Armageddon wrote:We are experiencing global energy shortages and these two same fools are claiming we aren’t past PO.
Armageddon wrote:We are experiencing global energy shortages and these two same fools are claiming we aren’t past PO.
AdamB wrote:
yellowcanoe wrote:AdamB wrote:
Yes, the petroleum industry has done an amazing job of pulling rabbits out of a hat and embarrassing the many people who have made predictions of peak oil in the past.
yellowcanoe wrote: I did believe we had reached peak oil in 2008 but the industry pulled another rabbit out of the hat in the form of fracking of light tight oil
yellowcanoe wrote:However the realities of geology dictate that we cannot indefinitely keep increasing oil production. There are some facts which suggest we could now be on the cusp of peak oil but we'll have to wait to see if the industry is once again able to pull a rabbit out of the hat!
AdamB wrote:Hubbert was right, even in 1956, when he explained the math of growth of extraction of finite resources. But that wasn't good enough for the Prophets to sell to the acolytes, pesky logic and math, nope. They needed doom, it can't ever be too far in the future (plus suckers will always come back after a bad call, it isn't as though they THOUGHT their way into the church, right?), and so who needs to know anything? 7 claimed peak oils (that I can name without looking) this century (including the most recent), peak oil has it all over the Mayan calendar and Nibiru for the faithful.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:The thing that really bothers me over time is that almost EVERY time, the fast crash doom re oil peak folks use the SAME damn chart. (They just move the dates). It always shows oil production going off a cliff in our face.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:
The next big peak will be a DEMAND peak, within the next few decades due to green ground vehicles coming to dominate vehicle locomotion, vs. hydrocarbon burning ground vehicles.
(Hopefully planes will follow, but that remains to be seen).
Outcast_Searcher wrote:The thing that really bothers me over time is that almost EVERY time, the fast crash doom re oil peak folks use the SAME damn chart. (They just move the dates). It always shows oil production going off a cliff in our face.
And they never give a good reason the collapse should be so soon and so steep THIS time. ("This time is different", "the economy can't afford to produce enough oil", "thermodynamics", etc. just don't cut it, no matter how often they try it, given they have no real supporting data, science, etc. behind such claims.
yellowcanoe wrote: However the impact of peak oil is going to vary widely. I would expect it to be quite damaging to poorer countries that depend entirely on imports. Initially at least, I would not expect a huge impact on wealthy countries, especially those that produce oil.
radon1 wrote:Wonder where this electricity for EVs will come from.
radon1 wrote: ICE utilizes about 30-40% of energy produced, the rest is lost to heat, and this is a very good ratio. Now we need to produce electricity at some ratio, then transport it at some ratio, then store at some ratio, then utilize in an EV at some ratio. So many additional steps and who knows how good these ratios are compared to ICE's. Where will all this additional energy come from without hydrocarbons?
Pops wrote:Fracking's other big problem is LTO wells just aren't living up to the hype. The Great Frack Scam's gig is up, turns out LTO wells will produce about a billion barrels less than promised.
Pops wrote:So, finally, the transition seems to be underway. Peak oil appears likely this decade if one believe the PR of the oil majors and various politicians. The Jetsons vs Flintstones question is, will it be demand peak or supply peak?
Or will it be a supply crunch or peak caused not by geology but simple lack of funding?
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada wrote:While I understand the psychological attraction of the "Demand Peak" hypothesis I find every argument in favor rather specious. IOW I am firmly convinced the peak when we get it will be a supply problem. Low supply will drive prices much higher which will cause demand destruction until the supply/demand situation comes back into balance.
Tanada wrote:Time for our 21st century civilization to grow up and face reality and true supply peak is going to be coming along spoiling political plans sooner than many seem to think.
AirlinePilot wrote: We produce X and our demand currently is X+ How we solve the problem of the + part is and should be a simple calculation. I DO acknowledge the miracle of US fracking has created a much more favorable balance since 10-12 years ago, but as far as I can tell, we still use more than we produce when it comes to CRUDE OIL.
Tanada wrote:We have known how to do natural gas to synthetic fuel and coal gassification to synthetic fuel for at least a century if not longer at this point.
Pops wrote:Tanada wrote:We have known how to do natural gas to synthetic fuel and coal gassification to synthetic fuel for at least a century if not longer at this point.
Yeahbutt oil prices were the highest level for the longest period in a century from 2005-2015 and yet none of the myriad technologies came to the rescue. Aside from wind and PV which I find remarkable. Still in 2019 90+% of vehicles sold globally are ICE—total fleet worldwide is 1.4 Billion and 100MM added annually.
It is easy to hand wave all the what ifs but just compare South Africa's actual per capita consumption of ALL energy to the US over the period mentioned:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG ... desc=false
CTL never did supply more than maybe half their consumption, and at that it has exemption from carbon rules and other government supports.
I'm not gonna go down the list of all the reasons why all the possible alternatives are all still in the possible list, except to state the obvious, they are all still poor-to-non-viable alternatives, not replacements. The best alternative we in the US found during that period was conservation and we did surprisingly well. refer to that first chart of per capita consumption.
Sadly, in the US, the political stacking has so far put GW, green energy and any and all conservation and alternatives in the left column and left "rolling coal" in the right. It is stalemate to the point of incapacity. Yeah that could change quickly and we all move together in some sane direction but I'm gonna bet we won't any time soon. Heck we can't even get all the Ds together.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Revi wrote:It seems like the cost of extracting liquid fuel from anything other than petroleum is too high to create anything like the $2-3 gas we're used to getting.
Revi wrote: Maybe this signals the end of easy motoring. There are lots of alternatives. Perhaps people could drive less, or get around in mass transit. A small electric vehicle uses far less energy and could be used by a lot of people to get groceries, etc. The rest of the world gets around without taking 4000 pounds of steel and rubber to get things. I hate to say it, but maybe we could figure it out too...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests