THE PEAK OIL AND THE 'HISTORY
Posted on 09/02/2011 by cdcnet
Dmitry ORLOVA Editor's Note: Dmitri Orlov is the author of "Reinventing Collapse", based on his direct observations of the collapse of the Soviet Union and socio-economic perspective of the United States of America. His new paper describes the key physical, social, political and economic analysts of the energy industry must be taken into account in the estimates of oil production, because these are significant. "Peak oil is history" is only on CultureChange.org until 1 November - JL
The back cover of the first edition of my first book, Reinventing Collapse, described me as "a leading theorist of Peak Oil" . When I read for the first time I was amazed. You see, if you scroll through a list of serious eminent theorists of Peak Oil: Your Hubbert, Campbell, Laherrère, Heinberg, Simmons and a few others worth mentioning, you will not find a single Orlov between them. Will look in vain among the records and proceedings of the conference 'Association for the Study of Peak Oil track of your humble author. But now that this nonsense has been printed and circulated in such a large number of copies, I suppose you have no other choice but to match the expectations it has aroused.
Apart from my few qualifications, this seems a good time to quibble at length on a new part of the theory of Peak Oil, because this year, for the first time, almost everyone is ready to admit that peak oil is substantially true, although some are not yet ready to call it by that name. Only five years ago, everyone from government officials to executives of oil companies dealt with the peak oil as the product of a fringe of mad scientists, but now that the traditional production of oil peaked in 2005 and that of liquid fuels has did in 2008, everyone is ready to acknowledge that there are serious problems in increasing the supply of oil worldwide. And although some people are still skeptical of using the term "Peak Oil" (and a few experts still insist that we should report to the peak as an "undulating plateau", which if nothing else is a nice paraphrase), the differences of opinion are now arising from a refusal to accept the terminology " Peak Oil "rather than achieve the maximum from the essence of global oil production. Of course, this is quite understandable: it is embarrassing to instantly switch from crying "peak oil is nonsense," cried out "peak oil story is" in no time. These stunts are allowed only for politicians and economists.
Now that the issue was broadly defined, I feel that the time is ripe for me to speak on this and declare unequivocally that peak oil is really silly. Not the part about the world production reaches at some point this close to a maximum and then inexorably declines: that part seems true enough. And even the part about the production in every region of the planet is constrained by geology and technology once peaked: that part, under experimental conditions designed well, seems to be prophetic. Indeed, the depletion model has been elegantly confirmed by the example of the continental U.S. (except Alaska) since 1970. But the idea that this model of collapse can be applied to the entire planet, is, I believe, something that must be rejected as completely and absolutely false. To see what I mean, look at a typical graph of peak oil (Fig1) shows that global production rising to a peak and then declines.
Note that the slope contains many interesting structures. There are wars, depressions, collapse of empires, oil embargoes, discoveries of huge deposits, not to mention the terrible cycles of expansion and braking that are the bane of capitalist economies (and the socialist societies are sometimes unable to grow, stagnate and eventually collapse much more slowly). It 's a rough climb, with walls, crevices, rocky outcrops and steep slopes. Now look down to: is not smooth so disconcerting? Its geological origin must be completely different from that of the climb. It seems to be composed of a single giant moraine, accumulated near the top corner of rest, with some spread to the base, no doubt due to erosion, with a gradual transition to what appears to be a gentle slope of a flood plain, certainly composed of silt from the flood, followed by a large perfectly flat, which could be the backdrop of an ancient sea. If you climb to the top must have required technical climbing, it seems that the descent is addressed in slippers. One would roll down all the downhill, and be sure not to hit anything sharp slowly before stopping somewhere around 2100. Mathematically, the curve slope should be characterized by some polynomial of high degree, while the descent is just e ^ (-t) with a minimum of statistical noise. This, you will agree, is extremely suspicious: a natural phenomenon of great complexity that just is forced to stop growing, changes direction and becomes as simple as a mound of earth. Where else do we have observed this kind of spontaneous and immediate simplification of a complex and dynamic process? Physical death is sometimes preceded by a slow decay, but sooner or later the majority of living things pass from life to death in a sharp transition. Not wither continuously for decades, until it became too small to be observable. So I call this situation generic and widely accepted of Peak Oil Scenario Rose. E 'that of the industrial civilization, instead of crashing to the ground immediately retreats to an imaginary nursing home and spends his last years due to elusive gold tank of oxygen and colostomy bag.
What's really strange is that the Roseo scenario could be quite accurate, in ideal circumstances, when applied to individual nations and oil-producing regions. For example, imagine that the biggest oil producer, which began with more oil than Saudi Arabia, peak, say, in 1970, but then suddenly fell from the gold standard, requires its currency to the rest of the world supporting it with the threat of force, including the threat of a nuclear attack initiative, Came to import over 60% of its oil, much of which is on credit, and, a few decades later goes bankrupt. So, that occurred over the decades, its domestic oil production shown at the effects of this curve beautifully delicate and technically constructed - until the moment of national bankruptcy.
