Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 04:58 PMTDOS,  when people pin you down you don't answer.

Et Tu, Brute? I have asked more than a few of my own....and they have been avoided with alacrity. One of them this very evening on your most current reference...and I provided the information to allow you to answer as easy as I could. Of what quality is the reference you provided, in light of their track record?

Quote from: K-DogYou are a cornicopian.  I asked you,  tell us how long the oil bonanza will last?

Define "bonanza". Volume or price. And the scale of the question. Domestic or global?

And I am a doomer. Just not like one of those you defined earlier i.e. the faith based who ignore conflicting evidence, facts and even reality in order to proclaim a result they like. You explained them quite well. Being a doomer is childs play based on nothing more than perspective. All it requires is an understanding that the Sun is getting lighter every day, and the astrophysical doom that guarentees.

Quote from: K-DogTell us in you own words.  I will make it easier on you this time and only answer one of the questions.

Cool. I put it in bold last time so you wouldn't miss it. Here it is again.
What might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

Your question was "tell us how long the oil bonanza will last?"

Give me the framework of interest and I'll give you my answer. Price or volume. And scale.

QuoteWhat might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

If they have an advanced degree from an accredited university, quite a fucking lot.  They would have to spew nonsense that can be refuted.  Now answer my question.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 06:05 PM

QuoteWhat might it take in your eyes K-Dog, to disqualify the value of a petroleum geologist's opinion?

If they have an advanced degree from an accredited university, quite a fucking lot.

Art has a history degree from somewhere, and a geology masters from Colorado School of Mines. It is a good school. So when as a petroleum geologist, with at least some minor experience with a major, states that when shale source rock can't have any left in it of significant volume in 2011, and folks from lesser schools turn that oil from shale rock into the world's 3rd largest producing source....well...it just seems that 8 mmbbl/d is quite a fucking lot.

Quote from: K-DogThey would have to spew nonsense that can be refuted.  Now answer my question.

Good. Perfect description of Art and the example I mentioned. We can put aside his nonsense about well productivity change until he gets an engineering degree and hope he can use it better than his geology one, like geolgists that can't find 8 mmbbl/d as it is being developed under their feet can be counted on to be able to add or subtract correctly, let alone get the training to be taken seriously by those who do well prpoductivity for a living.


Happy to answer your question. You didn't provide the reference of the answer so I'll fill it in for you. Domestic. And I'll do both price and volumes.

The US is burning through that 8 mmbbl/d = 2.9 billion/yr. Currently US total production has been relatively flat this year, so I will assume first that flat will continue. Oil prices running $80/bbl or so, companies focusing on return to investors rather than growth, rig counts began dropping last spring, been stable for awhile. Flat currently is a good start.

To figure reserves you multiple 2.9 billion X (6-8) to get the approximate amount of produced oil if you stopped drilling new wells tomorrow. So call that 20 billion barrels produced over through mid-century. Figure out remaining area in each of the big oil plays and you're looking at maybe 14 million acres. Take the wells drilled, in the big oil plays anyway, call that 49,000 at 150 acres each and you discount 7.4 million of those acres. So you figure that development of slightly over half the area netted you maybe 7 billion cum, +20 of existing production from them in the future. Lets call the remaining less than that, so another 25 billion. Assuming stable production in the $55-$100/bbl range, and the same type of rampup of new wells to get to the point of replacing the 2.9 that is declining away over the next quarter century, you might be able to sustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable. Presume existing prices though, and then variation becomes a acreage tier issue. You know...stuff geologists know....except for discredited ones. Higher prices have the chance to offset declines and even provide gains in exchange for lower rates later, even at the higher prices. Low prices slow the entire process down, including current rates, but extend a given rate longer. Low prices and slowdowns also have the potential to create another peak at a later point in time. I know....again...?

So the oil that Art claimed couldn't be significant and turned into the 3rd largest oil producing rock in the world (and rocketed the US to being the world's largest oil producer....again) can be sized at about 50 billion barrels, call it twice the size of Prudhoe Bay in place volumes. Just a back of envelope WAG of course.

So the US will be a substantial producer for quite some period of time, with holding oil prices, and no one changing the rules for the producers along the way, always a popular idea among the save the world types.

The bad news is this...US oil prices aren't based on US costs. They are based on international prices, storage and strategic volumes, OPEC proclamations and curtailments, and those are all about geopolitics. So those who don't know dick about oil particulars, like maybe Art, might be better off inventing cool global scenarios, the knock on effects of which can cascade all over US oil prices and the economy at large.

Quotesustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable.

