Fresh palatable water is the real future problem. Oil like coal will slowly evolve to something else.
Washington Capitulates: Peak Oil Is Real
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
Fresh palatable water is the real future problem. Oil like coal will slowly evolve to something else.
I agree the easy oil is coming to and end, but we will just pay more and life will go on. Oil will continue to be our main source of energy till someone comes up with something cheaper or we allow nuclear power to expand at a faster rate then it does. No reason to take 15-20 years to build a new nuclear power plant. Europe is approx. 80% nuclear powered. We build cities on earthquake fault lines, yet we hesitate to build nuclear power plants.
Lawrence Solomon: Endless oil
Posted: September 12, 2009, 1:50 AM by NP Editor
Russian research has shown that the Earth doesn’t need dinosaurs to produce oil
Except in Russia and Ukraine. What is to us a matter of scientific certainty is by no means accepted there. Many Russians and Ukrainians — no slouches in the hard sciences — have since the 1950s held that oil does not come exclusively, or even partly, from dinosaurs but is formed below the Earth’s 25-mile deep crust. This theory — first espoused in 1877 by Dmitri Mendeleev, who also developed the periodic table — was rejected by geologists of the day because he postulated that the Earth’s crust had deep faults, an idea then considered absurd. Mendeleev wouldn’t be vindicated by his countrymen until after the Second World War when the then-Soviet Union, shut out of the Middle East and with scant petroleum reserves of its own, embarked on a crash program to develop a petroleum industry that would allow it to fend off the military and economic challenges posed by the West.
Today, Russians laugh at our peak oil theories as they explore, and find, the bounty in the bowels of the Earth. Russia’s reserves have been climbing steadily — according to BP’s annual survey, they stood at 45 billion barrels in 2001, 69 billion barrels in 2004, and 80 billion barrels of late, making Russia an oil superpower that this year produced more oil than Saudi Arabia. Some oil auditing firms estimate Russia’s reserves at up to 200 billion barrels. Despite Russia’s success in exploration, most of those in the west who have known about the Russian-Ukrainian theories have dismissed them as beyond the Pale. This week, the Russian Pale can be found awfully close to home.
In a study published in Nature Geoscience, researchers from the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Sweden and the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington joined colleagues at the Lomonosov Moscow State Academy of Fine Chemical Technology in publishing evidence that hydrocarbons can be produced 40 to 95 miles beneath the surface of the Earth. At these depths — in what’s known as Earth’s Upper Mantle — high temperatures and intense pressures combine to generate hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons then migrate toward the surface of the Earth through fissures in the Earth’s crust, sometimes feeding existing pools of oil, sometimes creating entirely new ones. According to Sweden’s Royal Institute, “fossils of animals and plants are not necessary to generate raw oil and natural gas. This result is extremely radical as it means that it will be much easier to find these energy sources and that they may be located all over the world.”
The Institute’s lead author, Vladimir Kutcherov, Professor at the KTH Department of Energy Technology, is even more brash at the implications of his findings: “With the help of our research we even know where oil could be found in Sweden!” he delights. Kutcherov’s technique involves dividing the world into a fine-meshed grid that maps cracks (or migration channels) under the Earth’s crust, through which the hydrocarbons can bubble up to the surface. His advice: Drill where the cracks meet. Doing this, he predicts, will dramatically reduce the likelihood of dry wells. Kutcherov expects the success rate of drillers to more than triple, from 20% to 70%, saving billions in exploration costs while opening up vast new areas of the planet — most of which has never been deemed to have promise — to exploration.
The Nature study follows Kutcherov’s previous work, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that created hydrocarbons out of water, calcium carbonate and iron — products in the Earth’s mantle. By superheating his ingredients in a pressure chamber at 30,000 times atmospheric pressure, simulating the conditions in the Earth’s mantle, Kutcherov’s alchemy converted 1.5% of his concoction into hydrocarbons — gases such as methane as well as components of heavier oils. The implication of this research, which suggests that hydrocarbons are continuously generated through natural processes? Petroleum is a sustainable resource that will last as long as Planet Earth.
Posted: September 12, 2009, 1:50 AM by NP Editor
Russian research has shown that the Earth doesn’t need dinosaurs to produce oil
By Lawrence Solomon
Do dead dinosaurs fuel our cars? The assumption that they do, along with other dead matter thought to have formed what are known as fossil fuels, has been an article of faith for centuries. Our geologists are taught fossil fuel theory in our schools; our energy companies search for fossil fuels by divining where the dinosaurs lay down and died. Sooner or later, we will run out of liquefied dinosaurs and be forced to turn to either nuclear or renewable fuels, virtually everyone believes.Except in Russia and Ukraine. What is to us a matter of scientific certainty is by no means accepted there. Many Russians and Ukrainians — no slouches in the hard sciences — have since the 1950s held that oil does not come exclusively, or even partly, from dinosaurs but is formed below the Earth’s 25-mile deep crust. This theory — first espoused in 1877 by Dmitri Mendeleev, who also developed the periodic table — was rejected by geologists of the day because he postulated that the Earth’s crust had deep faults, an idea then considered absurd. Mendeleev wouldn’t be vindicated by his countrymen until after the Second World War when the then-Soviet Union, shut out of the Middle East and with scant petroleum reserves of its own, embarked on a crash program to develop a petroleum industry that would allow it to fend off the military and economic challenges posed by the West.
Today, Russians laugh at our peak oil theories as they explore, and find, the bounty in the bowels of the Earth. Russia’s reserves have been climbing steadily — according to BP’s annual survey, they stood at 45 billion barrels in 2001, 69 billion barrels in 2004, and 80 billion barrels of late, making Russia an oil superpower that this year produced more oil than Saudi Arabia. Some oil auditing firms estimate Russia’s reserves at up to 200 billion barrels. Despite Russia’s success in exploration, most of those in the west who have known about the Russian-Ukrainian theories have dismissed them as beyond the Pale. This week, the Russian Pale can be found awfully close to home.
In a study published in Nature Geoscience, researchers from the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Sweden and the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington joined colleagues at the Lomonosov Moscow State Academy of Fine Chemical Technology in publishing evidence that hydrocarbons can be produced 40 to 95 miles beneath the surface of the Earth. At these depths — in what’s known as Earth’s Upper Mantle — high temperatures and intense pressures combine to generate hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons then migrate toward the surface of the Earth through fissures in the Earth’s crust, sometimes feeding existing pools of oil, sometimes creating entirely new ones. According to Sweden’s Royal Institute, “fossils of animals and plants are not necessary to generate raw oil and natural gas. This result is extremely radical as it means that it will be much easier to find these energy sources and that they may be located all over the world.”
The Institute’s lead author, Vladimir Kutcherov, Professor at the KTH Department of Energy Technology, is even more brash at the implications of his findings: “With the help of our research we even know where oil could be found in Sweden!” he delights. Kutcherov’s technique involves dividing the world into a fine-meshed grid that maps cracks (or migration channels) under the Earth’s crust, through which the hydrocarbons can bubble up to the surface. His advice: Drill where the cracks meet. Doing this, he predicts, will dramatically reduce the likelihood of dry wells. Kutcherov expects the success rate of drillers to more than triple, from 20% to 70%, saving billions in exploration costs while opening up vast new areas of the planet — most of which has never been deemed to have promise — to exploration.
The Nature study follows Kutcherov’s previous work, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that created hydrocarbons out of water, calcium carbonate and iron — products in the Earth’s mantle. By superheating his ingredients in a pressure chamber at 30,000 times atmospheric pressure, simulating the conditions in the Earth’s mantle, Kutcherov’s alchemy converted 1.5% of his concoction into hydrocarbons — gases such as methane as well as components of heavier oils. The implication of this research, which suggests that hydrocarbons are continuously generated through natural processes? Petroleum is a sustainable resource that will last as long as Planet Earth.
No, of course not. Earth needs algae and zooplankton to form oil.
Even if the Earth does produce abiogenic oil, it's still a geologic process, which for all intents and purposes makes it a non-renewable resource.
Great! Just what we need, more of the same stupidity. So what if we have all the oil in the world? We don't need the resulting polution, we don't need the mentality of big oil running the world and we don't need to be slaves to them.
The Williston Basin is old news.
The Bakken is a formation in the Williston Basin has been drilled since the fifties.
Half of the Bakken play is in Canada.
The boys in Estevan ( The Estevan Mafia) have been banging down wells in the formation for dozens of years.
Try telling them it's a "new" discovery.
Extended reach horizontal drilling, multilateral horizontals and staged frac's have been going on there forever.
Well, since the early 90's anyway.
USGS figures about 2 to 3 billion BBL's recoverable.
And right you are Karrie, Bakken wells are expensive to drill, tend to be poor producers and deplete out quick.
It's old news about an old field that contains a lot of marginal wells.
Thats why the big dogs like Shell and BP got out of the Bakken.
Too much work for too little return.
Trex
What a crock.
Another breathless article cobbled together out of bits and pieces of fact and fiction.
Quote"Today, Russians laugh at our peak oil theories as they explore, and find, the bounty in the bowels of the Earth. Russia’s reserves have been climbing steadily — according to BP’s annual survey, they stood at 45 billion barrels in 2001, 69 billion barrels in 2004, and 80 billion barrels of late, making Russia an oil superpower that this year produced more oil than Saudi Arabia.
Unquote.
Russians don't explore and find they hire westerners with the skills and technology to explore and find for them.
They can't do it themselves they have neither the skill, the engineering capacity or the existing technology.
The seismic, the drilling rigs, the engineering, the service companies all come from the West.
All the new fields are joint Russian-Multinational oil company operations.
The Russians own the land.
The multinationals (The West) find, drill, complete and monitor the production.
So I fail to see why they would "laugh" about that.
Russian oil output has peaked because Western companies are tired of being screwed over by Russian Mafia and are starting to cut back development.
Granted it's Russia's oil but as soon as the multinationals quit developing it for them production plateau's which it now has.
Russian Oil reserves are about 60 billion BBLs, Canadian reserves by comparison are around 175 billion BBLs.
So that about puts Russian oil in perspective.
Russia does have the largest gas reserves in the world however that's a different kettle of fish.
quote:In a study published in Nature Geoscience, researchers from the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Sweden and the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of Washington joined colleagues at the Lomonosov Moscow State Academy of Fine Chemical Technology in publishing evidence that hydrocarbons can be produced 40 to 95 miles beneath the surface of the Earth. At these depths — in what’s known as Earth’s Upper Mantle — high temperatures and intense pressures combine to generate hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons then migrate toward the surface of the Earth through fissures in the Earth’s crust, sometimes feeding existing pools of oil, sometimes creating entirely new ones. According to Sweden’s Royal Institute, “fossils of animals and plants are not necessary to generate raw oil and natural gas. This result is extremely radical as it means that it will be much easier to find these energy sources and that they may be located all over the world.”
unquote.
Hogwash.
Every single oil field in Russia is conventionally sourced and trapped.
To repeat myself every single producing oil field in Russia today is geologically understood, delineated and defined as conventionally sourced oil.
Just about all the new fields (like Sakhalin) were defined and produced by Western multinationals and their Western geologists and geophysicists.
So the above theory has not resulted in one, not one, drop of oil actually being produced.
Anywhere let alone Russia.
You will notice the quotes about unconventionally sourced oil flip back and forth between the terms "oil" and "hydrocarbons"
Thats because hydrocarbons can be created deep in the bowels of the earth.
Just not oil.
Oil cannot be created deeper than the existence of sedimentary marine shales.
Period.
Methane can be created in swamps by bacterial action.
Hydrocarbon cow farts and belches are a massive contributor methane in the atmosphere.
Even humans after a long night of cheap draft, pickled eggs and pizza can create hydrocarbon bearing gases.
No oil though.
So the day one drop, just one drop, of "deep" unconventionally sourced oil gets produced is the day I start to believe.
Trex.
Cliff I so wish you were right. I can in all honesty tell you that I cannot afford to buy a car that does not run on gasoline. Our gas went up yesterday to $1.10 a litre (call me a liar for a tenth of a cent). I know - it's been higher. I need my car to get to work. My husband needs a vehicle to get to work. We both work different hours in different directions. Our entertainment is the camping we do. Again - to do that, we need our truck (hubby's mode of trans.)so again we need gasoline. We do what the rest are doing now - we have staycations instead of vacations. We travel anywhere from 15 min to a half hour from home and have our vacation in our trailer. Nearly every person in the campground is from our own city or Victoria. Since the Ferries need gasoline to operate they have raised the rates (and their wages) to the point that "Staycations" have become a necessity. To get off the Island we need the Ferry so most of us choose not to get off. There isn't anything we need to leave for unless we want to visit family on the mainland. The oil companies have made sure we are dependent on oil one way or another.
I have no idea if peak oil is correct or not. However, here is someone who thinks not.
The New York Times > Log In
Who do you think runs the government? How many oil lobbyists are there for every politician? Who pays their election campaigns? Do you think Mulroney was the only politician that got paper bags full of money or off shore bank accounts set up in their name?
Governments are puppet shows.
Trex is such a reality check killer. Russians aboitic oil. lol
Daniel Yergin of CERA keeps stating things are fine. He keeps predicting $30 per bbl oil. There is a joke I read in one article that peak oilers call $36 oil a
"Yergin". We're at about 2 Yergins now and not too long we got over 4 Yergins. And the future seems upward. We're stuck at about 85 million bbl per day production. We'll see if it rises as the world economy recovers.
Daniel Yergin of CERA keeps stating things are fine. He keeps predicting $30 per bbl oil. There is a joke I read in one article that peak oilers call $36 oil a
"Yergin". We're at about 2 Yergins now and not too long we got over 4 Yergins. And the future seems upward. We're stuck at about 85 million bbl per day production. We'll see if it rises as the world economy recovers.
An interesting few paragraphs how finding energy in the future is going to get harder.
HoweStreet.com - The Source for Market Opinions
The key to his whole argument rests on the current replacement cost curve for world oil. The average marginal cost to produce 84 million barrels of oil per day – the current demand – is $70 a barrel. In other words, if the oil price falls below that level and stays there for a while, marginal production becomes uneconomic…which means that production would be certain to fall.
Furthermore, the cost of production continues to rise. Less than a decade ago, the marginal cost was only $25 a barrel. So the whole curve has been shifting upward over time.
There is also a kind of feedback loop here. The biggest cost to produce oil is the price of steel and the price of oil itself. So as oil prices go higher, it means extraction costs also go up. The return we get on energy invested, or EROEI, is another element in decline. In 1930s, the return was greater than 100:1. By the 1970s, it slipped to 30:1. Today, the “energy return on energy invested” is in the mid-teens. It seems clear we’ll spend even more energy on to get energy in the future.
HoweStreet.com - The Source for Market Opinions
The key to his whole argument rests on the current replacement cost curve for world oil. The average marginal cost to produce 84 million barrels of oil per day – the current demand – is $70 a barrel. In other words, if the oil price falls below that level and stays there for a while, marginal production becomes uneconomic…which means that production would be certain to fall.
Furthermore, the cost of production continues to rise. Less than a decade ago, the marginal cost was only $25 a barrel. So the whole curve has been shifting upward over time.
There is also a kind of feedback loop here. The biggest cost to produce oil is the price of steel and the price of oil itself. So as oil prices go higher, it means extraction costs also go up. The return we get on energy invested, or EROEI, is another element in decline. In 1930s, the return was greater than 100:1. By the 1970s, it slipped to 30:1. Today, the “energy return on energy invested” is in the mid-teens. It seems clear we’ll spend even more energy on to get energy in the future.
At least THAT kind of energy. This seems fine to me.
Soon I will be using electricity and synthetic lubes.