Oil

[Samson]

We import a lot of our fuel in refined form.

Yes, I'd agree this is probably true since EPA and OSHA makes refining fuel in the USA more costly.

My guess is Mexico refines most of the USA's finished fuels.

And that really helps the planet doesn't it?

Everything the EPA and government in general does to "help" actually hurts the planet, for some odd reason.

Yes.

The current USA infatuation with ethanol is driving up corn prices in Mexico.

Mexicans can only afford to eat tacos if they work in oil refineries that export finished products to the USA.

 

[Big Fitz]

O.R., a half billion barrels isn't chump change. "Minor producers" add up. Your quoted article does shed new light on the subject but I don't think it exactly trivializes the project.

Still- nothing wrong with doing a little forward-thinking, and getting a windmill for the ol' ranch house..

500,000,000 is NOTHING. It is not enough to cook on a stove for your family, and keep warm, for a full month. Do you understand that, Mr H? It is NOTHING.

Even if we do find a few trillion.. It is still barely enough to keep afloat with.

500,000,000 bbl of oil isn't much. Certainly, it wouldn't last long enough to justify building any new refining capacity.

A large Oil Refinery (ExxonMobil, Baton Rouge, LA) refines about 500,000 bbl/day

500,000,000 bbl would last this ONE refinery 1,000 days = less than 3 years

I'm not sure if it is or isn't worth adding refining capacity. As it is, we still have a little ways to go to get back to pre-Katrina status, although we are close. It may have just all come back if my news is off. It'd be nice if it'd happen. After all, profit begets reason to increase volume and thereby increase profit more.

Your example does assume running at peak capacity every day for the entire 3 year period, which we all know won't happen. So let's call it 3-5 years to then find the NEXT source of that size or greater. Sounds like the method most industry operates on. Here's a contract for the next 3-5 years. After that, find the next contract. What's the potential profit on that amount of refining work? Better than doing nothing of course.

Of course you also have to consider the fact that the Federal Fuckuperment is so in cahoots with the far left anti-human greenies they are looking for every way possible to shut down the oil industry in this nation and get us hooked on near worthless ethanol. So, I wouldn't increase refining capacity in this nation either till these idiots are finally purged from the public sector and sane energy policy returns to this nation... aka pre-Carter thinking. Be nice to see the DoE shut down too.

but that's my assessment.

 

[Samson]

Still- nothing wrong with doing a little forward-thinking, and getting a windmill for the ol' ranch house..

500,000,000 is NOTHING. It is not enough to cook on a stove for your family, and keep warm, for a full month. Do you understand that, Mr H? It is NOTHING.

Even if we do find a few trillion.. It is still barely enough to keep afloat with.

500,000,000 bbl of oil isn't much. Certainly, it wouldn't last long enough to justify building any new refining capacity.

A large Oil Refinery (ExxonMobil, Baton Rouge, LA) refines about 500,000 bbl/day

500,000,000 bbl would last this ONE refinery 1,000 days = less than 3 years

I'm not sure if it is or isn't worth adding refining capacity. As it is, we still have a little ways to go to get back to pre-Katrina status, although we are close. It may have just all come back if my news is off. It'd be nice if it'd happen. After all, profit begets reason to increase volume and thereby increase profit more.

Your example does assume running at peak capacity every day for the entire 3 year period, which we all know won't happen. So let's call it 3-5 years to then find the NEXT source of that size or greater. Sounds like the method most industry operates on. Here's a contract for the next 3-5 years. After that, find the next contract. What's the potential profit on that amount of refining work? Better than doing nothing of course.

Of course you also have to consider the fact that the Federal Fuckuperment is so in cahoots with the far left anti-human greenies they are looking for every way possible to shut down the oil industry in this nation and get us hooked on near worthless ethanol. So, I wouldn't increase refining capacity in this nation either till these idiots are finally purged from the public sector and sane energy policy returns to this nation... aka pre-Carter thinking. Be nice to see the DoE shut down too.

but that's my assessment.

Ok lets say 500,000,000 bbl would last the ExxonMobil Refinery in Baton Rouge 5 years.

Lets also imagine that in 5 years, the US will need 500,000,000 bbl of gasoline produced from that refinery.

Now, obviously we cannot produce the gasoline we need in 5 years from this refinery: because 1 bbl crude doesn't yield 1 bbl gasoline despite all the technology "big oil" has invented to make this happen, and all the additional costs the US government has added to the process to prevent it.

So, what do we do? Build ANOTHER refinery?

The payout period (how much time it takes to begin to make a profit from an investment), for a new refinery is a very long time assuming that gasoline profitability remains what it is.

Of course, the higher the profitability of making gasoline, the shorter the payout period.

But, whenever oil companies have made profits that might justify the long term investment in a refinery whose Environmental Impact Statement alone would take a decade to prepare, the media begins to complain about "Big Oil" reaping "Windfall Profits."

The Government responds with Congressional Hearings, and passes statutes to tax these "Windfall Profits."

So, who wants to build a new refinery in the USA?

 

[Big Fitz]

Ok lets say 500,000,000 bbl would last the ExxonMobil Refinery in Baton Rouge 5 years.

Lets also imagine that in 5 years, the US will need 500,000,000 bbl of gasoline produced from that refinery.

Now, obviously we cannot produce the gasoline we need in 5 years from this refinery: because 1 bbl crude doesn't yield 1 bbl gasoline despite all the technology "big oil" has invented to make this happen, and all the additional costs the US government has added to the process to prevent it.

So, what do we do? Build ANOTHER refinery?

The payout period (how much time it takes to begin to make a profit from an investment), for a new refinery is a very long time assuming that gasoline profitability remains what it is.

Of course, the higher the profitability of making gasoline, the shorter the payout period.

But, whenever oil companies have made profits that might justify the long term investment in a refinery whose Environmental Impact Statement alone would take a decade to prepare, the media begins to complain about "Big Oil" reaping "Windfall Profits."

The Government responds with Congressional Hearings, and passes statutes to tax these "Windfall Profits."

So, who wants to build a new refinery in the USA?

And that's a lot of the problem in this nation. NIMBY and kleptocracy.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Peak oil is a myth

Then the IEA, the USGS, ASPO, the U.N. and countless other international entities are all lying? U.S. domestic oil production decline, North Sea decline, Mexico's decline, Indonesia's decline, Russia's decline were all "myths?" And now Middle Eastern decline is a "myth", and all are fabricated in some great global conspiracy?

That's odd.

Secondly, 500 MILLION is not "nothing." Have you any grasp how much oil a barrel of oil is? Have you any grasp at all of what a trillion of something is? A million of something?

The world uses 85 million barrels per day, and growing. Do YOU have a grasp?

Third, the first thing we should do is stop EXPORTING our domestic crude. Yes that's right -- it shocks most folks to find out we are #17 in the world in oil EXPORTS.

That's because domestic U.S. oil production peaked and began terminal decline 38 years ago. It's irreversible. This is fairly well-documented.

Pretending the realities of resource scarcity is a big global conspiracy comes off as fairly hollow.

You should really get a "grasp" of how global oil trade works. You can't just horde your own while scheming to trade for others'.

....

As for the original poster of this thread... I hate to break it to him, but Bakken contains oil shale, and oil shale is not oil. It yields a synthetic from kerogen -- again, not oil. It doesn't refine to unleaded gasoline. It can be refined to create diesel and jet fuel, but at great financial and environmental cost...

From the fist line of the Wiki page on oil shale, among countless other sources (I am not allowed to post links yet):

The name oil shale is a misnomer as geologists would not necessarily classify the rock as a shale, and its kerogen differs from crude oil.​

Additionally, the extraction process for these heavy oils is strip mining of the most destructive kind, and pollutes the ground water table for miles around. Some people might be willing to destroy the Rocky Mountains and divert the Colorado River for this economically UNviable energy "source," but not anyone thinking rationally.

In short, there is indeed an abundance of heavy, dirty oils all over the world, but those heavy oils will not save us... not before our energy crisis, which is on our doorstop now.

We are where we are (empire) due to a healthy EROI (energy return on invested) of between 25:1 and 100:1 that sweet LIGHT crude has provided us... Period, end of story. ... We are no where near that ratio any longer, and that is the case all over our planet. Worse, that ratio is getting smaller and smaller every year, while population continues to explode. Those two realities pull in opposite directions and can not continue, for obvious reasons.

