Jump to content


Photo

Peak Oil - Bull or Bear?


106 replies to this topic

Poll: Peak Oil - Bull or Bear? (104 member(s) have cast votes)

Peak Oil - Overhyped alarmism

  1. I'm a Peak Oil bull. It's over-hyped alarmism (5 votes [4.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.81%

  2. I'm a Peak Oil bear. This has the potential to take down our civilisation (55 votes [52.88%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.88%

  3. Undecided. It will hurt a but, but ultimately technology will resolve the issue (34 votes [32.69%])

    Percentage of vote: 32.69%

  4. Undecided. I don't really know much about it, thats why I am looking around this board (10 votes [9.62%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.62%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#41 alex a

alex a

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 71 posts

Posted 12 September 2006 - 05:52 PM

It's an excellent email, but I can't help thinking you got a standard reply. Your MP is probably far too busy claiming her travel expenses for her holiday to have spent time reading that lot. On the other hand, maybe you have an MP that does take it seriously, but they are not the type of people that I have faith in to wake up and smell the coffee.


I am preparing a document for their policy review which will contain some policy ideas that the Tories should consider adopting. I will also stress that this problem is so big and so large that the parties should agree to take a non-partisan approach to this. Furthermore the action taken should really be at the European or World-wide level. Feel free to add any of your policies to this thread and I may include them.

Also I would suggest that if you are registered to vote to e-mail your MP and let them know the seriousness of this situation. MP's may do something if they feel there are votes in it. Also I think that deep down beneath the thick hide you may even find a conscience in there. You can google for houses of parliament and it should bring back information on this.

I have 2 young children - and frankly now I wish I hadn't have bothered with the Peak oil and runaway global waming scenario.

#42 alternative-energy

alternative-energy

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 33 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 January 2007 - 08:57 PM

A few distinguished speakers at the recent Soil Association conference. Topic Peak Oil
Download the podcasts

I'm trying to learn how to inflation proof myself... is it possible?

#43 alex a

alex a

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 71 posts

Posted 30 January 2007 - 09:39 PM

Ooh lovely a virus. How kind!

#44 DrBubb

DrBubb

    Tri-Millennium Guru

  • Super Admins
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong & London
  • Interests:Trading and investing in stocks and commodities. Writing articles on related subjects, while building this website. I am interested in creating ways for communities

Posted 31 October 2007 - 07:24 AM

WE ARE PAST IT - Past the Peak in Oil, argues Kunstler:

Kunstler part 2


We are going to make "other arrangements" on how we occupy our planet...

Thanks to "the Global Energy predicament" / i.e. Peak Oil

+ Greatest amount of crude oil pumped - May 2005
+ Greatest amount of crude and oil liquids - 2006

Suffering people in the third world have had to opt-out thanks to rising prices.
The competition amongst the first-world countries will keep pushing up prices.

Fewer and fewer countries are net exporters of oil

+ Canada
+ Mexico
+ Saudi Arabia

are the main sources of America for oil. They are losing their export capacity
The market is "bipolar", swinging back and forth from a focus on Inflation to Deflation. Bet on swings; and stay flexible. What are bipolar markets? See: http://tinyurl.com/GEI-Manix

#45 Hogwild

Hogwild

    Tri-Centurion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 31 October 2007 - 10:20 AM

Some of the largest oilfields in the world are now in terminal decline. Cantarelle in Mexico is now on the otherside of the exponential curve - this time it is declining. New extraction well methodology has only served to increase the efficiency and speed by which we consume. Multi head drilling under the oilfield boosts production but when it is close to running out there will be little warning from the gradual watering out that has happened in the past in Oman and Kuwait. The "water cut" will suddenly go to 85% and the field will be totatlly uneconomic.
The same problem has already hit Ghawar in Saudi Arabia. This field is enormous stretching 120 miles in a 30 mile corridor - say, London to Birmingham in a 30 mile wide band! But, it has been pumping since 1954. The West has frequently leaned on the Saudis to pump more oil as "swing" producer. This has not helped the oil wells. They need to "rest"; if they are not allowed to the recoverable oil proportion goes down. It damages the structure of the well. Ghawar is "watering out" fast.
The Saudis have very little oil left on shore. The oil they have is deep under the sands and as thick as Canadian Tar sands. The easy oil has been depleted. Why else would they have out-bid all the Western oil companies, just before Katrina struck,for 3 giant OFFSHORE drilling rigs. The Saudis are now having to drill on their continental shelf. Why endure this cost if you have plenty of "reserves" on shore!??
Oil is grossly underpriced. A pint of oil is priced at about 40 pence per pint; the price of bottled water.
Oil will go a lot higher, and sooner than we think. The rate of depletion of world oilfields far exceeds the rate of new discoveries. The big oil companies on Wall Street consider it better use of resources to buy back their shares than to drill. This tells us that the oil companies know that the value of the oil reserves in the ground is very lowly valued.
Sincerely
Hogwild

