The Oil Drum

66 comments on The Loglet Analysis

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

DIYer on September 6, 2006 - 7:49pm

I think that it may not make much better predictions than Hubbert's mono-peak.

My criticism: we are making rough predictions based on partial information. While this method focuses enough precision on the logistic curves to distinguish individual fields (or wells?) in logistic history, it does not predict the placement or size of future bumps in the tail.

The original, monomodal method is a crude approximation to historic data, but also a crude prediction of undiscovered sources, basing its expectations on the historic end of the bell curve.

For example the historic data through, say, 1956 would probably not anticipate the bump from the recently trumpeted finds in the deep areas of the GoM. But in a hand-waving sort of way, Hubbert does this by expecting a tapering-off rather than a logistic cliff as known reserves are consumed.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Khebab on September 6, 2006 - 10:20pm

My criticism: we are making rough predictions based on partial information. While this method focuses enough precision on the logistic curves to distinguish individual fields (or wells?) in logistic history, it does not predict the placement or size of future bumps in the tail.

Always moving the future is.
I agree with you, the loglets on the left have taken away some of the area from the main loglet in order to model the different oil shocks. The result is that the main loglet has a steeper decline.