tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post5598920543785778934..comments2023-03-13T01:06:40.269-07:00Comments on BountifulEnergy: We do not face rapid declines of oilTomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18396160316791132955noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post-80649899477004592222014-11-08T11:57:41.886-08:002014-11-08T11:57:41.886-08:00Hi Irv,
"but the best estimates are that it ...Hi Irv,<br /><br />"but the best estimates are that it needs to be above 15 or 20 for a society like ours to function. When EROEI drops below that level, economic growth peters out."<br /><br />Those numbers are not the "best estimates". Those numbers were pulled out of thin air by members of a fringe movement.<br /><br />In fact, civilization can continue growing with any source of energy that produces more than it consumed.<br /><br />I've already addressed the errors of ERoEI repeatedly on this site.<br /><br />-Tom S<br />Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18396160316791132955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post-3464161343160886362013-04-02T17:22:30.491-07:002013-04-02T17:22:30.491-07:00Google EROEI -- energy returned on energy invested...Google EROEI -- energy returned on energy invested. That more expensive oil also takes more energy to acquire and at some point just isn't worth the effort. You might think that would be when EROEI is below 1, but the best estimates are that it needs to be above 15 or 20 for a society like ours to function. When EROEI drops below that level, economic growth peters out. Sound familiar? Irv Millshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08030800457536589003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post-91159341080544370422012-01-07T20:21:27.339-08:002012-01-07T20:21:27.339-08:00Tom - I'm curious to hear your response to Jef...Tom - I'm curious to hear your response to Jeffrey Brown's <a href="http://www.aspousa.org/index.php/2010/10/peak-oil-versus-peak-exports/" rel="nofollow">article</a> from last year that made the following important point (graph in the link):<br /><br /><i>Figure One shows the 1972 Texas oil production peak lined up with the 1999 North Sea oil production peak (crude + condensate in both cases). These two regions were developed by private companies, using the best available technology, with virtually no restrictions on drilling, yet both regions show clearly defined production peaks. Furthermore, the initial declines in both cases corresponded to sharply rising oil prices. These two examples, which jointly accounted for about 9% of global cumulative crude oil production through 2005, show that, contrary to conventional wisdom, Peaks Happen, even in the best of circumstances.</i><br /><br />That is, if peaks happen even when there's plenty of money, technology, etc. available in large oil regions, how is it possible for there not to be an aggregate decline given that the aggregate is just the sum of the regions.barathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17985128800963474684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post-69866882765610394782011-10-27T12:53:54.136-07:002011-10-27T12:53:54.136-07:00So, as long as we keep creating money out of thin ...So, as long as we keep creating money out of thin air, we will have more oil. Only millionaires will be able to afford it, but who cares? Poor people need a good kick in the teeth to get them motivated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7005412100005882053.post-57183657599610835052011-10-27T07:29:57.154-07:002011-10-27T07:29:57.154-07:00At $80/barrel, there is a certain amount of oil re...<i> At $80/barrel, there is a certain amount of oil remaining. At $150/barrel, there is far more oil remaining. And so on. The reason is because we leave most oil in the ground, since it's uneconomical to extract at current prices. As prices increase, the amount of economically extractable oil increases also. So there is no single "amount" of oil remaining. The amount depends upon price.</i><br /><br />Tom help me understand this. Peak oil has never been about running out of oil, but running out of extractable oil. You're correct in saying that the higher the price, the more attractive the harder pockets of oil become. Therein lies the dilemma. If at $80 dollars there is some, and then $150 there is a lot more, then surely theres shit loads at $1000 a barrel...will economies function at these prices is a different question! As you say the higher the price the more unattractive oil becomes but it isnt really clear as to whether a flailing economic system under these conditions can make a smooth transition to alternatives. <br /><br /> I was under the impression that in 2008 oil approached $150 before the global economy went wonky. Every post WWII recession, (with one exception) was preceded by an increase in oil prices, and every oil market disruption (with one exception) was followed by an economic recession (http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2011/01/oil_shocks_and_2.html). Surely these market disruptions disrupt the smooth transition to other cleaner sources.<br /><br />Interesting related link: http://kickingthegasoline.com/financial-justification/the-peak-oil-downside-will-be-steeper-than-the-upside<br /><br />Finally it wouldnt be one of my posts without a bit of environmental comment thrown in too: the harder to reach oil is generally dirtier and more polluting, which isn't a good thing. Deep water drilling, shale and tar-sands are far from a desirable outcome (see H2Oil and Gasland)greenJamienoreply@blogger.com