[VMarcHart]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', 'H')mm, the title in that graph in the original is "AS NOVAS OFERTAS ANUNCIADAS AINDA NÃO ATENDEM A DEMANDA NO LONGO PRAZO," Ace has neatly translated that into "NEW ANNOUNCED PRODUCTION IS YET TO MEET LONG TERM DEMAND" but when I feed it into Google Translator I get "NEW OFFERS ANNOUNCED YET MEET THE DEMAND IN THE LONG RUN."

[TheDude]

Thanks VMarc. I really doubt Tony would fudge on the Portuguese since one of the TOD staff members, <a href="http://www.theoildrum.com/user/Luis%20de%20Sousa">Luís de Sousa</a>, lives in Lisbon.

[VMarcHart]

Dude, I forgot to mention I woke up with a serious case of the splitting hairs. Yet, still, offers, supplies ... the juice is drying whether in Portuguese, English, or Malasian.

[JustaGirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Googolplex', 'I')'m surprised nobody pointed this out, but according to the chart, although production shows a peak in 2010, what we actually think of as "peak oil" looks to be in the 2013 time frame. Currently, we are in a large artificial dip in oil demand do to the recession, and the chart reflects that, so regardless of production peak, demand does not actually outstrip supply until several years later. That's when all the "peak oil" stuff will actually happen.

In short: looks like 2013 is the year to fear, not 2010. According to that chart anyway.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JustaGirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Googolplex', '
')In short: looks like 2013 is the year to fear, not 2010. According to that chart anyway.

[lper100km]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eastbay', 'T')he chart seems clear and easy to understand. I hope I have this right:

The lines on the chart heading up into the upper right indicate differing Petrobras estimates of worldwide demand. The cliff colored yellow/orange shows what the world can expect from supply.

Is there something else to read from this chart?

[JustaGirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')
The economy wasn't supposed to survive peak oil in 2005, let alone a couple of them in sequence. I have my doubts about any peak oil prognostications at this point, so doubts about any economic effects related to it strikes me as completely reasonable as well. Our last decent global peak oil involved a double dipper recession here in the US, it isn't unreasonable to expect another.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JustaGirl', '
')Short, my opinion has nothing to do with peak oil. It has to do with our very unsound banking system and the fact that our gov has spent trillions trying to fix it. I read a report earlier about China losing over a trillion yen so things are turning sour there as well. How long can they continue to purchase our debt? Now if we do have oil shortages and prices shoot to the moon again... well

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')Err, didn't the IEA say that 7% field decline was now, rather than since 2005?

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')Err, didn't the IEA say that 7% field decline was now, rather than since 2005?

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')Err, didn't the IEA say that 7% field decline was now, rather than since 2005?

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')It depends on what you mean by evidence.

Certainly Prudhoe and East Texas started declining long ago, Cantarell has been at it for years now, the US as a whole did it for decades, the EIA says that PADD 1 was declining quite a bit more than that back in the 80's, PADD2 since 1985, PADD3 and 4 the same, PADD5 since 1987 or so.

Sometimes these areas are clipping along much worse than 7%. It would stun me silly if the IEA didn't notice this prior to 2005, its been going on as long as there have been oilfields in existence.

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'I') have already provided pertinent examples to declines prior to 2005. I would also mention that the forecasting methods contained within the ASPO/Thesis work provided uses a method which assumes consistent decline rates with respect to time. Figure 4.5 for example. Such forecasting methods explicitly assume that past behavior forecasts future behavior. So a 7% decline in 2008 ( or whichever year the IEA suddenly decided to notice such declines ) is completely reasonable to have existed earlier in the cycle of what you obviously know are already old fields, with well established decline profiles.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', 'I')'m sorry, but examples don't give a global view, and extrapolating backwards for production decline using the same figures for decline is, ahem, wrongheaded. Please back up your assertion

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'S')adly, if multiple single field examples, multiple region examples in mature areas, and the predictive methods used by the ASPO secretary himself are not sufficient, then I have no other information to offer in my defense. PS: I found this interesting blurb. --snip--
Since you don't like the angle that we have needed 3 just in the past 5 years, are you able to show how many of the 11 that a 6% decline means we had to have found since 1977 have joined OPEC?

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')I'm merely asking you to ratify your assertion that we have been through a seven percent decline in production of existing fields for every year since 2005. Jimmy Carter is just a tad irrelevant.

[davep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'N')ot quite because at its heart its the exact same problem. Jimmy said the worlds fields were declining 6% a year in 1977. --snip--AT 6%, the drop from 85 M/d was to 62 M/d, for a loss of 23 M/d in 5 years. Call it 2 and 1/4 Saudi Arabia's. Have those shown up anywhere in OPEC?

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', 'I')'m just asking you to back up the statement: $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')t 7% field decline, we've already found some 26 MBO/Day since 2005, adding perhaps 3 new Saudi Arabia's in just the last 5 years

[JustaGirl]

If you look at the wiki oil megaprojects, new production has averaged around 3 mbpd(give or take), since 2002. Since we have been on a plateau since '05 there has definitely been significant decline since then. So short is absolutely correct when he says we have managed to add a new Saudi every 3 years or so.

I understand what you're saying Short, I don't understand the argument going on. The problem is not necessarily the decline rate, the problem is when new production can no longer offset that decline.

[rangerone314]

Its Monday, do we have a definitive agreement YET on what the Petrobras CEO actually said?