Has Global Peak Oil been reached?

Book recommendation for you Anders.......

The oil production history charts for peak oil follow the same decline curve for different countries. And even when looking at short time spans this can be seen, such as: http://stevemaley.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/shortfall.png

And the above graph is definitely a part of an overall peak oil curve: http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/8/23/saupload_reuters_cantarell_through_june_20093.jpg

So how can Saudi Arabia have such a flat oil production history? See for example: http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=sa&product=oil&graph=production

One possible explanation is that Saudi Arabia has been conserving its oil reserves. But as Matt Simmons said - that Saudi Arabia has been lying big time about its oil production and reserves - fits better with its flat oil production history. Saudi Arabia's oil production has probably already peaked and it's only fake statistics that is keeping an illusionary facade up.

Book recommendation for you Anders.......Lots has been written on the subject Anders, and perhaps you are all the more familiar with this stuff than me with regard to what is out there literature wise, but with respect to the Saudi question specifically, if you have never looked at this book;

TWILIGHT IN THE DESERT: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy by Matthew R. Simmons

it really is worth a read......

Some aspects of the subject are covered in perhaps a bit more detail than most of us would care to get into, but that said, one can skip around a bit to avoid getting bored and still pick up a lot, get flat out scared a lot too.

As a bicyclist, not a car driver, peak oil has always made intuitive sense to me. Not that I do not use and waste plenty of fossil fuel myself, surfing trips to Hawaii, Bali, and so forth, but seeing the cars all lined up struggling as they do grunting down the road every day, even before I caught wind of the subject thanks to that seminal Scientific American article by Colin Campbell back in something like '96, I thought, "this can't go on, just can't, it is inevitable, the oil drying up, slowly but surely".

What is interesting for me is that many complain about gas at $4 a gallon, $5 a gallon. We probably pay twice that given the "investment" we make in the carrier groups/battle groups that maintain/protect/safeguard the shipping/oil lanes in a sense, the wars we fight for oil, at least to some degree, the wars are about oil, and so forth. But even at $20 a gallon, $100 a gallon, $200 a gallon, the stuff is a steal, literally so.

What, the stuff took how many hundreds of millions of years to make and we are gonna' burn through it in 200 years? What if there was 300 years worth of oil left, which there ain't, but say there was, even then it would be absurd burning through it like this.

My sense is the turn has been made. As they say, it is one of those things we'll only recognize in retrospect, "IN OUR REAR VIEW MIRROR". 15 years from now we may look back and say, "yeah, there, 2010-ish is when we hit the 50% mark", or perhaps 2014 will be the year, but it seems close.

Take a look at the Simmons book Anders. I think it is worth the read. Very cheap, $ 0.01 used on ADOTCOM.
 
Last edited:
TWILIGHT IN THE DESERT: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy by Matthew R. Simmons

Yeah, that book was mentioned in one of my previous posts. I haven't read it, but I have listened a lot to Matt Simmons. I was very impressed by him. Unfortunately he 'happened'? to die fairly recently.
 
Check the book out Anders, even the non peak oil stuff....

Yeah, that book was mentioned in one of my previous posts. I haven't read it, but I have listened a lot to Matt Simmons. I was very impressed by him. Unfortunately he 'happened'? to die fairly recently.

Check the book out Anders, even the non peak oil stuff...., simply learning about the Saudi thing, fascinating.


In a way, I am reminded of the science fiction book DUNE......The most valuable "thing" in the world, buried under a desert and so mined...... It is a beautiful and amazing world this planet of ours....
 
Last edited:
It is a beautiful and amazing world this planet of ours....

I agree...too bad there are those who make the conscious decision to crap all over that beauty.

Guess it makes them feel more "important" than they are in reality...how sad.
 
What is interesting for me is that many complain about gas at $4 a gallon, $5 a gallon. We probably pay twice that given the "investment" we make in the carrier groups/battle groups that maintain/protect/safeguard the shipping/oil lanes in a sense, the wars we fight for oil, at least to some degree, the wars are about oil, and so forth.