Perhaps if we listened to the only president of the last 50 years who was honest with us about energy, we'd be ahead of the curve by now and on our way to renewables and sustainability. ... Unfortunately, his initiatives were immediately scrapped by the corporate president who followed him, and our age of gluttonous consumption ramped up to a whole new level.

And now the game of musical chairs (petroleum age) is ending.

 

[Big Fitz]

Then the IEA, the USGS, ASPO, the U.N. and countless other international entities are all lying?

Yep. Or they're ignorant. Or they stand to gain (most likely) by creating the false theory of a shortage. Fields decline, and new ones are found. Simple fact of life borne out by all the recent discovers of MASSIVE finds off Brazil, the Gulf Coast and ANWR, plus the known reserves in the Bakken reserve and other formerly hard to reach places that suddenly, thanks to technology are quite viable.

The world uses 85 million barrels per day, and growing. Do YOU have a grasp?

I have a firm grasp. I also know that by the 'math' they spouted on the first Earth Day, we ran out of oil 19 years ago. Huh. Strange how that never came true.

That's because domestic U.S. oil production peaked and began terminal decline 38 years ago.

Hmmmm... 38 years ago... 38 years ago... what possible connection could be with that year..... Oh yeahhh... the EPA, founded on Dec 2nd, 1970. Suddenly, domestic oil exploration became less profitable and harder to do, thanks to the dawn of the eco-nut.

We are where we are (empire) due to a healthy EROI (energy return on invested) of between 25:1 and 100:1 that sweet LIGHT crude has provided us...

And yet all 'green energy' systems provide less than a 1 to 1 ratio. Even Hydrogen is heavily reliant on petrochemicals in which to produce the hydrogen. HENCE the name HYDROcarbons. You will NEVER get away from oil till you find some other form of energy that produces as well as fossil fuels.

Still, too bad for you the fantasy of peak oil is just that. A fantasy designed to scare the simple minded with straight line predictions and massive socialist intrusions as our 'only hope'.

 

[Mr. H.]

There is a monumental glut of crude oil in storage worldwide. Still, new discoveries are being made on a monthly basis. The petroleum industry has historically supplied oil that the world has demanded and will continue to do so for decades to come.

U.S. oil production may be in decline but it's not terminal. Nor is it irreversable. The constraints to increasing domestic production involve access to capital, an effective tax environment, opening public lands and waters to exploration, and a reversal in public opinion based on education of facts.

If oil is so important, why do people expect it to be cheaper than dirt? Cheap oil makes voters happy. Keep the voters ignorant of facts and they stay stupid. In general, we want ourselves to fail in the hydrocarbon arena because it's easier than facing reality.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Yep. Or they're ignorant.

I see now. All those non-partisan entities are either "lying" or they're dumb. That's excellent.

You just compromised your entire argument within one paragraph.

Fields decline, and new ones are found. Simple fact of life borne out by all the recent discovers of MASSIVE finds off Brazil, the Gulf Coast and ANWR, plus the known reserves in the Bakken reserve and other formerly hard to reach places that suddenly, thanks to technology are quite viable.

None of the finds of proven reserves off Brazil, Gulf Coast nor ANWR can be considered "massive" by any measurement. Where are you getting your information? ... Ghawar was massive. Cantarell was massive. Those aren't. ... A "massive" field hasn't been found anywhere on God's green Earth in over 30 years.

Please link to your source of proven reserves at those sites, and then divide those totals by 85 million barrels per day. As a CEO of an oil company, are you willing to spend billions of dollars on infrastructure in order to suck out 3-5 months of fuel?

Hmmmm... 38 years ago... 38 years ago... what possible connection could be with that year..... Oh yeahhh... the EPA, founded on Dec 2nd, 1970. Suddenly, domestic oil exploration became less profitable and harder to do, thanks to the dawn of the eco-nut.

Wait, did you just punt to the EPA as the culprit behind well-documented U.S. oil production decline? So, the EPA is in cohoots with Big Oil now to give the impression of energy scarcity?

You realize how your argument on this topic consistently contradicts itself, do you not?

And yet all 'green energy' systems provide less than a 1 to 1 ratio. Even Hydrogen is heavily reliant on petrochemicals in which to produce the hydrogen. HENCE the name HYDROcarbons. You will NEVER get away from oil till you find some other form of energy that produces as well as fossil fuels.

