peak-oil aka oil-peak someone knows what is it?
Pietro C.
I am an enviromental engineer and geologist quite involved in the study of
the oil peak (or peak oil).
I am making a small test of mine for an international meeting to be held in
pisa, tuscany, italy into three weeks.
So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
about the oil-peak or peak-oil and if yes what he/she thinks about it, when
( if never) will happen and how it could affect his/her way of life.
My point of view (to give a perspective:):
I am, as a member of ASPO Italy ( Association for the study of peak oil),
quite convinced about the reality of the problem and the fact that it will
happen in few years if it is not already happening ( as someone is convinced
of).
I really 'd like to know what is the average consciousness of the subject.
Thanks in advance for an answer, whatever could be your idea on the subject
and sorry for my english.
Dr. Geol.Ing. Pietro Cambi,
ASPOItalia
Fiesole, Florence, Italy
Gary Reichlinger
<pietro.cambiamos...@tinaturner.italiasiitaliano> wrote:
>I am, as a member of ASPO Italy ( Association for the study of peak oil),
>quite convinced about the reality of the problem and the fact that it will
>happen in few years if it is not already happening ( as someone is convinced
>of).
If we were to ever reach a situation where peak oil was achieved
due to the "limits of nature," there would be a number of identifying
characteristics of such a situation. The most obvious thing to expect
would be that drilling success rates would be in a continuous decline
and approching all time lows as oil becomes harder to find. Also, oil
prices would be in a long term increase with 10 or 20 years of
successive new highs. The number of active drilling rigs should be at
all time highs as more effort was put in by a desperate world to find
the very last drops of available oil.
Now compare the above to the current reality. Drilling success
rates are at an all time high. Oil prices were at $9 per barrel as
recently as 1999. The number of active drilling rigs is less than
half the peak.
All that is necessary to increase oil production to new peaks is
the elimination of political obstacles.
Rick Cortese
messages but...
Pietro C. wrote:
<snip>
> So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
> about the oil-peak or peak-oil and if yes what he/she thinks about it, when
> ( if never) will happen and how it could affect his/her way of life.
Yes.
It is about: No more cheap oil. As countries like China and India 'go
western' demand will mean it happens soon. There will always be crude
oil but at a price.
Probably won't affect anything other then my travel in fossil fueled
vehicles. The powers that be will just burn more coal and build a few
more nuclear power plants.
One of my favorite quotes "The stone age did not end because we ran out
of rocks."
Brazil has already made it to energy independence and I imagine even the
USA will eventually make significant changes in what fuels automobiles.
Biodiesel and ethanol are already pretty big here.
Eric Sears
<rico...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>It is about: No more cheap oil.
That's right
>As countries like China and India 'go
>western' demand will mean it happens soon. There will always be crude
>oil but at a price.
I'm not sure whether it will be worth extracting when the price
reaches a certain level - well not for the purpose of transportation.
>
>Probably won't affect anything other then my travel in fossil fueled
>vehicles. The powers that be will just burn more coal and build a few
>more nuclear power plants.
I think "crude oil" is used for far more than transportation. Apart
from electricity - its used for fertiliser production and plastics at
least - I believe many others could be listed.
Yes there are alternatives for plastics - but not at the same price -
and also competing for the same raw materials (veg oil).
Just how the world's agricultural industries will manage without cheap
oil - I will leave to others to debate.
>
>One of my favorite quotes "The stone age did not end because we ran out
>of rocks."
I think not really relevant. Firstly, no-one ever claimed it DID.
Secondly - rocks were only "utilised" - not used up.
Thirdly, the quantity of "rocks" in the earth's crust exceeds the
supply of oil by thousands or millions to one.
The "stone age" lasted at least thousands of years.
So far the "oil age" is hardly 100 years old, and half the barrel has
gone - most of that in the last 30 years.
>
>Brazil has already made it to energy independence
has it?
I know they use sugar to make alcohol to replace a proportion of oil
imports (and I applaud that). But I doubt if they use anything like
the per capita consumption of the USA.
>and I imagine even the >USA will eventually make significant changes
>in what fuels automobiles.
I don't think they will have any choice - but I suppose the question
is "how long is 'eventually'"
However I don't believe they can grow sufficient sugar and other
crops (eg - grains) to replace all their imported oil, at least, not
without displacing a huge amount of arable land that is needed for
food crops.
Maybe they will find some other way of "doing" transportation. But the
"energy" has to come from somewhere.
There is some hope that algae could be a significant producer.
