Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Why does nobody want to talk about oil running out ?
14 Answers
If you Google 'Peak oil' you will find that oil production is now in decline and that the globe is likely to run out in around 2050. That is a long time away but we can see the price of fuel is likely to rise and rise, and slowly and surely the globe will start to meltdown with more wars and battles in oil producing countries, the price of living increasing to an intolerable point and mass business failings.
Lets face it, look around you and see what was brought in by ferry/ship/lorry/van and think how much more these things are going to cost to cover fuel price increases in the next decade or so ...
It would certainly be prudent to teach our children farming ways and how things used to be before oil.
Hmmm, global meltdown - maybe that is why people don't want to talk about it.
Lets face it, look around you and see what was brought in by ferry/ship/lorry/van and think how much more these things are going to cost to cover fuel price increases in the next decade or so ...
It would certainly be prudent to teach our children farming ways and how things used to be before oil.
Hmmm, global meltdown - maybe that is why people don't want to talk about it.
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Iggle Piggle. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
One of the problems is that these calculations are achieved by summing up reserves.
The different fields reserves are calculated on the basis of "worst case scenario" that is what is definately known to be there.
Then all these worst cases scenarios are added up.
Hopefully you don't have to be a statistician to see what is wrong with this logic!
That doesn't mean that there won't be a problem - it does mean it's unlikely to be in 2050.
Peak oil though is less about running out but demand outstripping supply.
the demand of emerging nations like India, Brazil and China. That causes prices to rocket.
It's one good thing of the global recession in that id supressed demand, and gave some breathing space for extra capacity - however with the recovery kicking in we can expect demand to rise again
The different fields reserves are calculated on the basis of "worst case scenario" that is what is definately known to be there.
Then all these worst cases scenarios are added up.
Hopefully you don't have to be a statistician to see what is wrong with this logic!
That doesn't mean that there won't be a problem - it does mean it's unlikely to be in 2050.
Peak oil though is less about running out but demand outstripping supply.
the demand of emerging nations like India, Brazil and China. That causes prices to rocket.
It's one good thing of the global recession in that id supressed demand, and gave some breathing space for extra capacity - however with the recovery kicking in we can expect demand to rise again
I think Carol there's one Russian with a crackpot idea that oil doesn't come from fossils but is created by the earth. Someone's obviously decided to cash in on a conspiracy theory book.
I wouldn't believe a word of it.
However even if it was true it wouldn't matter as I say it's not so much if it runs out but when demand outstrips our capacity to get it out of the ground and refine and transport it.
I wouldn't believe a word of it.
However even if it was true it wouldn't matter as I say it's not so much if it runs out but when demand outstrips our capacity to get it out of the ground and refine and transport it.
Whoa, jake... fact is the Russian theory of "abiogentic" sources of oil have been pretty well proven by their teaming with the government of Vietnam to explore the continental shelf off the coast of Vietnam.
They have formed a production company, (PetroVietnam) that has already completed a field that produces 280,000 bbls. a day and another producing 80,000 bbls. a day soon to be increased to to around 200,000 bbls.
These are very deep (near 3 miles) sites but all in crystalline basement complex rocks (read granite) unheard of just a few years ago.
My own formal education is in Geology here in the U.S and I have a son that is a petroleum engineer for a major company. They have contended for years that oil is not a fossil fuel. The most recent large discovery here in the U.S. is "under" an existing field that was originally drilled decades ago.
Check here for one source: http://www.geoscience...ent%20Ver%209_JCG.pdf
When oil was selling for under $25 bbl this type of innovation was not interesting, however with the price at or above $100 bbl. it suddenly becomes attractive...
They have formed a production company, (PetroVietnam) that has already completed a field that produces 280,000 bbls. a day and another producing 80,000 bbls. a day soon to be increased to to around 200,000 bbls.
These are very deep (near 3 miles) sites but all in crystalline basement complex rocks (read granite) unheard of just a few years ago.
My own formal education is in Geology here in the U.S and I have a son that is a petroleum engineer for a major company. They have contended for years that oil is not a fossil fuel. The most recent large discovery here in the U.S. is "under" an existing field that was originally drilled decades ago.
Check here for one source: http://www.geoscience...ent%20Ver%209_JCG.pdf
When oil was selling for under $25 bbl this type of innovation was not interesting, however with the price at or above $100 bbl. it suddenly becomes attractive...
OK if you want to be picky there are a few difficult to extract sources where hydrogen and Carbon being converted to hydrocarbons under pressure
But this is not a major source of Oil
this is the so called "weak" abiogenic concept
That is very different from the "strong" abiogenic concept which tries to say that oil is produced at a rate exceeding our use of it.
//Formation of higher hydrocarbons in the upper layers
of the Earth's crust occurs only as a result of Fischer-Tropsch-type reactions in the presence of hydrogen gas but is otherwise
not possible on thermodynamic grounds.//
http://static.scribd....ocs/j79lhbgbjbqrb.pdf
Strong proponents are often right wing Americans who think the Earth is 6,000 years old
But this is not a major source of Oil
this is the so called "weak" abiogenic concept
That is very different from the "strong" abiogenic concept which tries to say that oil is produced at a rate exceeding our use of it.
