now, it's the IEA admitting peak

[JiggsCasey]

so, last week it was the International Monetary Fund, now, on queue, the IEA... next week, who knows? ... maybe the World Bank? USAID? heck, the UN? ... it'll prolly move on a Friday too, like this absolute bummer did:

Cheap energy no more, IEA says
Cheap energy no more, IEA says - UPI.com

LUXEMBOURG, April 22 (UPI) -- The global energy sector will have to kick into high gear to meet soaring demand, the IEA said as it warned of the end of cheap energy.

The International Energy Agency warned that it won't be easy to reverse the rise in energy prices because it's getting harder to access and exploit conventional resources.

"The age of cheap energy is over," said IEA Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka in a statement from Luxembourg.

Tanaka said that if one assumes high prices are here to stay, the energy sector needs to consider whether the "extra rent" goes into the pocketbooks of global energy companies is going toward increased environmental sustainability.

IEA analysts said the world needs another 50 million barrels of oil from new fields by 2035 in order to meet expected demand. Crude oil production from existing fields, meanwhile, is expected to decline from the 68-million-barrel-per-day mark in 2009 to just 16 million bpd by 2035.

"Despite the fact that crude oil production doesn't increase, the need for new capacity on a gross basis is still very large, because so much of the world's existing production capacity will have been lost by the end of the projection period (of 2035)," said Tanaka.​

Let's see if we've got that straight (and anyone please stop me if I'm wrong):

the International Energy Agency - a global policy-influencing entity that, for years, has flat denied or deflected from acknowledging peak - just admitted the comfy world as we know it will absolutely want/need/require 50 million additional barrels per day by the time our children are in their 20s and 30s. And yet, it is ALSO saying the capacity of all known fields that exist today will in fact be LOSING 50 million barrels per day from what they provide currently. Can we assume then that we really need close to 100 million barrels of newly discovered oil - per day - by 2035? .... Shit, just for argument's sake, let's pretend the IEA is being over dramatic and call it merely 40 million new barrels. No. 30 million barrels. ... every day.

While you're pondering that figure, remind yourself that the Macondo Prospect that Deepwater Horizon was sucking off contained a total of 55 million barrels. Heck, not even a day's worth of what the IEA says the next generation will need. A night's sleep worth. ... Was it worth it? Would thousands more of them be?

Gosh, I guess mankind had better find about 5 new Ghawars in the next 10 years then... what with all that advanced exploration technology them librul lawmakers just won't let us use. ...

Of course, we could always let the rest of the world eat cake, and "frack" our way through the problem. There's supposedly "a thousanty trillion cubic meters" of that gas-from-rock stuff everywhere, from Conn. to Arkansas to Wyoming to Idaho, if the EPA would just stfu and (continue to) look the other way. ... Good times.

And so here we are. Many of us seeing the writing on the wall, knowing the world will never reach those new 50-100 million barrels per day, because demand will be crushed. ... others admitting (perhaps finally) obvious supply problems, yet sure as the sun will rise that technology is not only ready, but in place for a seamless transition into something new, 'like it always does!'... 'boy, i say boy!... the stone age din't end cause of lack o' stones!'

The IEA has admitted the Peak Oil condition. Period, end of story.

 

[editec]

As far as FRACKING for natural gas?

Pennsylvania just had its first FRACKING disaster.

Pennsylvania Fracking Spill: Natural Gas Well Blowout Spills Thousands Of Gallons Of Drilling Fluid

 

[mudwhistle]

As far as FRACKING for natural gas?

Pennsylvania just had its first FRACKING disaster.

Pennsylvania Fracking Spill: Natural Gas Well Blowout Spills Thousands Of Gallons Of Drilling Fluid

All that Fracking Fluid spilling all over the Fracking place.

Oh the humanity.

 

[RGR]

so, last week it was the International Monetary Fund, now, on queue, the IEA... next week, who knows? ... maybe the World Bank? USAID? heck, the UN? ... it'll prolly move on a Friday too, like this absolute bummer did:

Cheap energy no more, IEA says

Cheap crude disappeared in 1969.

So you are now claiming that 40+ years after it happened, that someone noticing is a amazing thing? And they didn't say peak you parrot...if you are going to claim someone is declaring yet another peak, they should do so, rather than you titling your thread as though they are, when they aren't.

I mean seriously Jiggs, do they teach ignorance at your church and you are a wonderful student, or were you born this way?

 

[RGR]

Gosh, I guess mankind had better find about 5 new Ghawars in the next 10 years then... what with all that advanced exploration technology them librul lawmakers just won't let us use. ...

Oh. And apparently we have discovered a few new Saudi Arabia's (to heck with just a Ghawar!) and peakers forgot to mention it!

(WARNING: Addition and subtraction skills required: Jiggsy, find a second grader for help with the math section)

PowerSwitch :: View topic - Expected decline rates and the questions they generate.

 

[editec]

As far as FRACKING for natural gas?

Pennsylvania just had its first FRACKING disaster.

Pennsylvania Fracking Spill: Natural Gas Well Blowout Spills Thousands Of Gallons Of Drilling Fluid

All that Fracking Fluid spilling all over the Fracking place.

Oh the humanity.

Well actually it's the humanities water supplies that the folks in PA are worried about.

Quite appropraitely worried, too, I might add.

 

[chikenwing]

As far as FRACKING for natural gas?

Pennsylvania just had its first FRACKING disaster.

Pennsylvania Fracking Spill: Natural Gas Well Blowout Spills Thousands Of Gallons Of Drilling Fluid

All that Fracking Fluid spilling all over the Fracking place.

Oh the humanity.

Well actually it's the humanities water supplies that the folks in PA are worried about.

Quite appropraitely worried, too, I might add.

Disaster,not so much,a spill yes,but not a disaster,no fish kill or water supply affected.

 

[chikenwing]

And as usual the media blows it out of reality, 1 farm,not farms,1 field not fields.

North east pa has gained so much economically from gas drilling,farms that were on the brink are now solvent,new start ups in support for drilling are doing very well.

They will learn from this and make improvements,this is a resource we need in this area,but as with everything,there is a cost.

As exploration has moved ahead,they have discovered,just as much oil as gas,its a huge find.

 

[chikenwing]

There are signs next to peoples gas meters on there homes,in protest of drilling,but they still want their gas.Could one be more selfish??

You don't want gas drilling,give up your gas,you can't have it both ways.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Cheap crude disappeared in 1969.

Are you saying I've somehow tried to suggest this?

If not, what does this statement mean then? Just that "cheap" crude is subjective? Sure, I'll admit that, to a degree.

So you are now claiming that 40+ years after it happened, that someone noticing is a amazing thing? And they didn't say peak you parrot...if you are going to claim someone is declaring yet another peak, they should do so, rather than you titling your thread as though they are, when they aren't.

I'm sorry you disagree, but yes they most certainly are admitting to the peak condition.

In the paragraph bolded, they are most certainly "saying" the growth model required is completely unsustainable. You had better do a bit more than continuously pointing to Spraberry as your evidence of alleged "reserve growth" on the scale required to mitigate dying existing capacity.

I'm not going to fight with you any longer. I've had a death in the family, and your snark, while usually entertaining, is no longer embraced. .... Let's please cut the crap, it's boring. Debate like a man, not an insecure "industry insider." Or I'm done with you. Your choice.

 

[uscitizen]

so, last week it was the International Monetary Fund, now, on queue, the IEA... next week, who knows? ... maybe the World Bank? USAID? heck, the UN? ... it'll prolly move on a Friday too, like this absolute bummer did:

Cheap energy no more, IEA says

Cheap crude disappeared in 1969.

So you are now claiming that 40+ years after it happened, that someone noticing is a amazing thing? And they didn't say peak you parrot...if you are going to claim someone is declaring yet another peak, they should do so, rather than you titling your thread as though they are, when they aren't.

I mean seriously Jiggs, do they teach ignorance at your church and you are a wonderful student, or were you born this way?

You really have no clue how supply and demand works in the oil industry do you?

 

[RGR]

Cheap crude disappeared in 1969.

Are you saying I've somehow tried to suggest this?

No. I am saying you quoted an article written by someone just as ignorant of peak oil and the oil industry as you. I have already told you, go back to your church and find someone who knows something, have them come on back.

If not, what does this statement mean then? Just that "cheap" crude is subjective? Sure, I'll admit that, to a degree.

The real price of oil, over its history, is not subjective, it is historical fact. Any peaker should have this chart memorized. Why don't you?

Crude Oil Prices 1861 - 2009 - Forbes.com

I'm sorry you disagree, but yes they most certainly are admitting to the peak condition.
In the paragraph bolded, they are most certainly "saying" the growth model required is completely unsustainable.