#46 DrBubb

DrBubb

    Tri-Millennium Guru

  • Super Admins
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong & London
  • Interests:Trading and investing in stocks and commodities. Writing articles on related subjects, while building this website. I am interested in creating ways for communities

Posted 31 October 2007 - 01:31 PM

Some of the largest oilfields in the world are now in terminal decline. Cantarelle in Mexico is now on the otherside of the exponential curve...


Good points.
And if we are really past the peak, this will change many iportnat things about our society and our global economy.

Kunstler has some intriging thoughts on the coming "Long Emergency"
The market is "bipolar", swinging back and forth from a focus on Inflation to Deflation. Bet on swings; and stay flexible. What are bipolar markets? See: http://tinyurl.com/GEI-Manix

#47 MunsterK

MunsterK

    Centurion

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 170 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 09:48 PM

Good points.
And if we are really past the peak, this will change many iportnat things about our society and our global economy.

Kunstler has some intriging thoughts on the coming "Long Emergency"

IEA are using very strong language w.r.t. oil supply..........

November 7, 2007
Warning on Impact of China and India Oil Demand
By JAD MOUAWAD and JULIA WERDIGIER
LONDON, Nov. 7 — A leading international energy agency today urged oil-producing countries to replenish crude oil inventories in light of a record oil price.
In unusually urgent tones, the International Energy Agency warned that demand for oil imports by China and India will almost quadruple by 2030 and could create a supply “crunch” as soon as 2015 if oil producers do not step up production, energy efficiency fails to improve and demand from the two countries is not dampened.

“At current prices the market is signaling that stocks need to be higher, something that is in the power of producers to address,” Nobuo Tanaka, executive director of the I.E.A., told journalists at a briefing in London. “Since this time last year, the world outlook has deteriorated. Demand is higher and supply worsening.”
Bolstered by speedy economic development and industrialization, energy demand from Asia has been one of the main contributors to higher oil prices. Over the last two years, China and India accounted for about 70 percent of the increase in energy demand and the world’s energy needs would increase 55 percent by 2030. Another reason for higher prices is investments not made by oil producers, including the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the agency said.
Strong demand has helped push oil prices to a series of records in recent weeks. Crude oil rose 1 percent, to $97.62 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange and futures climbed to $98.62, the highest intraday price since trading began in 1983. Prices are closing in on a record level, adjusted for inflation, of $101.70 a barrel in April 1980.
High economic growth in China and India could push oil prices to $159 a barrel by 2030, the agency said. Fatih Birol, the agency’s chief economist and the lead author of its flagship publication, The World Energy Outlook 2007, presented today, said that while economic growth should be encouraged because it helps to meet increasing energy demand through fostering innovation, it needs to happen in tandem with policies for energy efficiency.
Mr. Birol called on the Chinese government to put standards and quotas in place that would allow the country to grow while slowing energy consumption and carbon emissions. Car sales in China, which overtook Japan last year and are expected to overtake the United States by 2015, contribute to rising oil demand and harm the environment and are an area where new policies could take effect, he said. “We’re not running out of energy or money, but we’re running out of time,” Mr. Birol said.
The agency said the immediate adoption of policies, including tougher efficiency standards for air-conditioners and refrigerators in India and China, would result in China saving the amount of power produced by the enormous Three Gorges dam by 2020 and India profiting from a reduction of pollution.
The next decade is crucial for the stability of the global energy system, the agency said. Decisions made today in China and India — for example, whether to continue investment in coal-fired power plants or to adopt policies to tackle global warming — will have worldwide consequences for decades.
China’s and India’s energy use is projected to double from 2005 to 2030. By 2030, the two countries will account for nearly half the increase in global demand. China is expected to overtake the United States as the world’s top carbon emitter this year and the largest energy consumer soon after 2010, the agency said. In India, where more than 400 million people have no access to electricity, energy demand is expected to more than double by 2030.
China and India argue that it is unfair to blame them for rising energy prices, and they have resisted calls to limit carbon emissions when their economies are trying to catch up with development levels in the West. Energy use per person in those countries remains much lower than in the industrial nations.
In its report, the energy agency recognized the legitimate aspirations of China and India to improve the lives of their people. It said, moreover, that solving energy problems is a global responsibility that demands action by all countries.
“The challenges are global so solutions are global,” Mr. Tanaka said. “The global energy system is on an increasingly unsustainable path. Policies can make a difference but for those to be achieved implementations need to start now.”
<SNIP><SNIP>
Read the rest at http://www.nytimes.c...cnd-energy.html.

To get a view from India's perspective, read
http://timesofindia....how/2526709.cms

MunsterK

#48 Hogwild

Hogwild

    Tri-Centurion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 07 November 2007 - 11:07 PM

"Another reason for higher prices is investments not made by oil producers, including the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, the agency said. Strong demand has helped push oil prices to a series of records in recent weeks."

The IEA is in denial. The easy discoveries of the giant oilfields have been made and they are being very rapidly depleted. Oil reserves are not being replaced at same pace. The easy-to-find-and-pump type of low cost oil has been mispriced for decades. The most important resource in the world has been allowed to be sold at the lowest prices. The human race has squandered a large amount of the cheapest oil.

In the future, oil will be more difficult to find, and that which is found, will be more difficult to extract and will need a higher market price to bring it on stream. Western Oil Companies only control 15% of the oil reserves; the remainder is with national oil companies that do not have the same economic model as a private enterprise. Western oil companies can only make investments in exploration if mineral -rights contracts are honoured by nation states. Unfortunately, agreements are rescinded at will by Russia and others offering little incentive now to the major oil companies.
OPEC oil exports are falling because the OPEC nations are consuming more themselves.
Non OPEC production has been declining for 4 years. Supplies in storage have been gradually drawn down to low levels to make up the difference. With little marginal capacity prices can only rise. They will rise to whatever level is necessary to make it worthwhile to shoulder the risks(especially political risks). That price may $200; who knows?

#49 DrBubb

DrBubb

    Tri-Millennium Guru

  • Super Admins
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong & London
  • Interests:Trading and investing in stocks and commodities. Writing articles on related subjects, while building this website. I am interested in creating ways for communities

Posted 07 November 2007 - 11:49 PM

Western Oil Companies only control 15% of the oil reserves; the remainder is with national oil companies that do not have the same economic model as a private enterprise.
..
They will rise to whatever level is necessary to make it worthwhile to shoulder the risks(especially political risks). That price may $200; who knows?


Oil producers can now put buyers from East and West into competition with each other, to raise prices
The market is "bipolar", swinging back and forth from a focus on Inflation to Deflation. Bet on swings; and stay flexible. What are bipolar markets? See: http://tinyurl.com/GEI-Manix

#50 Steve Cook

Steve Cook

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 91 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 08:20 AM

Hello, I am new to this forum.

I voted "bear". My reasons are:

Peak oil has already started (probably 2005) and we are now comming of the peak.

This will destroy our complex oil-based energy-driven-civilisation

The will be no managed climb down from the oil age. Instead, there will be a rout.

Without cheap oil and gas to keep the food supply chain going, around 80% of the world's human population will eventually have to go into the night

We will undoubtably drag much of the biosphere along with us on the way down

I need to find somehwere for my family to hide away and batten down the hatches for the next 30 years or so.

