Energy body rejects PEAK OIL whistleblower

[Anders Lindman]

"Energy body rejects whistleblower allegations of oil cover up

London, England (CNN) -- The International Energy Agency has rejected reported allegations from a whistleblower that world oil reserves have been exaggerated to avoid panic buying in the oil market.

A senior source within the IEA is reported to have told The Guardian newspaper that many within the agency believe the body's prediction for oil supplies "is much higher than can be justified."

In its annual outlook released on Tuesday, the IEA repeated its prediction that oil supplies would rise to 105 million barrels by 2030 under current government policy.

"We're the ones that are out there warning that the oil and gas is running out in the most authoritative manner. But we don't see it happening as quickly as some of the peak oil theorists," Richard Jones, deputy executive director of the IEA, told CNN.

"Generally, we're viewed as more pessimistic than we should be by the (oil) industry," he added.

The whistleblower, who reportedly refused to be identified for fear of reprisals, told the newspaper that: "Many inside the organization believe that maintaining oil supplies at even 90 million to 95 million barrels a day would be impossible, but there are fears that panic could spread on the financial markets if the figures were brought down further."

Another second senior source also reportedly told the newspaper that within the energy body, it was "imperative not to anger the Americans" who were said to play an influential role in encouraging the body to underplay potential supply shortfalls."

Full story: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/BUSINESS/11/10/france.iea.oil.supplies/index.html

[rodin]

The MSM is pushing this. All you need to know. Source CNN

Of course they may use a peak oil scare to crash the economy again

The Guardian = Jewish Communist mouthpiece always has been. The worst. Manchester an enclave longtime

[Anders Lindman]

The MSM is pushing this. All you need to know. Source CNN

Of course they may use a peak oil scare to crash the economy again

The Guardian = Jewish Communist mouthpiece always has been. The worst. Manchester an enclave longtime

It's true that this CNN article is kind of pushing peak oil info. But it has been very silent about peak oil in mainstream media. So this article is one of the rare ones about peak oil. We will see if they will ramp up the peak oil info in the near future.

Personally I believe more in flat oil rather than peak oil; that the global oil production will remain essentially at the same level. But that is also a serious situation, and the politicians need to step on the break in the economy, through things like the climate change scam, engineered economic recession and the swine flu program.

The war in Afghanistan is to prevent new pipelines being built through Afghanistan to Iran and to Asia.

The war in Iraq is about securing oil resources and establishing a beachhead to prevent Asian interests from going in there and grabbing oil.

China has been making a lot of no-strings-attached deals with oil-producing nations in Africa. One important reason for why Obama was selected president is to compete with the Chinese government in Africa.

The U.S. recently formed a military pact with Colombia in order to put military pressure on Venezuela, and perhaps even manufacture a war between Venezuela and Colombia.

It's all about oil at the moment. The rest is political window dressing and fabricated smokescreen problems.

[jiffy]

Actually at the moment it is refining capability that is a much bigger problem than whether we have hit peak or not

[Anders Lindman]

Actually at the moment it is refining capability that is a much bigger problem than whether we have hit peak or not

But there is a reason for why new refineries haven't been built. The top leaders in the oil industry have known for a long time that the oil production will flatten out.

The global oil production has been essentially flat since 2005. And the economy model that has been the norm during the oil era has been based on economic growth. And that model requires an increasing oil production and consumption, and when the oil production flattens out, this form of economic growth can no longer be sustained.

[jiffy]

But there is a reason for why new refineries haven't been built. The top leaders in the oil industry have known for a long time that the oil production will flatten out.

The global oil production has been essentially flat since 2005. And the economy model that has been the norm during the oil era has been based on economic growth. And that model requires an increasing oil production and consumption, and when the oil production flattens out, this form of economic growth can no longer be sustained.

I'm on the fence on this one, I have seen evidence for lots of new oil fields. (But) Your reasoning however is a very valid one;) It does answer a very puzzling question.

[Anders Lindman]

I'm on the fence on this one, I have seen evidence for lots of new oil fields. (But) Your reasoning however is a very valid one;) It does answer a very puzzling question.

Yeah, I think oil is the root issue at the moment (and the real reason for the 911 attack for example). Even the New World Order thing may be pushed by the west in order to be able to deal with the potential threat from the east.

[Anders Lindman]

In one way it's good that the U.S. remains the dominating power in the world. The idea of China taking over that role scares the crap out of me. It's quite childish to have all the military conflicts in the world, but on the other hand it is probably needed for the time being. The whole world WILL move towards more peace I believe, but at the moment I think military power is still needed.

[particlepopup]

Its all mis-direction, ruses and fear shoveling, oil is abiotic and wont be running out anytime soon.
Some clever dudes talking about it http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2150

[rodin]

But there is a reason for why new refineries haven't been built. The top leaders in the oil industry have known for a long time that the oil production will flatten out.