[After the point of national bankruptcy circumstances are bound to become less than ideal, but the implications of this remain unclear. Will that unfortunate nation to continue to borrow money from around the world to import enough oil to continue to operate its economy, and, if this happens, under what conditions and for how long? It would be nice to know how it ends this story, but unfortunately all we can do is sit back and watch what happens.]
But we have another example (Fig. 3), which may offer explanations about what we mean when we write that circumstances are "not ideal". The nation is currently the most largest producer of oil reached its peak production around 1987. Its ruling class sclerotic, geriatric, ideologically rigid and systematically corrupt was not able to understand the importance of this fact, and only three years after the nation was bankrupt, shortly after it was dissolved politically. In this case the fall in oil production became the main economic indicator of the nation: the production of crude oil has plummeted, and GDP fell, then collapsed the production of coal and natural gas, and a decade later the economy had sunk to 40%. Behind these figures there was a collapse in life expectancy and a pervasive climate of despair in which many lives were lost or damaged.
But as long as no political or economic destabilizing factor interferes with the natural decline of the curve, the predictions of the theory of Peak Oil on what happens after the climax seems to hold. (When I say "ideal circumstances", I imagine it to be understood as ideal from the viewpoint of sentient, however irrational, hydrocarbon molecules, whose desire is to be pumped out from underground and burned before and efficiently as possible, because is clear, after all, who else benefit from it ... but let's not quibble). Since we know that the problem of not having enough oil to move cause all sorts of political and economic problems, and since this is exactly the problem that we should expect to face after the world reaches peak production, the employment of the land on which the forecasts are based on the theory of Peak global oil production, is not realistic. The specialists are in a position to predict the peak oil are not able to assess its political and economic effects, and so all they can do is give us the upper limit Scenario Rose as definitive. However, this warning is never explained very clearly as it should. The result is that we could be working with a theory that predicts that, once the peak of global production is reached, the delicious chocolate cakes turn out of nowhere and fly into our mouths on delicate wings of marzipan.
The explanation based on the theory of Peak Oil is that, while the rise and economic constraints, the descent is bound only by the geology of the reserves are emptied and the oil extraction technology, which are subject to thermodynamic limits and not can increase forever without incurring a decline and finally a decline. While the oil supply is growing, the demand fluctuates, producing numerous variations in the production superimposed on the main upward trend, since production tries to adapt to application. But on the side of decline, the demand is always higher than production, and every barrel of oil that can be produced at any time will be extracted.
extrapolating the consequences of a decline in local oil production, to understand those of a global decline, the tacit assumption is that the global economy will continue to work with a surprising calm in the level of demand can be met, while the application is not met in the slums will be drained by a steady stream of powerful social and political absurdities. All this will be resolved by rational market participants responding to the signals of price changes at any time decide if you must:
A) continue to consume oil in the manner in which they are accustomed, or
B) away and die quietly without drawing attention to himself or make noise.
Where was it never seen such a perfect organization in situations where a product key - for example, food or drinking water - a critical shortage? Have you ever seen? It has never seen you somewhere before?
And I suppose that a further tacit assumption is that a contraction in the economy (what to expect with all this application fee is not paid and friction between market participants) may work just as good of a growing, without being a financial collapse. Special financial instruments called "credit-default swaps can be used as a hedge against the growing risk that the counterparty antagonists collapsing massive self-inflicted wounds, however, after a while 'these tools started to become too expensive. But I do not think we can do much with the projections of economic growth out of the oven with any financial plan, at every level. Once these turn out to be unfounded, all the pyramids of debt start to crumble. And since a fiat currency (which the U.S. dollar) is composed of debt - credit in advance based on the promise of future growth - it is unclear how and with what the remaining oil will continue to be purchased. The end of growth is an unforeseeable event, started talking about it, and all of a sudden decide that became lunch time and start to order a drink. At least the French have a word for this: décroissance (literally, de-growth (the exact word in English is lacking, NdT)); here in the Anglophone world, all we can do is mumble and grumble of "double recessions." Perhaps Bernanke and Geithner can perform in a dance of figures to illustrate.
Let us see it in another way. As I already mentioned, the theory of Peak Oil has been quite good in predicting the profile of the depletion of certain stable and prosperous nations and provinces. But these predictions are meaningless when extrapolated on the planet as a whole, a very obvious reason: the world can not import oil. Let me rewrite this sprint to the title character, bold and centered, to emphasize the meaning of this phrase:
Planet Earth can not import oil
When faced with a lack of oil production an industrialized nation has only two choices:
1. import oil
2. collapse
But when a planet is developed to deal with a low overall production has only one choice: the choice number 2. Some may object that there is a third choice: immediately start using less oil. However, in practice, this would prove equal to the number two choice.