Ten years, then as production can not be maintained, what happens?  Ten years how much time is that.

This was the number one song of 2014.  Ten years ago.


Ten years is the blink of an eye.  After which no preparations have been made.  Peak thinking did pollute brains because the end will not resemble a gradual fading away.  Things will go to shit fast.

In ten more years the biosphere collapse will show that the human race is in overshoot beyond any doubt.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 24, 2024, 08:40 PM

Quotesustain the current rate for 10 years of buildup of new, same as the old. Seems reasonable.

Ten years, then as production can not be maintained, what happens?  Ten years how much time is that.

Ten years was how long it took the US to begin ramping up oil from shale and become the world's largest oil producer, and repeak the country some half a century after the last time.

What happens next is called the Texas ROZ. You can't ask Art about it, he'll say the same thing he said last time. And the folks who knew he was full of shit then are busy doing the same thing all over again. The cost will require a higher base price, but the last time I noticed a volume attached to it, that number was twice as large as the one I just gave you for light tight oil from shale formations. Another 100 billion.

Let me guess, Art didn't mention that one in his video? That research stuff does come in handy on occasion. Someone should tell Art, so he can deny it doen't exist like the last time. That would be a riot in another decade.

Quote from: K-DogTen years is the blink of an eye. 

True. The US went from leftover has-been to world leading oil and gas producer and LNG exporter in about that long.

Quote from: K-DogAfter which no preparations have been made.

Says who? Maybe there are folks out there doing that thing again...research? Maybe they were talking about it 15 years ago, and Art didn't notice that either? Maybe they began experimenting with the processes for at least 8 years now? Maybe their current beef is they can't get the oil price they want? 

Quote from: K-DogPeak thinking did pollute brains because the end will not resemble a gradual fading away.  Things will go to shit fast.

Well, we know it'll take longer than 6 years, right? And can go to 15, because we've already been post peak oil that long as well. So what are you thinking? 20 maybe? Gives us another 14 then maybe?

Quote from: K-DogIn ten more years the biosphere collapse will show that the human race is in overshoot beyond any doubt.

Could be, but that doesn't require yet another peak oil involved. Humans have plenty of stuff to keep polluting the biosphere with besides just burning stuff. Plus we've got the feedback loops going now, rising oceans and whatnot.

I think sticking with biosphere pollution and climate change is a great end times angle than peak oil stuff.

Sorry to hear about all the lost forum data and whatnot. That always sucks.

Quote from: K-Dog on Aug 01, 2023, 12:37 AM

Quote from: ed_from on Jul 31, 2023, 09:11 PMI thought we were running out of affordable fossil fuels and bad stuff was supposed to happen. Are we there yet?

Considering that I once bought gas for 17 cents a gallon in a gas war and getting to and from work now sucks up about an hour of the work shift, the answer is an unequivocal yes.

I once bought cheap gas in the US as well...us all being geezers and all. I also once lived in a state that had rationing when the 1979 global peak oil hit. The US hasn't seen state wide rationing since the late 70's has it?

And traveling to work is all about cost, you picked gas cost. Bummer. We are victims of our choices sometimes, certainly an hour of my work shift is 2250 miles of EV driving a stupid cage, at night time electricity charging rates. My current gas powered commuting 2 wheeler is worth about 1950 miles.  More efficient commuting for everyone, and geriatrics can help save the world!

Pretty stiff premium to be able to broadcast social status while just going to and from work seems like, or fuel is crazy expensive in the PAC NW?

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 20, 2025, 05:52 PM

Quote from: K-Dog on Aug 01, 2023, 12:37 AM

Quote from: ed_from on Jul 31, 2023, 09:11 PMI thought we were running out of affordable fossil fuels and bad stuff was supposed to happen. Are we there yet?

Considering that I once bought gas for 17 cents a gallon in a gas war and getting to and from work now sucks up about an hour of the work shift, the answer is an unequivocal yes.

I once bought cheap gas in the US as well...us all being geezers and all. I also once lived in a state that had rationing when the 1979 global peak oil hit. The US hasn't seen state wide rationing since the late 70's has it?

And traveling to work is all about cost, you picked gas cost. Bummer. We are victims of our choices sometimes, certainly an hour of my work shift is 2250 miles of EV driving a stupid cage, at night time electricity charging rates. My current gas powered commuting 2 wheeler is worth about 1950 miles.  More efficient commuting for everyone, and geriatrics can help save the world!

Pretty stiff premium to be able to broadcast social status while just going to and from work seems like, or fuel is crazy expensive in the PAC NW?

