peak oil debunked

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
pleaseremoveme's picture
pleaseremoveme
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 24 2009
Posts: 115
peak oil debunked

I haven't written much about peak oil yet. The subject was so scary that I didn't dare to delve too deep into it. Scary mainly for all the predictions of massive extinction and a loss of technology. My main thoughts were: nobody can predict the future, and a lot of things aren't as clear as the doom thinkers make them seem, and if this worst case scenario is indeed what is inevitably going to happen, I want to die! No point fighting what's going to happen, and no hanging on to my live.

So to me it only makes sense too enjoy life now, when it's still good. It occurs to me that it is hard to imagine how the distruction of all the splendor arround me could ever occur. I see the developments of new technologies, I see people changing their ways and sometimes it almost seems that even politician are able to learn their lessons. But even without that the sun still rises and live just seems to go on, with or without oil.

When I was confronted with yet another depressing peak oil movie, a looked around on the web and found this website: http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/. It proves my point that the future is uncertain, because the figures over there are no worse than those of the doom thinkers, and they show posibilties of a much brighter future. Finally, I can catch some sleep again.

JAG's picture
JAG
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 26 2008
Posts: 2492
Re: peak oil debunked

Dr. Martenson has made me a believer in peak oil, but one thing that bothers me about the theory is the following question:

Q: Who profits from the widespread belief of the peak oil theory?

A: The oil companies, of course.

But I think to be prudent, you have to do what you can to prepare for the ramifications of higher energy prices. I wish I could ignore it, because life would be a whole lot simpler.

Lemonyellowschwin's picture
Lemonyellowschwin
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 22 2008
Posts: 561
Re: peak oil debunked
woupiestek wrote:

It occurs to me that it is hard to imagine how the distruction of all the splendor arround me could ever occur.

You've got it backwards unless you love strip malls.  Peak oil won't destroy the splendor.  Peak oil might help save what's left of the splendor.

jrf29's picture
jrf29
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 18 2008
Posts: 453
Re: peak oil debunked

I would question that oil companies will universally profit from the idea of peak oil, for several reasons. One, the price at which oil can be sold may increase, but so will the cost of pumping it out of the ground.  The profit margins of companies may become seriously squeezed.  Oil companies make the most money when prices are falling, because their bottom line increases while they are able to slowly feather their sale price lower. 

Two, the stock price of oil companies depends on their ability to be profitable in the future.  The profitability of traditional Western oil companies is in great doubt in an era of depleting oil reserves, considering that even though the oil companies may have pieces of paper saying that they "own" their oil fields, most of this oil lies in other countries.  In the event of a shortage, the value of oil cannot be measured merely in dollars and cents: it becomes invaluable.  As a country, can you really put a price on having enough oil to run your navy and keep the lights on in your capitol?  It is doubtful that many countries would allow private oil companies to cart away unlimited quantities of their national oil, regardless of the amount of green paper which we offer in return.  Even if an oil company "owns" the foreign field, many oil fields would simply be nationalized by the countries in which they lie, leaving the oil companies out in the cold after having invested billions of dollars to develop them.

Just because the price of something goes up, doesn't mean that it will be profitable to be in the business...

Aaron M's picture
Aaron M
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 22 2008
Posts: 2369
Re: peak oil debunked

Whole-hearted agreement with LemonYellowschwin.

To me, every time I see a housing development go in over a tract of farm-land I wince.

We've destroyed as much of the splendor as we could, starting at the most beneficial spots for life to sustain itself; headwaters of major rivers; which were once rife with fish, wildlife and massive tracts of arable land.

Now? McMansions.

Cheers LYS, well said.

Aaron

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: peak oil debunked

"Q: Who profits from the widespread belief of the peak oil theory?"
JAG.....  that is old thinking, thinking that everything must be done for profit...  It's thinking like that that got us into this mess in the first place.  It's high time we start thinking about doing things because they are worth doing, not because they're a buck in it.

