50 comments on Clarification on Carioca (reported discovery in Santos Basin)
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
50 comments on Clarification on Carioca (reported discovery in Santos Basin)
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Blogroll
- ASPO The official site of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas.
- Energy Bulletin Clearing house for news regarding the peak in global energy supply.
- PowerSwitch Dedicated to raising awareness & discussion of the impending & permanent decline of cheap oil & gas supply.
- ODAC Oil Depletion Analysis Centre working to raise awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.
- Global Public Media Public service broadcasting for a post carbon world.
- Post Carbon Institute Learning to live in a low energy world.
- PeakOil.com US site and forum to educate and promote awareness of global hydrocarbon depletion.
- FEASTA The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability
- Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) This website describes an effective and fair response both to climate change and oil/gas depletion
- Aleklett's Energy Mix Global Energy Systems, Peak Oil, etc
- www.SamassaVeneessä.info Finnish peak oil site
Other Blogs
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
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 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
Brazil is fascinating enough in itself, but more fascinating to me is the whole South American offshore region and by extension the world oil production balance.
As Luis de Sousa says, "Tupi is possibly just the first of a series of fields that may compose an entirely new oil region enclosed in the Santos Basin. Hence new discoveries of significant volume in this area are likely."
The question is, what are we talking about when we say "significant volume" and big a series of new fields? Just the other day there was a link here on TOD to the possibility of sizable finds offshore Uruguay, finds offshore Argintina are now to be considered fully possible, and even the Falkland Islands has been mentioned.
Given world consumption today, it takes absolutely huge oil finds and development of said finds to have any real effect on oil markets. Could these finds make moot the idea of peak oil? Almost certainly not. But they could alter timing by some time, and create an interesting new balance of power in the oil producing group of nations.
The news just the other day that a Russian official had stated that Russia was for all practical purposes peaked would be a huge factor in rebalancing the power relationship. If Russia is indeed on the decline, while areas such as South America and West Africa are on the increase, it portends a major geopolitical shift in the world of oil production and petro power politics. Vladimir Putin had been getting pretty cocky about all the ways he hopes to use the petro weapon. Now, he and his successors may have to re-evaluate their options.
Of course, the wildcard is still Saudi Arabia. They have been very coy this time around, unlike the 1970's. They NEVER use the word, but they have been operating a defacto partial embargo for the last several years. But it is a cloaked embargo, and one that may not be intentional, if you accept the theory that KSA simply cannot raise production appreciably. Either way, the Saudi's do not have to "withhold " production to hold oil production flat, all they have to do is delay turning up investment. Either would have the same effect.
The question is, at what point will the confluence of events in the world have a real effect on the markets and break us out of the current paradigm, either to the upside on price or to the downside?
American and European oil consumption is beginning to flatten due to recession and a greater concern on the part of the auto buyer about fuel economy. Canada, West Africa, Brazil, and even the U.S. have the possibility of raising oil production, the U.S. very little, Canada some, Brazil and West Africa considerably more. But Mexico, the North Sea, and Russia seem to be at the top of possible production, at least for some time in the future, perhaps forever.
Saudi Arabia? Who can even guess. They may be at the top of possible production, or they may still have a considerable amount of oil up their sleeves to meter out as suits their needs. Do the Saudi's see the possibility of the non OPEC producers and new oil finds in South America and Africa combined with flat or declining American and European consumption being great enough to glut the market?
Or do the Saudi's feel that the developing nations, China and India, will more than swallow up any new production, and with declining production in Mexico, Russia and the North Sea it will make the possibility of glut improbable if not completely impossible? If so, how will OPEC react? Can they afford to "shoot the moon" on price, and not worry about competition or consuption restraint (conservation)? Or at some point, will they step in and stabilize oil markets? Even if they want to, can they?
So for my own benefit, in an attempt to clarify the unclarifiable, I draw a few conclusions:
(a) Once more I state my assessment that predicting peak oil down to the year or even to the decade is a statistical impossibility. The lack of information is too great and the variables too many. This does not mean peak oil is not a danger. Quite the contrary: It is all the more dangerous because of it's unpredictability, making it very difficult if not impossible to plan for.
(b) The implications of decisions made now, both on the production and consumption side, will take years, possiblly decades to play out. Huge sums of capital and long periods of time are required to change anything in the oil business, in fact in the energy business in general.
(c) Plans laid now based on current "facts" are an extreme risk. Planning for possible glut and price decline in the energy markets may seem foolish, but likewise planning for shortages, ever higher prices, and catastrophic collapse may turn out to be wasteful of years and money and look just as foolish a few years down the road. Once more we are reminded of the concept of "hedging". And we are not talking about the way that word has been abused recently (such as "hedge fund") but real hedging, i.e., being prepared to weather any eventuality as best as possible, "case hardening" economies, cultures and systems to sustain change in any direction.
(d) Other issues may well drawf concerns about oil depletion, and force action that will be completley unconnected to the depletion issue, but will have a major effect upon it. Carbon release is assured if we find large major new oil fields. Is there a point wherein we may begin to place a penelty on oil and coal use, not because they are in short supply, but because they are heavy carbon fuels?