Working always costs money, There are obvious costs.  A minimum $6 a shift for fossil fuel, the elective chocolate croissant and coffee for about $5.20.  I need it for strength.  Toss that box.  Tote that bale.  On a Seattle McJob wage that is about half an hour in mandatory expenses.
     There are also hidden costs that are hard to articulate, but you know they are they.  Simply being a wage slave makes you a consumer and when you have sold your time you must spend more on your off time to make up for the labor you stole from yourself to sell to someone else.
     This makes me very irritated when I am stuck with four hour shifts.  I figure an hour of my 'working day' is simple overhead from having to work.  That makes a hidden tax on the job of 25% doubling the visible cost to account for hidden costs.  (not likely accurate, but you have to start somewhere, and the actual hidden costs are larger IMHO).  Once I have four hours that are all mine, I am OK with the arrangement.
     Hidden costs also scale with income.  I get my work shirts at my McJob for free.  If I had not worked in the more casual professional era when I slummed as an engineer I would have had to have a suit.  The peoples car of the low tier American working class it the Toyota.  The higher tier class traitors of the American working class drive more expensive cars.  Assholes drive Teslas.

Bottom line, I am not a happy camper when I work four hour shifts.  I feel like I am getting screwed.  And I do not think I am wrong.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 20, 2025, 07:04 PMThis makes me very irritated when I am stuck with four hour shifts.  I figure an hour of my 'working day' is simple overhead from having to work.  That makes a hidden tax on the job of 25% doubling the visible cost to account for hidden costs.  (not likely accurate, but you have to start somewhere, and the actual hidden costs are larger IMHO).  Once I have four hours that are all mine, I am OK with the arrangement.

Well...then a 5 hour shift gives you four hours that are yours. But you are still stuck with an hours worth of "tax" to make it happen.

ALways thought of these types of things as "fixed costs". Regardless of job, you drive there. Whether you eat along the way or buy some groceries and make your own sandwich, a fixed cost regardless. Lump these types of things into just "life". I really like doing X! Pay to play. Or work.

Quote from: K-DogHidden costs also scale with income.  I get my work shirts at my McJob for free.  If I had not worked in the more casual professional era when I slummed as an engineer I would have had to have a suit.  The peoples car of the low tier American working class it the Toyota.  The higher tier class traitors of the American working class drive more expensive cars.  Assholes drive Teslas.

Well, never placed much value in how people decide to advertise their social class with clothes or jewerly or cars. You can find assholes behind the wheel of any automobile...same as you can an incompetent driver.

My wife falls for the status broadcasting with cars and clothes and whatnot. Maybe most do...otherwise advertising wouldn't work. I find it hysterical and take advantage of it everytime sometime broadcasts that they've fallen for it...or not, and work it in both directions just to watch the shocked look when someone expects one version of what they think you are, and you show up as the other. It works in both directions. I get giggles out of it every time.

Quote from: K-DogBottom line, I am not a happy camper when I work four hour shifts.  I feel like I am getting screwed.  And I do not think I am wrong.

Everyone gets screwed, one way or another when it comes to costs related to work. I consider buying suits to have to do dog and pony shows irritating. Just a cost of doing business/work.

The idea that less will be used in the future is a fantasy.  'Prices' will go up when production does not meet demand, and demand will be reduced until a hard limit is reached as supply is reduced to the point where society can't function.  By then everything will have gone to shit.

By 2030 prices will have to rise to reduce use by 50%.  One way or another consumption must fall.

EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2025

Looks like US peak oil (again) in 2028 or so?

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/data/browser/#/?id=1-AEO2025&region=0-0&cases=ref2025&start=2023&end=2050&f=A&sourcekey=0

EIA models assume some continued growth before decline sets in.  The EIA assumes continued investment, no geopolitical disruption, and no massive demand collapse.

It that graph is right, then it will be bizness as usual for two to three years.  After that American frogs begin to warm up.



Just enough time for the upper class to lower our living standards.  To get us ready for their future.


Closet self-serving doomers with an Armageddon complex are running the country.

Quote from: K-Dog on Jun 04, 2025, 04:31 PMEIA models assume some continued growth before decline sets in.

Looks that way. It has happened before. Decline setting in.

2015.2020. Most recent STEO says Q4 2025 and decline after.

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/data/browser/#/?v=30&f=Q&s=&start=200001&end=202604&id=&maptype=0&ctype=linechart&linechart=~COPRPUS&map=

Quote from: K-DogThe EIA assumes continued investment, no geopolitical disruption, and no massive demand collapse.

