Seattle Peak Oil Awareness - Group: Discussions

Writing-On-The-Wall on Interior Department - interesting tale of corruption

Thu, 08 Jul 2010 23:42:36 -0400

The immense devastation of the BP Macondo oil spill has really made me regret writing the initial post about misbehavior at the Federal government's Mineral Management Service in such a flippant and psuedo-hipster manner. Guess I was trying to go for the wink of an eye cynicism that this is “how things happen in the real world” type of bluster. Like when you are talking billions of dollars in oil exploration and development contracts (on Federal - read American Public - land), it is just natural that beautiful oil company “account representatives” will sleep with and provide cocaine to the government bureaucrats in charge of selling, controlling and managing those oil field contracts.

Well, guess we can see now some of the consequences of this type of corruption in the ongoing destruction of the Gulf Coast ecosystems. Seems the necessary oversight of environmental, safety and backup procedure compliance for obtaining oil field rights were part of the negotiating chips in a party-type culture that just has to be at the center of North America's energy and natural resources decision making.

We will get lots more oversight now, possibly enough to effectively end the financial feasibilities of maintaining US oil production from more offshore drilling. A little too late however as my father would say about the insanity of shutting the barn door after the horse ran off. My sincere apologies for the post-modern ironic take on political and corporate corruption. The fact that people are too jaded to take action against the bastards getting away with it - on all levels but particularly those of financial and military industrial complex is a good part of what is going wrong in our country. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on a few comments about GOM oil spill

Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:56:15 -0400

I haven't been keeping up with the news about the the British Petroleum - Transocean oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico until this morning when some headline news jolted me into awareness of the seriousness of this event. There is so much to say about this in relation to peak oil issues, it is hard to know where to begin. However, let me provide some links to some of the best commentary I found:

For updates on the oil spill and mitigation efforts, check out this site: http://www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com/go/site/2931/

The Oil Drum is great as always, here is their second thread on it, which is about the ramifications: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6407

John Michael Greer is practically incomparable in his perceptive understanding of our pedicament, his essay on the perils of additional societal complexity are well worth reading and carefully digesting: http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/

Some of his thoughts:

The result is that we’re pursuing oil wherever we can find it, no matter how complex or risky the prospect might be. Deepwater drilling is one example. It’s complicated stuff, far more expensive and demanding than the methods used to extract oil that happens to be conveniently located under dry land, and when the standard problems faced by oilmen everywhere crop up, responding to those problems involves a whole new world of complexity and risk. One of those standard problems is the risk of a blowout: a sudden surge of crude oil and natural gas that can come bursting up through a well at any point between the moment it’s first drilled and the moment the relatively sturdy structure that handles production is in place.

That’s almost certainly what happened to Deepwater Horizon. It’s a common enough event in drilling for oil, and it’s dangerous even when it happens on dry land and there’s someplace for the drilling crew to run. When the well begins almost a mile underwater, though, there’s the additional problem that nobody has the tools to handle a deepwater blowout if the underwater valves meant to shut it off at the wellhead should fail. That’s also happened to Deepwater Horizon, and if the current efforts to trigger the valves via robot submersibles don’t succeed – and they’ve shown no sign of succeeding so far – the only option left to the BP response crews is to jerry-rig techniques designed for shallow waters and hope they can be made to work 5000 feet under the sea. In the meantime, five thousand barrels a day of crude oil fountain out into the Gulf from the crumpled pipe.

Sharon Astyk also ranks as one of the most astute authors on peak oil consequences and like Greer, her opinions are always worth listening to, here is her take: http://scienceblogs.com/casaubonsbook/2010/04/drill_babyoops.php

And an excerpt from this essay:

t is interesting that this emerging situation is occurring at the same time as the final approval of Cape Wind, the controversial wind farm held up by NIMBYism and shortly following Obama's opening of offshore drilling. Our future as a society is going to involve a certain measure of raping the environment - we know this. We have been casual about the consequences we can see, and reluctant to make visible the full consequences of our extraction - we assume that our resources are clean if we don't have to live near the pollution they engender. This, of course is not true.

It is easy to cry “Drill, baby, drill” and harder to live with the real world consequences of our consumption - increasingly hard. And there aren't a lot of good answers - but one of the things I think is essential is that we understand what we are talking about. It is easy to march to close a coal plant - and it is necessary that we do close them. But unless we are prepared to bring our electrical generation home, to do with less and to find ways to live with less, that march is meaningless. We can't oppose offshore drilling and drive around as much as we like, nor can we support offshore drilling…except when it might affect our lives and livelihood.

It is perhaps beyond richly ironic that this oil spill incident follows on the Obama concession to the oil industry and general public opinion to allow oil exploration on previously restricted areas on the continental shelves such as the offshore coastlines of Florida, the Carolinas and California. It is also perhaps a inevitable slap in the face from reality to the Drill, Baby, Drill crowd whose innate desire to maintain BAU by drilling in any area, no matter how ecologically sensitive. When their war for conquest of vital oil resources started to prove too expensive in terms of money, materials and lives, their - OUR need for BAU, no sound reasoning seemed enough to stop us from pretending we can drill our way out of these problems domestically.

There probably is some oil in these offshore areas, maybe even billions of barrels. However even the most optimistic scenarios - as reported by those commenters on the Oil Drum who actually know about these things - say that exploration and infrastructure development will delay any real production for at least eight to ten years. Then there are these pesky problems that include the credit crunch, the ever greater technological difficulties of extracting difficult, expensive oil, a net energy decline certain to lead to financial and cultural turmoil and the general unforgiving truths of overall EROEI. We are witnessing right now how the concept of EROEI vs. deepwater exploration is playing out in the Gulf of Mexico, with an irreplacable marine ecosystem the main victim.

Right now, the oil spill in the GOM is threatening several dozen species with possible extinction, the devastration of vast regions of critical wetlands, coral reefs and other marine habitat and perhaps also the devastration of many GOM fisheries which support tens or hundreds of thousands of jobs and provide food for millions.

Beyond oil, net energy and their essential roles in maintaining our civilization, we depend upon fresh water, soil fertility and an ecologically complex ecosystem upon which we as a species are absolutely interdependent and well, actually dependent upon. My basic fear is that in our desires to drive our cars, buy consumer crap and well, keep warm and comfy, we will sacrifice all in our pursuit of biofuels and the extraction of tar sands and oil shale. I now believe it is quite possible we will poison the watersheds of the Missouri, Platte, and Colorado rivers from coalbed methane and oil shale extraction, before either regulators, industry or the general public realizes the extreme stupidity of such actions.

For those of us unfortunate enough to have studied the issues, ran through the numbers and thought out the consequences, our probable future is one for despair. I have lived with this grim knowledge for almost ten years, even since that fateful day when while researching the underlying causes of 9/11, I stumbled upon the web site: www.dieoff.org. I am more optimistic now then before, because it appears there are many technological and societal innovations that could in theory enable a gradual powerdown to a sustainable culture for most of the people currently living.

However, in more sober moments, I also recognize the inertia of the system we are in, the cultural biases that exist and our general animal biology and psychology won't enable, allow or permit these transformative changes. From my own personal experience within the peak oil, renewable energy and sustainable agriculture communities, I have found out sad truths. It is apparent that people will not make the investments that are needed (maybe there isn't the money or time anyhow), will not forge the bridges and bonds that are essential and in general don't even grasp the actual, real problems. It may be that civilizational collapse is actually the best case scenario. -Joe

P.S. - Having said this, constructive, foresightful action remains useful. Don't succumb to despair like I sometimes do, instead get busy doing the things that will protect and preserve yourself, your families, communities and the environment you live in.

Dianna98 on Investing In Oil, a viable option

Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:39:47 -0400

The world’s oil and energy sector is the strongest today than in the past 150 years. With the steeply rising prices and its depleting supply, it makes sense to go for an oil and energy investment. The profits from this investment can be seen fast. For e.g.: When an oil well is hit, you can start receiving returns in as soon as 60 days. There isn't an investment on the market that provides results as quickly as oil and gas have the potential to.

One of the important components of the oil and gas sector is the petroleum, which produces several other economically viable byproducts when mixed with other non-hydrocarbons. Petroleum Jelly, also called Petrolatum is blended with paraffin wax to be used in medicines, toiletries and healing moisturizers.

Petroleum is used in paints, lacquers and other inks to make them flow better. The asphalt that paves our driveways, roads and airfields is a product of petroleum. It is also present in the linoleum that is used to cover the floors with, in the shingles and soles of the shoes. The hundreds of petroleum-based products ensure the future of the oil and gas industry, for even if the world turns to renewable energy sources to power their homes and cars, it will still need petroleum to make all of these products.

Writing-On-The-Wall on some wicked comedic videos for your enjoyment

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:54:08 -0400

Telling the truth about our situation don't necessarily have to be grim, even if the messages are. Came across these Youtube videos, they are truly incredible. The first one I watched left me laughing so hard, I thought they should be shared. There are several hundred of these comedic masterpieces, but here are some to get you started:

About the banking crisis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpkxq_VgW3s&feature=channel

Overpopulation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpkxq_VgW3s&feature=channel

Writing-On-The-Wall on Bill Gates advocates zero carbon emissions at TED

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:13:05 -0500

Alex Steffens, a fellow Seattle native leads the web site: www.worldchanging.com, which is sort of a “Bright Green” futuristic web site that takes a decidedly more optimistic view to the challenge of resource depletion and economic/social change than we do here at Seattle Peak Oil Awareness. The work they are doing is wonderful in that they are articulating a positive vision for our culture's future, however time will tell how much successful manifestation of these dreams financial constraints, net energy decline and human psychology will permit.

So this interesting article on Bill Gates recently speech at TED about committing to a zero carbon emission economy is right in line with World Changing's vision: http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/010976.html

Extraordinary ambitious stuff, here are some excerpts:

Friday, Gates predicted extraordinary climate action: zero. Not small steps, not incremental progress, not doing less bad: zero. In fact, he stood in front of a slide with nothing but the planet Earth and the number zero. That moment was the most important thing that has happened at TED.

What, exactly, did he say, and why is it so important?

Gates spoke about his commitment to using his massive philanthropic resources (the Gates Foundation is the world's largest) to make life better for people through public health and poverty alleviation (”vaccines and seeds” as he put it). Then he said something he's never said before: that is it because he's committed to improving life for the world's vulnerable people that he now believes that climate change is the most important challenge on the planet.

Even more importantly, he acknowledged the only sensible goal, when it comes to climate emissions, is to eliminate them: we should be aiming for a civilization that produces no net emissions, and we should be aiming to live in that civilization here in the developed world by 2050.

CO2 = P x S x E x C

Meaning this: the climate emissions of human civilization are the result of four driving forces:

* Population: the total number of people on the planet (which is still increasing because we are not yet at peak population).

* Services: the things that provide prosperity (and because billions of people are still rising out of poverty and because no global system will work unless it's fair, we can expect a massively increased demand for the services that provide prosperity).

* Energy: the amount of energy it takes to produce and provide the goods and services that our peaking population uses as it grows more prosperous (what some might call the energy intensity of goods and services). Gates believes it's likely cutting two-thirds of our energy waste is about as good as we can do.

* Carbon: the amount of climate emissions generated in order to produce the energy it takes to fuel prosperity.

Those four, he says, essentially define our emissions (more on that later). In order to reach zero emissions, then, at least one of these values has to fall to zero. But which one? He reckons that because population is going to continue to grow for at least four decades, because billions of poor people want more equitable prosperity, and because (as he sees it) improvements in energy efficiency are limited, we have to focus on the last element of the equation, the carbon intensity of energy. Simply, we need climate-neutral energy. We need to use nothing but climate-neutral energy.

To do that, we need an “energy miracle.” We need energy solutions that don't yet exist, released through a global push for clean energy innovation. That, in turn, demands that a generation of entrepreneurs push forward new ideas for renewable energy, unleashing “1,000 promising ideas.” He described one of his own investments, but went on to note that we need hundreds of other ambitious companies as well, and he plans to put his own efforts into this arena.

Why is this important? The news stories focused largely on the clean energy aspect of the speech, and certainly the world's most successful businessman announcing that clean energy is the next frontier is a big headline. However, I think though that the real breakthrough was not Gates' answer to the problem, but his definition of success: zero.

Gates has a lot of money and we might assume that this means he is going to be investing some into clean tech and renewable energy. I do like his approach to nuclear energy - TerraPower: http://www.intellectualventures.com/docs/terrappower/IV_Introducing%20TerraPower_3_6_09.pdf - which is an emerging design of a fast breeder reactor that can recycle existing nuclear waste.