Nope

They are getting control of the oilfields because oil = food and if they choke supply they starve people

[rodin]

Its all mis-direction, ruses and fear shoveling, oil is abiotic and wont be running out anytime soon.
Some clever dudes talking about it http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2150

http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html

If you connect abiotic oil with the expanding Earth this theory fits.

Read posts headed

Oil is Abiotic and in Unlimited Supply

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=73423&page=5

[particlepopup]

Came across expanding earth a few months ago and found it interesting, cheers for the links.

[Anders Lindman]

Its all mis-direction, ruses and fear shoveling, oil is abiotic and wont be running out anytime soon.
Some clever dudes talking about it http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2150

It could be that oil is being regenerated in the ground, but not at a rate that can replace what is being taken out of the oil fields.

[Anders Lindman]

Nope

They are getting control of the oilfields because oil = food and if they choke supply they starve people

There is tons of hard data about discoveries of oil fields, and the production of oil. Much info is kept secret in the oil industry, but the overall statistics is there. It's not likely a huge conspiracy but rather a geological fact.

In fact, those in power may WANT people believe that oil is not a problem, because then they can uphold the illusion that they have more control than they actually have.

[rodin]

It could be that oil is being regenerated in the ground, but not at a rate that can replace what is being taken out of the oil fields.

Its a question of drilling deep enough. Also much evidence fields refill after being left 'fallow' and that large deposits are under wraps - Falklands War was about a field, Prudhoe bay etc

[particlepopup]

It could be that oil is being regenerated in the ground, but not at a rate that can replace what is being taken out of the oil fields.

Im sure there are places where vast reserves havent even been touched and the more we use the more it produces to balance itself, a bit like bees producing honey. Peak oil, flat oil...... plenty oil. Same kinda charade as "moneys running out, the banks dont have any, buy gold, economic shortfalls and all that carry on" if they are pulling our leg about the economy im sure they will be pulling both legs over oil.

[Anders Lindman]

Its a question of drilling deep enough. Also much evidence fields refill after being left 'fallow' and that large deposits are under wraps - Falklands War was about a field, Prudhoe bay etc

They are drilling deep, and they are using super-heavy oil such as the Canadian tar sands, and they are pumping seawater into depleting oil fields. They wouldn't do that if there was enough cheap sweet crude oil left in the oil fields. And all that effort is most certainly not just a show to fool people in a gigantic conspiracy.

[particlepopup]

Its a question of drilling deep enough. Also much evidence fields refill after being left 'fallow' and that large deposits are under wraps - Falklands War was about a field, Prudhoe bay etc

Good call, i read that this is why large oil companys stopped selling there fields to independent prospectors, they were filling back up, didnt know about falklands war was over a field though...kinda makes sense.

[Anders Lindman]

Im sure there are places where vast reserves havent even been touched and the more we use the more it produces to balance itself, a bit like bees producing honey. Peak oil, flat oil...... plenty oil. Same kinda charade as "moneys running out, the banks dont have any, buy gold, economic shortfalls and all that carry on" if they are pulling our leg about the economy im sure they will be pulling both legs over oil.

I heard in a video that Exxon/Mobil has 20.000 scientists just for collecting and analyzing geological data! :eek: The oil field discoveries peaked a long time ago, and that despite the use of extremely advanced technology in recent decades. As opposed to money, oil cannot be created out of thin air (at least not without Star Trek technologies ;)).

[particlepopup]

They wouldn't do that if there was enough cheap sweet crude oil left in the oil fields. And all that effort is most certainly not just a show to fool people in a gigantic conspiracy.

I wouldnt be so sure, after all its not really about cheap or expensive, its about fear and control, they have all the money they need, as long as they can balance the books, they'll keep on scamming us.

[particlepopup]

I heard in a video that Exxon/Mobil has 20.000 scientists just for collecting and analyzing geological data! :eek: The oil field discoveries peaked a long time ago, and that despite the use of extremely advanced technology in recent decades. As opposed to money, oil cannot be created out of thin air (at least not without Star Trek technologies ;)).

I heard that there are millions of people trying to find "god" but if their religious hierachy is telling them to look in the wrong place they aint gona find sod all, (unless Q from star trek shows up :) )

[Anders Lindman]

I wouldnt be so sure, after all its not really about cheap or expensive, its about fear and control, they have all the money they need, as long as they can balance the books, they'll keep on scamming us.

It's also about the ILLUSION of control. The ruling powers don't want people to know about declining oil reserves. The CNN article was one of the rare exceptions, and it even said that the International Energy Agency REJECTED what the whistleblower said. We will see if MSM will start to publish more articles about peak oil.

Instead of peak oil, they talk about climate change in the media and in politics. That's just a smokescreen for the peak oil problem and a convenient reason for reducing oil consumption in the world. Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth = Convenient Lie.

[Anders Lindman]

I heard that there are millions of people trying to find "god" but if their religious hierachy is telling them to look in the wrong place they aint gona find sod all, (unless Q from star trek shows up :) )

The oil industry is not likely looking in the wrong places for oil.

http://www.gebweb.net/growingGapB.gif

[Anders Lindman]

http://bp1.blogger.com/_nzjabESsGNY/RoxcRv4pmbI/AAAAAAAAAAk/DzlwSDxqSEQ/s400/Fig+1+Discoveries.jpeg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_muHJLa8l05g/Sqv4tXRkcqI/AAAAAAAAAic/DYxBQDpT4Jg/s400/Cantarell+decline_0.png

[Anders Lindman]

There are only two options available in the future:

Option 1

http://www.filmcynic.com/movies/cheesy/mad-max-beyond-thunderdome.jpg

Option 2

http://thetruthorthefight.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/camp_fema.jpg

Just kidding! :D

[Anders Lindman]

I know that in the so-called 'truth' movement it's politically correct to be a peak oil denier, because that's a comforting belief that their leaders have given them, and like obedient followers they parrot that belief.

The truth is that even the below graph is false (I think) since ALL oil-producing nations are past peak.

http://agoodhuman.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/oil-producing-countries-past-peak.jpg

[holylucifer]

Oil fields actually replenish them self's and that is big oils biggest secret.

The universe and all has the power to create so yea.

[Anders Lindman]

Peak Oil is about the production of oil, how much oil can be extracted per day from oil fields and other oil reserves. So even if there is still much oil left in say a large oil field, it's how much and how fast the oil can be extracted that determines the peak of oil production. Anyway, here is another article about the whistleblower:

"Key oil figures were distorted by US pressure, says whistleblower

The world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit, according to a whistleblower at the International Energy Agency who claims it has been deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying.

The senior official claims the US has played an influential role in encouraging the watchdog to underplay the rate of decline from existing oil fields while overplaying the chances of finding new reserves.

The allegations raise serious questions about the accuracy of the organisation's latest World Energy Outlook on oil demand and supply to be published tomorrow – which is used by the British and many other governments to help guide their wider energy and climate change policies.

In particular they question the prediction in the last World Economic Outlook, believed to be repeated again this year, that oil production can be raised from its current level of 83m barrels a day to 105m barrels. External critics have frequently argued that this cannot be substantiated by firm evidence and say the world has already passed its peak in oil production.

Now the "peak oil" theory is gaining support at the heart of the global energy establishment. "The IEA in 2005 was predicting oil supplies could rise as high as 120m barrels a day by 2030 although it was forced to reduce this gradually to 116m and then 105m last year," said the IEA source, who was unwilling to be identified for fear of reprisals inside the industry. "The 120m figure always was nonsense but even today's number is much higher than can be justified and the IEA knows this.

"Many inside the organisation believe that maintaining oil supplies at even 90m to 95m barrels a day would be impossible but there are fears that panic could spread on the financial markets if the figures were brought down further. And the Americans fear the end of oil supremacy because it would threaten their power over access to oil resources," he added.

A second senior IEA source, who has now left but was also unwilling to give his name, said a key rule at the organisation was that it was "imperative not to anger the Americans" but the fact was that there was not as much oil in the world as had been admitted. "We have [already] entered the 'peak oil' zone. I think that the situation is really bad," he added.

The IEA acknowledges the importance of its own figures, boasting on its website: "The IEA governments and industry from all across the globe have come to rely on the World Energy Outlook to provide a consistent basis on which they can formulate policies and design business plans."

The British government, among others, always uses the IEA statistics rather than any of its own to argue that there is little threat to long-term oil supplies.

The IEA said tonight that peak oil critics had often wrongly questioned the accuracy of its figures. A spokesman said it was unable to comment ahead of the 2009 report being released tomorrow.

John Hemming, the MP who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on peak oil and gas, said the revelations confirmed his suspicions that the IEA underplayed how quickly the world was running out and this had profound implications for British government energy policy."

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/09/peak-oil-international-energy-agency

[Anders Lindman]

Oil fields actually replenish them self's and that is big oils biggest secret.

The universe and all has the power to create so yea.

Yes, as I said in a previous post, that may be true, but the rate of the regeneration of oil doesn't keep up with the rate of how much oil is extracted from the oil fields. For example, cheap sweet crude oil can only be produced when the natural pressure in the oil fields is still high enough. After a while, the pressure drops, and it becomes much more difficult, time-consuming and costly to extract the oil.

[Anders Lindman]

From the Guardian article above:

"John Hemming, the MP who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on peak oil and gas, said the revelations confirmed his suspicions that the IEA underplayed how quickly the world was running out and this had profound implications for British government energy policy."

Can't the MP even connect two dots? :confused: What does the MP think the climate change scam is all about? :rolleyes::D

[Anders Lindman]

Venezuela has a lot of oil. Is the below article a coincidence? I don't think so. It looks more like the U.S. is desperately seeking control over oil reserves.

"Tension Rising Between Venezuela and Columbia

Not one known to pull diplomatic punches, Venezuelan President, Hugo ChavezHugo Chavez stoked the fire growing between Columbia and Venezuela Sunday during his weekly television show.

Chavez announced troop increases to guard the border between the two South American countries in an effort to combat his theory that a U.S.-led invasion is imminent.

"The two governments have joined together to fool the world or to try to fool the world," Chavez propounded.

Columbia responded immediately with a petition for the United Nation Security Council and the Organization of American States to intercede and denounce Chavez war mongering.

Colombian government spokesperson, Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, called Chavez's remarks "war threats."

Chavez took time out to personally address his chief military commanders telling them that they should not waste any time in preparing for an onslaught by Venezuela and its ally the U.S.

Recently, Columbia and U.S. signed a number of agreements increasing the U.S. footprint there with increased manpower and aviation capabilities. Both governments deny the accusations by Chavez and explain the increase of the joint venture as another direct weapon against the rampant drug trade.

Chavez even spoke directly to U. S. President Barack ObamaBarack Obama.

"Don't be mistaken, Mr. Obama, and order an overt aggression against Venezuela using Colombia," Chavez pontificated. "Don't make that mistake, because we are willing to do whatever it takes. Venezuela will never again be a colony."

The U.S. Department of State has denied Chavez’ assertions and issued a statement recommending increased diplomatic talks between the feuding countries.

Tension between the two has lasted for years because of Columbia’s accusation that Chavez harbors the Para-military, anti-government FARC near the countries’ borders. Columbia has gone as far as suggesting that Chavez is coddling the FARC guerrillas and providing weapons and supplies.

More tension arose recently when two Venezuelan border guard were gunned down on an international bridge between the two countries by masked motorcycle gunmen."

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/4590853-tension-rising-between-venezuela-and-columbia

[Anders Lindman]

"Too fearful to publicise peak oil reality

The economic establishment accepts the world soon won't be able to meet energy demands, but wants to keep quiet about it

It is very hard for the average person in the street to come to a sensible conclusion on peak oil. It's a subject that prompts a passionate polarisation of views. The peak oilists sometimes sound like those extraordinary Christians with sandwich boards proclaiming that the end of the world is nigh. In contrast, the the international economic establishment – including the International Energy Agency (IEA) – has one very clear purpose in mind at all times: don't panic. Their mission seems to be focused on keeping jittery markets calm.

Faced with these options the majority of people shrug their shoulders in confusion and ignore the trickle of whistleblowers, industry insiders and careful analysts who have been warning of the imminent decline in oil for over a decade now.

Remember the Queen's question – that uncannily accurate and strikingly obvious question she put to economists at the London School of Economics a year ago after the financial crisis: did no one see it coming? Apply that question to peak oil and the answer is that many people did see it coming but they were marginalised, bullied into silence and the evidence was buried in the small print.

Take the 2008 edition of World Energy Outlook, the annual report on which the entire energy industry and governments depend. It included the table also published by the Guardian today, and the version I saw had shorter intervals on the horizontal axis. What it made blindingly clear was that peak oil was somewhere in 2008/9 and that production from currently producing fields was about to drop off a cliff. Fields yet to be developed and yet to be found enabled a plateau of production and it was only "non-conventional oil" which enabled a small rise. Think tar sands of Canada, think some of the most climate polluting oil extraction methods available. Think catastrophe.

What made this little graph so devastating was that it estimated energy resources by 2030 that were woefully inadequate for the energy-hungry economies of India and China. Business as usual in oil production threatens massive conflict over sharing it.

Now, this all seemed pretty gigantic news to me but guess where the World Energy Outlook chose to put this graph? Was it in the front, was it prominently discussed in the foreword? Did it cause headlines around the world. No, no, no. It was buried deep into the report and no reference was made to it in the press conference a year ago.

The fear is that panicky markets can cause enormous damage – panic-buying that prompts fights over resources, which in turn could lead to power cuts in some places and other such mayhem. But so far in facing this huge challenge, our political/economic system seems unable to cope with reality. We are forced to carry on living in an illusion that we have so much time to adapt to post-oil that we don't even need to be talking or thinking much about what a world without plentiful oil would look like. Reality has become too dangerous.