Pretty much BAU. They sometimes do scenarios of high/low resource and various other types of things, prices and whatnot. They tend to focus on econometric models, and don't get involved much, by design and definition, with more than "legs and regs" as they put it. Legislation and Regulation.

Additionally, one of the only global peak oil estimates of the early 21st century that hasn't been discredited yet is the one the EIA did, based on USGS resource assessments.

They don't do stochastic much though. The lead modeler they had from around 2012 through 2018 or so was pure genius. He was responsible in part for getting their global oil and gas model built, which ended up answering the global peak oil issue some years ago, I think after he left.

Quote from: K-DogCloset self-serving doomers with an Armageddon complex are running the country.

I was under the impression that an orange dementia addled geriatric was running the country. Doomers anything have been in hiding for awhile now. Hell, resilience.org can't even get a good doom topic going as of late, they've about abandoned the peak oil angle altogether.

Quote from: K-Dog on Jun 14, 2025, 12:43 PMTDoS, this is your link where you posted this graph.

And it is why you are a troll.  You wrote this and I am responding to it.

I'm a troll.....because you THOUGHT I didn't know about AEO results? I do know about AEO results. Quite some time ago. What is the point? I'm a troll...because you read provided information? This is great!!

Quote from: K-Dog

QuoteAmerican LNG exports coming online means there is some coin to be made producing NG in the US....us now being the world's largest producer of both oil and gas. And word's largest exporter of LNG. Profits to feed the capitalism beast!

Your own graph which you used to counter my assertion that:

➡️ By 2030, approximately 50% of current oil supply will be lost to natural decline.

➡️ By 2035, if demand holds steady, gasoline supply failure becomes imminent.

You posted a graph of energy of crude oil anad lease condensate. In quads. That decline is maybe 1 quad out of 29 between a maximum and 2030. So where did you get gasoline supply failure imminent? Did the EIA say that, or did you not read the graph correctly and karnacked a 3.4% drop in energy into gasoline supply failure? Jesus man, you've got more brains than that, are you posting high again or something?

As far as "demand holding steady", maybe it will, maybe it won't. But you didn't show an EIA graph of demand assumptions, they certainly exist. Did you not reference that one because it doesn't say what you did? Did they SAY "gasoline supply failure imminent!" somewhere. Because if they did, I missed that.

Quote from: K-DogJust came back to haunt you.  You published clear evidence for decline, yet you pivot into a make America great posture.  Just let let the horses run free.  Prosperity is here for those who ride.

Once again...good thing I didn't say those things. Instead I just posted that the US might be peaking. Again. And the world already has, and we all know the HORRORS that has caused. You not able to fuel up the Benz, petro chemical production cratering, gas rationing just like global peak oil in 1979....all these horrors! Obviously the MIB have been erasing all internet news of these events.

Now that you have written new code to keep the MIB out, you can post some real news showing all the rationing and people with cars that won't move because they can't get fuel and whatever? It would be a big scoop for the website!

Quote from: K-DogAfter that the discount at the gas pump you get for buying groceries is going away.

Please. Keep up. I bought a BRAND NEW EV for an easy 405 LESS than your environmentally friendly do-gooder heat pump....why in the world would I give a shit about gas pumps and discounts for buying groceries? Again...I wrote an entire post about that cheap EV ON YOUR BLOG HERE. You missed it? Or just decided to assign this strawman to me forgetting that not everyone is an ICE powered polluter of the world (you know, folks who DO use gas..or DIESEL...pumps).


Peak has always been, and always will be a given. Hubbert's math in his seminal paper in 1956 was correct. Good thing  that Hubbert also wrote (when he declared US peak oil by 1950 back in the late 30's) that there might be multiple peaks along the way!

The man was a genius. Boy was he right! 2025....yet another US peak! Now the question will be can there be more? The answer is obviously dependent on other factors, but I am currently pessimistic. But the means to make it happen might require the same sea change in the economics of resource development that has OBVIOUSLY happened multile times before. You won't find any of thsi knowledge among the peakers, and they tend to be really embarassed nowadays after their hollering and screaming and getting it all wrong the last couple of times.

Official Moderation Notice

Regarding TDoS's violations of the Doomstead Diner Code of Conduct

Catalogued Violations

    Strawmanning (Severity: High):
    Deliberately conflated supply, my claim with production, the graph, despite knowing the distinction.

    Sarcasm/Personal Attacks (3 counts, 3-day ban each):

        "Posting high again?" → Mocking
        "Can't fuel up the Benz" → Ridicule
        "MIB erasing news" → Suggesting I am paranoid

Action

    9-day ban to commence tomorrow at a time of my choosing. 

For Virgin Eyes, what this is about.

