oil gusher in california

[JiggsCasey]

I went to the gas station today & pumped 40 gallons into my truck. All the pumps around were pumping full blast. If there was a shortage no gas would come out of the hose. I look at the EIA website & it shows the largest oil glut on record. This Peak Oil sounds a lot like Global Warming. Colder & wetter seasons forced them to change to Climate Change.

And, like climate change, gluttonous cons cite occasional April snow fall as their main piece of evidence against it.

It's not our fault you're too intellectually challenged to recognize the difference between short-term and long-term capacity. Tool.

 

[JiggsCasey]

That aside, we know where the reserves are and it would take little more than a matter of a few months to put them into full production.

This is beyond retarded. You suck at this topic. Pick another to be dead wrong about.

 

[mdn2000]

I went to the gas station today & pumped 40 gallons into my truck. All the pumps around were pumping full blast. If there was a shortage no gas would come out of the hose. I look at the EIA website & it shows the largest oil glut on record. This Peak Oil sounds a lot like Global Warming. Colder & wetter seasons forced them to change to Climate Change.

And, like climate change, gluttonous cons cite occasional April snow fall as their main piece of evidence against it.

It's not our fault you're too intellectually challenged to recognize the difference between short-term and long-term capacity. Tool.

Where is your evidence there is global warming.

The only thing I see is the natural cycle of the earth. No proof has been presented the earth is warming. Just flimsy theory based on CO2, CO2 which you can buy as dry ice. CO2 likes to be cold.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Where is your evidence there is global warming.

The only thing I see is the natural cycle of the earth. No proof has been presented the earth is warming. Just flimsy theory based on CO2, CO2 which you can buy as dry ice. CO2 likes to be cold.

While its painfully transparent that your position on peak oil has become untenable, you won't be derailing the topic here. This thread isn't about climate change, it's about the fraudulent assertion of some "oil glut."

No one will be following you down that rabbit hole, just because you and your allies here are out of bullets regarding world reserves.

 

[mdn2000]

Where is your evidence there is global warming.

The only thing I see is the natural cycle of the earth. No proof has been presented the earth is warming. Just flimsy theory based on CO2, CO2 which you can buy as dry ice. CO2 likes to be cold.

While its painfully transparent that your position on peak oil has become untenable, you won't be derailing the topic here. This thread isn't about climate change, it's about the fraudulent assertion of some "oil glut."

No one will be following you down that rabbit hole, just because you and your allies here are out of bullets regarding world reserves.

Maybe you have not noticed but I started the thread, not as a debate on peak oil, but as proof we are discovering more oil.

I am surprised you are so pissed off someone provides proof, that new oil is being found, that the new oil was never a part of the theory of peak oil.

Show me one study, any research, that takes into account oil not discovered.

Oil is infinite, there is no proof that Oil is not infinite. Oil will be discovered and used by humans as long as humans live.

Until theory is proved as fact, its simply scientist or researchers making a living the only way they know how, by causing fear and panic so that we bow to them to save us.

Why is it only the Democrat-Scientists that spit out theory after theory and demand more money to spit out more theories. Why has the first theory not been proved?

 

[westwall]

Where is your evidence there is global warming.

The only thing I see is the natural cycle of the earth. No proof has been presented the earth is warming. Just flimsy theory based on CO2, CO2 which you can buy as dry ice. CO2 likes to be cold.

While its painfully transparent that your position on peak oil has become untenable, you won't be derailing the topic here. This thread isn't about climate change, it's about the fraudulent assertion of some "oil glut."

No one will be following you down that rabbit hole, just because you and your allies here are out of bullets regarding world reserves.

How do you figure? I find it interesting that "peak oil" is based on light crude (which for those who don't know what it is is crude that has been naturally refined under ground over a few million years and is usable, as is, in a diesel engine you don't have to do a thing to it, the engine will run) which is by its nature uncommon in the world of petroleum reserves. Another term that is used in classification of oil is "sweet or sour" and this tells you how much sulfer is in the crude, sweet=very little, sour=a lot.

Here in the US the EPA does not allow sour oil to be refined so the oil from Prudhoe Bay goes to Japan. Furthermore the "Peak Oil" concept is based on the oil companies wanting to drive up the cost of oil. There were internal memo's released back in the '90's that exposed the oil companies collusion.

