Newest Peak, 2008

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 17 Mar 2009, 18:07

[quote="Andy Hunt"]

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 17 Mar 2009, 18:16

[quote="Adam1"]

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 17 Mar 2009, 23:34

RGR wrote: Any chance we can stop assigning things to me which I have never advocated in the least?

Why? You regularly do it to many of us. Annoying isn't it!

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 18 Mar 2009, 00:42

[quote="snow hope"

AndySir · Post by **AndySir** » 18 Mar 2009, 06:54

So, assuming what you're doing is not an exercise in trolling RGR, could you clarify what your views on peak oil are? After five pages of frequent responses to the topic I am none the wiser.

I would have assumed, like others on the thread, that you were on the cornucopian side of things. "Any chance we can stop assigning things to me which I have never advocated in the least?", you cry, after being accused of this (in a thread, I might add, which began with a reference to an article from a peak oil debunked blog). It's not an unreasonable assumption to make.

What do you think? Will oil peak and when? What will be the consequences?

It might aid us in our conversations with you if we knew where you stood, rather than simply knowing that you do not stand with the fast-crash scenario. Or have I ascribed another argument to you which you have never made?

Andy_K · Post by **Andy_K** » 18 Mar 2009, 07:29

My understanding of his view is:

A global oil peak, when it occurs, will be caused primarily by economics and only partially affected by geology. It will also not cause the end of the world as we know it, but might well cause a change in lifestyle or drop in living standards to many groups of people.

Although his main concern is dismissing other people's views rather than promoting his own because... well, lets face it - they're not doomy enough to be exciting!

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 18 Mar 2009, 08:16

I think there's also a hint of snobbery through the undercurrent of "the leading peak oil spokesmen aren't geologists" coupled with the overtones of "lack of mathematical rigour".

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 18 Mar 2009, 12:36

[quote="AndySir"]

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 18 Mar 2009, 12:37

[quote="Bandidoz"]

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 18 Mar 2009, 12:53

RGR wrote:Sure. Peak oil is an interesting industry factoid. Primarily irrelevant to the rest of the world, and the consequences to which, and the solutions to, lie almost exclusively within the economic arena.

So you're saying that an ultimate peak will happen at some stage, but that oil production will continue long into the future. So from an oil industry point of view it will just mean business as usual, with a gradual change to a lower output and increasing production costs, but the selling price will reflect that.

But when it comes to the effects that "lie almost exclusively within the economic arena", are you saying they aren't going to have a major effect on a lot of people's lives, or that because you work in the oil industry you aren't personally bothered what happens to people outside the industry?

Ballard · Post by **Ballard** » 18 Mar 2009, 14:02

RGR wrote:Global Peak Oil happened in 1929, 1941, 1948, 1957, 1973, 1980, 1990, and 2005, and in 2008!

I don't really understand your point RGR, it's patently obvious that any graph with a general upwards trend and a degree of noise will exhibit record high point’s regularly over time, so what?

The ‘peak oil’ premise (as I understand it) is that, at some point the general trend will reach a maximum point and decline, (the noise prior to this is unimportant), and this might have a dramatic effect on our lives.

The power-switch response is (on average), let’s discuss how likely this is, how immediate, and what you need to do to prepare (if anything).

So some people make incorrect predictions, (Sometime they even do it to try to earn a crust, Shock!!) so what? Seems to me that the whether by luck, or judgement the preparations I have taken have, in aggregate been very timely, all thanks to the knowledge and ideas that I gained from the Powerswitch community and other similar forums.

(I don’t really know why I’m responding to your prodding. Dialogue with you does tend to be like trying to herd cats, get’s nowhere and ends in frustration)

ziggy12345 · Post by **ziggy12345** » 18 Mar 2009, 14:10

A peak in oil production rather, whether its a geological constraint, a delivery and infrastructure problem or more than likely a mixture of both seem to assume this will have a proportional effect on the availability of oil on the open market. This will not be the case as oil exporting countries are finding they are using more and more of their own product and having less and less to export. Even with extended periods of oil production the problem will be availability

RGR says there will not be a geoligical peak in the short term, and possibly he is right but this doesnt mean there are not big problems just around the corner

DominicJ · Post by **DominicJ** » 18 Mar 2009, 14:43

"Domestic use" still has to compete with international use, normaly.

Populist leaders might like to ban exports to keep internal prices low, but it usualy just shuts the project down, and of course, denies them a healthy revenue stream.
North Sea production was minimal until the ban on exports was lifted.

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 18 Mar 2009, 17:19

In a more sustainable world where we need to relocalise, we will have to move towards the bioregional model, where the majority of resources come from within our bioregion, a small percentage come from other parts of the same country, and as little as possible is imported.

So it's logical that oil producing regions and countries will have oil available to them for local use, and non oil producing regions will have to adapt to a minimal oil use economy. It's not unreasonable that a resource producer should give the local market priority, although it's rather inconvenient to the current way of life. Not sure I fancy living near a coal field!

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 18 Mar 2009, 17:46

RGR wrote:
Andy Hunt wrote: My understanding of Olduvai Theory is that it is describing some kind of 'bottleneck' at some stage in the future. I didn't realise there was an actual date attached to it. It wouldn't surprise me if there was a bottleneck of some description, it has happened before to humanity in geological history.
Not a day ago you claimed to know nothing about Olduvai....now you have an understanding? What a fast study! I suppose its easier because you once did know, forgot completely, reremembered only upon a reference being provided....and soon will discover that goodness!! Duncan is the author!

You did say I should provide references...heck, I'm surprised you even knew Campbells name if you forget as fast as it appears!!

No, what I was saying is that I had never heard of the end of the world in 2008 or someone called Duncan being connected with Olduvai Theory.

I haven't seen Duncan's website, although I think I did read an article about Olduvai Theory written by someone on Energybulletin once, which is probably where I know about it from, I can't remember now. Maybe it was this Duncan character.

I must admit the only date I've heard mentioned consistently for 'end of world' scenarios is 2012 - so often in fact that I am beginning to worry that there might be something in it!!!

But if we get there and nothing has happened, I will be very happy to have you tease me about it.