Apocalypse Soon?

If you think you have made the case for oil prices declining for the last several years, then so be it. Your imaginary price decline since 2011 is hardly a compelling case against peak oil theory. Is this your best argument?

Nothing happened. I haven't been wrong. Where did I predict a more dramatic price increase than the one that actually happened? That makes no sense at all. You are trying to construct a straw man.

No. Absolutely, factually not. We have reached the world peak of conventional crude oil production (Nov. 2005, Deffeyes; 2006, IEA). Look it up. Production began to slow in 2003 as we approached the world peak. That is what explains the sudden increase in price starting in 2003.

Speaking of which, you dodged my question yet again. Here it is:

And how do you explain the sudden rise of oil out of it's normal trading zone (around $20/barrel) beginning in 2003? Your speculator caused oil spike fantasy starts in 2008, not 2003. You are dodging this question.

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Fortunately, from a global warming POV, which last paragraph of quote above is concerned about, I have pointed out that tropical sugar cane alcohol is slightly carbon negative and could totally replace oil for the entire world and be cheaper, and has proven technology in use and refined during last 35 years in Brazil (~80% of new cars now made in Brazil are “flex fuel,” meaning they can run on pure alcohol or with and fraction of gasoline mixed in.) That sugar cane alcohol can also replace oil for the production of plastics and is doing so cheaper with BrasKem producing 400,000 TONS of plastic each year now! The oil age is starting to end.

It would take at least a decade, if done without government help, to convent world to using only alcohol for transport fuel, but big trucks will all have converted to natural gas before that and would probably continue to use it for decades.

Ironically, if oil demand keeps falling, peak oil may have occurred in 2005, but not for lack of oil – for lack of demand after 2005. I.e. world may never get back to that level of production if China too switches away from oil for transport!

Don´t try to tell me (again) that the 2012 Harvard published study is wrong because a professor´s blog, working with 15 year old data, said peak oil occurred in 2005.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Good you are now sticking in the word "conventional" as that keeps you from being totally wrong as you were without that word which you have added to post made today. In yesterday´s post 571, you said "we had reached peak oil" with no qualifying "conventional" adjective in front of "peak oil" or "oil."

Your also wrong with "The situation can only get worse." As very much more oil that is economical to produce (< $35/Brl) than we use in three years has been found in the last three years (since start of 2010). Admittely much of it will require fracking but a lot of it is also "conventional" in deep off shore waters. Note in post 582 I quote Harvard University study/ report published in 2012 as saying Harvard, "provides compelling evidence that a new oil boom has begun."

Also note that in post 572, I give links to other posts documenting that about 300 billion barrels of oil that have been found since 2010! (More than 100 billion barrels in just small part of one newly confirmed deposit in Southern Australia!) There is another very similar geological structure less than 500 miles away that is totally unexplored - it may hold 500 billion barrels of economical recoverable oil when explored as is larger, but without any small town near by to support exploration.

I told you before: all commodities began to surge up in price about then, some like copper much more than oil did. Reason I think is a complex mix of many factors. Two of the main ones were: (1)The growing wealth / purchasing power of the common man, and (2) The growing fear of fiat money - that drove price of gold up at least five times more than oil. Almost ever commodity rose like oil did starting in about 2003.

Brazil´s president Lula was elected in 2002 and served 8 year years. He and Brazil rode the rise in commodity prices to new prosperity. It was such a strong wave that Lula left office with 80% of the population saying he did a good or great job as president. The surge up in commodity prices made Brazil economically strong. Unfortunately the current left-wing, sort of socialist, government is doing much wrong - mandating lower electricity price, so needed new generation facilities are not being built. They have not let Petrobras, which they control, raise gasoline prices for five years so now PetroBrass loses money on every gallon it sells! (Look at a graph of Petrobras stock price - down about 60%!) Brazil must sell crude and buy more expensive refined product at global prices as it lacks capacity to refine its crude. Like oil prices, commodity prices have also fallen in last few years so are not saving the foolish quasi-socialist govenment from its self.

Well your prediction that 95% of the world´s population would "soon die" because the high price of oil would economically destroy societies was "pretty dramatic."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Technically I think a recession is two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth (negative GDP).

That is a pretty twisted optimism biased way to look at things. The economy can get worse without being in recession. If the economy is getting worse or remaining sluggish, it makes no sense to describe it as improving, does it?

That is a pretty big IF. If gas prices stay at the $4 a gallon level, the economy will stay very sluggish. The debt situation will get much worse. Without significant growth in oil production, we remain vulnerable to a financial cross contagion collapse.

All that really matters is the price. Shale oil is more expensive to produce than conventional crude oil. They are producing the sweetest spots first. As shale oil replaces declining conventional production, the price will keep increasing.

They are obviously interchangeable. The markets only see the grade of the oil. The overall price is what is important. That keeps rising.

