[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RSFB', 'T')his is getting interesting!

http://www.iea.org/

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')EA Statement on Unauthorised Press Coverage of World Energy Outlook 2008
29 October 2008
The Financial Times carried a cover page article this morning and a second article on page 4 allegedly reporting on the findings of the forthcoming WEO 2008. This article was drafted without any consultation with the IEA. It appears to be based on an early version of a draft from several months ago that was subsequently revised and updated. The numbers in the article can be misleading and should not be quoted or considered to be official IEA results. We are dismayed that such a comprehensive and important IEA report was made public without our input and verification.

The IEA will present the final and accurate results of the World Energy Outlook 2008 officially as planned at a press conference in London on 12 November. At that time, we will be happy to discuss the results and their implications for the global energy and climate in full detail.

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'T')here is a valid reason why Hubert may be off some with regards to the production drop off. Enhanced recovery methods have changed radically since his time so this isn't an indictment of his skills. Many off the mega fields would show a relatively slow decline rate if they were allowed to deplete naturally. Ghawar and Cantarell are two good examples. Water injection at Ghawar began long ago and has maintained a much higher flow rate then would have been seen otherwise. It also contributed significantly to ult recovery. Horizontal redevelopment in the field in the late 90's also aided greatly in maintaining higher production rates. Similarly, nitrogen injection at Cantarell has had the same effect. W/o this pressure maintenance the field would have had a decline profile consistent with expectations learned in Hubert's day.

[galacticsurfer]

Not offset Rockman, either / or, but rather synthesis which is more than sum of parts(an effective marriage couple for example) .

Your broad and long experience in drilling brings you intuition so you are smarter than anyone here when it comes to drilling. I am just trying to counter the prejudice against ancient techniques based on experience but not backed up by logical scientific technique developed since 1800 (perhaps until now with the coming of fractals and chaos theory).

I know Tanada was joking about 2012 but I see serious grounds to believe something is really happening there but correlation or causation is the big question. 2012 and astrology in general as primitive superstition is too easy to dismiss as it does not fit into the box of physics/chemistry, etc.

The ancients were not completely stupid. They had experience. They managed over many thousands of years without computers and did not crash the system (as we are doing now with our linear purely logical "male" concepts). We have to find low tech predictive alternatives which work and find out why they work, even if we do not understand why they work (like with certain medicines, apirin, who cares as long as it works)

I don't want to hijack the thread with maybe off topic stuff as it is very important what the IEA is saying here.

Maybe I should learn to read tea leaves and chicken guts to figure out oil price/stock markets trends. It would be as effective as black scholes theory and all the rest which are getting us nowhere fast in a black swan future.

[seahorse2]

JD wrote:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')aybe "The Dude" or one of the other unemployed web addicts here can explain why their views of the post-peak decline rate hold more authority than the views of Campbell & Laherrere.

[seahorse2]

Mos,

I'm not following your "tin foil" idea. What do you mean?

[RSFB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RSFB', '
')It's funny to watch people discussing astrology while ignoring IEA's statement that this report was just an unapproved old draft.

[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RSFB', 'I')t's funny to watch people discussing astrology while ignoring IEA's statement that this report was just an unapproved old draft.

[MrBean]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('galacticsurfer', '
')I know Tanada was joking about 2012 but I see serious grounds to believe something is really happening there but correlation or causation is the big question. 2012 and astrology in general as primitive superstition is too easy to dismiss as it does not fit into the box of physics/chemistry, etc.

[AirlinePilot]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', 'H')ere we go again. The ever popular doomer favorite, Hubbert's Cliff:





The best argument against cliff-like decline rates for the world is Hubbert theory itself. All large oil producing regions, like continents, exhibit long plateaus and roughly symmetric Hubbert curves. There's no reason to expect the world to be any different. Colin Campbell predicts a post-peak decline rate of 1.8% from 2010 to 2030, and Jean Laherrere predicts a post-peak decline rate of 1% from 2015 to 2040.
Details

AirlinePilot, "The Dude" and other amateurs at this site have a very confused understanding of the different types of decline rates, and constantly confuse them to goose the doom level around here.

Maybe "The Dude" or one of the other unemployed web addicts here can explain why their views of the post-peak decline rate hold more authority than the views of Campbell & Laherrere.

[TheDude]

JD, since you apparently haven't heard: CERA says global 4.5 % decline rate means no near-term peak. So much for that HL 2%. Your clinging to these lowball figures at this point smacks of irrational desperation.

[AirlinePilot]

My guess on this IEA report is that the data leaked is probably really in the report, but since its not taken in the entire context of the whole, it might look really alarming. The report probably has a very smoothing and non alarmist nature to it when taken as a whole. It probably includes a really substantial "feel good" section about the future too. Just my prediction if what they (IEA) are saying about this has any merit at all.

