Oil Crisis

Status
Not open for further replies.
Abiotic. Methane is a common constituent of the GMCs (Giant Molecular Clouds). Given the universal abundance of hydrogen and carbon, and the stability of methane, this is hardly surprising. The solar system was formed from part of a GMC and thus was richly provided with many organic molecules. (Over one hundred types have been identified in the GMCs to date.)
 
Thanks Ophi, could one speculate that the same effect is taking place beneath earth? I suppose so, but I'm no geologist. What I do understand though is our inability to yet confirm whether oil be entirely fossil origin or a bit of both. I worked many years in the oil fields, and the only way to find oil was with fossil evidence, I never knew of abiotic oil, but do to lack of knowledge I don't completely disregard it's existence, though if there's such a thing as abiotic oil I know that it would take thousands of years to form to a commercial used product. So the point is we are using far more than abiotic/fossil oil then we can extract from beneath the earth. As I understand it there's plenty of oil to last a hundred years or more, however it's extraction on deeper depths is more expensive, making it a current market value worthless of efforts to retrieve it.
 
As I understand it there's plenty of oil to last a hundred years or more,

Well, you understand it wrong. Obviously... :(

If you divide the known estimated reserves (a highly inflated number for geo-political and business reasons) and divide it with today's demand (a number that would surely grow, if there was aviable oil) you get 40+ years...

That's it. Not hundreds of years and other bullshit. Go, do your research on the internet and come back to report what you have found...

Of course if you knew business you could understand that problems arise MUCH earlier than the last drop of oil extracted. Once we reach the top of the curve, there is no shoe-in capacity (a term you should know) left and there is decreasing supply to an increasing demand>>> higher prices and search for and switch to alternate energy resources....

End of story... It is actually quite simple to understand...
 
If you divide the known estimated reserves (a highly inflated number for geo-political and business reasons) and divide it with today's demand (a number that would surely grow, if there was aviable oil) you get 40+ years...
...Of course if you knew business you could understand that problems arise MUCH earlier than the last drop of oil extracted. Once we reach the top of the curve, there is no shoe-in capacity (a term you should know) left and there is decreasing supply to an increasing demand>>> higher prices and search for and switch to alternate energy resources.... End of story... It is actually quite simple to understand...
I think godless understand this and that it is you who is failing to appreciate it is economic factors that actually determine the quantity of proven reserves. -Proven reserves (expressed in years available at current consumption, not barrels) have not varied greatly for more than 70 years and thus in no way indicate the oil economically recoverable. (Typically they are always between 8 and 16 years, depending upon current interest rates.)

Usually the proven reserves drop during periods of high cost interest rates - I.e. it is not good management to borrow at high cost to add to the known reserves. (and conversely oil reserves climb when interest rates are low.)

The fact that the reserves did not follow this historic and very rational link to interest rates in the recent period of very cheap money (low interest rates) is cause for concern. It may indicate that "peak oil" is indeed here or it may be that the world is very troubled. For two examples of this "troubled world", many believe that there is still a lot of oil to be discovered in Iraq, but only now are the legal structures being created which will make it feasible to prospect for it. China and Vietnam only agreed a few years ago on how the likely large oil field in the Gulf of Tomkin would be shared, Western oil companies did little there during the Vietnam war.

Summary: Your "take reserves and divide by rate of consumption" lacks understanding. If applied in 1920, it predicted peak oil passed just before the start of WWII !!! as no oil company invests in developing reserves for more than 20 years into the future, even when interest rates are very low.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Summary: Your "take reserves and divide by rate of consumption" lacks understanding. If applied in 1920, it predicted peak oil passed just before the start of WWII !!! as no oil company invests in developing reserves for more than 20 years into the future, even when interest rates are very low.

First, back in 1920 they didn't know about peak oil. They did know that oilwells tend to run dry after a while though. Sure, they didn't know at that time how much oil is there all around the world, because most of the discoveries came much later...

Second, almost 90 years passed since and technology improved "slightly", not to mention we mapped and drilled quite a big part of the Earth. Thus we have WAY more data then 90-70-20 or even 5 years ago.

It is simple 3rd grade math really. Once the growth of consumption is bigger than the growth of new discoveries, (that already happened) it is easy to see that we will run out of the reserves, it is just question of time. Apply the math, please...
 
First, back in 1920 they didn't know about peak oil. ...Once the growth of consumption is bigger than the growth of new discoveries, (that already happened) it is easy to see that we will run out of the reserves, it is just question of time. Apply the math, please...
I am surpised you failed to understand my point. - you are usually bright.

