[meemoe_uk]

The IEA monthly oil report is out
http://omrpublic.iea.org/omrarchive/18jan13full.pdf
page 66

As predicted by cornucopians and ignored by doomers, in 2012 the world has set a new high annual oil production record of 90.90 Mbpd average vs the previous record of 88.44 Mbpd average set in 2011.

2010,2011,2012
3 back to back years on years record setting of highest oil production.
Don't know how that fits into the doomer myth that we were spose to peak in 2005-6.

IEA is predicting 2013 will break the record set in 2012, and so am I!

Hmm. Some of the regulars on this forum will remember I created similar threads for the 2010 and 2011 records, but these threads have mysteriously and quietly vanished in the last few months.

Seems like the PO.com overlords find reporting of the truth to be inconvenient to their religion. Have they been hidden away in a merger of threads maybe?

[Expatriot]

One of the worst features of PO.com is the tolerance of shills.
Why on earth would any non-shill be interested in posting 1000 posts on a website discussing something in which he does not believe? Why would a creationist post 1000 times on an evolution forum?

So OP, how do you explain gasoline prices being at their highest level ever for February?
What do you have to say about Saudi Arabia's declining production over the last few months?
The report is much less sanguine than you suggest. Specific introductory comments include:

"In one fell swoop, the estimate of the ‘Call on OPEC’ for 4Q12 has been nudged up by 400 kb/d. All of a sudden, the market looks tighter than we thought. . . . OECD inventories are getting tighter . . . ."

[kublikhan]

Hmm. Some of the regulars on this forum will remember I created similar threads for the 2010 and 2011 records, but these threads have mysteriously and quietly vanished in the last few months.

Seems like the PO.com overlords find reporting of the truth to be inconvenient to their religion. Have they been hidden away in a merger of threads maybe?

Our PO overlords have not been persecuting you by deleting your threads meemoe, unfortunately. Threads of similar topics often get merged together, as what happened with your previous threads. Since your threads have IEA in the title, they got merged into the IEA thread, as this one probably will as well. But if you really want to fuel your persecution complex, perhaps you can go out and see The Passion of the Christ.

I believe this is your 2010 thread you were looking for: The Passion of the Meemoe

[ian807]

Yes, actual quantities have increased, yet prices remain higher than ever. Connect dots much? Sorry to be snide, but no discussion about energy depletion that doesn't include net energy and price, over time, is meaningless. It is noise.

The "oil" being extracted from the Canadian tar sands, the Orinoco basin, et. al. has a much lower net energy, and a much higher cost. Even the dumbest corny should be able to figure out that it takes more energy and money to extract tar through two miles of water and rock and to refine it into something like fuel. Ditto for oil sands and their thrilling 4:1 net energy ratios. Yes, there are hydrocarbons. Lots of them. A teacup of oil in a cubic yard of granite 3 miles down will never, however, be energetically or economically profitable, even if there are trillions of such teacups.

Peak oil may have officially arrived or not in 2005 (It sure looks that way). It doesn't matter. What matters is that net energy from oil continues to decline. If you understand this statement, and can do arithmetic, you have already figured out that the net energy in the first half of the world's oil was remarkably larger than in the last half.

The lengths we are going to to extract hydrocarbons is not so much about human ingenuity as it is about desperation. Economically and politically, we don't dare stop or even slow down, without risking famine, revolutions and wars that could very well turn nuclear.

Nuclear power, ironically, might save some semblance of civilization. About 2500 new nuclear plants, running on thorium would at least replace about as much energy as we get each year from petroleum (160 exajoules or thereabouts). Even if we couldn't use if as effectively as we do oil, it would be enough to keep a few billion people from starvation.

To understand, numerically, what we're facing, start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubic_mile_of_oil

[eagle eye]

Yes oil production is rising but the rate of increase seems to slow down since 2006 according to EIA.

stat4.jpg

[SeaGypsy]

From:

http://www.energyeconomist.com/a6257783 ... world.html

Ingenuity, desperation or business?
Fact is we are digging further, deeper, harder, for worsening return; just to keep the plateau going. This can't go on forever.

[dolanbaker]

Ingenuity, desperation or business?
Fact is we are digging further, deeper, harder, for worsening return; just to keep the plateau going. This can't go on forever.

