Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oil Drum to roll away

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

  • Oil Drum to roll away

    The Oil Drum is closing down after eight years, giving up the long struggle to alert us all to "peak oil" and the dangers of an energy crunch. Readers have been drifting away. The theme has gone out of fashion, eclipsed by shale and fracking in the US.







    By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard


    7:40PM BST 31 Jul 2013


    The demise of Britain's leading website for oil dissidents has been seized on by critics as an admission that peak oil is just another malthusian myth like so many before. It comes amid a spate of reports from global banks announcing the death of the commodity supercycle, slain by creative technology and a surge of new supply.


    Yet if you stand back, it is hardly evident that the world is again enjoying abundant sources of cheap energy, metals or indeed food. Commodity prices have held up remarkably well given that we are in a global trade depression, albeit one contained by monetary stimulus.




    The eurozone is in the longest unbroken recession since the 1930s, with industrial production 13pc below the pre-Lehman peak. Average growth in the US has been 1.1pc over the past three quarters as it grapples with the most drastic fiscal tightening since demobilisation after the Korean War. The Economic Cycle Research Institute continues to insist that the US is in recession right now, a claim less absurd than it sounds.


    Russia and Brazil have ground to a near halt. China is in its second "mini-recession" in two years, its growth rate near zero on a GDP deflator basis. China's oil imports were down 1.4pc in June from a year earlier. Imports of iron ore were down 9.1pc.




    It all adds up to a prostrate global economy, yet on Wednesday Brent crude oil was still trading at $106, and US crude at $103. There is no comparison with the collapse to $11 in 1998. The CRB commodities index is still three times higher than a decade ago. You might conclude that the supercycle is in rude good health given what has been thrown at it.


    A new Eos report by the American Geophysical Union, "Peak Oil and Energy Independence: Myth and Reality", argues that global crude output has been stuck on a plateau of around 75m barrels per day (bpd) since 2005 despite enticing returns. "Global net oil exports from oil-exporting countries have peaked and are in decline."


    The output of the big five oil majors - Exxon, BP, Total, Chevron and Shell - has fallen by 26pc over the past nine years, despite a relentless hunt for new fields. The North Sea, the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska are all wasting away. Expenses keep ratcheting up as fields move further out to sea in the Atlantic, drilling deeper through layers of salt. Theoretical reserves are meaningless. What matters is the break-even cost.


    Eos said flows from the world's existing fields are falling at 5pc a year, and it is questionable whether shale or tar sands can easily step into the breach. "Production from these unconventional sources is difficult and expensive, and has a very low energy return on investment. Simply stated, it takes energy to get energy," it said.


    Using a rule of thumb that 4pc global growth requires a rise in oil supply of 3pc, Eos concluded that the world will need another 17m bpd within five years unless we find a way to change our habits fast.


    To the consternation of the authors, the report was cited by the BBC this week as evidence that peak oil production is a myth. "Where they got that idea escapes us," said co-writer Jim Hansen.


    What is clearly true is that US fracking has transformed America's economic and strategic prospects, slashing gas costs for industry to one third of European and Asian levels, and reviving the US chemical, glass and steel industries in what we now call the US manufacturing renaissance.


    Good for them. It is testimony to US engineering quality and the irrepressible spirit of the Great Republic. The sooner we can follow suit in this benighted isle, the better. One shudders at the reflexive Nimbyism of our complacent middle classes. Do they know how delicate our national predicament has become as we live chronically beyond our means, with the worst trade deficit in a quarter century, the worst budget deficit in the Atlantic world and an illusory recovery driven by debt-fuelled spending yet again? I doubt it.


    But though fracking is a Godsend, let us not lose our heads. The US Energy Department expects shale oil to add 3.1m bpd to America's oil output by 2020, a remarkable feat but far less than the 5.4m estimates of a much-cited study by Leonardo Maugeri at Harvard.


    The depletion rate on rigs at the Bakken field in North Dakota - the biggest US shale field - is precipitous. Output falls 30pc within two years, and a third is leaking into the air. Shale bears say average declines are nearer 70pc in the first year, and dismiss the whole craze as a bubble.




    That is going too far. The technology is improving every week. The decline rate may flatten over time. Yet claims of a 100-year bonanza in the US are wishful thinking. "The upper limit of supply is likely closer to 23 years using present day rates of consumption," said the Eos report.


