'Peak Oil' far, far away


I thought we were looking at Future efficiencies? Additional pipelines may drive down transportation costs (which trump has greenlighted)
Not sure what obama has to do with that?
There was huge gains in efficiency in the shale fields but i cant see much further efficiencies beyond relaxing regulations. Production/transportation/capital spending costs are already sub $20


Yes, you’re right we are talking about future improvements. I was just observing that some recent ones were done with fancy down-hole tech. You’re right about infrastructure too. That could be the most serious bottleneck. One of the things delaying a lot of Texas wells is that they have maxed out their flaring permits, so can’t pump oil because they can’t get rid of the gas. Obviously they’re flaring it because they can’t capture it economically. Something that makes it cheaper to pipe gas to a central hub would improve both oil and gas output, as well as curb useless CO2 emissions.


The use of pipelines in spite of the major opposition is clearly the best overall option both cost wise and environmentally. Its pretty amazing the efficiencies the US shale operators have achieved. Saudis attempt to bankrupt them has put them in a much stronger position.


Agreed. They have already broken through the magic 10 million barrel per day mark briefly, and look set to average greater than 10 mbpd for the year, which is pretty incredible.


Oil prices have been buoyed by Chinese conciliatory statements on trade wars, Middle East tensions, strong draws on US inventories, and the weak dollar. WTI and Brent were up sharply today with WTI pushing $66 and Brent above $71 for the first time since November 2014.


in.reuters.com/article/us-newze … NKBN1HI383


This seems a bit extreme. I presume there’s more to it than a dislike for gasoline:


This seems sadly misinformed. Inhalation of smoke has been a health risk factor since humans developed control of fire, mostly from firewood which is sustainable, renewable and not a fossil fuel.

That said, coal smoke is particularly nasty, containing both particulates and radioactive substances.


Seems like fossil fuels and air pollution was the least of his issues.


Some analysts have been predicting that oil will hit $80/bbl by the end of this year. While that sounds a tad optimistic to me, prices have been climbing as supply and demand seem to be rebalancing. In spite of The Donald complaining about higher prices in a tweet last week, it is high oil prices and the shale production it has stimulated that have brought the US back to the brink of oil self-sufficiency. Anyway, WTI seems likely to break through the $70 barrier this week. Currently above $69 with Brent above $75.


Electric Buses Hurting Oil Industry

About 279,000 barrels a day of fuel won’t be needed this year


Not only do buses use a lot more fuel, but they are on the road for possibly 10 times more than your average private car.
Great to see electric begin to make a significant difference.
When Tesla trucks (and other electric trucks) hit the market, you’re going to see similar results.


There used to be electric barges at one point. (some pictures here…)
treehugger.com/clean-techno … anals.html

World’s first electric container barges to sail from European ports this summer
theguardian.com/environment … nbiztweets


Hmmm… that’s just over a quarter of one per cent of global oil consumption. Hurting the oil industry? … maybe more like savaging it with wet cardboard. However, converting fleet vehicles everywhere to electric is definitely the most sensible initial use of EVs.

China generates 80% of its electricity from coal. So around 80% of those 279 kbpd have been replaced by dirty coal! Maybe a few percent less if the buses are grid connected through a pantograph instead of battery powered. EVs are only the start: you have to change generation too.


China is ramping up renewables at a massive rate though. Plus its always going to be more efficient to produce the power in a centralised facility than have every vehicle carrying its own power plant and fuel around on board.

Ive bought a few of the Aussie Lithium miners as long term holds.


I think what we’re going to see is continued massive increase in LNG shipments, with gas being the most popular fuel for electricity generation. Interestingly, in west Texas they are nearing a situation where the price of natural gas goes to zero they have so much of the stuff on their hands (Bloomberg, also covered by Platts). There are global buyers for it, but not enough pipelines to ship it to exporters. 8 Bcfd (billion cubic feet per day) of pipelines are under construction but the Permian oil basin is projected to produce 20 Bcfd of additional gas over the next few years. The problem is that it’s an unavoidable byproduct of oil extraction, so if you can’t flare it (due to environmental regulations) and you can’t export it from the field, your only option is to try to give it away or start shutting down oil production. It’s an interesting conundrum for the Permian Basin, it’s a victim of its own success. US natural gas prices are already at a historic low, and in west Texas they are only half the market spot price. Oil pipelines in the Permian are also running at 96% capacity. It looks like infrastructure may, temporarily at least, put the brakes on US shale.


Yes, a quarter of 1% isn’t much.
But it’s the progression that counts.
It’s not going to fall below that figure, but constantly increase.
And as we’re only at the start the curve, the only question is ‘at what rate ?’.

Take Ireland for example, the government intends to ban the purchase of diesel by Dublin Bus.


One assumes Electric/Gas or Hydrogen will be the alternatives.
But not oil.

In 10 years time, few buses on the road will be diesel.
In 20 years, there will be none.
Same with trucks.
0.25% of oil saved today with buses alone, but I could easily see all transport (buses, trucks & cars) consumption fall 50% in 20 years.


I’m not sure how realistic this is. Oil extraction and refining is a very highly integrated process. A lot of natural gas is produced along with oil. You can’t have one without the other. Other so-called natural gas liquids – ethane, propane, butane, pentane – are also produced and, among other things, become the feedstock for plastics through ethylene cracking. Alkanes with an average carbon number of 8 (octane) go into petrol. Diesel averages around 12 (dodecane). Kerosene and jet fuel are in a similar range (10 to 16). As you know, the fractional distillation process in the refinery separates out the hydrocarbons of different masses to be then blended into refined products. There’s a small amount of leeway to combine products in different ratios, but you are somewhat stuck with what nature gives you. That’s why the US – where trucks run on petrol – swaps a chunk of its diesel production for petrol with European refineries, to balance things out. There’s probably ways to fix an imbalance due to lower diesel use that I don’t know about, but … I don’t know about it. :smiley:


Its already happening, the change over will take time but the up sides are clear, buses in Dublin get about 8 miles per gallon, the switch to electric will see big fuel and servicing savings, if electric trucks are possible and its clear that they are, then so are electric buses, last week you saw the battery modules of the 75kWh Model 3, 3 or 4 of them would make a decent battery for a double decker bus

Any bus or truck company not working on EV versions of their products are finished in the long term


I’m not saying electric buses can’t be done. They can, and I think they’re a great idea. But look at the original article: at the current rate of build, it will take China 25 years to electrify its entire bus fleet. When it has done so, it will have saved 1.5% of current global oil demand. But global oil demand is consistently growing by that amount every year.

Of course, buses are only one of many things that could be electrified. Fleet applications are the low hanging fruit. Bring it on. I’m only disputing the timing. 2035 seems more likely to me as to when global oil demand might top out and begin a long slow decline. Natural gas demand will continue to increase beyond that. I’m going by the predictions of people whose job it is to assess these things. That said, there are huge uncertainties in their numbers and they get it wrong all the time, not to mention the possibility of black swan events. But to date, those predicting an imminent end to oil demand growth have been even more wrong.


thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro … -renewable