http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_5.pdf
No LNG, lease condensate, which is included, is a fraction of the total.
Why exactly did oil prices tank in 2015-2016?
- Thread starter nxt7
- Start date
No LNG, lease condensate, which is included, is a fraction of the total.
ha ha, we are talking about a barrel of crude. Same thing it was 50 years ago. Produces same BTU it always did (maybe a few adjustments based on new extraction and refining.) The only thing that changes is USD, and that is what we measure everything by. They wouldn't let me graduate high school because I refused to sign a statement that the United States Dollar was stable (and that was back when we were on the Gold Standard.) Nobody is arguing how big my dick is. Now all we are arguing about is how long an inch is.
To answer both of you, today's crude isn't what the old once was...
"Brown believes that worldwide production of condensate "accounts for virtually all of the post-2005 increase in C+C [crude plus condensate] production." What this implies is that almost all of the 4 million-barrel-per-day increase in world "oil" production from 2005 through 2014 may actually be lease condensate. And that would mean crude oil production proper has been nearly flat during this period--"
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2016-01-17/the-great-condensate-con-is-the-oil-glut-just-about-oil
I advise to read the whole article to understand the price drop too.
"But when oil companies (and governments) talk about oil supply, they include all sorts of things that cannot be sold as oil on the world market including biofuels, refinery gains and natural gas plant liquids as well as lease condensate. Which leads to a simple rule coined by Brown: If what you're selling cannot be sold on the world market as crude oil, then it's not crude oil.
The glut that developed in 2015 may ultimately be tied to some increases in actual, honest-to-god crude oil production. The accepted story from 2005 through 2014 has been that crude oil production has been growing, albeit at a significantly slower rate than the previous nine-year period--15.7 percent from 1996 through 2005 versus 5.4 percent from 2005 through 2014 according to the EIA. If Brown is right, we have all been victims of the great condensate con which has lulled the world into a sense of complacency with regard to actual oil supplies--supplies he believes have been barely growing or stagnant since 2005."
In short, there were 2 peak crude oils, in 2005 and in 2008 May. Since then it is mostly condensate that increases the volume. End of story...
For extra credit:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2010/11/101109-peak-oil-iea-world-energy-outlook/
"New analysis pegs 2006 as highpoint of conventional crude production
That’s the year that the world’s conventional oil production likely reached its peak, the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Vienna, Austria, "
"Brown believes that worldwide production of condensate "accounts for virtually all of the post-2005 increase in C+C [crude plus condensate] production." What this implies is that almost all of the 4 million-barrel-per-day increase in world "oil" production from 2005 through 2014 may actually be lease condensate. And that would mean crude oil production proper has been nearly flat during this period--"
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2016-01-17/the-great-condensate-con-is-the-oil-glut-just-about-oil
I advise to read the whole article to understand the price drop too.
"But when oil companies (and governments) talk about oil supply, they include all sorts of things that cannot be sold as oil on the world market including biofuels, refinery gains and natural gas plant liquids as well as lease condensate. Which leads to a simple rule coined by Brown: If what you're selling cannot be sold on the world market as crude oil, then it's not crude oil.
The glut that developed in 2015 may ultimately be tied to some increases in actual, honest-to-god crude oil production. The accepted story from 2005 through 2014 has been that crude oil production has been growing, albeit at a significantly slower rate than the previous nine-year period--15.7 percent from 1996 through 2005 versus 5.4 percent from 2005 through 2014 according to the EIA. If Brown is right, we have all been victims of the great condensate con which has lulled the world into a sense of complacency with regard to actual oil supplies--supplies he believes have been barely growing or stagnant since 2005."
In short, there were 2 peak crude oils, in 2005 and in 2008 May. Since then it is mostly condensate that increases the volume. End of story...
For extra credit:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2010/11/101109-peak-oil-iea-world-energy-outlook/
"New analysis pegs 2006 as highpoint of conventional crude production
That’s the year that the world’s conventional oil production likely reached its peak, the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Vienna, Austria, "
Last edited:
TBH, I appreciate this is a discussion of semantics. However, I note that neither the author of your first article nor yourself have any data to corroborate the statement that it's lease condensate that's solely responsible for the increase in world "crude oil" production. In fact, based on the data here and here, this is demonstrably not the case for US production:
http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_5.pdf
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_prod_lc_s1_a.htm
Specifically, while US production of crude and lease condensate grew by 3354Mbbl/d or 1224MMbbl/yr between 2009 and 2014, lease condensate accounted for only 148MMbbl/yr of this.
As to the National Geographic article, it's from IEA's outlook for 2010. IEA's current data for supply suggests relatively slow but steady growth in oil supply (their term) from 2006 to present:
https://www.iea.org/oilmarketreport/reports/AnnualStatisticalSupplement_2015.pdf
Just sayin'...
And that includes everything. Anyhow, since they are not publishing separate data just for sweet crude, (apparently even the experts can't say it for sure) we have to guesstimate here so we can close the debate.
Speaking of geographical peaks, I will throw in 2 less well known facts. Coal has peaked in the USA back in the 90s, IIRC. We do produce more coals today measured in tonnage, but not in max. calories. In short, there are 3 types of coal (high, medium,low) and obviously coalminers went first for the low hanging fruits, that being high calories coal. We pretty much ran out of that, so we are mining the ones with less energy. The point here is that not every replacement is equivalent to the old one.
The other fact is that the US reached peak water back in the 70s. That is right, a replenishable item and we are running out of it. Now one might ask, how come when eventually it is going to rain? Well, we have been using not just replenishable rainwater, but water from the ground, what has been there for millions of years. In short we are using up the extra storage water, and that won't be replaced, thus overall we are in the red with water.
The point is here that we can have peaks in non-replenishable resources...
"Ogallala Aquifer of the central United States is one of the world's great aquifers, but in places it is being rapidlydepleted by growing municipal use, and continuing agricultural use. This huge aquifer, which underlies portions of eight states, contains primarily fossil water from the time of the last glaciation. Annual recharge, in the more arid parts of the aquifer, is estimated to total only about 10 percent of annual withdrawals."
TL;DR: Whatever can peak, will peak eventually...
Of course - that is Econ 101, supply/demand. Whether a bubble or not.
There is no peak oil. There may be a shortage of oil at $30 a barrel (theoretically) but there will be no shortage at 100-150 dollars a barrel. If oil goes back up to $100 a barrel offshore oil wells and shale becomes profitable, but not at 30. There are 3,4 oil fields in the triangle found around Iraq, Iran and Kuwait that are suppose to be as healthy as the ones in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait.
But because the areas are unstable they are undeveloped. There is a lot of oil available. It just depends on how much you are willing to pay.
Ditto for gold, copper and iron ore. If it becomes too expensive, manufacturers will just find a substitute.
Has the production of coal slowed down because we are running out of coal or because coal is losing popularity and not as much is being used to produce energy ? But, I don't think coal miners bothered with the BTU count of their coal. They just mined whatever was in their backyard.
I think the next war or at least some of them in the not so distant future will be over water.
China and India and polluted many of their rivers beyond a reasonable point of recovery in the near future. Bad things happen when you don't have a reliable supply of fresh, clean water.