There are lots of things we did not know in 1920 - that is not the point.

Point is that the reserves are not related to the amount of oil in the ground, but to economic factors (interest rate and price of oil). Thus, your method to calculate when we will run out of oil, based on the reserves, is non-sense.

It only shows your lack of understanding of what determines the reserves. The proven reserves will always be, even 1000 years from now, as they were 70 years ago, between 8 and 16 years of current consumption as they are not related to the amount of oil in the ground.

Like testing an automatic stock trading plan on historical real data, I tested you methodology by applying it to era 1920. I found your method predicted we ran out of oil before WWII. !!!! This, in addition to explaining that interest rates are much more controlling of known reserves than oil in the ground, at least for the last 70 years, but not necessarily forever, is why your "3d grade math" is "too simple."

Perhaps, if I also explain that when an electric power company is designing a new power transmission line, the company's economist (who tells the cost of the borrowing, interest rates) has much more influence on the wire size selected than the electrical engineers, you will understand.

Power line wire size is increased (in the finite steps commercially available) until the next larger size, reducing the cost energy loss over the life of the line, when discounted to a present value, is less than the interest cost increase to buy that next larger size.

Likewise, oil companies, use the current and discounted present value of any additional increment of discovered oil to determine if it is worth adding that additional increment to their proven reserves. - Same logic as setting the power line size, but the oil company economist is much more likely to make mistakes and more dependent on what the geologist tell him that the electric company’s economist is. (All he needs from the engineers is power loss = I^2R.)

There will always be some oil in the ground, which is not profitable to remove at current prices and with current technology, but this interest rate / present value method of deciding whether or not to do more exploration for it will not change. Again, your method is far too simple and even ignores the most important factor in determining how many years of proven reserves an oil company will develop.

With a better understanding of all this, you can understand why the proven reserves have been between 8 and 16 years use for more than 70 years! - The amount of undiscovered oil has little to do with the size of proven reserves. That only controls the price of it. 100 years from now, oil may be $2000/barrel but there will still be 8 to 16 years of proven reserves!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I rented an excellent documentary DVD last night called 'A Crude Awakening'...highly recommended.

Basically it brings together some of the best experts in the fields of geology, energy and finance to explain exactly HOW the crash is coming sooner than everyone seems to believe.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
 
...the crash is coming sooner than everyone seems to believe. ...
Not everyone. - Ask swivel if he knows of anyone who has been predicting an economic crash with in the next decade or so, and posting the prediction here several years. :D i.e. probably 7 + or -2 years from now.
:bawl: :bawl:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not everyone. - Ask swivel if he knows of anyone who has been predicting an economic crash with in the next decade or so, and posting the prediction here several years.
:D
Yes...I kept thinking you were going to show up in this documentary at some point - "and now with the Brazilian perspective we have Dr. Billy T from San Paulo!"

Most of these commentators do predict an economic 'crash' of varying magnitude, but I used the word in reference to a sharp drop in oil production.

I'm more optimistic about the economic fallout.
 
Yes...I kept thinking you were going to show up in this documentary at some point - "and now with the Brazilian perspective we have Dr. Billy T from San Paulo!"

Most of these commentators do predict an economic 'crash' of varying magnitude, but I used the word in reference to a sharp drop in oil production.

I'm more optimistic about the economic fallout.
I do not think there will ever be a year in which oil production drops by 12% from the prior year until there is a the economic crash. Then it will not be because of high cost oil, but lack of demand for it. Well more accurately put (as the "demand" will still be there): lack of buyers with money to pay for it.

Would you consider a 10% yoy drop in production a "crash"? I doubt even that will happen except as a consequence of an economic crash. The economic crash will be mainly caused by a "run on the dollar", not problems with oil production.
 
One thing I learned from this documentary is that the relationship between reserves and production can get very complicated.

Its made very clear that OPEC nations are being deceptive about their reserves, and production from any given area is not in perfect alignment with the 'true' state of its reserves either.

And then theres the question of quality - the quality of the oil and the degree of difficulty in extraction.
 
Would you consider a 10% yoy drop in production a "crash"? I doubt even that will happen except as a consequence of an economic crash. The economic crash will be mainly caused by a "run on the dollar", not problems with oil production.

