 | Consumption Winners and Losers | The Oil Drum | An Attempt to Apply The Parabolic Fractal Law to Saudi Arabia |  |
DrumBeat: June 17, 2006
Posted by threadbot on June 17, 2006 - 9:40am
Update [2006-6-17 9:50:44 by Leanan]: China's
first strategic oil reserve is due for completion by August. It will hold 5.2 million cubic meters of oil. They expect it to be filled by the end of the year, though they won't say how they plan to do this. Three others are expected to be built and filled in 2007 and 2008.
In Russia, the Duma votes for Russian gas export monopoly:
A law that will reinforce Gazprom’s monopoly on Russian gas exports gained preliminary approval in Russia’s lower house of parliament on Friday, in a snub to European demands for Russia to open up its pipeline network.
In the U.S., NIMBY still rules:
A quarter of U.S. residents oppose any energy plant or facility in their hometown, including solar plants or wind terminals. A survey of 1,001 people by RBC Capital Markets also found that respondents in that 25 percent group are also more likely to believe that high energy prices are temporary, RBC said Friday in a statement.Meanwhile, Uganda is optimistic that their new budget will solve their energy crisis:
The east African nation has suffered crippling electricity shortages for months. Residents in the capital Kampala receive power for just 24 of every 48 hours and almost every business has been forced to run costly, diesel-powered generators. Under pressure to end the blackouts as quickly as possible, Suruma said the government had set aside sh202b to tackle the power crisis.They will be building more hydroelectric dams on the Nile, as well as more thermal generators (presumably fossil-fuel powered).
“This order [i.e. capitalism] is now bound to the technical and economic conditions of machine production which today determine the lives of all the individuals who are born into this mechanism, not only those directly concerned with the economic acquisition, with irresistible force. Perhaps it will so determine them until the last ton of fossilized coal is burnt.”
—Max Weber, 1905
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
There is an interview with the CEO of Shell USA in the Dallas Morning News today. He is doing a 50 city tour asserting that we can produce our way out of the current high energy prices. He explicitly makes the point that he is trying to ward off a Windfall Profits Tax.
"Iron Triangle" Reference: http://www.energybulletin.net/15126.html
Shell strategy leaves room for alternative fuels
It's been syndicated, and is appearing in papers all over the country.
China, formerly Asia's biggest gasoline exporter, plans to cut shipments of the fuel for a fourth consecutive month to meet domestic demand, contributing to a shortage that boosted prices in the region.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
China, formerly Asia's biggest gasoline exporter, plans to cut shipments of the fuel for a fourth consecutive month to meet domestic demand, contributing to a shortage that boosted prices in the region.
PetroChina and China Petroleum & Chemical Corp, which exported an average of 466,386 tonnes a month last year, may cut shipments to as little as 130,000 tonnes this month, according to three traders involved in the transactions who asked not to be named.
Reduced supplies from China helped to drive benchmark 92-RON gasoline to a record US$90.55 (HK$706.29) a barrel in Singapore on May 15. Soaring demand in the world's third-biggest vehicle market is trimming its gasoline surplus, prompting Beijing to impose restrictions on exports.
The number of civilian vehicles on China's roads rose 21 percent last year to 43.29 million, the National Bureau of Statistics said in February.
"Exports from China are likely to drop significantly in the coming months as the government orders refiners to boost production and limit exports to meet peak summer gasoline demand," Ravi Narayanaswamy, a Singapore-based analyst at Purvin & Gertz, said last week.
While gasoline has declined 8 percent from last month's record amid increased supplies from Taiwan, the price remains 28 percent higher since March, outpacing the 14 percent gain in the price of crude used to make the fuel, according to data.
Taiwan has displaced the mainland as Asia's biggest exporter of the fuel. Gasoline shipments from the island last year averaged 298,000 tonnes a month. The average in the first three months of this year fell to 150,000 tonnes as Formosa Petrochemical shut a crude oil distillation unit and one of its two 73,000 barrel-a-day gasoline- making fluid catalytic crackers for maintenance and upgrading from February 10 until April 19. Supplies have rebounded since the plants restarted.
"Taiwanese refiners are cashing in on this opportunity to export more volume to meet the strong demand in Indonesia and Vietnam," Narayanaswamy said.
China Petroleum & Chemical, Asia's biggest refiner known as Sinopec, exported a 30,000-tonne cargo each this month and last, down from about two cargoes each month in March and April. PetroChina halted exports this month, after selling a 30,000-tonne cargo last month.
West Pacific Petrochemical, or Wepec, jointly owned by PetroChina, Sinochem and France's Total, has kept exports steady at about 100,000 tonnes a month from its refinery in northeastern Dalian.
In April, the mainland exported 237,186 tonnes while importing 13,414 tonnes, according to the latest data from China Administration of Customs. In March, it exported 386,122 tonnes while importing 4,876 tonnes.