No it can't!

Coal & gas will increasingly backfill until they can't, then the shít will eventually hit the fan at a time several years after the decline in oil production has become clear for all to see, with the added bonus for certain people to say "look the Peak oil didn't cause the collapse of the world!" , as the substitutes keep the show running for a few more years before the inevitable global decline in all fossil fuels.

Then what!

[SeaGypsy]

The truth just about everyone is still busy hiding from themselves will become undeniable reality. The cultural expectation of ever increasing returns is already faltering and we not even off the plateau.

[KingM]

Everyone on this site speaks with such authority. Face it, we have no clue what will happen. I've been here for years and if you'd told me back in 2005 that it would be still arguable in 2013 whether or not PO would amount to something huge or a big yawn, I'd have thought you were crazy. I was sure the situation would resolve itself one way or another by now.

Apart from being able to say quite clearly that there would be no quick crash in the first decade of the 21st century, it still seems like we know very little.

Would it kill some of you guys (on both sides) to have a bit of humility and admit that you're guessing?

[meemoe_uk]

>So OP, how do you explain gasoline prices being at their highest level ever for February?
Same question gets asked every year, for the last 100 years or so I expect. You never learn.
It's called inflation, and business. Prices on average go up regardless of what the market is doing, as the buying power of your money is intentionally eroded by increasing the money supply. Business : The price of any commodity is determined not just by supply and demand, but also by how much you can afford to spend on it. As world GDP goes up every year, so will the avergae cost of commodities, regardless of how available they are.

>Our PO overlords have not been persecuting you by deleting your threads meemoe, unfortunately.
Threads of similar topics often get merged together, as what happened with your previous threads.

It's funny how many threads with evidence against POisNOW and PO doom seem to get swallowed up in merged threads. It's not correct to merge world record oil production under an agency who announced it. That's like sub-filing World War 2 under a Daily Mail thread because the Daily Mail announced World War 2.
Do you need me to evidence you that it doesn't work the other way round? How many threads on the peakoil forum with PO hype and doom which use some news agency report still remain unmerged into a thread with the news agency as the title?

And as much as you want it to be true, I don't have a persecution complex with PO.com. It's there job to promote PO hype and undermine any truth that goes against such hype. Its nothing personal between us.

The "oil" being extracted from the Canadian tar sands, the Orinoco basin, et. al. has a much lower net energy, and a much higher cost. Even the dumbest corny should be able to figure out that it takes more energy and money to extract tar through two miles of water and rock and to refine it into something like fuel. Ditto for oil sands and their thrilling 4:1 net energy ratios. Yes, there are hydrocarbons. Lots of them. A teacup of oil in a cubic yard of granite 3 miles down will never, however, be energetically or economically profitable, even if there are trillions of such teacups.

The " we're squeezing a few drops of tar out of a stone quarry " story is another myth cooked up by PO doomers when they were confronted with the fact that peak oil wasn't happening. In fact the average oil quality now is pretty light and sweet compared to history, and its getting lighter and sweeter. As usual, that bane of doomers - improving technology - has given access to a load of new high quality oil reserves - in particular shale oil which is very good oil ( not a small splat of tar per cubic mile of dusty sandstone as every doomer fantasizes ).
No its all good plentiful, cheap high quality oil for the next few years.

World’s average crude oil is becoming lighter and sweeter

The cultural expectation of ever increasing returns is already faltering and we not even off the plateau.
We now have energy reserves to keep us going at today's prosperity for over 10 billion years.

[kublikhan]

It's funny how many threads with evidence against POisNOW and PO doom seem to get swallowed up in merged threads. It's not correct to merge world record oil production under an agency who announced it. That's like sub-filing World War 2 under a Daily Mail thread because the Daily Mail announced World War 2.
Do you need me to evidence you that it doesn't work the other way round? How many threads on the peakoil forum with PO hype and doom which use some news agency report still remain unmerged into a thread with the news agency as the title?

And as much as you want it to be true, I don't have a persecution complex with PO.com. It's there job to promote PO hype and undermine any truth that goes against such hype. Its nothing personal between us.

