« What's Wrong With Small Business Lending? | Main | Pimco's Bill Gross — "No Way Out" »

03/08/2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

sharonsj

I wish the media would explain to stupid America that "drill, baby, drill" will not get us more oil. The multi-national oil companies that drill in the U.S. are under no obligation to sell us our own resources--they sell the oil to the highest bidder! For example, I have read that most of Alaska's oil goes to Japan. In order for us to keep our own oil we'd have to nationalize the oil companies. Just try to get one Republican to agree to that!

John D

I really think that if our pols agree to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, it will mark the transition from decline of the empire to the collapse of the empire. I am horrified even thinking that we even could be considering such a short term solution.

Jason

"The battle is over, the peakists have won."

I'm wondering, does this mean that there ever was a chance they wouldn't win? And what would that look like?

String Larson

Thanks Dave.
Always appreciate your work here.

Rebecca Redfield

As you have pointed out, the powers that be prefer an ignorant populace. The comments on Yahoo and other MSM sites are a measure of this ignorance. You also find the full complement of denier trolls there as well, busily denying any bad news on topics like climate change, overpopulation, peak oil, anything to do with limits and rules. Buccaneer capitalism has pretty much succeeded in getting rid of limits and rules human societies have tried to impose. But Nature and the laws of physics are waiting in the wings to impose their limits and rules. Soon we'll see how we like that.

As far as getting that horse to think? You need to have the Gee Whiz kid riff on this, something like, "Think?? Gee whiz, that's hard work! The brain uses too much human energy and blood supply as is! And thinking makes us uncomfortable! And how can we understand anything, when we're convinced our well-being depends on not understanding it!" And so forth.

Thanks so much for your work. It may be dark, but it is bracing as only the truth can be.

Rebecca Redfield

As you have pointed out, the powers that be prefer an ignorant populace. The comments on Yahoo and other MSM sites are a measure of this ignorance. You also find the full complement of denier trolls there as well, busily denying any bad news on topics like climate change, overpopulation, peak oil, anything to do with limits and rules. Buccaneer capitalism has pretty much succeeded in getting rid of limits and rules human societies have tried to impose. But Nature and the laws of physics are waiting in the wings to impose their limits and rules. Soon we'll see how we like that.

As far as getting that horse to think? You need to have the Gee Whiz kid riff on this, something like, "Think?? Gee whiz, that's hard work! The brain uses too much human energy and blood supply as is! And thinking makes us uncomfortable! And how can we understand anything, when we're convinced our well-being depends on not understanding it!" And so forth.

Thanks so much for your work. It may be dark, but it is bracing as only the truth can be.

adam

Part of the reason you may be recieving fewer comments on an oil-based story is that your audience knows and doesn't have much to say. Also, people aren't yet used to your Sunday posts.

If the Yahoo people (funny how that works) came here, you'd probably get spammed to death with "speculation" "drill moar" and "liberal lies" comments. It's a function of entitlement - I go to a car site (ironically I haven't owned a car for several years, but I like sports cars), and everytime EVs, Hybrids, or gas mileage comes up, you get the entitlement mentality of "I can afford it so I deserve to drive a (suv, luxobarge, whatever)". I want to say to these people "America still produces tremendous amounts of oil, and if you all drove economical cars and the hated hybrids (as well as lots of other stuff, I know) the entire country might start being a net exporter again, which would probably turn the economy around". But if I did, it would make no difference. They don't understand the link between fuel and prosperity. They only want to protect their lifestyle, selfishly.

It's sad, but I can hardly blame them - our entire culture is based on "getting yours" and acting out of self-interest. Our values suck.

Loveandlight

Yep, ever since I learned about Peak Oil and Gas (and, of course, coal at some point, too), I strongly suspected that anything we could do (such as cling to deep willful ignorance) to make the imminent crises worse we would do enthusiastically. That's why my personal philosophy on the matter has been to simply enjoy what there is to enjoy while it still can be enjoyed. :-)

Mitch

I see and listen to the "we just need to be energy independent--by drilling more here and getting rid of the all the environmental restriction" garbage all the time, Yahoo comments which I happened to read a bit of as well this morning--was of course full of ignorance.

As other have stated, we certainly can increase production domestically to a small degree--over many years, but likely much of it would just be an attempt to maintain our current production levels as it works to compensate for decline in older wells. We can't produce our way to oil independence while we consume about 7 BILLION barrels a year. That stupid Bakken forward is one of many bullshit stories that end up as email forwards that for some reason people believe hook line and sinker. EROI'S and the like are real concerns with non-conventional oil, if it takes a massive amount of energy to extract oil to the point its a net negative--then all your doing is eating your leg in some vain attempt to stave of starvation. If Yahoo comment sections are even somewhat indicative of the information/logic of the average person on the 'lifeblood' of the modern world--then we are certainly doomed. Peak oil, is peak everything, except perhaps electricity...but certainly as it stands data suggests electricity in the US is fragile and dependent upon Coal and just in time power plants.
-Mitch

Unbound

"We are not good at recognizing distant threats even if their probability is 100%. Society ignoring [peak oil] is like the people of Pompeii ignoring the rumblings below Vesuvius." - James Schlesinger

No, humanity isn't very good at recognizing distant threats, but throw into the mix copious amounts of willful ignorance, self-indulgence, arrogance and a multiplicity of distractions, proclivities inherent of the u.s. "consumer" class, adds up for a very disturbing outlook in the extreme.

That "consumer" class is probably representative of the majority — the few that visit this site and others that coherently grapple with the pressing issues at hand represent a very small contrary within the population.