Also there is the simple fact that oil reserves are recharging themselves. That poses some interesting problems with the peak oil myth. The most famous of the recharging fields is Eugene island 330 which in the 1970's was producing 15,000 bbls per day, and then by the late 90's was down to around 4,000 bbls per day. Then all of a sudden the production increased from 4k to 13k quite literally overnight. Upon checking, the oil was found to be of a different geologic age and more interestingly the reserves jumped from 60 million barrels to 400 million barrels.

Peak oil is a unsubstantiated myth promulgated by the oil companies and the fools who support them.

 

[mdn2000]

In the last five years Brazil has gone from importing oil to being an exporter of oil.

Brazil has not reached its peak.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hubbert peak theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reliability

US oil production (Lower 48 states crude oil only) and Hubbert high estimate for the US.Hubbert, in his 1956 paper,[3] presented two scenarios for US conventional oil production (crude oil + condensate):

most likely estimate: a logistic curve with a logistic growth rate equal to 6%, an ultimate resource equal to 150 Giga-barrels (Gb) and a peak in 1965.
upper-bound estimate: a logistic curve with a logistic growth rate equal to 6% and ultimate resource equal to 200 Giga-barrels and a peak in 1970.
Hubbert's upper-bound estimate, which he regarded as optimistic, accurately predicted that US oil production would peak in 1970. Forty years later, the upper-bound estimate has also proven to be very accurate in terms of cumulative production, less so in terms of annual production. For 2005, the upper-bound Hubbert model predicts 178.2 Gb cumulative and 1.17 Gb current production; actual US production was 176.4 Gb cumulative crude oil + condensate (1% lower than the upper bound estimate), with annual production of 1.55 Gb (32% higher than the upper bound estimate).

A post-hoc analysis of peaked oil wells, fields, regions and nations found that Hubbert's model was the "most widely useful"(providing the best fit to the data), though many areas studied had a sharper "peak" than predicted.[8]

 

[Old Rocks]

Hubbert's Peak, The Peak

Hubbert's Peak
in the 21st Century
World oil production will start to fall sometime during this decade, never to rise again. In 1956, M. King Hubbert predicted that U.S. oil production would peak in the early 1970's. Although Hubbert was widely criticized by some oil experts and economists, in 1971 Hubbert's prediction came true. The 100 year period when most of the world's oil is being discovered became known as "Hubbert's Peak". The peak stands in contrast to the hundreds of millions of years the oil deposits took to form. Hubbert's methods predict a peak in world oil production less than five years away.

Hubbert's methods predict a peak in world oil production less than five years away.

Ordinarily, we look to new technology for solutions to problems. Until recently, the oil industry enjoyed a higher rate of return on invested capital than any other industry. Historically, the most rewarding use of the profit was investing it into developing better ways of finding oil. As a result, the origin, trapping, exploration, and production of oil became advanced fields of knowledge. We cannot benefit today from reinventing those wheels.

There are long-term solutions to our future energy problems: conservation and both fossil and renewable energy sources. Unfortunately, large-scale implementation of these solutions requires more than five years and the industrialized nations have done little to address the short-term problem.

 

[westwall]

Hubbert's Peak, The Peak

Hubbert's Peak
in the 21st Century
World oil production will start to fall sometime during this decade, never to rise again. In 1956, M. King Hubbert predicted that U.S. oil production would peak in the early 1970's. Although Hubbert was widely criticized by some oil experts and economists, in 1971 Hubbert's prediction came true. The 100 year period when most of the world's oil is being discovered became known as "Hubbert's Peak". The peak stands in contrast to the hundreds of millions of years the oil deposits took to form. Hubbert's methods predict a peak in world oil production less than five years away.

Hubbert's methods predict a peak in world oil production less than five years away.

Ordinarily, we look to new technology for solutions to problems. Until recently, the oil industry enjoyed a higher rate of return on invested capital than any other industry. Historically, the most rewarding use of the profit was investing it into developing better ways of finding oil. As a result, the origin, trapping, exploration, and production of oil became advanced fields of knowledge. We cannot benefit today from reinventing those wheels.

There are long-term solutions to our future energy problems: conservation and both fossil and renewable energy sources. Unfortunately, large-scale implementation of these solutions requires more than five years and the industrialized nations have done little to address the short-term problem.

