And, again, this doesn't take into account the growing appetite within Saudi Arabia for its own oil (the net export issue)....

 

 

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2008/db2008079_865368.htm

 

July 10, 2008, 12:01AM EST

 

Saudi Oil: A Crude Awakening on Supply?

The Saudis say they can ramp up production to 12.5 million barrels a day. But a field-by-field breakdown obtained by BusinessWeek shows that's not likely

 

by Steve LeVine

 

Saudi Arabia's ability to calm panicky oil markets has been waning for years. With oil prices doubling since last summer, to more than $140 a barrel, Saudi King Abdullah on June 22 convened an extraordinary meeting (BusinessWeek.com, 6/22/08) of OPEC members, international oil industry CEOs, and foreign leaders in an effort to calm the markets. The kingdom's message was clear: Saudi fields can pump oil to market quickly, if demand warrants.

 

However, it appears that for at least the next five years, and possibly longer, the Saudis are likely to produce less crude than promised, according to fresh data on the kingdom's oil fields obtained July 9 by BusinessWeek. Saudi officials have said they would increase production to 12.5 million barrels a day next year, from the current 9.5 million barrels a day, and could even ramp up to as much as 15 million barrels a day if the market demanded it. As proof to a skeptical audience, the normally highly secretive Saudis were a bit more more open, escorting journalists on a visit to their new Al Khurais field (BusinessWeek.com, 6/23/08), east of Riyadh, and disclosing some field data.

Are there any rough estimates out there that suggest how many years remain until the oil supplies run dry, based on current consumption levels?  That may not be possible as it could be very subjective.

At current consumption rates of 30 billion barrels of oil per year, the globe's existing supplies of 1 trillion barrels of conventional oil will be exhausted in 33.33 years. However, there are trillions of additional barrels of potential crude oil supplies that can be converted from tar sands, shale and coal. In some cases, these supplies can be converted to crude oil in an efficient manner, both in terms of cost and energy. But much cannot. Does it make sense to convert some types/locations of shale or tar sands at a cost $200 per barrel when the market price for oil is $140? Or when it takes two barrels of oil-equivalent energy to recover one barrel of oil from shales or tar sands?

 

That's the dilemma. So just because there may be a supply out there, doesn't mean it's recoverable.

"Peak Demand" also needs to be taken into consideration.  The 30 billion barrels of oil figure above assumes that demand will not drop (or not grow), but remain flat over time. 

 

Given what we are seeing in the non-BRIC, Westernized societies with respect to domestic oil demand (it is falling), there is a chance we could see that 30 billion figure drop.  Considering that China, and other government regulated markets, are feeling growing pressure to stop subsidizing it, this potentiality should not be immediately dismissed.

 

Consider the US, in April day to day demand was down nearly 1 million barrels and most assuredly continued to drop in subsequent months.  That translates to a drop in US demand of 350 million barrels over a year.  The same is being seen in Japan/Germany/UK/France/Italy/etc.  So while demand in BRIC may still be growing (China's growth was 310 million barrels from 05-07), the drop seen in already fully-developed nations could more than offset it.

 

I do believe relatively high oil is here to stay though.  $75/barrel oil may not be profitable enough for oil companies to bother going after some of the more elusive, untapped reserves.  It's really economics 101 at the end of the day, finding that equilibrium between supply and demand.

Demand will drop with increased price. That's a given. If there are no negative economic repercussions resulting from the loss of demand, then everything will be just hunky dory. But as we we're starting to see, the economic repercussions from reduced demand are not painless. Far from it. How much economic damage accompanies demand destruction is the question.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-07/10/content_8525235.htm

 

China's crude oil import volume up 11% in first half 

 

www.chinaview.cn  2008-07-10 20:41:51

 

    BEIJING, July 10 (Xinhua) -- China, the world's second-largest energy consumer, imported 11 percent more crude oil in the first half of 2008 than in the year-earlier period.

 

    Crude imports stood at 90.53 million tons, the General Administration of Customs said on Thursday. The growth rate was down 0.2 percentage points from last year.