You are quite correct, and with Venezuela now considering selling oil for Euros instead of dollars that outcome to the dollar would be devastating. Some economist claim that one of the reasons of going after Irag was cause Saddam was about to sell oil for Euros.
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/19.html


Well, you understand it wrong. Obviously

And you have direct evidence of just how much oil there's in the ground to be retrieved right?

From that snapshot the oil situation doesn't look good. But there's little reason to assume that the next five years will simply see a continuation of current trends. Thanks to a combination of higher prices, increased exploration and production spending, and improved technology (page 32), oil supplies are poised to grow much faster than they have in recent years. Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), a respected energy consultant, sees 20 or more major new fields coming on line each year through 2010. Altogether those fields could boost worldwide production capacity 15%, from 87.9 million barrels per day to 101.5 million by the end of the decade, CERA estimates. As a result, supply should exceed demand by 7 million bbl. per day, a huge leap from the current cushion of 1 million bbl. That should take pressure off prices. "OPEC countries have the potential, and [most] are increasing production," says Peter Jackson, a CERA researcher. "Non-OPEC production has increased at quite a lick compared to the 1990s."

ALL OVER THE MAP
Where is the new supply coming from? Pretty much across the globe. After hiking its exploration-and-production expenditures by 50% since 2000, to $12 billion a year, Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM ) expects to add more than 1.2 million bbl. per day of new supply by 2007 from 27 projects, including ones off the coast of Angola and Russia's Sakhalin Island. Chevron Corp. expects its Big Five fields in West Africa, Australia, the Gulf of Mexico, and Kazakhstan to generate 800,000 more bbl. per day by 2009 -- a third of its current production. "We've got that pretty well mapped out," says Chevron Vice-Chairman Peter J. Robertson. "Projects are more complex now. They take a little longer. There's still plenty of oil in the world."
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_28/b3942038_mz011.htm

The real issue, says the article, is that neither major producing countries nor the big oil companies have been keen to invest money in substantial exploration campaigns. One reason has been the fear of creating permanent excess capacity such as in the mid-1980s, when the oil price tumbled to just $ 10 a barrel.
http://www.gasandoil.com/GOC/features/fex42298.htm

Yep, lets just keep them with "oil peak" scare and keep the price crude profitable!

Other variables to consider why gas prices are 3.00 a gallon is that the dollar is virtually worthless.
Hence being one of the reasons why Chaves (Venezuela) would rather sell their oil for Euros.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070416/dollar.html?.v=3
 
Point is that the reserves are not related to the amount of oil in the ground, but to economic factors (interest rate and price of oil). Thus, your method to calculate when we will run out of oil, based on the reserves, is non-sense.


Obviously you can't have more reserves, than what you have in the ground. Actually, scrap it, you can, because on paper, we can make up ANY numbers, and just say we have it.

Now we have a sligt misscommunication based on using different definitions of reserves. Proven, probably and possible. Yes, the proven keeps changing as technology advances and economy regulates the feasability of pumping.

Nevertheless reserve estimates uses proven and probable together, if I understand that correctly. Possible reserves are good for planning only. I think that's where your argument comes to play, that possible fields become probably and later proven....

Anyway, if you look at the recoverable oil reserves at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

You see 1650 gigabarrel, and that is the HIGH estimate. Since we use 31 gigabarrel a year, after a simple division we get 52 or so years. Mind you, this doesn't calcuate further increase in consumption!

Now of course one can say, hey we keep discovering NEW fields. Well,the rate of growth for consumption and also the absolute number are higher than the new discoveries, thus whatever new oilfield is discovered will get sucked up by growing thirst for oil.

Thus the 50 years or less stands. Actually, if you read theoildrum.com people who know about the subject estimate much less, like 30 years.

Here is another simple approach. If you accept the fact that we are peaking now, it took like 150 years to reach half, but because we are using oil WAY faster than in the first 100 years, it is obvious, we are going to use up the second half much faster. The only thing that will slow down the process is the difficulty to obtain the rest of the oil.

Now the only thing we can argue about is just how much left and how accurate is that 1650 gigabarrel. I saw other estimates in the 2-3 terrabarrel range. We don't know for sure who is right. Oilcompanies are saying 5 terrabarrels, but that is an exaggeration.

What we have for sure is production data. That is showing peaking and slowly declining oilproduction with very little extra capacity left, and no capacity to grow....
 
And you have direct evidence of just how much oil there's in the ground to be retrieved right?

My guess is just as good as yours. Scrap that, better. I usually never believe in numbers provided by a party with agenda. Thus government and company numbers are highy suspicious.

