Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 3372 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
FreddyH wrote:
Even using the conservative ASPO figures, this principle is evident. Today ASPO assumes 2300-Gb of discoveries in its URR Estimate (plus 143 of future discoveries). In 1996, this discovered quantity was 1650-Gb (plus 150 future allocation).
Thus before backdating, ASPO admits to 650-Gb of new discoveries between 1996 and 2008 on their funny armageddon graph. This coverts to 54-Gb/yr. Gotta love that backdating, eh.
Apples and oranges for the 2300:
Quote:
Campbell’s EUR figures increased from an initial 1650 billion to his present 2700 billion, though the latter figure represents a substantially different metric: “all liquids” in the latter vs. conventional oil (excluding heavy oil and unconventional enhanced recovery oil) in the former.
Assuming you are talking about Campbell and his Growing Gap graph. Megaprojects cover tar and polar so we can judge to some extent what their impact will be.
It feels to me like reserve growth has largely worked its magic. With so many regions going down the drain it's hard to feel your optimism in this this regard, in the light of al-Husseini's statements. You'll not dig up a more prominent source for an assessment of what the ME has, after all.
My favorite introductory page on reserves is from Wolf at the Door. _________________ Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
I will not abide another toe.
Joined: Jan 14, 2008 Posts: 321 Location: The Yukon
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 5:02 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
TheDude wrote:
FreddyH wrote:
Even using the conservative ASPO figures, this principle is evident. Today ASPO assumes 2300-Gb of discoveries in its URR Estimate (plus 143 of future discoveries). In 1996, this discovered quantity was 1650-Gb (plus 150 future allocation).
Thus before backdating, ASPO admits to 650-Gb of new discoveries between 1996 and 2008 on their funny armageddon graph. This coverts to 54-Gb/yr. Gotta love that backdating, eh.
Assuming you are talking about Campbell and his Growing Gap graph. Megaprojects cover tar and polar so we can judge to some extent what their impact will be.
Between 1995 & 2002, Campbell's estimate of Regular Conventional URR ranged from 1750 to 1950-Gb. Today it is 1875. Thus his 54-Gb/yr growth in URR is comprised of 19-Gb Conventional & 35-Gb non-conventionals.
As mentioned in my original post, non-conventionals only serve to soften the ultimate decline grade. The error of assuming that these 300-Gb/yr rises in URR will substantially raise and postpone the Peak Rate lies in the premise that non-conventionals sport a symetric Hubbert Curve.
Unfortunately, the six categories that are not part of Regular Conventional Crude each have very unique profiles with Peaks that are too late to help:
Using Linearization to create the usual symetric Hubbert Curve Peak for All Liquids assumes provinces/fields exhibiting traditional bell curves:
Joined: Mar 22, 2005 Posts: 201 Location: Pocatello
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
Freddy
Browsing over the data on your website, I noticed something that is disconcerting. You say that production was 86 mbd in the first quarter of '08 while demand was 86.4 and the shortfall had to be made up by reserve stocks. Well, if the produced supply can't keep up with the production, does that not qualify as the peak? Also, curious; of course the big concern for me and most other people is the economics of the situation. Really, how much oil is produced or consumed wouldn't be of concern if it weren't considered vital to economic growht or even keeping it afloat. So I'm actually quite alarmed that the US and other parts of the industrialized world haven't experienced a much sharper pull-back, seeing as how oil prices have doubled since this time last year (with gas prices to match). Can an (the) economy maintain in the face of ever higher prices? Also, consiring PO.com coverage on MSNBC and CNN recently, can you really call it a lunatic fringe anymore? FYI, I've always considered the point where production no longer keeps up with demand to be the practical peak. I mean, that's really where the concern lies anyway.
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
TheDude wrote:
It feels to me like reserve growth has largely worked its magic. With so many regions going down the drain it's hard to feel your optimism in this this regard, in the light of al-Husseini's statements. You'll not dig up a more prominent source for an assessment of what the ME has, after all.
Well, lets take that "expert" rating for a spin, shall we? For starters, al-Husseini's statements appear to hold some special credibility for you, so lets investigate.
A couple of days ago in this thread The Dude set the credibility of his witness quite high. I quote"
What The Dude Claims for al-Husseini wrote:
I expected better from you, like some sinister motive Al-Husseini would have for making these statements - profit related, most likely. But you're chalking his statements up to "recatageorization"?
If you missed it: this man was the head of Saudi Aramco's production and exploration, and he says those "reserves" aren't even probable; in fact they're not worthy of being called reserves at all. And I should believe you why, exactly?
Head of Production and Exploration....quite impressive. So, a quick run to here....
where we learn al-Husseini was actually executive Vice Prez, which, last I looked, sure ain't the same as "Head of Production And Exploration". Also, exploration, development and production generally consist of the geophysics and drilling end of the oil world, maybe with the occasional hookup to the dewatering production system, which isn't where the reservoir guys tend to hang out.