However at the risk of insulting this most astute of businessmen, it must be said, his talk is borderline delusionall. Mr. Gates, you really needs energy advisors who understand peak oil, net energy decline, what our present civilizational consumption patterns actually are and what levels of petroleum and resource depletion we can expect.

Note: Edited this post on February 19th to remove the references to the high EROEI of Powder River coal and to Kuntsler's infamous quote to Google about energy vs. technology. Mr. Gates is the perfect representative of what in the peak oil community is called Technological Triumphism, the belief - which reaches its zenith in the sci-fi religion of the Singularity - that human intelligence and creativity as expressed through material science and technological achievement will overcome the laws of physics, biology, real, actual water, energy and material constraints, ecological and environmental thesholds and perhaps most central - human desires, greeds, evils and what we have always historically done in times of stress..

I hope to add to these themes soon, perhaps in a blog post. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on a few thoughts about the Haiti Earthquake crises

Sat, 16 Jan 2010 23:20:23 -0500

Been spending the past few days viewing videos, both mainstream media and Youtube about the devastration in Haiti. So sad and tragic, it is beyond words. Watching the corpses of what were active men and women who had real lives, families, ambitions, loves and dreams despite their poverty, being dumped by bulldozers into mass graves and burned just brought tears to my eyes. I am happy the world's nations are rich enough and at this point at least, generous, giving and non-racist enough to give aid and help to these poor, desperate people. At the same time, the crisis is far from over, troubles in delivering aid, wounded people dying of infections, rioting and water borne diseases like dysentry and cholera are next. I expect the death toll to increase dramatically each successive day.

Being peak oil and climate change aware is sort of a curse to those of us so informed. Because we know that our American society running Business As Usual will mean tipping points and thesholds are guaranteed to be reached and different, quite unfortunate realities will result. What happened in Haiti may be a worst case scenario that few areas in the future will suffer all at once, this is hopefully true. Nonetheless, human population and economic expansion is reaching the limits of the Earth's ecological capabilities, many things will fall apart all over the place and much will catch people as unaware and vulnerable as a massive earthquake.

If people reading this post manage to live to 2050 or 2060, this earthfquake crisis as horrific as it is, will just be another milestone in what is llikely to be the collapse of industrial civilization and the probable destruction of much of the Earth's existing ecosystems. Not cheerful thoughts at all, but the realistic consequences of the trends we are on now. I do believe however that our decisions, our efforts, our courage, our creativity and yes, our love and our generosity can and will make positive differences . We should aim to do what is right for the environment and for our children's and their children's and their children the best we can.

Because we can do so easily, I do encourage you to support the aid efforts to help the people of Haiti. Maybe not the Clinton and Bush fundraising efforts, but there are many other worthwhile charitable groups. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on book burning as a source of heat - happening today

Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:40:39 -0500

This is a disturbing development, take a look at this article to see what pensioners in England are doing to keep warm: http://www.cnbc.com/id/34703166

Actually this story is so indicative of the type of mala-adaptive behavior of humans that might ensure a civilizational collapse, I will just give your the whole article:

Some cash-strapped British pensioners are buying books from charity shops and burn them to keep warm as freezing temperatures gripped the UK, a London newspaper reported Tuesday.

Workers at a charity shop in Swansea, in south Wales, told London newspaper Metro that pensioners were looking for thick books such as encyclopedias — which are sold for a few pennies second hand — as a cheaper alternative to coal.

"Book-burning seems terribly wrong but we have to get rid of unsold stock for pennies and some of the pensioners say the books make ideal slow-burning fuel for fires and stoves," the paper quoted one shop assistant as saying.

"A lot of them buy up large hardback volumes so they can stick them in the fire to last all night."

Energy prices have soared in Britain in the past years, with some estimates showing gas prices up by around 40 percent since January 2008, and electricity tariffs rising by about 20 percent.

Britain's National Grid, which is responsible for the country's energy needs, issued an alert Monday that consumption may have to be cut if supplies of gas do not improve soon.

Gas is used to heat about two thirds of British homes and consumption surged to 30 percent above the seasonal average Monday.

