Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on October 13, 2013
Peak oil enthusiasts might be giving up too soon
Proponents of peak oil should not capitulate too soon, as the days of oil – like those of horses – are numbered, writes Vincent Kaminski
The closure of The Oil Drum website after eight years – a move announced by the site’s administrators in a blog post on July 3 – is a sad moment for anybody with an interest in energy.
Published by the Colorado-based Institute for the Study of Energy and Our Future, The Oil Drum was a high-quality information aggregation website and discussion forum. It had a limited involvement of trolls and propagandists, was highly professional, and very effectively managed. The bloggers on the website had a strong bias in favour of peak oil theory and the decision to discontinue it may reflect the general demoralisation of this community. That has occurred in view of an incessant onslaught by the cheerleaders of fracking, along with the growing production of natural gas and oil from shale rock formation in the US.
It seems to me that the editors capitulated, like Stephen Hawking, too early.1 Peak oil theory has multiple threads and is not a homogeneous doctrine with a central politburo deciding what the acceptable version of it is. There are, however, two obvious and indisputable points every ‘peak-oiler’ would accept.
[Peak oil theory] is somewhere between the obvious and, hopefully, irrelevant
First, production flows of oil will reach a maximum limit sooner or later. A finite planet cannot support unbounded flows of any resource. What can be debated is when the peak will be reached, what the social and economic consequences will be, and how society will adjust to the inevitable. Daniel Yergin, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author and chairman of IHS Cera, the energy consulting arm of Colorado-based publishing firm IHS, observed in a widely quoted 2011 article that “there will be oil”, given human ingenuity and large remaining reserves. However, it is obvious that there will only be oil up to a point.2
Second, as a society we acquire energy from fossil fuels at a growing cost in terms of the energy required. I occasionally ask students in one of my classes to imagine, if they were a trout, whether they would prefer to dwell in fast moving streams or slow backwaters. There is no simple answer. Fast flowing water transports a lot of food, but that higher supply comes at a cost. A trout uses a lot of energy to stay afloat in a fast current. A smaller, weaker trout would wisely settle for less food, but also less effort.
Some humans may learn something from a trout. What matters is not only what we get, but also at what price. In the early days of the oil industry, the energy return on investment (EROI) was close to 100. One could poke a stick in the ground and oil would flow. Today, oil is produced at an EROI of between 5 and 10 in the Alberta oil sands to satisfy marginal demand. Yes, there is still a lot of cheap oil on the planet, but what matters is the marginal cost. While humans can play games with accounting carried out in monetary units, it is impossible to cheat Mother Nature. The trend towards more expensive traditional sources of energy is unmistakable.
What is my take on peak oil theory? I think it is somewhere between the obvious and, hopefully, irrelevant. This is my analogy: In the late nineteenth century many city planners believed there were natural limits to the size of cities.3 Moving people and goods required horses, and horses produced manure. It took additional horses to remove this manure – a measure that itself only increased the volume of manure. In this theory of ‘peak manure’, something had to give. We all know what happened next, although it stands to reason that one of the solutions proposed at the time was breeding stronger and more manure-efficient horses.
In the past, optimists would have argued that there would always be horses. And there are. In my country, they are used primarily as a source of entertainment for horse race aficionados, as a pastime of sportspeople and to drive nostalgic tourists around New York’s Central Park. What’s more, the horses used to carry tourists around Central Park will one day have to compete with vintage combustion engine cars.
16 Comments on "Peak oil enthusiasts might be giving up too soon"
Airwicky on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 1:48 pm
So this author believes that technology will yet again to get us out of the oil age – sooo stupid
The example of the end of the horse age is hardly comparable of the problem of peak oil.
Ghung on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 2:31 pm
I moved on from peak oil, not because it has become less relevant, but because my understanding of peak oil grew into an understanding of peak overall net energy, net resources and biosphere viability.
While oil is considered the ‘master resource’, peak oil’s relevance can only be accurately viewed in the context of growth versus the ability of the planet to support the behvior of 7 billion humans. All of the oil in the world won’t support current levels of agriculture or finite resource extraction if the other necessary parts of these systems are failing. In an overall systemic decline, substitutes for oil eventually become as irrelevant as oil itself. What’s the point of replacing oil with something else if the goal is the continued enabling of current behavior?
In the horse/automobile metaphor above, what would be the point of replacing horses with cars if the roads can’t be maintained, or there is not much reason for moving people and things from point A to point B?
Arthur on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 4:02 pm
“A finite planet cannot support unbounded flows of any resource.”
Except for solar. An area as small as Spain can replace the entire present day energy needs of the entire planet. Abandon fossil before it abandons us.
EROEI of latest thin film solar cells: 19-38, which is more than enough.
Jerry McManus on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 6:01 pm
@Ghung
Spot on! Thank you.
To this day it never ceases to amaze me that more people in the peak oil debate do not seem to understand that one simple, painfully obvious fact.
Namely that resource depletion in general and oil depletion in particular are just one aspect of the much larger problem of global ecological overshoot.
The eggheads at the Oil Drum being prime examples, routinely sneering at so-called “doomers” for suggesting that maybe, just maybe, it could be possible that overshoot is inevitably followed by collapse. Just as it has done for many civilizations past, so too will it happen now, except on a global scale never seen before.
This in spite of, if not greatly accelerated by moronic but otherwise well meaning efforts to cover Spain in solar panels.
SteveK on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 6:16 pm
Arthur, You’ll mine, transport, fabricate and build out that solar infrastructure using what materials and energy sources? You’ll back up that intermittent solar source with what/produced how?