But your answer doesn't make any sense. Oil prices began rising above historical averages starting in 2003. Are you saying that there was a false peak oil trading frenzy that spontaneously began 2003 and continued until 2008? Was any of this on the news? Almost no one had even heard of peak oil in 2003. Please provide some evidence that your claim is true.

You forgot to answer this question:

Do you agree with Billy T's ridiculous position that oil prices have been falling for the last several years?

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I did not just stick in the word conventional. I have been using the word conventional from the beginning. I have been very careful to be consistent and accurate, but you have been the cause of a lot of needless repetition. If you can find a place where it seems like I have made a false claim regarding the peak of conventional production, please list the post number. I have certainly not been "totally wrong".

You just added this while I was posting:

Here was what I said:

And you think this makes me "totally wrong"? Please. I stand by my statement.

Yet so far, world oil production has remained essentially flat. Perhaps Leonardo Maugeri is wrong. He is a political scientist and an economist, not a scientist. His report is very controversial.

Like I told you before, a portion of the price inflation in all commodities is the result of the price of oil. A surge in the price of all commodities is predicted by peak oil theory.

Your two main factors causing the sudden oil spike:

(1)The growing wealth / purchasing power of the common man, and

(2) The growing fear of fiat money - that drove price of gold up at least five times more than oil.

Why did these two factors begin effecting the price of oil so suddenly and dramatically? Did wealth/purchasing power and fear of fiat money rise very suddenly? If so, please provide some evidence.

My answer makes a lot more sense. Oil production began slowing in 2003, as we approached the 2005 peak. This led to dropping oil inventories and a rising oil price. Just as predicted by peak oil theory.

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

If you have been saying that "conventional" all along as you now claim, then few give a few post numbers (of posts not edited in last day or two) where you said "conventional oil peak occurred in 2005" instead of just "peak oil occurred in 2005."

 

Absolutely not. What a petty exercise and a totally lame waste of time. The burden of proof is obviously on you. And no one cares. This is just another one of your stupid diversions, like Swedish scientists and sugar seats.

Face it, we are experiencing the effects of peak oil. This could very well lead to a full scale social collapse soon.

Also, please go ahead and answer this one from my last post:

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Post #56 is where you made your first substantive statement about Peak Oil. You said:

These statements are clearly not compatible with the fact, that you now acknowledge, that shale oil is replacing "conventional oil" and allowing production to continue rising. It isn't even possible for you to say you accidentally left out the word "conventional" because you cited net energy production explicitly. Much worse than just erroneously timing Peak Oil, you're predicting our total energy production from all sources started dropping last year.

But we all know full well how this dodge works for you: somehow you see civilization collapsing soon even though oil production will continue rising for decades.

 

Futilist, I'm on vacation now and without a computer. I'll answer more completely probably tonight. But one more thing:

You can't weasel out of your erroneous picture of the economy by goalpost shifting and adding "stagnating". It wasn't what you said before but it is wrong too. The US economy is improving and has been pretty much nonstop for more than 3 years. The two most important measures are that the GDP is rising and unemployment falling.

 

more nonsense

I have several times now listed links showing ~300 BILLION barrels of new oil deposits have been founf in the last three years - That is a discovery rate of 100 billion battels per year, FAR ABOVE THE OIL CONSUMPTION RATE, and producable at less than $35/ brl !

 

I suppose, as I read back the post in question, that I may have been a bit hyperbolic at that stage of the conversation. Consider that the post in question is from page 3 (a very silly phase of the discussion) and we are now on page 30 (also a silly phase, but different). At this point we are considering evidence in greater detail. I guess that is why you feel the need to go back 534 posts to look for errors.

I have been very consistent in seeing civilization collapsing soon due to a number of interrelated factors. That is a valid and logical stance, not a dodge. You seem to be trying to create some sort of straw man in which I am married to only an oil spike causing civilization collapse. I have never asserted any such thing. Please look at the material I presented in the original post.

I am not weaseling or goal post shifting. I didn't say it before because you hadn't asked me. I think stagnating is the right word to use. GDP only rose .4% in the 4th quarter of 2012, a sharp decline from the 3.1% growth in the 3rd quarter. Unemployment numbers are sketchy, for a bunch of reasons. The number of people on food stamps might be a better measure. It is at an all time record high.

You say the economy is improving. I disagree. There is no absolute, scientific way to characterize it one way or the other.

And speaking of weaseling, you keep dodging this question:

Do you agree with Billy T's ridiculous position that oil prices have been falling for the last several years?

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

More Nonsense

I agree that you are just presenting more nonsense.

I believe we currently discover 1 barrel of oil for every 4 or 5 we produce. Annual discoveries have been less than annual production since the 1980s. Do you have some evidence that that has changed?

And while you are at it, please respond to this:

Your two main factors causing the sudden oil spike:

(1)The growing wealth / purchasing power of the common man, and

(2) The growing fear of fiat money - that drove price of gold up at least five times more than oil.

Why did these two factors begin effecting the price of oil so suddenly and dramatically? Did wealth/purchasing power and fear of fiat money rise very suddenly? If so, please provide some evidence.

My answer makes a lot more sense. Oil production began slowing in 2003, as we approached the 2005 peak. This led to dropping oil inventories and a rising oil price. Just as predicted by peak oil theory.

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yes, I do. - See recent BP statements and Forbes article quoted below.

Why is it you only give your obsolute BS opinions and no modern referenced facts? You can believe or invent whatever BS you like, but here are the facts:

The first quote is from Forbes article that is only 4 days old (published 27March 2013)

Note this final sentence is bold in the original, not made bold by Billy T. I might add that the reason why no one knows how much oil there is to still find is that the more difficult to explore regions have not been explored much at all. Very little exploration in the arctic, where most experts think much more oil probably is and very little in very hot (>110F degrees in summer) S. Australia so most of the homes in the tiny cities there (less than 2000 people) are underground. But about 3 months ago two independent evaluation firms said at least 100 billion economically recoverable barrels were in just one small part of a now partially explored geologiacal basin in S. Australia. (One of the two said 233 billion barrels!) There is an even larger, very similar basin, less than 500 miles away to the west, but there is not even a tiny town near by to help with supplies, etc. and no need now for the more oil that is probably there.

Here is what BP states about proven oil reserves increasing despite growing production*:

Note R/P = 54.2 means that proven reserves without any new finds, and current producion levels continuing would last 54.2 years, but they would last longer as natural gas is replacing diesel in big trucks, the fleet average mpg of cars is still increasing while people are driving less every year now and some cars are switching to batteries. I.e. demand for oil in the western world is falling and it will be many years before Chinese demand makes it start to increase again.

* don´t you think that "production growing" and "demand falling" could have anything to do with the recently falling oil prices.

BTW I´m going back thru your posts which are more than 2 days old to see if you ever included the word "conventional" before "oil" in "peak oil occured in 2005" claim. Thus far, your claim that you always did say "conventional oil" is just dishonest lying, but I again invite you to give a post number (with no recent edit as liers might be temped to do that) where you did qualify your "peak oil in 2005" claim to make it only about conventional oil sources. Do you think your opinions count more with readers here than Fobes´s researched article, BP oil company many statements, and the Harvard published in 2012 study partially quoted in post 582 when it is becoming more and more demonstrated that you are a dishonest lier about when you started to use the qualifier "conventional"?

Again if I missed an unedited earlier post where your did say "peak of conventional oil was 2005" give that post number.

Don´t tell me your don´t want to even try to show you are not a dishonest LIER as well as a BS inventor.

 

I looked through your post and I couldn't find anything to invalidate my statement above. Just huge this and billions of barrels of that. Hype.

Oil discoveries have been declining since 1964. Annual discoveries have been less than annual production since the early 1980s. We still use more oil than we are discovering. That hasn't changed significantly in the last couple of years.

You are rude. Please don't call me a liar again. Your abusive approach to me shows that you are desperate because your arguments are so weak. You are trying to bait me into insulting you back. Let's try and stick to the topic, shall we?

And while you are at it, I ask you once again to please respond to this:

Your two main factors causing the sudden oil spike:

(1)The growing wealth / purchasing power of the common man, and

(2) The growing fear of fiat money - that drove price of gold up at least five times more than oil.

Why did these two factors begin effecting the price of oil so suddenly and dramatically? Did wealth/purchasing power and fear of fiat money rise very suddenly? If so, please provide some evidence.

My answer makes a lot more sense. Oil production began slowing in 2003, as we approached the 2005 peak. This led to dropping oil inventories and a rising oil price. Just as predicted by peak oil theory.

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Here, here. Nailed it.

 

Thanks for popping back in, Ophiolite. Since you are a peak oil denier, perhaps you could try to answer the question that stumped your friends.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What caused the sudden rise in oil prices beginning in 2003?

And since you're such a big fan of Billy T's, perhaps you can also answer this:

Do you agree with Billy T's ridiculous position that oil prices have been falling for the last several years?

---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I just read that there has been a huge oil discovery in the Ozark Mountains region, it could dwarf what is in Saudi Arabia.

Here is the link.

So much for peak oil!!

 

You just can't abandon that desire to lie, can you? I am a peak oil promoter. I believe thoroughly in peak oil. I just don't think we have reached it yet. And I see you still seem to be avoiding admitting that peak oil need not be restricted to conventional resources - lying by implication. You are versatile, I'll give you that.

 

They have been. They have fallen from the peak in 2008. Look at your own graph.

 

Futiilist: "Face it, we are experiencing the effects of peak oil. This could very well lead to a full scale social collapse soon."