Jump to content
RobertPaulson

Peak Oil - Bull or Bear?

Peak Oil - Bull or Bear?  

104 members have voted

  1. 1. Peak Oil - Overhyped alarmism

    • I'm a Peak Oil bull. It's over-hyped alarmism
      5
    • I'm a Peak Oil bear. This has the potential to take down our civilisation
      55
    • Undecided. It will hurt a but, but ultimately technology will resolve the issue
      34
    • Undecided. I don't really know much about it, thats why I am looking around this board
      10


Recommended Posts

It definately has the potential to take the whole planet into utter chaos.

 

Without a major flu or other pandemic we are just too overpopulated to feed ourselves without oil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Yergin Day - was declared by this Blog when Oil broke $75:

 

In a column in Forbes Magazine, published on 11/1/04, Daniel Yergin, in response to a question about the future direction of oil prices, dismissed concerns about oil supplies and asserted that oil prices on 11/1/05 would at $38 per barrel. Note that oil prices exceeded $60 in the summer of 2005, prior to the hurricanes.

 

In my opinion, Mr. Yergin serves as an excellent symbol of the major oil company/major oil exporter/energy analyst group. And since oil prices are now trading at close to $76 per barrel--twice Mr. Yergin's prediction--I hereby designate July 13, 2006 as "Daniel Yergin Day," in honor of Mr. Yergin's continued efforts to, in effect, persuade Americans to continue driving large debt financed vehicles, on long commutes to and from large mortgages.

 

One of the little ironies about the Peak Oil debate is that it is those who are trying their best to warn Americans about the dangers posed by Peak Oil---Matt Simmons; Colin Campbell; Kenneth Deffeyes; Boone Pickens, Jim Kunstler etc.--who are most often blamed for rising oil prices. I think that it is just the opposite.

 

If you believe Matt Simmons, et al, about the future direction of energy prices, you will drastically reduce your overall consumption, especially your energy consumption, by living in a small energy efficient home, close to where you work--which would ideally allow you to walk or take mass transit to work, or at least result in a short commute.

 

In my opinion, it is those who are telling us that Peak Oil is decades away--such as ExxonMobil, Opec and Yergin--who are most responsible for, in effect, encouraging Americans to continue driving $50,000 SUV's on 50 mile roundtrips to and from $500,000 mortgages in the suburbs.

 

My personal take on this issue is that we have to kill consumption--via a large tax on energy consumption, offset by tax cuts elsewhere--before consumption kills us.

 

Jeffrey J. Brown is an independent petroleum geologist in the Dallas, Texas area. e-mail: westexas@aol.com

 

@: http://graphoilogy.blogspot.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is peak oil is years away as demand will fall especially as hard tie will push people towards efficent cars e.g. like 1970's.

Long term we'll find new energy resources e.g. Hydrogen with power from nuclear.

 

So I think the whole idea of peak oil is a scare tactic that environmentalists will cling to but in reality will not materialise.

 

Though i do expect oil to never be $35 a barrel ever again. In fact as the economy has survived $70 the producers will maintain this price level. I even expect supply reductions if we all hit a recession to maintain this price as the middle east countries want money/goods not a strong world economy.

 

PS The hotel islands in Dubai tells me a lot about oil being exchanged for real things not paper money.

 

 

quick additional:

 

I know that oil = food (my mate is a farmer and explained this to me)

 

7 barrels of oil = 1 ton of crops or similar.

 

If world population keeps growing oil demand will grow but i expect a major reduction in world population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My view is peak oil is years away as demand will fall especially as hard tie will push people towards efficent cars e.g. like 1970's.

Long term we'll find new energy resources e.g. Hydrogen with power from nuclear.

 

So I think the whole idea of peak oil is a scare tactic that environmentalists will cling to but in reality will not materialise.

Some would agree with you. For instance Cambridge Energy Research Associates predict that supply will outpace demand for at least another decade:

 

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/st...299&k=63352

 

On the other hand, Ali Bakhtiari, former Chief Advisor to the Iranian NOC, believes that oil supply will not grow much from where it is now and that we are already in the first stage of the crisis:

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/19180.html

 

The CERA conclusions are prpbably the upper end of their Monte Carlo type analysis, rather than the Expected Outcome. Its datasets are private, however, so not subject to audit by a wider body of experts. In effect US energy policy is being influenced by a private company's private information. Odd that.

 

I am a bit sceptical of CERA. They have a history of being too optimistic.

 

You should forget about the Hydrogen Economy, based on nuclear or renewables. It won't happen because the conversion processes are too expensive and inefficient and the Nat Gas needed to produce H2 otherwise will become scarce too. Plus you have distribution and safety issues. There is no replacement for cheap oil - period. There is no idea anywhere - not even a gleam in the eye of an inventor - that promises to replace the convenience and technical performance of cheap oil. It has been a remarkable gift and like locusts we have gorged. The only substitute for cheap oil is - not travelling. Develop an interest in gardening, reading, whatever.

 

Interestingly, the era of cheap oil may well return briefly in the next recession (which is likely to be a serious one in the West), but it won't last. We may be surprised by how rapidly oil prices go through the roof as we attampt to climb out of the other side of the recession, and find that the "peak" was actually "Twin Peak Oil".

 

Just keep your eyes peeled and don't let yourself get too set on any specific scenario. Any one of them could happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that oil = food (my mate is a farmer and explained this to me)

 

7 barrels of oil = 1 ton of crops or similar.

 

If world population keeps growing oil demand will grow but i expect a major reduction in world population.

 

A major reduction in world population? What is going to cause this? War, poverty, famine and birth control have all had a go. So, we are waiting for a plague, pandemic, or war to go nuclear or biological? Or a major economic collapse resulting in social disorder, war and mass starvation the likes of which we have never seen before? So far, the human race has adapted and population growth continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other thing I am suprised no one has mentioned is the implications for food production. I believe that ammonia, extracted from oil, is extensively used as fertilizer on crops to increase production. As the price of oil goes up, so will the price of food, and when it runs out, production will drop. This is especially worrying as the global population is still rising.

 

And there lies the conundrum...

 

How many decades can you get out of a biofuel crop field without resource to hydrocarbons for feedstock? One year perhaps.....

 

The soil alone will not support it for long, as we have seen from the massive depletion of minerals from our standard vegetable crops over the past century.

 

I'd be surprised if we are anywhere close to being strategically sufficent in farming these days, if there is a prolonged fuel shock we're in deep Shite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An interesting profile of a US Army article:

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/20008.html

 

Not exactly reassuring even if it is only half true!

 

“Without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East,”

 

This policy is about three thousand years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I e-mailed my local constituency MP to make her aware of the situation -

Message :

"Dear

 

I would like to draw your attention to the matter of Peak Oil which is

going to a be a problem that affects us all. A good explanation of the

scenario and effects are explained by the attached link. The conclusions

are somewhat lurid but I find it difficult to agree with any them.

 

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

 

I have done a lot of online research and I am of the opinion that Peak

Oil is either occuring now or will be certainly occuring sometime

within the next ten years. The recent quadrupling in oil prices would

continue as prices per barrel could reach $100/$200 a barrel. The world

would then go into the second great depression- at the moment I don't

believe there is anything that will bring us out of it. As it says on

the website the world's financial system is based on cheap oil and it

may collapse when it realises that oil is running out.

 

Alternative energy sources are currently nowhere near the level required

to be able to substitute for oil. I don't believe Bio-diesel is an

option as currently the return on energy invested is not good and

besides which the world needs food more than it needs fuel oil. The

Alaksan oil sands also look like an extremely poor substitute.

 

Would you not agree that problem dwarves all other problems that we are

facing as a country and a planet?

 

Without Oil & Gas we will not be able to support schools, hospitals, the

elderly , build houses or any of the basic functions that support

civilised life. Without oil I don't think the planet can support

anywhere near the current 6 billion inhabitants. In particular

fertilizer which is produced from Natural Gas is required to support the

current level of population. Ironically Peak Oil may reduce the effects

of global warming by reducing the amount of fossil fuels that we can

burn- although it may make things worse as countries may use coal to

produce petrol with increased emissions until that in turn runs out.

 

I believe that the Government and Opposition need to get together now to

take action immediately on this issue. Please could you let me know what

you are doing about this extremely grave situation? "

 

I got a reply saying she was on holiday - but a few weeks later I still hadn't got a reply so I followed up with :

 

"Any update on this? Since my e-mail a quick search on google news for Peak Oil displays the following headlines:

 

Peak-oil theory warns tank's almost empty

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...670-643,00.html

The Australian, Australia - 11 Aug 2006

FORGET pipeline problems in Alaska. The real elephant in the corner is "peak oil". This issue is in the same category as global warming - although there is a division of opinion as to whether or not it's real, it is probably prudent to assume the worse-case option

 

Crisis Overload: Peak Oil, Peak Grain and Peak Water

http://www.counterbias.com/710.html

CounterBias.com - 4 Aug 2006

... According to Christopher Brodie, a partner at UK-based commodities hedge fund Krom River, this tussle over grain adds a Hobson's choice to the Peak Oil dilemma ...

 

Peak oil and fragility of global oil supply

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/Navariednews.as...artid=255999417

Kuwait Times, Kuwait - 13 Aug 2006

... This involves the concept called "Peak Oil"-a shorthand way of describing a critical geological concept that you ignore at your peril. ...

 

BYE BYE PETROLEUM

http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=2714

Corporate Watch News, UK - 17 Aug 2006

...Colin Campbell, honorary chairman of ASPO international, began the conference with a prediction that peak oil would bring a succession of price spikes followed by global recession. He warned that current financial structures would be threatened, as the power to control money shifts, and suggested that a new era of geopolitics would emerge, with energy rich Russia ascending while energy depleted US and Europe compete with China for finite resources...

 

http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=22303

.....In May U.S. production fell 459,000 barrels a day year on year. In May U.K. production fell 292,000 barrels a day. Mexican data saw a 150,000 barrels a day slide and statistics from Norway saw a 226,000 barrel a day fall.

For 2006 as a whole production is down by 196,000 barrels a day in the U.K. and 503,000 barrels a day in the U.S., 229,000 barrels a day in Norway and by 24,000 barrels a day in Mexico.

French company Total [NYSE:TOT] saw production - which may well rise again it is true - fall 9% year on year. BP [NYSE:BP] said it will struggle to meet its targets for 2006, 4.2 million barrels a day despite 1 million barrels a day from its venture with TNK [OTCPK:TNKBF] in Russia. Shell [NYSE:RDS-B] produced more in 2003 than it does now and the only companies who have put on big production outside of Eni [NYSE:E] in Italy have done it by buying other companies, ConocoPhillips [NYSE:COP], Chevron [NYSE:CVX] and so on.......

 

Those were just a few of the selection. I see that John Reid suggested that we are facing "probably the most sustained period of severe threat since the end of the second world war," - we are but its Peak Oil that is threatening all of us far more than a handful of Islamic terrorists. Our prosperity, health, wealth and happiness has been based since the end of the nineteenth century on cheap oil - this is about to change and soon.

 

I see the current Government thinking of this is that Peak Oil is not before 2030. I seriously doubt this - Try somewhere between now and 2011-and in any case China and India's growing demand will ensure an unbridgeable supply gap well before then.

"John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate the Department has made of when global production of conventional crude oil will peak.

Malcolm Wicks: The Government's assessment of the remaining lifespan of global oil reserves is set out in the Energy White Paper 2003 "Our energy future--creating a low carbon economy". Paragraph 6.15 of the White Paper notes that "Globally, conventional oil reserves are sufficient to meet projected demand for around 30 years, although new discoveries will be needed to renew reserves. Together with nonconventional reserves such as oil shales and improvements in technology, there is the potential for oil reserves to last twice as long".

 

This is consistent with the latest assessment by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its 2004 World Energy Outlook. The IEA concludes that ". . . global production of conventional oil will not peak before 2030 if the necessary investments are made."

 

The Government remain committed to working with producers, consumers and the international community to improve the conditions for investment in the international oil sector, as well as implementing policies to maximise the economic recovery of the UK's own oil (and gas) reserves and to ease the UK economy away from power supplied primarily through fossil fuel supply. We are also supporting efforts to promote greater transparency in reporting of global oil reserves. "

 

One further piece of evidence that peak oil appears imminent. There is a website - theoildrum.com where various Geologists try to predict and analyse peak production. One thing they are concerned about is that all of the largest oil producers are starting to show declines

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/8/21/...3/1416#comments

 

I thought that it would be interesting to compare the decline since December in world crude + condensate production to the decline in production from the top 10 net oil exporters (based on the 2004 list of top exporters).

 

As of the May, 2006 EIA numbers, the world is down 1.3% since December, an annual decline rate of 3.1% per year, but the top 10 oil exporters are down 3.0%, an annual decline rate of 7.2%.

 

Note that consumption is growing quite rapidly in most of the exporting countries, and note that in most cases domestic consumption is satisfied before oil is exported. In the captioned article, I showed, using my "Export Land" model, how a 25% drop in oil production and a 20% increase in consumption (over a five year period) would lead to a 70% drop in net oil exports.

