THE ASPO Thread (merged)

fastbike · Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 5:07 pm Post subject:

The September ASPO newsletter has now been posted on the ASPO website. This month includes an assessment on Peru (one of the oldest oil provinces) , an update of the depletion model and an admission from the IEA that oil depletion is real.

EnviroEngr · Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 5:16 pm Post subject: Cross-Ref x

Cross-Ref X
link
_________________
--------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________

Ian · Coal Joined: Aug 24, 2004 Posts: 5 Location: Houston, TX

A couple of things,
First an observation, the date of peak oil has been shifted to 2006 but looking at total oil production, it would appear as though there will be little decline until post-2010 with production of 80 million barrels of day then a faily steep drop off to 65 million barrels a day by 2020.

Also I was looking here: EIA
And it says that US oil production during 2003 was 7.9 million barrels of oil per day of which 5.7 million barrels per day was crude and the remaining natural gas and other liquids. This does not appear to agree with the 4.4 million barrels of oil per day (2001) shown here unless that figure refers only to the lower 48 state and not any offshore drilling: link

Some questions as well. any explanation as to why the newer deepwater fields such as the Hoover-Diana development (online 2000), Atlantis (online 2005) and Thunderhorse (online 2005) are all expected to be depleted and non productive by 2015 (per ASPO's graph) ? link

Also, does anyone know of a more detailed breakdown of US consumption than this?: The United States consumed an average of about 20.0 MMBD of oil in 2003, up from 19.8 MMBD in 2002. Of this, 8.9 MMBD (or 45% of the total) was motor gasoline, 4.8 MMBD (24%) "other oils" 3.9 MMBD (20%) distillate fuel oil, 1.6 MMBD (8%) jet fuel, and 0.77 million bbl/d (4%) residual fuel oil. link

Motor gasoline and jet fuel I understand but what do people make of the other categories, especially "other oils"

gg3 · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:43 am Post subject:

Interesting analyses.

I more or less agree with Virginian here, about why more of us aren't engaged in the higher-level scientific analyses or discussions of same.

Many of us don't have the training & expertise to collect and analyze available data in a way that produces a more useful result than the results already being produced by trusted experts.

Most of us trust ASPO & related experts; therefore we accept their conclusions, and use those conclusions as inputs to our own responses to the crisis.

Most of us are focusing attention on such responses as we can take directly. These responses generally fall into three categories:

a) Utilizing the political processes in our respective countries, to encourage responsible energy & resource policies on the part of our respective governments.

b) Reconfiguring our personal economic choices & circumstances (education, career choices, investments, debt) to adjust to the new realities.

c) Reconfiguring our personal physical choices & circumstances (e.g. work skills, place of residence, type & degree of preparedness) to adjust to the new realities.

Beyond that, a lot of the "fluff" is social communication of the type that would occur, e.g. at the "non-working" hours of a physical conference: at dinner, the pub, etc. after the day's formal business was done. Some of this is also directed toward ascertaining the consensus of opinion among others, by way of influencing one's own choices (a, b, c) above.

As far as high-level readers/posters are concerned, yes, they're here, but it's reasonable to assume that they are not silent. If I were a hypothetical high-level dude (e.g. analyst for a corporation or government agency), I would be doing "hypothesis-testing" by putting up various ideas & scenarios to see how people respond. With due consideration for the usual demographic and related factors, i.e. that the "normal curve" of opinion here will tend to be low, flat, and with a skew toward a long tail in predictable directions (for example, more "survivalist" than mainstream opinion).

Personally, I'm acting on the basis that the impact of peak will begin to be felt in November 2005, which is a slightly more conservative (unfavorable) assumption than the mainstream of opinion.

Those of us who are operating on conservative assumptions are also for the most part working flat-out to adjust our own economic & physical circumstances as we think necessary. By analogy, as if we've just learned that a Cat 4 hurricane is headed our way and we have barely enough time to stockpile "no-cook food" and board up our windows and sandbag our doors (or gas up the car (quaint phrase, that) and head out on the road to stay with relatives before the storm comes in).

This is where you get some of the frantic discussion of topics such as new vehicle options (e.g. electric scooters, hybrid cars), household energy generation & conservation, self-defense & weaponry, organic agriculture, rural homesteading generally, etc.

Almost everyone here has found themselves in the position where they have to learn new skills rapidly. This is another category of discussion, distributed over a number of topics and not formally labeled as such. For any given skill-field, there are a few people with recognized expertise, who others ask (directly or, more often, indirectly) for advice. And when experts are hotly debating a topic (for example, best type of motorcycle for urban commuting), beginners are watching & learning. The way to locate these discussions is through the proliferation of "how?" and "which one?" questions.

So if you want to look at a kind of meta-analysis of this, it would appear to me that the "social organism" of this BBS is performing as it should. Tasks are parsed, information shared, and connections made that turn into direct actions taken. One can see the vague outlines of spontaneous self-organization taking shape.

The next phase of this will occur as economic resources are shifted to start implementing the solutions that are discussed. We will see more people reporting that they have taken specific actions that entail financial commitments and changes of risk/reward assessments; such as changing their transportation usage, their job, their place of residence, etc.

