![]() | More on the Systematics of Hubbert Linearisation | The Oil Drum: Europe | Sixth Annual ASPO Conference – Cork, Ireland | ![]() |
69 comments on The Amazing Power of King Hubbert(...?)
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
69 comments on The Amazing Power of King Hubbert(...?)
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Blogroll
- ASPO The official site of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas.
- Energy Bulletin Clearing house for news regarding the peak in global energy supply.
- PowerSwitch Dedicated to raising awareness & discussion of the impending & permanent decline of cheap oil & gas supply.
- ODAC Oil Depletion Analysis Centre working to raise awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.
- Global Public Media Public service broadcasting for a post carbon world.
- Post Carbon Institute Learning to live in a low energy world.
- PeakOil.com US site and forum to educate and promote awareness of global hydrocarbon depletion.
- FEASTA The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability
- Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) This website describes an effective and fair response both to climate change and oil/gas depletion
Other Blogs
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.





GAIA Host Collective
You can sum up this post in the following way:
Appart from this specific tweaking of HL to accommodate restricted production like in the Saudi case, Web pointed out in the previous post that HL is simply a heuristic – there’s no certainty that production will follow a symmetric curve.
In fact most oil producing regions do not yield symmetric curves. But the logistic analysis, due to its simplicity and soundness, is IMO a valid tool to have a sense of when a peak might occur.
And notwithstanding an erroneous observation that we may have peaked in 2000, Deffeyes' prediction, based on HL, never varied, to-wit, a world crude oil peak between 2004 and 2008, most likely in 2005.
Based on EIA data, world crude oil production (C+C) is down about one mbpd or so from its May, 2005 peak.
Question please. I have no qualification to comment.
If the U.S. Government and its allies succeed in eliminating all opposition to their policies in Iraq, and at the same time, succeed in transforming, co-opting or eliminating opposition in Iran, thereby allowing "efficient" market forces to develop the Persian Gulf region -- then what will be the effect on the total world production of petroleum and gas? Does it change the total URR? How long could present production and consumption proceed in the absence of meaningful opposition by the Arab and Persian worlds? Would a total U.S./European/Corporate victory really be meaningful to the folks who are promoting the war, or would it be a Pyrrhic victory at best?
Another way of asking the question is, if I want to keep driving my SUV and heating my McMansion, am I better off paying foreign powers whatever they ask for their oil, or am I better off paying my taxes to the American Government to go get it for me? Does anything we do make any difference, and is there enough oil in the Middle East to justify all the killing and destruction?
For some time, I have been expecting Bush/Cheney to come out of the "Peak Oil Closet" and admit that they want the US keep a large US ground force in the Middle East, in order to "protect" Middle East oil fields from takeovers by Iran and/or the terrorists. As they tiptoe out of the Peak Oil Closet, I actually expect Bush's domestic approval ratings to slightly increase.
If the US is disliked now, just wait until the US starts using the implied threat of military force to ensure that crude oil keeps flowing to the US (which has twice the per capita energy consumption as the EU).
In regard to the supply question, the big problem is the Export Land Model, where the combination of declining production and rapidly increasing domestic consumption in exporting countries, will cause a crash in exported liquids.
So, I recommend the following:
ELP Plan (April, 2007)
http://graphoilogy.blogspot.com/2007/04/elp-plan-economize-localize-prod...
Electrification of Transportation
http://www.energybulletin.net/14492.html
Streetcars 100 Years Ago
(if we did it in 1908, why can't we do it in 2008?)
http://www.familyoldphotos.com/tx/2c/chadbourne_street_trolley_san_an.ht...
Like you I can see Bush/Cheney tiptoe out of the "oil closet" but not the "peak oil closet." Denial of peak oil is required to send the message that sacrifices in the Middle East will be followed by another period of prosperity identical to today. This message is required to rally consumers behind a long-term military presence in the Middle East.
I would take the view that no amount of oil can justify the killing of 600,000 or more Iraqis, plus the propping up of ruthless dictators in the Middle East and Central Asia, to the great cost to the peoples of those countries.
Is driving an SUV to Wal-Mart that important? Three Days of the Condor indeed.
Of course, as this post demonstrates, all players would have to have been producing at capacity for the last 15 years for Mr. Deffeyes HL to be accurate. Since we know that several major players were not, we can safely assume that his figures will eventually prove to come up short.
Your theory is directly contradicted by the Texas/Lower 48 case history. Texas was gradually increasing production in the 10 years prior to its peak in 1972, when the RRC went to a 100% allowable, which corresponded to the final peak in production from the East Texas Field.
The Texas/Lower 48 case history was our basis for predicting an imminent decline in Saudi and world production.
In any case, it appears a near certainty that every oil field that has ever produced one mbpd or more of crude oil is now in decline, with only one definite one mbpd plus field on the horizon (peak production some time after 2020), Kashagan.
Peak Oil is basically the rise and fall of the big fields.
Texas developed, and in many cases, over developed every available major field. The same is not true for KSA or the world. Your analogy is lacking in this case.
I guess that's why Saudi and world crude oil production are both down from 2005.
So again, what's your recommendation? That we all buy Hummers and McMansions and party on, based on the assumption of an infinite rate of increase in the consumption of a finite energy resource base?
And yet, despite the 'voluntary decline', they are increasing their production by a few 100k bpd. Interesting...
158k bpd, hallelujah! Peak averted! Hummers for everyone!
Get back to us when they are producing over 9.6 mbd again.
Actually the production in the majority of cases has been maximized. You can verify this for yourself by comparing original URR estimates to the 507 giant/supergiant fields in the world (1% of all fields total) which produce 60% of all oil in the world. There is no need to even look at the smaller fields to see that the dominant factor is the giant/supergiant fields and that most of them have been maximized in production.
So as Euan has noted elsewhere, the URR is going to be low but not by as much as you try to insinuate.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Dr. Albert Bartlett
Into the Grey Zone
Ghawar could have produced over 15 million bpd, according to several people here at TOD. Did it ever produce 15 million bpd?
Clearly not.
Clearly you are incorrect.
Whoa, in rides the jackass! I said majority, not all. When you understand that difference, get back to me, little troll boy.
"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Dr. Albert Bartlett
Into the Grey Zone
Your case isn't helped by name calling, nor by ignoring the worlds largest oil field and basin...
In reality the "worlds largest oil field and basin" is just a statistical outlier in any decent model of global oil discovery and production.
You do realize that if Mr. Deffeyes is correct, this 'statistical outlier' represents almost 10% of all the oil we will ever produce. Clearly it shouldn't be considered at all! Typical TOD rhetoric though. WT can rant on all day about the lower 48, but a region of equal size such as KSA is an 'outlier'.
Big ones are rare. They fall in the tail of the distribution; evidently you have never seen a probability density function,
PartyGuy,
The changing political climate advances in technology and economics of the Texas Oil and Gas Industry over the last 105 years has had much lot to do with Texas development as political decisions have had with the development in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Much of it is field size distribution.
In the KSA 70% of the production came from the Ghawar complex, while Texas's largest field, East Texas had about 7% of the total Texas production. Ghwar has always been managed for maximum production by the major oil companies and their successor Aramco, and its discovery was after petroleum engineering had discovered basic principles of reservoir management like well spacing and chokeing back wells so they didn't cause reservoir damage. The first years of the East Texas field drilling and production was totally uncontrolled so huge amounts of economic waste occurred. The well density is 1 well for every 6 acres and oil prices fell to 10 cents a barrel in 1932.
The governor, Ross Sterling was a former president of the Humble Company (which became ExxonMobil eventually) and ended up sending in the Texas Rangers and the National Guard to shut in wells and enforce new state rules to limit production and raise prices. In essence the State of Texas acted like the OPEC cartel to limit production so that the producers made more money and the State collected more severance taxes for the same volume of oil.There's a great history of all this in a book called "The Last Boom" by Michael Halbouty and James Clark. For a shorter summary I'd also reccommend the "oil and gas industry" article in the Handbook of Texas Online.
The end result of the wild price gyrations was that many oilfields discovered before the East Texas field were abandoned too early, especially ones with heavy and sour oil. And, after the Texas peak Nixon put price controls on "old oil", or fields discovered before the tripling of prices after the first Arab embargo. All fields except the very best were sold by the big oil companies and they moved to offshore and foreign production because of the price distortions. Virtually no wells were worked because it took three times as much oil to reach pay-out as it did on new reservoirs. The 1990's crash in oil prices finished off most of the smaller independents, yet few people have much of an idea about the old, shallow fields and that's where the best chance of commercial production exists in the United States.I'm currently working on a couple of these prospects on old fields near Houston, but they exist all over the United States for tertiary development.
I think the conclusion I've come to is that Hubbert would be right in a universe withoutgeopolitical considerations or great technologica changes. The curves are elegant, and the thinking irrefutable. But, thats not our universe, so Stuart Staniford may be closer to the truth with his bottom up analysis.
Just think, if we all live another 94 years the answer wil be clear and obvious! Bob Ebersole
I disagree there Bob. We reckon that if Ghawar lay within the OECD that is would have peaked at over 15 mmbpd. Large segments lay undeveloped for decades (Haradh) and the developed segments have seen progressive drilling from flanks to crest over a period of decades. I's say that the ME supergiants have been developed to maximise recovery.
Which means that the reserves 'demonstrated' by the HL for Ghawar, if not KSA are greatly understated, seeing how over half their production comes from that one field. Its an interesting pickle. In one case, no one has suggested that Ghawar peaked when it achieved its highest production rate several decades ago of 5.6 million bpd. On the other hand, no one wants to admit the implications this has for our HL for their country...