Mike

PS I wish people would stop calling PO a theory.  It's as much a theory as the round Earth theory!

dave s's picture
dave s
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 20 2009
Posts: 56
Re: peak oil debunked

 The Industrial Revolution created a lot more than strip malls.  Certainly there has been plenty of bad with the good; such as it ever was.  But I think those people who really embrace end of world theories such as peak oil with relish have taken no meaningful stock of what we have, what we will lose, and how our children will live and die.  You would sell all your natural splendor for a crash cart.

DavidLachman's picture
DavidLachman
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 4 2008
Posts: 153
Peak Oil can mean more fulfilling lives

Hi Dave S,

I see you are a relatively new poster, welcome, and thanks for sharing your thoughts.  I would have to disagree with the characterization of peak oil as being an "end of world theory."  Peak Oil is merely a description of how oil will run out, and a suggestion of the problems that will occur when supply does not meet demand.  While the consequence of this will be uncomforable if we try to hold on to the way things were on the up side of the curve, if we accept the facts (and I'm not sure what part of PO you doubt) of the downside of the curve and plan and act accordingly (change the money system, the food system, the transport system, etc) then we can all still enjoy the world, and even, as Dr. Martenson suggests, have more fulfilling lives.

I also concur with Aaron Moyer and LYS, and add that the sooner we end the destruction of the natural world that cheap oil has caused the better off we will be and the better able we will be to create a world that is in harmony. 

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Re: Peak Oil - Fact...

Woupiestek,

Again and again I put this film on thread after thread throughout CM.com for new arrivals and, not a single person can question any of the math. If you haven't seen this before, I feel this is the reason you're at odds about the relevants of Peak Oil, for which I'm sure you'll later agree, hasn't been a theory for a very long time :-

Arithmetic, Population And Energy

...I'm also from the UK, and know that this film below will have more answers to your questions :-

A Farm For The Future

http://www.viddler.com/explore/PermaScience/videos/4/

Trust me, when I speak for others here. Your quality of life will be more fullfilling if you set your sites firmly into the future along the pathways you'll find amongst friends on this site...

Best,

Paul

 

mpelchat's picture
mpelchat
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 10 2008
Posts: 214
Re: peak oil debunked
JAG wrote:

Dr. Martenson has made me a believer in peak oil, but one thing that bothers me about the theory is the following question:

Q: Who profits from the widespread belief of the peak oil theory?

A: The oil companies, of course.

But I think to be prudent, you have to do what you can to prepare for the ramifications of higher energy prices. I wish I could ignore it, because life would be a whole lot simpler.

I understand your opinion Jag and if oil production could be increased to fill demand indefinitely than I would completely agree the perception of low supplier can drive costs up.  However, peak oil does much much more than just work supply and demand curves, it would be a quantum change on how this world and the people on it live, work, play, our industries would have enormous changes and most of all it would change the political power structure world wide forever.  Those in power due to oil do not want there to be a perception of that.   

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Re: Peak Oil - Fact...

I'm reading into the gaps of peoples perceptions and feel that a 'Must' read has to be Richard Heinbergs excellent book :-

The Party's Over

http://www.amazon.com/Partys-Over-Fate-Industrial-Societies/dp/0865715297

I strongly suggest anyone finding this thread should go and buy a copy today.

This also defines him well :-

Richard Heinberg's Peak Everything

Best,

Paul

EndGamePlayer's picture
EndGamePlayer
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 2 2008
Posts: 546
Re: peak oil

I have a different set of thoughts on this-

It doesn't matter if "peak oil" happens now or in 100 years - we need to be ready for it when it does. The best time to start planning for it - (regardless of when it happens) is now. Who would be so nieve to think that once "the age of oil" is over - we would magically come up with some new technology that would save us all if we don't take on those challenges now.