Qu - Is 20 years (or less) going to be enough time?
>Biodiesel and ethanol are already pretty big here.
Again, are they?
The last figures I saw speak of only a few percent at most.
"big" is a relative term.
And we need to consider that much of the rest of the world doesn't
have as much choice about what it might be able to do, which affects
world economies and ultimately even the USA.
I'm not a pessimist. I do think we can make choices. But they are all
going to be much more expensive - and the way we live life will be
much different to the way it was lived in the later 1900's.
With oil declining (YMMV), life will only be pleasant if the people of
the world co-operate. I can't see much sign of that at present.
Eric Sears
Eric Swanson
says...
>
>Hi to all.
>I am an enviromental engineer and geologist quite involved in the study of
>the oil peak (or peak oil).
>I am making a small test of mine for an international meeting to be held in
>pisa, tuscany, italy into three weeks.
>So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
>about the oil-peak or peak-oil and if yes what he/she thinks about it, when
>( if never) will happen and how it could affect his/her way of life.
There are several books out these days on the subject of peak oil, by which
I mean, "peak of production". Collin Campbell wrote one several years back and
the latest of interest is by Matthew Simmons. Simmons looked at the reserves
claimed by Saudia Arabia and concluded that there's not nearly as much oil
there as claimed. Since that's where most of the expected increase in
production was expected to occur, this analysis caused considerable concern.
The Saudi reserve data is a state secret, so there's no way to independently
verify the numbers.
Here are some web sites with lots of links:
http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/
--
Eric Swanson --- E-mail address: e_swanson(at)skybest.com :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Cortese
>>Probably won't affect anything other then my travel in fossil fueled
>>vehicles. The powers that be will just burn more coal and build a few
>>more nuclear power plants.
>
>
> I think "crude oil" is used for far more than transportation. Apart
> from electricity - its used for fertiliser production and plastics at
> least - I believe many others could be listed.
I believe most comes from the Haber Process which uses natural gas as a
feed stock. We always could go to electrolysis of water to get the
hydrogen. Only point being that we should never run out of fertilizer,
just the price will be high.
Figure we need nitrates to wage war so no way the powers that be will
let production slip.
>>One of my favorite quotes "The stone age did not end because we ran out
>>of rocks."
>
>
> I think not really relevant. Firstly, no-one ever claimed it DID.
> Secondly - rocks were only "utilised" - not used up.
> Thirdly, the quantity of "rocks" in the earth's crust exceeds the
> supply of oil by thousands or millions to one.
Only point was that something better/cheaper/easier came along. i.e.
there will still be crude oil but market forces may make it obsolete.
Could have used whale oil as an example if you prefer.
<snip>
>>Brazil has already made it to energy independence
>
>
> has it?
> I know they use sugar to make alcohol to replace a proportion of oil
> imports (and I applaud that). But I doubt if they use anything like
> the per capita consumption of the USA.
Yeap, if the Wall Street Journal is to be believed.
http://www.truthabouttrade.org/article.asp?id=5029
>>and I imagine even the >USA will eventually make significant changes
>>in what fuels automobiles.
>
>
> I don't think they will have any choice - but I suppose the question
> is "how long is 'eventually'"
> However I don't believe they can grow sufficient sugar and other
> crops (eg - grains) to replace all their imported oil, at least, not
> without displacing a huge amount of arable land that is needed for
> food crops.
I should look this up but I think most of our<you are from the USA
right?> grain is used as animal feed. Heard we consume 1/3 of the worlds
meat. Conversion ratios are very bad, grain => meat. So people on the
lower end of the income spectrum will have a choice between buying that
steak for $30 or getting 1/2 a tank of biodiesel or grain alcohol.
*IF* we were willing to change our eating habits the infrastructure
could be put in place in a matter of years. I don't think people will
change.
> Maybe they will find some other way of "doing" transportation. But the
> "energy" has to come from somewhere.
Well I am nearing retirement and posting from the sailing
newsgroup!<grin> Long as they deliver my S.S. checks when the time comes
and the wind blows, I am set.
>>Biodiesel and ethanol are already pretty big here.
>
> Again, are they?
> The last figures I saw speak of only a few percent at most.
> "big" is a relative term.
Somewhere around 4 billion gallons a year for alchohol alone. That's
maybe six fill ups per family/year and expanding. One of my friends just
bought a Benz so he could fuel it with old fry oil. I did see it being
towed last week but I haven't ask him why yet.
