BrianC wrote:Peak Oil is Coming. That Won't Save the World (cnn.com) 73
evilgenius wrote:I wonder if other people think we need to do a sort of dance with average EV range for a while? I think it needs to go up, or we are going to have to reform too many things at once about society.
Pops wrote: Unless the Ds can overcome the stark raving madness that is US politics the story will be global warming won't save us from peak oil.
BrianC wrote:Peak Oil is Coming. That Won't Save the World (cnn.com) 73
Posted by msmash on Friday October 15, 2021 @11:05AM from the closer-look dept.
The shift to clean energy is sending the oil industry into decline. But the world needs a much more ambitious plan to save the climate and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. From a report:
That's according to the International Energy Agency, which said in its global energy outlook published Wednesday that more aggressive climate action is needed as world leaders prepare for the crucial COP26 summit in Glasgow in November. "The world's hugely encouraging clean energy momentum is running up against the stubborn incumbency of fossil fuels in our energy systems," Executive Director Fatih Birol said in a statement. "Governments need to resolve this at COP26 by giving a clear and unmistakeable signal that they are committed to rapidly scaling up the clean and resilient technologies of the future."
More than 50 countries and the European Union have pledged to meet net zero emissions targets. If they live up to those commitments, demand for fossil fuels will peak by 2025, but global CO2 emissions would only fall 40% by 2050, far short of net zero. In that scenario, the world would still be consuming 75 million barrels of oil per day by 2050 -- only 25 million barrels per day less than today. The energy sector has been bolstered in recent weeks by a sharp increase in prices.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/13/ener ... index.html
Revi wrote:Peak oil is here. Has been for a while.
Revi wrote: There's no combination of finance, debt, green energy, hubris or stimulus that can save us now from what's happening.
Revi wrote: That doesn't mean they won't try to find someone to blame it on. Greenies, governments, poor people etc. When things get bad they always take out the blamethrower. It's a rule of management. When things go wrong, find someone or some group to blame.
AdamB wrote:But peak oils have been happening
evilgenius wrote:The problem with that, as we are seeing with the oil industry in relation to alternatives, is that it takes investment to do this. That sort of investment is currently being put into charging points. They just want to consider whether they will fail with this because they don't have enough points. There isn't really any strategy for land use or anything coming along with this, like they eventually did for the railroads.
Even that is problematic. If they consider land use rules, and solid state comes in, then the legal structure could be in place to ensure the survival of a dinosaur.
mousepad wrote:AdamB wrote:But peak oils have been happening
We're not interested in peaks. Only in THE peak.
mousepad wrote:The absolute maxima in the interval between year 1900 to 2500, for example.
mousepad wrote:Do you understand the difference between an absolute and local maxima? It's key to understanding the concept of peak oil discussed here.
AdamB wrote:I'm not one of those confused by endless peak claims, having pondered this question shortly after being introduced to the subject.
mousepad wrote:AdamB wrote:I'm not one of those confused by endless peak claims, having pondered this question shortly after being introduced to the subject.
Yeah, you might not be confused but you mix'n'match as you please to confuse others.
mousepad wrote:There's exactly 2 relevant questions regarding peak oil:
1. when is ABSOLUTE peak? As you mentioned, people seem to get it wrong. But that doesn't mean it wont happen.
mousepad wrote:2. what happens when ABSOLUTE peak is reached?
AdamB wrote:mousepad wrote:2. what happens when ABSOLUTE peak is reached?
You left out a more important intermediate stuff. Before you can answer your "what" you have to decide on the "why".
mousepad wrote:You make it too complicated.
mousepad wrote:Do you care trying to answer my 2 questions based on your expertise?
AdamB wrote:mousepad wrote:You make it too complicated.
I don't make it too complicated, it was already that way all by itself.mousepad wrote:Do you care trying to answer my 2 questions based on your expertise?
Feel free to accept any answer I give you as a weasel, and leave it at that.
In an excellent op/ed, vice chairman of IHS Markit Dan Yergin observes that it's almost inevitable that shale output will go in reverse and decline thanks to drastic cutbacks in investment and only later recover at a slow pace. Shale oil wells decline at an exceptionally fast clip and therefore require constant drilling to replenish lost supply.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:OTOH, I have NO IDEA what that might mean re price, especially in the intermediate term. For example, even if WTI gets to, say, $120 (for example) and hangs around there for months, I just read an editorial today claiming it will take a fair amount of time for the oil frackers to gear a lot of production back up in the places they ceased drilling, even if they're eager to go after "large oil profits" fairly quickly.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Plus, given how quickly OPEC can flood the market and dramatically lower prices again if they really want to smack the frackers again, who can say what price will induce many to jump back in with both feet re full-on production? I know I sure as hell can't even give a decent estimate on that price.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests