36 comments on A Simple Oil Production Estimate for 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
36 comments on A Simple Oil Production Estimate for 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- What "Lower Consumption" Means
- Tricking and Treating the Future
- Meeting Energy Decline Part-Way - Potatoes?
TOD:Europe
- The Future of Nuclear Energy: Facts and Fiction - Part IV: Energy from Breeder Reactors and from Fusion?
- The US stimulus and "green jobs"
- EROWI - energy return of water invested
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Saturday 7th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 30th October 2009
- Details of Solar Flagships Released
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.”
—Gandhi
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
I've been thinking about this a lot, and I agree with Prof. G's take on it here. We should keep in mind that the production data is hardly precise. From what I read, it is based, possibly in large part on the reports from PetroLogistics with it's tanker spotters and other strategically placed watchers. Given the uncertainty of the data, it makes no sense to keep one's nose too close to the numbers reported by official agencies, or, for that matter, the precise timelines of official announcements from the PR agencies of various oil-producing governments (such as the Haradh III announcement). Stuart's approach (and WT's as well) of assembling the various sources of data, plotting general trends, and drawing extrapolations seems the best we can do and in my opinion, is likely to yield a more accurate forecast than trying to pin down precise data points when the data is simply not very precise.
We should keep in mind that the production data is hardly precise. From what I read, it is based, possibly in large part on the reports from PetroLogistics with it's tanker spotters and other strategically placed watchers.
That argument cuts both ways, though. Then we might say that the production bump actually happened in August. Stuart tried to take some of that uncertainty out by averaging several data sets. Given that the Saudis completed the plant in January, and commissioned the plant in March, we should have seen a production bump in April and May.
Commissioning means that they have tested all the units, everything is working, they have already had flow running through the plant, and now they are starting it up for good. Those production issues that people are suggesting would have been mostly worked out following completion and prior to commmissioning.
So, here is what we know:
1. Plant started up in March.
2. Production bump in June or July.
Without doing a lot of speculating about things we have no way of proving, we can't say that 2 was caused by 1.