Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on July 13, 2014
IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven on peak oil
With the introduction of unconventional oil sources, predicting peak oil has become almost impossible, the executive argues
“The global energy map is quickly being redrawn,” says Maria van der Hoeven, Executive Director of the Paris-based International Energy Agency. “What we are seeing is an oil boom that shows no sign of slowing” she adds.
For energy analysts across the world, the IEA is the premiere source of industry intelligence, producing market reports and events that address all segments of the energy sector. This 360-degree viewpoint, coupled with the agency’s fervent relationships with the world’s biggest energy players, gives its staff unequalled insight into the world’s energy markets.
According to van der Hoeven, global energy demand will increase by around 30% by 2035, with oil contributing to around 27% of total energy usage by this date. While she admits increased use of natural gas will result in a slight fall in oil’s share within the world’s energy mix, this does not imply oil demand will lessen. Indeed, van der Hoeven argues the opposite.
“Will peak oil happen within this decade? No − that’s way too soon. And, it’s not only the concept of peak oil demand that’s premature, but also the view of peak oil supply happening soon. There is so much new technology coming online, which makes any these peaks very difficult to predict. The introduction of unconventional sources − like shale oil and light-tight oil − means oil is more readily available. We have predicted peak oil in the past and have been proved wrong many times,” says van der Hoeven in an interview with France 24.
“Oil demand will definitely increase, particularly in countries like China and India. It’s very important to the development of their economies for them to have oil. By 2035, we expect 60% of the world’s growth in oil demand to come form China alone,” she adds.
Energy efficiency
For van der Hoeven, peak oil is also subject to the deployment of energy efficiency technologies. While these are widespread among transport, buildings and homes in the North America, and are becoming increasingly common in the EU, the rest of the world has some way to go before they are widely used. According to van der Hoeven, more must be done on the part of governments to embrace energy efficiency
“In the IEA’s analysis, the potential is there for a transformative shift in global energy efficiency, which has long been a major failing of energy policy making in many parts of the world. There are some signs that this is rising up the policy agenda, but we’re not on track to take advantage of more than a fraction of the gains that are on offer.”
“If these were realised, you would halve the growth in energy demand. This would take almost 13 million barrels a day off projected oil consumption in 2035, and almost 700 billion cubic metres off gas demand,” she asserts.
Global oil flows
Van der Hoeven claims the US’s rise in oil production, coupled with its energy efficiency measures, will result in the reorientation of global oil flows. The world will witness a rapid decrease in US-crude imports over the next two decades, with exports to Asia set to soar. In addition, the IEA predicts that by 2035 the EU, China and India will depend on imports for more than 80% of their oil needs.
“Bringing the oil and gas picture together, it is striking to see the different trends that we observe among major importing countries. Even where we see a spread of unconventional oil and gas production, most major importing countries and regions become more dependent on oil and gas imports over the period to 2035,” she says.
“In addition, if we look at the implications for future exports from the Middle East, you see how oil trade is increasingly pulled east; towards China – which becomes by far the largest oil-importing country – and India. It is not difficult to imagine how these changes could re-shape the geopolitics of energy over the coming decades.”
According to the IEA, the US will be the world’s leading oil producer by 2020 – a feat unimaginable a few years ago. But, as van der Hoeven highlights, this may not be the case beyond this date.
“The US is a winner for the time being, as it experiences a rebound from their production efforts a few years ago. We saw a significant rise in oil and gas production in the US some decades ago, but then it fell into decline. The question is therefore how will US oil production fair post 2020? The IEA believes it will once again retract. But today, not only is the US a winner but it is also a first-mover, and that’s very important in today’s energy markets.”
Peak oil is concept that has been around for some time. And, as van der Hoeven points out, it is something energy analysts continue to inaccurately predict. The IEA claims neither oil demand nor oil supply will peak prior to 2035, due to the burgeoning economies of Asia and other emerging markets. Yet, a key influencer on future energy use will be energy efficiency technologies, which van der Hoeven claims will transform the world’s energy markets and bring future prosperity to all.
“Increased action to improve energy efficiency would pay handsome dividends by improving energy security, boosting economic growth and helping to tackle climate change,” she adds.
“The world needs to dramatically improve its efficiency and prepare tomorrow’s infrastructure so that other technologies can soon come to market on mass-scale,” van der Hoeven concludes.