You're one of those straw man arguers, aren't you? Adorable. ... when did i mention a word praising hydrogen's potential, pro or con?

You're right that we will never get away from our oil addiction willfully. It will be taken care of FOR us by geology.

I look forward to you showing the forum what new "find" that is "massive" for a global economy that consumes 85 million barrels per day. Perhaps 3-4 months of oil here and there is "massive" to you, but not to me.

Still, too bad for you the fantasy of peak oil is just that. A fantasy designed to scare the simple minded with straight line predictions and massive socialist intrusions as our 'only hope'.

Ah... So now it's "socialists" aligned with the EPA, Big Oil, the International Energy Agency, CERA, the U.S. Geological Survey and on and on who are all lying about energy scarcity.

What a coordinated effort!

 

[JiggsCasey]

There is a monumental glut of crude oil in storage worldwide. Still, new discoveries are being made on a monthly basis. The petroleum industry has historically supplied oil that the world has demanded and will continue to do so for decades to come.

Where? How much? Link to where you're getting your information please, so the forum has a basis for your argument.

Hypothetical:

If I own a continent, and you own a continent... And you find 1 trillion barrels of oil, and I find 500 billion... yet mine is concentrated amid one isolated region, while yours is spread out over hundreds of small pools all over your continent, as well as dozens off shore... Who do you think is going to have the more successful oil industry? ... Here's a hint: Not yours.

extraction and refining infrastructure cost is a huge part of this equation ... especially amid a recession/depression with no end in sight.

 

[Douger]

O.R., a half billion barrels isn't chump change. "Minor producers" add up. Your quoted article does shed new light on the subject but I don't think it exactly trivializes the project.

Still- nothing wrong with doing a little forward-thinking, and getting a windmill for the ol' ranch house..

500,000,000 is NOTHING. It is not enough to cook on a stove for your family, and keep warm, for a full month. Do you understand that, Mr H? It is NOTHING.

Even if we do find a few trillion.. It is still barely enough to keep afloat with.

Windmill ? I got ona them thar winmillz.

 

[Mr. H.]

There is a monumental glut of crude oil in storage worldwide. Still, new discoveries are being made on a monthly basis. The petroleum industry has historically supplied oil that the world has demanded and will continue to do so for decades to come.

Where? How much? Link to where you're getting your information please, so the forum has a basis for your argument.

Who's arguing? I'm stating a fact.

Follow this link to register and sign up for newsletter emails. Be sure to check the box "Daily Industry News".

RIGZONE - Newsletters

Here are some examples:

Apache Successfully Tests West Kalabsha Discovery

McMoRan Makes Ultra-Deep Discovery at Davy Jones

OGX Discovers Hydrocarbons in Offshore BM-C-42 Block

Dana Gas Hits Paydirt in Egyptian Oil Concession

North Sea Wildcat Purrs for Petro-Canada

 

[Big Fitz]

I see now. All those non-partisan entities are either "lying" or they're dumb. That's excellent.

Ever hear of conflict of interest? nooooooo... couldn't be THAT!

None of the finds of proven reserves off Brazil, Gulf Coast nor ANWR can be considered "massive" by any measurement.

So now we're gonna narrow the goalposts to "proven reserves"? Nice semantic trick. They were just discovered. They will be proven reserves soon enough. Till then, they're still considered significant/massive/large/important finds. Pick your own adjective. But they were still found.

Wait, did you just punt to the EPA as the culprit behind well-documented U.S. oil production decline? So, the EPA is in cohoots with Big Oil now to give the impression of energy scarcity?

Making up conspiracies yourself now? Every oil exec I ever listened to or read in passing is saying the same thing, take the handcuffs off and let us drill, refine and grow. The EPA, and the lawsuit addicted psycho-greens are the ones in the way.

BTW, why are some oil fields being discovered to have started refilling? Far as I know, that can't really happen under the green peak oil Olduvai Trench theory.

You're one of those straw man arguers, aren't you? Adorable. ... when did i mention a word praising hydrogen's potential, pro or con?

Nipping that argument in the bud. Got a problem with that? Still, Ethanol for instance, the only current replacement for portable fuel or bio diesel still has an EROI of a fraction that of oil. I believe I last heard it was about 0.8 to 1 as compared to standard Unleaded which is about 12 to 1. You can thank the destructive production methods for that as well as the expense of providing reliable 'renewable' raw resources.