(e)Lastly, and most controversially, I am more and more convinced each day that there will certainly be more than enough oil to transition to a new "renewable age". I am convinced that renewables and advanced efficiency technology is and has been smeared and slandered based on little or no use of real evidence. There is a large contigent who have a vested interest in seeing the renewables marginalized, and will use the tool of prospective peak oil as a tool to do it. The main reason we will not transition to a new renewable low carbon technology is not because there is not enough oil to do it. It is because we want to keep burning the oil that remains.
(e)Advice on how to cope: Think about, study, and teach your children about COMPLEXITY. If you yearn for the simple, primitive life, sadly, you were born into the wrong age.
RC
Re: Complexity... Always a good place to start:
I, Pencil
George (formerly in Vermont)
Thanks!
I'll probably remember this every time I pick up a pencil.
It was a very humbling read for me.
Steve
Reminds of the story I read somewhere about the efforts NASA had expended developing a pen that would write in zero gravity. The Russians just used pencils ;-)
Re: Teaching our children about complexity.
We already do this, many times over. It's called our education/work paradigm. It creates highly specialized people who know very little about the world beyond their immediate field. If the transition to renewable energy is handled properly then it won't matter all that much. But if it isn't - and we have already started in a very bad way (oil wars, famines, climate change) - learning very basic skills like how to grow a tomato will matter a great deal.
Case in point: I visited a large nursery the other day and got to talking with the owner. He proudly told me how he produces tens of thousands of tomato plant seedlings every spring for sale to amateurs (backyard vegetable gardens). He then laughed and said: "Thousands may PLANT tomatoes, but very few EAT tomatoes. They rot, fall prey to diseases and bugs, etc. Those guys have NO IDEA how to grow tomatoes".
Sorry if this seems pedantic, but wouldn't the farmer have said:
"Very few may plant tomatoes, but thousands eat tomatoes..." ??
No, he wouldn't. Please read carefully and the meaning should be clear.
Ha ! Sorry, really slow this morning !
Yes, and you provide a very good example of this "smearing" when you dismisse planning for shortages and even higher prices.
Peaknik,
You are exactly right, and I am in exactly wrong, at least in the way I phrased what I said. Blush on my part :-(
What I was and am attempting to describe is a method of preperation which allows a person to prosper even if the event he/she is preparing for does not occur on schedule, i.e., the event is mis-timed. So I did not intend to discount preperation, but was commenting on how badly foolish one can look if they disrupt their whole life, investments, education and that of their children in an attempt to prepare for something that will indeed happen, but happens sooner or later by a considerable margin than expected.
I am not sure there is a good word in our lexicon to describe preparedness for something, but preparedness for being wrong about the same event. This would include the ability to prepare for being right, but also the ability to be ready for being wrong, if not in fact, but only in timing. It is complex.
I guess the best phrase in English is the one I sometimes use, "case hardening", in which the system (company, nation, state, family) finds methods to "harden" it's ability to withstand energy shock but does so without dismantling or abandoning the system per se.
That's as close as I can get for now.
RC
I could add an (f):
Even at this late date, and even after we are definitely post peak, there will still be a few fields out there awaiting discovery. The discoveries will keep trickling in, some years a few, other years none at all. Every once in a while a jackpot will be hit and an exceptionally large field will be discovered. These may happen, but they will be increasingly few and far between. One data point does not make a trend, though. While the ignorant press and ideologues with an agenda to promote will be quick to latch on such news as evidence of a turnaround or a refutation of peak oil, the fact of the continuing and inexorable depletion of existing reserves will remain a stubborn fact.
"ThatsItImout",
another excellent post and I think this statement says it very well.
Every year that the transition is not begun, makes it that much harder to even do a transition.
All the resources keep increasing in cost, so with our present economic system, continuously greater numbers of people cannot afford to make transitional plans, especially those who become unemployed.
I have to disagree wholeheartedly with a). It certainly is possible to predict the decade peak oil would occur in. Hubbert did it a long time ago. And he would have been right had it not been for the oil shocks of the 70s. The shocks didnt really make his predictions wrong, because he wasnt predicting the effect of oil shocks. All he was predicting was a simple curve that would have played out if geopolitics hadnt intervened. Because the rate of production growth was reduced so greatly during the 70s, it meant that a new peak had to be calculated. In order to calculate the new peak, all we had to do was chop off the top of the hubbert curve and use that chunk of data to calculate how much more oil we would have consumed had we not had the shocks. And then calculate the difference, divide that by yearly consumption, and add it to the old date. It comes out to about 2005. Give or take half a decade. There is no way the calculations can be off by more than a few years. It would take 300 billion barrels of deepwater discoveries in order to move the peak by any measurable amount. Technology can also push forward the peak by a few years, in much the same way that tipping a jug of absopure allows the water to come out faster. But even with all our technology, we've only increased the recovery ratios by 20% at most. And it costed a heck of a lot of oil to bring us that technology. The unnaturally low output from Iraq more than offsets any extraction gains new technology has brought. It would take 8mbpd of output from Iraq to push the peak out beyond 2010. But obviously there is no way that is going to happen by 2010. Just like there is no way these new discoveries in south america are going to be producing by then.