Oil crunch, its coming

[4dsc]

The oil crunch is coming sooner than most people want to believe and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it!


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/4208727.html
U.S. Energy Department study concludes crude production will peak, requiring other energy forms

The study, led by Robert Hirsch, warned that the world should be spending $1 trillion per year developing alternative energy sources — including tar sands, oil shale and gas liquefaction — to avoid having its economy crippled by oil shortages and the resulting chaos. The study recommends a 20-year lead time, so it might already be too late to prevent a crunch.

Perhaps the report's most serious conclusion is that the free market and private industry alone will not prevent economic catastrophe from energy shortages. Government must have a policy for managing the transition from conventional crude oil to other energy forms.

Hirsch, a consultant and former government official overseeing research into solar and other renewable energy forms, said the conversion from oil could be compared to the race for the moon or the mobilization for World War II. Consumers, he said, could not rely on oil companies to get the huge job done.

If oil company managers disagree, they need to demonstrate where all the oil is going to come from to meet rising demand, or propose their own plans for developing alternative sources.

[Deja Q]

1. Oil can be made synthetically.

However, it's not as cheap.

As time goes by they can work on that too.

But the main problem is oil and gas for transportation.

ANYTHING can be done if people put their minds to it.

[Odin2005]

8. Doomers like 4dsc don't understand that, unfortunately.

Doomers are intellectual miggets who are incapable to think outside the box and so assume we are doomed to go back to a pre-industrial level of development.

Technology advances at an exponential rate, so those who attack "technofixes" are short-sighted fools.

[4dsc]

9. Techno-fixes!!

To bad technology will not put more oil into the ground!!

and if you do your research, echnology advances at an exponential rate has slowed considerably since the 1900's. I hope to find that article for ya!!

Doomer or realist??

[Odin2005]

13. I know which articles you are talking about.

It's the ones by Modis, Heubner, and Schmidhuber, I think they are nonsense.

[Strelnikov_]

11. "Technology Advances At An Exponential Rate"

Just like economic growth, population and the energy supply it is dependant upon.

So, tell me what recent technofix has shown potential for even partial mitigation of our energy harvest from fossil fuels.

[Odin2005]

14. Algal biofuel.

[Strelnikov_]

15. Any 100,000 bbl/dy Operations In Production Over Time

to establish scale and redundancy characteristics?

Algae, TDP, Cellulosic Ethanol, none have been proven scalable or redundant, therefore their potential in unknown.

I am in general agreement with Hirsch in his 2005 report on the practical mitigation options available currently. That is, CTL, GTL, and conservation. I think corn ethanol and soy bio-diesel can also be viable mitigation options if an alternative process energy source (wind) can be developed.

On edit: I do agree that Algal biodiesel holds a lot of promise, along with cellulosic ethanol. I just hope that promise bears out.

[NickB79]

16. Synthetic oil from Fischer-Topp conversion of coal

Unfortunately this will put even more CO2 into the atmosphere than we currently are, as well as give the green light to widespread strip-mining to get at even more coal.

In the long run, we may be hoping it is not technically feasible to produce a substantial amount of oil from synthetic sources. The alternative to even a modest "doomer" Peak-Oil future scenario is a pretty horrific global warming disaster worldwide scenario. Both will kill off many millions of people in the coming decades, but global warming has the potential to kill off far more than a doomers Peak Oil scenario.

[IDemo]

2. Prepare to wind down

Virtually all of the attention given to this topic by politicians and the media is focused on the assumptions that either oil reserves will continue to expand indefinitely or that alternatives will neatly step in when "the market" is right. Neither viewpoint addresses the reality we face this century: the era of indefinite expansion is coming to a close, and no amount of "Jack2" discoveries or alternatives will change that. The best either can do is to mitigate the impact, hopefully providing a "soft crash" versus a hard one.

Left unsaid is that even if a Ghawar is miraculously discovered every year, this won't solve our problem, just move it into the atmosphere.

The very important flip-side of the energy coin, conservation, is treated by many with disdain. Commute by bicycle when possible? (guilty). Recycling, lowered consumption, less travel, realistic thermostat settings, growing some of your own food; these are all things many could do today, but don't.

Doing my part for the War on Christmas..

[4dsc]

3. Because..

I believe because of our culture we will not change.. Only a small number of people are ever capable of changing against the will of the majority IMHO.. That's why our society will ride that train over the cliff instead of slowing it down to see what's really ahead..

"Our culture is built on growth and that phase of human history is almost over and we are not prepared for it. Our biggest problem is not the end of our resources. That will be gradual. Our biggest problem is a cultural problem. We don't know how to cope with it."

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/9/21/233944/840

[IDemo]

6. Excellent article, thanks

Two lines stick out:

.. "how today's complacent U.S. population will cope"

and - "A better solution is to question the supposed need for this energy, and get down to the task of redesigning our lifestyles to share the Earth with all species and peoples."

[MikeDuffy]

4. I haven't seen a recent U.S. Dept of Energy report by Hirsch

Here is a recent article of comments made by Hirsch in London: http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?from=rss_&fArticleId=3444622
The last "Hirsch Report" was published in Feb 2005:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report
so perhaps the OP is referring to a combination of the above?

I find it curious that the Business Report article says "Conventional oil production peaked in Texas in 1972, North America in 1985...", I can't recall having heard those dates mentioned before, only that the U.S. peaked in late 1970 (or early 1971), but these two dates might still be right since other states besides Texas perhaps had declines that offset Texas' increasing production until 1972, and Canada's increasing production offset U.S.'s declines until 1985. Canada is the number one exporter of oil to the U.S., followed by Mexico.

[IDemo]

5. I believe they are talking lower 48 in '70, +Alaska in '85 n/t

[NMDemDist2]

7. North Amer. includes Canada and Mexico

so that must be what they meant. Mex. is still pumping I believe and Canada has some resources too, but not readily drilled ones....

[4dsc]

10. What about technology??

Everyone keeps saying that technology will save the day yet oil production keeps going down in every oil field that has reached peak production..

[ramapo]

12. All ok until at least the 2nd week of November

Right now it is happy time at the pumps.