My point still stands.

Ah... So now it's "socialists" aligned with the EPA, Big Oil, the International Energy Agency, CERA, the U.S. Geological Survey and on and on who are all lying about energy scarcity.

Most members of bureaucracies lean socialist. Simple sociological fact. Conservatives and capitalists go into business, not politics, because they CAN do so much better there and have little interest in ruling and controlling others. They have bigger fish to fry.

On the other hand, leftists often can't do and therefore hate a meritocracy like Capitalism, therefore they gravitate to places and groups that seek to control, hamper or stop the thing they hate... Capitalism.

But it's cute that you keep trying to lump in private businesses into these groups. They will perpetuate frauds to push their anti-civilization meme. I'm not waiting for you to come around. Peakers would rather die than admit they're wrong regardless to how history keeps proving them full of shit, day after day after day.

 

[American Horse]

There are continuing to be discoveries of new oil in US discoveries in the lower CONUS. A lot of it will be outside the power of the Feds to discourage....except of course for the EPA

The trade off between EPA's expanded regulations and JOBS and energy costs to consumers will be more and more in the news during the coming election. Hopefully the R Party will initiate a debate along the lines of those issues.

Sarah Palin has already done so. Regardless of what one thinks of her ability to be elected, she does reach a large part of the US electorate and citizenry with the salient issues.

 

[Mr. H.]

The state of Illinois, not the EPA, has primacy with respect to the environmental regulation of oil and gas operations. An exception would be a discharge into a navigable waterway.

Here is a link to "The Illinois Oil and Gas Act" - it's everything you ever wanted to know about drilling for hydrocarbons in this state. Grab a cup of coffee because it's over 200 pages.

http://dnr.state.il.us/legal/adopted/62-240.pdf

 

[JiggsCasey]

Who's arguing? I'm stating a fact.

The argument is what is considered "massive." I asked you to link to your referral point, so that we could cover what you seem to be suggesting is "massive." ... I believe the pretentious language you used was "monumental glut."

This would be much easier if I were allowed to provide links, but until I have 15 posts, I can not.

Here are some examples:

Apache Successfully Tests West Kalabsha Discovery

Proven oil reserves amounted to 4.4bn barrels (bbl) in 2009​

Not massive, ... by any measurement. ... The world consumes 85 million barrels per day.

McMoRan Makes Ultra-Deep Discovery at Davy Jones

No mention of proven reserves. Even unproven estimates are in the 2-10 billion barrel range. Vague, and... unproven.

Not massive, ... by any measurement. ... The world consumes 85 million barrels per day.

OGX Discovers Hydrocarbons in Offshore BM-C-42 Block

No mention of proven reserves anywhere, but a "90x17 meter column" can't be very much.

online. wsj. com / article / BT-CO-20100111-703597

Not massive, ... by any measurement. ... The world consumes 85 million barrels per day.

Dana Gas Hits Paydirt in Egyptian Oil Concession

The Al-Baraka oil field is located in the Al-Baraka Development Lease and according to Sea Dragon’s internal estimates, has a discovered, undeveloped oil accumulation of approx. 100 million barrels of Original Oil in Place as Discovered Resources in two productive zones.​

energy-pedia.com/article.aspx?articleid=138589


Not massive, ... by any measurement (in fact, negligible). ... The world consumes 85 million barrels per day.

North Sea Wildcat Purrs for Petro-Canada

From your own link:

The estimated size of the discovery is between 7 and 40 million standard cubic meters of contingent resources​

Or about 6.3 million barrels (with an 'm')... About 8 hours of U.S. consumption alone.

Not massive, ... by any measurement (in fact, negligible). ... The world consumes 85 million barrels per day.

Do better. ... Where are the "massive" centralized finds?

-----------

I refer back to my hypothetical in post 49 for perspective... A trillion barrels of proven reserves spread over 1,000 (or even 500) separate sites is not economically viable.

It cost astronomical amounts of money to build extraction and refinement infrastructure at a single site. If it's only going to yield a month of fuel, it's not sustaining growth!

 

[Mr. H.]

Who's arguing? I'm stating a fact.

The argument is what is considered "massive." I asked you to link to your referral point, so that we could cover what you seem to be suggesting is "massive." ... I believe the pretentious language you used was "monumental glut."