Using less oil would lead to make some radical changes, often technically difficult, politically unpopular and therefore expensive in terms of money and time. These choices may be technologically advanced (and unrealistic) how to replace the current fleet of motor vehicles with battery-powered electric vehicles and build a large number of nuclear plants to recharge their batteries, or simple (and rather unrealistic) as a move in a place where you can get the job on foot or by bicycle, grow more of their own food in a vegetable garden and a chicken coop, and so on.
But whatever these steps, all require some preparation and expense, and in a moment of crisis (such as the time when oil supplies suddenly become thinner) is a notoriously difficult time to embark on planning activities long term. For when the crisis arrives or a country has already prepared what I can or want to prepare (by postponing the collapse) or did not do it, accelerating the arrival of the crisis and making it more severe. The Hirsch Report (often referred to) says that it will take twenty years to prepare for peak oil to avoid a severe and prolonged drought of transport fuels, and given that the peak occurred in 2005, we have to idle in less than five years before having to start preparing. According to Hirsch et al. we have already lost the opportunity to prepare.
Some may also wonder why a reduction in stocks of oil should give way to automatically collapse. You can see that - in an industrialized economy - a decrease in oil consumption leads to a proportional decrease in economic activity as a whole. Oil is the raw material for the vast majority of fuel used to move goods and provide services across the entire economic structure. In the U.S. in particular there is a correlation very strong connection between GDP and the miles traveled by motor vehicles. So we can say that the U.S. economy goes to oil fairly direct and immediate: less oil results in a more compressed. What is the point where the economy is reduced so that they are unable to maintain the minimum requirements for survival? In order to continue to operate all facilities, plants and equipment must be maintained and replaced immediately. Once that point has been reached economic activity is constrained not only by the availability of fuel, but also on the availability of functioning equipment. There comes a point where the economy is reduced so as to invalidate the assumptions on which finance is based, making it impossible to import oil on credit. Once that point is reached the amount of fuel available for transportation is not limited by the availability of oil, but also the inability to finance its imports.
order to trigger the entire sequence of events, the initial lack of transport fuels need not be large because even a small reduction in stocks may trigger a number of economically destructive reactions. Much fuel is wasted in the queue at the few remaining stations that remain open. Other wastes arising from the practice to always be full, not knowing when and where you can refuel again. Additional portions of fuel disappear from the market because they are stowed in tanks and makeshift containers. While the shortage continues and expands the fuel is stored and hidden, and was born on the black market: a fuel diverted from the official distribution channels and subtracted from the tanks became available on the black market at inflated prices. So the effect of a slight initial decline in stock can easily trigger an avalanche effect creating a disturbance economic} {enough to push the economy beyond its physical and financial, and [then] to collapse.
If at this point started to feel worried ... I'm sorry say, you're a lightweight because it is only the beginning. The scenario of peak oil may look rosy, but also a rose has thorns. And there are other aspects to be taken into account in the chart.
First, the rosy profile of post-peak global production is based on figures overestimated with respect to reserves. Much of the remaining oil is located in the Middle East, the OPEC nations, and these nations have said largely overestimated reserves during the "war of prices" in the 80s of last century. While other OPEC members have tentatively unwrapped invented numbers but with a vague semblance of realism, Saddam Hussein - who has always had a taste for the spectacular - Rounded to Iraq's reserves to a nice whole number: 100 billion barrels. It follows that the OPEC reserves were inflated quite a bit '- at least one third. And OPEC is not the only one to have exaggerated the numbers of their stock. U.S. energy companies have made the same game to please Wall Street. Put away the slippers to go down the slippery slope of peak oil there is need for serious climbing equipment.
Second, there is a phenomenon called Effect Exporting country exporting nations when production starts to falter have a strong tendency to reduce exports of the first impact on domestic consumption. Of course there are some nations that have surrendered their sovereignty over resources to international companies and have lost control over export policies. There are also some dictatorial regimes that penalize consumers for their fellow citizens continue to collect the export earnings needed to support the regime. But most of the nations will export only their excess production. This means that it will be impossible to buy oil at the international level long before the wells prosciughino, leaving all oil importing nations out in the cold. So if you live in an oil importing nation and thought he could get off the slope of peak oil in hiking boots ... put them away: you'll need a parachute.
Third, although the total amount of oil produced around the world have risen up to 2005, the total amount of petroleum-based products (gasoline, diesel, etc..) distributed to points of use reached its peak years earlier, in terms of energy derivatives. The reason is that more and more energy is required to extract a barrel of oil from the ground and refine it. Crude oil reserves have tended to become more difficult to extract, heavier and more polluted by sulfur, also the demand for fuels with reduced lead content to increase the octane number contributes to the wasting of energy.
