Oil Production: Will the Peak Hold?

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 11 Feb 2008, 10:39

Unfortunate, but as Lynch once said ( and I paraphrase ), if you want to know what oil wells and fields are doing, you don't ask an MBA who sells IPO's to pension funds, you ask a reservoir engineer.

Or the engineer's team leader.
Or the team leader's manager.
Or the managers CTO.
or the CTOs CEO.
Or the CEO's merchant banker.

Information can be transferred. Sure, it can be trimmed, tidied etc along the way .. but a contentious piece of info such as PO will be reviewed by MANY people and groups.

I haven''t heard thousands of engineers, oil companies etc claiming that Simmons is totally deluded.

I'm not even sure that asking a reservoir engineer would help much ... you would need a very experienced individual who had full access to all the data of many wells .. and even then you would be getting the opinion of a single individual.

Simmons has access to, and input from, many people at all levels in the oil industry. I doubt that he is making any insanely gross errors.

The numbers may be out a bit - but does it really matter if we hit the wall today, tomorrow, in two years time or in ten years time? Based on our track record we will be equally unprepared in ten years times as in one years time.

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 14 Feb 2008, 01:50

Aurora · Post by **Aurora** » 14 Feb 2008, 07:39

OK RGR. Forget Simmons if you insist, but just take another look at the EIA's graph. I think the numbers speak for themselves.

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 14 Feb 2008, 12:58

Okay RGR, so what is your take on what oil fields and wells are doing with regard to Peak Oil? Or are you not a reservoir engineer either?

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 14 Feb 2008, 23:25

Aurora wrote:OK RGR. Forget Simmons if you insist, but just take another look at the EIA's graph. I think the numbers speak for themselves.

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 14 Feb 2008, 23:32

snow hope wrote:Okay RGR, so what is your take on what oil fields and wells are doing with regard to Peak Oil? Or are you not a reservoir engineer either?

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 15 Feb 2008, 09:13

I am interested in the North Sea, which appears to have peaked in 1999. What do you mean by reserve growth? What is your view of ERoEI with the marginal wells and unconventional resources. What do you think of the environmental impacts of unconventional resources?

Can you tell me what production profile wells follow, if it is not an approximate normal distribution curve?

Why do you think the consequences of oil depletion will not be life altering? Surely this can't be based on your experience of the last couple of years, as we haven't seen any depletion yet? We are at the top of the curve and haven't yet started the downhill slope - the impacts are just around the corner in my opinion. Agree with what you say about the financial stuff.

Ballard · Post by **Ballard** » 15 Feb 2008, 18:46

Call me crazy...

But I think we will break the may 2007 peak yet.

Only once and very briefly however.

RGR · Post by **RGR** » 17 Feb 2008, 16:27

snow hope wrote:I am interested in the North Sea, which appears to have peaked in 1999.

Norfolk In Chance · Post by **Norfolk In Chance** » 17 Feb 2008, 17:03

You make some interesting points here RGR.

I just hope all military powers are as objective about global depletion as you are about field depletion..

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 17 Feb 2008, 17:18

RGR wrote:The North Sea peaked around 1986....declined...and then peaked again around 1999-2000. A beautiful example of how peaking doesn't have much to do with geology

The July 1988 Piper Alpha disaster, in which 167 died, the worst ever off shore accident, had quite an impact on North Sea production.

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 17 Feb 2008, 19:51

Peak Oil or not ... SOMETHING is happening out there.

In the UK energy bills are rising very rapidly and food price inflation last year was over 10% !

There are developing shortages of platinum, coal and other resources across the world.

Even if oil is not a key factor at the moment, the whole global resource system seems to be creaking ...

PS A dumb question: if there is NO oil supply problem why is it at $95 at the moment?

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 17 Feb 2008, 20:28

>PS A dumb question: if there is NO oil supply problem why is it at $95 at the moment?

With the price at $95, the poor folk drop out of the market and supply and demand are exactly matched, as ever. No problem. The suppliers pay $30 to suck it out of the ground and get $95. They have no problem. The consumers are rich enough to afford it. They have no problem. The poor can walk and, anyway, you don't miss what you haven't got. So they have no problem.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 17 Feb 2008, 20:38

PS A dumb question: if there is NO oil supply problem why is it at $95 at the moment?

Because we have a demand problem : )

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 17 Feb 2008, 21:38

Thanks for your answers RGR.

snow hope wrote: Why do you think the consequences of oil depletion will not be life altering?

RGR wrote: Manmade depletion of oilfields has been happening since August of 1859. Are you arguing that just because amatuers recently noticed, it matters more now than then?

I am not arguing the above. I mustn't have made myself clear; now that we are entering an era when the total amount of oil being produced out of the ground (per day, week, month, year) is about to start reducing permanently for the first time, I consider the impacts are going to be rather greater than you seem to think. We have developed quite a dependance on the black stuff over the last 150 years and as demand and supply go their opposing directions, I think there will be large ramifications.

snow hope wrote: Surely this can't be based on your experience of the last couple of years, as we haven't seen any depletion yet?

RGR wrote: See comment above. Depletion isn't a new event just because the amateurs got around to noticing. Were your parents scared many many moons ago? Were mine? Should Lincoln have stopped the Civil War for fear of it? Should Winston have caved in to the Nazi's because of it? Nah...I don't think so either. So using it to scare newbies now hardly means much.
[\quote]

I think I should have said "net" depletion - see my comments above.

snow hope wrote:
We are at the top of the curve and haven't yet started the downhill slope - the impacts are just around the corner in my opinion. Agree with what you say about the financial stuff.

RGR wrote: Prior to Peak happening, more than a few people had a grand time proclaiming the end of the world immdiately dollowing the peak for various silly scenario's. Years later they are still trying to prolong the hysteria, if only to keep up book sales and freeze dried food sales I imagine, because 3 years after the fact it hardly looks awe inspiring, on either side of the Atlantic.
If you think this is being done for the reasons stated, then I suspect you may be in for an unpleasant surprise.

I would suggest that for the last couple of years as all our energy prices have increased dramtically (have you not noticed?) demand has been tempered slightly (in global terms) and some stocks have been run down in order to meet demand. Also the poorest countries in the world have reduced demand considerably due to being priced out of the market. OF course this is not reported much in mainstream news.....