"The spiraling cost of energy means heating homes has become a luxury rather than a necessity for many people – particularly the elderly, low paid and unemployed," Ruth Davison, director of campaigns and neighborhoods at the National Housing Federation, told the paper.

I would like to add that North Sea natural gas production is in decline and that outside what off-shore wind they develop and the reopening of their coal mines, England will probably have to depend upon importing natural gas from Russia with their whole country being the end of the pipelines. Have you read about how Gazprom is flexing its muscle?

Books probably do have a fairly high caloric value when burned. Hope that as the stock is depleted, prices rise enough that people can't afford to burn them. Looking at the long term, our future is so tragic. I only hope that enough of us survive with the sense, love and strength to save a portion of what is good, true and beautiful. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on interesting video about Climategate

Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:51:37 -0500

Came across a very interesting debunking British video about the validity of the Climategate scandal. I hadn't bothered to spend any time researching Climategate because I believe in something called the Precautionary Principle which says that in situations where the consequences are extremely dire (the water issues are so serious, they can't be really be exaggerated), it makes good sense to halt the destructive behavior and increase the solution behavior well before environmental tipping points, EVEN if the data is inconclusive. This is actually the basis for insurance, you pay a premium for financial protection against what are actually low-probability, but high impact/destruction events

The sad reality however - and this is one of the aspects of humanity's short-term perspective - mammalian brain that keeps me a doomer even with a multitude of technological and social solutions - is that our American culture and possibly world civilization doesn't understand cumulative effects, thesholds and tipping points and IS NOT iinterested on scaling back-slowing down-changing-paying the costs if this means money, jobs or changes of lifestyle. -Joe

Anyway, here is the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg&feature=youtube_gdata

saima122 on Good article on Rigzone about oil pricing

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:52:13 -0500

Crude Oil price charts, Heating Oil & Commodities. Plus Articles & Analysis on Oil, Natural Gas, Metals and Alternative Energy. Free Oil Prices and Energy

Oil Price

WalterKixmiller on Energy Research Developments

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 03:26:46 -0500

Energy research experts are constantly in search to find out every pollution free renewable energy resource that can replace the fossil fuels, as they are getting exhausted day by day. Researches conducted by two of the top universities in US have focused on methane, one among the main components of natural gas. Methane is highly useful as a fuel, if it is converted in to liquid form. This has become one of the much discussed news on renewable energy these days.

Methane is available in plenty and is one of the much sought after raw material and fuel for the preparation of various chemicals. This is mainly because methane is more efficient than oil and produce only very less environmental pollution. Methane can also be used as a substitute for petroleum based fuels.

The only trouble that can arise for the users of methane is the difficulty and expense in the transportation of the gas. This is mainly because methane is easily affected by the variation in temperature and pressure.

Scientists from US are now developing a new way to convert methane to methanol and other liquid forms so that it can be easily transported from one place to another. This will be extremely useful when the gas has to be imported from remote sites to far off places.

Methane contains high energy carbon-hydrogen bonds, where each carbon atom is bound to four hydrogen atoms. As methane hardly reacts with other substances it is burned a fuel. The burning breaks the carbon-hydrogen bonds and produces CO2 and water.

High temperature and tremendous amount of energy are required to convert methane to chemicals, including liquids which can be readily transported. There are catalysts which can turn methane to useful chemicals at lower temperatures, but most of them are too slow and the process is highly expensive. Hence the works have been progressing to get a cost effective way of finding out a catalyst that can transform methane in to methanol and other liquids.

Writing-On-The-Wall on CERA proclaim peak oil demand in the developed world

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:05:49 -0400

After a tease that CERA and Goldman Sachs had announced predictions of a petroleum price superspike in the next 18 months, I did not supply any links, so I will remedy this now. Unfortunately I am proving myself to be a liar, because the links I have come up with do not indicate a price spike of the magnitude I implied. Pardon this blooper, early this summer, I had come across a few articles by analysts from both CERA and Goldman Sachs that talked about supply constraints from lack of investment into new wells and oilfields and mentioned price spikes of greater levels than 2008. I am confident that I did read these, but I am not finding them again. Here however are links to what CERA and Goldman Sachs are predicting:

This is from the Oil Voice, a good petro industry site: http://www.oilvoice.com/n/Bullish_Goldman_Sachs_Predicts_Price_Hike_in_2009_2010_Forecast/31759b3c.aspx

Quote:

Bullish analysts at Goldman Sachs have raised their oil price forecast for 2009 and 2010, on confidence that a new and sustained upturn is underway.

