DrumBeat: February 26, 2007
Posted by Leanan on February 26, 2007 - 10:04am
Topic: Miscellaneous
Iraqi Cabinet approves draft oil law
Iraq's government has agreed on a plan to divide the country's oil wealth and open the industry to international investment, a move seen as necessary to a political settlement of the nearly four-year-old war, ministers announced Monday.
Norsk Hydro makes significant new oil and gas find in Barents Sea
Norsk Hydro ASA has made a significant new oil and gas find in the Barents Sea which could dwarf the mammoth Goliath field nearby, according to Norwegian paper Dagens Naeringsliv.The paper, which quotes oil industry sources, says geological tests have show that the Nucula well could contain 300-500 mln barrels of oil.
Mexico Oil Barrel Costs near Double
Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) is currently facing an oil-extraction cost increase, from $2.20 to $4.20, per oil barrel, which means a 91-percent increase, according to statistics of the company.This increase adds to a decrease in production, volatility of prices and an important drop in success of drilling prospect wells, going from 57 to 42 percent, between 2000 and 2006.
Gore's `An Inconvenient Truth' Wins Best Documentary Oscar
The best-documentary award may further stir talk that Gore, a former Democratic senator from Tennessee and 2000 presidential candidate, might make another bid for the White House.
Following are figures on world energy supply by fuel in 2004 and projected supply in 2030, according to the International Energy Agency, energy adviser to the industrialised world.
States beat Washington to renewable energy
In Texas, home to some of the world's biggest oil companies, you might think the case for renewable energy would be tough to make. As it happened it was tough, but not impossible.It was simply a case of showing that technologies like massive wind turbines and solar roof shingles would do the job with costs that were in line with power generated from fossil fuel, said Jim Marston, of the Texas office of Environmental Defense, an advocacy group.
Climate draft allows spike in oil-sands emissions
Greenhouse-gas emissions from Alberta's oil sands would be allowed to rise dramatically under a draft version of the government's long-anticipated climate-change plan obtained by The Globe and Mail.The internal documents appear to underestimate significantly future oil-sands development as a way of producing more positive figures, said two environmentalists who analyzed the documents for The Globe.
Red tape thwarts wind revolution
They were hailed as our new energy source. But local objections have left wind farms in jeopardy.
How will thirst for biofuels affect global hunger?
Experts are talking about a permanent change in food economics."We're into a new structure of markets," says British food aid expert Edward Clay. "It could have profound implications on poor people."
Will Cellulosic Ethanol Take Off?
Fuel from grass and wood chips could be big in the next 10 years--if the government helps.
Europe and the IT industry seek energy-efficient data centres
The European Commission may ask data centre operators to become more energy efficient, and the IT industry - including recently formed body The Green Grid - is stepping up to the plate.
Boom seen for energy pipelines
China plans to extend its oil and gas pipelines by nearly 63 percent by 2010 to meet rising energy demand, according to the nation's key pipeline builder.
Iran Oil Offer Pleases Turkey But Not U.S.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki's offer to open natural gas and oil wells in Iran to Turkey, and even market the extra gas produced by these wells, was well received by Turkish energy circles.However, Mottaki's offer would give rise to new problems in Turkish-American relations said Turkish ministry of energy sources.
Turkey, Egypt agree to discuss oil crisis in Mediterranean
Turkish and Egyptian foreign ministers agreed to set up delegations to discuss an Egyptian-Greek Cypriot deal that paves the way for oil and gas exploration by Greek Cyprus in the eastern Mediterranean, diplomatic sources said yesterday. The agreement came during a meeting between FM Abdullah Gül and his Egyptian counterpart Ahmed Abdul Gheit.
Lithuania threatens to block EU-Russia agreement
Lithuanian officials, angered by Russia’s halting of oil supplies to the country, have said that they may join Poland in blocking talks on a new EU-Russia agreement.
Each oil crisis spells a new energy future
Some scientists assert that world oil resources are near their peak and may soon decline. However, reports of the US Geological Survey point out that peak oil production may not be as close as some have previously thought: Oil reserves are still about 42 times annual production levels. Long-term, alternative petroleum resources, such as the nearly 1 million barrels per day of crude oil that Canada now produces from oil sands and Venezuela's Orinoco tar sands, are promising.