In March, Beijing extended the suspension of export tax rebates for motor gasoline and naphtha to discourage refiners from exporting. Withholding the export rebate of 11 percent for gasoline and 13 percent for naphtha will make it more expensive for exporters to ship the fuels overseas, the State Administration of Taxation said on March 21.
On May 24, Beijing raised retail fuel prices for a second time this year to pare refiners' losses and boost retail supplies.
Last summer, provinces such as Guangdong had fuel shortages when gasoline exports jumped 51 percent in August to 856,223 tonnes in July. BLOOMBERG
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?we_cat=10&art_id=20674&sid=8376047&con_typ ...
Now where have I heard about this B4?
Rat
In 2009, Shell announces "Renewable American Oil"
Shell will build a series of large wind farms in Colorado. They will sell "peak power" to the grid and sell "spinning reserve" the rest of the time, (*Spinning Reserve" is off-line power that can come on-line very quickly in case of an unexpected problem. Usually a large power plant goes down. Rarely needed, but essential for grid stability).
They will use most of the wind output to heat oil shales for decades, produced a mix of natural gas and a waxy oil. They create "spinning reserve" by offering to turn off the heaters and divert the power to the grid on a moments notice. Another income stream.
They also offer to buy any momentary surplus power from any other wind turbine producer on a minute by minute basis for 1.25¢ /kWh (up to a limit), preventing any shut-in & wasted wind power.
Shell oil shale output stabilizes at 120,000 barrels/day + NG in 2022 and turns a decent profit despite spending 1/6th of the total project cost on PR.
Any comments ?
And what is NOT to love about this project ? IMHO, Shell PR & DC lobbyists would be drooling over this !
The average American would think that it is producing 10% or 15% of the oil that we need. The "Light at the end of the tunnel". Proven reserves would skyrocket (since this was making a profit), it is just that the production rate was quite low and it scalability depending upon wind saturation of the local grid. Return on capital would also be low but profitable.
Weren't these shale experiments funded from Deoartment of Energy grants?
And a small aside-the Cistern and Muldoon fields in Fayette County Texas were produced with windmills as pumps years ago. They were very shallow Yegua(Eocene) fields. It strike me that very shallow fields in other areas could profitably be produced with windmills to and save the energy conversion losses. Won't add much to the US reserves, but it might make some good ol' boy a buck or two.
I am unsure where the oil shale is. Perhaps they could be dual siting with no transforming or transmission losses, perhaps not. Worst case 5% to 6% T&T losses.
If Shell got a 5% return on their invesntment when all is said & done, the political & PR return would make it a wise investment.
It can be done, but not cheaply. Thar's plenty o' grease in them thar hills, but not cheaply extracted. At least global warming can't raise the oceans that high.
Sorry, Alan, I can't stop laughing.
SCENARIO
News release 2017 -- After decades of effort to develop the oil shales of the Western Slope of Colorado, Shell announced today that it will discontinue it's work there due to lack of a profitable return on such production....
And thanks for your kind e-mail yesterday about Thailand.
best, Dave
I have got a story on this in the queue. Should be posted today or tomorrow. Your "news release" probably isn't far off the mark, although I don't expect this experiment to last that long.
RR
SCENARIO
(AP) October 30. 2017
The Shell CEO, Ibriham al-Tikriti, explained before Congress that the shale oil production was too low for the valuable electricity inputed, that $2,120/barrel was just not enough to give an adequate return on capital and that oil taxes of $16/gallon should be waived for any "Renewable American Oil" (TM) or ShellExxonMobilBPChevronTexacoConocoPhillips would have to, reluctantly, sell their electricity on the open market and pump whatever oil continued to seep out during the next year or so before abandoning the project.
The loss of the 120,812 barrels/day would reduce US oil production by 4.8%; oil that the US could scarcely buy elsewhere with it's limited foreign currency reserves "especially after the recent limited wheat harvest".
He pointed out that the other oil company, Aramco North America, has shown no interest in developing a comparable project.
He called questions about his salary and perks "irrelevant" and "pandering".
Shell's in situ oil shale idea is to finish off the job nature walked away from and make newborn oil appear in selected patches that have been electrically frozen off (to keep ground water from flushing away the liquid) and electrically superheated (to transform the kerogen). It's then pumped out normally - no site restoration needed (since the earth was not disturbed, unlike Alberta) - and the crew moves on to the next four-year-roasted patch. The advantage over conventional drilling is that companies know exactly where the kerogen is - no mystery at all. The disadvantage is the freezing and superheating routine, but that doesn't seem weirder than the science fiction stuff going on in the tar sands. Shell's problem is of course to keep science fiction cheap. Almost all the electricity in this area now comes from coal strip-mined and burned on the spot, which is pretty cheap and very dirty, but there is also wind if you want to pay a premium for it. Wyoming has plenty of wind. It just costs more than coal. I don't see why Shell would need to get in the electricity business itself when other people will sell it wind power now - but it needs to make a profit of any kind first.
