Quote from: K-Dog on Aug 23, 2025, 04:08 PMI was told there were huge reserves of shale oil way back in 1975, the issue then was how to get it economically.  You will argue the point, but how to get it was not mainstream knowledge.

You would need to be more specific about "shale oil". That term in its proper geologic use designates "kerogen" (which is a solid, and not oil), and estimates of its size measuring in the potential trillions of barrels exists in the western basins in the Green River Fmt/Piceance if memory serves and the USGS quantified it a couple years ago, just for fun.

1.5 trillion or so, in the Piceance Basin...Utah and Colorado mostly I believe, the stuff Jimmy Carter was going to use to fight global peak oil in 1979.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3012/pdf/FS09-3012.pdf

This work was done by Ron who is a real geologist and knows damn well what he is saying when he opens his mouth. He came looking for me to have an interesting conversation about halfway through his research when he was wanting to discuss methodology ideas for quantifying these volumes.

This ISN'T the shale oil, referred to by the EIA as LTO, which includes both "oil from shales" (light sweet crude sitting there in-situ and produced directly from the rock (unlike kerogen) and oil from low permeability rocks. That "shale oil" is liquid, estimates of viability under $200/bbl measured in some fraction of a trillion barrels.

The kerogen was of interest in the late 70's when Jimmy was trying to save the world and Exxon hadn't yet scrapped the Colony project.

Quote from: K-DogEstimates since 2015 suggest that the best parts of the Permian Basin may reach an EROEI of 7–10:1, but the average across U.S. shale is still closer to an EROEI of 5:1.  It takes a lot more money to get the same oil than it used to.

Companies when evaluating their Permian LTO use IRR as their metric of doing something or not, EROEI calculations are irrelevant. The academics have certainly had fun with the idea, but no company to my knowledge and relationships spanning 5 decades, or my knowledge of the history of O&G development has ever reported it to shareholders or stockholders, CEOS are not delivered progress reports on improving it, they don't calculate it in advance of development to pick well sites or develop acquisition plans (XOM certainly didn't do it prior to acquiring Pioneer), and it is as meaningful as the phases of the moon when it comes to deciding what and when and where to drill.

So some EROEI somewhere calculated by someone is X over here and Y very there? Ok, I'll take your word for it.

Quote from: K-DogI think economic conditions will give us a Seneca Cliff of production after which taxes will be used to pump oil so you can then buy it.  Socialism for the rich.  Shit for everyone else.

No Seneca Cliff maybe as drilling rates have't cratered, but I'll let you in on something that folks in the media and internet "experts" don't seem to have spotted...but the data sits right there.

Buried on this chock-a-block page full of information for the public:
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/supply/weekly/
there is Table 9. Crude oil production from the WPSR is the top line. Go check out the history of the US over the past year. PEAK OIL AGAIN! Whoo Hooo! I wonder if my peak oil consulting will skyrocket again? Those days were fun.

Quote from: K-DogThe big picture is far more complicated than how much black stuff is in the rocks.

Of course it is. Except for the real diehard peak oilers, to whom it is the only thing. There aren't many of them left, having been burned by their ignorance so often, and so hard, this century.