Go Back   This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum > Main Floor > Science Center > Power Station

Power Station A wing of the Science Center dedicated to the discussion of energy issues. This includes both technical and political discussions of current and future conventional and renewable energy issues.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-03-2014, 07:46 PM   #1
dharma
Git it, booger.
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,645
Thanks: 1,130
Thanked 2,708 Times in 1,053 Posts
Default We Are Never Going To Run Out Of Oil

Actually a less inflammatory header than the original, which I've finessed, since liberals, wrong as they are about a great many things, have no particular monopoly on fuzzy thinking, especially when it comes to energy. And, I'm not sure either header is correct!

Quote:
One thing is for sure, the technological advancements we’ve seen in extracting fossil fuels is light years ahead of the progress we’ve made in the state-planned alternative energy infrastructure. Yet, the same people who were skeptics of shale ... believe windmills will solve our non-existent crisis. Probably because progress can often be confused with wishful thinking.
http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/02/...ergy-is-wrong/
dharma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2014, 12:27 AM   #2
ralfy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Peak oil isn't about running out of oil or reserves but production reaching a peak.

Crude oil production peaked in 2005. Shale oil has been used to make up for that. U.S. shale oil is expected to peak in only a few years.

Oil price fell not because of significant increases in oil production but because of a slight decrease in demand due to economic crisis in Europe and China. Meanwhile, the marginal cost is still high.

Finally, peak oil is not a "liberal" idea but a scientific fact. That's why two-thirds of oil-producing countries have reached or gone past peak production. And if oil production per capita is considered (which is more logical since oil is used by a growing global population), then that peaked back in 1979. The reason why the effects of that were not felt significantly is because the global middle class was small back then. Now, it is growing.
ralfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2014, 08:17 AM   #3
Oric
El Turco
 
Oric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 8,291
Thanks: 836
Thanked 2,217 Times in 980 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralfy View Post

Oil price fell not because ...
To teach the Russians a lesson
Oric is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oric For This Useful Post:
rryan (12-04-2014)
Old 12-04-2014, 11:56 AM   #4
andy
Senior Level 5
 
andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Posts: 5,592
Thanks: 635
Thanked 1,227 Times in 659 Posts
I only a few months ago actually, really, truly, believed "peak oil" existed as a threat and potential reality. Now, after this interlude started, I learn it is real, serious, and a looming threat. I now - in my gut, realize we postponed the looming reality. Shale oil/fracking saved the US (for now) and the world (for now) by adding hope and stability during the recession. I am glad now, I did not understand how close we came!

a
andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2014, 01:45 PM   #5
Sysiphus
Senior Level 6
 
Sysiphus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 8,566
Thanks: 708
Thanked 1,885 Times in 1,079 Posts
I think we will run out of reasonably cheap oil and natural gas, though. Give me $500 or $1000, and I will always be able to get a barrel out of the ground somehow. But, at what cost? As oil gets more expensive, it will contribute to inflation and gradually lower our standard of living. Eventually, we reach a point where it is so expensive that we have to forego energy-intensive activities and goods because they are simply too expensive. We currently see this in certain contexts, like aluminum production in areas that have high energy costs. Hopefully, a cheaper, safe, alternative source of energy will become available before this happens, e.g. fusion or efficient solar power. But, I am not betting on it.
Sysiphus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2014, 08:25 AM   #6
ralfy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oric View Post
To teach the Russians a lesson
A slight decrease leads to a substantial drop:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-1...rash-explained

---------- Post added at 07:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:23 AM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
I only a few months ago actually, really, truly, believed "peak oil" existed as a threat and potential reality. Now, after this interlude started, I learn it is real, serious, and a looming threat. I now - in my gut, realize we postponed the looming reality. Shale oil/fracking saved the US (for now) and the world (for now) by adding hope and stability during the recession. I am glad now, I did not understand how close we came!

a
Crude oil production peaked back in 2005. That's why shale oil is now being use, and that's expected to peak after only a few years.

Marginal cost for both is high (that's why capex and debts are high), and lower oil prices are not helping.

Finally, if one considers global oil production per capita (which is more logical because oil is used by a growing population), then that peaked back in 1979:

http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/...-peak-oil.html
ralfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2014, 10:13 AM   #7
dharma
Git it, booger.
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,645
Thanks: 1,130
Thanked 2,708 Times in 1,053 Posts
Shale oil is crude oil, ralfy. Light, sweet crude, in fact for most of the US.

Marginal costs for oil extraction have been rising since the days of 10˘/bbl. It'x not a new phenomenon.

Oil production per capita would be relevant if oil consumption per capita had stayed the same. One of the benefits of technology, however, is efficiency improvement. We use less because we need less (and because it's more expensive; supply and demand).
dharma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2014, 11:18 AM   #8
andy
Senior Level 5
 
andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Posts: 5,592
Thanks: 635
Thanked 1,227 Times in 659 Posts
Interesting. So what we are seeing is the actual "reverse" of Peak Oil. Prices are dropping greatly on a slight decrease in demand?!

And, in Peak Oil, you have great price increases as demand outpaces fixed supply (resulting in huge price increases).
andy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2014, 04:05 AM   #9
ralfy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dharma View Post
Shale oil is crude oil, ralfy. Light, sweet crude, in fact for most of the US.
Global crude oil production without U.S. shale oil peaked back in 2005:

http://crudeoilpeak.info/world-crude...to-2005-levels

U.S. shale oil is expected to peak by 2020. If crude oil production for the rest of the world drops, it will pull down total crude production.