 

    The imports were valued at 64.98 billion U.S. dollars, up 85.8 percent, as world prices surged. Import prices hit a record high of 849.10 U.S. dollars per ton in June.

True, but how does this whole scenario play out? 

 

A recession would only cause further drop in demand, thus theoretically lowering the prices of oil further, but then making it potentially too costly for oil companies to extract the remaining quantities.

 

Tough to guess where the "correct" market price of oil should be, but it would appear that $140 in 2008 may be too high.

 

 

Jimbo strikes again (the Larry King show did make me mad, too, at the silliness of so-called experts though)...

_____________________

 

http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterf$&k_nation/2008/07/where-were-at.html

 

Where We're At

    Every time I saw a car towing a motorboat this holiday weekend, I wondered what was going through the head of the towee. Did they have a sense that darkness was falling on their careers in motor sports? Did they have an inkling that an oil-and-gas crisis is upon us and just not give a sh!t? Or were they just going through the motions, following some implacable rote programming induced by, say, forty-odd years of TV addiction and a diet based on corn-syrup byproducts?

    The holiday to me was a creepy hiatus from an ever more desperate reality overtaking the nation like a miasma. Meanwhile, the mainstream media's ongoing narrative has gotten stuck in the moronic groove of "drill drill drill." The belief of people like Larry Kudlow of CNBC and uber-mega-idiot John Stossel of ABC-News is that we could go back to $1.50 gasoline if only congress would open the offshore exploration areas and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This view is just plain erroneous. Nothing we get out of these regions will come close to offsetting the ongoing depletion of worldwide oil resources, or even arresting our own losses.

^ So how far were we into the Great Depression until we realized: "Hey, this is some serious doo-doo--we're in a Great Depression".  We had 25% unemployment, a farm collapse and hunger and starvation before. 

One of my peak oil heroes. By the way, after falling $8 earlier this week oil broke another record high today on declining supplies.....

_______________

 

http://media.economist.com/images/20080712/2808WB0.jpg

 

http://www.economist.com/people/displayStory.cfm?source=hptextfeature&story_id=11702995

 

Face value

 

The only way is down

Jul 10th 2008

From The Economist print edition

 

The high priest of “peak oil” thinks world oil output can now only decline

 

Fifth RingFOR a man who believes that the world as we know it is coming to an end, as least as far as energy is concerned, Matthew Simmons is remarkably cheerful. He magnanimously excuses The Economist’s poor record of predicting the price of oil: our suggestion in 1999 that oil would remain dirt cheap was conventional wisdom at the time, he says soothingly. He also shrugs off our more recent scepticism about his belief that the world’s production of oil has peaked: he, too, hopes that “peak oil” proves to be a myth, he says. But over a 40-year career in investment banking, Mr Simmons adds, he has learnt never to rely on wishful thinking. Most of the world’s oil analysts, he believes, are far too optimistic about how long existing fields will last, the prospects for new discoveries, technology’s ability to unlock new sources and to extend the life of existing ones, and so on. He prefers to rely on data rather than daydreams. And according to the American government’s own numbers, the world’s oil output has been more-or-less flat since 2005.

Watch the video at this link.  This is perhaps Matt Simmons' strongest warning yet:

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4287

 

 

Perhaps?? I've never heard him talk that like before! Matt is scared!!

All that crazy talk about conservation was clearly going to make the rest of the guest's heads pop.

Perhaps?? I've never heard him talk like that before! Matt is scared!!

 

He sure is.  The quizzical looks from the guy who only wanted to talk about the "trading end of this thing" were a sad commentary of the outright cluelessness that abounds on the issue.

 

It didn't seem to phase any of them when he talked about how if we end up with gas and diesel shortages, "we'll be out of food in a week".  Hello ?!?!  Anybody in there?!?!?

