Plantagenet wrote:Hoo-RAY!!!! The Biden administration has done it again!
its against the law to use oil from the SPR to lower gasoline prices and/or boost a President's poll numbers. By law, the SPR is designated for the sole purpose of relieving oil shortages and supply disruptions
Doly wrote: the difference between lowering gasoline prices and relieving oil shortages is mostly academic, I think.
Indeed. Good thing peak oils have never had the relationship to price that is claimed.
_sluimers_ wrote:Indeed. Good thing peak oils have never had the relationship to price that is claimed.
I had to read that ten times before I understood what you mean by that.
Peak oils have never had the relationship!? You make it sound like peak oil is some type of creature.
sluimers wrote:The claims were that as oil peaks, prices would be going up and production would be going down.
sluimers wrote:Well what is currently happening right now is a bit different from the original prediction that world oil production would follow a bell curve.
sluimers wrote:Nevertheless, the current situation has already shown that at the very least self-sustaining fossil fuel production is coming to an end before mid 21th century,
sluimers wrote:as each time there's a new peak, some shoddier quality of oil or fossil fuel will be drilled or mined for, until that shoddier quality peaks as well.
shuimers wrote:This turns the bell curve into a multi-bell curve in which each peak has massive geopolitical and cultural consequences.
shuimers wrote:The 1970s US peak caused a rise in power of the Middle Eastern nations, the oil for dollars scheme with Saudi Arabia,
causing the eventual downfall of the Soviet Union.
shuimers wrote:The 2008 peak caused the rise in power of China.
As 2020 is yet another likely peak is now causing the rise of Russia
and a downfall of US allies and perhaps even the US itself.
shuimers wrote:The US shale oil and shale gas have only been profitable at current high prices,
shuimers wrote:That's very very far removed from what 'anti-peak oil' people like Michael Lynch predicted would happen.
_sluimers_ wrote:I had a a long reply to AdamB.
Unfortunately this site is designed to wipe your post if it thinks you're taking too long
to write when you press preview or submit.
So I am going to say that this forum needs an update or replacement for technical reasons.
Short answers:
- You're right that there are no future facts, but there are certainties.
The sun will rise on planet earth every 24 hours for the next 100 years is not an assumption I would hedge bets against.
sluimers wrote:- By shoddier I mean an oil type with a lower EREOI. The order should be going something like this: crude -> deep sea -> heavy crude -> tar sands -> tight oil aka shale oil -> oil shale.
sluimers wrote:I am from the EU and I would say I'm paying around 40% more, the US can't afford shale oil to fail and the cost is 20% higher than the price of oil, the other 20% comes from the war in Ukraine and I blame that on shale oil as well with EU being vassals of the US really thought they could cheaply buy shale gas from the US. They can't.
sluimers wrote:- I was talking about peak shale oil of the US for 2020. I might be wrong there, like you said, there are no future facts. But it's fairly certain that if it's not a peak, it certainly is a plateaupoint where shale oil will stop growing at higher than 3% rates, unless recovering from steep declines.
- Michael C. Lynch thought that oil was abiotic and oil would replenish itself. That fantasy has flown.
Oil types aren't measured by EROEI. Ask any of us who have industry experience. API gravity, color, market price, impurities, etc etc. No EROEI. Never. We don't do it in the decision making process, we don't use it to measure economic value, none of it.
Well, growing at rates <3% is still growing
_sluimers_ wrote:Oil types aren't measured by EROEI. Ask any of us who have industry experience. API gravity, color, market price, impurities, etc etc. No EROEI. Never. We don't do it in the decision making process, we don't use it to measure economic value, none of it.
First of all I'm quite sure that solar voltaic industry never uses the NREL Best Research-Cell Efficiency Chart for anything either,
yet it's a good first chart to see which solar voltaic technology will be dominant in the future.
That's is mostly because, just like EROEI, the trend is extremely enduring.
Cell efficiencies constantly go up and for EROEI it generally goes up for renewables and down for non-renewables.
Second of all EROEI can be used across multiple energy industries.
Unless you're a disney cartoon figure called Pocahantas, you don't think color has any use in the wind industry.
_sluimers wrote:And for market price...
The market price, which also depends on growth rates.
They can be extremely volatile, especially when the EROEI of non-renewable resource,
is already quite low.