I don't believe in Al Gore's theories on climate change either but when all the discussion is talked out about it - the bottom line is what harm is there in preparing for climate change? Why would anyone not want to be less dependent on external energy sources? Why would anyone want to pollute the place they live?

WHO makes money from people becoming self-sufficent? You missed the point - because the one who benefits is the one who becomes energy independent and self sufficent. 

EGP

joe2baba's picture
joe2baba
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2008
Posts: 807
Re: peak oil debunked

just a reminder folks i posted a thread months ago " peak oil a hoax?"

the thread had a lot of response you can find a lot of discussion there. if we keep posting new threads on top of old threads it dilutes the messages and the threads do not get the depth of attention they deserve.

my suggestion is if you are going to post something do a search to see if it already has a thread.

in the old days threads would be prominent for several days and allowed for more exploration.

maybe as a site upgrade there could be a reminder message whenever you are posting a thread, to see if one already exists.

we are having more and more people just getting here and i keep seeing the same things being posted over and over again

cat233's picture
cat233
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2008
Posts: 575
Re: peak oil debunked
joe2baba wrote:

just a reminder folks i posted a thread months ago " peak oil a hoax?"

the thread had a lot of response you can find a lot of discussion there. if we keep posting new threads on top of old threads it dilutes the messages and the threads do not get the depth of attention they deserve.

my suggestion is if you are going to post something do a search to see if it already has a thread.

in the old days threads would be prominent for several days and allowed for more exploration.

maybe as a site upgrade there could be a reminder message whenever you are posting a thread, to see if one already exists.

we are having more and more people just getting here and i keep seeing the same things being posted over and over again

Joe,

I have seen you make your prior post comment before.

It might be helpful to others if the link to the post that you are referencing was also included.

Peak Oil a Hoax?  http://www.peakprosperity.com/forum/peak-oil-hoax/7976

Cat

JAG's picture
JAG
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 26 2008
Posts: 2492
Re: peak oil debunked
Damnthematrix wrote:

PS I wish people would stop calling PO a theory.  It's as much a theory as the round Earth theory!

Sorry Mike, "Peak Oil" is technically just a theory. It may be valid, or it may not. but one thing is for sure, the human perception of reality is rarely accurate and is often tainted by the self image of the perceiver. I know that you personally have a great deal invested of yourself in the Peak Oil Theory. Do you feel that your personal investment might skew your perception of the situation? Probably not. In 2008, did you see the massive drop in oil prices coming? Probably not. 

Bottom Line: Human perception is flawed, and if you don't make an effort to keep your mind open to the many possibilities of reality, life will make a fool out of you.

 

JAG's picture
JAG
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 26 2008
Posts: 2492
Re: peak oil debunked
Damnthematrix wrote:

PS I wish people would stop calling PO a theory.  It's as much a theory as the round Earth theory!

Sorry Mike, "Peak Oil" is technically just a theory. It may be valid, or it may not. but one thing is for sure, the human perception of reality is rarely accurate and is often tainted by the self image of the perceiver. I know that you personally have a great deal invested of yourself in the Peak Oil Theory. Do you feel that your personal investment might skew your perception of the situation? Probably not. In 2008, did you see the massive drop in oil prices coming? Probably not. 

Bottom Line: Human perception is flawed, and if you don't make an effort to keep your mind open to the many possibilities of reality, life will make a fool out of you.

(Double posted for emphasis!...just joking)

BSV's picture
BSV
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 26 2009
Posts: 170
Re: peak oil debunked

In due course we are all going to find out whether Peak Oil is with us now or will be with us at a later date in the near future. I'm content with that "certainty". I appreciate Mike "Damn the Matrix" because he has the courage of his convictions and has dramatically changed his lifestyle in an attempt to deal with what he sees ahead. Hey Mike. Never let 'em see you sweat, guy. Keep on keeping on. It may be that you are right and some others of us are wrong. Or it may be the reverse. In due course, we will know. Meanwhile. I'm your friend. We may not agree on everything, but you bring a refreshing viewpoint to these discussions. I pay close attention to your posts because they are thoughtful. Sometimes I want to strangle you, though, but hey, I'm human. Live long and prosper, Mike.