So in reply to the Queen's question of a few years hence, we did see it coming but we chose to ignore it."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/10/peak-oil-fear-economic-establishment

[jiffy]

In one way it's good that the U.S. remains the dominating power in the world. The idea of China taking over that role scares the crap out of me.

Now you know how the 40 odd countries that American has bombed (since WWII) feel;)

The problem with American Atrocities as Harold Pinter (RIP) said, they are barely recorded let alone documented.

Films like the Fall of the Empire (Alex Jones) just fuel this crap about how American was built on some moral high ground and how wonderful the for fathers were.:rolleyes: Yeah ask the native Indians where their bill of rights are!!!

The truth is America has gotten it's wealth (as did the UK) from raping and pillaging it's way around the developing world!

The real smoking gun is the Arctic, Russia has planted a flag under the Ice claiming rights:rolleyes: Under international law, Norway has the largest stake followed by Russia then Canada.
Canada has or is building 4 military bases near the region(last I heard).
With an estimated half the world gas and oil reserves the shit may well hit the fan at sometime.

[Anders Lindman]

Now you know how the 40 odd countries that American has bombed (since WWII) feel;)

The problem with American Atrocities as Harold Pinter (RIP) said, they are barely recorded let alone documented.

Films like the Fall of the Empire (Alex Jones) just fuel this crap about how American was built on some moral high ground and how wonderful the for fathers were.:rolleyes: Yeah ask the native Indians where their bill of rights are!!!

The truth is America has gotten it's wealth (as did the UK) from raping and pillaging it's way around the developing world!

The real smoking gun is the Arctic, Russia has planted a flag under the Ice claiming rights:rolleyes: Under international law, Norway has the largest stake followed by Russia then Canada.
Canada has or is building 4 military bases near the region(last I heard).
With an estimated half the world gas and oil reserves the shit may well hit the fan at sometime.

Yes, but for example the Cold War was created on both sides by the same powers. Now China is fast rising as a major economic and possibly also military power in the world, and Russia, no longer locked into the Cold War may start to cooperate with China. Japan is seemingly cooperating with the U.S. but Japan has a lot of trade and exchange with China.

So we need U.S. military dominance in the world for the time being I think.

[jiffy]

Yes, but for example the Cold War was created on both sides by the same powers. Now China is fast rising as a major economic and possibly also military power in the world, and Russia, no longer locked into the Cold War may start to cooperate with China. Japan is seemingly cooperating with the U.S. but Japan has a lot of trade and exchange with China.

So we need U.S. military dominance in the world for the time being I think.

Still a very "Western" view point, that simply denies history. The good old US of A has had a hand in killing (since WWII) more people than the Nazi did in their concentration camps.

I no longer see Japan being allied to the US, since the change of government there has been a sea change of attitude to US military bases on Japanese soil.(rightly so)

I see nothing to fear in an "equalling" of world powers. The only trouble is the most violent race of modern times (USA) will have better idea's.

So to counter your argument, the one's you have to watch and fear are the Imperialistic US of A.
For when/if the time comes for all out war, it will be the European's being used as canon fodder (again).

[rollotomaz1]

It could be that oil is being regenerated in the ground, but not at a rate that can replace what is being taken out of the oil fields.

This does actually happen but rather slowly, I have an old friend many years my senior who oncehad worked in the oil industry from the bottom to the top over his 20 year career, what he said to me was when a field is found and then reaches its half way point and the natural pressure falls away, is when they need to pump in gasses/nitrogen or water,

When they do this and if they are not careful the well can be damaged beyond repair because the condensate and the permeable rock can be blocked or capiliarised I think he called it, thus stopping the natural flow of the media through the sponge like rocks,

He also said that most of the oil around 60 % is almost impossible to extract but if the fields are left to rest they can come back on line again, but not at the rate they were before resting, they have slightly improoved extraction via flat trajectory lines and multiple spray heads but once this method has been running for several months to years the field is pask peak anyway.

Rodin put me onto the abiotic scenrio which is quite intresting indeed, its how long its going to take to reach those reserves once they find them as to how we can keep running at our current rates and how much its going to cost the end user and the enviornment.

On another a recent thread there are several inventors making these self running magnetic motors, which will be a real pain in the pockets of the oil barons, if there is still plenty of oil in the ground, then this is why they are constantly destroying all competition for an alternative, if the oil is running out you would think they would be taking this kind of technology on board.
What would be an eye opener is, if a nuclear owner member laid a few bombs into place like Ghawar and other top producers, it could be the answer to end all wars, if not it would severley slow them down,no oil, no planes, tanks would be able to do their bussiness.

[Anders Lindman]

Still a very "Western" view point, that simply denies history. The good old US of A has had a hand in killing (since WWII) more people than the Nazi did in their concentration camps.

I no longer see Japan being allied to the US, since the change of government there has been a sea change of attitude to US military bases on Japanese soil.(rightly so)

I see nothing to fear in an "equalling" of world powers. The only trouble is the most violent race of modern times (USA) will have better idea's.

So to counter your argument, the one's you have to watch and fear are the Imperialistic US of A.
For when/if the time comes for all out war, it will be the European's being used as canon fodder (again).

Maybe I'm partial, but the Chinese government is really totalitarian as I understand it. :eek:

[Anders Lindman]

This does actually happen but rather slowly, I have an old friend many years my senior who oncehad worked in the oil industry from the bottom to the top over his 20 year career, what he said to me was when a field is found and then reaches its half way point and the natural pressure falls away, is when they need to pump in gasses/nitrogen or water,

When they do this and if they are not careful the well can be damaged beyond repair because the condensate and the permeable rock can be blocked or capiliarised I think he called it, thus stopping the natural flow of the media through the sponge like rocks,

He also said that most of the oil around 60 % is almost impossible to extract but if the fields are left to rest they can come back on line again, but not at the rate they were before resting, they have slightly improoved extraction via flat trajectory lines and multiple spray heads but once this method has been running for several months to years the field is pask peak anyway.

Rodin put me onto the abiotic scenrio which is quite intresting indeed, its how long its going to take to reach those reserves once they find them as to how we can keep running at our current rates and how much its going to cost the end user and the enviornment.

On another a recent thread there are several inventors making these self running magnetic motors, which will be a real pain in the pockets of the oil barons, if there is still plenty of oil in the ground, then this is why they are constantly destroying all competition for an alternative, if the oil is running out you would think they would be taking this kind of technology on board.
What would be an eye opener is, if a nuclear owner member laid a few bombs into place like Ghawar and other top producers, it could be the answer to end all wars, if not it would severley slow them down,no oil, no planes, tanks would be able to do their bussiness.

That's what I guessed, yes. That if the oil is regenerating, it's not regenerating fast enough to replace the oil that is taken out. I hope we soon will have things like water fuel and zero point energy technologies. Then we would have a lot more energy than today.

[Anders Lindman]

"The future of oil

The race for the world's remaining oil reserves could get very nasty. Recently, Nigerian militants announced their determination to oppose the efforts of a major Chinese energy group to secure six billion barrels of crude reserves, comparing the potential new investors to "locusts". The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta told journalists that the record of Chinese companies in other African nations suggested "an entry into the oil industry in Nigeria will be a disaster for the oil-bearing communities".

Whatever the facts, the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century is likely to be seen by future historians as the beginning of the final chapter of a unique, unrepeatable period in human development. Even oil companies now see the Age of Oil in irreversible decline – even if that decline spans decades. International oil companies (IOCs) increasingly accept that they must transform themselves completely – or expire – by mid-century.

Superficially, the so-called "super majors" appear to be in good health. Fortune's Global 500 list places the "big six" – Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, Total, and ConocoPhillips – among the seven largest corporations in the world, as measured by 2008 revenues. In third place, Wal-Mart stands alone as the only top seven company not dedicated to finding, extracting, processing, distributing and selling the liquid transportation fuels that drive the global economy, although few business models are as dependent on the ready availability of relatively cheap oil.

Worryingly for such companies, 2008 may prove to have been the high water mark for the global oil industry, with geological, geopolitical and climate-related pressures now creating new market dynamics. The oil question is now, more than ever, a transport question. Cheap and reliable supplies of transportation fuel are the very lifeblood of our globalised economy. So it matters profoundly that we are entering an era in which oil supplies will be neither cheap nor reliable.

For the likes of Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil, whose rates of liquid hydrocarbon production peaked in 2002, 2005, and 2006 respectively, the current economic paradigm requires them to replace reserves. Investors primarily value IOCs on this basis, as well as their ability to execute projects on time within budget. A key problem for the IOCs is that petroleum-rich countries feel increasingly confident in the ability of their own national oil companies to steward their domestic resources. So generous concessions once offered to IOCs in return for technical and managerial expertise are now deemed unnecessary.

The imperative to satisfy investor expectations fuels an increasingly risky growth strategy, which drives IOCs towards energy-intensive (and potentially climate-destabilising) unconventional oil substitutes, such as tar sands (in Canada), gas-to-liquids (in Qatar), and coal-to-liquids (in China and elsewhere). These pathways are not chosen as ideals: they are more or less reflexive responses to external market pressures.

Meanwhile, the uncomfortable fact is that our economies are addicted to liquid hydrocarbon transport fuels, the consumption of which creates a catalogue of negative side effects. And we cannot hope to address this addiction by way of our "dealers" developing even more damaging derivatives of the same drug.

