Peak Oil News

 

  Login or Register
 
Menu
 News
 Search
 Topics
 Stories Archive
 Submit News
 Discussions
 Code of Conduct
 Forums
 Forums Search
 Last 24 Hours
 PO 24hrs
 Peak Blog
 Resources
 About Us
 Downloads
 Web Links
 PeakWiki
 PeakPortal
 Focus Search
 Peak TV
 Peak Oil Boston
 Houston Peak Oil
 Members
 Your Account
 Members List
 Ignore List
 JOIN!
 Private Messages
 
google
 
PeakSpeak
NICKNAME

Download TeamSpeak
What is PeakSpeak?
Peak Oil on IRC
 
Photo Album
Submit Photo
Peakoil.com is You!


member photos
 
Light Sweet Crude Oil
 
Member Quotes
Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.

shortonoil

Suggest Quote

 
ICM
Cisco & Net App Training
 
Peak Oil News: Forums

Peakoil.com :: View topic - Sprott says 8% decline... that's a 9-year halving time
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Sprott says 8% decline... that's a 9-year halving time
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly version    Peakoil.com Forum Index -> Peak Oil Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
khebab
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 935
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 8:24 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

if we assume a alpha= 8% depletion rate, past peak production with a maximum noted P0, the area (Q) on the right side of the curve is:

Code:

Q= P0 / alpha= 12.5 x P0

Depending on what is the value of P0 we have the following URR (cumulative production in 2003 being about 1092 Gb):

Code:

P0= 29.29 Gb/year (2004) Q= 366.13 Gb URR= 1092 + 366= 1458 Gb
P0= 29.71 Gb/year (2005) Q= 371.38 Gb URR= 1492 Gb
P0= 30.45 Gb/year (2006) Q= 380.68 Gb URR= 1531 Gb
P0= 31.35 Gb/year (2007) Q= 391.87 Gb URR= 1573 Gb


For reference ASPO puts the URR around 1800 - 2000 Gb, BP around 2476 Gb, Gueso lately put the value around 1500 Gb (see thread Peak prediction based on the Riccati equation: 2007!).
_________________
______________________________________
http://GraphOilogy.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
aahala
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude


Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 954

PostPosted: Wed Jun 29, 2005 8:42 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Sprott is NOT predicting peak this year. He is stating peak MAY occur
this year.

I can state the Yankees may win the World Series this year. My statement
would be considered a WAG(wild ass guess).

Sprott's statement includes numbers, so his is a SWAG(statistical
wild ass guess.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eli
Fusion
Fusion


Joined: Jun 18, 2005
Posts: 3980
Location: In a van down by the river

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 8:56 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Opec is the key to world decline and specifically SA.

Looking at the evidence they did cook their books back in the 90's and all of them doubled there known reserves with no evidence to support their claims.

The argument can also be made for a quicker decline because of how the oil has been extracted.

Horizontal drilling and 3-d seismic imaging have made the North Sea the example of what has happened with the use of greater technology in oil extraction. It does allow for higher peak extraction but then a corresponding steep decline.

The SA fields have also been using secondary recovery techniques (pumping in sea water) for years which boosts peak extraction but also decline rates when the field passes prime production. Pumping in see water is also inferior to tertiary extraction in which co2 is pumped in to the field to push the whole reserve towards the well head. Secondary extractions weakens the field and the water breaks through the oil and does not push the whole field.

The large oil fields that the US did not see the these techniques used until much later in there lives so that helps explain why they did not see as steep of declines.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan1195
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Mar 19, 2005
Posts: 277

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:19 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

There are a couple reasons we should be concerned bout a faster decline rate:

1. Use of secondary and tertiary methods. These keep field production rates up, but make for a steeper decline. This is possible for many of the larger fields, including Canterell an Ghawar those 2 fields along current account for ~10% of world production.

2. Offshore fields. These have been source of much supply growth in the past 10 years, and tend to have shorter lifespans with steep decline (e.g. North Sea) due to higher costs they pump full tilt.

3. Mathematical relationships:

Rate of discovery rose then fell (peak ~1960)
total reserves rose then fell (peak ~1980)
production rose and will fall
Rate of depletion is just beginning to rise (and wont decline under most oil is gone)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sparaxis
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 108
Location: California

PostPosted: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:42 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

pepper2000 is correct. This article makes no distinction between the various types of depletion--type 1, 2, or 3. Type 3--national depletion--is our signpost to world decline, not that of individual fields. An 8% depletion rate in an existing field or well is not unusual, but it is constantly offset by new drilling and production. At some point, these new wells don't offset the decline from others and the entire field enters depletion, and when all new wells and new production don't make up for the decline in all the fields in a country, you have type 3 depletion. The ODAC estimates that at about 1-1.2 mmbd/year.

Quote:
Beside decline itself, we could also try to to determine how much percent of the oil extracted will be sweet crude? And will we have enough natural gas to process it?