If you read the link in the previous post, you can see just how big DOWNWARD corrections were done by Shell and some of the ME countries about their reserves, once scrutiny was applied.

Here is my personal guess, print it out and check it in 5 years. Oilproduction will hoover between 80-90 mpbd for the next 7-10 years. Some new fields will come online and technology advances but the old fields losing production will take that advantage away.

After this plateauing (is that a word?) period we reach the declining part, when it will be obvious for ANYONE, that peak oil has passed...
 
My guess is just as good as yours. Scrap that, better. I usually never believe in numbers provided by a party with agenda. Thus government and company numbers are highy suspicious.

My point exactly, both big oil and governments are profiting by keeping the cheeple scared of the concept "peak oil." It's a weapon to manipulate, it's the source of income of nations. Can we really trust anything the house of Saud says? NO! their agenda is to maximize profit, while cutting expenditures.

And that is the same agenda for any oil producing company. Thus the lesson of economics, quantity & cost of production determines value of the commodity. If the commodity is abundant the commodity value is cheap, if it's value is cheap, not much profit can be gained. So make it seem in short supply that will raise the price of said commodity.

On that note the price of corn has been on an upward trend, since many are looking to produce ethanol as a fuel source.

What determines the price of crude is our open markets, many traders trade by emotions, thus when Catrina hit New Orleans the barrel of oils shut up significantly, scarcity of fuel production staled in that region, so speculators flooded the market with oil orders this action drove the price of crude. Any event that happens in the world on oil producing nations reflects the emotions of traders behavior. If BP and Exxon suddenly come out Monday morning on opening bell and deliver a news such as finding a deep well with over 2billion barrels of crude, what do you suppose this news would do to the price of crude?

interesting article worth the read:
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics and History/peak_oil/peak_oil_is_a_known_fraud.htm
 
Last edited:
My point exactly, both big oil and governments are profiting by keeping the cheeple scared of the concept "peak oil."

You got it backwards on 2 levels, factually, and theoretically:

1. Factual: Neither the government nor big oil acknolwledge peak oil, for the obvious reasons. And that is if they would, they should act on it, as any responsible government would. That would hurt big oil in the short run.

If you don't agree with this, please list the governments and oil companies that acknowledge peak oil....

2. Theoretical: They are actually in the business of denying it. Scaring people is not a good business because scared people don't buy Hummers and they invest in alternate energy.

So get your facts and thinking right.... So far in this thread you had not ONE valid point... :eek:

P.S.: I took a 5 secs look at the link, oh boy, was it stupid!!! First you come with the Russians as the leaders in abiotic research, now they are spreading peak oil myth?? Those russians should make up their minds!!! ;)

One last question: Why is it a myth? Any idiot with an 80 IQ or more could see that when you apply insatiable thirst to a finite source, the end is dryness...
 
Last edited:
Obviously you can't have more reserves, than what you have in the ground. ...
That is certainly true if you are measuring the reserves in barrels, but in post 204, you were offering a methodology to determine when we would run out of oil, speaking of years remaining. You said:

"...If you divide the known estimated reserves (a highly inflated number for geo-political and business reasons) and divide it with today's demand (a number that would surely grow, if there was available oil) you get 40+ years..."

That math is flawless, but does not imply that no oil will be pumped out of the ground in40+ or even in 400+ years from now. This still true even if one makes the following two clearly false assumptions:

(1) No new oil is discovered.
and
(2) No new extraction methods are developed.

Clearly, less oil will be pumped from the ground after sometime as oil is finite. Perhaps this "peak oil year" is 2007, perhaps not. Certainly not if both (1) & (2) are very false instead of only a little false.

But as I have stated in prior posts there will NEVER come a year when the proven reserves are not approximately enough to sustain between 8 and 16 years* more of the current consumption. Thus, the reserves, expressed in years of supply are never, even in distant the future, significantly different than they were 70 years ago.

The objective of my recent posts was to get you to understand that your post 204 methodology for estimating when we will run out of oil is non-sense. I showed this dramatically by applying your methodology to era 1920, as it predicted we ran out of oil before the start of WWII. Hence, it is clearly a non-sense methodology.