There's other alternatives AFAIK people are looking into yet. Just as a
for instance, when Honda started making motorcycles after WWII he made
them run on turpentine because it was more readily available in post war
Japan then gasoline. Very low tech process that can be done like a cross
between making maple syrup and moonshine.
Aidan Karley
> So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
> about the oil-peak or peak-oil
> and if yes what he/she thinks about it,
It's as inevitable as the setting of the sun in the west.
> when
> ( if never) will happen and
For the European oil fields, it's happening right now ; for America it
was a couple of decades ago ; Arabia is showing signs of approaching it;s
peak ; much of Russia is mature, but new field developments may put it off
there for approaching a decade.
(I restrict myself to those regions where I've done work trying to
find and/ or develop oil reserves)
> how it could affect his/her way of life.
>
Slow increase in income as smaller and harder to develop accumulations
are being developed, which requires more precise geological work.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Written at Thu, 29 Jun 2006 03:48 +0100, but posted later.
Aidan Karley
> All that is necessary to increase oil production to new peaks is
> the elimination of political obstacles.
>
Err, where?
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Rich
> In article <gva5a255t0qu4jrtg...@4ax.com>, Gary
> Reichlinger wrote:
>> All that is necessary to increase oil production to new peaks is
>> the elimination of political obstacles.
>>
> And the discovery of new fields.
> Err, where?
>
sufficient oil to last us comfortably into the next century. But why
bother? Why pollute the environment even more? Why not switch to
alternative sources while we have a perfect opportunity right now.
Aidan Karley
> >
> >Brazil has already made it to energy independence
>
> has it?
> I know they use sugar to make alcohol to replace a proportion of oil
> imports (and I applaud that). But I doubt if they use anything like
> the per capita consumption of the USA.
>
litho-fuels considerably more approachable, and makes for a quicker
political payback on investments - a plant that comes onstream in 4
years and produces 5% of the country's fuel needs is a lot easier to
defend (politically) than the same plant that only makes 1% of the
country's fuel.
I think the original impetus of the "gasohol" project in Brazil
was for balance-of-payments reasons rather than carbon-neutrality
reasons, but that just makes the spinoff effects a nice addition to the
original plan. The development of the significant oil reserves on the
Atlantic coast are another nice-to-have spinoff.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fc...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
The U.S. house just voted to end the long-standing moratorum on all oil and
gas drilling along all of the U.S. coastline. Essentially from Maine to
Alaska will be opened up (there will be a 50 mile exclusion zone extending
out from the shoreline where drilling will not be allowed), if it passes
the Senate. That is a big hurtle to overcome, though.
George
Aidan Karley
> Canada ... the Athabasca Oil Sands would provide the world with
> sufficient oil to last us comfortably into the next century.
>
energy they yield per gigajoule spent is a much more moot question.
There are also good questions about quality - what's the composition of
the hydrocarbons distilled off, straightness or branchedness of the
chains ? Aromaticity?
"Crude oil" is a simple phrase that covers a great variety of
chemistry. That's why, should anyone think it's unimportant, most
newspapers that report the oil price, actually report at least two -
Brent Blend (from the North Sea, light and sweet, a premium oil whose
producing field is in terminal decline) and West Texas (still sweet, I
think, but heavier. No idea about it's long term future. Being onshore,
it's probably going to be around for longer, if only as a marker
price.) Difference between the two prices is generally several percent.
> But why
> bother? Why pollute the environment even more? Why not switch to
> alternative sources while we have a perfect opportunity right now.
>
boost his favourite industry?
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Aidan Karley
> The U.S. house just voted to end the long-standing moratorum on all oil and
> gas drilling along all of the U.S. coastline.
>
prospectivity. But I'll bet that's well known already.
When I was at that Russian conference a few months back one of the
sponsors was doing something horribly simple, for offshore exploration : scan
IR reflection satellite photos of the oceans ; repeat regularly ; draw rings
around areas that repeatedly have (IR-absorbing) oil films on the surface ;
exclude areas with lots of shipping being mucky ; sell the results.
Seep analysis is an effective way of deciding "we'll have that block,
that one, that one, and two of those". Damned sight cheaper per thousand
square kilometers than seismic too.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fc...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
But did it produce results?
George
Gary Reichlinger
<doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group> wrote:
>In article <gva5a255t0qu4jrtg...@4ax.com>, Gary
>Reichlinger wrote:
>> All that is necessary to increase oil production to new peaks is
>> the elimination of political obstacles.
>>
> And the discovery of new fields.
> Err, where?
