# The Etp Model Has Been Empirically Confirmed

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Futilitist, Aug 24, 2015.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
Yep, I was wrong about that one. Many people thought we might be entering a recession at that time. So what? I never claimed to be right on everything. But good catch, from 3 years ago.

To bring things more up to date, I have that recession feeling again. Let's wait and see if I am wrong this time.

It's not just about you, Russ.

No, it does not. You don't know anything.

Depletion means that production is declining.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_depletion

Oil depletion is the decline in oil production of a well, oil field, or geographic area.

Ha ha. Stopped for a breather. You are very funny.

Fracking is just too expensive to be sustained. The fracking boom could never have happened in the first place without FED sponsored easy money. Now that easy money has come to an end, the fracking boom is a fracking bust. Forever.

And without that fracked oil (and oil from tar sands), the world enters the depletion phase of the oil production life cycle. That means the end of world economic growth. That is why the markets are starting to crash.

---Futilitist

Last edited: Jan 19, 2016

3. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
Here was a prescient response from origin at that time:
So, reboot, reload! Let's do it again!
Clearly -- all the rest of the people who watched the economy not collapse when it was expensive were affording it fine as well.
Erp - so you are acknowledging you were wrong in your claim about fracking? Or are you now claiming the fracking oil fields are actually running dry/empty?

krash661 likes this.

5. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
It's fun browsing the old thread. You should put this one in your signature so we can see it with every post/prediction you make:
Of course:

krash661 likes this.

7. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
I have no idea what you are talking about. What claim about fracking? Of course I am not claiming "the fracking oil fields are actually running dry/empty". Quit trying to put words in my mouth. We were just talking about your complete misunderstanding of the term "oil depletion". I corrected you. See my last post.

You are really tiresome, Russ.

---Futilitist

8. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
Hey, remember this exchange?:
So would you now acknowledge that your searching on your hands and knees with a magnifying glass for a negative to hold up to say the economy was getting worse really was delusional? Your weaseling during that whole exchange truly was entertaining!

krash661 likes this.
9. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
Uh huh....so you're claiming that fracked oil fields are being "depleted" but they aren't running dry? You sure you read that link?

krash661 likes this.
10. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
I'll bet it is. For you it has to be better than dealing with the present situation.

Off the top of my head, no.

I was talking about total world oil production entering the depletion phase. I never said anything about fracked oil fields. Quit trying to put words in my mouth.

---Futilitist

Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
11. ### exchemistValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,398
Exactly!

Meanwhile, Fute now concedes his "model" merely looks at the thermodynamics of pumping a fluid (water? oil? - doesn't matter) out of a single well!!

As I remarked ages ago, near the start of this long and hilarious thread: "This concept relates to analysing entropy in a single, discrete chemical engineering process. Trying to apply it to a constantly changing global aggregate of oil wells, old and new, across the world, is barking mad."

He now concedes his "model" does not even consider how much energy is available from the oil extracted, to carry out the pumping operation! So it gives no information whatsoever about the trade-off between energy required for extraction versus energy available! But he says that does not matter! Some thermodynamics, eh?

krash661 likes this.
12. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
You didn't say anything about fracked oil fields? Gee, where did I get this?:
Looks to me like you did say some things about fracked oil!

So which is it: will fracked oil fields be "depleted" or will people just stupidly choose not to pump fracked oil out of the ground?

krash661 likes this.
13. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
Interestingly, I just checked the eia website and the fracking boom is taking longer to abate than I expected: with two months left to be reported, 2015 is already sure to exceed 2014's production and will come close (+- a few tenths of a percent) to breaking the 1971 peak. I did not expect that.

Every month of 2015 saw higher production than the same month of 2014, but in the past couple of months, that gap has narrowed, so I expect we will come up just short of the peak and start a slight drop with the Nov or Dec numbers.

krash661 likes this.
14. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
False. The Etp model looks at the total energy used by the entire oil industry.

Why? It makes perfectly good sense. And it works.

The model considers only the energy used to produce the oil. After that, whatever energy is left can be used by consumers in the general economy.

That is not true. According to the model, in 2012, the total EROEI of oil production for society reached 2:1. The model projects that we will reach the "zero state" (1:1 EROEI) by around 2021.

Quit twisting my words! I never said anything about fracked fields becoming depleted. I said that without the additional oil from US fracking, the world would be experiencing irreversible oil depletion already. That means that total world oil production would already be in decline every year if we weren't fracking. But fracked oil is too expensive to produce sustainably. That is why the boom is coming to an end. Once US fracked oil production begins to decline, so will total world oil production.