That in turn will be followed by the phase where these various solutions are tracked and discussed, e.g. "here's the news update on what I am / we are doing right now."

That's a critical turning point: at that point there may be a tendency of some individuals to drop out of the discussion, because they feel they've solve the problem for themselves. But this is precisely when their contributions could be of the greatest concrete value to new participants.
We should be encouraging people to maintain communications here, especially after they have solved the problem for themselves, specifically in order to provide useful advice to help others get through the crisis. The greater the number of those who are taking constructive steps, the better for all of us.

Pops · Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 10:15 am Post subject:

Gg3 makes a good point, “Those of us who are operating on conservative assumptions are also for the most part working flat-out to adjust our own economic & physical circumstances as we think necessary.”

While I think it is important for newcomers to have access to the various attempts to define the very hour and minute of maximum production, I think it makes the situation seem somewhat remote and academic. To extend gg3’s hurricane analogy, it is as if we were in the predicted track of the hurricane and instead of boarding the windows and storing water we were attempting to second guess and refine NOAA’s predictions.

Many times we seem to focus on the radar instead of noticing the marked increase in wind and rain outside the window. The end of cheap oil, rather than the precise moment of the peak is what historians will document. And its effect on our personal lives, like any other economic gyration, will affect each of us at different times, in differing ways and to different extents. If I worked for a bankrupt airline or were an independent trucker squeezed by fuel prices, or had been laid off from the fertilizer plant that couldn’t afford rising nat. gas prices, or the average paycheck-to-paycheck family that paid $1,000 more for energy in the last year, I might tell you the storm has already arrived.

Listen to and try to judge the validity of the forecasts and forecasters and make your own best assessment. Develop your own forecast if it entertains you, but don’t get so caught up in the intellectual challenge that you forget this isn’t merely an academic exercise; at some point you will need to make a plan and take action. Whether your plan is to evacuate, shelter in place or do nothing and hope for a miracle, my advice is to look out the window occasionally; your own personal hurricane may not show on the radar and it could be just over the horizon.
_________________
Make a plan and work it:

Desire · Tar Sands Joined: Jun 20, 2004 Posts: 72

Predictions like date of Peak Oil tend to be taken more seriously if they come in the form of a confidence interval.

lowem · Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 1:34 am Post subject: ASPO Newsletter #46

ASPO newsletter #46 is out at: link
Scroll right down to item #435: "... Saudi’s final production peak will be in the last quarter of 2004"
Yikes! Is that right?!
_________________
Live quotes - crude oil, gold and currencies
http://www.post1.net/lowem/page/livequotes

Jack · Dark Lord Joined: Aug 11, 2004 Posts: 4957

The assertions seem to be well thought out and justified.

Maybe Thanksgiving, 2005 was too optimistic... Shocked

Soft_Landing · Heavy Crude Joined: May 28, 2004 Posts: 377

Seriously guys. The Nemesis report is fun, but it's more like a fairy tale than hard data. A spooky tale you tell yourself to lull yourself to sleep. Sure, maybe Mr Nemesis really is an Aramco insider. But how can we take it seriously?? Anonymous tip-offs are good to let you know where to investigate. They don't count for a lot as raw data. We already knew to watch Saudi production closely, so it seems Nemesis adds little (except fairy tale value).

I'm much more interested in the review of the PFC report (item 430). I thought ASPO and PFC were a little more divergent when I first had a look at it, but on further consideration, the reports have a lot in common. Further, PFC comes from a respected group of Washington analysts with no obvious link to Campbell/Simmons etc. I think this is really outstanding.

slick50 · Tar Sands Joined: May 05, 2004 Posts: 85

Nemesis sounded much like T. Boone Pickens a few days ago on Kudlow & Cramer. T. Boone said the Saudi's peak will be 9.2-9.5 mb/d max, he really laid the truth on the line about Peak Oil with Kudlow/Cramer, at the end Kudlow&Crame were quite sobered by Pickens's firm convictions of where oil and natural gas are headed. Pickens mentioned the earth has been fairly well explored and there is not much more out there to find, or worth looking for, even at $50 per barrel. He said we will see $60 per barrel before we see $40, and we will NEVER see $35 per barrel again. Maybe Pickens knows Nemesis?

smiley · Fission Joined: Apr 16, 2004 Posts: 2105 Location: Europe

Well I'm not even sure he's an Aramco insider. Everything he mentions is publicly available.

EnviroEngr · Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 12:26 pm Post subject: Canada Here?

Where's that guy from Canada who contested the last 2 ASPO Newsletters to the point Kjell or Colin retracted them? I wish speaks with him again.
_________________
--------------------------------
| Whose reality is this anyway!? |
--------------------------------
(-------< Temet Nosce >-------)
____________________________

satjeet · Heavy Crude Joined: Jul 15, 2004 Posts: 121

My hunch is that Nemesis is none other than C.J. Campbell himself.

Whitecrab · Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2004 6:17 pm Post subject: Re: Canada Here?

JohnDenver · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Aug 29, 2004 Posts: 1844

Anybody know? Everytime you read about them, they are always referred to as a group of Europeans. So why Europeans? Where are the Americans?