From the time of the first oil well, there has never been a time
when the location of the next successful well was known in advance.
If I could answer your question, I would not post that answer here, I
would invest in that well. The only way to assess the health of the
oil exploration industry is the drilling success rate. As soon as
there are no more places to drill, the success rate will drop to zero.
Jo Schaper
> Hi to all.
> I am an enviromental engineer and geologist quite involved in the study of
> the oil peak (or peak oil).
> I am making a small test of mine for an international meeting to be held in
> pisa, tuscany, italy into three weeks.
> So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
> about the oil-peak or peak-oil and if yes what he/she thinks about it, when
> ( if never) will happen and how it could affect his/her way of life.
Oil availability is intimately related to oil costs (what one must
invest to get the oil) and oil price (what one may sell it for).
For the US, we are at cheap oil peak oil. The 19 cents/gal of my
lifetime will never come again. Whether or not we are at 'peak oil' in
terms of bell-curve usage of existing resources--I don't know, and don't
think anyone knows, since not all petroleum reserves have been found.
I wouldn't hazard a guess about when the world runs out of oil. We've
only been withdrawing it on an industrial basis for 130 years.
Is the world out of oil? No.
Will it cost more to get to that oil? Yes.
Is the use of oil for fuel, as opposed to other petroleum derived (and
partially recyclable) uses a most stupid use of the resource? Yes.
Does the United States lead the way in transportation-oil-usage folly? Yes.
What is driving the oil crisis--economics or politics? Politics,
stupidity and greed have equal shares.
How will high oil prices affect my way of life? It already has in terms
of the increased cost of basics like food, and consumer goods. Such
increase in price, without increase in value will result in
increasing poverty in terms of scale of living. I already drive less (my
36 mpg vehicle), have the furnace/AC set cooler in the winter and warmer
in the summer to save energy, and have cut back on luxuries. Instability
in fuel prices affects every sector of the economy. It's worse than
pulling teeth to get people to switch to renewable energies.
Aidan Karley
> As soon as
> there are no more places to drill, the success rate will drop to zero.
>
Quick question - what's an "injector", in this context? And how
many of them are drilled annually compared to "producers"? And how many
are worked-over to change from one to the other?
You do know what your skin- and K- factors are for the reservoir,
don't you?
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Aidan Karley
wrote:
> But did it produce results?
>
The company is in business.
They find it worthwhile to spend a number of tens of thousands
of sterling paying speaker's costs to get to London, so they can talk
to people who are interested in what the seep-analysts have to say.
No one remote prospecting technology is sufficient to get the
coffers open. But each one can contribute to one side (or the other) of
the scales of decision about whether to drill or not drill.
Damn, Mike has had the web pages re-vamped and obliterated the
nice example I wanted to cite: http://www.aminex-plc.com/tanzania.html
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Aidan Karley
> What is driving the oil crisis--economics or politics? Politics,
> stupidity and greed have equal shares.
>
Police around for a nice little chat.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
Interesting. I realize that one needs multiple lines of evidence in order
to justify the expense of just one exploratory well. What I was asking was
did the seep-analysis help find the "black gold" they were looking for? It
is an interesting concept, no doubt. I mean, being an environmental
consultant, I've conducted soil gas surveys in order to delineated shallow
subsurface petroleum 'contamination' (but only under certain favorable
conditions, such as high soil permeabilities). So I suppose this is a more
sophisticated version of such a survey, and done by looking at evidence for
large-scale seepage at the ocean surface. Yes? Another question. Do they
take ocean currents into consideration? I would think that a seepage plume
would move around a lot depending on currents and prevailaing winds.
George
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fd...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
Don't worry, Jo. I'm sure if I pass the hat around, we can raise enough
money to bail you out. After all, you are a valuable member of the group.
We need more Jos here, and less DFs. Wouldn't you agree, Aiden?
George
chriso
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fd...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
>> What is driving the oil crisis--economics or politics? Politics,
>> stupidity and greed have equal shares.
>>
> Carry on saying things like that and you'll have the Thought
> Police around for a nice little chat.
the secret squirrels are busy these days.
The idea of peak oil is gradually spreading through the world, probably
through the services of the "stock market" and the mass media. Hubbert
predicted the peak of American oil reserve discovery and his successors
are predicting a world "peak" early this century.
I believe there will be a "peak" within the next 25 years. There is
plenty of oil still to be found and fields developed- deep water, Arctic,
Alaska wildlife reserve etc The question is will the discovery of new
reserves keep pace with consumption? A high oil price will also support
the development of more difficult fields.
