OPEC tosses a riddle, page 2

I know the geological and physical facters governing the behaviour of oil fields, thank-you - I'm a graduate geologist. We were taught the Hubbert model at university (along with others), I've written complex simulations using the model etc... and studies seem to suggest that the model is correct and as far as I'm concerned, I'm not arguing with that until it is proved 100% incorrect -- which incidentally has not happened.

I have heard some great jokes when it comes to geologist mind you....

I hope you went to the trouble of reading the document i provided? If this is just a question of the authors credibility what follows below might help you.

"Michael C. Lynch has over twenty years of experience analyzing international energy, particularly oil and gas markets. He has numerous publications in four languages and speaks regularly at international conferences. He is the primary author of Global Petroleum SEER and Global Petroleum Outlook, which provide short- and long-term oil market analyses.

Mr. Lynch's previous work has included computer modeling of the world oil market and estimation of the economics of supply for both world oil and natural gas, including LNG supply, and market behavior under normal and disrupted conditions. He has also given testimony and advice to committees of the U.S. Congress and the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Energy Agency.

Before coming to Strategic Energy & Economic Consulting , Inc., Mr. Lynch was Vice President of Oil Services at WEFA, Inc. Prior to coming to WEFA he was Director, Asian Energy and Security, at the Center for International Studies, M.I.T., as well as a Lecturer in the Diplomatic Training Program at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. Prior to that, he held a number of research positions at M.I.T., as well as serving as a senior associate for the Washington International Energy Group. His work consisted primarily of advising corporations, governments and industry associations on world oil and gas markets and energy security policy."

If you did not read please do so www.energyseer.com...]now.

Agreed, there are exceptions to the model but most oil fields follow the Hubbert model which makes intuitive sense.

They simply do not as is pointed out by world oil reserves growing each year far in excess of usage. This all despite intense effort to keep oil exploration investment capped despite growing profits.

quote: There simply is no evidence that the world is in fact running out of oil. There is plenty of evidence of oil price manipulation.

I never claimed we were running out of oil, that's not the nature of Hubbert's peak which claims we have used half of the oil and besides we only run into problems when demand outstrips supply. Incidentally, Hubbert was correct regarding America's oil peak in the 70's.

By 'running out' i do mean that we are nowhere near a peak and thus not near the half-way mark as the peakers have been predicting for decades running. The hubbert peaks suggestions comes and goes without much fanfare these days but mabye we should go back and point out how it's been dead wrong for so long? US oil EXTRACTION peaked in the 1970's but mainly because it became cheaper to import it from other sources wich had it in cheap abundance. The US government was allready spending huge ammounts in that region for 'security' reasons and it made a good deal of economic sense to exploit the cheap oil while you were heaping cash on dictators to keep them in power. The USD was also taken of the gold standard with all the economic implications of that. The changes in Us production numbers did not reflect lack of oil but only the relative cost of extraction in different parts of the world; why make only 500% profit when you can make 2000%?

I'll admit I'm not too hot on the politics and economics of the oil markets but I don't trust any economist that reckons the mysterious market forces will solve everything regardless of any physical, chamical or geological factors! It's totally absurd. They know exactly bugger-all about the geology and physics of the situation and pick and chose statistics to suit the point they wish to convey.

Fact is he is more qualified to judge oil availability than any of the prominent peak oil spokesmen and if that was not enough he shows them to be bad scientist at best, liars at worse. You can name the peak oil spokesmen one by one and i can shame them in like fashion working from my previous posts on other threads. Will not take much time as their fearmongering is really based on no science at all.

From the wall street journal article.....

"Doomsayers to the contrary, the world contains far more recoverable oil than was believed even 20 years ago. Between 1976 and 1996, estimated global oil reserves grew 72%, to 1.04 trillion barrels. Much of that growth came in the past 10 years, with the introduction of computers to the oil patch, which made drilling for oil more predictable."

... oh and abiotic oil is a load of bollocks -- there is simpily no hard facts to suggest anything otherwise.

It does not really matter where these oil fields refill themselves from. Fact is so many of them do and their reserves are too frequently adjusted upwards. World reserves are growing fast despite the best efforts of oil companies to avoid finding any more oil.

Now, my orginal query was regarding why the Saudi's do not let anyone audit their reserves. Do you have any idea why this is?

Greenspan was present when the prominent Saudi officials made that claim ( they invited him) and just 4 months later ( in the article i provided) he says that the world is not running out of oil. I am sure you are familiar with the name and thus unsure why want to question his motives when he is making comments that will REDUCE profits for oil companies. Mabye you want to clarify your point of view here.

One other thing... You source all our info from news sites, do you not think for one moment that the articles could be incorrect / people could be lying?

I think about that ALL the time and you must have noted what forum am i posting this on!

I try stick to official news sites and try spot the inconsistencies in claims made hoping that that can lead us to some truth. We have to work from somewhere and i am comfortable working from such sites when creating reference frameworks for others. No one will however benifit( as you rightly claim) from trying to use these sources as ultimate proof of anything in themselves. It's all about the big picture.......

Bush, Balir and other leading politicians have lied about much worse.

No argument here....

I don't believe in crazy conspiracy theories like many people on these forums do but I certainly don't trust any figures given out by Saudi oil officials, simply due to the fact that they won't let anyone audit their reserves.

Well this then seems to have come down to who you will trust and not where the evidence leads. I'm here to show you evidence that was enough to convince me that the Saudi's are being conservative in their reserve claims. All i can do is add more evidence and see if leads you where it has me.

These guys can say whatever the hell they want, and I'm well aware of the political pressure on people to produce the 'correct' results.

That we all are i hope.

Stellar

[edit on 16-9-2005 by StellarX]