But I am only wrong from a particular point of view.
There is no point in looking for conventional oil in old writings because the distinction was not made before fracking became a significant part of production. There was no distinction before that time.
You are totally right about fracking tech being around in Hubbert's time. It was used 100,000 times by then. Fine.
Fracking for production in the United States began in the early 21st century. However, it wasn't until around the mid-2000s that fracking technology advanced sufficiently to unlock vast reserves of oil and natural gas from shale formations. The increased production of oil from fracking significantly impacted domestic American production around that time.
And not before that time.
Fracking used before the 21st century was used to augment and improve conventional wells.
Conventional wells being defined as wells that do not need fracking to produce oil.
Conventional was an unnecessary and unused qualification before the 21st century.
If Hubbert was squaking about a peak in oil as early as 1936 good for him. I don't see what it proves if he was or not. Hubbert described the mathematics of oil depletion. The mathematics he described is essentially correct. If the math were wrong, Hubbert would be a Bozo and we would not even be talking about him.
All that matters is if Hubbert correctly described the math or not. He did.
QuoteThe oil is conventional oil about 450 meters down.
That refers to the Oklahoma well in the video only.
Interesting tidbit about 1936. You wonder if peak oilers know about his earlier claim.
I wonder if the climate collapse crowd knows about Guy Mcphearson's mud hut days. Before he decided to exaggerate the danger of the arctic methane deposits way beyond any reasonable credibility, Guy was hard core peak oil. With a doomstead in Arizona.
Oil depletion does not pay as well as the methane bomb does on the dinner theater circuit.
Like the original Diners, I watched Guy change his tune. But that switcheroo can't compare to Hubbert because your claim is that Hubbert was humming the same tune earlier. Not a different one. So ??? what is the point. If Hubbbert had earlier insight, good for him.
I might sill have Guy's mud hut book if I look hard enough. It has a white cover. Like the suits he likes to wear.