![]() | DrumBeat: July 13, 2008 | The Oil Drum | Peak Oil Media: Matt Simmons gets more pessimistic on CNBC, Heinberg, and others... | ![]() |
107 comments on Peak Oil Media Guide
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
107 comments on Peak Oil Media Guide
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
- EROWI - energy return of water invested
- An interview with Stoneleigh - the case for deflation
- The Future of European Transport: iTREN-2030
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
It is my view that if the media is going to write about peak oil, they need year-by-year data points that they can plot as to what future oil production will look like under peak oil, so they can illustrate their article with some easy-to-understand graphic. They are also likely to need someone to point them to historical EIA data that they can graph that corresponds to the forecast.
The graph from the ASPO Ireland newsletter does not work for this purpose, because it is way too complex for the average reader, and the data points are not given so that the media can reproduce this. Currently, the way media can do this, if they figure it out, is contact me at GailTverberg at comcast dot net or Nate or editor at TheOilDrum dot com, and we will provide something like an interpolation of the data points in the ASPO Ireland newsletter, and also point them to EIA data.
It seems like the media guide should either provide such data or should tell the media who they can contact for information of this type.
It is fantastic to see the ASPO putting out a media guide! Congratulations!
I agree with Gail. Most media will want to create high quality charts and graphics. And having the data for each of your graphics available would really help (and perhaps ASPO should spring for a graphic designer to polish up the graphics in this guide).
My other recommendation would be to take a look at the Scientific American article by Campbell and Laherrere. That article does a nice job of sketching multiple lines of evidence supporting peak oil. HL is just one.
Here is one on line version
http://dieoff.org/page140.htm
Of those, I think it is very valuable to show that discoveries have been falling since the 1960s. People hear about new oil field discoveries every day and feel that peak oil cannot possibly be true. But once you can see that we are not finding nearly as much oil as we are using, then those stories about Jack 2 wells become much, much less convincing.
You might also consider including a chart showing the relative sizes of oil, coal, natural gas, and wind and solar just so people understand that the transition will be time consuming and difficult.
Here is such a graph from Wikipedia.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/World_energy_usage_wi...
I agree on the relative size of oil, coal, natural gas, wind and solar being a worthwhile thing to understand. This is the one I have been using, which is in my overview post. If the media is looking at both, they don't need to see the same graphic both places.
I take your point, Gail. If you'd like to suggest a different graphic, or perhaps a SHORT table of data that could be incorporated as a sidebar, I'll insert it. If the table is too big though, in the interests of keeping this piece short and to the point, then maybe referring to your other doc and the EIA site is the way to go.
Gail,
I agree completely that part of our job is to make it easier for others (media, policy makers, general public) to access the raw data, generate graphics and come to their own conclusions about what has happened in the past, what is happening today and what is likely to happen in the future.
Removing the hurdles to working with the raw data is the entire premise behind the Energy Export Databrowser. The goal is to make generation of high quality data graphics as easy as possible. Chris Nelder recently used several of these graphics in his The Impending Oil Export Crisis article. If you haven't looked at the databrowser since Robert Rapier's article last month you should have another view. The user interface has been updated and it now includes the coal, oil and gas worksheets from the 2008 version of BP's Statistical Review.
And I've tried to make access to the raw data as easy as possible. The Statistical Review comes as an Excel workbook with various inconsistencies that have been cleaned up and converted to ASCII CSV that anyone can use. These files are available from the data page linked from the databrowser.
I have focussed on the historical data from the Statistical Review rather than projected output but I think the same approach would be useful for any of the datasets that we want the media to make use of. The basic principles are:
If we are going to move away from preaching to the choir we need to empower those disinclined to hear our message with tools that will allow them to educate themselves. The data really do tell a pretty interesting story all on their own.
Happy Exploring!
-- Jon
Yes Jonathan, this indeed an excellent, very easy to use tool, well done - there is an excellent help page as well!
Others, test it out for yourselves - try France as an example and see how much oil,gas and coal they produce themselves - if you were them would you have gone for nuclear in a big way?
It will be interesting to see how France fares with meeting their mandatory 20% targets for reducing CO2 emissions by 2020, since nuclear emits lots of CO2 during initial power station build and decommissioning - guess what they are soon going to have to do in a big way?
Quantify lifetime CO2 emissions of nuclear plant relative to coal plant. Scale by power produced.
I agree. All too often we are presented with complicated compound graphs that try the patience of even experts. Ordinary folk won't even look at them. T Boone Pickens knows how to do it. "oil is 85 million and demand is 87 million" Period, end of story. That people can understand. I thought his presentation on CNBC was excellent. He's a good teacher.
"T Boone Pickens knows how to do it. "oil is 85 million and demand is 87 million"
If you use that quote, you have to be ready to answer the question "Then why aren't there shortages at the pump?"
People will ask it, and if the answer is not satisfactory, they will dismiss the whole idea.
RC
The reply I give is " Because a third of the world does not want to walk or ride bicycles anymore "
Then give Matt Simmons's price comparisons re cups of expresso coffee,water and soft drinks etc.
Well, Econ 101 informs us that when demand exceeds supply the price rises until more is supplied and/or less is demanded. If an external agency (government) places an artificial/arbitrary ceiling on prices that is below the natural market price, the supply/demand mismatch will then manifest itself as a shortage. Then there is the whole issue of what 85M is...conventional oil, GTL/CTL, biofuels, etc? The non-conventional oil complementary/substitute liquids could very well be supplying the difference if they are not included in the 85M number. A good question is what is the World elasticity of demand for oil? How do country oil subsidies to consumers affect the resource depletion curves and the price? American consumers have a notoriously short and over-optimistic memory: Gasoline prices have tended to rise in a sawtooth fashion...going up quite a bit, then backing off by a quarter, a third, etc, then rising again to exceed the previous peak. During the price regression part of the sawtooth, consumers rejoice, do high-fives and tell themselves that the nay-sayers are idiots and do not understand the (fictional) 'free market',then they go back to driving large SUVs and driving like there is no tomorrow. Most people have no idea that oil was ~$29/barrel back in 2001. The vast majority of people have no concept of PO, and furthermore are ill-equipped to understand even the most basic precepts of PO, and even worse, they don't want to know. Watch 'Three Days of the Condor', and pay rapt attention to the final dialog. Last man (nation) standing is where we are going...Mad Max, anyone?
IMO peak oil is about crude + condensate, the stuff that comes out of the ground as a liquid, has peaking characteristics and decline rates and we haven't produced more than ~74 mbpd for about 4 years.
IMO it isn't about all liquids since that includes ~11 mbpd of so called 'alternates'.
IMO the only reason you would mention 'all liquids' is to show that they clearly aren't adequate alternates despite heavy subsidy and environmental degradation.
An excellent point, and an issue I struggle with. Almost everybody uses the all liquids numbers, but that tends to mask the reality of crude production. I am thinking that perhaps a simple two-line graph showing just c+c (or even just c) on one line, and all liquids on another, would be the best solution. If anybody knows of such a graph, please send me a link or post it.
It depends who your intended audience is, but actually, if they live in a 'net importing' country then the outright decline of 'net exports' in recent years is much more important than peak oil itself.
It is the 'net exports' that are the 'marginal' barrels that determine the current high prices.
http://netoilexports.blogspot.com/
Peak oil is not a problem while you live in an oil exporting country, so I suspect you do mean to just inform people who rely on imported oil?