<Drumbeat: May 1, 2009 The Oil Drum Drumbeat: May 2, 2009>

273 comments on "Peak Oil" or "Limits to Growth"

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

WebHubbleTelescope on May 2, 2009 - 9:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

So ask yourself whether you want to convince them of the idea that oil availability is permanently dropping, or of your particular beliefs about what that will mean for society. The first of those is pretty easy - show them a few graphs of prices and rig counts - but the latter is something that will be extremely difficult to provide an evidence-based argument for.

Wow. You think it is "pretty easy" to convince someone that oil availability is permanently dropping? Just by showing a few graphs of prices and rig counts? That is a skill in rhetoric, not of any formal reasoning. I think a person equipped with such scant supporting evidence will get decimated when they get confronted by a real cornucopian.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Pitt the Elder on May 2, 2009 - 1:59pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

You think it is "pretty easy" to convince someone that oil availability is permanently dropping?

Relative to the difficulty of convincing someone to accept my interpretation of what that implies, yes.

Compared to $10 oil in the 90s, though, $50 oil in the middle of a deep recession is a steep drop in availability. Compared to the 90s when the West had most of the world's purchasing power, booming growth in BRIC countries has raised the competition for oil substantially, and that increased competition - which decreases availability in the West - is highly likely to continue and increase.

A strong case can be made for falling availability without even touching on supply issues. However, you're probably right that talking about the near future (10-20 years, or so) is both more defensible and more appropriate than trying to convince anyone that anything is truly permanent.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
steve from Virginia on May 3, 2009 - 3:35pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Your point is a good one:

A strong case can be made for falling availability without even touching on supply issues.

Relative price is a good way to ocmpare rate of production against rate of consumption. At maximum relative production price is likely to be lowest in real terms.

Photobucket

This graph is from the International Monetary Fund, 2009. I added 'Peak Oil'.

From a physical delivery standpoint, peak production was either 2005 (Simmons) or 2008.

If a late- 1990's effective peak is accurate, then current economic dislocations are more easily accounted for. The likely outcome is a continuing general decline in economic indicators with periods similar to current where a return to 'normal' economic activity appears likely.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gail the Actuary on May 3, 2009 - 8:39pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Steve,

US per capita energy consumption peaked very close to the time frame you are pointing to. This is a graph I put together of US per capita energy consumption (including imports). I am sure it moved down in 2008, and will be down further in 2009.

The graph is based on EIA consumption data.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Pitt the Elder on May 4, 2009 - 3:39am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

US per capita energy consumption peaked very close to the time frame you are pointing to.

US per capita energy consumption peaked in 1978.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

273 comments on "Peak Oil" or "Limits to Growth"

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version