The other problem is that oil shale country looks like this:
There is no water, and features on the map like "Green River" would simply be called large creeks anywhere else, and every drop is already spoken for, many times over (and global warming is just going to make this worse). If Shell could conjure up a lot of water without taking it from Los Angeles, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and local tourism one might begin to see how it could eventually follow (thirty-five years behind) in the footsteps of the tar sands.
Ah, you guys are stealing my thunder. ;^) I have had a story sitting in the queue on this for 2 days, but there were several stories ahead of me. I think mine will be the next to be posted, and I took a close look at Shell's process.
RR
More importantly, is this a voluntary cut in production, or is it a sign of "peak stories?"
RR
At any rate, Shell plans to use the natural gas produced to provide the electricity once the project gets going. At that point, coal fired generation would not provide a significant amount of the electricity needed.
The natural gas generation would be a good fit for any intermittant renewable, as a peaker turbine can come online rather quickly, to be followed, perhaps by a combined cycle gas plant.
Perhaps Shell's use of renewables in the production of cooked kerogen and natural gas could be used to offset CO2 emissions elsewhere, making the renewables more attractive.
It was also interesting to note that on Bloomberg yesterday, during an interview with Gore, he said he was in favor of nuclear power plants, though he wanted smaller ones and more advanced in designs.
Toilet paper.
The become instant millionaires. Alternative SciFi story line, a guy from the future goes back into the Civil war past and sells tones of Toilet paper in a general store refusing to let anyone know his source of the fine Soft Wiping Paper as it is called in his new time.
As others have said, horde money no, Horde Toilet paper and massive amounts of it. You will be richer than you can every imagine.
Dan Ur, Aka Charles Owens Author at large.
But the world could be in a bad place if we reach Peak Toilet paper" Sad but true.
LOL.
The latest was titled "Why should we punish the oil companies?" was published in The Land magazine June 16. 2006 edition. (www.thelandonline.com) It takes a month or two before these things get to the web site.
These articles are all coming from an organization called the "Center for Global Food Issues" which is a part of the "Hudson Institute - a Washington DC based think tank".
These people are VERY good at getting their "messages" into many publications - especially ag publications.
Go here:
http://www.cgfi.org/
and look at any.some of their stories on global warming, ag, peak oil, etc..... Guarenteed to make your hair curl and steam come out of your ears.
What it is good for is turning heavy hydrocarbons into lighter hydrocarbons. Liquid transportation fuel may become scarce pretty soon... and "unconventional oil" will go a lot farther if hydrogen can be added. A hydrogen-generating nuke plant, for example, might be a very useful addition to the tar sands.
Is it possible that the whole "hydrogen economy" research push/fad is aimed at improving hydrogen handling and generation for the oil refining industry?
Chris
Funny stuf, the Smithsonian removes the EV-1 to replace it with some High Tech SUV! Perhaps they are right, that car will be history soon and electric vehicles will make a come back.
Saudi Arabia's Growing List of New Friends
Excerpt:
Concerned over the increasing calls for protectionism in the US and the recent Dubai Ports imbroglio, Saudi Arabia isn't sure how much longer it can count on the US as a favorable destination for its investments from oil revenue. Likewise, the recent call by President Bush to reduce America's dependence on Middle Eastern oil in the coming decade explains the Kingdom's new links with China and India as a logical progression after9 /11. American imports of Saudi oil have been falling since the invasion and occupation of Iraq. In his State of the Union Address in January2006 , Bush called for a need to minimize America's dependence on oil from Saudi Arabia and the Middle East.
At the same time, Saudi Arabia is seeking new markets for its oil and new opportunities for its trading outfits, while China and India are on the prowl for new sources of oil and new customers for their accelerating industrial output. It was not without reason that the King Abdullah made a concerted effort to forge cooperation in energy sectors in both the countries during his visit. This in turn would have the long-term effect of putting into place a steady crude-supply chain, providing some measure of security to Saudi Arabia's crude markets.
I think we have seen worse times in the USA than are starting right now, but only because the Civil War was such an unmitigated disaster for everyone.At least in the Great Depression everyone still had relatives living on the farms and could go back to the country to avoid starvation
Doesn't that mean that 75% don't care or are favorable? Sounds good to me.
I'm still wondering how much of it is evil machiavellian planning and how much is just stupid incompetence.
To find this you just have to look. You might not like the source though. Exports in March 2006 were 1.41mbd. it brought into the Iraq govt. 1.82 billion dollars.
Check this out:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:g6htcDz15tUJ:www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RS21626.pdf+iraq+oil+res erves+2006&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4&client=safari
http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2005/12/11/business/doc439a12bba9566167055013.txt
http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RS21626.pdf. (The Italian embassy??)