    Kevin Norrish from Barclays said US drillers have already tapped the "best plays" for shale, with newer Utica ventures in the north east of the US and Canada coming up short. The biggest productivity leaps may already have happened. "We expect a steep slowdown in the rate of tight oil production growth from the middle of this decade onward," he said.


    Barclays is defiantly holding to a Brent crude forecast of $184 in 2020, betting that spare capacity in global output will prove thinner than supposed, and that oil shocks will come back to haunt us.


    We should think of shale as one-generation play for the US, enough to ensure American superpower primacy into the middle of the century. Whether the rest of the world can follow suit in any meaningful time-frame is an open question. Boston Consulting Group said there were 110,000 shale wells in the US and Canada by the end of last year, and just 200 in all other countries combined.


    Argentina, Poland and Ukraine may try to get going after 2015 but they have almost no service infrastructure, and all score badly on "ease of doing business". Australia may do better from 2017 onwards.


    China has the world's biggest reserves on paper. It is itching to start but much of its shale is in the north-west desert where there is no water, and frackers have yet to find a viable extraction process without water. Not one of the 19 drilling awards issued by the Communist authorities in January went to companies with oil and gas experience. They were mostly power utilities or coal miners.


    Even if China seizes the prize, it will first have to build a vast network of pipelines. That will take a great deal of energy, long before shale supply reaches the market.


    As for Western Europe, it has mostly shunned shale out of obscurantist ideology, depriving itself of a way out of its EMU quagmire. Common sense will prevail in the end, but Europe does not have the luxury of time. The next five years may decide whether Carolingian Europe spirals into catastrophic decline as the ageing crisis hits, or whether it can hang on for another half century. It may already be too late.


    We all love a fresh narrative but consensus has swung too fast from the 2008 oil panic to the energy complacency of 2013, and done so on slender evidence. As matters stand, peak cheap oil remains an incontrovertible fact. To Oil Drum, a fond farewell.


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/c...ite-shale.html

  • #2
    Re: Oil Drum to roll away

    AEP has low credibility to me, and his failure to contrast both the shale bears' 70% depletion rate and the industry 30% depletion rate vs. a 'standard' oil field just reinforces my view.

    To then conclude that America has a full generation of ongoing dominance due to shale despite the 'shale bears', whatever.

    Here's why it would be nice to see the difference:

    Below I created spreadsheet entries for a 'normal' field with a 5% per year decline, a fracked field with a 30% 1st year decline, but 5% afterwards, and a fracked field with a 69% decline with a 5% decline per year afterwards.

    Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total After Year 1 Total
    standard 1000 950 903 857 815 4524 3524
    fracked 30% 1000 700 665 632 600 3597 79.50% 2597 57.40%
    fracked 69% 1000 310 295 280 266 2150 47.52% 1150 25.42%
    For the 30% case, the 5 year total oil yield is 20% lower than the 'normal' field. This isn't so bad. However, the yield for years 2 through 5 is 42% lower than 'normal'. This is significant.

    For the 70% case, the total yield is less than half, and for years 2 through 5 it is almost 3/4s less.

    Thus the profile matters a great deal in both cases - and shows the 'front loading' which EJ has alluded to.

    Note the above models are not real - just something I slapped together.
    Last edited by c1ue; August 03, 2013, 10:46 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Oil Drum to roll away

      Here's the actual article from AGU.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Oil Drum to roll away

        Originally posted by c1ue View Post
        AEP has low credibility to me,....
        ....
        Thus the profile matters a great deal in both cases - and shows the 'front loading' which EJ has alluded to.

        ....
        is significant tho, yes - that 'the news' about the frontloading and depletion rates is (somewhat suddenly) starting to 'leak out' ?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Oil Drum to roll away

          The "peak oil has peaked" meme is just getting started. An "all assets" drop triggered by a significant bond and US equity market correction might spike oil down 20% (more if it temporarily overshoots, as it usually does), and that will just reinforce this view. But it will also put a crimp in the funding for unconventional resource development...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Oil Drum to roll away

            EJ closed iTulip.com for several years, then brought it back to life again when times warranted it. I hope the same thing happens with The Oil Drum.

            Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Oil Drum to roll away

              Meanwhile, Jimmy chimes in...

