Separate names with a comma.
Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.
Discussion in 'The Pub' started by DisgruntledDog, Oct 17, 2010.
I'm sure a cost benefit analysis will determine that as oil price starts increasing, other means of energy production will become favourable and society will start to rely on energy sources other than oil for their needs.
speaking of declining supply, what about helium?
Lies and damn statistics
There are many oil reserves that are not allowed to be touched - consider the Alaskan North Slope for one
Also the Russians have deep well drilling technology the USA does not - consider the oil fields of Vietnam --the US said you have no oil - the Russians drilled deeper and found it
ANWAR (North Alaska) has somewhere between 5.7 and 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Wikipedia.. At the current world consumption of 85 million barrels a day, that represents somewhere between 57 and 188 days of consumption. It might delay peak oil by a few months but it certainly isn't going to stop it.
Peak oil has little to do with reserves. It's about cheap and plentiful oil. We've got all of the cheap and easy oil. We're now going deeper and deeper out to sea to recover the oil. It's much, much more expensive to do drill deep water than it is to stick a straw in the sands in Saudi Arabia and have oil pump out under it's own pressure.
If the study is correct then we have 2 years to find some other energy source and build the infrastructure to support that energy source.
There is currently no known energy source that can replace oil. Our whole civilisation is dependant on oil.
I can imagine us throwing together more coal-fire power plants to charge up electric cars...
Our electrical grid barely copes with demand as it is. Some of it is due to production but it's also do to the ageing overloaded transmission lines.
Eh, privatise it. That'll fix the problems for sure.
Absolutely, oil supply is not a problem, there is ample oil if you're prepared to pay enough. 'Peak oil' doesn't deny this, that's a common misinterpretation.
The issue is that cheap energy is in declining availability. Those other sources you mention are a reality, but the expense in obtaining them will cause price shocks that affect the entire global economy, causing recessions, political instability etc...
do a google search on pastor lindsey williams non energy crisis
I find it interesting that you would believe some Pastor who says there isn't an looming energy crisis over the vast majority of petroleum geologists but hey some people believe economists over climate scientist re climate change.
There isn't any credible evidence that ANWAR has more oil reserves than Saudi Arabia.
There is some skepticism over the existence of gull island oil fields of the magnitude that Mr Williams claims
The issue is not the cost of oil as scarcity increases its the decreasing energy return from extraction.
50 years ago easy oil produced a ratio of 100:1, now its about 20:1. Eventually you will reach close to 1:1, which means it takes just as much energy to extract as you get in return. At the moment we mostly use oil itself as the energy source to extract it.
Oil shock is predicted to hit around ratio 10:1
From reading some Exxon reports 20 years ago more than 60% of the worlds oil supply lies below that 1:1 ratio.
So we will never physically run out of oil, but for all-intense and purposes it will be.
The only solution would be to use an alternate energy source to extract it. But the consequence is that it becomes unaffordable.
sorry mate, not trying to pick on you, just this is a phrase that bugs me. It's "for all intents and purposes". Meaning whatever intent or purpose for something that exists.
back on topic.
I prefer to use "For all incense and porpoises", myself.
Err, sorry for the spamminess, I cannae help myself today 8-[.
"Play it again Sam"