Please don't jump off a cliff after reading this.  KJP

 

http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=413&Itemid=91

 

Peak Oil Review -- July 14th, 2008 

Written by Tom Whipple   

Monday, 14 July 2008 

1. Production and Prices

2. China

3. Blackouts and Shortages

4. Washington

5. Energy Briefs

 

1. Production and Prices

Oil prices fell by $10 a barrel during the first part of last week on reports of a more conciliatory attitude in Tehran, a rising dollar, and profit-taking. On Thursday and Friday, oil jumped by more than $10 a barrel to touch an all-time high of $147.25 on reports, later denied by the Pentagon, that Israeli aircraft were rehearsing for strikes against Iran over Iraqi airspace and on well-publicized Iranian missile tests. A statement by the MEND that they are going to renew attacks on Nigeria’s oil infrastructure contributed to the price spike. Despite the $10s’ worth of volatility, oil closed out the week at $145.08, down 21 cents from the previous week’s close.

 

The Wednesday stocks report showed a 5.9 million barrel decline in US crude inventories, a small increase in gasoline and distillate stocks, and a 2.1 percent decline in US gasoline consumption.

http://blogs.edmunds.com/karl/2008/07/car-guys-versus-environmentalists-why-i-can-only-wear-one-of-those-labels.html

 

Written by Karl Brauer, Edmunds

 

Car Guys versus Environmentalists: Why I Can Only Wear One of Those Labels

 

"The automotive and oil industries need to stop profiting from raping our planet!"

 

"Environmentalists won't be happy 'til we're all living in caves and eating leaves!"

 

I could go into a long-winded discussion of the opposing views between environmentalists and car guys, but in the spirit of efficiency I think the above statements capture the most extreme perspectives quite effectively.

...

What was the point of that article?

Here's a better researched article. The graphics (some of which I've posted here) are worth visiting at:

 

http://seekingalpha.com/article/84966-gas-lines-coming-this-fall

 

Bill James

posted on: July 15, 2008

 

Gas lines are not hard to find.  This fall, you will likely see them at your local gas station:

 

+ There were spot shortages during the 2007 harvest in North and South Dakota.

+ A home heating oil crisis will occur when cold weather forces empty tanks to be filled.

+ Increasing mortgage foreclosures illustrate that people are choosing between their cost of commuting to work and house payment.

+ Fuel and food riots occur where people that cannot borrow or buy oil (examples):

  - June 13, 2008, 2 people killed in fuel riots in Spain and Portugal.

  - July 12, 2008, 13 people killed in fuel riots in Yemen.

 

The purpose of this essay is to highlight petroleum inventory issues likely to cause shortages this fall.  Several events can create instant, grave shortages.  Following is an incomplete list of known risks.  There are still more unknown risks of unknown magnitude.  As explained below, gas lines will be accompanied by a price jump of about $1.50 per gallon, even if crude oil does not increase in price.

 

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/7/15/saupload_uscrudestock080710.png

 

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/7/15/saupload_gulfimportskatrina_thumb1.jpg

 

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2008/7/15/saupload_uscrudedays080710.png

With the record price in the drop of oil today. If gas gets down to about $3 a gallon do anyone think bigger companies will buy up gas and store it just in case prices rise again?

Biggest oil price drop in 17 years

 

Crude falls $6.45 a barrel - 2nd largest price drop in dollar terms - as Fed chief indicates inflation and high fuel prices will cut into U.S. demand for oil.

By Kenneth Musante and David Goldman, CNNMoney.com staff writers

Last Updated: July 15, 2008: 4:56 PM EDT

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Oil prices plummeted by the second-largest margin on record Tuesday as investors feared a further decline in U.S. demand after hearing comments from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

 

Light, sweet crude fell $6.44 to settle at $138.74 a barrel in trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

 

Find this article at:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/15/markets/oil/index.htm?postversion=2008071516 

 

With the record price in the drop of oil today. If gas gets down to about $3 a gallon do anyone think bigger companies will buy up gas and store it just in case prices rise again?

 

I don't see it going down. In fact, despite the drop in oil, the price of gasoline hit a new record.

In addition to the slowdown in the economy, here's some other interesting reasons why oil fell a few percentage points. I especially find it interesting that cash-strapped banks may be dumping commodities investments to free up some cash....

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2008/07/16/oil-slick-why-are-crude-prices-falling/

 

July 16, 2008, 11:01 am

Oil Slick: Why Are Crude Prices Falling?

Posted by Keith Johnson

 

After crude oil’s biggest one-day drop in 18 years, there’s been no bounce—not even a dead-cat bounce. Crude kept falling in early Wednesday trading, even as the dollar rattled around at record lows against the euro.

 

...

 

But if it’s not supply or demand, then what’s pushing oil prices down? A lot of traders say technical factors, from electronic trading programs that pull the trigger at certain price points, to a slew of options set to expire tomorrow. At the same time, cash-strapped banks that invested heavily in commodities could be unwinding positions to get their dough. That is—oil’s recent slide doesn’t herald a return to $60 barrels, but is just the market hitching up its pants a la Arnold Palmer before another charge at the peak.

 

EC readers, with oil prices still falling, is there any answer for why?

 

http://transitionculture.org/2008/07/15/matt-simmons-and-the-five-psychological-stage-of-grief/

 

15 Jul 2008

Matt Simmons and the Five Psychological Stage of Grief

 

This is a wonderful clip (see above). Matt Simmons is the author of Twighlight in the Desert, is a leading US investment banker, and a long-term advocate of the peak oil argument. When he was asked to go on CNBCs Fast Money to discuss the high oil prices, he clearly stunned the presenters with his forthright analysis of societys current perilous situation. When asked if $147 a barrel is a wake up call he replied yes, but were not having a wake up call, were having a witch hunt for who got us here, a succinct analysis of the current world situation. What was especially fascinating to watch was when he was asked for his prognosis of the near future.

 

The nub of his argument is that oil is still actually very cheap, and that the biggest danger the world faces at the moment is those people who argue that the current high prices are a blip, a bubble, a speculators spike. When asked for his scenario of the next year or two, he replied that the US would keep dropping its inventories (of oil) and feeling good about it, which would be followed by a shortage, which would, in turn, lead to a run on the banks so fast your eyes would spin. This is when everyone tops up their tank. We havent run out of oil, but we could literally run out of usable diesel and gasoline and then we would have the Great American Disaster, because within a week wed have run out of food.

 

At this point the looks on the faces of the presenters is priceless. Yet Simmons isnt finished yet. What can we do now, he is asked. We need to retreat from our oil addiction, start living in villages again, eliminate long distance communiting by liberating the workforce and paying by productivity and growing food locally, and starting to embrace an enormous amount of R&D into things were not really doing anything about today, like ocean energy, geothermal, then within 5-7 we could get ourselves out of a very deep hole, but we have to do it real quick.

 

The programmes oil analyst then quickly goes straight off back into business-as-usual, and the discomfort evident in those in the studio subsides. In Richard Heinbergs Peak Everything, he cites Elizabeth Kubler-Rosss five psychological stages people go through when told they have a terminal illness, denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. I am increasingly finding these a useful scale by which to measure where people are at in the peak oil debate. While Simmons appears to have moved, in this piece, to acceptance, the presenters are still in the bargaining phase, as if we can somehow haggle and trade our way out of this.

 

When I look around at UK society today, we see the denial about peak oil in the tabloids arguing that high oil prices are all the governments fault, and in the conspiracy loons who argue there is still hundreds of years worth of supplies which some mythical they are hiding from us, the anger in the striking hauliers and other fuel protesters, the denial in government circles who still argue that oil will cost $67 a barrel in 2020, the bargaining in the debates around the 2p duty on fuel, the depression about it seems to be pretty common in writers on the subject, and then the acceptance, which I guess is what Transition work is trying to do, to look at the practicalities of where to go once people accept what is happening. It is fascinating to see what happens as people move through these stages, and I see lots of people moving through them quite quickly these days!

 

What is so fascinating about this clip, is that it is somehow a microcosm of what happens when people in denial and in bargaining meet someone from the acceptance stage. Now all we need is for Simmons (and others) to really integrate climate change into his thinking, and then that acceptance would be even more powerful! These exchanges are happening more and more these days, and what is important, I think, is not to take any of these 5 stages as being somehow superior to any of the others, there is no moral high ground here, rather they are all perfectly natural responses to a bewildering situation, although ultimately, the faster we can move towards acceptance, the faster we can actually start in earnest our preparations for life after oil.

I'm not posting the entire article because of all the charts and graphs in it. But here's a few teaser paragraphs to get you started....

 

 

http://www.peakoilblues.com/blog/?p=204

 

Published Jul 14 2008 by Peak Oil Blues

 

Get Out of Credit Card Debt! Now!

by Kathy McMahon

 

This post is a companion piece to C-Realm’s KMO interviewing me on an Episode entitled “Stop Digging.”

 

I’d like to dedicate this post to you, KMO.

 

We’re often told in the PO community “get out of debt,” and yet, as we continue to pay the minimum on the credit card each month, it appears to have little effect on the overall balance of the bill. Should we forget about getting out of debt and just start putting up supplies? Not unless you have a crystal ball that tells you when all US banks will fail, and that whatever entity takes them over will be unable to figure out how to collect your monthly payments. That’s a huge pool of money to ignore, now, isn’t it?

 

I’d suggest you seriously consider getting out of debt, rather than hoping that your debt will disappear. How can you begin to accomplish this task?

 

In a graduate course I taught a few semesters back entitled: “Sex and Money,” I spoke about credit card debt and presented the strategy I describe below. All of my students felt it to be very useful. I offer it to you here, described using a hypothetical couple, the Balinski’s. I hope you will “tune in, turn on, and take heart”, to quote the C-Realm Podcast.

 

.............http://www.peakoilblues.com/blog/?p=204

Wow, oil for next month's delivery has fallen below $130 and gasoline below $3.17 wholesale. We're saved!

schucks, texas is awful gung-ho for wind power, pardners (yay!)

 

 

Texas approves major new wind power project

 

 

Jul 17, 5:05 PM (ET)

 

By JIM VERTUNO

 

In this Jan. 9, 2007 file photo, wind turbines are seen at the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Project in rural Taylor County north of Wingate, Texas. Texas is moving forward on the nation's largest wind-power project, a plan to build billions of dollars worth of new transmission lines to bring wind energy from gusty West Texas to urban areas, it was announced Thursday, July 17, 2008. (AP Photo/LM Otero, file)

 

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - Texas, headquarters of America's oil industry, is about to stake a fortune on wind power.

 

In what experts say is the biggest investment in the clean and renewable energy in U.S. history, utility officials in the Lone Star State gave preliminary approval Thursday to a $4.9 billion plan to build new transmission lines to carry wind-generated electricity from gusty West Texas to urban areas like Dallas.

 

"People think about oil wells and football in Texas, but in 10 years they'll look back and say this was a brilliant thing to do," said Patrick Woodson, vice president of E.On Climate & Renewables North America, which has about 1,200 megawatts of wind projects already in use or on the drawing board in Texas.

It seems to me like very little progress has been made at improving our power grid since the massive Cleveland-New York blackouts a few years ago.  Did the general public forget about it the day after power was restored?  Are any major projects underway to build this infrastructure?  A better grid is essential if we are going to start relying more on wind and solar (which can only be produced in certain parts of the country, unlike coal, nuclear, etc.).

Has anyone thought about using the current of the river to make electricity? By putting turbines at the bottom of the riverbed.

^silt

Maybe put it slightly above the river and make it self adjust when the river rises and falls.  It least it will be a continuous stream unlike wind power, were you have to wait for the wind to pick up.

As if this "gas crunch" is temporary, but still an interesting read...

 

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/moneymag/0807/gallery.bplive_gas_crunch.moneymag/index.html

 

Where to ride out a gas crunch

Here are 10 places where commutes are short or many residents get to work in ways that don't use a lot of fuel.

 

Marquette, MI

Hays, KS

Laramie, WY

Aberdeen,SD

Naples, FL

Bainbridge Island, WA

Westport, CT

State College, PA

Hoboken, NJ

Santa Paula, CA

Has anyone thought about using the current of the river to make electricity? By putting turbines at the bottom of the riverbed.

 

Chagrin 'Falls', Olmstead 'Falls', Cuyahoga 'Falls', etc. Hi, I'm Hydroelectric Power, have we met?

 

Dude, you're on the right track.

I wasn't sure how to answer that without sounding mean. Thanks for doing that, jonmoxon.

I'm not talking about damming im talking about on a free flowing river with commercial freight.

The closest thing would be power generation via waves, but that only works along the coast.

 

At any rate, the Army Corps of Engineers would never allow such a contraption to be built on an inland waterway. They are very... anal.

I'm not talking about damming im talking about on a free flowing river with commercial freight.

 

If it's a free-flowing navigable waterway, the speed of the water would be so slow that it wouldn't provide enough of a rotation for an electric turbine. For example, a wind or water turbine needs the air or water to move at more than 10 mph to provide enough "spin" to produce electricity. The Missouri River and the lower Mississippi River, with currents of 4-5 mph, are the fastest rivers in the U.S. that are navigable by large watercraft.

 

By the way, I'm not expert on this issue, but your presumption didn't sound right. So I found the answers by doing Google searches. I have every confidence that you can do it too!

Great article.  The mainstream media is starting to get it:

 

 

Published Jul 20 2008 by San Francisco Chronicle

 

California must wake up to looming fuel crisis

by Erica Etelson

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/46007

This month's GQ has a pretty fare and interesting article on Peak Oil and the folks involved. Kunstler comes in for a couple jabs, but nothing he doesn't deserve.

Based on what McCabe said, I question if he knows what peak oil is...

 

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/200807/s2311956.htm

 

Peak oil a myth, claims geoscientist

 

Wednesday, 23/07/2008

 

Predictions that oil production will peak in a few years' time and then taper off have been dismissed by a leading geoscientist.

 

Dr Peter McCabe, from the CSIRO, says predictions of a peak oil phenomenon date back to the 1920s but are no more relevant today than they were then.

 

He claims it's geopolitical problems in oil-producing countries such as Nigeria and Venezuela that's pushing up oil prices, rather than dwindling supply.

 

Dr McCabe was a member of the US Geological Survey Assessment of global oil supplies, and says the figures show oil will last for many decades to come.

 

"We have produced about 35 per cent of the world's conventional oil, and we are producing about one per cent of that oil per year, so we have about 65 years left of producing at the current level of world production."

I guess we need to waste more precious time finding another boogeyman....

 

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/22/news/economy/oil_speculation.ap/index.htm

 

Fundamentals led to $130 oil - report

Federal task force finds that supply and demand for oil are largely responsible for the commodity's record rise.

July 22, 2008: 3:36 PM EDT

 

 

NEW YORK (AP) -- A federal task force set up to examine the sharp run-up in oil prices says in an interim report that fundamental supply-and-demand factors are most likely to blame.

 

A number of lawmakers and other critics have blamed the historic rise in prices on speculators that they say are manipulating prices.

The problem with the peak oil hype is that there really hasn't been too much of a problem getting oil in the last 50 years.  When there was a problem for the US, mainly we had the oil crisis of the 70s and everyone then clamored for cars with good gas mileage.  Thats how the US works and the Saudis know it.  Slowly move prices up and we'll gladly pay.  Shock us with high oil prices and we'll find other methods or more efficient means to pay less at the pump.  Don't forget there were oil gluts back in the late 80s. 

 

I have always been supportive of higher gas tax because I knew people would have no problem paying it.  Hopefully in the near future we can get the gas price back down under $2/gallon then have an additional .25-.50 gas tax to improve public transportation.

