News Round-up and Linkfest

Oil to Head for $80/bbl this autumn:
Trading positions suggest a strong probability that oil will hit $80 a barrel this autumn, an amazing record high for black gold. But wiser leaders in the GCC are concerned that such high energy prices will throw the consumer nations into recession, if they are not already there.
Chevron-Texaco admits to peak oil and even creates a website. Their slogans are:
"It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil. We ll use the next trillion in 30."

"One thing is clear: the era of easy oil is over."
Go have a read and participate.

OilCast #15:
* New statements from Don Coxe says Saudi & Mexican fields peaked
* Petro Caribe comes into force - details
* Russia moves to limit investment
* BP report 2Q 05 non-Russian production flat
* Prices await inventory draw or build
* Cindy outs major offshore terminal


Technorati Tags: ,

Real Inflation: The Magic of Hedonics, Geometric weighting, Substitution, and Seasonal adjustments

I just stumbled on this piece that seems a nice primer on government manipulation of the CPI numbers and other key economic indices that make up the bases for cost of living/inflation adjustments and the like. Is this a good explanation for those of us not well-versed in the economic side of this? Some snippets:
A caller into a Washington D.C. talk show asked a very pertinent question regarding the business of living. "Have they changed the way they measure the rate of inflation? The CPI report in May was zero percent, excluding food and energy. If you take those things out, that is what is primarily driving up everything. What would be the real inflation rate, if you add back everything they take out?"
The caller was smart enough to know something changed and he was right. In the early 90's the government realized it had a problem with rising entitlement costs for Social Security, Medicare, and government pensions. These entitlement payments were indexed by the inflation rate each year. With inflation on the rise it meant these costs were rising faster, thus making government deficits much worse. In order to bring the government deficits under control, it would be necessary to bring rising entitlement costs down. One way to lower entitlements would be to bring the inflation rates down, which would translate into lower Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA).
Doesn't this sort of manipulation make a crash even more likely, the longer we wait to see that there is an actual problem, doesn't it mean that, when the problem actually arrives, the fall will be worse?

This is exactly what I have been talking about regarding the rationality of politicians of both parties. They will continue to practice inaction like there's no pressing problem, of course, until the real problem hits, then they'll blame each other and we'll be left holding the bag.
Technorati Tags: ,

Walking the walk

Dave Roberts has an interesting post at Gristmill called "There are worse things than hypocrisy". It's a response to a reader who sends the question:
In a recent column, George Monbiot excoriates environmental superstars for not walking the talk. So what about the Grist luminaries? How do you live in reality?
I have long thought that for most people, the goal of conservation should be to cut down on the quantity of waste one produces, or the amount of fuel or electricity one consumes. The goal is not to become the most virtuous environmentalist/survivalist, living in a cabin without electricity and sustaining oneself off the garden in the back. Instead, the idea is to figure out how to sustain modern lifestyles that have been developed over decades while eliminating the unnecessary excesses.

Imagine how much we would cut down on if we all just refused the plastic bags or cut out meat even 2 days a week.

While I think Roberts is right to disdain the claim of hypocrisy, I don't entirely agree with his response. At the end of the piece, he writes:
Whether I, or you, or any particular person lives a life of environmental virtue is all-but-irrelevant to the larger environmental effort. The goal is creating a human society where a life of environmental virtue is de facto, something individuals live without thinking twice about it, because their material and social circumstances channel them in that direction.
Yes, of course the point is to change the social forces in a more sustainable and environmentally friendly direction. But I don't think that people publicly advocating such cultural change can afford to make no changes in their lives. I think the best course of action is to make small but obvious changes--the canvas bags at the grocery store, living closer to work, consolidating the errands to cut down on car trips--to demonstrate to other people that we can still enjoy modern conveniences while drastically cutting down our abuses of them.

Technorati Tags: ,

British Oil Production Falls 11% in April, gas down 16% year on year...

This from an article in today's Scotsman (hat tip: peakoil.com)
BRITISH oil production fell 11 per cent in April, continuing the past year's trend of declining production, according to the latest Royal Bank of Scotland Oil and Gas index.

The June survey says that gas production was also down by 16 per cent on the year. Combined oil and gas production was down 13 per cent on the year.
RBS said, however: "Continued high oil prices and the success of the most recent offshore licensing round continue to point towards a positive outlook for the North Sea."

Tony Wood, senior economist with Royal Bank of Scotland, said: "The ongoing rate of decline of UK oil and gas production continues to be of concern.

"However, high oil prices combined with the success of the recent Seaward Licensing Round point to a much more positive operating environment in the UK for at least the next two years."


Technorati Tags: ,

Did anything change?

Isn't it nice to go away for a couple of weeks and find that, while you were gone, the problems of the world were all solved? Thanks to Dave, I have just read the CERA Press Release, from June 21, which describes the coming glut in global oil production, where, by the end of the decade supply will exceed demand by 6 to 7.5 mbd. The full details were apparently presented at the International Energy Conference in Istanbul, last week. Glancing at the meeting schedule, however, the report authors Peter Jackson, and Robert Esser were not on the Speaker List.