It will be interesting to see what the final document looks like. I do know that there are several folks here and over at TOD who have pointed to this report in the making and basically saying "stand by for incoming".

I find it comical that JD used the term "addict". Pot calling the Kettle black??

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ractals are a new mathematical area but a standard occult method "As above so below". We draw parallels as in fables and fairy tales as well as in astrology. Analogies are much more holistic than sicentific formulas and proofs but math, when it is comprehensive enough can represent reality. However having the intuition to do this is rare. Thisis the integration of the old culture and the modern. A synthesis is necessary so we do not go dwon in flames. Female intuition of the ancients plus male logic(math and science) bring us to a higher level of knowledge so that we might be able to survive the coming difficulties.

[Plantagenet]

The credit crisis and oil price plunge have reduced incentives for BOTH alternative energy and oil field maintainance just as we reach the peak and begin the inevitable decline.

This is another proof of the old adage that "whatever can go wrong, will go wrong."

FT reports IEA projects 9% "natural" decline rate in oil production (i.e. without ongoing massively expensive recovery efforts)

[ROCKMAN]

We’ll take it point by point John:

First, there’s no need to “to show a significant large area (continent etc.) encompassing thousands and thousands of fields”. As most here already know current global production rate is dominated by the mega fields. It matters not what thousands of small oil fields do or not. Given the obvious impact of just the Cantarell decline for Gulf Coast refineries it’s clear we are looking at two different realities.

Second, as far as “Cantarell is pretty much a one-of-a-kind” we are again living in two different worlds. I’ve worked on many gas injection projects (N2…CO2…NG…air). They are just as common as the decline characteristic I described of such recovery operations.

Thirdly, Ali doesn’t disagree with me at all. Your regurgitated statement only describes his opinion that water injection lengthens the life of such water drive reservoirs. Well…dah. Of course it does. That’s why we do it. But you might want to dig up some of his papers on the nature of the near-end decline rates of highly effective water injection programs such as being done at Ghawar. He supports my premise in those works.

And finally, and most importantly, look at your own graph. You clearly show two decline rates, starting in 1971 and 1985, which show a more cliffish drop. In fact, YOUR DECLINE CURVE PROJECTS a production rate 50% less than Hubert’s by the year 2020. Maybe you want to argue about what a “cliff” is and isn’t. Fine…you’re welcome to have that conversation with yourself. You can also work on the question regarding angels on pins heads. I suspect a few years ago you would be arguing that Cantarell wasn't heading for a “cliff”. Funny how cliffs work. By most definitions they’re not very predictable from trends until the trend hits the cliff. Thus they are called cliffs and not slopes.

This isn’t about who’s smarter. This isn’t about who has more impressive titles. This is about science and first hand experience. I’ve only got 33 years of petroleum geology and reserve engineering to guide my opinions as well as associations to some of the smartest folks in the oil patch.

But, hey, you got me on my spelling. Normally I use spell check (geologists are notorious bad spellers). But I was in a hurry. Also, I’m not normally so terse with folks on here but since you feel it’s appropriate to be condescending to other here I figure it’s appropriate.

[Plantagenet]

Matt Simmons presents the case for production falling off a cliff at Ghawar in his book "Twilight in the Desert." His contention is that the extensive use of horizontal drilling and water flood technology means that when the rising oil-water contact produced by ongoing water flooding reaches the current set of production wells-- which are horizontally drilled and so taking in oil within a narrowly restricted zone near the top of the production horizons--that production at Ghawar will drop quickly and dramatically.

The IEA report doesn't even consider nightmare scenarios of that sort...

[Revi]

A 1% decline rate is a nightmare. 7 or 8 % would be a major disaster.

When will we see the decline start?

If it starts in the next few years we are in real trouble.

We can barely deal with slow or no growth. Any kind of a reversal will lead to real financial trouble.

Wait... financial trouble is already happening!

[ROCKMAN]

Come on plant...stop being such an ameture. And who does Simmons think he is anyway? Hell, he probably thinks he's smarter than John.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'C')ome on plant...stop being such an ameture. And who does Simmons think he is anyway? Hell, he probably thinks he's smarter than John.

[ROCKMAN]

Wecomed prase from ametuer to a semi-profeshal. l

[eastbay]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')AirlinePilot, "The Dude" and other amateurs at this site have a very confused understanding of the different types of decline rates, and constantly confuse them to goose the doom level around here.

Maybe "The Dude" or one of the other unemployed web addicts here can explain why their views of the post-peak decline rate hold more authority than the views of Campbell & Laherrere.