Leanan, thanks for the link.  I have always wondered why a certain type of graph is always done for NG fields but never for oil fields. The one I am talking about is this, from Jerome's post:

If people could see this effect on oil fields, we could better explain the situation for oil as well.
Maybe oil wells do not work like that.
At least for the UK, you can see a similar graph for the oil production here:  http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/06_Analysis_of_UK_oil_production.pdf (page 6 and 7). The data only runs till 2000 though. But there is a different color for each oilfield (there are around 260). The graph is pretty impressive, by the way. You understand much better the major problems that the uk oil production is facing.

It would be convenient to group oilfields by their starting year of production, like the graph you show of NG. The data of each oilfield updated is available here: http://www.og.dti.gov.uk/pprs/full_production.htm . I have imported all the data with a program. So it would be fairly simple for me to do the graph you suggest. I will try to do it soon and post it.

Norway also has a web site with the same type of data. I will try to do the same thing for Norway.

Excellent, thank you. The graph for UK North Sea does condense everything into one graph.


That was back in  year 2000.
Does anyone have a similar graph for year 2004-2005 to see how the predictions for the "future" (beyond 2000) actually worked out? And also is there a discoveries graph that shows how those correlate to actual productions in the UK?
Like this

As of 2004 it was down ~66% from peak. The prediction said 50% by 2005. Not bad, IMO.

Here is an overlap of a trace (red) of Mobjectivist's yellow dots (assumed to be actual production points) and the year 2000 prediction curve. Pretty close. (The yellow verticals are for aligning the year markers at 1980, 1990, 2000)