And then, thanks to Jack, I meandered over to today's Business Week, and the discussion by four economists, three of which would again assure us that there is no immediate problem. Although, to be fair, two of the participants points out that this is going to be a very short-lived balance. Even by the end of the year three of the participants could be taken to be concerned about supply. Given that the fourth was our good friend Michael Lynch, who expects oil to be down to $40 by then, what else needs to be said!

The situation will not likely be cleared up by the new World Oil Data base located in Riyadh, since the opening of this has been postponed apparently because of the poor quality of some of the data supplied.

So what is going on? Well, short of reading the entire CERA report, which promises a "field-by-field bottom-up analysis", the first thing that catches attention is that they are not exactly comparing apples and apples.

For example in looking at world production:
"Jackson and Esser argue that "unconventional" oil will play a much larger role in the growth of supply than is currently recognized. These unconventional oils include condensates, natural gas liquids (NGLs), extra heavy oils (such as Canadian oil sands), and the ultra-deepwater (greater than 2,500 feet deep). By 2020, they could be almost 35 percent of supply."
And
"Total OPEC liquids capacity will expand significantly to 45.6 mbd in 2010 from 36.8 in 2004, with the proportion of condensates and NGLs rising to almost 18% of total capacity. Post-2010, OPEC has the hydrocarbon resources to continue expanding capacity at a slightly lower rate than the current decade's 10.9 mbd growth. CERA believes OPEC will accelerate key projects in anticipation of a non-OPEC slowdown in capacity growth."
What this is projecting is that OPEC other liquids – currently being produced at around 3.8 mbd will rise to a level of 8.2 mbd. This will come from condensates and natural gas liquid (NGL) increases. In which regard it is useful that the OGJ had an article last week which listed anticipated increases in NGL and condensate production that can be anticipated. Qatar, for example has planned production of 95,000 bd of condensate, Saudi Arabia has Haradh which is a natural gas project, but will produce 170,000 bd of condensate, Abu Dhabi will produce 125,000 bd of condensate. While, in themselves, these are significant numbers, they do not approach the levels that CERA are projecting.

And the CERA document does not appear to address current field depletions. Of those currently changing, perhaps Mexico is the most critical to our near term future. And the OGJ also reports that the arrival of Peak Oil there may well have already occurred.

Overall I suspect that the world really didn't change much while I was away, and those who predicted that oil would be back around $30 a barrel by now are still being given a hearing. Wonder why?

Technorati Tags: ,

Microbial Enhanced Oil Recovery

This week Business Week magazine has a whole special section on oil. Now, I don't usually read magazines like Business Week or the Economist, but my father tells me that in general, BW is a pretty moderate publication. The main article on the issue, "Is there plenty of oil?", is pretty optimistic that there is, but is not entirely dismissive of the idea that there might not be. Of course, then they say something like this, which TOD readers have expressed wariness about before:
But there's little reason to assume that the next five years will simply see a continuation of current trends. Thanks to a combination of higher prices, increased exploration and production spending, and improved technology, oil supplies are poised to grow much faster than they have in recent years. Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), a respected energy consultant, sees 20 or more major new fields coming on line each year through 2010. Altogether those fields could boost worldwide production capacity 15%, from 87.9 million barrels per day to 101.5 million by the end of the decade, CERA estimates. As a result, supply should exceed demand by 7 million bbl. per day, a huge leap from the current cushion of 1 million bbl.
In a companion article called "Tapping Gushers Beneath The Gushers", they run through some methods for recovering oil from mostly depleted wells. These include techniques like supercomputer simulations and CO2 injections. Then, they mention MEOR: microbial enhanced oil recovery. The online version is subscription only, but here are the relevant paragraphs:

The latest idea is called MEOR, for microbial enhanced oil recovery. Various labs around the world are engineering special bugs that generate CO2 biologically, along with detergent-like chemicals that help flush oil out of rocks. The microbes can be cultivated underground or in well-side vats. Because they grow explosively, the Energy Dept., which is funding several research projects, says MEOR technology may be the most cost-effective of all tertiary processes.

MEOR is already used in Venezuela, China, Indonesia, and the U.S. to treat deposits of heavy oil -- a molasses-thick form of oil. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory hope to develop new armies of bioengineered bugs that can infiltrate underground rocks and turn the gunky stuff into the sweet-flowing crude that erupts like the gushers in Hollywood movies.
(A few petroleum companies, universities and governments that also have descriptions of the process: Cano Petroleum, Mississippi State, Canada.)

Anytime I hear about introducing any kind of species--be it bacteria or plant life--into an environment where it didn't exist before, I get uneasy. We all know about kudzu, and perhaps you've heard of the northern snakehead fish (wow, the government has a whole website called invasivespecies.gov!). Can it really be beneficial to inject microbes into the ground and let them grow unchecked at a very fast rate?