//Formation of higher hydrocarbons in the upper layers
of the Earth's crust occurs only as a result of Fischer-Tropsch-type reactions in the presence of hydrogen gas but is otherwise
not possible on thermodynamic grounds.//
http://static.scribd....ocs/j79lhbgbjbqrb.pdf
Strong proponents are often right wing Americans who think the Earth is 6,000 years old
C'mon, jake... that last was uncalled for, unfactual and frankly not contributive to the discussion.
There are myriads of scientists that have, for decades questioned the source of hydrocarbons and the possibility that they may be continually processed at the mantle's boundaries. It appears the Russian conglomerate with Vietnam lends a lot credence to the theory.
Note: nothing in the theory, science or its application contains any reference to "creationists" or the Earth being only 6,000 years old... quite the contrary.
So, we can have a reasoned and informative discussion or we can exchange meaningless barbs... which do you choose?
There are myriads of scientists that have, for decades questioned the source of hydrocarbons and the possibility that they may be continually processed at the mantle's boundaries. It appears the Russian conglomerate with Vietnam lends a lot credence to the theory.
Note: nothing in the theory, science or its application contains any reference to "creationists" or the Earth being only 6,000 years old... quite the contrary.
So, we can have a reasoned and informative discussion or we can exchange meaningless barbs... which do you choose?
Clanad - that is a bit unfair on Jake. Oil is being created as we speak - always has been, the issue is the amount and the costs of recovery which make it dubious. Fischer Tropsch style reactions perhaps are pusing the limits but the geological process goes on.
There has been plenty written about the problem of Peak Oil measurement and stats and also there maybe/is a conservativeness on behalf of major oil but then it is thought that the Saudi stats are over-stated for OPEC political machinations.
However there are a number of massive upsides to oil reserves being "found" as they have done in the past. I started in the 80s and oil decline to major problems was then forecast back to before 2010....
These sources are:
(i) Brazil - massive fields are currently being discovered - Sugar Loaf is 26 to 40 bln recoverable (as big as the No1 Saudi field), The Tupi and Lupa fields are thought to be 8bln plus with a lot of upside on Tupi.
(ii) The Arctic and Antarctic - not withstanding politics and green issues and on the Arctic, the political tensions are developing.
(iii) Shale Oil and Black Oil (the latter is very heavy with APIs less than 10 and takes a lot to get out. The UK has a lot of this off the Tyne for example). The question is economics of extracting as shale = milling the stone and black oil means heat is needed to make the tar more fluid.
(iv) New seismic and exploration techniques and more use of lateral drilling to pick up smaller pockets within a field
(v) new technologies. Schlumberger has an exciting downwell use of microwaves that work by shaking the molecules to pop more easily. Currently only a third of oil is extracted through primary, secondary and tertiary techniques (nat pressure, pump mud and gas back down the well, use fluid enhancers). Imagine the impact of increasing the recoverable % from 34 to 40% on the worlds reserves from existi
There has been plenty written about the problem of Peak Oil measurement and stats and also there maybe/is a conservativeness on behalf of major oil but then it is thought that the Saudi stats are over-stated for OPEC political machinations.
However there are a number of massive upsides to oil reserves being "found" as they have done in the past. I started in the 80s and oil decline to major problems was then forecast back to before 2010....
These sources are:
(i) Brazil - massive fields are currently being discovered - Sugar Loaf is 26 to 40 bln recoverable (as big as the No1 Saudi field), The Tupi and Lupa fields are thought to be 8bln plus with a lot of upside on Tupi.
(ii) The Arctic and Antarctic - not withstanding politics and green issues and on the Arctic, the political tensions are developing.
(iii) Shale Oil and Black Oil (the latter is very heavy with APIs less than 10 and takes a lot to get out. The UK has a lot of this off the Tyne for example). The question is economics of extracting as shale = milling the stone and black oil means heat is needed to make the tar more fluid.
(iv) New seismic and exploration techniques and more use of lateral drilling to pick up smaller pockets within a field
(v) new technologies. Schlumberger has an exciting downwell use of microwaves that work by shaking the molecules to pop more easily. Currently only a third of oil is extracted through primary, secondary and tertiary techniques (nat pressure, pump mud and gas back down the well, use fluid enhancers). Imagine the impact of increasing the recoverable % from 34 to 40% on the worlds reserves from existi
existing major fields - effectively, some 10 to 15% increase on the recoverable already known today.
The current price spikes are, in part, driven by political tensions, (ii) lack of refining capacity especially in upgrading (conversion) equipment and (ii) the impact and speculation of traders - for every 100 mln bbl produced (about a days worth) the equivalent of 70% is traded through - some parcels several times mind you.......and this is a global business, not just the majors - they only control under 10% of production and under 20% of trading and it might sound funny to you, they are not a co-ordinated block....competition is enormous.
The current price spikes are, in part, driven by political tensions, (ii) lack of refining capacity especially in upgrading (conversion) equipment and (ii) the impact and speculation of traders - for every 100 mln bbl produced (about a days worth) the equivalent of 70% is traded through - some parcels several times mind you.......and this is a global business, not just the majors - they only control under 10% of production and under 20% of trading and it might sound funny to you, they are not a co-ordinated block....competition is enormous.
1 to 14 of 14
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.