[KevO]

The U.S. Department of Energy admits that “a chance exists that we may experience a decline” of world liquid fuels production between 2011 and 2015 “if the investment is not there”, according to an exclusive interview with Glen Sweetnam, main official expert on oil market in the Obama administration.
This warning on oil output issued by Obama’s energy administration comes at a time when world demand for oil is on the rise again, and investments in many drilling projects have been frozen in the aftermath of the tumbling of crude prices and of the financial crisis.
Glen Sweetnam, director of the International, Economic and Greenhouse Gas division of the Energy Information Administration at the DoE, does not say that investments will not be “there”. Yet the answer to the issue of knowing when, where and in which quantities additional sources of oil should be put on-stream remains widely “unidentified” in the eyes of the most prominent official analyst on energy inside the Obama administration.
The DoE dismisses the “peak oil” theory, which assumes that world crude oil production should irreversibly decrease in a nearby future, in want of suffisant fresh oil reserves yet to be exploited. The Obama administration of Energy supports the alternative hypothesis of an “undulating plateau”

full article at
http://petrole.blog.lemonde.fr/2010/03/25/washington-considers-a-decline-of-world-oil-production-as-of-2011/#more-10

[KevO]

from the article

The DoE dismisses the “peak oil” theory, which assumes that world crude oil production should irreversibly decrease in a nearby future, in want of suffisant fresh oil reserves yet to be exploited. The Obama administration of Energy supports the alternative hypothesis of an “undulating plateau”. Lauren Mayne, responsible for liquid fuel prospects at the DoE, explains : “Once maximum world oil production is reached, that level will be approximately maintained for several years thereafter, creating an undulating plateau. After this plateau period, production will experience a decline.”

errm. An undulating plateau and then a decline?
and that's not peak oil?

Well at least it's official at long last and the official line now is, 'as from 2011 we are truly fucked'

ho hum

[Cyrus]

Wuddup with that mythology shortonsense?

[ian807]

For a long time, peak oil will be about price more than actual shortages. In 1997, oil was $12 a barrel. Now, it's $83 a barrel. Admittedly, this figure is jiggered by the fact that it's in nobody's self interest to add refining capacity or production capacity beyond a certain point, but that too, is a pretty clear sigh of declining capacity. The oil companies want to maximize sustained profit, so keeping production limited is in their self -interest.

[KevO]

For a long time, peak oil will be about price more than actual shortages. In 1997, oil was $12 a barrel. Now, it's $83 a barrel. Admittedly, this figure is jiggered by the fact that it's in nobody's self interest to add refining capacity or production capacity beyond a certain point, but that too, is a pretty clear sigh of declining capacity. The oil companies want to maximize sustained profit, so keeping production limited is in their self -interest.

not according to Colin Campbell

http://peakoil.com/?p=53927

[shortonsense]

Wuddup with that mythology shortonsense?

You haven't heard of peak oil mythology? You ask a reasonable question if you haven't heard the concept before, maybe I should start a new topic and we can tally them?

An example would be the causal nature of EROEI.

[shortonsense]

The oil companies want to maximize sustained profit, so keeping production limited is in their self -interest.

not according to Colin Campbell

http://peakoil.com/?p=53927

Yeah, like him changing his mind AGAIN is a surprise.....he's done it so often now its enough to make one wonder if he isn't just flipping a coin at this point.

[gollum]

The oil companies want to maximize sustained profit, so keeping production limited is in their self -interest.

not according to Colin Campbell

http://peakoil.com/?p=53927

Yeah, like him changing his mind AGAIN is a surprise.....he's done it so often now its enough to make one wonder if he isn't just flipping a coin at this point.

Short, peak oil is a farce, go tell everyone you know! The longer the populace believes peak oil is a fairy tale the longer I get to prep. Perhaps some interested parties could chip in so Short can take out some full page ads in national newspapers decrying peak oil?

[Cyrus]

Wuddup with that mythology shortonsense?

You haven't heard of peak oil mythology? You ask a reasonable question if you haven't heard the concept before, maybe I should start a new topic and we can tally them?

An example would be the causal nature of EROEI.