This would be much easier if I were allowed to provide links, but until I have 15 posts, I can not.

You bold-texted my comment "Still, new discoveries are being made on a monthly basis." and I responded.

It's also a fact that there is a glut of oil in storage around the world. Monumental? That may be debatable but it's certainly not a pretentious assertion.

For you to compare each and every new discovery in relation to it's affect on total world demand then dismiss them accordingly is, I think, a bit misleading.

Yup- it's frustrating trying to communicate here until you reach the magic 15 posts but keep going, you'll get there.

 

[Mr. H.]

I refer back to my hypothetical in post 49 for perspective... A trillion barrels of proven reserves spread over 1,000 (or even 500) separate sites is not economically viable.

It cost astronomical amounts of money to build extraction and refinement infrastructure at a single site. If it's only going to yield a month of fuel, it's not sustaining growth!

It is economically viable to produce a mere 10 million barrels of oil during an entire year from 20,000 separate sites. It's being done here in Illinois. They're called "marginal" wells and there are roughly a half million of them in the U.S.

I've built "extraction infrastructure" and yes it is very expensive but not necessarily an astronomical expense. If estimated reserves warrant the investment there can be a very profitable reward.

It seems you're not seeing the forest for the trees.

 

[JiggsCasey]

It is economically viable to produce a mere 10 million barrels of oil during an entire year from 20,000 separate sites. It's being done here in Illinois. They're called "marginal" wells and there are roughly a half million of them in the U.S.

They are called marginal because they are dying out and close to abandonment, which further underscores my entire thesis: U.S. production is in terminal decline and has been for decades.

From Wiki:

A stripper well or marginal well is an oil or gas well that is nearing the end of its economically useful life. In the United States of America a "stripper" gas well is defined by the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission as one that produces 60,000 cubic feet (1,700 m3) or less of gas per day at its maximum flow rate; the Internal Revenue Service, for tax purposes, uses a threshold of 75,000 cubic feet (2,100 m3) per day. Oil wells are generally classified as stripper wells when they produce ten barrels per day or less for any twelve month period.

In the United States of America, one out of every six barrels of crude oil produced comes from a marginal oil well, and over 85 percent of the total number of U.S. oil wells are now classified as such. There are over 420,000 of these wells in the United States, and together they produce nearly 915,000 barrels (145,500 m3) of oil per day, 18 percent of U.S. production.

Many of these wells are marginally economic and at risk of being prematurely abandoned.
​

A drop in the bucket. Not exactly a sustaining of "infinite growth" such that our entire economy is predicated upon.

I've built "extraction infrastructure" and yes it is very expensive but not necessarily an astronomical expense. If estimated reserves warrant the investment there can be a very profitable reward.

It seems you're not seeing the forest for the trees.

Well, at least you post respectfully, unlike some infantile contributors here.

As for the bold above, estimated reserves are not proven reserves. The correct statement should read:

If proven reserves warrant the investment there can be a very profitable reward. ​

Unproven reserves are nothing more than figures on paper, based on hope, to inflate investment optimism. They are the bane of the global oil debate.

When you're discussing EROI and economic viability in regards to light crude drilling, there is only one figure that matters -- PROVEN reserves.

 

[Mr. H.]

A good geologist will estimate reserves based on best available methods. This is helpful in raising capital for the drilling program. Proven reserves reflect a more accurate estimate based on reservoir deliniation, pressures, and production rates. Proven reserves are useful for reporting and accounting.

Re: marginal wells- they are extremely important to overall production in the U.S. Here's a DOE report on the subject. It's a bit dated but with a little digging one could find more current figures.

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/policy/Policy077.pdf

Well, I'm out 'till Sunday evening. Talk to you later.

 

[Big Fitz]

From Wiki:

Obviously you still seem to think that this source isn't potentially biased.

Wiikipedia Statistics Suggest Strong Liberal Bias

Liberal Bias at Wikipedia?

I'm not saying it's all biased, but the political hot button postings like energy, healthcare and all active political figures are not to be trusted blindly. Just thought I'd point that out.

hen you're discussing EROI and economic viability in regards to light crude drilling, there is only one figure that matters -- PROVEN reserves.

Then why didn't we run out in 1984 or so when the first Earth Day participants predicted it based on mathematics and current proven reserves?