You forgot to mention, and I also noticed you cut out the fact, that the prediction was made back in the 1970's.

In other words....FAIL

 

[Mr. H.]

U.S. oil production is a vastly different subject to world oil production. U.S. policy is to "stop, drop, and roll" over.

 

[JiggsCasey]

You forgot to mention, and I also noticed you cut out the fact, that the prediction was made back in the 1970's.

In other words....FAIL?

Your lack of reading skills aside, it says in the first sentence he made the prediction in 1956 about U.S. production peaking in 1970, and he was one year off. What are you talking about?

It also says world production would peak in the first decade of the 21st century. ALL evidence indicates that we are currently at peak, and have plateaued since 2004.

Again, HOW is that fail? Try and respond this time without alluding to irrelevant anomalies like 1 in 1000 kiddie pools "refilling" in our Gulf.

 

[mdn2000]

Thus far we have explored only 20% of the planet for oil, new and improved technology is allowing us to explore new areas for oil.

I speculate that the largest oil reserves in the world have yet to be discovered.

 

[westwall]

You forgot to mention, and I also noticed you cut out the fact, that the prediction was made back in the 1970's.

In other words....FAIL?

Your lack of reading skills aside, it says in the first sentence he made the prediction in 1956 about U.S. production peaking in 1970, and he was one year off. What are you talking about?

It also says world production would peak in the first decade of the 21st century. ALL evidence indicates that we are currently at peak, and have plateaued since 2004.

Again, HOW is that fail? Try and respond this time without alluding to irrelevant anomalies like 1 in 1000 kiddie pools "refilling" in our Gulf.

Oil production in the US has dropped to the lows we see today due to legislative fiat. How exactly is it peak oil when there is plenty of oil in the ground, it's just the oil companies are not allowed to go get it?

And once again, why is peak oil predicated on light crude which is uncommon in the world as a whole? There is a 30 to one ratio of heavy to light crude in the world so why resort to yet another fictitous methodology? Hmm?

And I suggest you refrain from comparative reading comprehension levels. You've allready exhibited a fundamental lack of education in that particular area.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Thus far we have explored only 20% of the planet for oil, new and improved technology is allowing us to explore new areas for oil.

Where is your link corroborating that assertion that we've only explored 20%? Landmass? Does that include the deep ocean? What is considered 100%? And how far down?

I speculate that the largest oil reserves in the world have yet to be discovered.

Your entire argument is speculation.

Oil production in the US has dropped to the lows we see today due to legislative fiat. How exactly is it peak oil when there is plenty of oil in the ground, it's just the oil companies are not allowed to go get it?

LOL.

You: There's plenty of oil here.
Me: OK, where? Support your claim.
You: I don't have to link, it's in the ground. duh!

Generally, when trading opinions on the intrawebz, it's standard procedure to back up your work with corroboration. For the dozenth time, please show where you're getting your assertion that there is "plenty" here in the U.S. Let's settle on a ballpark figure for proven reserve totals here. Doesn't have to be specific. Can you handle that? Where is the light crude (which our empire is entirely built upon)?.... If you're referring instead to far more expensive heavier, dirtier shale and tar sands, say that, and then we can cover that particular fail.

And once again, why is peak oil predicated on light crude which is uncommon in the world as a whole? There is a 30 to one ratio of heavy to light crude in the world so why resort to yet another fictitous methodology? Hmm?

Gosh, I dunno "scientist." Because light crude has returned a 200:1 down to 20:1 ratio for return on energy investment over the years, and light crude is why we are where we are today - empire? Meanwhile heavy oil is around 3:1 down to 1.5:1, and will NOT sustain 7% growth by even the lamest extrapolation? This has been covered countless times throughout this forum, but clearly you're just the latest slow pony.

And I suggest you refrain from comparative reading comprehension levels. You've allready exhibited a fundamental lack of education in that particular area.

Ah, no. That would be you. But not just in reading comprehension, you obviously don't even know your own alleged industry. You "do science," but you're just a bit fuzzy on the profound differences between light crude and kerogen/bitumen.

Wow, are you over your head on this topic.

 

[westwall]

Thus far we have explored only 20% of the planet for oil, new and improved technology is allowing us to explore new areas for oil.