A key excerpt: And the conclusion:
Zapata George is veryyyy skeptical and stopper just short of hollering "bull shit"., but has apparrently talked to some of those directly involved. The link to the third hour is at: http://netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2006-0617-3.ram Maybe this "find" was discussed earlier in the week. A hell of bit of good news for the cornucopians if confirmed. If this location does not work, go to financialsense.com then click on the newshour [incorrectly identified as June 10, 2006.] then the third hour, then fast forward to 1:50 minutes or just listen to the discussion as Puplava among other things makes fun of the Fed's official view of the definition of inflation among other things.
Has this discovery been discussed?
Anybody see that small article?
On Tuesday, the International Energy Agency reduced its forecast for growth in demand during 2006 to 1.24 million barrels a day from 1.25 million barrels a day -- down about 30 percent from its growth estimate in January. The agency said inventories in the U.S. and Asia are at 20-year highs.
see:http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/3977804.html
But i see Bodman last month said that he regularly presses OPEC oil ministers to do more to expand production capacity. Claude Mandil, executive director of the International Energy Agency, an adviser to 26 oil-consuming nations, said new production will only keep pace with rising demand until about 2010.
(Which is only 3 and a half years away.) YIKES!!!!!
Then i see that:
France's Total estimates global oil production will peak around 2020 if output growth continues at current levels and has advised governments to cool demand to avoid a supply crunch, its chief executive said.
"The capacity of raising (oil) production is a real challenge ... if we stay with this type of production growth our impression is that peak production could be reached around 2020," Thierry Desmarest told the World Gas Conference in Amsterdam on Wednesday.
as seen here: http://today.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompanyNewsArticle.aspx?view=CN&storyID=2006-06-07T114812Z_ 01_L07762836_RTRIDST_0_ENERGY-TOTAL-PEAKOIL.XML&rpc=66
So USA and Asian inventories are at 20 year highs and new production will only be able to keep up with demand by 2010?
DUDE, we are in deep "kempshi"!!
To my mind, Peak Oil impacts EVERYTHING. Now that my eyes are open to it, I understand that it's not just the latest fashion or fad.
My brother also says he believes Peak Oil will happen, but that technology will take care of much of it. We'll have a cocktail of replacement fuels and life won't be that much different. Of course he's got kids and I'm sure he doesn't want to think about a hard life for them.
So I'm living my life today, all the while aware and thinking about the future and how best to prepare for it. I have to avoid talking about it too much for fear of aggravating my wife.
Sending e-mails to my local community listserv gets no response, but for complaints that I shouldn't post "environmental" issues on a community listserv.
I guess I'm wondering how I prepare for Peak Oil when everyone around me pays lip service to it, but doesn't truly think it's a big problem.
It makes sense to prepare for trends that you think will happen in the future. However, none of us knows what will really happen.
In many ways the concept of peak oil is a great psychological litmus test. Exposing people to the concept separates them into a set of different groups based more on internal make up than facts or evidence.
Maybe you are right that peak oil will destroy mankind, but maybe you are afraid of having kids and this is how you have reacted.
My guess is that if dwelling on peak oil is impacting your marriage the issue is you and not peak oil. I think the risk that you ruin your marriage and wife's dreams is greater than the risk that peak oil does. I know others will disagree.
Apologies if this sounds harsh or if I have misinterpreted your situation. But this is what I feel on reading your post.
Ditto on what Jack said.
Your wife is a human being.
Like conversation with any human being, when your wife asks you to tone down the PO talk, do it. You can't shove this down anyone's throat --and especially with your new marriage, you should not be shoving it into her ears 24/7. There is a lot more to life and to this world than just PO.
Getting married is scary.
Having a first child (Happy Father's Day in advance BTW) is a scary thing.
If you are scared, it means you intend to do it responsibly.
It means you will probably be a good father.
Raise a PO-aware child.
Go for it.
The future is going to come no matter what.
One child is barely replacement rate.
Po has nothing to do with having your first child.
Many of us have made choices that, had we seen the economics and the environment even 5 years ago, the way we see them today we'd have made them differently.
Nobody can tell you that you are wrong to consider such things in your personal decisions IMHO.
Although there is something to be said for 'keeping your cards close to the vest' especially in a small town like where I live. After having done your 'civic duty' to try and 'let others know' there is a great benifit to 'keeping your personal options open' in this current environment.
There are some occurances like ,higher energy costs, increasing financial volitility, and decreased employment security that have upward probability.
It is silly not to hedge against these things when its possible to do so.
I'm not buying any SUV's anytime soon, or investing in a large home. Many 'peak oilers' are staying physically fit and growing a garden. We're considering how we'll cook, commute, and care for ourselves in a resource constrained environment. It only makes sense.