People will not "just stupidly choose not to pump fracked oil out of the ground". People will stop fracking because the fracking process is too expensive to be sustained. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

---Futilitist

Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
15. ### originIn a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
11,049
Because it is not true.

Here is the breakeven price for fracking.

Here is the price per barrel for oil and the gasoline prices.

Earlier today it was as low as $28.58. Those prices are much lower than even the lowest break even price on your chart. Most analysts expect the oil price to remain low for a long time. This is having a terrible effect on the economy, and world stock markets are in turmoil and may even crash very soon. So... ---Futilitist Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 17. ### krash661[MK6] transitioning scifi to realityValued Senior Member Messages: 2,973 what about refining cost--what about up-stream and down-stream cost?? 18. ### krash661[MK6] transitioning scifi to realityValued Senior Member Messages: 2,973 so besides this being a backpedaling tactic on your part-- are you admitting that you are obviously wrong in the face of your own words ? 19. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member Messages: 5,051 You're twisting yourself, trying to get out of this: why would fracked oil production decline if it wasn't "depleted" given that by definition a production decline is a demonstration of "depletion"? At this point, what you are telling us is that you fully reject every bit of the Peak Oil theory you spent years and thousands of posts advocating! Because fracking production was demonstrated to be cheap enough to be sustained, when it experienced explosive growth at$100 a barrel.

You're really twisting yourself around arguing against your own concepts/definitions here!

Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
krash661 likes this.
20. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
If my words are being intentionally twisted and I try to clarify my intended meaning, that is not backpedaling. On the other hand, what you are doing is trying to create confusion.

Of course not, krash661.

1. What you are saying is gibberish.

2. I am not wrong.

---Futilitist

21. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
"Srsly guys, it's rlly gonna happen ths time! Hey, stop laughing at me!"

When it happens, I'm sure you'll let us know.

krash661 likes this.
22. ### FutilitistThis so called forum is a fraud...Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,586
Depletion means geological depletion. No matter how hard you pump, you can't get it up.

On the other hand, fracked oil will decline because it is no longer profitable for oil producers. Surely you can understand that.

You and I have discussed the concept of depletion many times over the years. Now, you suddenly can't remember what it means. You are full of shit, Russ. You are just trying to create confusion and in the process you are only embarrassing yourself (further!). If you have any good arguments, make them. If not, please go away. You are wasting my time.

Fracking is not cheap enough to be sustained because oil prices are nowhere near $100 a barrel. Last time I checked, WTIC was$28.78!!!

The FED enabled fracking with easy credit:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-01-1 ... mple-chart

Correlation Or Causation: How The Fed Helped Create The Global Oil Glut (In 1 Simple Chart)

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/13/2016 19:45 -0500

Easy money by The Fed expanding their balance sheet ENABLED tight oil to be produced 'economically'...

But the signals this sent to the market became self-fulfilling (thanks to an endless Fed put) further creating record US crude production (as the oil 'gold rush' ensued), forcing a real 'deflating' world to be 'glutted' with ever-increasing output of mal-investment-driven 'expensive' oil...

of course until that facade of 'boom', busted and crushed the price of the over-produced by 75% (back to 'reality')

Can you spot the moment The Fed jumped the shark?

......

I think it is very interesting to note that the Fed initiated QE3 right after the 2012 Etp crossover event. But all that easy Fed money was no longer able to make the price of oil rise. All it did was keep raising production, which made the glut much worse. And this is what made the oil price drop even lower than Etp model forecast.

When it happens, you won't need me to point it out to you.

---Futilitist

Last edited: Jan 19, 2016
23. ### Russ_WattersNot a Trump supporter...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
5,051
Yes, and the harder you try - the more money you spend - the less return you get. That's the essence of Hubbert's theory and is splattered all over the page you linked: production goes down and costs go up. And no matter how high prices go, production can't be turned around.

By suggesting a totally different mechanism, you're explicitly rejecting all of the Peak Oilism you used to preach!
It certainly helped, but your claim is on the other side: falsely claiming people couldn't afford it at $100 a barrel. It was affordable at$100 and will be again at 100.
Indeed, it makes me wonder why you are here, since you can't really win and instead are just experiencing thousands of just crushing failures year after year.

krash661 likes this.