This is a good article:
http://www.platinum.com.au/images/drops.pdf
Earlier posters have pointed out that there is a reweighting of political
and global power going on - Bolivia, Venezuela, Iran. To me a significant
change is that some oil producers no longer accept US dollars, preferring
Euros.
Profligate and wasteful use of scarce resources never made much sense
anyway. One of the reasons that the US car industry is in such a mess is
the fact that they have been slow to develop fuel efficient models and
hybrids that can compete with new models from Japan.
To my way of thinking, the last 2 points support Warren Buffet's
hypothesis that the US dollar will continue to fall.
Gary Reichlinger
<doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group> wrote:
> That shows how much you know about the industry.
I do not claim to know the offshore end of the industry (unless
you count my Kansas well that becomes "offshore" when the creek
floods). I do know my segment of the industry better than you do.
The oil industry has a lot of specialties and even being an expert in
one area does not make you an expert in all areas.
> Quick question - what's an "injector", in this context? And how
>many of them are drilled annually compared to "producers"? And how many
>are worked-over to change from one to the other?
> You do know what your skin- and K- factors are for the reservoir,
>don't you?
And this has what to do with drilling success rates?
Aidan Karley
> What I was asking was
> did the seep-analysis help find the "black gold" they were looking for?
>
they started from overall basin analysis - basically there's a continental
slope there with no proven oil deposits and almost no drilling history, then
Agip (IIRC) discovered a small gas field (development in progress
http://www.tpdc-tz.com/songo_songo.htm), then while they were doing
large-scale basin analysis with the Tanzanian government geologists (TPDC -
Tanzania Petroleum Development Corp) they got the information about seeps,
which showed a significant number to the NE of the in-development gas project.
At which point they sent people out into the field. In the field, they found
tar balls on beaches (tough work! <G> Mike enjoyed getting paid to go beach
combing on desert islands.) and a active onshore few oil seeps. Geochemistry
on the tar balls showed that their origin was more related to the oil seeps
than it is to random tanker garbage etc.
Then it's a case of finding seismic that had been shot previously,
getting new seismic done, and looking for structures. Given a stock of
structures, you rank them according to probabilities and potentials, as well
as the cost of drilling (which is a major reason why Nyuni was chosen for
their first well - a land rig could be used which brought down the costs
substantially).
The satellite work on seeps was a guide towards where to run seismic
lines, but you very rarely work in a complete vacuum. NAtional governments
will run some speculative seismic ; seismic companies that have a boat moving
from one region to another may invest a couple of days shooting speculative
lines on the route of travel, just to see what they can get for it.
Next months job is using seismic form the mid-80s IIRC, and the nearest
other well is 50km away. That's pretty remote these days.
And I've just had that phone call again. Back to the rig tomorrow. Damn
Red Baron.
> Another question. Do they
> take ocean currents into consideration? I would think that a seepage plume
> would move around a lot depending on currents and prevailaing winds.
>
plumes highlighted, so you get source, current direction and strength all in
one go.
Seep studies are for continental shelves, lakes etc (Caspian or
smaller), not deep marine. I'd guess the couple of thousand foot water depths
of the GoM and PetroBras stuff whose name I've forgotten is the deepest one is
likely to get for the foreseeable future. Deep sea drilling is really hard.
And expensive.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Aidan Karley
> Don't worry, Jo. I'm sure if I pass the hat around, we can raise enough
> money to bail you out. After all, you are a valuable member of the group.
> We need more Jos here, and less DFs. Wouldn't you agree, Aiden?
>
get us all on the "little list". I know I've been getting their attention for
years, so you may not want that sort of attention.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fd...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
That's really interesting, Aiden. Thanks for that. Yeah, deep sea
drilling is very hard, which I suppose is why I never went out on any of
the rigs in the Gulf. But then, there are some aspects of it that I have
always found really interesting, such as what you've described above. I
but looking for tar balls on deserted Island beaches can be mind bending at
times. If I had gotten my degree when I was younger, I might have tried
for one of those rig jobs. Alas, I'm pretty much a permanent land fish
now.
George
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
news:VA.00000fd...@validemailaddresstoa.news.group...
Good point. But I think we could risk it for her. If they give us any
trouble, we'll send them to Ed Conrad hell. lol
George
Aidan Karley
> And this has what to do with drilling success rates?
>
reserves, but is still a successful well.
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
Aidan Karley
> Good point. But I think we could risk it for her. If they give us any
> trouble, we'll send them to Ed Conrad hell. lol
>
*and* the torturers!