The global investment bank and securities firm said on Friday that it has raised its 2009 forecast to a $59 a barrel average, up from an earlier prediction $50. For 2010 the broker lifted its forecast to $80 a barrel, up from $70 a barrel as previously predicted.

Going into 2011 it foresaw the price of a barrel flirting with $95.

Considering light crude has broken $80 a barrel today, this prediction has good likelihood of being low.

Lots of interesting price predictions on this site: http://omgili.com/2010-gas-prediction-prices

Here is the site for the master kleptocrats themselves: http://www2.goldmansachs.com/

Here is CERA's web site: http://www.cera.com

And here is a recent prediction that looks very interesting, but you can't access it unless you are a client of their who has paid them megabucks: http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/client/report/reportpreview.aspx?CID=10661&KID=

It is obvious that much better info is available from them if you pay for it, as most all their links dead end into a client check in form. No matter, if you are on this site, you already know we are in for a thrilling economic and cultural ride downhill the next several years. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on CERA proclaim peak oil demand in the developed world

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 12:10:31 -0400

Yesterday I posted in a reply in to Perplexed blog entry that both CERA and Goldman Sachs have stated that due to lack of necessary investments into new petroleum developments caused by lower commodity prices and an unfortunate financial investment climate that supply constraints are likely to lead to a superspike in petroleum prices within 18 months. Now CERA and Goldman Sachs for different reasons (the naked criminality of the Goldman Sachs - US treasury axis is so bold that it is amazing the entire awakened and informed world) have little credibility in the peak oil community and indeed are frequently seen as the enemy.

It was actually for that reason I posted this info, because what has happened is that both organizations have just covertly admitted that peak oil is occuring. Also their predictions have tended to be right and for reasons that are a little more complicated than just their desires to maintain their reputations as stellar financial advisory services (rather than go into tinfoil, I will simply encourage you to do your own research). Oil prices did indeed return to the $39 a barrel level this past year, thus vindicating Yergin's prediction. He was right, if only briefly.

Now however CERA is predicting different things, here is a quote from a research paper they have just released to the public:

Peak Oil Demand in the Developed World: It's Here

September 29, 2009

OECD LONG-TERM PETROLEUM DEMAND UNLIKELY TO SURPASS 2005 PEAK

As the world moves from recession to growth, oil demand will grow once again. However, all of the demand lost in the developed world (countries in the OECD) is unlikely to return, even over the long term, and 2005 could be the peak year of OECD oil demand. The long-term demand outlook has dimmed under ongoing demographic and socioeconomic changes (such as the aging of OECD populations), improved transportation efficiency, and encroachment by substitutes such as biofuels and natural gas. An OECD demand peak’s significance includes

Potentially less long-term upward pressure on crude prices. OECD oil demand represents 54 percent of world demand in 2009. Although that share has been trending down for years, if it has peaked, this will help counteract the expected rapid demand growth in the developing world. Such a peak does not eliminate the potential for higher oil prices in the future, but could help to diminish such pressures.
OECD economies less susceptible to oil price shocks. As the oil intensity of OECD economies declines, economic growth will be more insulated from the impact of oil price swings. It will likely take larger price spikes to inflict the same damage to the economy as would otherwise be the case.
The potential for increased energy “resilience.” Less OECD oil demand could also prevent the rate of dependency on imported oil from increasing. Developed countries may therefore be able to withstand physical oil supply disruptions more readily.
Increased potential for rationalization of the OECD refining sector. Without steady long-term demand growth, refining overcapacity in the United States, Europe, and Japan will ultimately lead to the shutdown of less competitive refining assets.

This is mostly, but not entirely the truth. China and India have what is termed ''latent demand” for energy and over time, any oil not consumed by the OCED will be consumed by them, Brazil, Russia, etc. Oil prices will rise for sure, but as we have seen, probably not in a linear way. This is unfortunately for the long-term investment cycles for the massive amounts of financial and technological resources that have to be applied to extract petroleum and natural gas - if what is wanted is an adequate supply of oil to maintain BAU in America. As a stable prices that ensures a reasonable profit to the oil companies - Oil Drum commentators are saying this is a price somewhat between $60 and $70 a barrels- Robert Rapier says a price of about $40 should be adequate - are necessary for the companies to risk their investment capital.