The energy index on energy invested (Energy Returned On Energy Invested - EROEI) is increased from 100:1 dawn of the oil era, when a group of tough guys could dig an oil well with picks and shovels, to an average of 10:1, now that the production of requires subsea oil platforms (which sometimes explode and poison entire ecosystems), and horizontal drilling technology for the fractional distillation, secondary and tertiary recovery by injection of water and nitrogen separation plant oil from the water and all sorts of other technological complexity consuming more energy they produce. While the index declined from 10:1 to 1:1 EROEI oil industry begins to look like an obese nurse sucking greedily hungry but their breast beside the cradle of an infant dying of hunger. At some point it will no longer economically viable to transport oil and gasoline dealers.
do not know exactly when this moment comes, but lead to some indicators suggest that the minimum sustainable EROEI for the industry is around 3:1.
dell'EROEI The effect of the reduction is to make the gentle slope of the rosy scenario much steeper. The trend is not more like a pile of pebbles, but a river of lava plunging into the sea amid clouds of steam solidifying. There is a lot of energy left, but much of this is designed to disperse and may be unable to get near enough to roast marshmallows.
Fourth, we should consider the fact that our modern global oil industry is highly integrated. If you need a specialized component for operation of drilling is likely to be purchased by one of two global companies. It is equally likely that this company has some important and high-tech operations in a country which is incidentally an importer of oil. The importance of this becomes clear when you consider what would happen to the operations of that company when it occurs the effect exporting nations. Suppose you're a national oil in a oil-rich nation that has still raw enough for domestic consumption, although it was recently forced to drop all its international customers. Your are large but mature oil fields, and you can keep them productive only by continuing to drill new horizontal wells just above the water level and keep the high-pressure injection of seawater. Interrompeste even if only briefly this activity would change the composition of crude oil from aqueous oily water that we might as well refer back underground. Now it happens that this equipment you need to continue to drill horizontal wells comes from an unfortunate own nations that usually your imported oil, but now longer, and engineers usually build your equipment have given up trying to fuel the black market to get to work by car and are committed to till their gardens to plant potatoes. Not long after your drilling operations ending spare parts, your production of oil falls apart and most of your remaining reserves are buried, helping to increase another increasingly important category of fields: those that are not never extracted.
When you take into account these four elements together it becomes difficult to imagine that global oil production will decline slowly from its peak in a gentle curve that spans decades and continues. Rather the image that arises is that of a sudden and widespread collapse which ultimately affect the entire planet. Whoever and wherever you are likely to see the process unfolding in three phases: Phase 1
: access to fuel for transport and services remained at the current level
Step 2: access to fuel for transport and services is severely limited
Step 3: access to fuel for transport and services is impossible to occur and severe restrictions on travel opportunities.
The duration of phase 2 will vary from place to place. In some places you could go directly to Step 3: tankers do not reach more cities, dealers in the area close and that's it. In other countries, a thriving black market could afford to have gasoline for a few years at a price that will still allow some uses, such as an electric generator in emergency centers. But the ability to manage to survive the phase 2 and phase 3 is in large part by the changes and the preparations put in place during Phase 1.
We must expect that the vast majority of people have not done anything to prepare, having no awareness of doing so. You can expect someone to do some step in the direction of common sense how to install a wood stove or to provide thermal insulation of houses, or in a direction apparently common sense, but basically useless, how to waste their money on a new hybrid car or spend their energies to form a new political party or trying to take control of one of the existing ones.
Some will buy a farm, equipped to be autonomous, they will begin to grow their own food (perhaps carrying their surplus to a nearby rural market equipped with bicycles or boats), to educate their children at home, emphasizing the classics and the ' agriculture, animal husbandry and other useful knowledge in all ages. Some flee to places where the fuel is already low and where a moped is considered a device that relieves fatigue ... Donkeys and camels.
Unfortunately it is difficult predict which of these changes and adjustments will actually be successful and which will fail because a lot depends on circumstances unpredictable and vary from place to place and from person to person: the uncertainty is simply too great. But there's one thing we can be certain: that the rosy scenario of peak oil, that projects a slow and gradual decline of world oil production, is meaningless. Become aware of this fact should cause a sense of urgency. We use it wisely or foolishly depend on us, and our success depends on luck, but have a sense of urgency is not a bad thing. If we have a desire to prepare we have some months, maybe a few years, but certainly we do not have decades. Let those who would have you believe otherwise, first take into consideration the objections that I raised in this article.
Original title: "Peak Oil is History"
Source: http://www.culturechange.org
Link
01.09.2010
0 comments:
Post a Comment