Meanwhile, demand has to rise by up to 2 pct per annum to maintain economic growth, or the equivalent of one Saudi Arabia every seven years. If unconventional production (including natural gas) has to be used to make up for a lack of fossil fuels, then more new oil will be needed because energy returns are low.

Quote:

Marginal costs for oil extraction have been rising since the days of 10˘/bbl. It'x not a new phenomenon.
The point isn't that they're rising. It's that they are rising at significant rates compared to the past:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLCsMRr7hAg

On top of that, what is supposed to replace crude oil also has high marginal costs.

Quote:

Oil production per capita would be relevant if oil consumption per capita had stayed the same. One of the benefits of technology, however, is efficiency improvement. We use less because we need less (and because it's more expensive; supply and demand).
Oil consumption per capita had remained stable because of a small middle class. That has now changed:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22956470

In capitalist systems, efficiency does not lead to less consumption but more. That's because what's conserved thanks to efficiency is sold for profit.

Thus, we are not using less but more, and not just oil but many other material resources.

Finally, the reason why oil is more expensive is because of peak oil. That is, supply can hardly increase to meet demand. That's why we are forced to use U.S. shale oil. That's why crude oil production for the rest of the world barely went up even after oil price tripled.
ralfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2014, 04:13 AM   #10
ralfy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy View Post
Interesting. So what we are seeing is the actual "reverse" of Peak Oil. Prices are dropping greatly on a slight decrease in demand?!
It's not the reverse of peak oil because marginal costs remain high. It's the result of financial crisis, leading to lower demand in Europe and in China.

Quote:

And, in Peak Oil, you have great price increases as demand outpaces fixed supply (resulting in huge price increases).
Peak oil does not refer to price or demand but to extraction rate reaching a peak. According to the IEA, crude oil production peaked in 2005. According to the EIA, shale oil is expected to peak by 2020.

Demand, of course, may affect the time in which peak production takes place. That is, if there's little demand, then production rate can be lowered. But it's not a relevant point because the result of peak oil is also lower demand.

The reason why demand dropped is because of continued economic crisis, as seen in Europe and in China, as well as fears that another crash will take place. That's why not just oil but other markets became jittery.

The catch is that even a slight drop in demand may lead to a substantial drop in price:

http://thisbluemarble.com/showpost.p...70&postcount=6

And that's bad news if marginal costs and debts are high:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christop...to-oil-output/

leading eventually to lower production.

Finally, it's possible that prices will not increase considerably, as the global economy may crash when that happens:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...trained-future
ralfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2014, 01:46 PM   #11
BuilderBob
Senior Member
 
BuilderBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, UK
Posts: 1,418
Thanks: 231
Thanked 433 Times in 276 Posts
Well, it appears if fuel becomes a problem you can grow your own in your own FUEL FARM.

It even recycles most of the CO2. The science is rather beyond me so any explanations might help.
BuilderBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2015, 06:29 PM   #12
Potemkin
Omne ignotum pro magnifico
 
Potemkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 28,075
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 110
Thanked 5,819 Times in 2,881 Posts
Alternative energy people can masturbate all they want about wind, solar, tidal, pollution damage to the environment, whatever but people will never go to it until it becomes cheaper than hydrocarbons.

Humans will be human.

Even then it will take several generations to make the change. Our infrastructure is just too developed on hydrocarbons.

It is likely that we will be long gone from this planet.

The only scenario I could ever imagine if it was to immediately change was is some scientist was to release some oil eating bacteria, it went out of control, and all the oil in the world was consumed. (Or as soon after it was pumped from the ground.)

I think there was a science fiction story with that scenario but I did see a science news report where someone does use bacteria.
__________________
“The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness.”
― Robert A. Heinlein, The Puppet Masters
Potemkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2015, 04:48 AM   #13
BuilderBob
Senior Member
 
BuilderBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, UK
Posts: 1,418
Thanks: 231
Thanked 433 Times in 276 Posts
Hmm... seems like bacteria already eats up oil.

Study: Oil-Eating Bacteria Mitigated Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

There are quite a few oil seepages in the Gulf of Mexico which might account for why the bacteria was already there.

Last edited by BuilderBob; 01-02-2015 at 04:51 AM. Reason: add info
BuilderBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2015, 12:24 PM   #14
Dietrich
Niche player
 
Dietrich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,166
Thanks: 405
Thanked 882 Times in 491 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Potemkin View Post
Alternative energy people can masturbate all they want about wind, solar, tidal, pollution damage to the environment, whatever but people will never go to it until it becomes cheaper than hydrocarbons.
Of course. Reminds me of the old saw: what fits in a teacup, costs 25cents, and can move 2 tons a distance of a mile?
Answer: oil.

Unfortunately, for us hoomans, it's a finite resource. The only question is when does it become so scarce, and expensive to extract, that our current lifestyle becomes increasingly impossible to maintain.
Dietrich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2015, 02:34 PM   #15
BuilderBob
Senior Member
 
BuilderBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire, UK
Posts: 1,418
Thanks: 231
Thanked 433 Times in 276 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dietrich View Post
Unfortunately, for us hoomans, it's a finite resource. The only question is when does it become so scarce, and expensive to extract, that our current lifestyle becomes increasingly impossible to maintain.
Not at all. See Post 11 above. Just grow your own. All you need is algae, water, CO2 and lots of sun.

Seems like an ideal business for some of these cash strapped Pacific Island communities.
BuilderBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2015, 03:30 PM   #16
dharma
Git it, booger.
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,645
Thanks: 1,130
Thanked 2,708 Times in 1,053 Posts
Without a (well-contained) ocean to work with, I am baffled as to how it could possibly scale to be anything other than an interesting experiment.
dharma is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
oil, run

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.