Barry

SamLinder's picture
SamLinder
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 10 2008
Posts: 1499
Re: peak oil debunked
BSV wrote:

In due course we are all going to find out whether Peak Oil is with us now or will be with us at a later date in the near future. I'm content with that "certainty". I appreciate Mike "Damn the Matrix" because he has the courage of his convictions and has dramatically changed his lifestyle in an attempt to deal with what he sees ahead. Hey Mike. Never let 'em see you sweat, guy. Keep on keeping on. It may be that you are right and some others of us are wrong. Or it may be the reverse. In due course, we will know. Meanwhile. I'm your friend. We may not agree on everything, but you bring a refreshing viewpoint to these discussions. I pay close attention to your posts because they are thoughtful. Sometimes I want to strangle you, though, but hey, I'm human. Live long and prosper, Mike.

Barry

I think there might be something in the site guidelines that prohibit strangling other members.

Besides, my friend, it's hardly considered good form, eh what?

pleaseremoveme's picture
pleaseremoveme
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 24 2009
Posts: 115
Re: peak oil debunked

Paul,

I looked at that video one other time, and remembered that I read Bartlet's comments on this site. Chris has a transcription of these lectures in his essential articles: see http://www.peakprosperity.com/dr_albert_bartlett. As a mathematician I never question math. But Bartlet is just extrapolating exponential curves, as if that has anything to do with reality! Typical mistake of physicists. 

joe2baba,

I searched for other threads on this subject, and found none that posted the link to http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/. For that reason I posted a new thread, hoping that some people might actually visit that site, and react to its content. But I promise I won't make that mistake again.

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Re: peak oil debunked

Gosh Woupiestek,

I just spent a couple of hours skimming the link you gave and found all sorts of fascinating stuff in there!!! Here :-

http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2005/08/38-is-peak-oil-scientific.html

[snippet]

38. IS PEAK OIL SCIENTIFIC?

 

 

" ANSWER: It depends on what you mean by "peak oil". If by "peak oil" you mean the inevitable peak and decline in natural/conventional oil, then yes: it's a settled scientific fact which no one disagrees with. That much cannot be refuted. But I think it's a little disingenuous to claim that "peak oil" means nothing but that. In fact, "peak oil" is a huge mountain of doomsday religion, survivalism, luddism, anti-capitalism, conspiracy theory, democratic politics, radical environmentalism, fascism, nationalism, eugenics, authoritarian depopulation programs, goldbugs, oil speculators, sh1t-talking market bears and every other agenda under the sun, all trying to advance themselves under the cover of that tiny pinpoint of scientific fact.

Consider these positions:
"There is no techno-fix." OR
"The worst thing that could happen would be the discovery of a source of unlimited, cheap energy."

Are those positions part of "peak oil"? Are they scientific?

How about the luddite, anti-technology (sometimes even anti-agriculture) agenda of the doomers? Is that part of "peak oil"? Is that scientific?

How about proposals to adopt eugenics, and involuntarily euthanize burdensome humans, like we find in the ASPO newsletter (see #29)? Is that science? Or is that just plain ol' fascism masquerading as science?

Peak oil is a serious problem, and there are many honest people who are concerned about it. I'm one of them. It is critical, however, to think clearly and separate the science from the bullshit. The stubborn attempts by the doomers to portray their fearmongering and ideologies as science are a menace to clear thinking. "

...............

I have to say, after finding this article I realise I've had it all ar$e backward and can't see much more point in writing further on this thread. My mind is made up, you've saved me from myself...

THANKYOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Best,

Paul

P.S. The ASPO bit really nailed it for me... There can't be anything worse than "...Fascism Masquerading as Science..."

Damnthematrix's picture
Damnthematrix
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 3998
Re: peak oil debunked

Consider these positions:
"There is no techno-fix." OR
"The worst thing that could happen would be the discovery of a source of unlimited, cheap energy."

Are those positions part of "peak oil"? Are they scientific?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So?  Once you realise the scientific part of PO is 'real' and mathematically provable, is it not desirable to discuss the implications?

There are many reasons why many Peakniks believe there are no techno fixes.  But that has far more to do with undersatnding where energy comes from than PO.  After all, you only need to look all around you, right now where you are sitting, to see evidence of the power of oil...

Mike

Hummingbird920's picture
Hummingbird920
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 6 2010
Posts: 1
Re: peak oil debunked

The belief that 'the oil companies are going to profit from peak oil' is addressed by Matt Savinar on his site, Life After the Oil Crash: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Savinar asks: (this is a paraphrase) If peak oil was thought up by oil companies in order to cheat consumers, then why aren't they publicizing it?

In fact, Savinar gives examples of how some oil executives have publicly denied the peak oil theory.  And have you noticed that most of the geologists that are experts on peak oil are retired from oil companies?  It means, of course, that they can now finally speak their minds without fear of losing their jobs.

down2earth's picture
down2earth
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 4 2010
Posts: 5
Re: peak oil debunked

I was introduced to the idea of peak oil from watching the ‘Tragedy of Suburbia’ presentation given by Kunstler at the TED Talks ( http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/james_ho...s_suburbia.html ) a number of years ago. I have since read several books and watched several presentations that in some way deal with the issue directly, the industry itself or with related scenarios.

If we are to seriously create pressure to gain exposure to the theory of peak fossil fuel energy and to be taken seriously then we must also fully consider the argument given by the gainsayers, many of which have I suspect a vested interest in keeping the status quo. In light of this I’ve been trying to read and understand some of counter-argument to peak oil theory. I’m currently reading Robin M. Mills’ ‘The Myth of the Oil Crisis’ ( http://www.praeger.com/catalog/B36498.aspx ) and there are some good arguments made in his book against Peak Oil Theory, especially against the use of Hubbert’s Curve as a prediction method for peaking dates and one that I can honestly see sense in.

The problem with Hubbert’s Curve he argues is that there are numerous variables, some which cannot be predicted like technological advances or black swan events, that can distort the rate of production over time and render Hubbert’s Curve as a predictive tool completely unreliable for both date of peak and Estimated Ultimate Recovery. He cites many examples where Hubbert’s Curve is shown to be wanting (Papua New Guinea peaking at 25% of production, Australia 67%, San Joaquin Valley California 72%) and claims that Hubbert’s Curve as a predictive tool has actually only ever been close to the mark when modelled against the total U.S production figures. He then goes on to argue that follower’s using Hubbert’s Curve have leapt to a dangerous and unscientific conclusion that one correct prediction proves a theory when in fact just one incorrect prediction should infact disprove a theory.

The above is just one counter-argument and in honesty I’m barely a quarter of the way through the book but I feel an argument for action must be centred on a blend of Malthusian theory, economics and ecological ethics (i.e anti-polution) and perhaps lose the predictive nature of statistical data analysis, or at least try and identify a new, more accurate method of prediction in order to gain some political support. Dr Martenson’s 'Crash Course' presentation went some way towards accomplishing this but we must start by highlighting the possible inaccuracies of the data as a reason to do something, and not as a reason to do nothing. We must also highlight specifically to our own populace the implication that as nett importers of energy we will be first to suffer the consequences, including the economic costs. My fear is that our analysis could also be used, if we’re not careful in how it is presented, by the 10% to secure investment in maintaining the fossil fueled energy supplies rather than any alternatives and we should argue that investing in oil long term is socially damaging and the risk of increased production is a shorter time period between now and peak production, and indeed greater dependance.

