Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2012

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2012

    Just when iTuliper's thought they had a handle on the scope of "Peak Cheap Oil" along comes Charley Maxwell of WELLING & WEEDEN, arguably the most senior and respected analyst in the oil industry (anyone with doubts or who does not know who this guy is, can ask GRG55 about Mr. Maxwell's credentials, and a reputation for sobriety from fifty years in the business). He is possibly the most senior oilman working today, both by tenure and reputation.

    Read this article, and wake up to a whole new level of fear, of the world that is going to be slamming into us in a mere 5-7 years. This is not by any means "the world my children will have to face". It is 100%, "the world I will have to face" - a mere seven years from now.

    BTW, for your interest GRG55, Mr. Maxwell disagrees with your assessment of the "Peak" as a decade long process. He describes it in terms of "two years". The article is fascinating. Are we then really to think of the miles and miles of commentary here on the housing bust as more important than this?? Who is even going to remember the housing bust of 2007 when the events below break on us?

    iTulip has designated the event described below as the "lesser of the present emergencies", in refers to the present debt and credit crisis as the "larger and more imminent" of the two problems - this seems to me a continuing mis-estimation. The credit crisis may be three or four years earlier in time, but it quite clearly pales into insignificance compared to what Mr. Weeden is describing.

    I can't help it if so many people here find the peak energy topic "over-discussed and shop-warn fodder for alarmists". My suggestion to these people is that they really have not yet grasped the size, and proximity of the thing that is approaching us. Don't take my word for it. But please do take Mr. Weeden's, and then look up his bio to get a measure of how often this man has ventured into "over the top" predictions.

    ___________

    CHARLEY MAXWELL - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 201O. Peak Oil Hits 2012-2015

    http://www.energybulletin.net/40016.html

    ‘Dean of Oil Analysts’ Maxwell (Part 1 of 4): Oil Shortages Start in 2010; Peak Oil Hits 2012-2015

    Posted: February 4, 2008

    Nearly 40 years on Wall Street, plus 12 years before that working for a major oil company, equals a lifetime of experience for Charles T. Maxwell, senior energy analyst at Weeden & Co., known as the “dean of energy analysts.” Now, in an interview that sounded like a preliminary draft of a valedictory address, Princeton and Oxford-educated Maxwell has laid out in stark, uncomplicated terms what might be called the “Nightmare on Main Street” that he sees barreling toward America and the world.

    Every investor needs to pay attention to Maxwell’s nightmare scenario, because if the dean’s forecast is correct, it’s going to influence every investment decision made for at least the next 10 to 20 years. As we’ll see in this four-part series, although Maxwell sees much pain being inflicted on consumers and investors, he also sees opportunities to make a lot of money.



    It all boils down to this, Maxwell told EnergyTechStocks.com: We live in a world where there is only about 1.2% more oil available each year, not enough to keep up with 1.5% annual demand growth. Between now and 2010, this supply shortfall will be made up through a drawdown in inventories, helped out by a slowdown in demand in 2008 and 2009 due to a recession or near-recession in the U.S.

    But in 2010, Maxwell said, the shortfall will become greater than can be made up by what’s still in inventory, and thus will begin a long period of global oil scarcity that will get worse starting in 2012 or 2013, which is when Maxwell foresees a “peak” in conventional oil production. It gets even worse in 2015, which is when he expects a peak in the production of all liquids, a category that includes condensates, tar sands oil and biodiesel.

    Maxwell described the period 2010 through 2015 as the “letting down” of production. In 2015, he said, the all-liquids peak arrives, after which production “starts down,” even as demand continues up. He added that production will start down even though new oilfields will go into production, and even if there is only a 4.5% average annual depletion rate from existing fields, which is what Cambridge Energy Research Associates has optimistically concluded. (Others believe the depletion rate is significantly higher.)

    As the nightmare worsens, Maxwell sees cities in many countries where people depend on kerosene having to do without this life-sustaining fuel. If this prediction of Maxwell’s turns out to be correct, one can easily imagine a sharp rise in the number of environmental immigrants flooding into the more developed countries in Europe and Asia. This could lead to excruciating social unrest that produces outbreaks of violence, as some experts have already predicted.

    When will the nightmare end? Maxwell said that by 2025, “We can create some answers.” He explained that both plug-in electric vehicles and cellulosic biofuel made from garbage are “wonderful ideas”; however, given that it takes 10 to 15 years or longer to turn over the world’s vehicular fleet, such technological breakthroughs won’t happen quickly enough to prevent the nightmare from happening.