Here is Hubberts 1956 paper, upon which your religion is based. Please show me his calculations using a "growth model" which uses the term "price" anywhere, rather than saying that oil production goes up, peaks, and comes back down in a predictable manner. Page and paragraph will suffice. Also, where does he call it a "condition"? Or are you making this things up again because we all read the reference you provided and it didn't say anything about peak oil? Just your interpretation of some piece of it, which is based on nothing more than your religious beliefs and ignorance of basic economics?

Nuclear Energy and the Fossil Fuels | Energy Bulletin

You had better do a bit more than continuously pointing to Spraberry as your evidence of alleged "reserve growth" on the scale required to mitigate dying existing capacity.

Trust me Jiggsy, you don't want to discuss reserve growth with me. I have already provided the EIA information showing its size and consistency through time. Go review that thread. Should be easy to find, its the one where you forgot how to google up information, thereby demonstrating your intellectual ability on something most 3rd graders are familiar with.

 

[RGR]

You really have no clue how supply and demand works in the oil industry do you?

I am very familiar with supply and demand. I have relied on it doing its job down through the ages, and it hasn't let me down yet.

However, the information I provided was to the real cost of oil. That stopped back in about 69 or 70, and has been trending upwards ever since. Peakers hadn't discovered this information as recently as the late-90's, when one of their Priests named Colin Campbell, thought that cheap oil might disappear soon. He apparently did not pick up a book on the economics of oil prior to writing one of the Scriptures of Peak.

 

[KissMy]

World Oil Production is still on the rise.

The falling US dollar & adding 2 billion Asian drivers may very well outstrip the rising oil supply. This is why we will not have any more cheap oil. Indo-China is the new rising economic power. Get use to having less of everything in the USA from now on.

 

[RGR]

Get use to having less of everything in the USA from now on.

I have no objection to the idea that as America devalues its currency, all sorts of things will become more expensive. Particular our imports. We deserve it.

And it isn't "less of everything", more like "everything is more expensive". Perhaps next time we won't elect leaders who represent our economic interests so poorly.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Get use to having less of everything in the USA from now on.

I have no objection to the idea that as America devalues its currency, all sorts of things will become more expensive. Particular our imports. We deserve it.

And it isn't "less of everything", more like "everything is more expensive". Perhaps next time we won't elect leaders who represent our economic interests so poorly.

And what do you propose future leaders do to represent our economic interests in this global economy?

 

[bripat9643]

The IEA is a socialist propaganda organ. Why wouldn't they "admit" what is in their self interest to promote?

That's like Nazi Pelosi "admitting" that George Bush caused the sub-prime mortgage debacle.

The IEA has admitted the Peak Oil condition. Period, end of story.

 

[RGR]

And what do you propose future leaders do to represent our economic interests in this global economy?

I propose that they consider the welfare and well being of the majority of the people they represent primarily, rather than basing their representation on the wants of their largest campaign donors.

 

[Old Rocks]

so, last week it was the International Monetary Fund, now, on queue, the IEA... next week, who knows? ... maybe the World Bank? USAID? heck, the UN? ... it'll prolly move on a Friday too, like this absolute bummer did:

Cheap energy no more, IEA says

Cheap crude disappeared in 1969.

So you are now claiming that 40+ years after it happened, that someone noticing is a amazing thing? And they didn't say peak you parrot...if you are going to claim someone is declaring yet another peak, they should do so, rather than you titling your thread as though they are, when they aren't.

I mean seriously Jiggs, do they teach ignorance at your church and you are a wonderful student, or were you born this way?

Hmmm...... I think that you are the dummy here, Peak Oil for the US occured around 1970. So the price of fuel started ratcheting up at the time as we went over the hump for peak oil here in the US. Now we see the same effect for fuel prices as we experiance the peak for the world.

 

[Old Rocks]

The IEA is a socialist propaganda organ. Why wouldn't they "admit" what is in their self interest to promote?

That's like Nazi Pelosi "admitting" that George Bush caused the sub-prime mortgage debacle.

The IEA has admitted the Peak Oil condition. Period, end of story.

Oh my, another dumb ass that thinks the answer to any stated problem is to call those defining the problem 'Socialists'.

Like global warming, peak oil is a fact, one that will have an increasing effect on our economy. We can ignore both, and slide into third world status as those that respond to the challenge take the economic and political lead in the future, or we can take up the challenge.

Given the number of idiots like yourself, Bripat, I think there is more than an even chance that the US will become another third world nation.