32 Comments on "IEA Executive Director Maria van der Hoeven on peak oil"
Davy on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 4:50 pm
Standard Cornucopian talk of happy days and all is well. Don’t worry be joyful.
nemteck on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 5:11 pm
Her credentials say it all: From Wikipedia:
From 1969 she taught at home economics schools and from 1971 at a junior secondary commercial school, where she later became a school counsellor. Until 1987 she was head of the Adult Commercial Vocational Training Centre in Maastricht….
From 1985 to 1991 Van der Hoeven was a member of the municipal council of Maastricht. From 1991 to 2002, Member of the House of Representatives. Minister of Education, Culture and Science from 2002 to 2007 and Minister of Economic Affairs from 2007 to 2010. She has held a variety of social and cultural posts, including membership of the governing board of the Domstad Primary Teacher Training College in Utrecht and the Southern Dutch Opera Association….”
Contradiction:
On one hand: “…. a rapid decrease in US-crude imports over the NEXT TWO decades…”
On the other hand: “… US will be the world’s leading oil producer by 2020 but this may not be the case BEYOND this date.
So, from 2020 to 2030 the US decreases imports but at the same time the US oil production will decrease.
Pveroi on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 5:31 pm
She belongs in magazines in my opinion. I don’t do internet shopping.
GregT on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 6:58 pm
This article is a complete load of crap.
CBC News Posted: Jun 03, 2014 11:34 AM ET
“The days of cheap energy are over and it will take increased investment in electricity sources, oil and gas to meet world energy demands, according to the International Energy Agency.”
“The IEA’s annual outlook on investment, released today, shows annual investment in new fuel and electricity supply has more than doubled in real terms since 2000. Costs to the oil and gas industry also have doubled in that period and the IEA warns of “gradual depletion of the most accessible reserves.””
“The IEA estimates $48 trillion US in investment will be needed by 2035 to meet world demand for energy, a 25 per cent increase per year from what is currently invested.
More than half that investment is needed just to keep the energy supply at current levels.”
“even more investment will be needed if the world wants to combat climate change, says Maria van der Hoeven, executive director of the IEA.”
“The IEA warns that $53 trillion in cumulative investment in energy supply and in energy efficiency is required by 2035 to reduce emissions to the point where the globe warms by just 2 C.”
“But the IEA, an independent agency that attempts to ensure reliable, affordable and clean energy, is forecasting a decline in production at existing oil and gas fields.
By 2020, it estimates non-OPEC oil reserves will be diminishing and the world will again be dependent on the Middle East for continued use of oil, a risk unless investment in OPEC oil fields picks up to meet demand.”
GregT on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 7:00 pm
Link here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/days-of-cheap-energy-over-iea-figures-show-1.2663195
GregT on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 7:10 pm
Maria van der Hoeven
The Guardian, Tuesday 24 April 2012 22.50 BST
“The world’s energy system is being pushed to breaking point, and our addiction to fossil fuels grows stronger each year. Many clean energy technologies are available, but they are not being deployed quickly enough to avert potentially disastrous consequences.”
“Vehicle fuel-efficiency improvement is slow in many countries, and manufacturers’ sales projections for electric vehicles after 2014 are a fraction of government targets. Carbon capture and storage is not seeing the rate of investment needed to develop full-scale demonstration projects. In addition, half of new electricity demand has been met by coal; and to make things more challenging, 50% of those new coal-fired power plants are still being built with inefficient technology. All these trends are going in the wrong direction.”
“The ministers meeting this week have an incredible opportunity before them. It is my hope that they heed our warning of slow progress and act to seize the security, economic and environmental benefits clean energy transition can bring.”
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/24/we-can-have-safe-sustainable-energy
paulo1 on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 7:36 pm
I taught carpentry and other subjects for 17 years. During this time I flew bush planes and built all kinds of ‘stuff’…apartments to dams over a 40 year career. If a home-ec teacher can work at the IEA, I should be able to fly fighter jets and finally get that surgeon ticket. Right? Right? JEESH.
It says everything we need to know about the IEA, doesn’t it?
Paulo
Davy on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 7:56 pm
Paulo, she is probably good at polishing knobs. That can get you a long ways in a boys world.
Calhoun on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 8:26 pm
Paulo, you don’t have to demean her that way. The fact that she was chosen to head IEA, with no qualifications, says all we need to know about that organization. She was selected for a reason, and probably her lack of background was considered a plus. IEA is a sham so who better to head it than a sham leader?
Bones on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 8:26 pm
There are three sexes is this world. Males. Females and school teachers.
JuanP on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 8:54 pm
The only prerequisite to becoming an IEA director is knowing how to memorize and repeat any talking points they give her. Being a servile puppet is all that’s needed for this position and she seems qualified to do that. Isn’t BAU beautiful?