              The idea that techno-industrial society is headed toward a collapse has become very unpopular the last couple of years. Thoughts (and fears) about it have been replaced by a kind of grand redemption fantasy that bears the same relation to economics that masturbation has to pornography. One way to sum up the current psychological state of the nation is that an awful lot of people who ought to know better don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground anymore. We’re witnessing the implosion of the American hive mind.

              This is what comes of divorcing truth from reality, and that process is exactly what you get in the effort to replace authentic economic activity with accounting fraud and propaganda. For five years, the Federal Reserve has been trying to offset a permanent and necessary contraction of techno-industrialism by lobbing mortar rounds of so-called “money” into its crony “primary dealer” banks in order to fuel interest rate carry trades that produce an echo in the stock markets. An echo, let us be clear, is the ghost of something, not the thing itself — in this case: value.

              The permanent contraction of techno-industrialism is necessary because the main fuel for running it has become scarcer and rather expensive, too expensive really to run the infrastructure of the United States. That infrastructure cannot be replaced now without a great deal of capital sacrifice. Paul Krugman — whom other observers unironically call Dr. Paul Krugman, conferring shamanic powers on him — wrote a supremely stupid op-ed in The New York Times today (“Stranded by Sprawl”), as though he had only noticed over the past week that the favored development pattern of our country has had adverse economic consequences. Gosh, ya think?

              Meanwhile, the public has been sold a story by nervous and wishful upholders of the status quo that we have no problem with our primary resource due to the shale oil and shale gas bonanzas that would make us “energy independent” and “the world’s leading oil exporter — Saudi America!” A related story along these lines is the imminent “American industrial renaissance.” What they leave out is that, if actually true, it would be a renaissance of robots, leaving the former (and long ago) well-paid American working class to stew in its patrimony of methadrine, incest, and tattoo “art.”

              To put it as simply as possible, the main task before this society is to change the way we live. The necessary changes are so severe and represent so much loss of previous investment that we can’t bring ourselves to think about it. For instance, both the suburbs and the big cities are toast. The destiny of the suburbs is to become slums, salvage yards, and ruins. The destiny of the big cities is to become Detroit — though most of America’s big cities (Atlanta, Houston) are hybrid monstrosities of suburbs and cities, and they will suffer the most. It is not recognized by economic poobahs such as Dr. Krugman and Thomas Friedman that the principal economic activity of Dixieland the past half century was the manufacture of suburban sprawl and now that the endeavor is over, the result can be seen in the millions of unemployed Ford F-110 owners drinking themselves into an incipient political fury.

              Then where will the people live? They will live in smaller cities and cities that succeed in downsizing sharply and in America’s currently neglected and desolate small towns and upon a landscape drastically refitted for a post-techo-industrial life that is as far removed from a Ray Kurzweil “Singularity” fantasy as the idea of civic virtue is removed from Lawrence Summers. The people will live in places with a meaningful relationship to food production.

              Many of those aforementioned swindled, misled, and debauched lumpen folk (having finally sold off their Ford-F110s) will eventually see their prospects migrate back into the realm of agriculture, or at least their surviving progeny will, as the sugar-tit of federal benefits melts away to zero, and by then the population will be much lower. These days, surely, the idea of physical labor in the sorghum rows is abhorrent to a 325-pound food-stamp recipient lounging in an air-conditioned trailer engrossed in the televised adventures of Kim Kardashian and her celebrated vagina while feasting on a KFC 10-piece bundle and a 32 oz Mountain Dew. But the hypothetical grand-kids might have to adopt a different view after the last air-conditioner sputters to extinction, and fire-ants have eaten through the particle-board floor of the trailer, and all the magical KFC products recede into the misty past where Jenny Lind rubs elbows with the Knights of the Round Table . Perhaps I wax a little hyperbolic, but you get the idea: subsistence is the real deal-to-come, and it will be literally a harder row to hoe than the current conception of “poverty.”

              Somewhere beyond this mannerist picture of the current cultural depravity is the glimmer of an idea of people behaving better and spending their waking lives at things worth doing (and worthy of their human-ness), but that re-enchantment of daily life awaits a rather harsh work-out of the reigning deformations. I will go so far to predict that the recent national mood of wishful fantasy is running out of gas and that a more fatalistic view of our manifold predicaments will take its place in a few months. It would at least signal a rapprochment of truth with reality.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Oil Drum to roll away

                Ah, Kunstler is a **** and can get fucked like one, too.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Oil Drum to roll away

                  Originally posted by Thailandnotes View Post
                  Meanwhile, Jimmy chimes in...

