Is there any truth in this Peak Oil Rebuttal?

Rebuttal of Hubbert's claims

Its come to my attention that this document strives to debunk the claims of Peak Oil. I admit im having a hard time with the way its written and interpreting it.

Any takers for rebutting the rebuttal?

This topic thread may be of some interest in that there is mention of a Hubbert Model debunking by Michael Lynch.







seekerof

[edit on 11-4-2005 by Seekerof]

i read this paper a while ago and it states that production deline is not as steep as production increase. in doing so it doesn't help the fact that the oil is running out, but it indicates that it won't run out as quickly as the pessimists argue.

i have also read that hubbert did mention that out of over 50 fields he studied only 8 of them followed the steep production decline when using a bell curve model.

it's still bad news but if its true it takes some air out of the nasty predictions for the future.

Originally posted by subz
Rebuttal of Hubbert's claims

Its come to my attention that this document strives to debunk the claims of Peak Oil. I admit im having a hard time with the way its written and interpreting it.

Any takers for rebutting the rebuttal?

Not sure as I would do a full rebuttal,but a couple of point come to mind.There is a lot of emphisis on increasing production.I think there needs to be a restatement on that.I feel processing would be a better term here.One cannot produce oil.Like any other mineral element in the earth, it is simply there. Like gold,silver aluminum etc.The increase mentioned in the article concerns larger volumns taken out of the ground.This is not production,only extraction.Improvements in the process of locating new fields and extracting greater quantities make it look good,and it certainly improves the prospects of peak production time-lines,but it will still run out.We need to learn to use some other form of fuel if we are to extend the oil supply.Also,several places of potential fields were not mentioned in his statistics.I wonder why.I suspect the picture hubbert paints is a bit fuzzy.At least in some details.

"Peak Oil" is a myth, according to these sources (and I believe them):

WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 - Officials from Saudi Arabia's oil industry and the international petroleum organizations shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts in Washington yesterday with an announcement that the Kingdom's previous estimate of 261 billion barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2 trillion barrels.

Additionally, Saudi Arabia's key oil and finance ministers assured the audience - which included US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan - that the Kingdom has the capability to quickly double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as 50 years.

"Saudi Arabia now has 1.2 trillion barrels of estimated reserve. This estimate is very conservative. Our analysis gives us reason to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discover new resources, and we are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existing reserves," the minister said.

Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the average price of $25 per barrel set by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to more than $28 or drop under $22.
educate-yourself.org...

So, is it the Saudis driving the price up? Nope, it's Wall Street.

This has some good practical information:
www.mises.org...

Also, anyone interested might want to do a little research on just exactly where oil comes from. Some interesting observations are being made by some highly qualified people that it's a renewable resource & not a fossil fuel at all.
www.oralchelation.com...

also reference:
THE MYSTERIOUS ORIGINS OF OIL
By Siegfried E. Tischler, PhD. - Oil is not formed by the decay of organic matter but is created by hydrogenation processes deep within the Earth.
Nexus Magazine Volume 11, Number 5
September-October 2004 (USA & CA)

(Edited for spelling)

[edit on 24-7-2005 by Lordling]

We are only running out of land and Continental Shelf oil. About 70 percent of the Earth's surface is covered by water - and much of i t is still unexplored. Granted - it will take some new technology to get to it - but the picture is not as bleak as many have feared.

Bell Curve or not . . . there could easily be enough for the next 200 years.

I think there're three items to remember. First, unless you're one of the very few individuals who still believe the now-discounted abiotic oil hypothesis, since the oil in the Earth was laid down smoetimes in the Mississippian, Pennsylvanian, Permian, and up through the beginning of the Tirassic eras, sooner or later there isn't going to be any more oil.

Period.

Second, even if you buy into the belief that there are a trillion or so undiscovered barrels of oil tied up in tar sands, undersea deposits, or whatever, the costs of exploiting the oil are so high that it is simply economically un-fearsible to go after it.

Third, even if you buy into the belief that there are a trillion (heck, make it a bazillion) barrels of oil out there and it'll be economically feasible to get it, burning that stuff is killing us all by pollution, contribution to global warming, and so on.

So no matter how you look at it, we need to quit our oil addiction before it destroys us all.

[edit on 24-7-2005 by Off_The_Street]

Originally posted by Lordling
WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 - Officials from Saudi Arabia's oil industry and the international petroleum organizations shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts in Washington yesterday with an announcement that the Kingdom's previous estimate of 261 billion barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2 trillion barrels.

Additionally, Saudi Arabia's key oil and finance ministers assured the audience - which included US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan - that the Kingdom has the capability to quickly double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as 50 years.

"Saudi Arabia now has 1.2 trillion barrels of estimated reserve. This estimate is very conservative. Our analysis gives us reason to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discover new resources, and we are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existing reserves," the minister said.

Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the average price of $25 per barrel set by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to more than $28 or drop under $22.
educate-yourself.org...

Who to believe ... what kind of effects to the market would it have, if the Saudis were to say that they will reach peak oil in a decade or so? and that the reserves wouldn't be all that large? That statement could be purely political.

I'd rather trust science than politics, in this matter at least. Colin Campbell, who has worked as a geologist for many of the big oil companies on all continents of the world has other thoughts on this matter. Read a interview of him done by the From The Wilderness website:

www.fromthewilderness.com...

You'd indeed have to be stupid to thrust the reserve figures the Saudi government puts out, always without any evidence to back it up. It isn't the first time either they've revised their reserve estimates.