I attended Dr Martenson’s presentation expecting to hear some solutions from the academic section of the audience but came away with a perception that most were resigned to a direction of ‘preparing for the worst’ rather than suggestions of ways in which the effects of resource depletion can be offset or countered. Little was mentioned in the way of alternative technologies that may reduce demand to at least lengthen the cycle from initial date of production to date of peak and eventually to depletion.

 

I made the post above on the GEI website just after watching Dr. Martenson present his Crash Course to the Complexity Study Group and thought I'd add it here in my first post.

I firmly believe that Peak Oil will essentially change the way we live and what we value. I have read through many of the counter arguments and have come to the conclusion that it is almost impossible to predict a peak date, especially when ultimate recovery figures calculated by various camps can vary so massively, and in some cases are pure speculation rather than estimation.

I would however encourage anyone concerned about 'Peak Oil' to read the counter-argument as there is some insight into the oil supply industry as a whole within the argument. The flaw I see in the counter-argument is that it makes very little mention of exponential increases in demand due to population increases.

 

LtCdData's picture
LtCdData
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 21 2010
Posts: 8
Re: Peak Oil - Fact...

Yep, i don't actually have that book here, but do have peak everything. Presently I am reading the limits to growth - 30 year update. So far the interesting bit seems to be, if we get ready ahead of time we can still have a high tech society, at lower population, but if we keep on pushing forward looking for any and every short term gain to the bitter end, then it is really bad news.

I watched  Ian Crane talking about the peak oil theory. He seemed to say in one hand, without saying it, its not real, yet deny the reality. An example would the the USA peaked in the 70's. How can there be no such thing as peak oil but after that date yes he also says the USA imported oil, not export. One graph he did push was the one which also had the unconventional oil added, this merely delays peak oil not stop, assuming the figures come true. I have noticed that conventional oil seems to be dropping at nearer 6.7% not 3.7%. This might change the map a bit in terms of how quickly (assuming the whole point of Iraq) they can get production ramped up and the use this to get the rest of the other oil in production. Either way it does not stop the right hand side of  the Hubbert curve.    

Talking of Peak Everything I do also have all part downloaded and converted to an ISO for DVD. This is one of many DVD titles i drop off in Geo-caches and to friends or other people I talk to about this topic. (still not finished Pary's over to dvd)

( I also have on DVD ISO - Power Down -Heinberg and Arithmetic Population and Energy Bartlett. The rest of my stuff is copyrighted though)   

gaucho's picture
gaucho
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 8 2010
Posts: 2
Re: peak oil debunked

Hey paid big oil disinfo agent.  I guess that it depends upon what date you use for your figures.   The military must alo be wrong when they predict somewhere in 2012 world wide peak oil.  Who am I goning to belive some idiot playing fast and loose with the numbers or the US military and facts.

tim bradley's picture
tim bradley
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 10 2011
Posts: 1
No need to worry. I have

No need to worry. I have read micheal ruppert and have seen collapse three times and all I can say to dispute/rebut the peak oil theory is to read julian simon. Read julian simon and you will see that peak oil is similar to peak coal, and peak lumber, and peak uranium etc. The simple fact is that as things become more scarcethe price goes up, and as the price goes up it spurs investment and creation and innovation in other areas. Now because oil is so important and diverse in the economy this price going up will cause a depression. So, I, just like everybody else it seems these days, is predicting depression(deflation) for the long haul. Which does not have to be seen as negative or "depressing", it is an opportunity to correct the mistakes we have made in the past and make sure they never happen again.

 

The danger or trouble with oil is that it is in everything and at times it does appear that there is no way to maintain our current infrastructure without some sort of collapse. This is why we will be in a depression. A depression is the necessary correction we need and will have which will progenate a new economy. A better one. This is not all doom and gloom by any means. Even michael ruppert says it best, "we will be living the way we always should have been" 

So yeah, I could write a lot more on this but I think I need a book.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments