Peak Oil is a Myth
People keep finding huge oil fields. Here’s another one.
The Brazilian government says huge new oil reserves discovered off its coast could turn the country into one of the biggest oil producers in the world.
Petrobras, Brazil’s national oil company, says it believes the offshore Tupi field has between 5bn and 8bn barrels of recoverable light oil.
A senior minister said Brazilian oil production had the potential to match that of Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.
Oil is a common thing, despite what the press and greens want you to believe.
Obviously, it would be great if we found something better to use, and we will. Lots of people are working on new energy sources. The race is on. But in the meantime, there’s plenty of oil out there.
So, peak oil is a myth, you say. The amount of oil we extract each year will increase forever? There is no limit?
Posted by on 11/10 at 10:30 PMA myth? Phew! That’s a relief! For a minute there I thought oil was touching $100US a barrel.
Posted by on 11/11 at 03:39 AMI sometimes wonder if the Earth is renewing the oil fields...we still don’t know everything there is to know about our own planet.
Anyhow, it’s good that field is far away from Comrade Chavez.Posted by Macker on 11/11 at 07:04 AMOil is being renewed. It’s not “fossil fuels.”
It’s created by a process of the earth. But more importantly, it’s all over the place. We keep finding huge oil fields when its supposed to be running out.The price of oil is tied to the value of the dollar, oil speculation, which has been dropping fast and “supply and demand.” Oil producers put a cap on output and they are reaping huge profits from these high barrel prices.
If more oil fields were opened up, such as the many fields we have in the US that are untouched (in Alaska and off the coasts), we would see a drop in oil prices also. Though new fields take years to come on line.
Oil speculation has a lot to do with the prices also. Fears of a new war with Iran is driving up the price, also.Posted by on 11/11 at 08:24 AMoil isn’t a fossil fuel? You have to be kidding me.
BTW, demand for oil is a big reason for the consistent increase in price, thanks to the development of China and India. Iran may have a bit to do with it, but even if the Iran problem was solved today, we would still see the upward trend in price.
The age of oil is over. Time to move on. The exxons and BPs of the world will try to stop progress at any cost (since it means their extinction), and we would be well suited to ignore them.
Posted by on 11/11 at 09:54 AMSalaam
Peak oil is not and cannot be a “myth”. It’s simply the point when more than half the world’s recoverable reserves have been recovered. As such, it will happen. The debate is when, not if. And, as a writer (a real one!) working in the Gulf, I have serious doubts about claimed reserves in the UAE and Saudi (they go up, arbitarily, ever year), as well as cost of extraction from fields which have basically been ruined by lazy extraction practices.
having said that, I’ve only written about oil and Middle East politics for, oh, ten years or so, and so am perfectly happy to bow to the greater knowledge of an identikit raving wingnut whose writing style betrays at least one extra chromosome.
I suggest Paul Roberts’ End of Oil as a good, fairly balanced, and impeccably researched starter on peak oil theories. Though his fears of oil hitting $50 a barrel is quite amusing these days,
Posted by on 11/11 at 10:47 AMverplanck,
I’m of the opinion (notice I say opinion, I am not claiming it’s a fact) that oil is abiotic. Scientists have assumed for decades that oil is a fossil fuel. But scientific theories are often disproved. I think this one may be.
This is why I think Peak Oil is a myth. It’s designed to make the oil companies richer. And that’s exactly what’s happening.
Your second point is also a factor, but not the only factor.
Posted by on 11/11 at 11:54 AMALinarabia,
You don’t do your argument any favors by calling me names. We like to keep it civil here. Please act like an adult.
Frankly, your tone discredits you. I am a real writer. I have made a lot of money as one. And whether you have written on a subject for ten years or not, doesn’t mean you are right.
The fact is, the Peak Oil argument has been used since the 1920s and we still keep finding huge oil fields.
But let me state, because you seem to not understand where I am coming from, I am not for us to keep using oil. What I am saying is, he oil prices are inflated and not based on reality. Peak Oil is an argument that favors oil producers. It elevates prioes.
Posted by on 11/11 at 12:03 PMOil is carbon-rich. How can it be made from inorganic rock?
The cites you posted do not prove much. The first merely states that the USSR uses abiotic theories in finding oil (which does nothing to prove the underlying reason why oil is formed). The second’s best argument (origin of methane) makes a questionable link between methane (CH4, a simple molecule with a single carbon and 4 hydrogens) and oil (a complex mix of aromatic and long-chain hydrocarbons).
I don’t get the logic that you use to say that the oil companies benefit from the concept of peak oil. How is it a long-term business plan to have your primary feedstock expire in the near future? I said it somewhere else, but it bears repeating: oil price increases are more from increased demand from India and China more than greedy oil executives.
Posted by on 11/11 at 01:23 PM“The price of oil is tied to the value of the dollar...”
That’s a laugh. I think you’ll find it’s the other way around.
It’s not for nothing that the Bushistas tried and failed to mount a coup in Venezuela.
Truth is, Saddam Hussein did have a weapon of mass destruction. He could have, and tried to, sell his oil for euros. That would have had disastrous effects on the American economy. So, we invaded a defenseless nation, crippled by ten years of embargoes. Iraqi oil once again started trading for dollars.
When Iran started talking about setting up their own bourse to sell their oil for euros, Bush’s cabal once again started beating the war drums.
You really don’t know squat, do you? Tell me, is that 20 years of writing experience, or are you going on 20?
Posted by on 11/11 at 03:44 PMJames Hudnall wrote:
“Oil is being renewed. It’s not “fossil fuels.” “OK, now I see. You claim oil is abiotic. What do you think, based on your research, is the RATE at which oil is “ being renewed” abiotically?
Can you express this rate in terms like barrels/day or tons/year, please?
Thanks
Posted by on 11/12 at 09:36 AMSince none of you are interested in a serious discussion, and since this post is talking about new oils fields being discovered, not abiotic oil, I’m going to cut his short.
I’m interested in debating the merits of oil, since I am all for new fuel sources.
Oil is more common than some people want is to think, because perceived scarcity keeps prices high. Just as diamonds are expensive because of price fixing, so is oil.
Posted by on 11/12 at 10:43 AMOK, so talking about the rate of discoveries only…
From your research, what is your estimate of the amount of new oil discovered every year, on average, for the last decade or so?
Does it come close to replacing the amount pumped out every year?
Posted by on 11/12 at 11:47 AMNo, we’re not talking about that.
I merely said large oil fields are being discovered all the time. A huge deep field was discovered in the Gulf of Mexico recently, this one in Brazil was discovered even more recently. Others have also been discovered and we have plenty of untapped fields in the US, not to mention enough oil from Shale to last 70 years.
All I am saying is Peak Oil isn’t even close to happening. We haven’t found all the oil out there. We aren’t even pumping all the fields we know about.
Posted by on 11/12 at 12:27 PMSorry, I’m a little slow today - I’m having a hard time following your logic.
If Peak Oil is the theory that the amount of oil we can extract increases to a maximum, then declines for geologic and economic reasons - then a rate of discovery that is less than our rate of extraction would seem very relevant. That would eventually cause a peak in extraction, as it is impossible to pump out oil that hasn’t been discovered.
So if you can show that recent discovery rates are greater than current extraction rates, that would be a good argument to support the title of your post.
Your second strategy could be to argue that we have huge untapped, already discovered reserves - enough to last for a very long time, even without discovering new fields. You make that claim in comment #14.
But doesn’t that just support the Peak Oil theory? If we don’t discover new fields to replace the currently depleting ones, won’t we eventually experience a decline in extraction, once our existing fields run out?
So I am back to the same question. Are these discoveries enough to replace our current extraction rates?
Posted by on 11/12 at 04:10 PMNo matter what I say, no matter what evidence I throw at you, you’ve already made up your mind. So this is a wasted conversation. I don’t have the time to do your homework for you. If you have an opinion, give me your cites.
Here’s one of many claims made on the web about peak oil:
Yet we keep finding oil fields that have 50 to 70 years worth of oil in them. The Earth is large and there are places like the North Pole yet to be fully explored. My contention is we are far, far away from any such event.
Does that clear it up for you?
I’m sure you disagree. But that’s my position.
Posted by on 11/12 at 04:49 PM“Yet we keep finding oil fields that have 50 to 70 years worth of oil in them.”
Are you referring to the Tupi fields? Because they won’t last very long at all. World oil consumption is now at 83 million barrels of oil per day (Official figures from the International Energy Outlook 2007). So lets take the bigger figure of 8 billion barrels and do the math. 8bn divided by 83m works out to about 96 days, if we’re lucky.
The Earth is indeed large but it’s resources are still finite and therefore our consumption of those resource simply cannot go on forever. That is an undeniable fact.
Posted by on 11/13 at 04:50 AMBrenda,
That’s the kind of voodoo math that peak oil believers subscribe to.
When has the entire world pulled its oil from one well solely?
How about never. How about there are thousands. Yes, thousands of wells around the globe. Many aren’t even tapped. Many aren’t even discovered yet.
They’ve been claiming peak oil since the 1920s. Yet they still keep finding new wells.
Will they run out someday? Possibly. But in 30 years, which is still within the margin of most peak oil estimates, we will have some other energy source moving cars and lighting homes. We already do.
Posted by on 11/13 at 08:42 AMLong division is “voodoo math”? I think you misunderstood me. What I said was that at present rates of consumption the Tupi oil fields will at best only be able to provide the world with 96 days worth of the oil it needs. The numbers may be big but the math is very easy to understand, 83 million barrels per day divided into 8bn barrels equals 96 days. There is a finite amount of oil and we will run out. That is a fact. I think that we will be at peak sooner than 30 years but if that is what you think I’m willing to go with it. That means that in your lifetime oil will peak.
Nor is there a good replacement. Remember, we not only have to find a totally new energy source, it has to be able to supply our need for steady growth. 83 million barrels every single day, without fail. Ethanol will not do this. Wind and solar will not either. Nuclear is our only hope and I frequently argue with with those on the left who are against it. But at least they have actual arguments, you don’t seem to have one.
You say you want polite discussion, do you really? So far I have been respectful, I just disagree with you. So prove my numbers are wrong. I don’t think you can, in fact, I know you can’t.
Posted by on 11/13 at 11:34 AM
Next entry: The Writer's Strike Explained
Previous entry: Scary
