If by "stopped drilling" you mean "increased US crude oil production throughout the Obama administration from a 2008 low back in line with the 10-year average", this makes a lot of sense.
Even the Citigroup Global Markets investment research report you provide as "evidence" cites a "rise in US production [that] has contributed to the sharp drop in US crude imports".
There seems to be a lot of table-pounding in Mungowitz postings of late.
I'm not certain what is meant by "stopped drilling". Can someone clarify? I'm been out of the oil industry for long enough to stop paying attention to the particulars.
We may have stopped new exploration wells or development wells or we may have new restrictions on both or either.
Restrictions aren't good. That oil production increased under the Obama administration is no credit to the Obama administration. Oil prices have gone up steadily during his administration and that provides incentive to produce more oil.
Is he impeding exploration and production? That's the relevant question. The effects of such prohibitions are not felt for years.
I realize that science is beyond some people's grasp, but Peak Oil is a mathematical law. It was confirmed in 1970 for US oil production and it was confirmed in 2005 for world oil production. The idea that it's 'idiocy' is... well, idiocy.
It was established in 1970 that U.S. oil production would start rising in the late 00s? How odd. All the predictions I have heard of said it would fall and keep falling forever. That whole mathematical law.
While it is mathematical that total oil production can never come close to extracting all the oil there is, we have no idea how much oil there is, and the evidence suggests there is far more oil than Peak oil allows for.
With a sufficiently inconsistent model, you can predict anything. With no model at all, and a bunch of quasi-religious intuitions, which is what the Citi report appears to be founded on despite all the charts, it's even easier.
10 comments:
If by "stopped drilling" you mean "increased US crude oil production throughout the Obama administration from a 2008 low back in line with the 10-year average", this makes a lot of sense.
Even the Citigroup Global Markets investment research report you provide as "evidence" cites a "rise in US production [that] has contributed to the sharp drop in US crude imports".
There seems to be a lot of table-pounding in Mungowitz postings of late.
We clearly have not stopped drilling.
but how many times do peak oil ideas have to be debunked?
At the right price there is plenty of supply. How much oil there will be under Newt's $2.50 promise is another question.
I'm not certain what is meant by "stopped drilling". Can someone clarify? I'm been out of the oil industry for long enough to stop paying attention to the particulars.
We may have stopped new exploration wells or development wells or we may have new restrictions on both or either.
Restrictions aren't good. That oil production increased under the Obama administration is no credit to the Obama administration. Oil prices have gone up steadily during his administration and that provides incentive to produce more oil.
Is he impeding exploration and production? That's the relevant question. The effects of such prohibitions are not felt for years.
I realize that science is beyond some people's grasp, but Peak Oil is a mathematical law. It was confirmed in 1970 for US oil production and it was confirmed in 2005 for world oil production. The idea that it's 'idiocy' is... well, idiocy.
Exactly. Kinda stupid to keep pounding this incorrect point every other day.
It was established in 1970 that U.S. oil production would start rising in the late 00s? How odd. All the predictions I have heard of said it would fall and keep falling forever. That whole mathematical law.
While it is mathematical that total oil production can never come close to extracting all the oil there is, we have no idea how much oil there is, and the evidence suggests there is far more oil than Peak oil allows for.
Peak oil is a solid mathematical law... as long as we live in a world with no price changes or technological development.
And people complain about the unrealistic assumptions in *economics*?
"we have no idea how much oil there is"
You may have no idea, but others have relevant info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves
At the right price a coal mine is an oil reserve
With a sufficiently inconsistent model, you can predict anything. With no model at all, and a bunch of quasi-religious intuitions, which is what the Citi report appears to be founded on despite all the charts, it's even easier.
Post a Comment