As if that were not enough, there is the hot topic of "peak oil", defined as the point at which global oil production reaches a maximum rate, from where it steadily declines. The basic principle is uncontroversial: production of a finite non-renewable resource cannot expand endlessly, and this has been demonstrated in practice at national level all over the world. The heated debate centres on the point at which the peak in global oil production is likely to be reached.

"Early toppers" argue that the peak has already been passed, and that the world will never produce more than 85 million barrels per day. By contrast, "late toppers" point to the huge scale of unconventional reserves – for example, Alberta's tar sands resource is vast – that remain untapped, as well as the potential bounty locked away in frontier regions such as the Arctic Ocean, where global warming is opening up new areas for oil and gas exploration.

Unfortunately, what matters is not the absolute size of these unconventional and frontier resources, but the rate at which they can be developed and brought to market. By definition, this is the "difficult" oil. Production rates are determined by a series of significant financial, social, and environmental constraints that raise grave concerns for the viability of a global economic system made possible by liquid transport fuels.

At the same time, leaders of all the major economies finally acknowledge what scientists have long been warning: to avoid catastrophic climate-change impacts, the global average surface temperature increase must be limited to 2° Celsius compared with the pre-industrial era. To stand any reasonable chance of avoiding a 2° Celsius rise, our best understanding of the climate change science suggests that global greenhouse-gas emissions must peak within the next five to 10 years, and then decline by more than 80% on 1990 levels by 2050. Realistically, meeting this requirement will demand that we engineer a transition to a zero-carbon energy system by mid-century.

So what might a zero-carbon energy system look like? As well as dramatic improvements in the energy efficiency of buildings and appliances, and massive deployment of sustainable renewable energy technologies, we will no longer be allowed to burn fossil fuels without capturing and sequestering the carbon dioxide emissions. This implies that we must restrict our use of fossil fuels to stationary facilities, such as power plants, where carbon capture and storage (CCS) is practical (see "Outlook and obstacles for CCS"). Strikingly, a zero-carbon energy system will also mean that no liquid hydrocarbon fuels, with the exception of biofuels, can be consumed in mobile applications such as transport.

This does not make pleasant reading for international oil companies. Their core business today may be described as: digging geological carbon resources out of the ground, converting those resources into liquid fuels, then marketing those fuels to consumers who set them on fire in internal combustion engines to move around. By 2050, these activities will all be considered to be strikingly primitive."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/11/future-of-oil

[Anders Lindman]

"Eddie Hobbs

A few years back I set out to disprove a contrarian theory gathering momentum among geologists, engineers and certain economists. This was that the world, based on access to cheap oil for over 100 years, was facing into depletion as red hot demand from non-OECD economies was outstripping production, a by-product of adding an extra two billion new consumers to the three billion that already made up global consumer markets. Put it this way, you can’t increase the Chinese and Indian car fleet by 25 per cent each year without facing intense competition for limited natural resources like copper, aluminium, silver and, the king commodity, oil.

The beginning of the Age of Scarcity
Fast forward to today and we now have the results from the International Energy Agency’s audit of the world endowment of oil, published last October but lost in the melee over Lehmann Brothers and near collapse of the global banking market. Long a sceptic on peak oil, the IEA report validated much of the peakers assumptions; the depletion rate at 6.7 per cent per year is twice what we’d thought — which means jumbo oil fields like Ghawar are close to exhaustion — and to meet demand, six new Saudi Arabia’s have to be discovered over the next twenty years.

The IEA is praying that a ‘Goldilocks’ solution can be found involving the release of huge amounts of oil from Canadian oil sands, a rapid growth in Natural Gas Liquids (NGLs) and a €26 trillion investment over 15 years in oil and gas infrastructure — half of it needed to make up for a deficit in refurbishing existing assets.

The problem is that Canada can’t become the world’s second largest oil producer without burning up vast amounts of gas reserves needed to heat the sand to release bitumen, there’s been zero growth in NGLs for several years and the infrastructure investment is very iffy as national oil companies focus on feeding domestic demand first before exporting. Internal demand within oil-producing nations is accelerating to a point where shortly, combined, they will exceed the USA as the world’s largest consumer. It’s just a question of when the oil available for export begins to shrink as domestic demand is given priority.

A noted expert, Jeff Rubin, former CEO and Chief Economist of CIBC, a Canadian bank, reckons that crude oil has flat-lined since 2005. All that’s increased in the oil production numbers is propane and butane, by-products of maturing oil fields."

Full story: http://www.imt.ie/lifestyle/2009/10/money_matters_with_eddie_hobbs.html

[rollotomaz1]

That's what I guessed, yes. That if the oil is regenerating, it's not regenerating fast enough to replace the oil that is taken out. I hope we soon will have things like water fuel and zero point energy technologies. Then we would have a lot more energy than today.

The jury is still out because we don't know exactly how much capacity is on offer, what we the people need to do right now is to warn the people who have been suppressing the newer technologies that, if we ever find out that they have cause irrepreble damage to the people furtures because, the very people who have fed them,

that they will be held responsible for crimes against humanity and they will not only loose their entire purse but their lives too, its no good pussy footing around these people they need to be taught a valuble lesson and know that their money nor themselves will be safe anywhere on this planet.

It really is time to wake up, because they must know we are nearing our breaking point and will try to protect their god like image and status by trying to gain complete and uter control over us, so as we have nowhere else to go, and irradicate the possible thread or reaction towards them, it must be geting pretty close to which side is going to loose out either way.

Can we afford to wait much longer ? or do we send them to coventry so as to starve them out, is it too late ?

[Anders Lindman]

The jury is still out because we don't know exactly how much capacity is on offer, what we the people need to do right now is to warn the people who have been suppressing the newer technologies that, if we ever find out that they have cause irrepreble damage to the people furtures because, the very people who have fed them,

that they will be held responsible for crimes against humanity and they will not only loose their entire purse but their lives too, its no good pussy footing around these people they need to be taught a valuble lesson and know that their money nor themselves will be safe anywhere on this planet.

It really is time to wake up, because they must know we are nearing our breaking point and will try to protect their god like image and status by trying to gain complete and uter control over us, so as we have nowhere else to go, and irradicate the possible thread or reaction towards them, it must be geting pretty close to which side is going to loose out either way.

Can we afford to wait much longer ? or do we send them to coventry so as to starve them out, is it too late ?

One theory I have is that advanced energy technologies are being suppressed because they are too dangerous in the hands of for example criminals and terrorists and can therefore not be allowed yet for public use.

[rollotomaz1]

One theory I have is that advanced energy technologies are being suppressed because they are too dangerous in the hands of for example criminals and terrorists and can therefore not be allowed yet for public use.

Mmm, Maybe, I'm open to that one for sure, but if such energy bringers are cheaper for everyone and self sustaining, then no one needs to steal anothers gain.

[kitler]

One theory I have is that advanced energy technologies are being suppressed because they are too dangerous in the hands of for example criminals and terrorists and can therefore not be allowed yet for public use.

+1

Imagine what the planet would be like if everyone had the knowledge to build flying saucers or death rays.

[Anders Lindman]

"The one thing depleting faster than oil is the credibility of those measuring it

I don't know when global oil supplies will start to decline. I do know that another resource has already peaked and gone into free fall: the credibility of the body that's meant to assess them. Last week two whistleblowers from the International Energy Agency alleged that it has deliberately upgraded its estimate of the world's oil supplies in order not to frighten the markets. Three days later, a paper published by researchers at Uppsala University in Sweden showed that the IEA's forecasts must be wrong, because it assumes a rate of extraction that appears to be impossible. The agency's assessment of the state of global oil supplies is beginning to look as reliable as Alan Greenspan's blandishments about the health of the financial markets."

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/16/oil-running-out-madman-sandwich-board

[rollotomaz1]

"The one thing depleting faster than oil is the credibility of those measuring it

I don't know when global oil supplies will start to decline. I do know that another resource has already peaked and gone into free fall: the credibility of the body that's meant to assess them. Last week two whistleblowers from the International Energy Agency alleged that it has deliberately upgraded its estimate of the world's oil supplies in order not to frighten the markets. Three days later, a paper published by researchers at Uppsala University in Sweden showed that the IEA's forecasts must be wrong, because it assumes a rate of extraction that appears to be impossible. The agency's assessment of the state of global oil supplies is beginning to look as reliable as Alan Greenspan's blandishments about the health of the financial markets."

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/16/oil-running-out-madman-sandwich-board

If we can remember when OPEC turned down the tap in Ghawar of late, it was said to be because it wanted to raise prices, well I'm not so sure, I was speaking with a freind in Austrailia who has worked in the oil industry for over 20 years, he explained,

many oil fields consist of condesate, that's oil within sponge like semi permable rocks, and not a huge solid lake of fluid, the condensate perculates at different rates in different wells depending o how thick the oil is,##

If the well is over worked it can do ereprable damage to the capilliary type process and can stop altogether, especially oif much water is uded to encourage the flow, some wells won't work this way and gas is used to help promote flow,

He tends to think that the last slow down was due to the wells becomming slow to deliver, so a back off was needed to let the flow return again,

There are also other wells that were thought to be drained out that have come back on line a few years later, but when these wells are opened back up they soon fall off again.

They have special sofware today that can map digitally the entire well so as to get a acurate picture, so they know exaCTLY WHAT IS LEFT UNDERGROUND.