Peak Oil - myth or reality ?

[SEATALTEA]

Originally Posted by mikepepler

I reckon as Peak Oil keeps driving fuel prices higher and higher in years to come there'll be massive demand for electric bikes, just on the basis of cost, never mind the environmental benefits.

Off topic but Peak Oil is a myth, world oil reserves are huge, there is more oil in the earth than we could ever reasonably use during this period where technology dictates oil is our first choice for energy.

It's just the case that we've taken a lot of the easy to access stuff out of the ground, have a look at the Oil Sands in Canada and Venezuela to get an idea of how much untapped oil is out there, it's just difficult to get out.

Look at how energy was used from the start of the Industrial Revolution and how changes in technology brought about new energy sources.

Animal, Water, Coal/Biomass, Steam, Oil, Nuclear.......Solar, Cold Fusion (in time), Fuel Cells and so on.

In 50 years we'll look back at oil romantically, thirty years ago the Saudi oil minister put it very plainly in what is one of the best energy quotes I've heard.

“The Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, and the Oil Age will end long before the world runs out of oil.”

[andysmee]

My father rode a camel;
I drive a car;
My son rides in a jet;
His son will ride a camel.

The returns on extracting oil from tar sands is approximately 3 barrels of oil for every 2 consumed. This is an EROEI of about 1.5. There are also extreme environmental costs in water pollution and land destruction. And that is only taking current production into account, where the easiest resources are the first mined. This suggests that the Alberta tar sands can fuel the world for less than 5 years, even if you are prepared to pay the vast environmental costs.

[flecc]

I think that the only reason we'll extract from tar sands long term is to get oil for the chemicals and plastics industries where value added can justify it.

For industrial power, transport and heating purposes, I'm certain we'll go the nuclear generation for electricity and hydrogen route.
.

[nikon201]

This article is interesting, looks like solar power could become more cost effective
BBC NEWS | Technology | Solar dyes give a guiding light

[Footie]

Originally Posted by SEATALTEA

Off topic but Peak Oil is a myth, world oil reserves are huge …. It's just the case that we've taken a lot of the easy to access stuff out of the ground …. it's just difficult to get out.

I can’t help but wonder, this must surely be similar to the debate that haunted the ancient mariners, long ago.

‘The Earth is flat’.
‘No it’s not, the Earth it’s round’.

Unfortunately, everyone had to wait until it was proved ‘beyond doubt’ that the Earth was a globe. How many lives could have been saved by going the wrong (shorter) way?

No doubt the purists of this argument (on both sides), who base their arguments on the masses of easily manipulated data, will continue to defend their standing to the bitter end.

Personally, I think this is shamefully counter productive, because all it does is confuse the issue and argument, resulting in a world failure to address research into alternative energy sources – what’s the point there’s lots of oil left … blah …. blah.

This confusion perpetuates the world’s dependence on a fuel source that is killing the planet and everything on it – makes sense to someone, somewhere I guess. Probably makes most sense to those lining their pockets from it all - (not to me).

I have a strong interest in space exploration. Not only because of the big rockets but because in this field energy usage and consumption is finite and calls for mind stretching and imaginative solutions (solar, nuclear, etc).

In the end it boils down to survival. Whatever data you support, fossil fuels are bad for all. We can't really continue sitting around arguing about “what ifs” – If not now then when do we get off our asses and set about finding sensible alternatives.
.

[mikepepler]

Originally Posted by SEATALTEA

...there is more oil in the earth than we could ever reasonably use during this period where technology dictates oil is our first choice for energy.

But the problem is that we've used half of what's there in 150 years, and the rate of use is at its highest ever. Remember, Peak Oil is not about oil running out - it's about when the daily production rate reaches a plateau, and then declines irreversibly - that's the peak. The outcome is that energy prices soar.

In case you hadn't noticed, oil production has been largely flat since 2005, despite prices going up by almost 200% - economists have been telling us that high prices will encourage production, but they haven't, because there is not enough new capacity coming on line to make up for declines in existing fields.

Originally Posted by SEATALTEA

It's just the case that we've taken a lot of the easy to access stuff out of the ground

This is exactly the case for Peak Oil - the easy stuff was cheap, and yielded a good energy return, i.e. you didn't have to expend much energy (and materials) to get a lot of energy back in the form ofoil or gas, or coal or uranium for that matter! What's left now is harder to get at, so is more expensive and yields a lower energy return, and is also dirtier, leading us to the tar sands...

Originally Posted by SEATALTEA

have a look at the Oil Sands in Canada and Venezuela to get an idea of how much untapped oil is out there, it's just difficult to get out.

First, they are not "oil sands", there's no oil in them. They are tar sands. The sand has to be washed in hot water and mixed with naptha to produce what the industry calls Syncrude. The amount of fresh water and natural gas used to do this is phenomenal, not to mention the fuel and materials used in the 400 tonne trucks that move the stuff around. Oh, and the water that comes out of the process is heavily contaminated with nasty chemicals, and is just being stored in huge lakes.

I won't go into any more detail, as it is somewhat off-topic, although it is the reason I've just ordered an electric bike... If you want to read more, I'd suggest the following sites:
PowerSwitch - Peak Oil news, Peak Oil forum, Peak Oil DVDs for the UK
The Oil Drum | Discussions about Energy and Our Future
Energy Bulletin

And a Google News search if you want to see it in the media.

[jontee]

I suspect that profit is the driving force for oil and gas - when it's no longer generating enough profit then alternatives will be realised.
The recent high costs are due to supply and demand.

On a historical note though - Before and during WW2 Germany started to manufacture synthetic oil and gas (from coal) - low grade at first but gradually improved. It created deisel,gas and low octane petroleum at first but before long powered very high performance engines (from fighters to jets).

South Africa has been producing synthetic oil since the 80's and Germany has now been constucting production plants in the Ruhr.

The USA,Russia,Europe even the UK still has coal reserves - just not yet profitable as yet to use.

In the coming years when cheap oil is no longer available and there is a choice of alternatives in various quantities the choice will be made by what the consumer can most afford and/or enviromental concerns.

Interesting times!

[mikepepler]

You're right jontee - the problem is indeed supply and demand. Demand is increasing and supply isn't. And yes, production will stop if it is not profitable, but the fact is that oil is so useful that people are prepared to pay a high price for it - there's no other way to power planes, and no transport alternative where you can "recharge" in a minute to give hundreds of miles of range for a large vehicle.

We'll only see prices fall if (or when) the world enters a recession, and the moment it recovers prices will shoot up again.

Doing "coal to liquids", as it's called, is certainly a practical way to produce oil, but it is very dirty (especially in terms of CO2), and at the same time is more expensive and yields a lower energy return than conventional oil. This is why it's biggest historical uses, as you point out, were only when the countries had no alternative, i.e. Germany during WW2, and South Africa during sanctions. It could certainly help supply liquid fuels in the face of declining oil supply, but due to the infrastructure needed it's unlikely it could be ramped up fast enough to offset declining production from areas such as the North Sea and Cantarell in Mexico, where annual decline rates have been in the 10-20% range.

The biggest concern is that China and the US have a huge amount of coal - if they decide that the way to deal with peak oil is to convert that coal to transport fuel, then we might as well forget trying to tackle climate change.

Electric bikes with renewable electricity are part of the answer - as long as there's enough lithium to go round in future!

Mike

[flecc]

Originally Posted by mikepepler

Electric bikes with renewable electricity are part of the answer - as long as there's enough lithium to go round in future!

Mike

Fortunately lithium is abundant and there's little prospect of being able to run out of it. It's quite possible that fuel cells will replace traction batteries anyway, and with hydrogen from nuclear generation or nuclear based chemical conversion, it's unlikely lithium supplies could ever be a problem.
.

[nikon201]

Originally Posted by flecc

Fortunately lithium is abundant and there's little prospect of being able to run out of it. It's quite possible that fuel cells will replace traction batteries anyway, and with hydrogen from nuclear generation or nuclear based chemical conversion, it's unlikely lithium supplies could ever be a problem.
.

Flecc

If that's the case, why are lithium batteries so expensive? Could we expect to see them become cheaper as demand rises?

Jon