    Which leaves unanswered the question of greatest importance in most people’s minds: how high is the price of gasoline going to go? We’ll find out what the dean thinks tomorrow in Part 2.

    ‘Dean of Oil Analysts’ Maxwell (Part 2 of 4): U.S. Pump Prices to Hit $12 to $15 a Gallon

    Posted: February 5, 2008

    As America enters a world of ever-increasing oil scarcity, there is going to be a “horrific” rise in the price Americans pay for gasoline, Charles T. Maxwell, senior energy analyst at Weeden & Co., told EnergyTechStocks.com.

    Think $3 a gallon is high? Get ready for $12 to $15 a gallon within a few years, the “dean” of energy analysts predicted during a discussion about the future of energy that sounded like a preliminary draft of a valedictory address.



    Maxwell said it will take $12 to $15 a gallon to get Americans to let go of what he called the “precious freedom of mobility.” As much as Maxwell laments the loss, he sees no other way for the U.S. to impose enough conservation to deal with the growing imbalance between oil demand and supply that he sees developing around 2010 and getting worse in 2012 or 2013, as the world hits a “peak” in conventional oil production.

    Because he expects Americans to hang on for dear life to their freedom of mobility, Maxwell says there will have to be a “stomping exercise” to “get them to let go.” Basically, Maxwell said, Americans’ freedom of mobility will have to be stomped on by allowing the supply-constrained price of oil to steadily rise starting in 2010, reaching $180 a barrel in 2015 and $300 a barrel in 2020.

    Maxwell doesn’t see how this stomping exercise can be avoided. While he sees great promise in oil demand-reducing technologies such as cellulosic biofuel and plug-in electric vehicles, he says there just isn’t enough time left to displace the upwards of 1 billion oil-consuming cars and trucks that are expected to be on global highways when oil production peaks and starts down early in the next decade. Even if the world were suddenly to find a number of huge new oilfields – an unlikely possibility – it would still take too long to develop them to head off this crisis, he noted.

    One can only imagine the anger Americans will feel if and when they are staring at $15 a gallon pump prices. (In Europe, presumably, prices might be even higher, unless European nations decide to remove some of their gasoline taxes, which they financially can ill afford to do.) While Maxwell’s “Nightmare on Main Street” scenario may sound far off, the fact is whoever wins the White House this November will face the voters’ wrath, especially if he or she wins reelection.

    As much as Maxwell discussed the scary future he envisions, he also discussed how this future should produce some companies that pay off nicely for investors. More on that tomorrow in Part 3 of this series.


    ‘Dean of Oil Analysts’ Maxwell (Part 3 of 4): ‘Deep Oil’ Drillers Like Pride Should Do Well

    Posted: February 6, 2008

    Want to make some money during the period of global oil scarcity that Charles T. Maxwell, “dean” of energy analysts, says is right around the corner? According to Maxwell, there is money to be made in oil drilling companies, especially those with the equipment to tackle the new frontiers of the business, namely deep oil drilling in the bottom of the ocean.

    During a lengthy discussion with EnergyTechStocks.com, Maxwell, senior energy analyst at Weeden & Co., said a lot of oil and natural gas is going to be recovered from new fields that lie beneath 4,000 to 8,000 feet of water, plus another 15,000 to 20,000 feet of land below that. While he said that all this new energy won’t be enough to prevent a “peak” in liquids production in 2015, it should do wonders for the bottom lines of several oil drilling companies.





    Maxwell said that seismic studies are showing that there should be a lot of oil and/or natural gas fields in deep water off India, China, Australia, Russia, Indonesia, the U.S. Gulf Coast, the North Sea, Brazil and Angola. While these new fields will be extremely expensive to exploit, he said that they should be affordable when, as he predicts, oil is selling at roughly $150 to $160 a barrel (in today’s dollars) in seven or eight years time.

    Deep oil drillers may make investors a lot of money in two ways, Maxwell said, reiterating what he first said on the PBS program Consuelo Mack’s Wealthtrack. On that program Maxwell said, “Offshore drilling will continue to be very profitable. The oil companies can finance it quite easily with their cash flows.” He added, “There will be acquisitions as the industry consolidates. There are eight of them. I think there will be four of them in three or four years.”

    As he first indicated on Wealthtrack, Maxwell’s top drilling pick is Pride International Inc. He told EnergyTechStocks.com that while Pride is known for its rigs that work in shallower water, 70% of the company’s assets (in terms of value) are tied up in deepwater rigs (three drillships and 11 semi-submersibles), with another couple of rigs on order. Maxwell further expects Pride to be one of the companies that ultimately gets acquired.

