Peak Oil: Fact or Crap?

sevin

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
4,648
Okay, this is really frustrating. I've been reading about this subject for a long time and have found that without examining the world's oil reserves with my own eyes, there's no way to know what's true and what's not!

On the one hand, a lot of doomers talk about how we're using up all the oil too fast and that it will lead to the destruction of our economy. On the other hand, a lot of people claim that this is all BS propaganda put out by oil cartels to keep the price of oil unnaturally high.

Example: I read an article about all the untapped oil reserves discovered in the Dakotas and Montana, supposedly more oil there than in the whole middle East. Then I found another article stating that the amount of oil there is exaggerated and it's not enough to make a big difference.

Damn you, Internet! Who am I supposed to believe? :confused:
 
Damn you, Internet! Who am I supposed to believe? :confused:


Believe in yourself :)

There are good arguments on both sides, and you're right, without observing it with your own eyes it is pretty much impossible to know.
 
It's hard to dismiss Lindsey Williams as his theory makes a lot of sense as it relates to our relationship with Saudi Arabia. It makes sense that the oil cartel might use congress to make certain areas off limits to drill, as this ensures everyone in the cartel cooperates with the agreement. Like a secret government sanctioned cartel.

There is also a lot of mathematical evidence to suggest otherwise.. but if specific areas are purposely kept 'off limits' to drilling, then the math is incomplete.
 
Okay, this is really frustrating. I've been reading about this subject for a long time and have found that without examining the world's oil reserves with my own eyes, there's no way to know what's true and what's not!

On the one hand, a lot of doomers talk about how we're using up all the oil too fast and that it will lead to the destruction of our economy. On the other hand, a lot of people claim that this is all BS propaganda put out by oil cartels to keep the price of oil unnaturally high.

Example: I read an article about all the untapped oil reserves discovered in the Dakotas and Montana, supposedly more oil there than in the whole middle East. Then I found another article stating that the amount of oil there is exaggerated and it's not enough to make a big difference.

Damn you, Internet! Who am I supposed to believe? :confused:

Lulz... Sevin... I feel your pain. The Internet is the prime experience of the free market, so "Caveat Emptor." The abiotic theory makes sense, but so does the "fossil fuel" theory. I'll bet that oil executives and geologists know the truth. As a conspiracy theorist, I look at why industrial hemp was demonized in the 1930's, and I cannot help but believe that oil companies pushed for laws to keep hemp from competing with the petroleum industry. I lean toward abiotic oil, yet we are sure to run low on oil someday nonetheless. Industrial hemp should be in mass production now, imo.
 
there is not an unlimited supply of oil. The technology to drill deeper and discover new supplies gets better every year. But it will end sometime...probably not in the near future though.
 
Peak Oil theory makes much sense to me. This is the Mike Ruppert position. I think the acceleration in oil decline has lessened slightly due to this horrible economic downturn with its associated shift in aggregate demand. So were seeing a slight masking of the gravity of the oil situation for a possibly very brief moment or two.
 
Oh it's fact, just look at America's production. We peaked in 1970 and haven't gotten anywhere near that level of production since.

More evidence came in today from wikileaks that we might be closer to global peak oil than we have been led to believe: Saudi Arabia has been inflating their reserve numbers.

 
Last edited:
Oh it's fact, just look at America's production. We peaked in 1970 and haven't gotten anywhere near that level of production since.

More evidence came in today from wikileaks that we might be closer to global peak oil than we have been led to believe: Saudi Arabia has been inflating their reserve numbers.

I explained in my post why the numbers don't matter... If humans only inhabited North America for whatever reason and we were drilling oil, and we started running out, could you say we hit peak oil? Of course not, there's plenty of oil in South America, Russia and Saudi Arabia we haven't even tapped yet.

The fact that we have large areas that are off-limits to drilling means we don't really know how much oil is in the ground, and the amount drilled each year is not a very good indicator if specific areas are being intentionally avoided by the oil cartel (either by agreement or government regulations). This isn't a free market, you know, free market principles don't apply to oil these days.

Of course I'm not saying you are wrong, maybe all the areas that are off-limits don't have any significant oil to speak of. I'm just saying that what you are saying isn't necessarily fact.
 
Last edited:
We could be growing some green energy ... if our politicians would just quit putting us in jail for living.

 
Here yah go... chew on this for a bit

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/08/saudi-oil-reserves-overstated-wikileaks/print




<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N630.guardian.co.uk/B5154568.2;abr=!ie;sz=728x90;click0=http://oas.guardian.co.uk/5c/www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/08/saudi-oil-reserves-overstated-wikileaks/print/oas.html/L27/890431415/Top/Guardian/HSBC_PremierWM_Leader_Busines/HSBC_PremierWM_Leader_Busines_DA.html/7256657379557a35533955414332346e?;ord=890431415?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <A HREF="http://oas.guardian.co.uk/5c/www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/08/saudi-oil-reserves-overstated-wikileaks/print/oas.html/L27/890431415/Top/Guardian/HSBC_PremierWM_Leader_Busines/HSBC_PremierWM_Leader_Busines_DA.html/7256657379557a35533955414332346e?http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N630.guardian.co.uk/B5154568.2;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=890431415?"> <IMG SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N630.guardian.co.uk/B5154568.2;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=890431415?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT="Advertisement"></A> </NOSCRIPT>




WikiLeaks cables: Saudi Arabia cannot pump enough oil to keep a lid on prices

US diplomat convinced by Saudi expert that reserves of world's biggest oil exporter have been overstated by nearly 40%

Peak oil alarm revealed by secret official talks
Datablog: Are we running out of oil?
John Vidal, environment editor
  • guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 8 February 2011 22.00 GMT
  • Aerial-View-of-Oil-Refine-007.jpg
  • Saudi oil refinery.
  • WikiLeaks cables suggest the amount of oil that can be retrieved has been overestimated. Photograph: George Steinmetz/Corbis
  • The US fears that Saudi Arabia, the world's largest crude oil exporter, may not have enough reserves to prevent oil prices escalating, confidential cables from its embassy in Riyadh show.
    The cables, released by WikiLeaks, urge Washington to take seriously a warning from a senior Saudi government oil executive that the kingdom's crude oil reserves may have been overstated by as much as 300bn barrels – nearly 40%.
    The revelation comes as the oil price has soared in recent weeks to more than $100 a barrel on global demand and tensions in the Middle East. Many analysts expect that the Saudis and their Opec cartel partners would pump more oil if rising prices threatened to choke off demand.
    However, Sadad al-Husseini, a geologist and former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, met the US consul general in Riyadh in November 2007 and told the US diplomat that Aramco's 12.5m barrel-a-day capacity needed to keep a lid on prices could not be reached.

  • According to the cables, which date between 2007-09, Husseini said Saudi Arabia might reach an output of 12m barrels a day in 10 years but before then – possibly as early as 2012 – global oil production would have hit its highest point. This crunch point is known as "peak oil".

  • Husseini said that at that point Aramco would not be able to stop the rise of global oil prices because the Saudi energy industry had overstated its recoverable reserves to spur foreign investment. He argued that Aramco had badly underestimated the time needed to bring new oil on tap.

  • One cable said: "According to al-Husseini, the crux of the issue is twofold. First, it is possible that Saudi reserves are not as bountiful as sometimes described, and the timeline for their production not as unrestrained as Aramco and energy optimists would like to portray."
    It went on: "In a presentation, Abdallah al-Saif, current Aramco senior vice-president for exploration, reported that Aramco has 716bn barrels of total reserves, of which 51% are recoverable, and that in 20 years Aramco will have 900bn barrels of reserves.
    "Al-Husseini disagrees with this analysis, believing Aramco's reserves are overstated by as much as 300bn barrels. In his view once 50% of original proven reserves has been reached … a steady output in decline will ensue and no amount of effort will be able to stop it. He believes that what will result is a plateau in total output that will last approximately 15 years followed by decreasing output."
    The US consul then told Washington: "While al-Husseini fundamentally contradicts the Aramco company line, he is no doomsday theorist. His pedigree, experience and outlook demand that his predictions be thoughtfully considered."
    Seven months later, the US embassy in Riyadh went further in two more cables. "Our mission now questions how much the Saudis can now substantively influence the crude markets over the long term. Clearly they can drive prices up, but we question whether they any longer have the power to drive prices down for a prolonged period."

