Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

[Jay]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

There are HUNDREDS of years of oil in Alberta's tar sands. There are NO environmental or climate limits or water or any limits to their development.

If you want a future, you have to get as far away from Greenpeace type of thinking as you can get.

China is a willing buyer for oil. America is lost in space. China will have an economic future for its people, and America will have a false eco-religion for its people.

There are natural limits to exponential growth, but we are no-where near those limits. Especially in America, we are no-where near the limits to growth.

Just looking at Jeddah, Saudi-Arabia: 6.5 inches of rainfall in November, and the water just ran-off in a catastrophic flood. There were no dams, no storm sewers, no perculation ponds, no catchment basins, nothing.

It seldoms rains in Saudi-Arabia, so why bother to build dams? (They must have consulted with Greenpeace.)

And we see the exact same stupid-thinking in California: No dams built in California in decades. In other words: Why bother to build dams when it seldom rains? In other words: Why bother to dam the Eel River? Why bother to place a dam on the Carmel River? Why dam the Yuba River? The water issue is "settled": the climate is getting "warmer and dryer".

The same defeatest thinking with energy: no new power plants other than windmills and solar in California in decades. The same thing in BC: nothing that amounts to anything in energy-generation, for decades.

And the same defeatest thinking (lack of thinking, non-thinking, non-planning, contempt for development, contempt for planning, contempt for humanity) now appearing in Alberta with Greenpeace protesting the oil sands projects, trying to create water issues that never existed before.

But China is the willing-buyer for up-graded oil. China creates no problems for energy producers in Alberta because China wants a future (a higher standard-of-living) for its people..... Let America have its new eco-religion and its new poverty, but China will have its new oil and its new wealth.

Steve, I have been thinking about this issue for a while, and the conspiracy side of me, which grows every day ;), thinks that those who really know what the F is going on, let the US blow out its oil based economy on purpose. Sounds confusing, but if you think about it from the perspective of someone in power who wants to keep that structure intact, not taking other measures to mitigate energy use reveals peak oil early in a sense. And when that moment of peak oil comes there is room for recourse through conservation and technology measures. If you conserve your ass off, build a million dams and nuclear plants and then hit the peak, there is no way to smooth out the edges of the change. You need the low hanging fruit of conservation, and the slightly less low hanging fruit of ready to install dams and nuclear plants to have time to try and build a bridge toward finding the equivalent of a new industrial revolution for the new world economy.

It also brings other benefits, you get to restart the production economy focused on "green energy," which just means any cheap energy we can find in my mind, and also you have less of a tinderbox of population to deal with when the moment comes because the earlier it comes, the less population on the earth.

All those energy sucking appliances that fill everyone's kitchen counter tops and fill the nooks and crannies of our houses, and continued gas guzzling reckless behavior make more sense in that light.

So, I think you are going to get your wish real soon.

[GRG55]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

I really think Americans could cut their energy usage by 60% with little change in our lifestyle. We are an extremely wasteful society. I remember when I lived in California, my father came to visit me. We drove the 20 min. it took to go 1.5 miles to the shopping area. It was an open mall area and all the shops had their doors wide open with their air conditioners on full blast. We then proceded to buy a bunch of stuff we didn't need.

I wonder, would my quality of life be severely decreased if I planned out my shopping a little better and only went once or twice a month versus several times a week? Would it be lower if I turned down my heater a couple degrees and threw on a cardigan instead of wearing short sleeves in the winter? Would my kids be suffering if they only got toys on their birthdays and Christmas like I did as a child instead of at least once a month. Do stores really need to be opened 24/7? I know in my house, we've cut back some but quite honestly, we could cut back by 60% by driving less, buying less and wasting less.

Absolutely. And that is why through this economic downturn consumption of the most expensive forms of energy is falling as the most discretionary usages are eliminated.

It's now falling so much in some sectors of the economy that the changes will be permanent, even after there's an economic recovery. That's why, for example, the USA is seeing refineries being closed permanently. Nobody expects those facililities will ever be financially viable ever again. And I suspect that some of the changes in habit that you and your family, and others like you around the country, continent and the world, undertake will also be permanent changes.

It shows once again, in my opinion, that price and economic incentives [and I include taxes in the latter] can be much more powerful drivers of behaviour than government regulations.

[bill]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Absolutely. And that is why through this economic downturn consumption of the most expensive forms of energy is falling as the most discretionary usages are eliminated.

It's now falling so much in some sectors of the economy that the changes will be permanent, even after there's an economic recovery. That's why, for example, the USA is seeing refineries being closed permanently. Nobody expects those facililities will ever be financially viable ever again. And I suspect that some of the changes in habit that you and your family, and others like you around the country, continent and the world, undertake will also be permanent changes.

