west and eastern growth can be sustained at $70 bl.
How long this will last?
If it were possible to get accurate information from the sources, it might be possible to answer this question.


The problem with your conclusion is inertia only maintains what already exists, it doesn't grow anything. The entire USA and Canadian economies are based on GROWTH, not a steady state economy, and so even thought they are purportedly shrinking at only a small rate the entire system is in crisis.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby frankthetank » Thu 01 Oct 2009, 15:10:50

OR oil will stay cheap but nobody will have jobs :)


I'd love to know what production will be in a 100 years... I'd guess 10 million barrels a day? more/less? Population will be half or less what it is now...or less.
lawns should be outlawed.
User avatar
frankthetank
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6202
Joined: Thu 16 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Southwest WI
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby drew » Sat 03 Oct 2009, 15:39:37

Back to the original post....
I have a subscription to SA. Been reading it for 20 years now. The article is crap. The author, (by who he is) obviously knows what the definition of PO is but chooses to change the definition and talk about reserves instead.



Drew
User avatar
drew
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Thu 22 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: canada
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby yesplease » Sat 03 Oct 2009, 16:24:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'T')he problem with your conclusion is inertia only maintains what already exists, it doesn't grow anything. The entire USA and Canadian economies are based on GROWTH, not a steady state economy, and so even thought they are purportedly shrinking at only a small rate the entire system is in crisis.
Isn't it closer to the system purportedly being in crisis? As much as it sucks for the unemployed, the great recession is a heck of a lot better than the GD was. I just don't buy the whole economy based on growth lemma. People tend to like growth because it means more stuff, and w/ a growing population, even a steady state economy implies that per capita economic output is dropping, but none of that means our economies can't exist w/o growth. I don't think people would jump for joy, or that elected officials wouldn't promise just about anything, but IRL, people cope w/ a wide variety of conditions w/o seeing TEOTWAWKI.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Pops » Sat 03 Oct 2009, 17:19:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GASMON', 'T')he BP 2009 statistical survey states otherwise. Oil 42 years,

Yea, and it's been 40-something years for 30 years.

Oil use per capita (worldwide) has been virtually flat for 30 years as well.

We keep finding just enough and devising just enough better recovery methods to stay even. Which isn't to say our per capita primary energy use has been flat, in fact its been increasing but an increasing share has been contributed by gas and that other alternative - coal.

You all probably have seen my favorite graph - I updated an Olduvai inspired primary energy per capita comparison...

Image

Natural gas use flattened and coal use began to drop in the early '90s, but then we all got on the global market wagon and needed something to push it along. Surprise, surprise oil couldn't keep up. So we used more and more nat. gas but by the turn of this century gas couldn't keep up so we poured on the coal!

Coal use has increased around 25% in the last 5 years.

That oil is being replaced by coal certainly must tell us something.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Carlhole » Sat 03 Oct 2009, 17:26:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'C')rap, guess it's back to suburbia!


Not back to suburbia.

Onward! Onward! Toward the singularity!
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Sci Am says 100 years

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 03 Oct 2009, 18:59:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'T')he problem with your conclusion is inertia only maintains what already exists, it doesn't grow anything. The entire USA and Canadian economies are based on GROWTH, not a steady state economy, and so even thought they are purportedly shrinking at only a small rate the entire system is in crisis.
Isn't it closer to the system purportedly being in crisis? As much as it sucks for the unemployed, the great recession is a heck of a lot better than the GD was. I just don't buy the whole economy based on growth lemma. People tend to like growth because it means more stuff, and w/ a growing population, even a steady state economy implies that per capita economic output is dropping, but none of that means our economies can't exist w/o growth. I don't think people would jump for joy, or that elected officials wouldn't promise just about anything, but IRL, people cope w/ a wide variety of conditions w/o seeing TEOTWAWKI.


I don't think static output or shrinkage equals no economy, but it certainly equals an economy completely different in its driving forces to the constant growth economy we have been using for the last 125 years or so in the westernized countries.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top
Next
Post a reply

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests



cron