As oil becomes more expensive, other energy sources will be substituted for it, even for use as mobile fuel. Alcohol is already used in cars in Brazil about about as much as gasoline is. - Even the "gas" in Brazil is ~20% alcohol! (When alcohol is abundant, this percentage, set by government, goes as high as 25% and when it in short supply it drops to 15%. About 80% of all cars sold now can run on any mixture, but almost all use 100% alcohol as it is both cheaper and more powerful, but alcohol gives ~20% smaller range between fill ups.) In a few years, more than 90% of the car fuel used in Brazil will be alcohol! (Assuming that it is still the cheapest fuel.)

Part of the misunderstanding is you think in terms of barrels in the ground, not years of proven (or estimated) supply, that your erroneous methodology calculates. A worse error is implicitly assuming demand will not decrease as the price rises. Your whole post 204 methodology is non-sense because of these two mistakes. The world will never run out of oil, but there will be some very serious economic consequences of its price rise, as it becomes harder to find.

It is tragic the way GWB is tricking the US public with the alcohol from corn program - a great cost to the US taxpayer. (Including the both higher cost of food, and reduced exports of corn effecting the value of the dollar, increasing inflation, etc. as well as the direct tax cost of all the various subsidies given to the already rich.) GWB may be able to displace 20% of the gas used in cars by 2020 (or whatever), but the oil consumption requirements of the US will still be steadily increasing as corn based alcohol, grown in cold Iowa etc. requires more (or at least nearly as much) oil energy as it can provide alcohol energy.

That taxpayer expense could be much better used. - It is part of the reason why the dollar will collapse soon (less than a decade now). The whole alcohol-from-corn program is a trick to get wealth to the few from the many without reducing the Saudi shipments of oil to US. The beneficiaries of this trick are very grateful campaign contributors and after GWB is out of office his speech fees, which they will gladly pay, will set new records.
----------------------
*As clearly explained twice now in prior post the number of years that proven reserves will last does not depend upon the amount of oil still in the ground, but upon economic factors (interets rates and price of oil). It depends on the oil price indirectly as that is what determines the rate of consumption. As oil gets harder (more expensive) to find the consumption will fall, but because people will still have cars that need gas, etc. the reduction of consumption will cause hardships /suffering and the associated slowing of GDP will be another factor contributing to the eventual "run on the dollar" and the global depression. The corn to alcohol money should be making electric public transport etc. “Bring back the street car,” etc. should be GWB’s push, but the Saudis and other big campaign contributors would not give to Republican party if that happened.

If it does not come for at least 5 years, this global depression will be a blessing for China because they will not need to pay as much for oil as if the US and EU were economically sound. The rapidly growing wealth of the Chinese middle class and the need to send finished goods to the raw material and food stocks suppliers of China (like Brazil) will keep the Chinese factories "humming at capacity" with zero sales to the US.

Brazil’s agricultural and iron ore exports are already causing a huge flux of foreign currency into Brazil (along with investors wanting to sell dollars and buy a currency with rising value). This is making the Brazilian currency very strong - too strong for Brazil’s manufactures to export. "De-industrialization" is the current "buzz word" in every financial paper. Thus, manufactures in Brazil are going thru a painful period, while the farms and suppliers of raw materials prosper. I.e. like it or not, Brazil is adapting to be a major consumer of Chinese factory goods, sent in payment for the raw materials and food stock China increasingly needs as almost a million people leave the rural areas (farmers mainly) for jobs in the city EVERY MONTH.

Brazil is already an exporter of both alcohol and oil, some to Asia. San Marthino, a Brazilian sugar and alcohol company I own 2500 shares of, just signed a 30 year contract to supply 30% of its alcohol produced to Mitsubishi. A joint Brazilian / Japanese company, formed late last year, is building a fleet of alcohol tankers to ship alcohol to Asia - etc. When the US voters finally realized how badly they have been screwed by GWB, Brazil may not have any cheap alcohol left to sell to US, even if the dollar has not collapsed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Billy, we actually agree more, than what you think. So instead of going into length, let's just pick one sentence.

The world will never run out of oil, but there will be some very serious economic consequences of its price rise, as it becomes harder to find.

OK, now reread the TITLE of this thread! :)

It says Oil crisis. What you said and I agree with counts as oil crisis, so we can stop the debate here and now... :rolleyes:

Sure, there are more factors than what I used calculating the years remaining for oiluse. I oversimplified, because people like BR and Godless don't understand SIMPLE concepts (anybody who is denying peak oil itself is an idiot), so why would I want to confuse them with extra information?

The main point here is making most people acknowledging first the dangers and challenges coming in the near future, and second making them to ACT now, not when it is already too late....

But when we have people who don't even get the concept of peak oil, than we have a long, long way to educate....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top