It shows once again, in my opinion, that price and economic incentives [and I include taxes in the latter] can be much more powerful drivers of behaviour than government regulations.

http://blogs.ft.com/energy-source/20...ds-oil-prices/

China, setting the world’s oil prices

January 25, 2010 9:37am by Kate Mackenzie


Well, Goldman Sachs’ analysts think so. In their latest weekly commodities report, they point out that China’s 1.6m b/d rise in crude imports almost perfectly offsets a 1.5m b/d decline in the same, from the US:

They add (emphasis ours):

Furthermore, recent data on crude loadings suggest that close to 14 mn barrels of West African crude is being redirected from the West to the East. The surging Chinese demand for oil suggests that the drivers of not only consumption growth, but also world oil demand and prices, are shifting from the West to the East.

The IEA hinted at a similar dynamic in its latest monthly oil market report, pointing out that some Saudi Aramco grades were no longer available to European customers at all, in favour of Asian markets and domestic power consumption.
Now, Goldman actually forecast China’s crude oil demand growth rate will slow, but warn of a significant risk that this might not be the case.
The reason they give is that, while there is a perception of financial policy tightening in China due to recent measures - such as higher capital ratio requirements, policy is in fact looser than the second half of 2009. They view the country’s economic policymakers as essentially conservative on export demand growth, and therefore more at risk of not tightening policy adequately than of going too far. This scenario would see crude demand continue to rise rapidly.
Finally, they point out that fears of a medium-term supply squeeze, brought on in part by growing emerging market demand, seems to be creating volatility in long-dated WTI contracts. While volatility levels for short-dated contracts have settled towards historical norms, long-dated contract price volatility has remained high for two years. They state that the same thing happened in 2005 when, in a classic demonstration of price elasticity, Goldman believe it pushed crude demand almost half a million barrels per day lower than GDP growth implied, while also pushing inventories to their highest level since 2001.
Given China’s apparent nervousness about its increasing reliance on imported fuel, we wonder if a big part of that reverse-rebound in demand could come from China itself.

[GRG55]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Steve, I have been thinking about this issue for a while, and the conspiracy side of me, which grows every day ;), thinks that those who really know what the F is going on, let the US blow out its oil based economy on purpose. Sounds confusing, but if you think about it from the perspective of someone in power who wants to keep that structure intact, not taking other measures to mitigate energy use reveals peak oil early in a sense. And when that moment of peak oil comes there is room for recourse through conservation and technology measures. If you conserve your ass off, build a million dams and nuclear plants and then hit the peak, there is no way to smooth out the edges of the change. You need the low hanging fruit of conservation, and the slightly less low hanging fruit of ready to install dams and nuclear plants to have time to try and build a bridge toward finding the equivalent of a new industrial revolution for the new world economy.

It also brings other benefits, you get to restart the production economy focused on "green energy," which just means any cheap energy we can find in my mind, and also you have less of a tinderbox of population to deal with when the moment comes because the earlier it comes, the less population on the earth.

All those energy sucking appliances that fill everyone's kitchen counter tops and fill the nooks and crannies of our houses, and continued gas guzzling reckless behavior make more sense in that light.

So, I think you are going to get your wish real soon.

I also think the US population has gone through a bit of an epiphany about the cost of securing foreign oil. It's finally dawned on enough people that the first and second Gulf Wars were all about oil, not "freeing Kuwait from tyranny", or "WMDs", as the case might be. Those, I believe, are the first two wars the USA has ever fought over that specific resource.

[GRG55]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

http://blogs.ft.com/energy-source/20...ds-oil-prices/

China's import of crude oil in December was a record setting 21.26 million tonnes, or 5.02 million barrels per day...the first time China has ever imported more than 5 million bbls/d.

Coal imports were also a record setting 16.4 million tonnes, up an eye-popping 29.5% over November. Only 3.5 million tonnes of that was coking coal, the bulk of these imports apparently thermal coal to deal with electricity generation needs.

[jk]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

China's import of crude oil in December was a record setting 21.26 million tonnes, or 5.02 million barrels per day...the first time China has ever imported more than 5 million bbls/d.

Coal imports were also a record setting 16.4 million tonnes, up an eye-popping 29.5% over November. Only 3.5 million tonnes of that was coking coal, the bulk of these imports apparently thermal coal to deal with electricity generation needs.

china has over 12% of world coal reserves. yet they are importing coal. could be their own reserves aren't sufficiently developed, or it could be they are looking for ways to spend dollars and get something real for them, while holding on to their reserve real assets. i.e. they are exchanging previously retained dollars for the ability to continue retaining coal.