Arthur on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 6:42 pm
Steve, by gradually replacing the existing energy infrastructure with solar and wind. Intermittent supply filtering out with mass hydro storage in mountain basins.
Ghung on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 8:50 pm
@Arthur: That’s pretty much what I’ve done at our place, with a few caveats –
We essentially started from scratch. All infrastructure on our place was designed and built with resilience and self-sufficiency in mind. We didn’t have to convert infrastructure that was originally completely unsuited to the above goals. We were able to divest from our previous investments and replace them with current ones.
We did it during a period of relative economic stability and abundant availability of resources and materials with little competition for said resources. We also had a unified sense of purpose on a family level while the rest of the world went about its business. A lot of the materials we used were actually discarded by a throw-away society, saving costs and providing a service to those who simply wanted these things to ‘go away’.
We were fortunate to, in part, inherit a fairly remote property that was uniquely suited to our goals in a very moderate climate with abundant rainfall.
Having said that, one may assume that we are smug in our off-grid lair. Far from it. Climate change, social disruption, an inability to pay property taxes as economic systems collapse…. the understanding that ‘no man is an island’,, all mean that we are also reliant upon, and vulnerable to a complex web of external systems that are also in decline. Peak oil is only one thread in a tapestry that is unravelling as we muddle along trying to understand (or deny) the enormity of our overshoot condition.
J-Gav on Sun, 13th Oct 2013 10:26 pm
Good on you, Ghung! Though we must all recognize that no ‘system’ is failsafe, sounds like you’ve got something interesting going.
BillT on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 1:21 am
“Steve, by gradually replacing the existing energy infrastructure with solar and wind. Intermittent supply filtering out with mass hydro storage in mountain basins.”
Artur, you still miss the point. What gets you to those places? Concrete or asphalt roads. What makes those roads and maintains them? Oil energy.
What gets materials to the factories to make those pumps and generators? Machines running on oil. What builds and maintains those factories? Oil energy.
Tech exists as a benefit of the cheap plentiful oil of past years. It will die with the passing of oil as the major energy source.
GregT on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 3:35 am
Welcome Ghung,
I personally look forward to all of your future input here. Cheers!
Arthur on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 9:47 am
“What gets you to those places? Concrete or asphalt roads.”
Not really. The two largest mega-cities in Russia, Moscow and St. Petersburg, are merely connected by a 2*1 lane road. The rest of the country is worse. Yet Russia is fully electrified, A gravel path will be enough to maintain electricity cables between American cities and the Rockies. You are really overdoing your pessimism if you assume that the road system in the US is going to disappear.
“Machines running on oil. What builds and maintains those factories? Oil energy.”
Electricity will do fine as well.
Title article: “Peak oil enthusiasts might be giving up too soon”
The real reason why TheOilDrum gave up was because they understood that their depletion message came at least ten years too early and that Saudi-America sort of is going too happen after all. No army can afford to stay mobilized for ten years without a ‘war’. Unfortunately, one is tempted to say, because it will have grave consequences for the environment and will postpone the inevitable transition.
rockman on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 2:01 pm
“…because they understood that their depletion message came at least ten years too early and that Saudi-America sort of is going to happen after all.”. Not so…they were actually a tad late IMHO. The impact of PO isn’t about reserves, production rates or how much oil the US produces. It’s about how the changing production dynamics are effecting prices and thus our economy. About ten years ago the world economies were paying about $1 trillion per year for the oil it consumed. Today it is spending almost $3 trillion per year for the oil it consumes. And 10 years ago the US was paying other countries $125 billion per year for our oil imports. Today we are importing significantly less oil but paying about $270 billion per year for it. And to that invoice one can add the $trillions of tax dollars and thousands of lives expended by US military efforts to stabilize oil production in the Middle East.
That is the significance of PO IMHO…not depletion or any of the various components of the dynamic. When one tops off their car’s fuel tank they aren’t thinking about the date of PO, increased production from the Eagle Ford Shale, the depletion rate of Ghawar Field, etc., etc. They are thinking about what that tank of gasoline cost them today compared to not too long ago. That’s what PO means to the vast majority of the population.
mike on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 3:32 pm
Uh oh Arthur is back with his solar panels and “renewable” energy. He even has an evangelical message to send us this time “abandon fossil fuels before it abandons us” and may the great lord of science deliver us all to that glowing future of infinite growth with every new born fed and clothed. For sooneth the great lord growth shall fly us into the skies and help us settle new worlds with our culture of goodness and bravery and the. Amen Arthur! Amen Progress!
Arthur on Mon, 14th Oct 2013 4:21 pm
Mike is probably tired of anything that smells of technology and industrial civilization. Back to the Bonanza purity of 1850 it shall be, saddle your horse, you go left, I go right, we cut them them off at the pass, heeehaaa!
mike on Tue, 15th Oct 2013 6:39 am
Mike actually has a technology degree and has been working in the technology business for 15 years. Mike also doesn’t want to return to the 1850s but sadly logic dictates the future will be closer to the 1850s than back to the future 2. You see I’m not going by what I WANT to happen like you are, I am going by the simple facts of entropy which you can read in any ecology 101 book. Renewable energy will be used but not in the way you think it will.
Arthur on Tue, 15th Oct 2013 8:06 am
“Renewable energy will be used but not in the way you think it will.”
This is not how I think renewable energy is going to be used, this is how it IS being used:
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/in-spain-wind-now-electricity-source-1/
deepresource . wordpress . com/2013/10/14/worlds-largest-thermal-solar-plant-online-in-arizona/
More of it.