Page added on May 18, 2012
Several articles in the international media in recent months have claimed that worries about peak oil – the peak and decline in yearly world oil production – are unfounded because vast new reserves of unconventional oil are coming on stream. But a closer look at these new sources of oil casts doubt on this assertion.
Data from the US Energy Information Administration show that conventional crude oil production – oil from wells accessed using typical drilling techniques – has been essen- tially flat at around 74-million barrels per day (mbpd) since 2005. Looking at the history of con- ventional crude oil discoveries, this is not surprising – they peaked in the mid-1960s and have been on a declining trend ever since.
Since 2005, all liquid fuels production – which includes natural gas liquids, biofuels, gas-to-liquids and unconventional oil – has been growing much more slowly than in previous decades – at less than 1% a year – while demand in the developing world has burgeoned. The trillion-dollar question is: For how much longer can growth in these unconventional sources of oil offset the declining production from existing conventional fields, estimated by the International Energy Agency to be depleting at about 6.5% each year?
There are three types of unconventional oil resources, namely heavy oil, oil sands and oil shale. Heavy oil, which is mostly located in Venezuela’s Orinoco belt, is denser and more viscous than conventional oil and requires special extraction and refining techniques. Oil or tar sands – the bulk of which is located in Canada’s Alberta province – consist of sandstone impregnated with heavy oil. Oil shale, found predominantly in the western US, is oil trapped in shale rock.
Technically, recoverable resource estimates for unconventional oil vary widely but are generally very large – possibly several times the roughly one- trillion barrels of oil consumed globally to date. But, economically, recoverable reserves are substantially smaller than total geological resources.
The methods involved in extracting oil from unconventional sources are quite different from those used to extract conventional oil. In the case of shale oil, extraction involves similar hydraulic fracturing processes used to extract natural gas from shale. Oil sands production is a massive surface mining opera- tion, followed by extensive use of natural gas to produce synthetic oil.
The hugely capital-intensive nature of these production processes means that marginal production costs – typically estimated at between $80/bl and $100/bl – are much higher than those of conventional oil. As the world shifts increasingly from conventional to unconventional oil sources, the floor under market oil prices will continue to rise.
The higher production costs reflect the most crucial energy variable of all: the energy return on investment (EROI) ratio, which measures the energy delivered by a process relative to the energy required to find, extract and process the energy resource. Experts estimate the EROI for oil shale and oil sands at about 4:1 at best, compared with a global average for conventional oil of about 18:1 today, and nearly 100:1 in the 1930s.
A further downside to unconventional oil is that its environmental impacts are significantly worse than those of regular oil. The freshwater demands are much greater and the carbon dioxide emissions can be up to twice as high for each barrel of oil. Fracking and oil sands production also pollute freshwater sources. These environmental costs are largely externalised, that is, the public pays for it indirectly.
Returning to peak oil – the key issue is the flow rate, that is, how much oil can be brought to market in a given year. There are economic and physical constraints on how much oil can be extracted from low-EROI, high-cost unconventional oil reserves, arising from the highly capital-intensive nature of this business.
Several peer-reviewed articles in academic journals have shown that the depletion of older, conventional-oil fields will soon outpace the gains from new unconventional oil sources. Chris Skrebowski, consultant editor of the UK-based Petroleum Review and director of Peak Oil Con- sulting, maintains a large database of current and forthcoming oil pro- jects. His latest forecast is that global spare oil capacity will be exhausted by 2015. After that, we are looking at a long downhill slide for total world liquid fuel production.
So, while there will be plenty of investment in unconventional oil sources, it will not materially change the peak oil phenomenon – at best, it will delay the date of the global peak of all liquids by a few years. And the switch to unconventional oil is setting a triple-digit floor to international oil prices, thereby putting brakes on global economic growth.
The bottom line is that the peak oil challenge has not gone away. If we do not intentionally wean our civilisation off oil quickly, we face increasingly severe economic shocks as well as intensifying climate destabilisation and environmental degradation as we burn dirtier fuels.
7 Comments on "Scraping the bottom of the barrel"
BillT on Fri, 18th May 2012 2:17 pm
Liquid fuels + 1%/yr.
Depletion minus 6 1/2% per year.
Net minus 5.5% per year.
Rule of 72 says that liquids will equal 1/2 today’s production in 2025. That takes us back to 1965 levels and another 13 years (2038) takes us to 1950 levels. But, the game will end before that. The world cannot continue anywhere near even the 2025 levels.
Kenz300 on Fri, 18th May 2012 2:25 pm
Every country needs to develop a plan to balance its population with its resources, food, water, energy, oil and jobs. Economic security and national security will depend on it. The era of cheap oil is over. What will be the worlds reaction to higher prices and declining supplies?
SOS on Fri, 18th May 2012 3:12 pm
It costs about 4 million to fully developed a fracked well in North Dakota. Most wells are coming in between 2 & 3,000 barrels/day. This oil isnt expensive. Well investment is recovered in under 6 months. Too bad the gas has to be flaired off because of regulations prevent proper shipping and storage.
Cost is added by politics, regulation and taxes. Wages need to be high in the oil patch because high prices are a main factor in building out needed infrastructure including housing, roads, utilities etc.
Another problem is the politics preventing orderly and efficient shipping of the crude and natrual gas. This is also costing each of you in higher prices as producers try and recover these unnecessary but burdensome costs.
The problem in the United States isnt hard to get oil that costs too much, its politics that prevent orderly development of our resources and drive the costs to the end user higher and higher. All of this is a huge factor in the phenomena some call peak oil.
Peak oil is a measure of how politicians are failing you not a measure of any physical shortage.
Rick on Fri, 18th May 2012 3:18 pm
SOS you need some help.
Rollin on Fri, 18th May 2012 4:27 pm
North Dakota Bakken wells are averaging about 142 bbls/day since they fall off very quickly. The total ND Bakken production is 494,001 bbl/day as of Feb 2012. that is about 2.7% of US demand. Even if the Bakken were able to double it’s output (made difficult by the high rate of fall off), if would only achieve about 5% of total demand.
Kerogen deposits are economically and environmentally not feasible as well as an energy sink when compared to alternatives. Utah tar sands are also not feasible.
Time to move in other directions. The energy industry seems to be playing the same old broken record song.
DC on Fri, 18th May 2012 4:30 pm
Gee, and I thought techincally flaring was illegal in the US of Oil SoS? …O but wait..it isnt the LACK of regulations that are preventing(or there enforcement)flareing, its *because* there are regulations that the gas is being flared off. So I guess that must mean..flaring is legal now because the, presumeably previous regulations were somehow stopping the guys at the frak well from capturing it. So…Flare on!?
Confused yet? Join SoS
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/18/us-usa-fracking-emissions-idUSBRE83H0UH20120418
Gee looks like the frakers exempted themselves any requirement to capture flare-gas. Which is even stranger when you consider frak-gas is one step above waste gas itself. So flareing off ‘waste’ gas from well that basically producing waste gas as its primary product….boggling aint it?
BillT on Sat, 19th May 2012 1:16 am
Gotta hurry up that climate change coming to the Us. Let’s flare a few thousand more wells and see how fast it can happen. And there is still some drinkable water left in the Us. Gotta get rid of that too. I wonder if the wealthy think they can eat and drink their money?