So our source is basically an exploration and drilling guy, who wasn't in charge....and we want to use him as an expert on...reserves?
and discover that Sadad is actually speculating that peak isn't peak, but more of a refinery constraint, and see's production rates climbing quite a bit more than they are now.
Interesting.
Well, what can we do to counter a drilling guy, on the topic of reserves?
I know! How about an expert in reservoir management? Even better, ARAMCO itself?
I present the Manager of Reservoir Management for Saudi Aramco, you know, the guy in charge of the guys who actually know whats in the reservoirs, count it, add it up, goodness, I'll bet they even do the reserves!
Dunno there Dude....drilling guy....reservoir guy....one a VP, the other the manager of the topic under examination....ummmm.....call me crazy, I'll go with the reservoir guy.
Thats a pretty poor introduction and explanation of the topic there Dude. Dead giveaway as soon as someone says that a field prodution profile is supposed to be a bell shaped curve...oops...nope...even Campbell discounted that in his book. If they can't get the basics right, what makes you think anything else is any better? _________________ Freddy RULZ!
www.TrendLines.ca/scenarios.htm Home of the Real Peak Date ... set by geologists (not pundits) (or bankers) (or web "experts")
Joined: Jan 14, 2008 Posts: 321 Location: The Yukon
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
DamienJasper wrote:
Freddy
Browsing over the data on your website, I noticed something that is disconcerting. You say that production was 86 mbd in the first quarter of '08 while demand was 86.4 and the shortfall had to be made up by reserve stocks. Well, if the produced supply can't keep up with the production, does that not qualify as the peak?
FYI, I've always considered the point where production no longer keeps up with demand to be the practical peak. I mean, that's really where the concern lies anyway.
DJ, global inventories outside of SPRs are approx 2600 million barrels. If there is a month with avg of 1-mbd draw, the stocks are only reduced by 30 million ... or 90 million over a whole quarter ... and 2510 million left. And vice versa. Seasonal draws are normal and the present situation is above the five year avg. There is no cause for concern. Watching inventories is not the best barometer. It is a supply chain mechanism. Price increases are used to quell Demand and keep the Inventories in relative balance.
Peak occurs when successive months, quarters or years are in terminal decline. That is not happening. Based on the Year-to-Date numbers, 2008-YTD is poised to break the 2005 annual record by 1.1-mbd. New Quarterly Records were set in 2007Q4 & 2008Q1. New Monthly Records were set in December, February & May.
Quote:
Also, curious; of course the big concern for me and most other people is the economics of the situation. Really, how much oil is produced or consumed wouldn't be of concern if it weren't considered vital to economic growht or even keeping it afloat. So I'm actually quite alarmed that the US and other parts of the industrialized world haven't experienced a much sharper pull-back, seeing as how oil prices have doubled since this time last year (with gas prices to match). Can an (the) economy maintain in the face of ever higher prices?
Prices have risen 12-fold since 1999. This reveals that rising GDP is not directly dependant on oil. Total Energy in an economy is more appropriate, but even by that metric, GDP is rising faster than Primary Energy due to efficiencies in the system, known as the lowering of energy intensity.
It take 8 quarters for price bumps to work thru the marketplace. The USA economy & CPI are not yet reflecting all the 2006, 2007 & 2008 increments. Thus far, the Fed's lowering of interest rates has mostly offset the higher oil prices. If Productivity increases do not cancel out the trickle-down in play, the Fed may have to reduce rates further. If Fiscal Policy is chosen to combat this challenge rather than Monetary Policy, due to Inflation concerns, Congress will increase the Deficit.
Quote:
Also, considering PO.com coverage on MSNBC and CNN recently, can you really call it a lunatic fringe anymore?
Peak Oil Theory is a geologic hypothesis. The element of the lunatic fringe that are bothersome are those that have no perspective on this phenomenom and the reprecussions on future lifestyles, the Economy & Currency.
It is based on their lack of adaquate education and/or understanding of the associated disciplines, including futurism. Their dissemination of dire consequence of Peak Oil is groundless for the most part ... both in degree and ultimate time line.
Most gloom merchants fail to comprehend the concept of URR and therefore their projection for eventual oil shortages is completely wrong ... in the scale of decades. Looking at the TrendLines Worst-Case-Scenario with 2-Tb URR, it would take until 2062 to "run out of oil" yet we commonly see die-off and collapse forecasts that are immanent.