 

The positive aspect of this increase in price of gas has been apparently less people getting killed on the road, a serious re-evaluation within society of the necessity of personal transportation, a realization how much gas is going into an SUV tank, and serious interest in conservation.  Pain in the wallet is a wonderful teaching tool.

 

So the reason I dispute Peak oil is the fact that new technology is not taken into account.  I feel that with more modern batteries and ultracapacitors, hybrids and plug-ins will come into their own.  There's also more modern diesel engines coming on line and there's of course an ability to use a variety of biofuels if one should so choose.  Personally the major shift will be with hydraulic transmissions in combination with diesels.  Several local companies are working on this - Eaton and Parker Hannifan as well as a company in the Detroit area called Hybradrive.  I would expect to see this technology coming soon to a post office near you.  They are testing it on garbage trucks right now as well as UPS and Fedex trucks.  With all that said, its close to the end of the line for the internal combustion engine because its so 20th century...

^Peak Oil is about production rates and geologic limits, period.  The technologies you mention won't change that.  We don't have enough cropland to grow enough biofuels to replace oil the way we currently use it for transportation.

 

The only way to make them work is to reduce driving by about 75% and make the vehicles that we would still have be far more efficient than they are now.  We also would have to pretty much eliminate long-haul trucking and warehouses-on-wheels, and 10,000 mile global supply chains for manufacturing and food, etc. 

 

Even if we're successful in doing all theses things (and more), none of it will change the reality of oil depletion-- it will still be there.  The only thing that would change is the level of impact on human society. 

 

The problem is, there is so much to be done and we're so close to depletion setting in and taking over, that the transition is going to be anything but smooth. You need 20-30 years for a smooth transition.  We're likely looking at 2015 at the outside.  We'll transition because we'll be forced to, not because we've had any foresight.  And the ride will be rough.

 

 

Even if there was a wonderful, cheap, energy-dense, portable, plentiful and nonperishable replacement for oil, which there isn't yet, we'd still have to:

 

> Expand the scale of production and distribution of this replacement(s) to the massive levels which we consume oil.

> We'd have to either replace or modify vehicles to accommodate this as-yet unidentified replacement (Hirsch estimates this can be done in 20 years with little or no economic hardship, or in 10 years or less with significant economic hardship).

> And we'd have to do all this by using petroleum-based inputs to build the infrastructure to replace oil -- while oil's cost rises and its availability decreases.

 

In short, we've missed our window to transition to the post-oil economy in a "painless" way. The proof of this is all around you and we're only at the peak. So if the economic pains of peak oil are hype, then you haven't been paying much attention to the news much lately.

But obviously, it's still speculation that's causing the rise in oil prices, despite what charts like these say....

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/files/CFTC_Fig_1.png

And if there is a small part of oil's high price that is due to non-speculative factors, then it clearly must be China and India's fault for consuming so much oil. Uh, not really....

http://www.theoildrum.com/files/CFTC_2.png

^The chart on the bottom right is interesting. China and India get mentioned a lot for being part of the problem. They're nowhere near as glutenous as the US. If they reach our levels, watch out. I wonder how long other countries can keep their fuel subsidies. Those governments could be at the breaking point.

 

Any idea where Europe and Russia would fall. Somewhere in the middle I'm sure.

I am looking forward to the end of:

Drive-by gangland shootings

Bank robbery escapes

High speed chases

Criminals casing neighborhoods

Gangsters "taking someone for a ride"

Truck stop white slavery

Smuggling

Oil has lost nearly $30 since in 3 weeks.  Peak Oil is soooo July.

 

Discuss...

lol, doubtful

A short term price volatility has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not peak oil is real.  Why is it that you think it does, twnipper?  Or are you just poking the bees nest to see what comes out?  ;-)

 

I don't know how many times it has to be explained before it gets through to people-- Peak Oil is about production rates and natural geological limits. 

 

 

 

 

If it backs off food inflation that will be an unalloyed good, otherwise it could be not so good as the article notes.