Yes please evidence me. Start from the beginning of the forum and work your way forward. I want you to compile a list of every doom thread that was merged, and compare it to a list of every corny thread that was merged. I am certain you are onto something insidious here meemoe now we just need the proof to unmask this vile conspiracy. Together, we will stop this merge thread abuse!

[kublikhan]

In fact the average oil quality now is pretty light and sweet compared to history, and its getting lighter and sweeter. As usual, that bane of doomers - improving technology - has given access to a load of new high quality oil reserves - in particular shale oil which is very good oil ( not a small splat of tar per cubic mile of dusty sandstone as every doomer fantasizes ).
No its all good plentiful, cheap high quality oil for the next few years.

That ultra light oil you mentioned is actually causing more problems for US refiners than the ultra heavy stuff. We finally got our refineries tooled to process the heavy Canadian sludge, then this ultra light oil production starts surging. Not only are our refineries not equipped to handle all this ultra light oil, but it ends up making mostly gasoline and very little diesel. This is a problem as worldwide diesel demand is up while gasoline demand is down.

Here’s the situation. Most crude oils when they come out of the ground are relatively balanced across the yield curve. So for example, a light crude might yield 25% naphtha & lighter products, 30% middle distillates, 30% gas oils and 15% bottoms. A heavy crude will have a lot less naphtha and middle distillates and a lot more bottoms, but still the yield is spread over the different fractions.

But what if you had a crude oil with a lot of naphtha and lighter fractions, a lot of heavy bottoms and nothing in the middle? Big on one end – big on the other end. Like a dumbbell. For decades unscrupulous crude oil marketers have been buying batches of cheap heavy crude and very light crude. They then blend the two together to make a crude with API and sulfur specification that looks like West Texas Intermediate (WTI) and sell the resulting cocktail to unsuspecting refiners as WTI. Refiners hate these artificial blends because their refinery processes are balanced for real WTI, so the fake dumbbell grade throws off operations. Also because dumbbell crudes have little middle distillate fractions, the refinery produces less diesel, fuel oil and jet fuel the refined products that come from the middle distillate range. These days with diesel and related products at high prices, that’s a bad thing.

because of the influx of a mixture of very light shale and very heavy Canadian crudes, the entire crude slate for U.S. refiners is being ‘dumbbelled’. Here’s how:

On one end, as we’ve discussed here in many RBN blogs, US domestic crude production from shale is growing rapidly. The majority of this new crude production is light sweet crude, with a significant percentage consisting of what TM&C calls Super Light crude (42 – 60 API) and for the first time in US history, large volumes of condensate – very high API gravity ultra-light liquids that are being produced from shale basins –plays like the Eagle Ford and Granite Wash. These super-lights and condensates are increasing as a percentage of the total U.S. crude mix, and are one end of our dumbbell.

The other end of the dumbbell is growing too. That is because of increasing imports of Canadian crude, which is super-heavy. We’ve talked here many times (see It's a Bitumen, oil - Does it go too far) about how very heavy crude extracted from tar sands (called bitumen) are mixed with various diluants to enable them to flow in pipelines (the resultant mix known as dilbit). In effect, dilbit is a dumbbell crude by definition.

Put these two developments together and you have a situation where the entire U.S. crude slate is starting to look more like those dumbbell crudes that the refineries don’t like – with similar consequences – Yields of middle distillates will decline, and gasoline production as a percentage of total refinery output will grow. Both of these developments are important, so let’s look a little closer at their implications.

Gulf Coast Diesel Export Boom/Bust: For the past two years, US Gulf Coast refineries have benefited from a booming diesel export market. This is because many Gulf Coast refineries are well equipped to process conventional crudes from West Texas and the offshore Gulf of Mexico to produce high yields of the middle distillates that diesel is blended from. US refiners also have better technology to remove sulfur from the distillate pool so that they can produce diesel to ultra-low sulfur European and US specifications. These advantages together with tight international low sulfur diesel supplies have allowed Gulf Coast refineries to profit by exporting product into global markets. As the dumbbell crude mix grows as a percentage of the total crude oil supply (backing out international waterborne imports), production of diesel, fuel oil and jet fuel will fall. There just won’t be as many middle distillate molecules around. Ultimately this will wipe out much of the lucrative diesel export market.
Reduced Demand for Gasoline and Export Growth: In contrast to diesel, US domestic demand for gasoline has shrunk over the last 5 years as drivers use fuel-efficient autos and as ethanol mandate volumes replace gasoline in the tank. While gasoline exports have been growing, the international market for gasoline is more competitive than it is for diesel, so margins are lower. the refiner’s marginal return from manufacturing diesel has been higher than the marginal return from making gasoline.