Tiny Radioactive Tree on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 9:19 pm
Dear Maria van der Hoeven.
Jevons paradox is the proposition that as technology progresses, the increase in efficiency with which a resource is used tends to increase (rather than decrease) the rate of consumption of that resource.
Since the Industrial revolution we have been “improving” energy efficiency. However never will any energy efficiency technology will reduce the amount of energy consumption. On the contrary, energy efficiency will boost the profitability of that energy use and cause it to mass used that will result in an increase in demand.
There is no supply left, of cheap oil, to increase current production dramatically!
rockman on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 10:30 pm
And one last thought: I’m always willing to review anyone’s future energy projections. Oil prices rose which allowed us to exploit known hydrocarbon deposits using exiting technology. And that dynamic could continue for some period of time. Where everyone of these offerings fail is not documenting the specifics. Every geologic trend that has ever been developed since the beginning of the oil age has followed the same life cycle: discovery and development until that trend reaches it’s geologic limit. I’ve yet to see any predictor of continuous oil develop post a single map highlighting those future drill sites. One cannot plot the production curve of any oil/NG trend and carry it forward indefinitely. That has never and will never happen.
I would be very glad to accept any optimistic project of future oil production: all I need to see is the reservoir geology that supports. Just saying it’s going to happen doesn’t do it.
Nony on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 10:48 pm
Rock:
If it’s just a simple matter of price allowing more supply to come in (and I actually agree that is a lot of what is happening), why didn’t the Campbell, Deffeyes, Ace types recognize it? If the potential of the Bakken/EF was so known, why didn’t they talk about how it would come in (rather than tar sands). And why did Picollo and Rune underestimate the Bakken even as we were in the high price regime?
Also, even though a lot of what is going on with oil is just price enabled production, that does not seem same with gas. We’ve had large growth in production and price has been below $5 for last 4 years. Heck, it’s at 4.16 now. The Marcellus really does seem pretty transformative. And able to produce at these low prices (they bring in huge wells). I read some stuff from you from 2010 about how gas prices would need to rise for production to continue, but that has not been born out. Just because you had to stop drilling…other plays did not. Especially the Marcellus. Basically the MArcellyus squeezed you out. And the Haynesville…and Canada. (Not totally but in that direction.)
Nony on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 10:48 pm
Rock:
If it’s just a simple matter of price allowing more supply to come in (and I actually agree that is a lot of what is happening), why didn’t the Campbell, Deffeyes, Ace types recognize it? If the potential of the Bakken/EF was so known, why didn’t they talk about how it would come in (rather than tar sands). And why did Picollo and Rune underestimate the Bakken even as we were in the high price regime?
Also, even though a lot of what is going on with oil is just price enabled production, that does not seem same with gas. We’ve had large growth in production and price has been below $5 for last 4 years. Heck, it’s at 4.16 now. The Marcellus really does seem pretty transformative. And able to produce at these low prices (they bring in huge wells). I read some stuff from you from 2010 about how gas prices would need to rise for production to continue, but that has not been born out. Just because you had to stop drilling…other plays did not. Especially the Marcellus. Basically the MArcellyus squeezed you out. And the Haynesville…and Canada. (Not totally but in that direction.)
Nony on Sun, 13th Jul 2014 10:51 pm
Ok, we’re not at $2. But we sure aren’t at the 7-8 that both you and Art Berman talked about in 2010. And it’s been a while. And the gas keeps growing. And some pretty expensive infrastructure is being constructed.
Seems like you were wrong about gas.
synapsid on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 12:27 am
Nony,
If memory serves, the Marcellus is being drilled for wet gas, not dry, and it’s the liquids supporting the gas production. I don’t know if there’s any drilling for dry gas; I believe not.
Someone confirm or correct?
Nony on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 12:44 am
There is more dry gas than wet gas production.
https://medium.com/@masoninman/is-the-marcellus-all-wet-now-224ddd5f8833
Arthur on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 2:45 am
To be fair to Maria van der Hoeven… I know here from Dutch politics and she is one of the saner figures. As Greg shows with his 2012 link, vdHoeven thought like I did two years ago that peak oil was immanent. But we were all caught by surprise by the fracking developments since. She is realistic when she says that the US will be past peak production as early as 2020; that’s only six years from now. But how many Bakkens are there around, scattered all over the planet, waiting to be exploited? If we should exploit is a different matter altogether, but the potential could very well be there. She is consistently broadcasting the message that we should move into renewables NOW, as Gregs link illustrates. And yes, her professional credentials don’t match very well with here current occupation of oil barrel bean counter, but she merely parrots what the professionals of the IEA come up with. Peak oil 2035 is alarming enough.
meld on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 4:17 am
This ends one way unfortunately. The rich suck the money from the poor like the leaches they are, this capital is used to support their habit for fossil fuels even at ever increasing prices. Kind of like a drug user stealing from his family, this goes on until a breaking point is reached and the family simply disown the druggy. The druggy is then eventually found in a bin somewhere. The family are destitute as their son took all the family silver and they now etch out a subsitence life. Now when this is going to happen is the only thing up for debate,could be next week, could be in a century.