--
Aidan Karley, FGS
Aberdeen, Scotland
john fernbach
that we will reach the "peak oil" point eventually.
On the other hand, I'm distrustful of predictions that we will reach it
in the next few years -- not because I think the model of eventual
energy shortages occurring is necessarily wrong, but because I don't
trust the figures that petroleum analysts such as yourself are offering
about how much oil still remains in the ground.
I don't remember who I read on this topic, but one radical author on
the concept of oil depletion has pointed out that until recently, the
best estimates of "proven reserves" and potential reserves in the
global oil business have been estimates that were provided by -- not
surprisingly -- experts with the global oil business. Even powerful
governments and international agencies have relied on such corporate
estimates of remaining reserves. But how trustworthy have the
estimates been?
Perhaps such corporate petrolem experts are now telling us, and our
political leaders, the simple truth about the coming peak in oil
production. But perhaps they are manipulating their estimates of how
much oil remains in the ground so that their companies can drive prices
up or down, for their greater profitability. I just don't know.
I also am very impressed by Daniel Yergin's book "THE PRIZE," on the
history of the global petroleum business since 1859. In that book, the
author recounts how the oil business has repeatedly encountered periods
of apparent scarcity and looming disaster, followed by the sudden and
unexpected discoveries of vast new oil fields that presented the major
petroleum companies with the opposite problem from scarcity -- with a
big problem of apparent surpluses and soft markets.
Prof. Yergin then shows how these problems with market surpluses and
soft prices have subsequently led the major oil companies to try to
encourage more demand for their products, and as global consumption has
risen in response to corporate sales efforts, of course, the rising
consumption has in turn produced new periods of apparent scarcity ...
Whether the current scarcity of oil supplies and the current rising
prices are a sign of permanent future scarcies, or merely another turn
in a very twisting road, therefore is something I cannot judge.
So I think it is very possible that "peak oil" is just a few years
away, and that human civilization will be woefully stressed as we run
out of cheap energy. On the other hand, I also think it's possible
that the biggest oil producing coutnries and the biggest petroleum
companies are simply manipulating the market again.
I think a third possibility is that we now really seem to be facing
permanent scarcities -- but that some amazing new discovery will soon
make the market awash in petroleum again, and drive down prices and
discourage energy conservation efforts once more.
So I suppose I am "agnostic" on the subject of peak oil.
I truly think oil-induced global climate change is a bigger and more
pressing problem than peak oil, because more and more scientists are
pretty sure that global climate change is really happening, and that
many of its effects seem to be negative. Whereas the "peak oil"
situation is more debatable, in my view.
For the sake of the human race and the other living creatures with whom
we share this beautiful planet, I hope our leaders will act to reduce
our use of fossil fuels, including oil, whether or not "peak" oil
production is now at hand.
If we don't soon reduce our oil, coal and gas consumption, I think we
face a very frightening and destructive future that could be
characterized by many unexpected and negative changes in global weather
patterns -- but NOT because of a scarcity of petroleum. Of course, the
scarcity problem could soon afflict the global economy as well, if you
are correct about the peak oil situation.
Having offered this opinion, I wonder how you and your employer plan on
using it. Maybe in good ways, maybe not, I think. But anyway, that is
my view.
--------------------
Pietro C. wrote:
> Hi to all.
> I am an enviromental engineer and geologist quite involved in the study of
> the oil peak (or peak oil).
> I am making a small test of mine for an international meeting to be held in
> pisa, tuscany, italy into three weeks.
> So, i am asking to all the folks in this newsgroup if somebody has heard
> about the oil-peak or peak-oil and if yes what he/she thinks about it, when
> ( if never) will happen and how it could affect his/her way of life.
>
> My point of view (to give a perspective:):
> I am, as a member of ASPO Italy ( Association for the study of peak oil),
> quite convinced about the reality of the problem and the fact that it will
> happen in few years if it is not already happening ( as someone is convinced
> of).
> I really 'd like to know what is the average consciousness of the subject.
>
> Thanks in advance for an answer, whatever could be your idea on the subject
> and sorry for my english.
>
> Dr. Geol.Ing. Pietro Cambi,
> ASPOItalia
> Fiesole, Florence, Italy
George
"Aidan Karley" <doIlookDAFT...@validEMAILaddressTOa.NEWS.group>
wrote in message
I'll have to forward that request to higher authorities for review. You
make a good case for keeping it open, though! lol
George