I understand your not seeing EROEI as an issue but how does that apply to this specific prediction as seen in the article.

I guess what I'm saying is how does the Department of Energy coming to a consensus that there will be short as well as long term supply constraints while your posts seem to indicate you don't think there will be either. Are you using different numbers to calculate your predictions? Where do you think has exploration potential to offset the 4% decline in existing fields the article speaks about? Or do you believe offsetting the declines is of no importance because alternatives and market forces will offset any pain caused my such?

PS: A thread about this mythology would be great. Discussion of multiple viewpoints of information and belief is the best way to get a real grasp on peak oil imo.

[shortonsense]

Short, peak oil is a farce, go tell everyone you know!

Can't, I would be confronted with a oil production graph showing me the error of my ways.

You aren't implying that you didn't NOTICE peak oil as it came and went are you?

The longer the populace believes peak oil is a fairy tale the longer I get to prep.

Prep away! Prepping is good! I certainly felt that way during the 1979 peak oil and I certainly needed alot of time since then to prep and it was quite worthwhile. Everyone should do prepping.

Perhaps some interested parties could chip in so Short can take out some full page ads in national newspapers decrying peak oil?

Why would I? Its historical fact, makes as much sense as denying the sun rose this morning.

[shortonsense]

I guess what I'm saying is how does the Department of Energy coming to a consensus that there will be short as well as long term supply constraints while your posts seem to indicate you don't think there will be either.

I think Schlesinger said it best when, as Secretary of the DOE, was quoted as saying:

"We only have two modes, complacency and panic."

That phrase seems to fit the information which comes out of DOE as well. Under Schlesinger, it was "running out by the end of the 80's!". Under Clinton, it was "oil will never again be above $30/bbl". And then there was the famous EIA 2037 peak prediction...and now they are back to panic.

Want to bet how many other times we'll go through the same cycle during your lifetime?

Are you using different numbers to calculate your predictions?

I don't make predictions, I make observations. I am quite willing to make predictions of course, but when I do, people get cranky because they aren't the kind of predictions they are expecting.

Where do you think has exploration potential to offset the 4% decline in existing fields the article speaks about?

The same place its been coming from for the past 5 years? I don't know where that is, but I know you can certainly see it in the numbers released by the EIA for global reserves.

Between new estimates of 500 billion from the Orinoco, 500 billion from offshore Brazil, and all of the oil the DOE keeps talking about which will come out of the ground when CO2 starts getting pumped into the ground, I certainly don't have to look very far to round up another half century worth of supply.

Or do you believe offsetting the declines is of no importance because alternatives and market forces will offset any pain caused my such?

I think that certainly is a part of it as well. The US imports about the same amount of oil now as it did 30+ years ago...and we have what, an extra 100,000,000 cars now?

Some people want to ignore this fact because it means that somehow the United States has managed to fuel 60% more cars while importing no more crude to do it. Efficiency and conservation are not to be ignored in this debate.

PS: A thread about this mythology would be great. Discussion of multiple viewpoints of information and belief is the best way to get a real grasp on peak oil imo.

Sure. You want to help me frame the question, I'll start the thread. PM me with any ideas.

[gollum]

I agree with short that there are a lot of gains we could make through efficiency and some social change. I just don't think we will until it's too late for them to be effective.

[shortonsense]

I agree with short that there are a lot of gains we could make through efficiency and some social change. I just don't think we will until it's too late for them to be effective.

Well, currently the US is sitting at a crude import level not seen since the late-70's. If we can turn the clock back that far with nothing more than a recession and the BEGINNING of The Great Transition, just think of what happens after we get a decent half decade of full scale production of PHEV's and EV's going, 5 more years of exponential growth in wind and solar power, 5 more years of increasing CAFE standards for everything else, etc etc. Skys the limit I always say.

[sparky]

.

the peaking of oil extraction is a long heralded geological fact,
some uncertainty remains as to its occurrence , none as to its reality

Peak Oil as discussed by many bloggers on this site refer more precisely to the economic and social consequences of scarcer and ( presumably ) dearer oil

there is a strong doomer line ,
it assume modern society to be on the bycicle model ,
if it slow down , it collapse in a heap

Some assume the technical and scientific gains provide a sufficient prop to avoid a general collapse , simply a painful re orientation toward a more sustainable society

Other presume it's one of the many failed predictions and scare stories beloved of medias and fringe elements ,
there is an abundance of resources ,
technology and progress will overcome possible shortage as it always had in the past
That's an Egelian position , contradiction are resolved by a mutation to a better stasis

History has provided many example of civilizations collapses ,
either from internal or external stresses , often from both simultaneously
often in quite brutal ways

One thing I totally believe , energy is no joke ,
its the very life blood of any society ,
even more vital the more complex the society is

Time will tell

[hillsidedigger]

Don't you listen to those oil company TV ads where they say world consumption of oil will increase by 50% during the next 20 years?

[mcgowanjm]

Amazingly insane:

nothing more than a recession

Only the Top 50 000 and their apologist aficionados
could say that.

The Top 10% take 83% of all US income.

Nothing but blue skies from any media.
Anyone saying different is taken off, demoted,
badgered, arrested.

Truth replaced by silence is evil.

[shortonsense]

.

Peak Oil as discussed by many bloggers on this site refer more precisely to the economic and social consequences of scarcer and ( presumably ) dearer oil

Presumably dearer is one of those assumptions which falls on the mythology side I think. How dear is, say, whale oil nowadays? And how do we measure "dear'? Price? Price has been climbing for decades, so certainly peak doesn't appear to be necessary to make oil more "dear", thats been happening all along.

One thing I totally believe , energy is no joke ,
its the very life blood of any society ,
even more vital the more complex the society is

I have to agree with that. Energy is the real deal...which is why when peakers get lumped in with general crackpottery it really chaps my hide.

Time will tell

It certainly has during past peaks.

[shortonsense]

Amazingly insane:

nothing more than a recession

Only the Top 50 000 and their apologist aficionados
could say that.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I've been prepping for decades now, and they have paid off. May your preps be so successful. And lets be thankful that your claims of starving people and other wild fantasies are just that.

The Top 10% take 83% of all US income.

And the Top 50% pay all the federal income tax. And those who work for a living are more likely to be in either group than, shall we say, "others" who sound more than a little irritated that others have traveled the road MORE traveled and made it pay off?

Nothing but blue skies from any media.
Anyone saying different is taken off, demoted,
badgered, arrested.

Truth replaced by silence is evil.

Lets bet I can find a pessimistic story, from the past week, who's author hasn't been taken off and arrested? Bet? But it has to be from this reality, not wherever it is you go when you make this stuff up.

[mcgowanjm]

And the Bottom 90% pay all FICA, sales, retail taxes.

Plus All Multinationals pay zero.

See GE/ XOM offshore for details.

“It’s not a question of the danger of contagion; contagion has already happened,” OECD secretary general Angel Gurria said.

“This is like Ebola. When you realise you have it you have to cut your leg off in order to survive,” he added, saying the crisis is "threatening the stability of the financial system".

*
World stability hangs by a thread as economies continue to unravel

Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, called for Eurozone countries to "urgently" agree a bail-out for Greece or risk a further decline in stock market confidence.

Amazing how fast gov'ts work when it's the Top
1% in a sling, eh Shorty?

[mcgowanjm]

Amazingly insane:

nothing more than a recession

Only the Top 50 000 and their apologist aficionados
could say that.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I've been prepping for decades now, and they have paid off. May your preps be so successful. And lets be thankful that your claims of starving people and other wild fantasies are just that.

The Top 10% take 83% of all US income.

And the Top 50% pay all the federal income tax. And those who work for a living are more likely to be in either group than, shall we say, "others" who sound more than a little irritated that others have traveled the road MORE traveled and made it pay off?

Nothing but blue skies from any media.
Anyone saying different is taken off, demoted,
badgered, arrested.

Truth replaced by silence is evil.

Lets bet I can find a pessimistic story, from the past week, who's author hasn't been taken off and arrested? Bet? But it has to be from this reality, not wherever it is you go when you make this stuff up.