 

I estimate that net oil exports from the top exporters are probably down by 4% to 5% (over a five month period), an annual decline rate of as much as 12% per year, which suggests that exports from the top exporters are falling about three to four times faster than world oil production is falling

 

As I have been relentlessly pointing out, I think that we are looking at a series of bidding cycles for declining net oil export capacity, with the oil going to the high bidders and with the losers having to reduce consumption. Leanan, on The Oil Drum, has documented several case histories of poorer countries having to reduce consumption. Soon, the developed and rapidly developing countries will be bidding against each other, instead of bidding against regions like Africa

 

On a positive note (!) the biggest hopeful are recent development is advances in solar technology:

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/19262.html

We approach this news as current and former public electric utility executives, sympathetic with consumer and environmental concerns. South Africa and California technologies rely on the same alloy -- called CIGS (for copper-indium-gallium-selenide) -- deposited in an extremely thin layer on a flexible surface. Both companies claim that the technology reduces solar cell production costs by a factor of 4-5. That would bring the cost to or below that of delivered electricity in a large fraction of the world

 

I believe that it should shortly be mandatory that all new building developments should have as a minimum solar power for hot water tanks, and that by a certain date all new developments should also have photo-voltaic designed into them. Also any houses with gardens should have water butts to try and combat a) flooding and :unsure: drought.

 

You may note I haven't mentioned global warming - although I think its a serious problem - mainly due to rising sea levels. However given the fact that the effects for the UK tends to along the lines of "Future balmy Mediterranean Climate will lead to more vineyards and olive trees and UK seaside resorts becoming top tourist destination" its not really a vote winner is it?"

 

Yesterday I got a reply:

 

"Thank you for your email about 'Peak Oil'; I share your concerns about the future of our oil supply. A broad energy mix with less reliance on oil and gas would be in the best interests of the UK and the global economy.

 

The Government are currently conducting an energy review to update their 2003 Energy White Paper. As you might be aware, the Conservative Party is also conducting an energy review which will be an evidence-based project. The review will work alongside the Quality of Life Policy Group, set up by David Cameron and affect our environment and the quality of our lives. The energy review will be published early next year and the policy group will report in July 2007. I am more than happy to pass on your points in Consideration as part of the review.

 

Thank you for taking time to get in touch. It is always important for me to hear the thoughts and views of those whom I represent here in Westminster. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if I can be of any further assistance."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice letter, alex

 

the response is serious- as it should be. but more can be done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I e-mailed my local constituency MP to make her aware of the situation -

Message :

"Dear

 

I would like to draw your attention to the matter of Peak Oil which is

going to a be a problem that affects us all. A good explanation of the

scenario and effects are explained by the attached link. The conclusions

are somewhat lurid but I find it difficult to agree with any them.

 

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

 

I have done a lot of online research and I am of the opinion that Peak

Oil is either occuring now or will be certainly occuring sometime

within the next ten years. The recent quadrupling in oil prices would

continue as prices per barrel could reach $100/$200 a barrel. The world

would then go into the second great depression- at the moment I don't

believe there is anything that will bring us out of it. As it says on

the website the world's financial system is based on cheap oil and it

may collapse when it realises that oil is running out.

 

Alternative energy sources are currently nowhere near the level required

to be able to substitute for oil. I don't believe Bio-diesel is an

option as currently the return on energy invested is not good and

besides which the world needs food more than it needs fuel oil. The

Alaksan oil sands also look like an extremely poor substitute.

 

Would you not agree that problem dwarves all other problems that we are

facing as a country and a planet?

 

Without Oil & Gas we will not be able to support schools, hospitals, the

elderly , build houses or any of the basic functions that support

civilised life. Without oil I don't think the planet can support

anywhere near the current 6 billion inhabitants. In particular

fertilizer which is produced from Natural Gas is required to support the

current level of population. Ironically Peak Oil may reduce the effects

of global warming by reducing the amount of fossil fuels that we can

burn- although it may make things worse as countries may use coal to

produce petrol with increased emissions until that in turn runs out.

 

I believe that the Government and Opposition need to get together now to

take action immediately on this issue. Please could you let me know what

you are doing about this extremely grave situation? "

 

I got a reply saying she was on holiday - but a few weeks later I still hadn't got a reply so I followed up with :

 

"Any update on this? Since my e-mail a quick search on google news for Peak Oil displays the following headlines:

 

 

Yesterday I got a reply:

 

"Thank you for your email about 'Peak Oil'; I share your concerns about the future of our oil supply. A broad energy mix with less reliance on oil and gas would be in the best interests of the UK and the global economy.

 

The Government are currently conducting an energy review to update their 2003 Energy White Paper. As you might be aware, the Conservative Party is also conducting an energy review which will be an evidence-based project. The review will work alongside the Quality of Life Policy Group, set up by David Cameron and affect our environment and the quality of our lives. The energy review will be published early next year and the policy group will report in July 2007. I am more than happy to pass on your points in Consideration as part of the review.

 

Thank you for taking time to get in touch. It is always important for me to hear the thoughts and views of those whom I represent here in Westminster. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if I can be of any further assistance."

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.com/2007/11/07/business/07cnd-energy.html.

 

To get a view from India's perspective, read

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Busines...how/2526709.cms

 

MunsterK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×