Baltic gas pipeline sparks fears in Nordic countries
A gas pipeline project linking Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea that has already prompted an outcry in Poland is also raising environmental and national security concerns in the Nordic countries.
Emirates, MIT team up for green energy
Leaders of this major oil-producing Gulf country said Sunday they were plunging into the field of renewable energy, announcing a joint research venture into green energy with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Saving Starving Children Should Trump Global Warming Concerns
Nobel Peace Prize-nominee Al Gore told a New York University audience last September that, “Our children have a right to hold us to a higher standard when their future… is hanging in the balance.”But the future for 18,000 hungry children extends about 24 hours. What’s our planetary hero doing about that?
A Conservative Conservationist?
When George W. Bush, The Post and the insurance giant Lloyd's of London agree on something, it's obvious a new wind is blowing. The climate change debate is here to stay, and as America warms to the idea of environmental conservation on a grander scale, it's vital that conservatives change the debate before government regulation expands yet again and personal freedom is pushed closer toward extinction.
I'm tired of hearing people complain about the parking situation on campus. When more than 80 percent of students live within a mile of campus, there is no excuse for using your cars.
An Open Letter To Cindy Sheehan
We do not have the luxury anymore for shortsighted policies which benefit the few. Our reliance on cheap oil, our subsidization of corporate agribusiness, and our death-kiss to family farms have made us incredibly vulnerable to famine. Our unchecked consumption, our devotion to technology, and our car-dominated sprawling lifestyles have been ravaging the planet. Global warming is a huge threat to all of Earth's inhabitants, while peak oil threatens our economic system and will completely end the standard of living we have grown accustomed to. Ecologically speaking, the 6 billion people of the planet can likely not be sustained without cheap oil, and most certainly not without dramatic social reorganization.
Michael T Klare: Three US reasons to attack Iran
Some time this spring or summer, barring an unexpected turnaround by Tehran, US President George W Bush is likely to go on national television and announce that he has ordered US ships and aircraft to strike at military targets inside Iran.
Nigerians not benefiting from foreign debt cancellation, says CITN
He listed some of the woes recorded in the country in spite of increased earnings from crude oil sales at the international market to include: the pervasive infrastructural inadequacies which inhibited the operations of businesses and the attendant business closures; the escalating energy crisis and incessant increases in the prices of petroleum products which make the cost of manufactures goods very prohibitive and incomparable with those of other economies globally.
Global warming worries to boost renewables
Three decades after former U.S. President Jimmy Carter experimented with solar panels on the White House roof, grim U.N. warnings about climate change may kick-start wider global use of renewable energy.
Aramco signs Chinese refinery deal with Exxon, Sinopec
An Official at Saudi state oil giant Saudi Aramco announced that the company has signed an agreement with Exxon Mobil and China-based Sinopec for a project to triple the capacity of the Fujian oil refinery in southern China, the Peninsula reported.
Gas Rationing Begins At Some Stations As Fuel Shortage Worsens
A few Petro-Can stations that are running low on reserves are at least temporarily restricting drivers to just 75 litres [20 gallons] of fuel per fill-up.Pumps have been set to shut off once the magic number is reached and you won't be able to squeeze any more out of the nozzle.
In some instances, stations have completely run out of super, leaving high-end vehicle owners with no choice but to put in what regular they can get.
Gas prices up almost 13 cents nationwide
Gasoline prices soared nearly 13 cents a gallon on average nationwide in the past two weeks as the price of crude oil rose.
Shell cuts flow to 16 Oregon gas outlets
Shell Oil Co. has cut the flow of gasoline to 16 Oregon stations - 11 in the Eugene area - because the stations' operator is behind in its payments, a Shell spokeswoman said Friday.
Three papers published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society now report a significant milestone in hydrogen storage: the first definitive evidence for H2 binding to open metal coordination sites in nanoporous metal-organic frameworks (MOFs).
Uganda: $160 Million Palm Oil Project Stalls As Bidco Waits for Promised Land
One year down the line, Bidco Uganda Ltd is still waiting to get land for the Bugala nucleus palm oil project.Because of this delay, the project is expected to cost more than the initial estimate of $160 million.
Who Sucks Energy: Conventional or Organic Farming?
The London Telegraph dutifully reported the results of a study by the Manchester Business School, comparing energy use in organic and conventional farming systems. In a life cycle assessment - farm to fork - it found that many organic crops use more energy.
'End of Oil' author to speak at Embry-Riddle
"Every 24 hours," journalist Paul Roberts writes, "we burn 81 million barrels of crude."For oil producers, it's getting more difficult to locate the large fields where oil can be cheaply pumped. So high prices will likely continue, ultimately leading to change -- be it the rise of alternative fuels or a scaling back of our consumptive practices, says Roberts, author of "The End of Oil," a celebrated 2004 book on the subject.



Oil Glut Hidden by Rig Dearth Makes Drillers Good Bet
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ajvh5bpnZTPg&refer=h...
Left in the ground is not the same thing as recoverable.
Rick
right, interesting choice of words: "deposits"
Norsk Hydro makes significant new oil and gas find in Barents Sea
300-500mbl - million barrels, right?
That mean 4-7 days of world oil consumption. Or have I missed something?
Just to add to PeakPlus: my point is that a find of 0.3-0.5 GBl is a pin prick and that during earlier times nobody would have made a big deal of such a find.
What these journalists should do if they're at all professional is to put their reports into perspective: tell the readers how small the find is compared to previous years and let them know (1) what the hype threshold would have been back then (say, 1970s) and also, as PP notes, how many days that is in terms of either the world consumption or the US/EU consumption.
Bruce Scott in Duesseldorf
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
This hype and lack of basic math skills is also the reason why ANWR oil development continues to make the "addicted to oil" talking heads in Washington salivate.
ANWR is 25 times more than this discovery. That is enough to matter. It is almost inevitable that this area will be developed eventually. But it will be a lot more valuable post peak when we are all driving micro-mini cars or taking public transit.
ANWR may be or may not be 25 times more than this discovery. As I understand, the SWAGs for ANWR are just that, Scientific Wild-Ass Guesses.
There was a test well. That makes the estimate 10 gb better than a SWAG.
one test well 10 gb ??????? roflamo
I also understood that there had been one test well drilled in ANWR, but that the findings were not public.
I did a fairly intensive search of the EIA, though, and could not find any reference to the test well. Instead estimates of oil resources seemed to be based on comparisions of other areas with similar geographical structures.
Does anyone have any more solid data on what we actually know about potential resources in ANWR?
the 10 gb figure is apparently the mid range of usgs estimates, based on very limited information, making lots of assumptions and applying monte carlo simulation.
when i first started learning fortran* the prof had a saying "gigo" (garbage in garbage out)
* that was back in the days when programing was done on punch cards (shortly after we graduated from basic programing - the programs were saved on tickertape)
Here are a couple of links on KIC-1 'The only test well drilled in ANWR' with its results still held confidential by Chevron.
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnn11977.htm
http://anwrnews.blogspot.com/2005/04/aint-it-kic-story-of-anwrs-only-wel...
Like I said, SWAG, unless somebody has news of a more recent, and public, exploratory effort.
No realistic estimate that I can find goes beyond 7-800 kbd, and many go lower. Which is a lot, but still maxes out at just 3% of US daily use (today's consumption, no growth included).
And it's an optimistic number, and disregards the costs and uncertainties inherent in the operation. Look at what happens at the Sakhalin projects, how the deep freeze differs from normal extraction. Cost predictions double every 2 years, Putin gets angry etc etc.
If, for example, the ANWR oil turns out to be twice as expensive to extract as the oilsands, what will happen? What if the oilsands' oil gets twice as expensive as it is now? Hard to predict, except that the price'll move upward, not down.
All of these estimates are on the "happy"side, but we will be in for some nasty surprises.
What's going to happen to ethanol fuel prices if the cost of corn, or grains in general, quadruples?
Might as well get your investment advice in Vegas.
OK, I will buy 7.7 gb as a reasonable estimate. By the time this comes on line, the price will probably be well over $100/barrel. It's hard to imagine the technical/economic problems there being more challenging than deep water oil, or tar sands.
There is no environmental free lunch for oil (except conservation) The potential environmental nightmares for oil shale and stripmined tar sands are probably worse than ANWR. Chronic marine oil spills have a comparable impact.
That mean 4-7 days of world oil consumption. Or have I missed something?
I think that is correct. But 500 million barrel of oil also translates into 30 billion dollars (at the current price of $60 per barrel), and maybe thats the countervalue oil companies prefer to think of.
What I found strange is how this "news" made it all the way to Forbes. Because when I read the original article, I definitely got the impression that the 300-500mbl number was pure speculation ahead of the Norsk Hydro information that is to come out sometime in march. (I haven't had time to check out the printed edition though). Similarly there has been speculation that Eni's Goliat field may actually contain as much as 900mbl (from memory) rather than the present 250mbl.
Concerning "Each oil crisis spells a new energy future"...
Here's another journalist with the same problem... no perspective. He thinks this is like the 1970s where all we need is more effort and some new mentality. So what if there's a lot in the reserves? How much is there actually, in terms of days at current production? Just how much does this "shift the peak?
Not knowing the data or how to get it, I'll take a guess: of order 100 days.
Now, in the history sea-change that peak oil represents, what is 100 days? Or 500 days, for that matter?
The overall numbers involved in the currently rising demand (IEA says we need 120 Mb/day, right?) are such that these tiny considerations are meaningless and the journalists writing "upbeat" pieces about them are pretty unprofessional.
Bruce Scott in Duesseldorf
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
There's a great article in today's ASPO Peak Oil review:
Commentary: Smoke and mirrors
By Aage Figenschou
Any chance it could be an article on TOD?
The article is "Smoke and mirrors"
by Aage Figenschou is posted now on Energy Bulletin.
http://energybulletin.net/26474.html
Bart
Indonesia drops balls into mud volcano
But they've had a setback. Broken equipment is delaying the ball-dropping.
This is going to keep a small army of engineers busy for a while. Der Spiegel notes that "the plume occasionally contains larger amounts of hydrogen sulfide," which, I suspect means that the sediments themselves are rich in sulfides. They will have to figure out how to keep the sediments saturated or they'll have a huge acid-runoff problem. See some pictures here.
Saudi Royal says US energy independence a myth:
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlebusiness.aspx?type=ousiv&storyid=20...
He's correct.
That's why we're going out there to get it as we speak. Which, when you think it over, is also a form of independence: having the biggest guns.
As Homer so famously said in the Odyssey:
<
I guess I don't understand the value of having the "biggest guns" to fight constant, multiple, oil wars around the world when those big guns (our military) are the largest consumers of oil on the planet. How is that going to save US from peak oil? (Although it might save Dick and George's butts -at least for a while.) EROEI still applies here, whether it's an energy source or an energy user. Doesn't it?
Linda
Big guns are needed when your goal is world domination. The energy situation today is what we've been building towards for some time now. As the world's most powerful nation, we are also the world police. (nice perk) And, when the energy source the entire human world has built its modern civilization upon begins to decline... with no plan B in hand... the handling of which requires (forced) control... well, you get the picture.
To remain the police requires loads of energy. The next president, whoever that person is, will be only the next in line to try his/her hand at being the commander-in-chief... of the world's police.
Its not supposed to save you. Its supposed to make some oil company executive rich.
Translation: "Who's your Daddy?"
Well...the oil is not foreign if you take over the country now is it?
So we are making ourselves "independent" by taking ownership of the remaining oil reserves that we can get our hands on.
(being sarcastic :)
It would be an interesting exercise to look at exactly what America would need to do, if it lived entirely within its own resources for oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear power, and renewable energy. Compared to world per capita resources, America's are still very good - but much lower than what we have grown accustomed to.
A top priority should be to look at what we can do with only our own production of natural gas, since imports from Canada are sure to decline and we cannot hope for much help from LNG. I expect a huge scramble for other heating arrangements if U. S. natural gas production declines as rapidly some are predicting. If people try to switch to electric heating, this could have a major impact on the grid - at the same time others are trying to add plug-in electric autos.
You mean no OPEC no FSR no Nigeria? I've been toying with something similar except I limited enegy use when the US oil peaked in 1971.
Why do this? (Underlying premise alert)
B/C if the world is now in fact where the US was in 1971 ,as WT Simmons and others propose, THEN substantially living within our 'production means' is the reality we may now face. (just in case that other idea doesn't look like it has much future)
My alternate future started like this...
Today 36 years later we in the US would already be running
our society on 12MBPD oil production +coal et all (maybe a bit more) or maybe substantially less.
In dollar terms lower to middle income families would be working less, shopping less, and sheltering less. In human terms we would have been caring for basic needs for a lot more people. (I hope)
We would have passed or still be in a 'most difficult financial period'. So most wealthy Americans would also see downturn. Those shrewd enough to invest in 'winning' energy strategies did better.
Exploratory and production drilling on the OCS, ANWR, and GOM
would have yielded up it's fruits ,at whatever monetary
aesthetic and environmental costs necessary.
Feasible and politically acceptable opportunities in light
rail, wind, micro hydro, biofuels, solar and nuclear may well
have been explored, exploited, and developed.
Alternately if inefficient technologies would have been explored
and developed in favor of workable ones we would be reaping
those consequences as well.
(We would be well on our way to understanding the difference)
Voluntary or involuntary conservation would have been in
effect for many years already. The consumption 'fat' would be
coming off. Think post-USSR Cuba w/o Venezuela to the rescue.
Society would have been become more contracted and less
mobile and neighborhood models would be more sustainable in some areas.
Alternatively where people were less inclined to collectively
work on solutions, social upheaval, crime, and income
inequality would be ruling the day.
Course this alternate reality will never be because the US has continued to 'expand' it's economy for those 36 extra years and now we will have to 'break off' from a higher level of dependancy. So if you buy peaknow, whatever you come up with as a US domestic energy constrained future certainly is relevant thinking.
Blankets maybe??
US continental (lower 48) wind resources are estimated at about 1.2 TW average, while the continental shelves are estimated at about 900 GW average. If we grabbed 50% of this, we'd generate about 1.05 TW average or 9200 billion kWh/year, over twice what we use today. That would be more than sufficient to power all our electric stuff plus all our ground transportation, with plenty left over.
Then you've got the US biomass energy potential (so-so if you turn it into liquids to burn in piston engines, but potentially another 3-5000 billion kWh if you use the best known conversion technology), and that doesn't even begin to touch the solar potential.
We'd be in lousy shape if we switched today, but we could live mighty well on RE alone if we set our minds to it. This does not include the 5 million bbl/day of oil we're still pumping, the billion tons/year of coal we mine, etc.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece
Samsara posted this yesterday. It's about reports of threats by top US generals and admirals to resign if Bush orders an attack on Iran.
I discussed this last year. I thought that we would eventually see something akin to a mutiny, or at least mass resignations, in the US military.
That would be very bad indeed. Their places would subsequently be filled by individuals much more likely to be ideologically coherent with the power centres in the administration. I shudder thinking of heads of commands being of like mind with BushCo as an attack against Iran unfolded.
What is much more serious is that the Democrats will keep on funding the entire theatre.
The US has a bit of reason and principle left in individuals, but not in politics, or for that matter in any organization that matters. The Democrats are nothing more than the other side of the same coin.
We can drool over Barack Hussein Obama and Albert Arnold Gore, Jr as much as we want, but no-one gets elected in the US without the $millions that come from always inevitably the same people and interests. Don't be surprised if Hillary presides over the next phase of warfare. She's ready. So is John McCain. Don't count him out.
And there's always another general and colonel and soldier to be found.
2.2 million people in prisons, and 2x 2.2 million in deep sucker mortgage debt.
Take your pick.
And than there's this:
"as Americans we can set the price of oil at $20 a barrel simply by proclaiming that is all we will pay for it."
Ahhh... the Wal-Mart Principle: As the biggest customer, you set the price that you are willing to pay and the rest of the world has no choice but to dance to your tune.
Sump'n tells me it won't work.