James Kunstler and Peak Oil

Kaligula

Woodpecker
Global warming is a cover for resources depletion, and won't be scrapped soon.
They will just call cooling "weather instability driven by global warming" or something in this style.

But I think we have already started repeating our arguments.
 
911 said:
Oh, that's really bad argumentation, very poor attempt to conflate biomass/methane from human waste with natural gas, tsk tsk quadruple dash! You said that renewables today are 2/3 as electricity source when it's actually about 1/3.

Admit you were wrong, learn and move on, nothing wrong about that, to the contrary. Doubling down is silly when your audience isn't too thick.

I also said that the natural gas drilled from underground is renewable because the biomass that gets buried underneath the soil every day rapidly converts into methane as it decomposes providing an instant source of natural gas.
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
---- said:
911 said:
Oh, that's really bad argumentation, very poor attempt to conflate biomass/methane from human waste with natural gas, tsk tsk quadruple dash! You said that renewables today are 2/3 as electricity source when it's actually about 1/3.

Admit you were wrong, learn and move on, nothing wrong about that, to the contrary. Doubling down is silly when your audience isn't too thick.

I also said that the natural gas drilled from underground is renewable because the biomass that gets buried underneath the soil every day rapidly converts into methane as it decomposes providing an instant source of natural gas.

In this sense everything is renewable, except nuclear. Oil, gas, coal were once biomass.
 
Kaligula said:
In this sense everything is renewable, oil, gas, coal were once biomass

Yes, but natural gas renews faster than coal or oil because the methane gas is released immediately upon the decomposition of the biomass. The biomass for coal and oil must be subjected to tremendous pressure and heat underground for millions of years before it turns into coal and oil. This is why it is also possible to extract methane from landfills because it is released immediately when the decomposition of the biomass begins.
 

Oberrheiner

Pelican
SamuelBRoberts said:
If it's too expensive, then why is it so cheap?

This guy has many good answers, unfortunately it's in french :


There used to be an english version of the slides but apparently it's gone :(

Although I just saw that there are english subs available with the video, no idea whether they're any good though.

Kaligula said:
In this sense everything is renewable, except nuclear. Oil, gas, coal were once biomass.

Well we tried breeder reactors in the past ..
 

EvanWilson

Kingfisher
Gold Member
SamuelBRoberts said:
If it's too expensive, then why is it so cheap?

It is expensive because the companies doing oil shale drilling are borrowing all kind of money against the oil reserves to get it out of the ground. Another problem is that the estimate oil reserves and recoverable oil is almost always over estimated on wells.

I remember a number of oil companies telling every prior to well completion they expected 400 to 600 boe per day, and usually coming in at about half of that. As if that was not bad enough, oil shale well have a step decline so after 3 to 5 years, the well is basically 'done' and may even get capped because it is not worth pumping anymore.

It is cheap, to the end consumer, because the companies and other oil producing countries are all in trouble in that they need every dollar possible to either keep up government spending or bringing in revenue to service the debt that was borrowed to get the oil out of the ground.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
---- said:
Kaligula said:
In this sense everything is renewable, oil, gas, coal were once biomass

Yes, but natural gas renews faster than coal or oil because the methane gas is released immediately upon the decomposition of the biomass. The biomass for coal and oil must be subjected to tremendous pressure and heat underground for millions of years before it turns into coal and oil. This is why it is also possible to extract methane from landfills because it is released immediately when the decomposition of the biomass begins.

You're comparing methane from landfills the size of a city block, with natural gas deposits the size of small countries... Landfill methane operations are not scalable, they can't provide anything close to the 32% power production that natural gas occupies today.
 
EvanWilson said:
It is expensive because the companies doing oil shale drilling are borrowing all kind of money against the oil reserves to get it out of the ground.

Of course you'd borrow against the oil reserves. An oil well is an asset with a high up-front cost and a long term return. How else would you do it?

Another problem is that the estimate oil reserves and recoverable oil is almost always over estimated on wells. I remember a number of oil companies telling every prior to well completion they expected 400 to 600 boe per day, and usually coming in at about half of that. As if that was not bad enough, oil shale well have a step decline so after 3 to 5 years, the well is basically 'done' and may even get capped because it is not worth pumping anymore.

This would mean that the entire oil industry is engaged in widespread fraud against its investors. And not just a little fraud, but inflating the expected returns of a well by 2x, which is absolutely massive. This fraud is so well-known that you, a random guy on a message board, are aware of it, but none of these high-powered investors, with millions or billions of dollars on the line, have noticed this, and they continue to blindly throw money at oil companies?
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Oil guy: We'll get 2 billion barrels out of this well for sure, pardners! Yeeeeehaw!
Investors: Can we have minute please, Mr Eastwayneswood?
Oil guy: Sure thing, buckaroos!

Investor1: He says 2 billion barrels but they always double it.
Investor2: Will we still turn a massive profit on 1 billion barrels?
Investor3: Fuck yes.
Investor1: It's a go then.

Investors: Mr Eastwayneswood, you have a deal.
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
Demand and supply curves do not apply to things in fixed supply. Oil is now such a thing. Therefore, in the current situation just small additional demand (or small supply removal) is required to push oil higher, for a time being.
At the moment it is being attempted to push oil price higher by taking down Venezuela, Libya, soon Iran, and part of Saudi output.
Volatility of oil price means also that oil has been already decoupled from the greater economical cycle, oil will never again push general economy up, only down. Overall price trend for oil is down.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Kaligula said:
Demand and supply curves do not apply to things in fixed supply. Oil is now such a thing. Therefore, in the current situation just small additional demand (or small supply removal) is required to push oil higher.

Dead wrong, you keep making the same mistake. The supply
of accessible oil is constantly growing, the technology is changing
fast and allowing us to tap into ever greater supply sources.

This is the reality:

8330919336_74b5db78f3_b.jpg


Look at the size of that Siberian monster:

fig1map_large.jpg
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
There is neither shale oil nor shale gas in Poland. It was a great fad in Poland a few years ago, but then they drilled a couple of wells and since then Poles do not hear about shale anymore.

I presume that the rest of your map has similar level of imprecision.

"Siberian monster" is just Western Siberian oil basin, the main oil province of Russia, running out just now, by the way.
Siberia has no rail there. Just planes, pipelines, and trucks. Impossible to scale up any labour-intensive drilling like shale.
 
Kaligula said:
There is neither shale oil nor shale gas in Poland. It was a great fad in Poland a few years ago, but then they drilled a couple of wells and since then Poles do not hear about shale anymore.

I presume that the rest of your map has similar level of imprecision.

After 30 seconds of google searching, I found that the reason they're not drilling for shale oil in Poland isn't because the initial reports were wrong, but because there's SO MUCH SHALE OIL OUT THERE FOR SO CHEAP that they just can't make any money off the shale they have. Nobody wanted to bother financing the construction of wells, because there's so much cheap oil out there that it's not profitable.

“We have been looking for a partner who could finance exploration works in Szczawno and Gdańsk W. for the last four years but we haven’t found one,” Paweł Chałupka, managing director at San Leon Energy Poland, told Puls Biznesu. “Oil prices have dropped and investors have diverted their attention to conventional gas reserves...

Again, this was a 30 second google search for "shale oil poland". Don't just talk out of your ass without doing basic research first.
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
SamuelBRoberts said:
Kaligula said:
There is neither shale oil nor shale gas in Poland. It was a great fad in Poland a few years ago, but then they drilled a couple of wells and since then Poles do not hear about shale anymore.

I presume that the rest of your map has similar level of imprecision.

After 30 seconds of google searching, I found that the reason they're not drilling for shale oil in Poland isn't because the initial reports were wrong, but because there's SO MUCH SHALE OIL OUT THERE FOR SO CHEAP that they just can't make any money off the shale they have. Nobody wanted to bother financing the construction of wells, because there's so much cheap oil out there that it's not profitable.

“We have been looking for a partner who could finance exploration works in Szczawno and Gdańsk W. for the last four years but we haven’t found one,” Paweł Chałupka, managing director at San Leon Energy Poland, told Puls Biznesu. “Oil prices have dropped and investors have diverted their attention to conventional gas reserves...

Again, this was a 30 second google search for "shale oil poland". Don't just talk out of your ass without doing basic research first.

Why they have been drilling in USA during last 4 years?
Why the guy in Poland could not find anyone to drill a few exploration wells? Maybe because there is not much to explore...? You don't expect seriously a company guy to say the truth, do you...?
 
Why the guy in Poland could not find anyone to drill a few exploration wells? Maybe because there is not much to explore...? You don't expect seriously a company guy to say the truth, do you...?