As the post-peak oil reality continues to manifest and becomes more evident over time the majority will still be clueless, kept off balance and ill-informed. They'll have no idea what besets them, and they will act accordingly — the die has been cast.

On the subject of the Bakken panacea, Gail the Actuary did a good piece over at TOD entitled Is "shale oil" the answer to "peak oil"? Oh, there the reader comments are more cogent than what is found elsewhere.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/7499

"This problem is truly frightening. This problem is like nothing that I have ever seen in my lifetime, and the more you think about it and the more you look at the numbers, the more uneasy any observer gets. It's so easy to sound alarmist, and I fear that part of what I'm saying may sound alarmist, but there simply is no question that the risks here are beyond anything that any of us have ever dealt with. And the risks to our economies and our civilization are enormous." - Robert Hirsch

Dave Cohen

There seems to be a misconception here. The Bakken Shale is a SUCCESS STORY. We may even get another 2 or 3 hundred thousand barrels per day out of it -- if the oil price stays high.

The main point concerning the Bakken is that ultimately it's not going to save our bacon. Gail was arguing against the idea that the Bakken will produce an additional 2 MILLION barrels per day, which is probably where Credit Suisse (cited by the FT in my Sunday post) got their 33% increase in U.S. oil production. That's just crazy.

This is why I wrote on Sunday about oil produced by wishful thinking.

best,

-- Dave

Greg Reynolds

Question: I thought that US oil production peaked in the 1970s. The EIA graph shows that it has been growing with a dip around 2005. Am I mistaken, or do those two square somehow ?

Greg

Morocco Bama

Greg, that graph is for offshore oil production which is only a subset of overall lower 48 oil production. When all lower 48 oil production is included, it is in decline. What Dave is mentioning will extend the decline, but not substantially.

Morocco Bama

This graph charts comprehensive U.S. oil production from '45 to 2005, Greg. As you can see, it peaked approximately in '70, and has steadily declined ever since.

http://www.energybulletin.net/image/uploads/27804/us-production.jpeg

Morocco Bama

This graph shows U.S. consumption of oil versus U.S. oil production since 1970.

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/07/26/GR2008072601599.gif

an391

It is a bit of a scandal, that the list of supply disruption above doesn't list the 67 or 70 one as "US oil production peak", as it is really what happened, supply diruption and lines at the pump started from the first producer of the time reaching its peak, and nothing else !!
The American ignorance on this is truly amazing.
Moreover the "Arab Embargo" was NEVER effective towards the US, Saudis tankers were getting to Bahrain and then straight to Vietnam to fuel the US army. Moreover, the OPEC price rise was ASKED FOR by US diplomacy and majors (James Akins key person here, too bad he died not long ago, but interviews still there), asked for because higher price was needed to start GOM, North Sea, Alaska oil.
Really what needs to be done for Americans is to put the story of their OWN PEAK straight !!

jdl75

Maybe you could go through below press extracts for example, and explain how they would be in anyway related to the embargo or OPEC price rise :

edit : Ok some kind of filter forbids posting these URLs, but just go to the new york times archive (prior 1980) and search for "fuel shortage" or similar from 69 to 71 for instance.


The true history of US production peak really still needs to be written, obviously even "peak oil aware" Americans still completely buy in the Embargo and OPEC price rise story, as if the production peak of the first producer of the time had no effect at all !

A great documentary on this (and other aspects) "face cachée du pétrole" from Patrick Barberis, with interviews of many key people (James Akins, ex Saudi oil minister, others) unfortunately only exist in French and German to my knowledge, available on daily motion (second part for the 1970 peak story).

Time to look more precisely at the story of US peak, guys, especially when the majority of Americans do not even acknowledge that the US went through its production peak. But the fact that "peak oil aware" Americans still completely buy in this Embargo/OPEC price rise story is really TIRING ...

jdl75

Look at below list of article for instance :

http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?frow=0&n=10&srcht=s&daterange=period&query=fuel+shortage&srchst=p&submit.x=23&submit.y=15&submit=sub&hdlquery=&bylquery=&mon1=09&day1=18&year1=1970&mon2=03&day2=31&year2=1972

And explain how they are related to the Embargo (never effective towards the US anyway), or 1973 OPEC price rise (asked by US diplomacy and majors as much as OPEC).

Time to get your facts straight a bit, this view of the US as a "victim" in the 1973 oil shock is truly LAUGHABLE !

jdl75

Or look at below Nixon talk in 1970 and explain how it is linked in anyway to the embargo or OPEC price rise ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0u-PKNKm_M

Truth is that the "1973" oil crisis starts in 1970 and should be labeled "US production peak Oil crisis" FULL STOP, and again the 1973 OPEC price rise is an answer, from US majors as much as anybody else to this crisis, that is all.

Morocco Bama

Nixon doesn't look at all well in that video. Or maybe he's just green with envy......over all that oil the Arabs HAD.

Tony Weddle

The EIA's latest Short Term Energy Outlook came out recently:

http://tinyurl.com/4bu55e7

It shows that, over the last 12 months, there were three months of stock builds (globally) and nine months of stock draws. My guess is that the Libya shut down will extend those draws.

This actually makes me wonder (again) about Saudi Arabia's much vaunted (or at least much reported) spare capacity. It hasn't been able to make up for declines elsewhere, up to now, why would it suddenly be able to do so simply because the declines are artificially induced?

jdl75

And of course the only way out for Americans, if there is one, would be first to raise their totally ridiculous third world gas tax level.

But these guys clearly appear to be way too commited towards total economic suicide for doing anything like that, besides being totally apathetic regarding having any true political debate about this and other things, they prefer making "moral" and "witty saying oriented" blog posts about the subject ...
A bit sad ..

The comments to this entry are closed.