The acid test in challenging the cornucopia of nihilist predictions is to request an occurence date from the source. With that in hand, it is a simple matter of dismissing the doom by matching it against concensus based facts by professionals in the field. _________________ www.TrendLines.ca/scenarios.htm Home of the Real Peak Date ... set by geologists (not pundits)
Joined: Oct 23, 2004 Posts: 5897 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
Moderators - the above post violates the CoC, for insulting personal attacks on some posters here. Please remove it. _________________ It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
Joined: Mar 22, 2005 Posts: 201 Location: Pocatello
Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
Gotta love that attitude. Laugh at the idea of mass death, starvation and human suffering but don't EVER suggest that someone on this board isn't an Oracle on the topic.
Joined: Jan 14, 2008 Posts: 321 Location: The Yukon
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:32 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
DamienJasper wrote:
Gotta love that attitude. Laugh at the idea of mass death, starvation and human suffering but don't EVER suggest that someone on this board isn't an Oracle on the topic.
Thanks for the reply Freddy.
DJ, nobody would laff at that prospect. Nobody. Please take a moment and reflect why "mass death, starvation and human suffering" is not part the public discourse...
Stark realities are not taboo subjects anymore. Plainly, writers that do even a meagre amount of due diligence can very quickly figure out that this collapse stuff is wildly off base. I know this 'cuz many come to my site to learn and most of 'em converse with me.
Total Energy continues to be projected to rise 'til at least 2050 by all the major Agencies and analysts. And, the 24-model consensus for oil production profiles presently forecasts a flow of 67-mbd fifty years from today.
Meanwhile the dire collapse scenarios are generally based on flows of less than 25-mbd. Again, next time that u read one of these, ask them when "it" will happen and based on "how much flow" of oil. Enuf said. _________________ www.TrendLines.ca/scenarios.htm Home of the Real Peak Date ... set by geologists (not pundits)
Joined: Mar 22, 2005 Posts: 201 Location: Pocatello
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:29 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
Freddy,
I'm not referring to you. I'm not even a hundred percent sure what you're referring to. I'm talking about the sig that says "Die Off; Funner to watch with Popcorn" or whatever. And the people here who seem to get behind it, saying "We're due" or "We deserve it" and such. But I'm mostly referring to that sig. Perhaps I should have been more clear.
Also, my Oracle comment is me defending you. Dantes Peak only seems to have a problem with your because you imply in your post that the people here aren't experts. He seems to have taken offense, but I won't dignify him with a response which is why I generalized my comment, obviously too much.
Hell, I'm glad you responded to my query.
PS: That the membership ratings actually declares someone an "expert" because they have a certain amount of posts is also what I'm referring too. Guess I should be WAY more specific and leave the noodle work to other interests.
Joined: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1985 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 1:55 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
FreddyH wrote:
Firstly, i never said the 143-Gb was Discoveries only. Please stay on the page.
I did. You said that "148-Gb of new oil is found each year". If it is not new oil, why did you say it is?
FreddyH wrote:
Thus before backdating, ASPO admits to 650-Gb of new discoveries between 1996 and 2008 on their funny armageddon graph. This coverts to 54-Gb/yr. Gotta love that backdating, eh.
I suppose that's one interpretation. Another is that ASPO acknowledges reserve growth. That doesn't amount to 650 Gb of new discoveries.
Joined: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1985 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:10 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
FreddyH wrote:
Plainly, writers that do even a meagre amount of due diligence can very quickly figure out that this collapse stuff is wildly off base.
I think the term "plainly" is rather insulting to those who have genuinely spent a lot of time and effort to study this stuff. For me, collapse is inevitable on a finite planet unless we choose to move toward sustainability. There seems little sign of that, so make your guess at when collapse will happen, not if.
FreddyH wrote:
Total Energy continues to be projected to rise 'til at least 2050 by all the major Agencies and analysts. And, the 24-model consensus for oil production profiles presently forecasts a flow of 67-mbd fifty years from today.
Would those be the same analysts, surveyed by Bloomberg each week, that get the price movement right 49% of the time?
The BP report has demand well in excess of production last year (by almost 4 mbpd). It seems like production has a lot of catching up to do, to make the projections, especially as natural gas and coal could start their own declines well inside that time period.
Joined: Jan 14, 2008 Posts: 321 Location: The Yukon
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:24 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
TonyPrep wrote:
FreddyH wrote:
Firstly, i never said the 143-Gb was Discoveries only. Please stay on the page.
I did. You said that "148-Gb of new oil is found each year". If it is not new oil, why did you say it is?
Nice edit job, Tony.
In reality, my previous post says:
Quote:
Before the backdating, 148-Gb of new oil is found each year. At least since 1996. It is attributed to Discoveries, Reserve Growth and Future Resource. With consumption of only 31-Gb/yr, knowing where the oil is located is not at all an Industry concern.