US oil consumption in 2010: 19.2 million bbl/day (source)

Price of crude oil today: $105 per bbl (source)

Annual US spending on crude oil at today's prices: $750 billion.

This represents only about $2.50 per gallon of oil, so we can tack on at least another 50% for refining, transportation, profit, and taxes, for at least a trillion dollars a year spent on refined petroleum products in the United States.

US Department of Defense's entire budget for Fiscal Year 2011: $687 billion, including $158 billion for "overseas contingency operations" (Iraq and Afghanistan).

This represents about 4.5% of GDP. In FY 1936, during the depths of the Great Depression, US defense spending was 3.2% of GDP (source), and the US Navy had six fleet aircraft carriers in commission, building, or ordered (today the Navy maintains 11). At this time the US was a net exporter of oil, and none of the later Axis powers had begun making significant international trouble.

I also dispute your insinuation that the war in Afghanistan is "about oil" to any significant degree.

In sum, your claim that "we probably pay" an additional $4-$5 per gallon of gas in defense spending is specious.
 
I find the concept of discussing "Global Peak Oil" as a conspiracy issue to be ridiculous.

Here's why. Peak Oil scenarios entail two main claims:

1. Industrial civilization is destined to collapse (sooner or later, quickly or slowly, completely or partially depending on whose scenario you listen to).

2. There's nothing anybody can really do about it.

It's item 2 that makes conspiracies irrelevant. Because if there's nothing anybody can do about it, a conspiracy to keep it secret makes no difference. It's like concealing a weather forecast. The weather's going to happen anyhow, and it won't be secret once it starts happening. Peak Oil conspiracy theories have the strange quality of being irrelevant even if they were true.

It would be quite different if there were a solution that evil boogeymen were preventing the public from putting into effect. Like a working free energy machine. That's implausible for various reasons but at least it's not self-contradicting. But the idea of a conspiracy to conceal a solution contradicts the very foundation of Peak Oil doomerism which is that there is no solution (hence, the doom part). If free energy exists and is known, then Peak Oil is not a problem to begin with.

Non-conspiracist Peak Oil doomers, generally, see free energy beliefs as at best feckless wishful thinking, that goes exactly counter to the kind of thinking they're promoting. (They don't even like to talk about nuclear power, and that's actually real. Doomers who will gladly regale you with pages of detailed facts and figures about every other known energy source in nature, if you ask them about nuclear power, will usually answer: "Poison! Evil! Hssssssss!" while making magic evil-eye-warding hand gestures at you.)

Here's another flavor of the irrelevant even if it were true Peak Oil conspiracy theory: that global elites are manipulating things to assure that they, and they alone, will be able to maintain their privileges and luxuries following the coming collapse. Why is that irrelevant if it's true? Because the very nature of a collapse guarantees that only an elite few, at most, would be able to maintain privileges and luxuries following it. If that were not true, then it wouldn't be a collapse. So what are conspiracy theorists complaining about? Not that no more than an elite few will maintain a higher lifestyle, because that's inevitably true in a collapse, but that it's not them. If they're right, then the only reasonable responses would either be acceptance of that fact, or doing whatever you can to attempt to become one of those elite few yourself before the collapse occurs. A third option, attempting to ensure that the elites end up destitute like the rest of us instead, is mere irrelevant spite that helps no one. (Though in a real collapse, that third option would be likely to happen anyhow.)

Okay, let's shoot for the evil conspiracy moon and see if we can find a relevant conspiracy possibility there. Let's say that every expert in the world has secretly reached consensus that the world's resources cannot sustain more than 1/10 of our current population. So they've convinced every government in the world to cooperate on a plan to outright murder 90% of us.

That would be evil, sure enough. But what does it mean to the ninety percent? Either the murderers are wrong about the ability of the world's resources only being able to sustain a smaller population, or they are right. If they are wrong, then there is no threat from Peak Oil collapse. If they are right, then the murder they plan is redundant with the natural die-off that would occur anyhow once nutrition, sanitation, and health care systems break down. An equal number of people would be equally doomed either way, and we can only hope that a well-designed murder plan could produce less suffering and preserve more infrastructure and resources intact than natural epidemics and famines would.