_sluimers wrote:It has been low enough that for US shale oil producers,
they were not able to pay back their investors,
during the entire or almost almost the entire run up in
US shale oil production output until it (will) hit peak production.
_slumiers wrote:Well, growing at rates <3% is still growing
The 3% is max and decellerating quickly, because it's going to hit peak production.
_slumiers wrote:The consequences of this (and the Ukraine war) I can tell you are not small.
Because due to the Ukraine war, my country and
the whole of the EU has decided on the dumbest decision in history,
or at the very least since a certain German decided to conquer Russia where Napolean had failed,
and decided to join the US in a campaign to have where the Russian president is told that "this man must go",
help blow up it's own most profitable gas pipelines from, and to fully rely on LNG imports, mainly from the US and the Middle East,
but not before fully insulting the Middle East as well, so mainly from the US and in particular US shale gas,
something that's clearly running out and whose overproduction is extremely likely to be short-lived.
_slumiers wrote:I've seen at least one discussion* on the oilprice forum that this gas shale from the US was going to be
just as cheap as Russian pipeline gas.
Well gee, we're now and I've recieved an e-mail this week that I'm
going to have to pay a 100% increase on gas bills starting next year.
100% PERCENT!!!!
_slumiers wrote:All because our politicians turn out that they care more about subservience to the US than
not just their citizens, but even themselves.
_slumiers wrote:The age of cheap fossil fuels in the world, at least for the EU, is gone.
_slumiers wrote:P.S. I could have sworn Micheal C. Lynch was a oil in abiotic supporter
from watching a youtube video on a peak oil debate twenty years ago where he was in,
plus an article published on the subject matter.
I never heard of the abiotic oil theory before that, but I must be mixing up things from twenty years ago,
because I can't find him supporting abiotic oil theory anywhere on any time.
longpig wrote:It seems this peakoil thing is a load of crap, Western Canadian Select crude is at $5 a barrel, same price for a bigmac meal. WTI $20 same price as in 2002
theluckycountry wrote: But men like Ken Deffeys pegged it right. Expect price volatility as we go over the peak and down the long slope of decline.
theluckycountry wrote:longpig wrote:It seems this peakoil thing is a load of crap, Western Canadian Select crude is at $5 a barrel, same price for a bigmac meal. WTI $20 same price as in 2002
99% of the Peakoil community got it wrong, myself included. They assumed prices would simply climb higher forever until none but the really wealthy could afford it. But men like Ken Deffeys pegged it right.
Newfie wrote:Exactly, one things humans are really bad at is integrating mulit-generational changes into our mind set.
AdamB wrote:Could be. And certainly one day it will peak. Remember how oil in the US peaked back in 1970 and doomers were all agog about it being an immutable principle or something? Turns out, it was just their basic ignorance of geologic resources. What level is your understanding to geologic resources, in the US or globally, to not fall into the same trap?
The Old World has had some exciting adventures, I can't disagree. And being so stupid as to pin their energy future on Russia over the past decade or two is certainly one of them.
I recommend you apply some good ol' fashion New World exceptionalism and get to drilling and developing and windmill building and nuke building in order to not be toady to other fascist powers in Europe.
And without some understanding of that geologic resource thing I mentioned previously, you can't make any claim of US shale gas "clearly running out".
Find yourself some bootstraps to pull on, get a drilling rig, and try and channel American exceptionalism.
The Old World decided being a energy toady to Putin was a great idea. The Old World made a choice...welcome to the consequence.
Well, I can't cure Old World government inaction and incompetence for you. Emmigrate to the land of the free and home of the brave and leave the Old World behind?
Well...I understand that there are times where things look that way. The oil prices circa 2011-2015 certainly looked that way. But events like Putin revealing his true intentions can be game changers, I imagine the Old World will be building nukes and windmills and solar panels as fast as they can.
There is a reasonable chance that this type of fossil fuel shock is exactly what the Old World needed to kick a paradigm shift into high gear.
I hadn't ever heard even a hint of Mike being that way, I've worked with him or spoken to him at conferences on 3 different occasions on energy topics and this one never came up in any form or fashion. Which is why I asked for a reference, having never seen hide nor hair of it in his work or words myself. I collect references, as you never know when the need for a good footnote to make a point could come in handy.
ralfy wrote:Also, world oil production per capita peaked back in 1979. More oil per capita is needed to allow for industrialization.
mousepad wrote:Not at all.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests