 | DrumBeat: August 14, 2007 | The Oil Drum | The Resurgence of Risk – A Primer on the Developing Credit Crunch |  |
80 comments on Oilwatch Monthly - August 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
80 comments on Oilwatch Monthly - August 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- March 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- March 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
any insight into canadas liquids dropping like a rock?
That's interesting, I haven't heard anything about declines in Tar Sand Land.
i dont think it is purely tarsandland. canada crude is way past peak, but tarsandland may be soaking up all the investment... (but my hindbrain says no rational investor would ignore real benefits especially when the MR is above the ATC, so WTF?)
The largest 6 month loss in OECD supply is from canada, why is there NO NEWS ON THIS. I SEE NO information on this. Nothing in the news, or anything.
This is distressing for me, very distressing. No factors are mentioned at all. Canada lost pretty much 1/6th of its production.
Is this caused by oilsands scaling? (are inputs greater than output??)
EDIT when i get back to school i will talk to one of my profs, he worked for shell for 20 years, he may have some insight.
The data show the decline coming from non-conventional liquids, but then a closer look reveals that the liquids number is IEA and the crude number is EIA so perhaps these are not directly comparable. Maybe this is "noise" but one wonders. There are limiting factors in the oil sands including signficantly the diluent used to make the crude transportable by pipeline, so production would be subject to significant declines from time to time given the complexity of the operation up there.
More generally, there is a drop in IEA figures that makes them closer to EIA's one than before. They have splitted for almost one year, making the plateau being much more conspicuous in EIA's figures than in IEA's. I've never seen any explanation for that. IT seems that much of the recent decrease can be explained by the drop in non conventional Canadian oil alone. Was there something wrong in the way IEA counted tar sand production? (hope for them it's not just a silly extra zero in some excel table ;) ).
Regarding Figure 7 for Canada, I don't understand the big drop from February 2007. Below is the chart I get using the last EIA (up to May 2007) and NEB numbers (for Tar Sands and Crude Oil + condensates (C+C)):
NEB's projections do not indicate a big drop (unless it's coming from the NGPL category).
What's NGPL?
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (NGPL)???
Natural Gas Plant Liquids: Propane, butane etc...
Basically, NGL minus lease condensates:
(ref)