<The ASPO plot The Oil Drum Physics in the Economy I: Physical Work>

31 comments on Simmons: Saudi Oil Shock Imminent

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Halfin on September 12, 2005 - 3:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
So if we're OK in a year can we stop paying attention to Simmons any more? In other words, are any of these predictions falsifiable?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on September 12, 2005 - 4:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Probably not that quickly. If we're ok in a year and then Saudi production goes in the toilet in 2007, I think people would say Simmons was mostly right. If you look at what he actually says, he is relatively nuanced in his statements (speaking of the probability of this and the chances of that).
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dave Cohen on September 12, 2005 - 4:29pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Honest folks, I don't see any new revelation from Matt Simmons in the lead article for this thread. I would agree that if there's no downturn in Saudi production from Ghawar by this time next year, Simmons will appear to be "crying wolf" and so will not be doing the peak oil community any favors. On the other hand, Stuart is also right that if there's a decline in 2007, Simmons' is mostly right. I sometimes wish he would be more temperate in his statements.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ericy on September 12, 2005 - 5:02pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The only thing new is the suggestion that the Saudis are overproducing.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on September 12, 2005 - 5:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
No, they are not falsifiable. That's the beauty of these predictions. If the Saudis don't go off a cliff, that just means we're in even more danger, and need to listen to Simmons even more. It is impossible for facts to damage his authority or credibility.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on September 12, 2005 - 10:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Here I completely disagree. If the Saudis were to allow a third party audit of their reserves and the results to be published in detail, we would all know the truth. Matt Simmons would be a hero or an idiot. The reason there are few useful facts is because of official government policy on the part of the government of Saudi Arabia and in no way is the fault of Matt Simmons.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on September 13, 2005 - 2:14am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Let me rephrase: It is impossible for facts to damage his authority or credibility, unless you let him call the shots.

Maybe Simmons should start with a more modest, intermediate goal -- such as opening up the ASPO database to a third party audit.

For those who are interested, a contrarian analysis of Matt Simmons is located here.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on September 13, 2005 - 6:50am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Well, that link doesn't work for me, but I had already found your site through AltEng. From what I have read, you believe in Peak Oil, but the rest of us are not worthy.  

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/ article #97 refers to Simmons

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on September 13, 2005 - 9:06am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I don't think much of your analysis. Calling someone names and pointing out that they don't agree with other people is useless as a form of analysis. You need to actually read his book and criticize the logic of his position if you are to make a useful contribution to the debate.

Personally, the striking things about Matt Simmons are 1) that I couldn't find major logical holes in his book when I read it, and 2) he has a track record of calling the situation right, rather than wrong. Here he is in 2000 pointing out the problems with North American natural gas supply before they were widely accepted, and the problems with electricity supply before the California electricity crisis.

And here is is correctly calling the peak in North Sea oilin 1999, at a time when very few agreed with him.

To me that's a track record that makes me listen very hard to what he has to say.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JD on September 13, 2005 - 5:26pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Stuart, the issue isn't Simmons' forecast of Saudi production. That point has already been addressed by Husseini. The issue is whether we should drill ANWR to prop up the status quo. I don't need to read any "analysis" by Simmons to weigh in on that question. It's not an analytical issue; it's political.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on September 13, 2005 - 6:05pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Will there be enough oil/bitumen produced to prop up the status quo?  Will it get here soon enough?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather it will be ten years until we see anything from ANWR, and even with Sadad al-Husseini's assurances, that seems to be be too little, too late for any propping up of the status quo.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on September 13, 2005 - 10:32pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I was referring to the post on your blog that you linked where you referred to Simmons as "speaking out of his ass". I didn't think you justified such a strong statement at all well.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

31 comments on Simmons: Saudi Oil Shock Imminent

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version