So, the only case conspiracists should really be worried about is if there is a murder plan, but the murder plan is unnecessary because the population can carry on just fine the way it is. But if the population can carry on just fine the way it is, why promote Peak Oil, instead of "OMG they're planning to murder us all for no reason!"?

Peak Oil and conspiracy theories go together like something that doesn't mix with water very well and water.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
On the Alex Jones show today they talked about peak uranium, lol. There may be truth to that, I haven't looked at uranium, but the funny thing is that they said that peak oil isn't a problem because there is plenty of oil, they claimed.

They are probably ordered to not mention any oil problem because that could actually make people too worried collectively. At the same time they mentioned peak uranium and rare earth minerals in Africa as a disguised heads up for peak oil.
 
2. There's nothing anybody can really do about it.

It's item 2 that makes conspiracies irrelevant.

But they ARE doing what they can. They are desperately trying to solve the global peak oil problem without telling the public about it. That's the conspiracy. And it may actually be a valid conspiracy, because the world could have been in even more disarray today if they hadn't covered up the global peak oil problem.
 
Do you think the Jews and the Vatican are in cahoots? I've always wondered about that.

Judaism is an older religion than Christianity, but I think it was the power elite in the Roman Empire that figured out that they could piggyback on Judaism and create a new religion on top of it. And via Christianity they could much more easily grab more power than was possible with the Roman Empire.

And for example Zionism may actually be a Vatican invention. But to tie it back to peak oil, not even the Vatican or the globalist bankers can do anything to create more oil.
 
The real solution to peak oil is....... free energy! :cool: Seriously! Such as overunity extraction of zero point energy. The problem is that such technology is REALLY dangerous. That's what I believe. So they can't just roll out that kind of technology from black op laboratories.
 
:eek: I came to think of a really tricky conspiracy theory. What if they are already using free energy technology for oil extraction? In secret. Then the global peak of oil production will be moved many decades into the future.
 
On the Alex Jones show today they talked about peak uranium, lol. There may be truth to that, I haven't looked at uranium, but the funny thing is that they said that peak oil isn't a problem because there is plenty of oil, they claimed.

They are probably ordered to not mention any oil problem because that could actually make people too worried collectively. At the same time they mentioned peak uranium and rare earth minerals in Africa as a disguised heads up for peak oil.

If you sincerely believe this junk, and you believe it without evidence, then there is little hope for you...
 
:eek: I came to think of a really tricky conspiracy theory.

There are plenty of existing ignorant "theories", so we don't need you to pull any more out of your hiney....

In other words, stop thinking...it isn't serving you well.


What if they are already using free energy technology for oil extraction? In secret. Then the global peak of oil production will be moved many decades into the future.

Delusional...
 
There are plenty of existing ignorant "theories", so we don't need you to pull any more out of your hiney....

In other words, stop thinking...it isn't serving you well.




Delusional...

It's an extremely speculative theory, but if the global oil production will continue to remain flat for say a decade into the future I will start to think there could actually be some truth to it!
 
On the Alex Jones show today they talked about peak uranium, lol. There may be truth to that, I haven't looked at uranium, but the funny thing is that they said that peak oil isn't a problem because there is plenty of oil, they claimed.

They are probably ordered to not mention any oil problem because that could actually make people too worried collectively. At the same time they mentioned peak uranium and rare earth minerals in Africa as a disguised heads up for peak oil.

There's no such thing as peak Uranium. M. King Hubbert, the original developer of Peak Oil Theory, specifically stated that it doesn't apply to Uranium. The energy density of fission fuels is simply too high.
 
The real solution to peak oil is....... free energy! :cool: Seriously! Such as overunity extraction of zero point energy. The problem is that such technology is REALLY dangerous. That's what I believe. So they can't just roll out that kind of technology from black op laboratories.

Would you mind explaining, in your own words, how to take advantage of Zero Point Energy?
 

Back
Top Bottom