Generally the good stuff is produced first. But refining doesn't require natural gas. It is used to make supplemental hydrogen for removing sulfur in products, but that's only when refinery hydrogen from reformers is insufficient. And if you don't have natural gas, you can make it from other hydrocarbons like naphtha, thaough not as cheaply.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
0mar
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude


Joined: Oct 12, 2004
Posts: 1647
Location: Davis, California

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 12:44 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Permanently_Baffled wrote:
Aaron wrote:
Lower US 48 oil producing states - Conventional extraction

Current major fields - MRE

See North Sea depletion rate \ Ybel depletion rate etc...


how come the US doesn't use MRE? I would of thought those evil, greedy american producers would be first up to maximise production Razz Twisted Evil

PB


The US peaked in the '70s, just as MRE was becoming popular. The older fields in the US never saw those technologies. We are probably applying MRE techniques right now, but during the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s oil was so damn plentiful and cheap that it didn't even warrent the research to recover more oil.
_________________
Joseph Stalin
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
JBinKC
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Posts: 252

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 2:45 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

I have been a big fan of Sprott since the crash of 2000 where he has been the best performing money manager since the internet bubble. I believe his fund groups had the best return in 2001. I know he made a fortune with PetroKazakhstan buying it under $1 among other stocks. I know I spend big time checking out what he is doing on the Canadian SEC equivalent Sedar.


Regarding this latest piece on oil I am not sure that his figures are accurate but he has been uncanningly accurate on the timing of many of his investments. Its hard to dispute him when he has been right so many times. I know he also has written a piece also on our real estate bubble and mortgage debt and that was also a scary scenario.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Quizzle
Coal
Coal


Joined: Jul 04, 2005
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:24 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Quote:
In fact, the U.S. may essentially be bankrupt in a few years because of its war on terrorism and its debt-ridden economic system.


The United States has already fallen into a defict.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
trespam
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude


Joined: Aug 10, 2004
Posts: 1104
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 10:55 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Speculation about depletion rates must take into account consumption. Long before 8% annual depletion rates are a proven fact the world economy will produce an extraordinary amount of demand destruction that will push the decline out by many years--and put many people out of work.

Answer these questions:

How many of your purchases are necessary? How many of the automobile purchases are necessary? How many vacations are necessary? How many vacations to far off places on jet planes are necessary?

Needs versus wants. Wants will decline to meet needs. I don't think 8% declines will happen. Demand will drop to produce period gluts of oil.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khebab
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 935
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:39 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

trespam wrote:
Speculation about depletion rates must take into account consumption. Long before 8% annual depletion rates are a proven fact the world economy will produce an extraordinary amount of demand destruction that will push the decline out by many years--and put many people out of work.

Answer these questions:

How many of your purchases are necessary? How many of the automobile purchases are necessary? How many vacations are necessary? How many vacations to far off places on jet planes are necessary?

Needs versus wants. Wants will decline to meet needs. I don't think 8% declines will happen. Demand will drop to produce period gluts of oil.

I'm not convinced of that, I think people will keep buying the black stuff at any price! crude oil prices have almost tripled in three years but the economy is still going strong, US GDP will be probably grow +4% this year, consumer confidence is very high despite higher gas prices. Inflation seems under control. Historically, it does not seem that oil demand is influenced much by prices.

The situation may changed but so far world economies are getting used to higher oil price (at least for rich countries). Demand destruction could happen faster in poor countries.

However, the last BP energy report shows that new discoverie numbers are going flat since 2003 so depletion could show its ugly face sooner than we think.
_________________
______________________________________
http://GraphOilogy.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
trespam
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude


Joined: Aug 10, 2004
Posts: 1104
Location: San Diego, CA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:03 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

khebab wrote:
trespam wrote:
Speculation about depletion rates must take into account consumption. Long before 8% annual depletion rates are a proven fact the world economy will produce an extraordinary amount of demand destruction that will push the decline out by many years--and put many people out of work.

Answer these questions:

How many of your purchases are necessary? How many of the automobile purchases are necessary? How many vacations are necessary? How many vacations to far off places on jet planes are necessary?

Needs versus wants. Wants will decline to meet needs. I don't think 8% declines will happen. Demand will drop to produce period gluts of oil.

I'm not convinced of that, I think people will keep buying the black stuff at any price! crude oil prices have almost tripled in three years but the economy is still going strong, US GDP will be probably grow +4% this year, consumer confidence is very high despite higher gas prices. Inflation seems under control. Historically, it does not seem that oil demand is influenced much by prices.

The situation may changed but so far world economies are getting used to higher oil price (at least for rich countries). Demand destruction could happen faster in poor countries.

However, the last BP energy report shows that new discoverie numbers are going flat since 2003 so depletion could show its ugly face sooner than we think.


We've not hit depletion yet. There have been no shortages. There have been no gas lines. True depletion, once we hit it, changes the game. The end of economic growth (on a global, time averaged basis). Imbalances will unwind.

Speculation? Of course. But my gut tells me that once we hit true depletion, once world production drops by a few percentage points, recession starts, imbalances unwind, etc.

What's happened so far is not depletion, just speculation about upcoming depletion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MagnoliaFan
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude


Joined: Apr 17, 2005
Posts: 121

PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 10:14 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

RdSnt wrote:
What you are missing in this discussion is the economic impact of any type of supply shortage. I would suggest that the US economy, in particular, is extremely sensitive to even one or two years of shortened supply. We aren't going to need to wait for supply to be halved before very bad things happen to the world's economies.
Also keep in mind the reaction of the power elite and the citizenry. Both are likely to panic in one form or another and that will compound the purely technical problems exponentially.


What he said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly version    Peakoil.com Forum Index -> Peak Oil Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Atom News FeedRSS 1.0 News FeedRSS 2.0 News FeedRSS Forums Feed