On the other hand, as the Canadian government website (which also has links in a bibliography) points out (in a section called "Sustainable Development and MEOR"), the use of microbial bacteria may reduce or eliminate the use of chemicals during drilling:
As MEOR reduces or eliminates the need to use harsh chemicals during oil drilling, it is an environmentally compatible method of carrying out tertiary oil recovery. MEOR will become increasingly economically feasible as genetic engineering develops more effective microbial bacteria that may subsist on inexpensive and abundant nutrients.
OK, so far it doesn't sound so bad, aside from my original objection. And in fact it was difficult to find websites listing other environmental drawbacks, but I found these lecture notes which list the following problems:
A. Subsurface water
  • 1. migration of organisms or metabolites into groundwater
B. Wastewater
  • 1. spent fluids due to additional drilling
  • 2. equipment washing
  • 3. brinewater, media, chemicals for pH adjustment
C. Atmospheric Emissions (e.g. H2S)

D. Solid Wastes
  • 1. bacteria in filter solids
So j, what more can you tell us about MEOR?

Technorati Tags: ,

Also...a big thank you to Super G...

You have probably noticed that some changes are being made to TOD. We're trying to make some improvements to the site to make your experience better.

Many of the thanks should go to Super G for his work thus far...thanks SG.

If you have any suggestions, comments, or ideas, or just want to thank Super G for his work, the comment box is below.

4th of July Reading List

First off, here's a bullet-pointed (perhaps straight off powerpoint) lecture by Colin Campbell (hat tip: peakoil.com). It is from 2000, but after all that time, it seems quite valid in its reasoning and main points:
An oil crisis is bad for politicians.
Blaming OPEC or the oil companies will not wash much longer.
It would be better to make a proper analysis of the true position and inform people.
No one blames the government for an earthquake. So they wouldn't blame it for an oil crisis either if they realized it was a natural phenomenon.

Peak oil is a turning point for Mankind
100 years of easy growth ends
Population peaks too for not unrelated reasons
The transition to decline is a period of great tension
Priorities shift to self-sufficiency and sustainability
It may end up a better world
Five years is a long time. We could have done so much.

Second, here's a piece from the Economist that provides a counterpoint to yesterday's Guardian pieces accentuating the positives of China's growth.
In terms of peacefully integrating China into the world economy, this is to be welcomed, not feared. Chinese companies will make their mistakes, and they will need to learn fast. Another wave of hopefuls is already discernible. On June 28th, Thomson of France sold the final leg of its TV operations—not to China's TCL, its partner until now, but to an Indian rival.

Technorati Tags: ,

The Tick-Tock of the Clock is Painful...

Matt Simmons is in the Guardian today (thanks Rajiv!):
Oil prices could rocket to $100 within six months, plunging the world into an unprecedented fuel crisis, controversial Texan oil analyst Matt Simmons has warned.
and then, here's another relevant piece in the Guardian about the US and China:
Occasionally, there are tipping-point moments and we are witnessing one at the moment. Seismic change is afoot. As oil prices breach $60 a barrel and pessimists warn that the world could be as little as 10 years away from a first-order resources crisis, China's largest oil company, CNOOC, has launched a £10 billion bid for one of the US's juiciest medium-sized oil companies, Unocal.

Technorati Tags: ,

Discussion of the idea of the carbon tax in Britain...?

The British government has started to research ways to ration energy use, not just for commercial ventures and government facilities but for each and every person in the UK.

The Telegraph reports that Tony Blair's ministers have started thinking about imposing a system of "personal carbon allowances" that residents can barter or trade as they see fit, but which would restrict access to all forms of energy for consumers:
Every individual in Britain could be issued with a "personal carbon allowance" - a form of energy rationing - within a decade, under proposals being considered seriously by the Government.

Ministers say that increasingly clear evidence that climate change is happening more quickly than expected has made it necessary to "think the unthinkable". ...

Under the scheme for "domestic tradeable quotas" (DTQs), or personal carbon allowances, presented to the Treasury this week, everyone - from the Queen to the poorest people living on state benefits - would have the same annual carbon allocation.

This would be contained electronically on a "ration card", which could be the proposed ID card or a "carbon card" based on supermarket loyalty cards.

It would have to be handed over every time a form of non-renewable energy was purchased - at the filling station, or when buying tickets for a flight - for points to be deducted.

High users of energy would have to purchase points from low users, or from a central "carbon bank", if they wanted to use more energy.

As much as I like the sound of it, my first, and truly American, reaction is: "oooh, that sounds like it would suck." But then, my peak oil conscience kicks in and says "Goose, that's a good idea and necessary to slow down the progress over the peak."

It will take years (or a massive crisis) before something like this would ever fly in America. Britain is used to more socialist/governmental ideas. I wonder if we ever will be.

This article also raises the question: is global warming going to be the excuse for addressing peak oil, or is peak oil going to be excuse for addressing global warming? I guess I think of the two as inexorably linked, but some do not.

Technorati Tags: ,