Where is your link corroborating that assertion that we've only explored 20%? Landmass? Does that include the deep ocean? What is considered 100%? And how far down?

I speculate that the largest oil reserves in the world have yet to be discovered.

Your entire argument is speculation.



LOL.

You: There's plenty of oil here.
Me: OK, where? Support your claim.
You: I don't have to link, it's in the ground. duh!

Generally, when trading opinions on the intrawebz, it's standard procedure to back up your work with corroboration. For the dozenth time, please show where you're getting your assertion that there is "plenty" here in the U.S. Let's settle on a ballpark figure for proven reserve totals here. Doesn't have to be specific. Can you handle that? Where is the light crude (which our empire is entirely built upon)?.... If you're referring instead to far more expensive heavier, dirtier shale and tar sands, say that, and then we can cover that particular fail.

And once again, why is peak oil predicated on light crude which is uncommon in the world as a whole? There is a 30 to one ratio of heavy to light crude in the world so why resort to yet another fictitous methodology? Hmm?

Gosh, I dunno "scientist." Because light crude has returned a 200:1 down to 20:1 ratio for return on energy investment over the years, and light crude is why we are where we are today - empire? Meanwhile heavy oil is around 3:1 down to 1.5:1, and will NOT sustain 7% growth by even the lamest extrapolation? This has been covered countless times throughout this forum, but clearly you're just the latest slow pony.

And I suggest you refrain from comparative reading comprehension levels. You've allready exhibited a fundamental lack of education in that particular area.

Ah, no. That would be you. But not just in reading comprehension, you obviously don't even know your own alleged industry. You "do science," but you're just a bit fuzzy on the profound differences between light crude and kerogen/bitumen.

Wow, are you over your head on this topic.

Really? According to the US Department of Energy the US has approximately 1.2 TRILLION barrels of oil waiting to be pumped out.


DOE - Fossil Energy: DOE's Oil Recovery R&D Program

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/news/techlines/2006/06015-Oil_Recovery_Assessments_Released.html

And heavy crude is not kerogen or bitumen either, those are closer to tar, but go ahead and tell yourself how brilliant you are, you're an audience of one.

You can leave now bucko, you're far to ignorant to partake in a reasonable discussion.

 

[Ropey]

I posted this in another thread but the significance is Peak Oil shattering

I believe that Peak Oil is an exaggerated symptom that is used to raise current prices. Saudi Arabia and OPEC has the ability to produce more oil than they do currently, and most peak oil predictions are based without using many of the updates to estimated oil reserves.

Technological advances have allowed us to extract more oil and will allow us to extract more oil than we have previously. Peak oil might be coming, but I personally do not believe that we are not close to having reached it.

Some do not believe it at all:

An entirely alternative theory of oil formation has existed since the early 1950’s in Russia, almost unknown to the West. It claims conventional American biological origins theory is an unscientific absurdity that is un-provable. They point to the fact that western geologists have repeatedly predicted finite oil over the past century, only to then find more, lots more.

Not only has this alternative explanation of the origins of oil and gas existed in theory. The emergence of Russia and prior of the USSR as the world’s largest oil producer and natural gas producer has been based on the application of the theory in practice. This has geopolitical consequences of staggering magnitude.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ropey, what you believe is irrelevant. What can you prove? King Hubbert made a rock solid prediction in 1956 concerning the peak oil of the US. And missed by only a year. If there were big untapped fields in the US, nothing would stop the oil companies from tapping those fields.

Frauds like Walleyes can lie all he cares to concerning the Hubbert Curve. It has been right on thus far.

 

[Ropey]

Ropey, what you believe is irrelevant. What can you prove? King Hubbert made a rock solid prediction in 1956 concerning the peak oil of the US. And missed by only a year. If there were big untapped fields in the US, nothing would stop the oil companies from tapping those fields.

Frauds like Walleyes can lie all he cares to concerning the Hubbert Curve. It has been right on thus far.

Irrelevant to you possibly. As I said, there are other views and I posted a different view that is clearly arguable.

I don't need to prove it. Time will prove itself out. That's why I gave my opinion. You are attempting to find concrete proof in something that is far too theoretical and arguable.

 

[Old Rocks]

In other words, you would rather repeat talking points than research the subject. Just another willfully ignorant idjit.