I want to add one thing - my thinking has become ever more tinfoil over time, but back in 2006 I posted a link on the old Seattle Oil forum about the 2006 Bilderberg meeting, where they were debating what to do with the energy crisis thing and the consensus was that the solution was to deflate the US economy as it is/was the world's largest energy consumer.

It may be necessary to put prejudices aside and take the search for a clear understanding of truth about this world to a deeper and more comprehensive level. -Joe

Writing-On-The-Wall on Peak Oil mentioned casually by the Wall St. Journal

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:49:09 -0400

I haven't been devoting much time online or otherwise recently to keeping with either the Wall Street Journal or peak oil media exposure, but apparently the concepts of peak oil and petroleum depletion are well known enough (maybe due to high profile appearances of Simmons, Campbell, etc) to the WSJ's readership that they can debunk peak oil casually. Witness this recent article about the Deutsche Bank's assertions that peak oil (demand) will be cushioned by the transition to hybrid/electric vehicles: http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/10/05/peak-oil-the-end-of-the-oil-age-is-near-deutsche-bank-says/

Here are the main points of the article:

That’s the take from Deutsche Bank’s new report, “The Peak Oil Market.” In a nutshell: The oil industry chronically under invests in finding new supplies, exemplified both by Big Oil’s recent love of share buybacks and under-investment by big oil-producing nations. That spells a looming supply crunch.

That will send oil to $175 a barrel by 2016—and will simultaneously put the final nail in oil’s coffin and send prices plummeting back to $70 by 2030. That’s because there’s an even more important “peak” moment on the horizon: A global peak in oil demand. That has already begun in the world’s biggest oil-consuming nation, Deutsche Bank notes:

US demand is the key. It is the last market-priced, oil inefficient, major oil consumer. We believe Obama’s environmental agenda, the bankruptcy of the US auto industry, the war in Iraq, and global oil supply challenges have dovetailed to spell the end of the oil era.

The big driver? The coming-of-age of electric and hybrid vehicles, which promise massive fuel-economy gains for short-hop commuting but which so far have not been economic.

Deutsche Bank expects the electric car to become a truly “disruptive technology” which takes off around the world, sending demand for gasoline into an “inexorable and accelerating decline.”

In 2020, the bank expects electric and hybrid vehicles to account for 25% of new car sales—in both the U.S. and China. “We expect [electric propulsion] will reverse the dynamics of world oil demand, and spell the end of the oil age,” the bank writes.

Besides the clear statement that the world will face a supply crunch within a few years from "underinvestment" (probably somewhere in the 2010 to 2011 period), what is amazing is the words and concept "peak Oil" are now on the intellectual horizon of the average WSJ reader, if dismissed as fringe or unduly pessimistic. -Joe

kf5nd on Thinking about moving to Washington

Wed, 05 Aug 2009 05:09:35 -0400

Job possibility in Richland. I'll find out more later in the year.

Peaknik on Thinking about moving to Washington

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:50:56 -0400

Peter, Hello! from the Tri-Cities. You are correct we are served by Amtrak and we are surrounded by agriculture and WA State I believe has the highest percentage of organic farms of all the states. Most of our power IS hydro with tons on wind coming on line in the Columbia River Gorge and we do have a nuke facility out on the Hanford reservation. I believe our only refineries are on the West side of the mountains? We do have fuel terminals at the confluence of the Snake & Columbia which I believe the finished product is barged/pipelined in to. And I think there are also some natural gas lines coming in from the East. Also, our electric companies are still publicly owned (for now). We have a great public transit system and with only 17 inches of rain a year you can certainly bike in the Winter.

My wife and I are both peak oilers and have decided to stick it out here. We thought about moving to the small town of Goldendale where we own a couple homes but feel this area will do just fine. We are selling our properties up there to pay off the house down here and we are out of debt! We have just under an acre in the town of West Richland. Being a very rural area our town allows barnyard animals so we were able to bring in chickens this year as an addition to our garden. Anyhoo...what made you think of Tri-Cities, WA? Jon