Because of the high naphtha content of super light sweet shale crudes and the diluent component of dilbit, there will be a lot more naphtha in the U.S. crude mix, and that will make a lot more gasoline. So much more that gasoline production (as a percentage of total refinery output) will grow, resulting in the need for significant increases in gasoline exports.

Growing Supplies of Light Sweet Crude Will Reduce Refining Capacity: Many U.S. refiners simply do not have the capacity to run lighter-than-planned shale crudes. Their refineries are not configured to process increasing quantities of light crudes due to column limitations, compressor constraints, overhead cooling issues and other problems – all of which can limit charge rates. Put simply, that means the refinery process overflows because the crude produces more light products than the units were built to handle. The only way to counteract this short term is to reduce the throughput volume. As a result, U.S. refinery capacity will decline by the equivalent of 2 or 3 average refineries during the 2013-17 timeframe unless compensating investments are made.

Dumbbell Lessons Refiners Need to Learn

U.S. refiners – thinking a few years ago that most of the growth in crude supplies would be heavy crude oil from Canada have recently retooled to favor the processing of those much heavier imported crudes. That’s exactly the opposite of what has ended up happening with the largest growth in crude volumes coming from light sweet shale crudes and condensates. The sheer volume of new condensate and light crude coming on stream will cause these refiners a variety of problems. We can summarize these problems into three general categories.

First, refineries are designed to handle certain mixes of crude oils with some equipment handling the lighter fractions while other equipment handles the heavier ends (See Sandy Fielden’s Complex Refining 101). Put in a crude oil mix that has way too much of the light fractions, and the refiner’s equipment for handling that material gets maxed out. And as that happens, the refiner’s equipment for handling the heavier ends can become underutilized. A refiner can adjust to run the lighter crude mix – by cutting back on total capacity. It works, but it’s a costly way to fix the problem because expensive refining capacity is underutilized. Ultimately the only way to fix the problem is to invest in new processing equipment.

Second, condensates and light crudes have much lower yields of distillates (diesel, jet fuel) and much higher yields of naphthas (motor gasoline and similar products). This is a problem for refiners because gasoline prices are much cheaper than diesel prices and refiners are making big margins on distillate-derived products and less money on gasoline. So the lighter the input crude mix, the lower the margin.

Third, a number of complex refiners are just completing major upgrades planned years ago to run more heavy crudes. Essentially this makes problem #1 above worse for the refineries that went this direction. They have the ability to run more heavies just when the supply of lights and condensates is increasing.

For all of these reasons, the refinery system is starting to choke on light crudes and is responding with the one way to make the economics work out – reducing the price they will pay for condensates. That $15 dollar differential mentioned earlier could get larger in the coming months. So if larger volumes of condensates continue to go to refineries they will do so at a lower price.

Fifty Shades of Condensates – Where is All This Condensate Going?

[ralfy]

Related:

"The authors of the BP report have asked us to highlight that a large part of the difference between consumption and production, in the charts above, is accounted for by such things as biofuels, oil made from coal and other non-conventional sources, which are not included in their production figures."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailycha ... onsumption

[meemoe_uk]

It's funny how many threads with evidence against POisNOW and PO doom seem to get swallowed up in merged threads. It's not correct to merge world record oil production under an agency who announced it. That's like sub-filing World War 2 under a Daily Mail thread because the Daily Mail announced World War 2.
Do you need me to evidence you that it doesn't work the other way round?

Yes please evidence me. Start from the beginning of the forum and work your way forward.

Well here's just the 1st page of threads

http://peakoil.com/forums/major-oil-pool-found-t328.html#p3325

not merged under freeRealTime thread

oil-gas-journal-energy-prices-surge-t698.html#p6248

not merged under OGJ editor thread

world-facing-a-potential-triple-whammy-t1835.html#p20193

not merged under morganstanley thread

rebirth-of-the-chamber-pot-t2364.html#p26408

not merged under zmag thread

aljazeera-acknowledges-peak-oil-t2489.html
waving-goodbye-to-oil-t2506.html

not mergerd under aljazera thread

oil-supplies-over-estimated-t2599.html#p29484

not merged under channel4 news thread

vonnegut-speaks-out-about-peak-oil-t2734.html#p31254

not merged under inthesetimes thread

oil-market-pullback-may-be-short-lived-t3038.html#p34831

not merged under msnbc.msn.com news thread

various-important-articles-t3478.html#p40463

not merged under any of the sources thread

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/ ... 6890.shtml

not merged under cbsnews thread

bigger-than-expected-supply-drop-t4097.html#p49418

not merged under bloomberg thread

santos-oil-find-in-jeruk-field-off-east-java-t4326.html#p53151

not merged under ft news thread or the courier mail thread

texaco-admits-peak-oil-t5164.html

not merged under boston news thread

if-you-can-t-play-the-game-then-complain-about-the-rules-t5268.html#p65742

not merged under rte news thread

the-answer-to-it-all-not-t5317.html#p66408

not merged under smirkingchimp news thread

madagascar-75-billion-barrels-of-oil-found-t4967.html

not merged under west austrialian or china daily news thread

article-about-oil-pricing-t5461.html#p67794

not merged under vheadline news thread

oil-estimate-up-writer-needs-dictionary-t5731.html#p71481
gas-price-expected-to-jump-25cents-in-days-t5521.html

not merged under cnn news thread

peak-oil-early-warning-oil-prices-t6433.html

not merged under bbc news thread

salute-to-professor-hatfield-s-early-po-warning-t6462.html

not merged under oilfield.com thread

pearls-of-wisdom-on-peak-oil-t6428.html#p81169

not merged under ar15.com thread

peak-steel-t3156.html

not merged under yahoo news or steel thread

Most of them are peak oil hype. A couple are speculative oil finds. None of them assess the reality that back in 2004-5 the world was breaking oil production records. This evidences that pro hype PO threads don't get merged under the news agency that reports them.
It's plain and clear even from the 1st page. I think u already know. The only reason you wanted evidence was because you identified it as a bit of a long task for me to stumble over. Anyway you said you'd muck in. You can do the 2nd page to even the workload so far and then return my initiative by doing the 3rd page. But you ought to start a new thread somewhere rather than this one.

[meemoe_uk]

That ultra light oil you mentioned is actually causing more problems for US refiners than the ultra heavy stuff. We finally got our refineries tooled to process the heavy Canadian sludge, then this ultra light oil production starts surging. Not only are our refineries not equipped to handle all this ultra light oil, but it ends up making mostly gasoline and very little diesel. This is a problem as worldwide diesel demand is up while gasoline demand is down.

Despite once protesting you weren't a doomer looking for ways to spin every news article into a bit of doomer porn, you didnt waste any time doing just that with this article.

Oh no, so the world has a nicer cleaner supply of oil? How do you turn that into doom and gloom? Of course ! Fewer jobs in cleaning oil ! Doom ! Gloom ! World ecomony crashs !
What a great doomer toy you've found for yourself to play with.
With this toy it's win win for doomers in any situation.

Dirty park -> we all catch diseases from dirty park and die -> doom
Clean park -> no jobs in cleaning park, no money, economy crashs -> doom

Dirty coal -> pollutes and poisons environment, so we all catch diseases and die - > doom
Clean coal -> no jobs in cleaning coal, no money, economy crashs -> doom

Sorry Kub, so far, despite your efforts to rise above the sheeple who're prone to doom and hype, you're effectively no better than they.

[Beery1]

With your philosophy it's win win for cornucopians in any situation.

Dirty park -> the air will magically clean itself -> we all live in utopia.
Clean park -> we all live in utopia.

Dirty coal -> the air will magically clean itself -> we all live in utopia.
Clean coal -> peak oil is irrelevant, we all live in utopia.

But if we look at reality for a minute, your Panglossian Utopia doesn't seem to be playing out on the world stage: the Middle-east is a mess, Europe is in bankruptcy, Africa is war-torn, etc., etc., etc.

The world is messed up. If peak oil isn't real, why are oil prices so high? And if technology can save us even if it does occur, why isn't that already happening?

[meemoe_uk]

That's not my philosophy beery, its kublikans, please concentrate on who said what and who is referring to who.

But if we look at reality for a minute, your Panglossian Utopia doesn't seem to be playing out on the world stage: the Middle-east is a mess, Europe is in bankruptcy, Africa is war-torn, etc., etc., etc.

It's playing out exactly as I'd expect. Middle east has 'been a mess' since about 1900 starting with the british operations to destroy the ottoman empire and split the region into weak warring factions. The british didnt want the ottomans to rule the world with there huge reserves of oil. The same policy is in operation today. Europe is not bankrupt, its BAU for there to be a permanent percieved monetary crisis since around 1600AD. Africa is kept very weak so that when international businesses want to loot some resource from africa there is no strong sovereign nation established to oppose or demand payment for the exploitation of those resources.
The world may look messed up to those who swim in mass media hype, but it looks tidy to those who hold world power.
> If peak oil isn't real, why are oil prices so high?
The price of oil isn't just about supply and demand. The cost is controlled by TPTB. The price is bumped up at the mo to fund the decades long 'war on terror' ( invasion of africa and the middle east ) and the upheaval of the oil industry that started back in 2001.

>And if technology can save us even if it does occur, why isn't that already happening?
Because the powers that be dont see that they need it. They are happy in with their multi billion dollar industries and lifestyles.

[Econ101]

Prices, if you use dollars as the measure are going up, not because of any fundamentals with milk, oil or bread but rather political policies that erode the value of the dollar. Using different measures prices are about the same. For instance a gallon of gas is worth about a quarter if you use a silver one minted prior to 1964.

We are not scraping the bottom of the barrel as some would like to believe. We are opening up new areas of development and this has a lot of front end costs that will be recovered in the long run. The financial burden on oil comes after it is above ground. higher prices are not signs of shortage. they are more than likely signs of government interference.

Even though the numbers are large they are no proof of peak oil either. Because its tough to grasp large numbers many people will simply draw incorrect conclusions. What was a large, if not unbelievable, production number for the crack-pot that first proposed peak oil?

[kublikhan]

Oh no, so the world has a nicer cleaner supply of oil? How do you turn that into doom and gloom? Of course ! Fewer jobs in cleaning oil ! Doom ! Gloom !

Nice little strawman you setup there.

Here's what I actually said:
kub: The us refinery system is currently not setup to handle large quantities of condensate and ultra light oil. And condensate produces primarily gasoline, with little middle distilitates like diesel. The world market for gasoline is already oversupplied while diesel is in high demand.

And here's the strawman you setup to attack:
kub: The world is bursting with super good oil that makes cars cars go voom voom and oil prices go down down! But this is bad bad for poor dirty Canadian oil All those people who wash the dirty oil have job no more

Your slipping meemoe. You usually can do better than this.

Prices, if you use dollars as the measure are going up, not because of any fundamentals with milk, oil or bread but rather political policies that erode the value of the dollar. Using different measures prices are about the same.

Why would you post something that can be proven wrong in 5 seconds?

[meemoe_uk]

Same difference kub. I'll break it down for you

> The us refinery system is currently not setup to handle large quantities of condensate and ultra light oil.
Yep. US refinery system is currently set up to handle lower grade oil

>And condensate produces primarily gasoline, with little middle distilitates like diesel.
Yep.

> The world market for gasoline is already oversupplied while diesel is in high demand.
=
All those people who wash the dirty oil have job no more
Yep. Markets are currently set up to consume more of the products of lower grade oil. They will have to change.

At both the refining and consuming ends of the oil processing the world economy is more used to lower grade oil.

Your slipping Kub. Face it, you've been beat fair and square by the meemoe again. Squirming around with wording doesn't do you any credit.

BTW, it's a victory in itself that you even resort to bringing up a small problem such as quality of oil vs what industry and market are currently setup up to process. This is a thread about the 2012 world record oil production, and you've derailed it.
How's it going with page 2 and 3 btw?