GregT on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 8:38 am
In other news, the Pacific Northwest is experiencing a heat wave. Temperatures 8 to 10 degrees C above historical averages. All time record highs are being broken…….again.
In the mean time, the debate still rages over how much more oil, coal, and natural gas we have left to burn, and how much more CO2 we can release into the environment.
If there truly is any intelligent life on this planet, it is doing a piss-poor job of exposing itself.
Northwest Resident on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 9:45 am
GregT — No kidding! It has been hotter than hell down here around Portland Oregon metro area. It was supposed to be another 90+ degree day yesterday but the cloud cover rolled in and kept it cooler for a change. But they’re predicting nearly 100 degrees today and higher than that tomorrow — as usual, there is a 50/50 chance they’ll be right or wrong, but still, I can’t remember the last time we had a “heat wave” that lasted this long.
On the plus side, the corn and beans and tomatoes and peppers are growing like crazy — I just have to water them daily. On the down side, the wheat is getting heat stressed to the max and some of the heads are turning white — basically, dying.
I get the uneasy feeling that heat waves and other weather extremes are going to become much more common, not just in Pacific Northwest but everywhere else too. What happens if suddenly the weather around here turns unseasonably cool and rainy next month. I won’t be the only “farmer” totally screwed, that is for sure.
Arthur on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 10:09 am
Message from Holland to Oregon: please send us 3 degrees Celcius, so we can finally have a little bit of summer!
GregT on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 2:18 pm
NWR,
My extended family on my Mom’s side are farmers in Manitoba. It has been so unseasonably cold and wet that they haven’t even got their crops in. It is now at the point that they aren’t even going to bother as they wouldn’t be ready to harvest until after the first frost sets in.
Food is going to be a major problem in the not so distant future.
Northwest Resident on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 2:54 pm
Arthur — I don’t dare do that. Might piss of Mother Nature, who clearly intended for Holland to suffer cold and damp summers.
GregT — It is the marginal areas I think — both north and south — that are initially going to get the hardest hit by the wild and whacky climate change variations. When was the last time your extended relatives weren’t able to plant due to unseasonably cold and wet, I wonder? Did it ever happen before, or is this the first time? In any case, that sucks. At least there is a lot of unspoiled nature — deer, elk, fish, etc… — that they can survive on up there. Here just 20 miles or so outside of the Portland metro area, if we get awful weather that ruins harvests, there isn’t much left to subsist on. Dandelions maybe — my lowlife neighbor has a great crop of those growing… Thank God for tall fences.
synapsid on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 6:28 pm
Nony,
The article at your link isn’t about production.
It does refer to “companies’ strategies of going for liquids.”
Nony on Mon, 14th Jul 2014 7:11 pm
Read the whole thing.
GregT on Tue, 15th Jul 2014 12:18 am
“Read the whole thing.”
OR, read between the lines. We are going to completely ‘EF’ up what is left of our life support systems. For maybe a couple of decades more BAU.
steve on Tue, 15th Jul 2014 12:33 am
Well wait a minute Arthur has a great point and I have not seen anything to counter that point……If peak oil is not till 2035 that is far enough away to put people back to sleep……on this issue….wake them up in 15 years….
Arthur on Tue, 15th Jul 2014 3:22 am
Steve is joking of course, we should use what is left of the fossil reserves to set up a new energy base ***NOW***.
Danlxyz on Tue, 15th Jul 2014 8:29 am
So, in 2035 (about 20 years from now) global energy demand will grow about 30%. That comes out to 1.5% per year. Since GDP and energy use are closely aligned then the economy wont be growing by more than 1.5% or 1.6% per year either. That is pretty slow. Not a robust economy.
I think I see why increased efficiencies will be so necessary. Otherwise she is predicting a 20 year recession.
Davy on Tue, 15th Jul 2014 8:39 am
Dan, diminishing returns are affecting efficiency efforts especially with the costs of most everything rising rapidly. In fact many things are rising much faster than the energy itself these folks are trying to save on.