Peak Oil Redux Part VIII

Peak oil theorists are pessimists of a Malthusian nature, because they believe that in the end, new technology cannot prevent oil production from declining since the amount of oil is finite.

In this series, we have provided evidence to support the contrarian view, that as in the field of agriculture, new technology may allow new energy sources to be used and may allow more energy to be extracted from old ones.

We do support Jevon's illogical paradox to the extent that as technological improvements increase the efficiency with which energy resources are used, total consumption of those resource may increase, rather than decrease.

Additionally if people manage to do more work with less fuel, their relative ratio of income to oil price goes down, giving them the ability to support a higher price for oil than before. This makes it even more worthwhile to extract hard to reach oil, and develop alternative energy sources even faster.

As for the supply and demand argument, according to the EIA, supply is greater than demand, and a temporary and premeditated lack of refining capacity may exist, but even this is questionable given refining capacity since 1990 has increased 12.5%, and since 1970 has increased 100%.

As pointed out in CERA's report and supported by other reports, current supply is in line with and exceeds current demand. In the future, supply will outstrip demand.

Furthermore, currently known fields or remaining reserves of crude oil could well be abiogenic in nature. This would explain why certain fields replenish themselves "mysteriously" and negates the finite supply argument of peak oil.

We also believe that further investigation of abiogenic processes would uncover a methodology which would make oil as plentiful and easier to produce than clean water.

Trillions of barrels of traditional and non traditional oil await technological, geopolictical and economic impetus.

Examples are tar sands, oil shale, bitumen, biofuels, thermal depolymerization (TDP) of organic matter, and the conversion of coal or natural gas to liquid hydrocarbons through the Fischer-Tropsch process.

Many of the non-conventional oils today require more energy to extract than can be gained from the oil itself. This may change with new technology.

Opposed to this is the problem that the remaining fossil fuel reserves usually are increasingly difficult to extract. They may be in increasingly remote areas, such as far below the surface of the ocean or in the Arctic.

They may also be of increasingly lower quality, and thus more difficult to refine. Both of these factors may affect oil price in the future, making it difficult to predict.

Tar or Oil Sands: A potentially significant deposit of non-conventional oil is the Athabasca Tar Sands site in north-western Canada as well as the Venezuelan Orinoco deposit. It is estimated by oil companies that the Athabasca and Orinoco sites (both of similar size) have as much as two-thirds of total global oil deposits but they are not yet considered proven reserves of oil.

Oil Shale: Oil shale is a general term applied to a group of fine black to dark brown shales rich enough in bituminous material (called kerogen) to yield petroleum upon distillation. The kerogen in oil shale can be converted to oil through the chemical process of pyrolysis.

Oil shale has also been burnt directly as a low-grade fuel. The United States Office of Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves estimates the world supply of oil shale at 1662 billion barrels of which 1200 billion barrels is in the United States. Estonia, Russia, Brazil, and China currently mine oil shale.

Bitumen: Bitumen is a tar like substance that contains oil, but no economic viable method of extracting oil has been found.

Biofuels: Biofuels such as biodiesel and ethanol are also hydrocarbon fuels.

Thermal depolymerization: Thermal depolymerization (TDP) has the potential to recover a lot of energy from existing sources of waste as well as pre-existing waste deposits.

Coal and gas conversion: The conversion of coal and natural gas has the potential to yield great quantities of non-conventional oil albeit at much lower net energy output. Because of the high cost of transporting natural gas, many known but remote fields are not being developed. Conversion can make this energy available even under present market conditions.

Synthetic oil: Fischer-Tropsch process method for the synthesis of hydrocarbons and other aliphatic compounds. Synthesis gas, a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, is reacted in the presence of an iron or cobalt catalyst; much heat is evolved, and such products as methane, synthetic gasoline and waxes, and alcohols are made, with water or carbon dioxide produced as a byproduct. An important source of the hydrogen–carbon monoxide gas mixture is the gasification of coal.

Abiogenic petroleum origin: The theory of abiogenic petroleum origin states that petroleum (or crude oil) is primarily created from non-biological sources of hydrocarbons located deep in the crust of the Earth. The theory stands in contrast to the more widely held conventional view that petroleum is created from the remains of ancient living matter. The constituent precursors of petroleum (mainly methane) are commonplace and it is possible that appropriate conditions exist for hydrocarbons to be formed deep within the Earth.

The difference with Abiogenic origin is they come from deep carbon deposits from when the planet formed or subducted material. At depths of hundreds of kilometers, carbon deposits are a mixture of hydrocarbon molecules which leak upward through the crust. Much of the material becomes methane. When the material passes through temperatures at which extremophile microbes can survive some of it will be consumed and converted to heavier hydrocarbons.

Other alternative energy technologies that are making rapid advances: Photovoltaic Photo Cells (Mono, MultiCrystalline, Amorphous, Thin Film, Cells, Arrays, Modules), Solar Electric Systems (Rural Electrification, Inverters, Chargers), Wind Power Systems (Turbines, Mills, Blades, Propellers, Rotors, Gear Units, Towers), Hydro Power Engineering (Turbines, Francis, Kaplan, Tidal, Pelton, Current, Dams, Gates), Bio Reactors (Anaerobic Digestors, BioMass Energy Systems, Methane Biogas, Mesophilic, Thermophilic) Fuel Cells (SPFC, PEM, PEFC, SOFC, MHD), Geothermal Power Generation (Turbine Generators & Heat Pumps), Natural Gas Cogeneration (Integrated & Fixed Bed Gasification).

In addition, electricity, hithane, natural gas and hydrogen are other energy sources with evolving technologies upon which we can draw.

In conclusion, the reality is that there is no provable lack of oil or energy supply, refining capacity, nor a lack of existing technology or economic impetus.

There only exists a lack of geopolitical willingness to make the technological commitments necessary, which will foster a shift from the status quo and a fundamental change in the way things are and have been.

All one need do is follow the money to see who benefits from the urban myth called peak oil. Then ask and answer the following question truthfully:

If you were in the position of the oil cartel and its attendant geopolitical and global economic ogliarchy, would you let the cat out of the bag and lose control? We think not, case closed.


Recommended reading: Another Peak Oil Cufuffle Series


$130 Oil Justified? No Way
Oil Price Redux
OIL: Demand, Production and Speculation
Peak Oil - The Myth, The Legend, The Fraud
Spreading "Peak Oil" Crack
"Peking" Oil, the Saudis and China
Peak Oil? Not!
Peak Oil? Not! Part Deux
Peak Oil? Not! - Update
Peak Oil Redux Part I
Peak Oil Redux - Part II
Peak Oil Redux Part III
Peak Oil Redux Part IV
Peak Oil Redux Part V
Peak Oil Redux Part VI
Peak Oil Redux Part VII
Peak Oil Redux Part VIII
The Blame for $135 a Barrel Oil
Blame it on Markman's Myopia or The Day They Burned Ol' Dixie Down - A "Peak Oil" Commentary

Another Peak Oil Cufuffle Series 

Comments

Rod Adams said…
Interesting post. I disagree with your conclusions, and wonder why, in your enormous list of alternative energy fuels that you fail to mention the only real choice - nuclear power?
Mr. Naybob said…
Thank you for the thought provoking comment.

In the context of "PEAK OIL" we mention types of "fossil fuels" and include a list of "alternative energy technologies" that are "making rapid advances".

Although we should have mentioned nuclear energy as a proven "alternative energy technology", it is not a "fossil fuel", nor is it (to our knowledge) "making rapid advances".

Henceforth, the exclusion.