[GRG55]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

china has over 12% of world coal reserves. yet they are importing coal. could be their own reserves aren't sufficiently developed, or it could be they are looking for ways to spend dollars and get something real for them, while holding on to their reserve real assets. i.e. they are exchanging previously retained dollars for the ability to continue retaining coal.

Could be some of all of these.

However, in the short term China does not appear to be able to mine enough thermal coal.

Last week Premier Wen Jiabao and Vice Premier Li Keqiang said that China will increase imports of thermal coal to ease the country’s power shortages.

“Easing demand and supply strains on coal, power, and gas is crucial to making adjustments to the operation of the economy,” Wen said in a high-profile economic policy statement. He also said that China would restrict power supplies to energy-consuming firms.

[bill]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Could be some of all of these.

However, in the short term China does not appear to be able to mine enough thermal coal.

Last week Premier Wen Jiabao and Vice Premier Li Keqiang said that China will increase imports of thermal coal to ease the country’s power shortages.

“Easing demand and supply strains on coal, power, and gas is crucial to making adjustments to the operation of the economy,” Wen said in a high-profile economic policy statement. He also said that China would restrict power supplies to energy-consuming firms.

http://www.chinamining.org/News/2010...253d33420.html

: 2010-01-15 09:49
China's coal-hungry power plants have turned to imported coal to cope with widespread shortages, but spot supply is scarce, traders said on Thursday.

Coal stocks at China's major power plants edged higher from a week earlier to more than 20 million tonnes, sufficient for eight days of consumption by Wednesday, data by Zhongneng Power Industry Fuel Co and published on sxcoal.com, an industry data website, showed.

But some provinces and regions, including the eastern province of Anhui, central province of Henan, and the region around Beijing were at or below levels for 7 days of consumption, the data showed.

Power plants along the coast or even from inland provinces have been seeking imported coal as domestic supply failed to keep up with high winter demand due to limited production from key coal-producing regions such as Shanxi and transport bottlenecks caused by harsh winter weather.
.
.

Even 24/7 neighbors cannot keep up with demand.
http://www.southgobi.com/s/OvootTolgoi.asp

[Jay]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

I also think the US population has gone through a bit of an epiphany about the cost of securing foreign oil. It's finally dawned on enough people that the first and second Gulf Wars were all about oil, not "freeing Kuwait from tyranny", or "WMDs", as the case might be. Those, I believe, are the first two wars the USA has ever fought over that specific resource.

I'll take that as a positive response to my post GRG55, thanks, coming from you. In addition, we still have quite a large base in Iraq among other things. I doubt we just hand the green zone over. That will be the new US Alamo if need be.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Only if some energy source replaces oil, something with enormous capacity that produces lots of energy for little effort.

So far, jtabeb is the only one I see claiming this can be done, and I'm way too poor to pay the price of admission, so cannot vet his plan.

Without such an energy source, we will not repeat the last century. We might achieve some even finer more sustainable civilization using less energy, "the likes of which we can barely imagine", as you say. But that's not what I'd call a "boom".

Remember: you won't get 42 miles per U.S. gallon in a Toyota Echo, the most fuel-efficient model without air-conditioning, unless the windows are rolled-up. This makes the most fuel-efficient car somewhat unpleasant to drive in summer in the South-west.

Think about the new "sustainable civilization" driving such a car, this way. ( Call this, "a therapy-session" or "a reality-check".)

We don't have to live like this. We could have nuclear power. We could have natural-gas power. We could use up-graded oil. We could use synthetic oil made from coal. We could use bio-fuels and alcohol fuels, properly and competitively priced by the free-market for the energy-content of such fuels.

But we have chosen to live like this; it's part of the new and false eco-religion in America. Defeatism and hostility toward humanity is part of the new religion. "Growth" has become a dirty word.

I have never seen such stupid thinking in all of my life!

As I said, it reminds me of Jeddah, Saudi-Arabia last November: six and one-half inches of fresh rainfall, and the water just ran-off in one catastrophic flood, killing over 100 people. They didn't build the infrastructure to capture and conserve run-off because it seldom rains in Saudi-Arabia.

[Verdred]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

It is also interesting to see where the major fields fields will be, and just how tiny they are. If you didn't click through this, it is worth a look.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/01/20/big...s_slide_2.html

Yeah, Kashagan at #6. That was the "field of the future" in 1998. More like "field of the future forever more" and really puts the lie to the idea that "if we just put enough money" (and use the bodies of dead environmentalists to slick the pipeline, etc) we'll have oil forever, cause boy does that get super old.

[Verdred]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Also came across this good article on the recently released Movie " Avatar" (Now banned in China!)

Avatar: A Multi-Dimensional Pop Parable for Ascension

One interesting thing about Avatar is that I thought it was instructive that the real hero of the movie is the planet itself. Remember that the Na'vi were conducting a "strategic rearward advance" when the planet responded. Without the planet fighting the humans, the Na'vi would have lost.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Add to the ten mega-oil fields listed in Forbes Magazine, there is also oil in the Santa Catalina Channel off of Los Angeles. There is also oil in the Gulf of Mexico, recently discovered. There is also the oil sands of Alberta with about an 800 year life to them. There is also the un-developed Hibernia Oil Field off of Newfoundland. There is also exploration to be done off the East Coast of the U.S. There is also the entire frontier of synthetic oil from coal, also realistically and affordably priced bio-fuels and alcohol fuels, still to be developed in the world market. There is also rejuvenated life in old oil fields through side-a-ways drilling and fracking of shale. There is also new oil to be taken from southern Saskatchewan and in North Dakota, possibly new oil from Pennsylvania, as well. Tallisman is rejuvenating life into the North Sea Oil Field.

Environmentalism and defeatism are mental illnesses and should be treated as such. These illnesses first appeared in the 1960s on college campuses. Pot-smoking was a symptom of these mental illnesses.

Compare the achievements ( or lack of achievements ) of environmentalists to-day to the achievements of Americans in our parents' generation. Witness the achievement of William Mulhulland, for example, who achieved the solution to Southern California's water shortage:

"There's your water; now go take it." (William Mulhulland, City of Los Angeles)

[peakishmael]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

Remember: you won't get 42 miles per U.S. gallon in a Toyota Echo, the most fuel-efficient model without air-conditioning, unless the windows are rolled-up. This makes the most fuel-efficient car somewhat unpleasant to drive in summer in the South-west.

Think about the new "sustainable civilization" driving such a car, this way. ( Call this, "a therapy-session" or "a reality-check".)

We don't have to live like this. We could have nuclear power. We could have natural-gas power. We could use up-graded oil. We could use synthetic oil made from coal. We could use bio-fuels and alcohol fuels, properly and competitively priced by the free-market for the energy-content of such fuels.

But we have chosen to live like this; it's part of the new and false eco-religion in America. Defeatism and hostility toward humanity is part of the new religion. "Growth" has become a dirty word.

I have never seen such stupid thinking in all of my life!

As I said, it reminds me of Jeddah, Saudi-Arabia last November: six and one-half inches of fresh rainfall, and the water just ran-off in one catastrophic flood, killing over 100 people. They didn't build the infrastructure to capture and conserve run-off because it seldom rains in Saudi-Arabia.

Driving a Hummer, the true measure of happiness. I'll call your eco-religion, and raise you one petro-theism. :rolleyes:

http://www.markfiore.com/petrotheism_0

[mesyn191]

Re: Top 10 oil fields (Cantarell kaput)

telecom and the Internet use 1/1,000th the energy that they do now

Sorry this is unrealistic to expect to happen even decades from now. While there has been a recent trend in low power laptops and such, in general people demand more performance from their PC's over time to meet new needs, and as a result power keeps going up dramatically. Particularly if you're running high end hardware, or a data center, or a mainframe. Just one of my video cards uses over 200w for instance. In the 1980's an entire system used less than that....less than half that IIRC. My CPU alone uses around 90w or so, and its not even close to being high end, several years old now in fact. nV is coming out with a new video card in a few months, its supposed to use over 250w. Dual GPUs aren't uncommon either BTW, and quad and triple GPU systems are available as well. PC's that use over 1Kw while hardly common place are something which flat out didn't exist, and 500w+ systems are all over the place.

Heat is becoming a real problem for PC's in general...

I bet we will get something close within 20 years.

Wars aren't always fought for rational reasons like resources you know. Quite a few of them have been totally irrational in fact. McNamara did a great doc a few years before he died called The Fog of War that touches on this subject very well. In short, wars are much like financial manias, they are an unavoidable by product of the human condition as it currently exists. That will not change until humanity itself changes, and I see no reason to believe that will happen anytime soon.

If we can do things like this, I am sure there will be similar rapid improvements in our daily lives.

While all that stuff is certainly cool none of it is a reason to be optimistic about our future. After all, much of today's tech exists because weapons R&D so that it could be used in wars...