                  The idea that techno-industrial society is headed toward a collapse has become very unpopular the last couple of years.
                  oh! what a diff an election/2 do make, eh?
                  when it was ALL BAD NEWS, ALL THE TIME, daily - thruout 2008 - and now?
                  with little change in the actual stats (like the number of people working, the numbers of houses actually listed for sale, never mind under construction) might suggest (to some) that any 'recovery' is - at best - a mirage based upon the latest credit/free-fed-bux bernanke-bubble to inflate mostly TBTF.inc's balance sheet - and little else?

                  its all good now, from the lamestreamist media-cabal of the chattering class - who's already workin on buffin up hilary???
                  (who really would've made a MUCH better choice, but since race trumps 'gender' these daze, what with 'marriage' all but redefined an all, who can say...)

                  but eye DO like this guys style....

                  Thoughts (and fears) about it have been replaced by a kind of grand redemption fantasy that bears the same relation to economics that masturbation has to pornography. One way to sum up the current psychological state of the nation is that an awful lot of people who ought to know better don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground anymore. We’re witnessing the implosion of the American hive mind.

                  This is what comes of divorcing truth from reality, and that process is exactly what you get in the effort to replace authentic economic activity with accounting fraud and propaganda. For five years, the Federal Reserve has been trying to offset a permanent and necessary contraction of techno-industrialism by lobbing mortar rounds of so-called “money” into its crony “primary dealer” banks in order to fuel interest rate carry trades that produce an echo in the stock markets. An echo, let us be clear, is the ghost of something, not the thing itself — in this case: value.

                  The permanent contraction of techno-industrialism is necessary because the main fuel for running it has become scarcer and rather expensive, too expensive really to run the infrastructure of the United States. That infrastructure cannot be replaced now without a great deal of capital sacrifice. Paul Krugman — whom other observers unironically call Dr. Paul Krugman, conferring shamanic powers on him — wrote a supremely stupid op-ed in The New York Times today (“Stranded by Sprawl”), as though he had only noticed over the past week that the favored development pattern of our country has had adverse economic consequences. Gosh, ya think?....

                  and the only reason that even came up with the good doctor, is because race _still_ trumps all other considerations in his universe - seeing as there are plenty of places where lack of _effective_ public transportation (and we'll just leave out the effect of things like the jones act) causes all sorts of economic disadvantage - unless of course, its aim isnt to make rational decisions about the future of transportation, but just how many votes it can buy (of certain subsects of the electorate, typically in that same universe...)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Oil Drum to roll away

                    Not to mention, he consistently seems to be ripping off themes from EJ. Notice how he just volleys in 'peak cheap oil' in the last sentence. A quick search shows that he must have become an iTulip member sometime in mid-2012 when he first starts throwing the term around.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Oil Drum to roll away

                      I'm also noticing more memes like these being put out there: http://www.economist.com/news/leader...cers-excellent. It's the whole 'oil production has peaked because demand for it has peaked' meme.

                      A bit of irony that a magazine called The Economist doesn't understand the supply side of the equation and somehow attributes production numbers to falling demand. I could have sworn in my Econ 101 class that price drops if demand drops and supply remains steady. Hmmm...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Oil Drum to roll away

                        Originally posted by lomaxzoltor View Post
                        I'm also noticing more memes like these being put out there: http://www.economist.com/news/leader...cers-excellent. It's the whole 'oil production has peaked because demand for it has peaked' meme.

                        A bit of irony that a magazine called The Economist doesn't understand the supply side of the equation and somehow attributes production numbers to falling demand. I could have sworn in my Econ 101 class that price drops if demand drops and supply remains steady. Hmmm...
                        Works a bit different with oil, if by "supply" you mean actual production.

                        Total above ground inventory of oil is quite minuscule compared with annual consumption. And since it is not possible to consume virtual barrels that means consumption cannot materially exceed produced supply over time. On the other side of the equation, if production capacity (what can be produced) materially exceeds consumption demand then production is reduced very, very quickly...because there is limited above ground inventory capacity and therefore the cheapest place to store unwanted oil is "in the ground" (by not producing it).

                        The Economist has a long history of being accused of getting oil wrong. It published this famous cover on March 6, 1999, right about the time oil prices bottomed and started to head up relentlessly.

                        Last edited by GRG55; August 07, 2013, 07:07 PM.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X