If we get WWIII on the way down (which, frankly, I think very likely). there will be nowhere safe

I want my mummy....... :lol:

Steve


#51 malco

malco

    Tri-Centurion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 05 March 2008 - 10:52 AM

Steve,

I think you may be being a bit pessimistic. I think I am right in saying that there has been no case of European civilization "collapsing" in the written record. The "collapse" of the Roman Empire did not mean that a load of Mad Maxes ran the show. Life still went on, and in fact studies show that the end of the Roman Empire benefited most of the population, because the yoke of slavery was lifted from them and their diet improved. Italy was still orderly after the last Roman emperor in the West, it's just that it was orderly in a different, less organised way, under a different boss class.

Not even the Black Death caused European civilization to collapse into chaos. Things were nasty, but there was no widespread disintigration into anarchy. Even when smashed utterly, people get themselves organised again quite quickly.

Oraganised society offers the vast majority of people so many comforts and so much security that there is great resistence to allow it to fade away even under duress.

My main concern about PO is that the sheeple will not understand what is going on as they are not being told. This could lead to disillusion with "feeble" mainstream government and the rise of nasty governments like the BNP (which quite openly sees PO as a "once in 200 year opportunity" to gain power). I am not sure it really offers them the opportunity they think it does. They underestimate the extent to which various ethinc groups have been genuinely accepted into British society by most people, even if not by them. For instance, my boss at work is a black man from Nigeria. He is highly respected in the company. PO is not going to make everyone suddenly want him booted out... (well I hope not anyway).

Maybe I am underestimating the change of mood that comes over the herd when it gets scared. I may look at my colleagues one day and no longer recognise them...

We shall see. I had always been dismayed that I had missed the exiting bits of history like WW2. Now I realise that I am going to live through "The Big One" in my mature years, having enjoyed a misspent youth in the heyday of the cheap oil play-pen (thrashing around to my heart's content on a big motorbike). I had the awareness to anticipate it and watch it happening, unlike 90+% of others. I seem to have been quite fortunate.
Will economics be single-handed?

#52 julius

julius

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 11:12 PM

Malco,

To your comment on the fall of the Roman Empire, I just read The Fall of Rome: And the End of Civilization by Ward-Perkins, and he would disagree with your assessment of no fall in living standards, based on the architectural evidence. It's an interesting and short read.

A quote from an interviewwith him:

My book, and this is its major novelty, concentrates on the impact of the fall of the West on daily life, as revealed by a mass of new archaeological research over the last few decades (which I hope is presented in a readable and approachable manner). I argue what is currently an unfashionable view (though, in my opinion, it is blindingly obvious) – that the Roman world brought remarkable levels of sophistication and comfort, and spread them widely in society (and not just to a tiny elite); and that the fall of Rome saw the dismantling of this complexity, and a return to what can reasonably be termed ‘prehistoric’ levels of material comfort. Furthermore, I believe that this change was not just at the level of pots and pans, important though these are, but also affected sophisticated skills like reading and writing. Pompeii, with its ubiquitous inscriptions, painted signs, and graffiti, was a city that revolved around writing – after the fall of the empire, the same cannot be said for any settlement in the West for many centuries to come.



#53 malco

malco

    Tri-Centurion

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 440 posts
  • Location:UK

Posted 08 March 2008 - 09:13 AM

I imagine the perspective on the Roman Empire depends on where you are looking. I can't recall where I read my reference about diet improving for most ordinary people after the fall of the empire. Most studies I have come across indicate that towards the end at least, Rome was producing nothing much and consuming a great deal, debasing its currency and burdening the populace dictatorially with high taxes. The empire in its heyday was a different matter, obviously.
Will economics be single-handed?

#54 wren

wren

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,989 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland

Posted 08 March 2008 - 02:06 PM

I imagine the perspective on the Roman Empire depends on where you are looking. I can't recall where I read my reference about diet improving for most ordinary people after the fall of the empire. Most studies I have come across indicate that towards the end at least, Rome was producing nothing much and consuming a great deal, debasing its currency and burdening the populace dictatorially with high taxes. The empire in its heyday was a different matter, obviously.

Just what I was thinking as I read the quote in the post above yours. IMO the surprising question about the Western Roman Empire is not so much why it collapsed, but how did it manage to last as long as it did?

I once read a report on complexity which compared the Eastern and Western Empires. It suggested that the Eastern one did better by decentralizing successfully, while the Western one took the opposite tack of ever more centralization, loss of efficiency and finally collapse. In fact it was taken over by more competent rulers with less centralized political structures. I think many ordinary people, especially rural people who were the real economic mainstay, after the initial shock of invasion were in practice better off.

About the implication in the quote that the "barbarians" were really quite backward: this is highly disputable. Modern evidence indicates that the Celts and Germans were excellent craftsmen. However, they built in wood (even roads as found in Ireland) so they left no legacy of impressive stone edifices. Also they remained politically decentralised which often limited grand schemes. Ultimately these "barbarians" took over because Rome had become rotten from the core.
Gold and financial news: 24knews
Video at guardian.co.uk: Gold for Food in Zimbabwe.
Video at YouTube: Buying groceries with silver in California.
Energy Bulletin A daily news site about oil, natural gas, food, transportation and their economic and social ramifications.

#55 Pluto

Pluto

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,011 posts

Posted 08 March 2008 - 02:43 PM

Please take the time to review this TV clip of Peter Schiff on Fox Business news. About half way through Peter warns them on the demise of the dollar and everyone starts to laugh like a pack of hyenas. The bearers of truth are being ridiculed in the press.

http://www.europac.n...-3-04-08_lg.asp

#56 wren

wren

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,989 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland

Posted 08 March 2008 - 04:37 PM

Please take the time to review this TV clip of Peter Schiff on Fox Business news. About half way through Peter warns them on the demise of the dollar and everyone starts to laugh like a pack of hyenas. The bearers of truth are being ridiculed in the press.

And immediately he had said "there are no safe investments here in the United States", they put up a table on the screen to obscure his face as he talked. Media manipulators. :angry: But they're getting desperate; that was nervous laughter.
Gold and financial news: 24knews
Video at guardian.co.uk: Gold for Food in Zimbabwe.
Video at YouTube: Buying groceries with silver in California.
Energy Bulletin A daily news site about oil, natural gas, food, transportation and their economic and social ramifications.

#57 wren

wren

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,989 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland

Posted 10 March 2008 - 07:00 PM

From the FT:

Posted Image
Gold and financial news: 24knews
Video at guardian.co.uk: Gold for Food in Zimbabwe.
Video at YouTube: Buying groceries with silver in California.
Energy Bulletin A daily news site about oil, natural gas, food, transportation and their economic and social ramifications.

#58 DrBubb

DrBubb

    Tri-Millennium Guru

  • Super Admins
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 91,703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong & London
  • Interests:Trading and investing in stocks and commodities. Writing articles on related subjects, while building this website. I am interested in creating ways for communities

Posted 09 April 2008 - 01:06 AM

The Gorecal is back !

Al Gore: New thinking on the climate crisis


"How dare we be optimsitic!"
"We have work to do. Political will needs to be mobilised!"

Ladies, and gentlemen, If Barak Obama has enough sense, Al Gore will be Vice President again.
The market is "bipolar", swinging back and forth from a focus on Inflation to Deflation. Bet on swings; and stay flexible. What are bipolar markets? See: http://tinyurl.com/GEI-Manix

#59 chazza

chazza

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,094 posts
  • Location:South East

Posted 21 April 2008 - 01:10 PM

David Smith taking issue with the Peak Oil arguments doing the rounds in the Sunday Times.

Stating "International Energy Agency figures show that output is up by 2m barrels a day on two years ago and by 4m on four years ago"

Is this easily refutable?

I am not upto speed on the details of the peak oil argument...
“What experience and history teaches us is that people and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it”
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)

#60 chazza

chazza

    Millennium man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,094 posts
  • Location:South East

Posted 22 April 2008 - 11:12 AM

QUOTE (chazza @ Apr 21 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
David Smith taking issue with the Peak Oil arguments doing the rounds in the Sunday Times.

Stating "International Energy Agency figures show that output is up by 2m barrels a day on two years ago and by 4m on four years ago"

Is this easily refutable?

I am not upto speed on the details of the peak oil argument...


Chazza stop being a mug and get off your arse and do some reading...


ah, now i see...... rolleyes.gif

Do we have a David Smith thread yet, think I might have to start one, he is a legend
“What experience and history teaches us is that people and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it”
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users