Once again for the new folks ... URR increases 148-Gb/yr and includes:
1) Discoveries
2) Reserve Growth
3) Future Resource _________________ www.TrendLines.ca/scenarios.htm Home of the Real Peak Date ... set by geologists (not pundits)
Joined: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1985 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:49 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
FreddyH wrote:
In reality, my previous post says:
Quote:
Before the backdating, 148-Gb of new oil is found each year. At least since 1996. It is attributed to Discoveries, Reserve Growth and Future Resource. With consumption of only 31-Gb/yr, knowing where the oil is located is not at all an Industry concern.
Once again for the new folks ... URR increases 148-Gb/yr and includes:
1) Discoveries
2) Reserve Growth
3) Future Resource
My apologies if you thought I was trying to mislead. You called it new oil. It is not new oil. Some is reserve growth (not new oil), some is increased estimate of future discovery (not, yet, new oil) and some is actual discovery (new oil). So how much of that 148 Gb per year is actual new oil?
Joined: Jan 14, 2008 Posts: 321 Location: The Yukon
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:26 am Post subject: Re: Oil shortage a myth, says industry insider
TonyPrep wrote:
FreddyH wrote:
Plainly, writers that do even a meagre amount of due diligence can very quickly figure out that this collapse stuff is wildly off base.
I think the term "plainly" is rather insulting to those who have genuinely spent a lot of time and effort to study this stuff. For me, collapse is inevitable on a finite planet unless we choose to move toward sustainability. There seems little sign of that, so make your guess at when collapse will happen, not if.
Then let me ask u a question, Tony. In what year can we expect this collapse and what will be the "mbd" flow of All Liquids upon that horrid event?
Quote:
FreddyH wrote:
Total Energy continues to be projected to rise 'til at least 2050 by all the major Agencies and analysts. And, the 24-model consensus for oil production profiles presently forecasts a flow of 67-mbd fifty years from today.
Would those be the same analysts, surveyed by Bloomberg each week, that get the price movement right 49% of the time?
We have tracked these scenarios since 2004. The practitioners include:
"Our compilation and representation of 24 Peak Oil Depletion Scenarios based on data by Pierre-Rene Bauquis (France), Colin Campbell (Ireland), William Carlson (USA), CERA (USA), EIA (USA), EU WETO (EU), ExxonMobil (USA), Sadad Ibrahim Al Husseini (Saudi Arabia), Freddy Hutter (the Yukon/Canada), IEA (Int'l), IFP (France), Rembrandt Koppelaar (Netherlands), Ray Leonard of Kuwait Energy, Jean Laherrere (France), Michael Smith (UK), OPEC (Int'l), PFC Energy (USA), Fredrik Robelius (Sweden), Royal Dutch Shell (Netherlands), Saudi Aramco (Saudi Arabia), Matt Simmons (USA), Chris Skrebowski's Megaprojects (UK), Total (France) & Wood Mackenzie (Scotland)."
In 2006, at the request of a theoildrum contributer, we started tracking the AVG of these estimates. The first one had Peak Oil @ 95-mbd in 2020.
In May 2008, with the spotlight of all the media on these analysts to sharpen their pencils, the latest AVG is 91-mbd in 2019. Does an eleven year wait for Peak Oil followed by a 1.2% Decline Rate give anyone a shudder? Methinx not...
Quote:
The BP report has demand well in excess of production last year (by almost 4 mbpd). It seems like production has a lot of catching up to do, to make the projections, especially as natural gas and coal could start their own declines well inside that time period.
By almost 4-mbd? Really?
Well, BP released its 2008 Statistical Review earlier this week, Tony. The new folks can see its highlights at BP.com, where they'll find:
85.2-mbd - Consumption (Consumption of fuel ethanol and biodiesel is also included) pg 11
81.5-mbd - Production (*Includes crude oil, shale oil, oil sands and NGLs. Excludes liquid fuels from other sources such as biomass and coal derivatives.) pg 8
So yes, a 3.7-mbd apparent shortfall. It would have been nice, Tony, if u disclosed that we know via EIA that BTL (Bio-to-Liquids), CTL (coal), GTL & other synthetics brought up the Production figure to 84.6-mbd ... and thus a shortfall of only 0.6-mbd.
So no Tony, there's not "a lot of catching up to do"...
In fact, EIA stated this week that Production was 85.7 and Consumption is at 86.0-mbd in 2008Q1. The gap had narrowed to 0.3-mbd.
In the same STEO report, it revealed that Production was 86.1 in May & Consumption only 84.8-mbd.
Yes Tony, Production surpassed Consumption by 1.3-mbd last month.
The same report shows that new annual monthly Production records were set in December, February & May. It's a great trend, eh. _________________ www.TrendLines.ca/scenarios.htm Home of the Real Peak Date ... set by geologists (not pundits)
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