Well, that's certainly convenient.
"This chart show's there plenty of oil available across the world."
"The chart is lying! The fact that there's no oil fields in Poland proves it!"
"This link shows that there's no oil fields in Poland because oil is so cheap that it's just not profitable."
"The link is lying!"
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
SamuelBRoberts said:
Why the guy in Poland could not find anyone to drill a few exploration wells? Maybe because there is not much to explore...? You don't expect seriously a company guy to say the truth, do you...?

Well, that's certainly convenient.
"This chart show's there plenty of oil available across the world."
"The chart is lying! The fact that there's no oil fields in Poland proves it!"
"This link shows that there's no oil fields in Poland because oil is so cheap that it's just not profitable."
"The link is lying!"
Cheap oil is 10-20$ barrel, ok?
You can still get low cost oil in Middle East.
They did not find Middle East conditions in Poland. Or elsewhere, for that matter.

BTW, you are obnoxious, pretending to not understand simple things.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Kaligula, about the map above, there are large shale oil deposits in eastern Canada that don't show on it.

With the current world oil reseerves around 1,600 billion barrels, and the current consumption rate of 100M barrels per day, we have an annual consumption of 360M barrels, so about 1 B every 3 years, which translates to about 400 years of oil left.

Basically, oil is a relatively cheap and accessible resource that can power humanity for generations to come. I think the reason Big Oil has lined up behind the global warming hoax is that this is a way to artificially throttle the supply of a near endless commodity. The owners of big oil are tribes like the Rockefellers, who have long become banker oligarchs, and to them artificially created markets like the carbon trade market represent trillion dollar financial opportunities, as are "green" energies which they also dominate. Furthermore, the banksters as oligarchs can impose taxes and further fleece the middle class.

This is covered really well in this James Corbett documentary, one of his best works, and one of the best documentaries made in the last decade, a must-see:


This is the angle that leftists don't understand, they believe that evil big oil is the main barrier against global warming regulation schemes, when in fact they're fully on board.
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
911 said:
Kaligula, about the map above, there are large shale oil deposits in eastern Canada that don't show on it.

With the current world oil reseerves around 1,600 billion barrels, and the current consumption rate of 100M barrels per day, we have an annual consumption of 360M barrels, so about 1 B every 3 years, which translates to about 400 years of oil left.

Basically, oil is a relatively cheap and accessible resource that can power humanity for generations to come. I think the reason Big Oil has lined up behind the global warming hoax is that this is a way to artificially throttle the supply of a near endless commodity. The owners of big oil are tribes like the Rockefellers, who have long become banker oligarchs, and to them artificially created markets like the carbon trade market represent trillion dollar financial opportunities, as are "green" energies which they also dominate. Furthermore, the banksters as oligarchs can impose taxes and further fleece the middle class.

This is covered really well in this James Corbett documentary, one of his best works, and one of the best documentaries made in the last decade, a must-see:


This is the angle that leftists don't understand, they believe that evil big oil is the main barrier against global warming regulation schemes, when in fact they're fully on board.

Most of oil is produced by national oil companies, not "Big Oil" (Chevron, Total, BP, Shell, and others).
Why would Big Oil suddenly decide to earn money by artificially throttling supply instead increasing it? If they could increase it, they could earn 140$ per barrel, as 2008 showed. It doesn't make sense, sorry. Too complicated for Ockham razor.
 

Kaligula

Woodpecker
SamuelBRoberts said:
EvanWilson said:
It is expensive because the companies doing oil shale drilling are borrowing all kind of money against the oil reserves to get it out of the ground.

Of course you'd borrow against the oil reserves. An oil well is an asset with a high up-front cost and a long term return. How else would you do it?

Another problem is that the estimate oil reserves and recoverable oil is almost always over estimated on wells. I remember a number of oil companies telling every prior to well completion they expected 400 to 600 boe per day, and usually coming in at about half of that. As if that was not bad enough, oil shale well have a step decline so after 3 to 5 years, the well is basically 'done' and may even get capped because it is not worth pumping anymore.

This would mean that the entire oil industry is engaged in widespread fraud against its investors. And not just a little fraud, but inflating the expected returns of a well by 2x, which is absolutely massive. This fraud is so well-known that you, a random guy on a message board, are aware of it, but none of these high-powered investors, with millions or billions of dollars on the line, have noticed this, and they continue to blindly throw money at oil companies?

It is simple. Oil industry basically believed in higher oil prices when they took loans. Oil may be collateral, but its final price is set by general economy.
 
Top