desperation - a nice example of declining energy intensity

[ceti331]

yes he was syntactically incorrect , but got the correct idea across.

I understood what he meant. EROEI<1 => net energy is negative.

When explaining things verbally its convinient to skip some steps to highlight the salient information.. thats the nature of language.
Like we say "exponential population growth on a finite planet " alot... yes, we know it isn't exactly exponential , there's a phase with exponential like properties and it gets the point across

[Ralph]

They might make money drilling by conning investors into backing them, looking as if some work's being done, collecting the cash and then...surprise! finding nowt and declaring bankrutcy. While somehow or other managing to keep the loot. If you assume that human ignorance (I mean of the genuine sort, as in "not knowing") is a renewable resource, this kind of activity could go on for as long as there is money. It's perfectly possible that the people behind "Ralph" are part of this process.

Bakken and Three Forks oil wells range in F50 size from about 150K barrels to 300k barrels.

Figure 11, here:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1109/OF13-1109.pdf

Discounting for royalty interest, Capex of drilling and completion and land acquisition of about 8.5 million, OpEx running about $600/month or so, it would seem that the undiscounted cost to surface (assuming a 25 year well life, fairly conservative) is about $68/bbl for the small end of that EUR range, $36/bbl for the upper end?

first purchase crude price in North Dakota is going for about $82, according to the EIA?

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHa ... 038__3&f=M

So the issue isn't going bankrupt, but the terms under which you are loaned money to drill the well (or terms of "investment") because certainly at the F50, the wells are capable of paying for themselves.

[RenewableCandy]

That all sounds very nice but are they really going to have a well life of 25 years? There seem to be lots of reports right now of rates tailing off by 1/2 after just a couple of years and the like. These are either b***ocks, pertaining to a different set of wells than your favo(u)rite ones here, or else, erm you get the idea...

The population density of North Dakota is <looks it up>, ah, about 4 people per square km in 2010. Here in the UK it's more like 250. There is, almost literally, no room for error. And, if the guys with the flaming taps (faucets) aren't making it all up, errors there will be. Bear this in mind(?) as you marvel at our limey skepticism about this sort of thing. We are all neighbours in this country: would you like the Bakken activities as your neighbour?

Going back to the 25 year thing again: it's actually not a very long time, is it? I expect to still be around and growing my food in 25 years' time...

[Ralph]

That all sounds very nice but are they really going to have a well life of 25 years?

Well life being defined as able to paying operating expenses (the equivalent of $60 oil and 10bbl/month), most of them, absolutely.

But that isn't critical, as a majority of the production is made within the first few years. That happens to be the advantage of the shale decline, the high initial production rates.

There seem to be lots of reports right now of rates tailing off by 1/2 after just a couple of years and the like. These are either b***ocks, pertaining to a different set of wells than your favo(u)rite ones here, or else, erm you get the idea…

The previously referenced work of the scientists (versus, say the expertise at PCI) also describes the decline as well upon which the EUR distributions are based. They sure do decline. But then, all wells, and fields, do.

The population density of North Dakota is <looks it up>, ah, about 4 people per square km in 2010. Here in the UK it's more like 250. There is, almost literally, no room for error. And, if the guys with the flaming taps (faucets) aren't making it all up, errors there will be. Bear this in mind(?) as you marvel at our limey skepticism about this sort of thing. We are all neighbours in this country: would you like the Bakken activities as your neighbour?

The farm I grew up on had 3 hydraulically fractured gas wells on it. The drilling activities weren't any trouble to growing a garden, deer hunting, or the well water we all drank from the fresh water aquifer above that particular geologic formation. So…what do you mean..would I LIKE….I DID.

If the Brits choose to kowtow to whoever will sell them energy, rather than produce their own, that is there decision. But you don't get to blame the consequences of the such a dependency on anyone except yourselves.

Going back to the 25 year thing again: it's actually not a very long time, is it? I expect to still be around and growing my food in 25 years' time...

Some of those Bakken wells will be producing after you are dead. Just because folks to stay on a conservative side might use a 25 year timeframe, doesn't mean they get turned off on the first day of the 26th year. That is a well by well, company by company decision. And that depends on what the price is of oil 25 years from now as well. The EIA seems to think there is a chance it could be a good bit higher.

[vtsnowedin]

[
Some of those Bakken wells will be producing after you are dead. Just because folks to stay on a conservative side might use a 25 year timeframe, doesn't mean they get turned off on the first day of the 26th year. That is a well by well, company by company decision. And that depends on what the price is of oil 25 years from now as well. The EIA seems to think there is a chance it could be a good bit higher.

Well of course some of them will be producing twenty five years from now but how much and at what price. Lets see now if five percent average declines in production kick in beyond new discovery then in 25 years world output would be 28% of present and the USA's share (assuming we have maintained enough military power to command our present lions share of 15mbd would be 4.2 MBD. I'm guessing our ability to pay limits will have been reached and the price will be around $350 per bl and most will walk up to two miles to work or ride a bicycle.
A big change I know but things do change. In 1986 oil was $14.45 per barrel and world demand was 60 MBD and the USA hogged 16 MBD of it. What can go up can and probably will go down.

[RenewableCandy]

The population density of North Dakota is <looks it up>, ah, about 4 people per square km in 2010. Here in the UK it's more like 250. There is, almost literally, no room for error. And, if the guys with the flaming taps (faucets) aren't making it all up, errors there will be. Bear this in mind(?) as you marvel at our limey skepticism about this sort of thing. We are all neighbours in this country: would you like the Bakken activities as your neighbour?

The farm I grew up on had 3 hydraulically fractured gas wells on it...

USA farms are typically about the size of the whole of Berkshire so my point still stands. Assuming of course you're not making it all up...

Some of those Bakken wells will be producing after you are dead.

Yes, but they'll probably not be producing much more useful energy than I shall be doing at the time.

[Ralph]

[
Some of those Bakken wells will be producing after you are dead. Just because folks to stay on a conservative side might use a 25 year timeframe, doesn't mean they get turned off on the first day of the 26th year. That is a well by well, company by company decision. And that depends on what the price is of oil 25 years from now as well. The EIA seems to think there is a chance it could be a good bit higher.

Well of course some of them will be producing twenty five years from now but how much and at what price.

Obviously. And as I have already said. Which is why a price path is very important when discussing the future. Never seen ASPO or TOD put out a future price path…I wonder why?

See below for potential price paths from the folks who do this for a living.

I'm guessing our ability to pay limits will have been reached and the price will be around $350 per bl and most will walk up to two miles to work or ride a bicycle.

Fortunately, folks in America aren't required to ride a bicycle at $350/bbl, as long as the current round of EVs are still available. Or their better descendants. However, we need to understand that synthetic liquid fuels can be manufactured from natural gas for about $20/gal, and even with that level of liquid fuel prices, the average American commuter wouldn't have a liquid fuel bill of more than about $600/year.

Hardly enough $$$ to make me want to run out and begin commuting to work on a bicycle. Although I'll do that for fun.

[Ralph]

Some of those Bakken wells will be producing after you are dead.

Yes, but they'll probably not be producing much more useful energy than I shall be doing at the time.

Probably incorrect, considering the amount of energy contained within a single barrel of oil, versus what an Olympic athlete can put out in terms of power generation.

[vtsnowedin]

Fortunately, folks in America aren't required to ride a bicycle at $350/bbl, as long as the current round of EVs are still available. Or their better descendants. However, we need to understand that synthetic liquid fuels can be manufactured from natural gas for about $20/gal, and even with that level of liquid fuel prices, the average American commuter wouldn't have a liquid fuel bill of more than about $600/year.

Well EVs will run out of subsidies by then and owners will have to pay the full cost plus battery replacements as needed and the full cost of the electricity to charge them. Probably not a bargain all things considered. $20 gas from natural gas? possible but why would you buy any of it when $350 oil would mean gas at about $12.75/ g. Your $600 per year commuter cost is off by a factor of ten today and probably a lot more twenty five years out. Of course those on welfare and those that work at home have zero commuting costs but I don't average them in.

[RenewableCandy]

I'm afraid you're probably p!ssing into the wind there VT: "Ralph" doesn't seem to understand how high prices (of anything) present problems. This is one of the resons I don't treat them as (posting as) a real person: real people understand the implications of prices and the concept of "can't afford that".

[Ralph]

Well EVs will run out of subsidies by then and owners will have to pay the full cost plus battery replacements as needed and the full cost of the electricity to charge them.

Fine by me. Should happen for everything. But it won't. Governments interfere, market forces and competition get in the way, and at the end of the day it is as likely that we'll be building liquid fuels from dirt and natural gas well into the next century because it will be cheaper.

The good news being that not using liquid fuels for transport is fundamentally a good thing. Too bad it didn't stick back in the early 20th when it started.

Probably not a bargain all things considered. $20 gas from natural gas? possible but why would you buy any of it when $350 oil would mean gas at about $12.75/ g.

Cool. $12/g means it costs even less to fill up the range extender on the EV, right? But $20/g is perfectly affordable as well.

The beauty and thing to watch will be the whining and complaining as lifestyles change. People, Americans in particular, HATE it when economic stimuli requires a change in behavior, even if it is for the better.

Your $600 per year commuter cost is off by a factor of ten today and probably a lot more twenty five years out.

It is not. Unless you are ramping up actual consumer costs to account for what might be better described as "societal" costs. My scooter gets about 100 mpg, at $20/g it would run me about $230/year for commuting to and from work. As well as minor grocery shopping, collecting one of the children from school on occasion. At todays prices I don't even notice the fuel I use for it, taking it from the lawnmower can when it needs a gallon.

But an EV to fill in the gaps certainly doesn't cost $6000/year in fueling costs.

Of course those on welfare and those that work at home have zero commuting costs but I don't average them in.

WHy not? In America it has become quite popular, to drop out of the workforce to take care of an elder relative and collect some state stipend to do so in lieu of a real job. Seen that one happen with a friend just within the past month.

And those who work at home have REALLY figured out how to mitigate commuting costs. The federal government is even encouraging it as of late, so there is certainly value in it for some.

[Ralph]

I'm afraid you're probably p!ssing into the wind there VT: "Ralph" doesn't seem to understand how high prices (of anything) present problems.

Define "problem". Certainly lack of, or expensive, fuels hasn't stopped folks from buying derivative products like computers, utilizing fossil fuel generated power to run them, and then take advantage of the fossil fuel fired grid to transmit messages to and fro.

I don't see you complaining about the horror of the cost of such leisure time activity…so why do you automatically assume people would rather call what they do with their time "life" rather than a "problem"?

It isn't a problem for you, seems like it isn't fair for you to treat them as though they think about these issues any differently than you.

This is one of the resons I don't treat them as (posting as) a real person: real people understand the implications of prices and the concept of "can't afford that".

People are "affording that". Obviously. You wanting to pretend that higher costs have stopped them is just an inability to face the failure of peak oil to do what the fear mongers had hoped.

All TOD declared peak oil did was cause a dip…and then folks went right back to buying. Amazing…they didn't even notice those post peak oil induced price changes to "can't afford" because they…went and bought them anyway.

Why not pimp another fear meme? Because not being able to afford the most linked things to oil prices ain't working so well….even all these years after peak oil.

[vtsnowedin]

It is not. Unless you are ramping up actual consumer costs to account for what might be better described as "societal" costs. My scooter gets about 100 mpg, at $20/g it would run me about $230/year for commuting to and from work. As well as minor grocery shopping, collecting one of the children from school on occasion. At todays prices I don't even notice the fuel I use for it, taking it from the lawnmower can when it needs a gallon.

Lets see... 230/20=11.5 gallons x100mpg =1150 mile A Year? Yah Righttt. I got to tell you Ralph or (whatever) I'm a real American commuter and when I'm working which recently is about thirty weeks a year I put on at least 1100 miles each week. I'm semi retired so don't work in the off season and then put on less then 100 miles a week. just a beer and milk run is ten miles. The Mrs. who works in town puts on at least 18 miles each workday on her car Then drives a 60 passenger school bus another 50 for
175 days a year(5mpg) but lets not worry about that. so 50 weeks x 5 x 18 = 4500 miles all without leaving town. Edit to avoid confusion: She works two jobs ,bus driver at each end of the day when school is in session and town clerk mid day every business day. The school is on the way to her office so no extra miles to get to that job.

[vtsnowedin]

I'm afraid you're probably p!ssing into the wind there VT: "Ralph" doesn't seem to understand how high prices (of anything) present problems. This is one of the resons I don't treat them as (posting as) a real person: real people understand the implications of prices and the concept of "can't afford that".

Yah I know it's a waste of time but you and I both seem to enjoy jousting with him/them and they don't get all huffy or whinny when you call them out. Nothing better to do while I wait for the garden soil to warm up as I've already cut as much wood as my back cares to deal with today.

[RenewableCandy]

I'm afraid you're probably p!ssing into the wind there VT: "Ralph" doesn't seem to understand how high prices (of anything) present problems.

Define "problem".

See what I mean?