    For similar reasons, other drilling companies that Maxwell said should do well include: Transocean Inc., Noble Corp. and Diamond Offshore Drilling Inc. They are among a group of 10 or so drilling firms that Maxwell said already are “making a terrible lot of money.” As evidence of that, Maxwell said that two years ago this group collectively had about $32 billion debt, while today it’s only about $2 billion.


    ‘Dean of Oil Analysts’ Maxwell (Part 4 of 4): Oil Crisis Will Lead to 10-Year Financial & Political Crisis

    Posted: February 7, 2008

    A growing chorus of voices is screaming for the United States to undertake a Manhattan Project-type program to wean America off its oil dependency. But as Charles T. Maxwell, the “dean” of Wall Street’s energy analysts, looks into the future, he deeply fears that Washington won’t do anything to head off the oil crisis he sees rapidly developing starting in 2010. He says this will make the financial crisis he fears even worse. Also, because Washington will be seen by angry voters (who will be paying $12 to $15 for a gallon a gas) as the cause of their “Nightmare on Main Street,” Maxwell sees the American political system being shaken to its roots.

    Princeton and Oxford-educated Maxwell believes that if the Democrats are in power, their core constituencies – farmers, workers and intellectuals – will be ranged against one another, resulting in an impasse. If the Republicans are in power, he expects whatever “solution” they come up with to be politically untenable because it will be premised on people with money continuing to consume as before, with the have-nots expected to do without.





    Seeing no chance of a timely political response to America’s looming oil calamity, Maxwell, senior energy analyst at Weeden & Co., expects an oil-induced financial crisis to start somewhere in the 2010 to 2015 timeframe. He said that, unlike the recession the U.S. appears to be in today, “This will not be six months of hell and then we come out of it.” Rather, Maxwell expects this financial crisis to last at least 10 or 12 years, as the world goes through a prolonged period of price-induced rationing (eg, oil up to $300 a barrel and U.S. pump prices up to $15 a gallon), while waiting for new technologies that can wean nations off their oil dependency to take hold in the marketplace. (It will take time to change over the world’s one billion or so oil-consuming cars and trucks.)

    As this combined oil and financial crisis worsens, Maxwell would not be surprised if the U.S. government started functioning the way it did in World War II, when the democratic dialogue was often put on hold so that unilateral decisions could be made by people given special powers. He described them as little tyrants who will be able to cut off debate, effectively weakening the democratic process. Not a pleasant prospect, Maxwell emphasized, but one that may be unavoidable in the oil-scarce world that’s coming.
    Last edited by Contemptuous; February 18, 2008, 01:14 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 201O. Peak Oil Hits 2

    You mention in a post here that "...demand destruction" in the non-OECD world is the least likely hypothesis, because it is indeed not remotely as price sensitive as in the OECD world. It sounds counterintuitive - one would think "richer nations have more to spend on oil", but CIBC does not agree. Further, they point out that in 5 years non-OECD energy consumption will exceed the OECD consumption, while also persisting in much more dynamic consumption growth than in the industrialised mature economies of today."

    The report you cite does not take into account that the reason why oil demand is declining in developed OECD nations, especially in the US, while it is rising in developing non-OECD nations, especially oil producers: oil is subsidized by government in many developing countries precisely because economies in the early stages of economic development are more sensitive to high oil prices. Where the market is operating high oil prices is reducing demand.

    In this post Maxwell says: "We live in a world where there is only about 1.2% more oil available each year, not enough to keep up with 1.5% annual demand growth."

    If non-OECD countries stop subsidizing oil demand will fall in non-OECD nations as well. However, the economic and thus the political impact of a reduction in subsidies will be far more dramatic in these countries than in the US. This is one benefit of the FIRE Economy: it is not energy intensive and can absorb energy price increases far better than economies that are more dependent on energy for economic output, such as China. Oil producers can cope with falling demand by restricting supply.

    Chart below show a range of forecasts for peak oil with a consensus around 2010 with the notable exception of CERA.


    Last edited by FRED; February 18, 2008, 09:21 AM.
    Ed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 201O. Peak Oil Hits 2

      Originally posted by FRED View Post
      ... The report you cite does not take into account that the reason why oil demand is declining in developed OECD nations, especially in the US, while it is rising in developing non-OECD nations, especially oil producers: oil is subsidized by government in many developing countries precisely because economies in the early stages of economic development are more sensitive to high oil prices.
      It would be a stretch to conclude that an exhaustive study of global consumption patterns in oil by CIBC does not take the heavy subsidies into account. If these are trained economists conducting even a marginally self respecting study, how could they not factor that?

      China has enough cash to buy several of the largest oil companies in the world outright without even putting a large dent in their cash reserves. What impediment do they have from continuing to subsidise hydrocarbons to insure high growth policies for their nation for two decades to come? The amount of cash any of the rapidly growing non-producer BRIC nations needs to continue subsidising oil internally is a fraction of their cash receipts from continuing to displace everyone else as the world's factory floor.

      What about the oil producer nations? These nations, together with the BRIC countries, represent almost all of the consumption growth in the world the last seven years, and are projected to accelerate that consumption growth even through a recession, regardless of export growth - purely due to their internal infrastructure build-out. iTulip's long awaited "infrastructure boom" is already in progress throughout the world, while we wait for it's first glimmerings here in the US. Their infrastructure boom or "bubble" will be far larger in aggregate (it's half the world) than the US one.

      Why would Venezuela, Russia, Qatar, UAE, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iraq or Iran ever need to abolish their internal fuel subsidies if they are producers and the global price is soaring and filling their coffers with cash reserves? All of these nations, BRIC and oil producing alike, will however likely decrease their subsidies - but they will do so in line with the growing purchasing power of their population.

      As their incomes rise - and in percentage terms, their incomes will be rising hundreds of percent more than in the in the OECD nations, they will have considerably wider latitude to increase the price they set for fuel internally to their economies, than these OECD countries, partly because they are starting from very low base prices internally (e.g. 50 cents a gallon) but first and foremost, because their incomes will be rising 200% - 500% faster than the OECD incomes.

      The CIBC article points out the consumption growth hinges entirely around income growth, not net income. Their purchasing power for fuel - that's the primary bid on global fuel supplies, will be underwritten by those cash rich nations using state money to continue underwriting their national growth. Particularly in the fuel producing nations, where this future trend is practically certain. I find it very hard to believe the China's and India's of the world won't employ some of their prodigious cash earnings to provide insurance for their growth as well.

      If iTulip editors listen in on the third hour of this past weekend's Financial Sense news hour for a glimpse of what others think of your "petroleum demand destruction" thesis, you may be surprised that this is regarded as discredited! They may be right, or you may be right - but the point is, iTulip does not seem to be aware that some people (Maxwell, CIBC, Puplava, Leeb) are suggesting your espoused view is chained to a highly US centric, developed-nation view of the consumption dynamics - which will not bear out.

      Puplava mentions for instance, in reference to the widely accepted idea around here, says that the notion "global oil consumption growth must fall when the US consumption lynchpin" falls", says (to use his own words) "that's naive". The reason he observes this, is because the global context happens to be the full scale industrial build-out of half the world. He predicts petroleum consumption growth will continue inexorably this year and next, barring any really severe global GDP collapse. He plots this trajectory on a collision course with the production growth event which Maxwell here unequivocally describes.

      Finally, you quote Maxwell writing:

      "We live in a world where there is only about 1.2% more oil available each year, not enough to keep up with 1.5% annual demand growth."

      Your thesis is, that once oil prices really begin to bite, the subsidising of oil prices will disintegrate or reduce sharply, and consumption growth will materially decline on a global basis. In response to this, Mr. Maxwell expressly points out, as the thesis of his entire quoted article, that by 2010 (just two years from now) even that 1.2% annual growth is going to fade. He goes on to note that by 2013 - 2015 that production growth will enter into actual production declines.

      iTulip's objection is that "demand destruction" must set in also in the developing world, to produce a graduated transition to new energy means. The point being made here is that even if demand destruction occurs, it will be occurring in a world where global all liquids production declines - within a mere 5 -7 years, will begin to outstrip (what you anticipate is) demand destruction, which is a "reluctant" dynamic by it's very definition. One is an accelerating trend, the other is a "reluctant" trend". Which will move faster?

      There can be no "willing, orderly, or accelerated demand destruction" to accommodate the increasing pace of production declines described here by Maxwell. Not with the BRIC nations dynamic in the mix in the next 10 years. With half the world subsidising their oil prices to protect their nascent growth, and cash rich enough to keep that going a good long while, there is much more likely to be only exceedingly reluctant demand destruction. Put that together with a world where rates of decline, once they commence, accelerate. Once decline starts (and Maxwell describes this as merely a two year "cusp" event) it is an increasing rate.

      Finally, I should note that Mr. Maxwell introduced this article with a very formal preamble. He said specifically that he introduced this article because he wanted to go on the record, in 2008 clearly and unequivocally, about how he sees this play out. If you go back and search through his 40-50 year professional history, Mr. Maxwell did not ever venture into any such pronouncements. He is trying to communicate this position statement with emphasis.

      I fully understand the visceral objection many feel towards being "forced" or "coerced" to "doomer conclusions" in regard to the described events. The posting of this description was intended primarily for those of us who understand the depth of experience and fundamental conservatism of Mr. Charley Maxwell. You just don't shrug this guy off. If this guy is talking in these terms, it provides an "extra incentive" to revisit his description and open one's mind to the possibility he's going to be correct. He's been considered most authoritative - for half a century.

      If we listen in on Mr. Puplava, on the coming oil scarcity (150 books read, and ten years of intense study to decipher the reality or gravity of the issue), he states it is precisely the "economists" who have applied the most consistently incorrect analysis (demand destruction theories chronically fixated on first world paradigms) to gauging the dynamics that will govern this most critical resource's depletion arrival.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

        Alarmist nonsence!

        We can make diesel from Coal (which there is penlty). My Grandfather used to bomb German liquaid/coal plants all the time in WW2.

        While i agree that the oil price wil arc higher, it will simply draw "New methods" or new production processes into being.

        Luke honestly!
        Mike

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

          very interesting discussion, and thanks for the post lukester. i have read in other pieces about the increased domestic consumption in oil producing countries cutting into their ability to export. mexico is one example. further, the political stability/legitimacy of the regimes in e.g. iran and venezuela is quite dependent on cheap energy. i could foresee such regimes maintaining their subsidies, even in the face of rocketing world prices, since their only loss would be an opportunity cost, which they will see as worthwhile to maintain their power. thus higher prices worldwide will not be as effective as one might wish in rationing consumption, at least within the borders of surplus oil producers. this will cause prices in non-surplus producers and non-producers to rise even higher, of course. [the u.s. is a non-surplus producer, thus my care in phrasing.]

          edit- surplus producers who may well continue to subsidize are, i think, in a very different position than countries with financial but not energy surpluses, e.g. china. it is not in china's interest to accelerate its energy dependency even if it can afford to at this time, though i could see ongoing subsidization with a gradual phase out over time.
          Last edited by jk; February 18, 2008, 02:59 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

            Here is an excerpt from (one of?) Maxwell's previous article on the subject:

            14 Nov 2004 The Gathering Storm by CHARLES T. MAXWELL (full text)

            Over the next 25 years, a new world energy economy will arrive in three waves. We are near the top of the first and smallest one, a warning wave. A second more powerful wave likely will hit in the 2009-2010 period when the non-OPEC world may reach its all-time highest output of crude oil, subsequently declining to become ever more dependent on OPEC for incremental barrels of production. The final wave should break around 2020, or earlier, as even OPEC's vast reserves are tapped at a maximum rate of production. After that, oil volume should head down and keep falling, never to revive.

            [..]

            We are running out of the ability to produce 2% more barrels each year to meet world demand that increases about 2% annually. The potential loss of the incremental barrels of output in the non-OPEC world as early as 2009-2010 would put the availability of additional barrels -- and power over the price at which the world's consumers might purchase them -- in the hands of five OPEC nations: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Iran. (Under some circumstances, Venezuela might be an additional member of the club.)

            Depending on their perception of their own political and economic strength, these countries might decide to lift crude prices much faster than the rate of dollar inflation, thus initiating economic and social changes in energy use on a global basis.

            For the period 1987 to 2003, the historical range of oil prices was approximately $10 to $40 per barrel, with an average of $20. For 2004 to 2010, the price range could be $30 to $60, with an average of $40. For 2011 to 2020, the range could be $50 to $100, with an average price of $70 per barrel.
            An interview with Maxwell in the New York Times:

            August 13, 2000 MARKET INSIGHT; Oil Prices Falling? Don't Count On It By ROBERT D. HERSHEY JR. (full text)

            and this:

            Business Week Online - DECEMBER 10, 2002 (full text)
            Last edited by Slimprofits; February 18, 2008, 03:44 PM. Reason: added two excerpts

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

              Lukester,

              Maxwell says that new deep oil production won't prevent peak. I can't find a quick link but I am reading that these new Brazilian finds may rival the Saudis.

              If so, my question to the group is how does this affect the peak oil scenario, specifically its affect on prices, supply and its' affect on further development of alternate energies?

              To Mega's point, if we are faced with the doomsday peak oil scenario, at what point will we rush headlong into liquified coal, environmental considerations be damned?
              Greg

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                Here is the news item in question - Brazil's oil: new wealth or petro-populism?

                From the article

                On Nov. 8, Brazil's state-controlled oil firm Petrobras confirmed the finding of huge oil reserves that could hold up to eight billion barrels of light crude in the Tupi fields, off Brazil's southeastern coast. Some experts say that Brazil's oil officials usually downplay the size of the country's oil findings, and the new reserves could be up to 10 billion barrels.

                The discovery is likely to raise Brazil's oil reserves by 50 percent, and turn it into the country with the eighth-largest oil and gas reserves in the world. Petrobras President Sergio Gabrielli said that the reserves ``will lie somewhere between those of Nigeria and Venezuela.''
                8 billion barrels at the current rate of oil use represents 97 days of world oil usage -- even if all of it was ultimately extractable -- no Saudi Arabia by any stretch of the imagination.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                  Originally posted by Lukester View Post

                  ...BTW, for your interest GRG55, Mr. Maxwell disagrees with your assessment of the "Peak" as a decade long process. He describes it in terms of "two years". The article is fascinating. Are we then really to think of the miles and miles of commentary here on the housing bust as more important than this?? Who is even going to remember the housing bust of 2007 when the events below break on us?...
                  Thanks for posting the article Lukester. Maxwell is indeed one of the resident "deans".

                  Regarding the difference in views on duration of "The Peak", neither Mr. Maxwell nor myself are perfectly clairvoyant, so we will just have to see. But here is what I said about it a while back [excerpted], and I don't see any reason to alter my view at this point in time:

                  Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                  ...Another 5 to 10 years of roughly flat global production of hydrocarbons from all sources is well within the realm of the probable, and IMO is the most probable outcome. The main (predictable) threats to this outcome are collapsing prices (most likely the result of a severe global recession this decade) or a series of enforced climate change policy measures that severely discourage hydrocarbon usage and penalise investment...
                  Originally posted by GRG55 View Post

                  ...What I have/will argue with is:
                  • "The decline is because we are running out of producable oil resources - the geology is in control" (although you may NOT be one of them, I hear this argument repeated ad nauseum from others). I am sure we both agree it's wrong. There's no shortage of oil resource in the world. There is a shortage of undeveloped oil resource that can be exploited at prices and within time intervals competitive with other, alternative energy sources - particularly coal & natural gas, increasingly nuclear, solar & wind, and eventually maybe even biofuels and so forth.
                  • The climate change debate is raising the prominence of the CO2 emissions cost of mankind's use of hydrocarbons and, through carbon taxes or other policy and public preference outcomes, may further widen the cost differential between crude oil and alternatives. Such measures, if implemented, will have exactly the intended effect - redirecting investment away from carbon intensive energy sources.
                  • Those who are predicting a sudden, surprising and rapid decline in global hydrocarbon production (the "hit the wall scenario") may be correct, but probabilities are NOT in their favour, IMO. I do not think we will hit the wall when it comes to liquid transport fuels because the combined effect of conservation (from secular rising prices), use of LPGs, additions from ethanol and other biofuels, shift of public transit to stationary (electric) power, additions from unconventional oil, and a myriad of other moderate, not radical, technology, behaviour and oil displacement/reallocation changes will offset the decline in conventional crude oil production. Only in the low (but not zero!) probability case of a precipitous decline in OPEC (read: Saudi) conventional production/exports will we "hit the wall". I do not have the same confidence that Saudi can maintain production for as long as Mr. Groppe thinks (I think the law-of-big-numbers is catching up with the world's largest producer), but neither of us has the definitive data to know the actual correct answer today.
                  • If cost and other resources were not limited, we could keep global crude oil production rising for many, many more years. Not economically (see first bullet), and maybe not environmentally either. That's why I agree with the terminology "peak cheap oil"...I think it describes the situation perfectly and disassociates "peak oil" people like me from the "apocalypse soon" peak oil advocates like James Howard Kunstler, the LATOC folks, and in some limited respects Matt Simmons also.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                    Originally posted by BiscayneSunrise View Post
                    Lukester,

                    Maxwell says that new deep oil production won't prevent peak. I can't find a quick link but I am reading that these new Brazilian finds may rival the Saudis.

                    If so, my question to the group is how does this affect the peak oil scenario, specifically its affect on prices, supply and its' affect on further development of alternate energies?

                    To Mega's point, if we are faced with the doomsday peak oil scenario, at what point will we rush headlong into liquified coal, environmental considerations be damned?
                    Don't believe everything you hear about spectactular oil finds in the media. Here's some previous stuff on Brazil's Tupi deep water find, and a few others before that in the link at the end:

                    Originally posted by GRG55
                    This one story has been repeated so many times now it's getting ridiculous. A very good example of lazy journalism, something that appears in no danger of "peaking" anytime soon, unfortunately...

                    There's a lot of mis-information and increasing noise levels about oil supply floating around out there folks. For example the article linked below from today's Baltimore Sun picks up on reports from Nov 9 about Petrobras' deep wildcat test at Tupi that was first posted by iTulip's "Jay" here: http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...19466#poststop



                    Some excerpts and my comments that may help interpret reports such as this. I expect we will see lots more media stories about "plentiful oil" in the weeks ahead - you can draw your own conclusions as to why.
                    Brazil looking to tap deep oil
                    Huge offshore deposit challenges technology
                    December 2, 2007
                    RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil
                    This country, famed for its development of ethanol from sugar cane, soon could become one of the world's great oil powers if its state-controlled energy company, Petrobras, can tap a potentially huge deposit beneath the South Atlantic Ocean.
                    One ultra-deep well test and now we have Brazil "soon" becoming a "great oil power". I've even seen reports speculating about Brazil joining OPEC. The chances of Brazil becoming a great oil power on the basis of this exploration success are about the same as the US becoming petroleum self-sufficient in my lifetime.
                    Experts believe the deposit, in the Tupi field 180 miles off Brazil's southeastern coast, holds up to 8 billion barrels of light oil and natural gas. If confirmed, the deposit would be the largest petroleum find in seven years and would propel Brazil to the No. 12 position in oil reserves, after the United States and ahead of Canada and Mexico.
                    You can be certain that "experts" don't have any real idea and at this point neither does Petrobras. It will take more than a single successful test to delineate and assess a reservoir of the purported size and depth. When you read these sorts of reports in the media remember that resource potential is not the same as oil in place, which in turn is not the same as recoverable reserves (which is what eventually shows up at a refinery gate).
                    Analysts say the deposit could be worth up to $60 billion and predict that Brazil, which last year for the first time produced as much oil as it consumed, could become a major oil exporter.
                    More "great oil power" hype. Who pays these people to write this stuff anyway? Some of the truly uninformed journalists are suggesting that Brazil will happily run its economy on ethanol while shipping a grateful world its petroleum. Not likely, given that every other petroleum producer is trying to figure out how to maximize the domestic industrial benefits from hydrocarbon feedstock, and I see no reason why Brazil should behave diffferently.
                    But the Tupi deposit is deeper than Petrobras has ever drilled - under 7,000 feet of ocean water and more than 16,000 feet of rock, sand and salt, including a 1.2-mile-thick layer of rock-hard salt.
                    Petrobras deserves full marks for successfully and safely drilling and testing this well. The technical hurdles to pull this off are unbelievable and there's damn few companies on the planet that are capable of such a feat.
                    Company officials say years of planning lie ahead, and experts estimate that the Tupi field won't start operating fully until 2013. Though the company announced the find last year, it just released estimates of its size in November. The company will have to drill more wells to better calculate the size of the deposit.
                    Drilling the first well alone cost $240 million, and tapping the Tupi deposit will require investing at least $5 billion at the outset, Llewelyn said. Petrobras controls a 65 percent stake in the deposit, with British company BG Group and Portugal's Gal Energia controlling the rest.
                    There's those "experts" again. There isn't a snowball's chance in hell that Tupi will be producing by 2013. Because of the breathtaking cost per well, and limited rig fleet capabilities, the additional wells will be drilled sequentially. Every aspect of the results from each well will be studied thoroughly before the next one is drilled. That takes time. Lots of time. Especially at these depths. A high confidence production decision is years away, ifthe prospect proves up. And I will go on record that the actual capex cost of a production operation at Tupi, if it ever comes about, will be considerably more than $5 B's (especially if Ben and Hank are still in charge of the currency).

                    In 2005, U.S.-based Chevron and its partners drilled the deepest offshore oil and gas well in history at 34,189 feet below sea level in the Gulf of Mexico, according to Transocean, the world's largest offshore drilling contractor, which completed the well. The deepest onshore well, at 37,016 feet, was completed this year on Sakhalin Island, off the Russian coast, for ExxonMobil.
                    Notice that when a developing country NOC like Petrobras completes a successful deep test, that puts it on the verge of world domination as a "great oil power". But when an IOC like Chevron did the same thing...well...ho hum.
                    Last year, Chevron announced it had found one of the biggest oil deposits in the United States, with up to 15 billion barrels of petroleum, more than 28,000 feet below sea level in the Gulf of Mexico.
                    Chevron (and its partners) made no such announcement. This nonsense has been repeated so often in the echo chamber media that one almost wants to gag. Here's a link to the Chevron press release about the well.
                    http://investor.chevron.com/phoenix....0805&highlight=
                    I defy anyone to find any reference to barrels of petroleum in any context in this release. It was one of the "experts" that the media love to employ to get their sound bites that came up with the 15 billion barrel number; it got picked up and is still being repeated and now attributed to Chevron. If there really was a 15 billion barrel find, wouldn't that make the USA also "one of the world's great oil powers"? Funny how that wasn't mentioned. Maybe it just doesn't fit the script.

                    Over-hyped media reports on oil finds are commonplace. This post lists a few recent examples of similar media hyper-ventilation on oil fumes.
                    http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...19470#poststop

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                      Thanks gentlemen,

                      It seems intuitive that since 2/3rds of the earth is covered by ocean that we would find a similar proportion of resources below the ocean as on dry land. Agreed, though, the cost would be staggering. Not just in terms of dollars but also in terms of energy required to extract it.

                      In Kunstler's "Long Emergency" he says that in the early days of oil exploration that it took 1 barrel of oil to extract 100 bbl. Today it is something more like 1 bbl required to get just 2. Forgive me if my figures are off. I am on the road and don't have the reference in front of me but you get the idea. The resources may very well be there but it seems the law of diminishing return wins out every time. Like ethanol, at some point, the energy return for deep water drilling would be a net negative.
                      Greg

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                        Sorry not to chime in further on this thread, or indeed reply to a few other posts in the past few days. I'm awaiting lab results for some tests from my doctor for a persistent abdominal swelling, and I'm a wee little bit *nervous* at the moment.

                        One of the corrolaries to having these tests is related to the fact that for the past couple of years I got into the habit of browsing emails and the web with a laptop computer sitting on my stomach for several hours every evening, pretty much all year long.

                        My doctor has told me some "scary" stories related to this (e.g. very extensive long term use of cellphones) that are *somewhat cautionary*. So if you spend many hours a year with a laptop resting on your stomach or lap, perhaps on a sofa, or a lounge chair or prone on a bed - the best advice is, don't.

                        Got to check out for a few days here. I hope to find this place a whole lot more anarchic and unruly when I come back. It's all getting far too sedate around here.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                          Originally posted by Lukester View Post
                          Sorry not to chime in further on this thread, or indeed reply to a few other posts in the past few days. I'm awaiting lab results for some tests from my doctor for a persistent abdominal swelling, and I'm a wee little bit *nervous* at the moment.

                          One of the corrolaries to having these tests is related to the fact that for the past couple of years I got into the habit of browsing emails and the web with a laptop computer sitting on my stomach for several hours every evening, pretty much all year long.

                          My doctor has told me some "scary" stories related to this (e.g. very extensive long term use of cellphones) that are *somewhat cautionary*. So if you spend many hours a year with a laptop resting on your stomach or lap, perhaps on a sofa, or a lounge chair or prone on a bed - the best advice is, don't.

                          Got to check out for a few days here. I hope to find this place a whole lot more anarchic and unruly when I come back. It's all getting far too sedate around here.
                          Good luck Lukester. Hope it turns out that everything works out fine for you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                            Originally posted by BiscayneSunrise View Post
                            Thanks gentlemen,

                            It seems intuitive that since 2/3rds of the earth is covered by ocean that we would find a similar proportion of resources below the ocean as on dry land. Agreed, though, the cost would be staggering. Not just in terms of dollars but also in terms of energy required to extract it.

                            In Kunstler's "Long Emergency" he says that in the early days of oil exploration that it took 1 barrel of oil to extract 100 bbl. Today it is something more like 1 bbl required to get just 2. Forgive me if my figures are off. I am on the road and don't have the reference in front of me but you get the idea. The resources may very well be there but it seems the law of diminishing return wins out every time. Like ethanol, at some point, the energy return for deep water drilling would be a net negative.
                            One other reason for today's focus on deep water exploration is that only a very small number of companies have the technical knowledge, balance sheets and commercial capability to do it. And very few of those companies are owned by national governments.

                            As Big Oil gets pushed out of more countries and conventional petroleum basins, deep offshore is one of the few places where it is still needed, and don't face expulsion or significant competition.

                            However, deep offshore, and various uncoventional oil projects, are not enough to offset the loss of reserves from nationalizations. One look at the recent performance of BP or Shell will show that.

                            FRED: I propose that alongside Peak Cheap Oil, we add "Not So Big Oil" to the iTulip glossary. That's what they will continue to become.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Charley Maxwell - WELLING & WEEDEN - Oil Shortages Start in 2010. Peak Oil Hits 2

                              Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                              Good luck Lukester. Hope it turns out that everything works out fine for you.
                              Yeah, good luck. I hope everything turns out okay.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X