Jet Fuel Prices WILL Be Climbing A LOT, and Soon

[Phaedrus]

"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine"
--Michael Stipe

 

[jetflyer]

"Peak Oil is a GEOLOGICAL PHENOMENON!!"

So if we had drilled in ANWR in 1968, is it possible in your myopic world that U.S. oil production would have peaked in 1973 instead?

You're finally getting it.

Yes. Right after 1970, Prudhoe Bay, other Alaskan oil, and the Gulf of Mexico oil fields came online and U.S. oil production continued to decline.

The declines from U.S. onshore fields were just too much to overcome even with the new fields coming online.
(Sounds like today's global situation huh?)

Prudhoe Bay provided at a peak 1.4 Million Barrels per day and now produces less than 400,000 bpd.

ANWR is going to produce 10 years after it is given the go ahead 1 MBD for 20 years. This will not even make up for the declines in Mexico and Saudi Arabia last year alone.

Sky God Answer this: So since Onshore Oil field production in the Contiguous 48 states is down from 10 mbd to less than 4 mbd, can the U.S. flood the market any day now with an extra 6 million barrels of oil a day???

According to your economic theory yes, since Peak Oil is not a geological event.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

Not if it means higher profits for the oil companies.

 

[T-Bags]

Jetty,
Here are a few clips from another, far more liberal, energy economist. If you have trouble with the bigger words, I'll help you out...

http://zfacts.com/p/62.html

http://zfacts.com/p/313.html

 

[jetflyer]

Sky God Answer this: So since Onshore Oil field production in the Contiguous 48 states is down from 10 mbd to less than 4 mbd, can the U.S. flood the market any day now with an extra 6 million barrels of oil a day???

According to your economic theory yes, since Peak Oil is not a geological event.

Answer the above questions. Why are you afraid to answer the questions?

Also: Why did the U.S. decide to produce 6 mbd less? (This is Six ANWR's)


Jet

 

[jetflyer]

T-Bags,

You confuse me.

Do you not understand what scalability is?

Do you know what crash programs for the Oil Sands say they can produce in MBD in 2016?

Do you know how long it takes and how much money it takes to build a Coal to Oil Plant that produces 50,000bpd?

Do you not understand the Export Land Model?

I really don't think you know the answers to any of these. If you did we wouldn't be having this conversation that you're engaging me in.

You would also respect my viewpoints a lot more and would stop belittling me.

Jet

 

[T-Bags]

Answer the above questions. Why are you afraid to answer the questions?

Also: Why did the U.S. decide to produce 6 mbd less? (This is Six ANWR's)


Jet

Yes, the U.S. could flood the market with 6 million BPD. We have about 750 MB just sitting in Salt Caverns....

The U.S. didn't decide to produce 6 million BPD less oil, the OIL COMPANIES DID!! Why? Because on balance, it would have costs them MORE to produce the oil than THEY COULD HAVE SOLD IT FOR, or in their mind, the RISK of a price collapse during the period of positive cash flow of a given project resulted in the use of a discout rate that gave the project adverse economics. And what did the price of oil do? IT WENT DOWN.

So lets do this slowly.... Peak oil production PER PERSON WAS IN 1978! Since then OIL PRICES HAVE GONE DOWN. SINCE THEN, PER CAPITA GDP WENT UP. SINCE THEN, I GOT FATTER DUE TO GLUTTENY. SINCE THEN I GOT A BIGGER, FASTER, TRUCK.

Again, slowly. On average, per capita oil use is LOWER than in 1978, but LIFE is BETTER. FOOD PRODUCTION IS HIGHER. What part don't you understand? The Geology of oil is NOT a problem. We will NEVER USE ALL THE WORLD'S OIL

 

[jetflyer]

I think the smartest thing you just said was "We'll never use all the world's oil" Well yeah....

Way to dodge my question. Of course we could dump the 700 MB that are in the salt caverns. That wasn't my question.

Do you agree that the 6 mbd decline in US onshore oil production was because the US passed peak oil in 1970?? For the second time why are you afraid to answer this.

The fact is that even with EOR most of the oil production is LOST forever. The internal pressures in the fields are so gone that even EOR will not ever get back the 6 mbd of lost production. You may be able to get back 1 mbd but probably not more.

Peak Oil is geological for Mexico as well:
The Cantarell Field in Mexico produced 2,000,000bpd at the beginning of 2006 with EXPENSIVE, EXPENSIVE NITROGEN INJECTION used as the EOR method. At the end of 2006 Cantarell was producing 1,500,000bpd. NITROGEN INJECTION CONTINUES.

Did the Mexican oil company PEMEX CHOOSE to pump 500,000bpd less oil in 2006?
According to you, YES!!!! BS.

You're just proving yourself to be a retard by continuing to dodge these questions.

Peak Oil is geological for an individual oil field. Peak Oil is geological for an individual country.

Do you think Great Britain has chosen to have their North Sea Oil production decline by 14% per year? They are using every EXPENSIVE, EXPENSIVE EOR technique they can think of.

Read this from a Coal to Oil website on the potential of Coal to Oil to prevent Peak Oil:
http://www.ultracleanfuels.com/html/peaking.htm

If peak oil is now, there will be a liquid fuel shortage while mitigation measures are ramped up.
After 10 years of Crash Programs:
-Vehicle Efficiency will contribute the equivalency of 2 mbd of oil
-Gas to Liquids will contribute the equivalency of 2 mbd of oil
-Heavy Oil/Oil Sands will contribute the equivalency of 8 mbd of oil
-Coal Liquids will contribute the equivalency of 5 mbd of oil
-Enhanced oil recovery will contribute the equiavalency of 3 mbd of oil

You seem to have this fantasy that 200 MBD of coal to oil can be brought to market tomorrow if the money was there.

There is something called scalability of time that you don't understand. How fast can these things be increased? How fast can the new coal mining be brought online? How fast can the coal-to-oil plants be built?

YOU ARE WRONG T-Bags about scalabilty. Even if your credentials are great, this doesn't mean you're right,
Jet

 

[jetflyer]

T-Bags,

Do you also agree that the faster the decline of current fields the harder mitigation will be?

Do you agree that an 8% decline in current fields will be a lot harder to mitigate with alternatives than a 2% decline.

The scary thing is that since EOR is being used on so many fields to extend the peaks like the North Sea, Ghawar, Australia, Mexico, etc. that we're starting to see decline rates reaching the mid-to-upper teens.

What really matters after peak is the decline rate in current fields.

Jet

 

[T-Bags]

From it's "peak" in 1979, worldwide oil production dropped 15% to hit a low in 1983. 15%!!!! It didn't reach the 1979 level again until 1994. Did we all starve? NO. The notion of peak oil came from a statistical view of oil production, NOT from extensive studies of reserviors. That's where the Bell Curve reference comes from. I'm not disputing the notion that oil production may have peak, I'm saying IT DOESN'T MATTER. IT HASN'T MATTERED. Even among the true believers, I haven't seen any of them that predict that we'll wake up one morning to empty oil tanks. EVEN THEY see a gradual dropoff. RELAX, HAVE A DRINK!!