My actual claims (vs. TDoS's distortions):

➡️ By 2030, approximately 50% of current oil supply will be lost to natural decline.

➡️ By 2035, if demand holds steady, gasoline supply failure becomes imminent.

Production is related to supply, but they are not the same thing.  TDoS fully understands the difference but cares to muddy the waters.  TDoS is a Troll who countered my claims with a graph concerning Production not Supply.  Which was the actual content of my claim.

Even on the graph TDoS posted, by 2030 we are in steep decline.  By then we will be in a different economy.

Quotethe means to make it happen might require the same sea change in the economics of resource development that has OBVIOUSLY happened multiple times before.

Multiple times, and so on.  Rinse and repeat. Technology will save us, so claims TDoS.  For now and forever.  I say otherwise.

QuoteSo where did you get gasoline supply failure imminent?

I get that wherever I want to get it because I make my own interpretations.  My analysis considers exports are going to take the place of what Americans will not be able to buy when the economy fails.  I see shortages ahead when supply chains fail.

Ten years goes by in the blink of an eye.  After which no preparations are made.  The end will not resemble a gradual fading away.  Things will go to shit fast.  The Seneca cliff.

As shale output declines and imports face global competition, shortages and supply instability happens. This could happen sooner if black swan events occur, and once there are supply chain problems, they will not be easily resolved. The complexity of the oil industry means that when something goes wrong, it can be difficult to fix, and it's not as simple as just sticking a pipe in the ground as it once was.

The U.S. shale boom was a one-time geological lottery win, not a sustainable energy revolution. The idea that we can just "do it all over again" with the Texas ROZ (Residual Oil Zones) or some other unproven play is dangerous fantasy.

The last decade's surge was built on cheap money, prime acreage, and OPEC's price umbrella.  None of which exist today.  Permian producers now need $65-$96/barrel for breakeven, but prices are projected to fall to $59 by 2026.

Investors are done bankrolling growth.  After $300 billion in losses, Wall Street wants dividends, and reckless drilling is a gamble they do not want to take.

Declining rig counts, and a looming supply cliff is in the future and the Texas ROZ will not ride in as the oil cavalry at the last minute.

The Texas ROZ supposedly holds another 100 billion barrels. But let's get real. Residual oil zones (ROZ) form due to various geologic conditions and are located below the oil/water contact of main pay zones.  A ROZ is not shale. It is a depleted conventional reservoir, requiring far more expensive extraction techniques.  CO2 flooding must be used.

The Texas ROZ oil needs $80-$100+/barrel to be viable.  Prices that high are not good times.  Even if the Texas ROZ holds vast reserves, ramp-up will take decades in an environment where the economy can't do better than limp along.

Ten years ago we had fresh shale plays, eager investors, and $100+ oil.  Now we have depleted sweet spots, no easy capital, and volatile prices.  The next 10 years are not going to be years of growth.  They'll be a desperate scramble to run in place.  Then geology is going to win. Shale wells decline 70-90% in three years, and the Permian's best rock is already squeezed out.

Saudi Arabia's spare capacity can crash prices anytime, strangling shale.

The energy transition is a feel good fantasy, and all you have to do is look under the spinning globe on the main page to see the proof that it is a fantasy.  More fossil fuel was burned in 2023 than ever before.  EVs, efficiency, and climate policies are propaganda plays without teeth.  I track CO2 and it rising faster than it ever has.

Cheap oil built modern civilization. When it's gone, everything gets impossibly expensive.  Financial collapse will come before total biosphere or supply collapse. The shale sector is a debt house of cards, and it only needs one idiot to make it fall.  And when it falls it'll take pensions, banks, and jobs, everything, down with it.  And America has plenty of idiots to make it happen.

The U.S. shale miracle was a flash in the pan, not an energy revolution. The next 10 years won't be a repeat of that miracle.  It will be a reckoning with stupidity.  Renewables don't replace fossils.  Renewables actually increase total energy use.

We have no energy transition. We only have energy addition. Our system is increasing fossil fuel use while layering renewables on top.  We have Jevons Paradox in action.  Jevons Paradox can be dealt with.  But it will take a dictatorship of the proletariat to make that happen.  American capitalism has no ability to deal with Jevons Paradox.  None at all.  A system without any ability to regulate itself, and a system in which exploitation is a cornerstone ushers in doom.

Year to year change in CO2 concentration in the air is now at 0.85% per year.  See the green table in the upper right corner on the main page which you can also get to by clicking the globe.

https://chasingthesquirrel.com/

That is half again what it was when I started tracking the annual increase.