  • A fourth cable, in October 2009, claimed that escalating electricity demand by Saudi Arabia may further constrain Saudi oil exports. "Demand [for electricity] is expected to grow 10% a year over the next decade as a result of population and economic growth. As a result it will need to double its generation capacity to 68,000MW in 2018," it said.
    It also reported major project delays and accidents as "evidence that the Saudi Aramco is having to run harder to stay in place – to replace the decline in existing production." While fears of premature "peak oil" and Saudi production problems had been expressed before, no US official has come close to saying this in public.
    In the last two years, other senior energy analysts have backed Husseini. Fatih Birol, chief economist to the International Energy Agency, told the Guardian last year that conventional crude output could plateau in 2020, a development that was "not good news" for a world still heavily dependent on petroleum.

  • Jeremy Leggett, convenor of the UK Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security, said: "We are asleep at the wheel here: choosing to ignore a threat to the global economy that is quite as bad as the credit crunch, quite possibly worse."
 
Last edited:
Ha, yeah, while you're at it, read up on the flat earth and earth-centered solar system.

Apparently you're buying into a 300-yr old theory that has never once accumulated one ounce of empirical evidence vs. a theory that has time and again been shown to be empirically correct. Reference Eugene Island Oil Field.
 
Just some facts to consider. One. Oil is being consumed globally at a rate much faster than new sources are being found and brought on line. Two, One by one, oil exporting countries are becoming net importers. The US used to be the biggest exporter in the world, now we are the biggest importer. Brazil has made some large finds, but even with those, they are consuming the same amount as they produce- and their demand is expected to increase in the future. Britain, Denmark, Indonesia all used to be big exporters and are now net importers. Iran, Mexico, and perhaps Venezuela are getting close to becoming net importers- could happen in the next decade.

The major portion of oil reserves available for export come from the Middle East (actually the largest source for the US is Canada) but can we trust their numbers? They likely have much less oil than they claim they do. None of the countries there allow any auditing of their industry. Back around 1980, OPEC changed the way they determine production quotas- the bigger your reserves, the more you were allowed to export. This led to a bidding war and a massive increase in reported reserves- without any major new finds of oil fields being made. Between 1980 and 1990, the following INCREASES in reported reserves occured:

Iran went from 58 billion barrels to 93 (they have since upped it to 130 billion). They are nearly a net importer(they do have to import gasoline- they lack their own refining capabilities to produce enough)- they want to develop nuclear power for domestic consumption to free up more oil for export and revenue.
Iraq went from 30 to 100
Kuwait 67 to 96
Saudi Arabia from 168 to 261
United Arab Emerates (Quatar) 30 to 98
Venezuela 19.5 to 60 (and now at 99)
Lybia and Nigeria did not make significant revisions in their "reported reserves" though they are members of OPEC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

We won't one day wake up to not a single drop of oil in the world. There is still a ton of oil out there- it is just that getting to it and extracting it is getting more and more difficult and expensive. The oil shale fields in the Rocky Mountain region features oil locked up in rocks- not in big pools. You have to dig out the rocks, smash and heat them to get the oil out. Current technology estimates that it would take the equivelent of one barrel of oil to get out two barrels of actual oil to use. It also requires a lot of water (a scarce resource in the region) and produces a lot of wastes and toxins. Saudi Arabia recently opened a new field but it requires two gallons of sea water to be piped in and pumped underground to get out one barrel of oil. If they had easier ways to get oil out of the ground, they would be doing it.

Peak oil says that production will hit the point where it cannot keep up with demand. It will mean much, much higher prices for it due to the higher costs of finding and getting oil out of the ground. That day may be close if we are not already there. Production of the two currently largest producers, Saudi Arabia and Russia, are peaking. Russia peaked a couple years ago. They cannot sustain the pace of extraction they are currently producing. That is why they are also moving into production of natural gas which they do still have a lot of.
 
Last edited:
Even if the abiotic oil theory is true, unless the oil is produced at a rate equal to or great than our rate of consumption, it would still be possible to hit peak oil.

I haven't made up my mind on this one, considering that most of the world's oil is found, drilled, and controlled by various governments---the US is a major exception, and it's getting more and more difficult to drill here.

That said, I tend to think this current wave is just your typical inflationary driven commodities rush.
 
Along with the scientific angle, you have to factor in inflation as a player in the rising cost of oil.
 
I was told by an engineer who use to work for an oil company that we had at least 200 years of oil and 1000 years of natural gas. Now I'm not exactly sure how, or where he got those numbers, but I trust them enough to not think it's freak out time.
 
Back
Top