Oil Crash
-
~ pimp hand ~
- Posts: 277
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 2:19 pm
Not everyone signs up to the peak oil doomsday predictions.
At $60 a barrel, I've read/heard it becomes economical to make oil from coal and shale reserves. Apparently there is LOTs of coal and shale. SFU prof Mark Jaccard talks about this:
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/ideas_20070611_2430.mp3
and check out Nathan Lewis's presentation:
http://nsl.caltech.edu/energy.html
Is it a good idea to make oil from coal and shale? Likely not.
The conclusion I reach is that we're more at risk of climate change than running out of oil.
At $60 a barrel, I've read/heard it becomes economical to make oil from coal and shale reserves. Apparently there is LOTs of coal and shale. SFU prof Mark Jaccard talks about this:
http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/ideas_20070611_2430.mp3
and check out Nathan Lewis's presentation:
http://nsl.caltech.edu/energy.html
Is it a good idea to make oil from coal and shale? Likely not.
The conclusion I reach is that we're more at risk of climate change than running out of oil.
Can the oil shale make enough of it though? The tar sands for example can only ever put out two or three million barrels a day when the world uses 86 million a day. There's as much oil in the tar sands as crude in Saudi Arabia - it's just not possible to produce the oil from it quickly. FYI, Canada has surpassed it's "peak" in natural gas production (hence the natural gas tanker terminal being built at Kitimat and planned undersea gas pipeline from Siberia to Alaska). We also export 70% of our natural gas to Uncle Sam.
Jaccard thinks we have centuries of coal left - that's the premise behind his theory to keep using lots of fossil fuels and capture and store the carbon dioxide. Others now think it's only 50 years of coal left.
Who do you beleive? No one knows til the fat lady sings I guess.
How ever you it cut though, all our main fossil fuel AND mineral resources (e.g. uranium) are quickly nearing the steep downslope of depletion.
Enjoy your sails and kites while there's still oil to the make the polymers
And don't throw out that old "woody" board, if you still own one
Jaccard thinks we have centuries of coal left - that's the premise behind his theory to keep using lots of fossil fuels and capture and store the carbon dioxide. Others now think it's only 50 years of coal left.
Who do you beleive? No one knows til the fat lady sings I guess.
How ever you it cut though, all our main fossil fuel AND mineral resources (e.g. uranium) are quickly nearing the steep downslope of depletion.
Enjoy your sails and kites while there's still oil to the make the polymers
And don't throw out that old "woody" board, if you still own one
Signature Block.
I forgot to mention about the Tar Sands - they can't operate without huge amounts of natural gas.
You wonder why there's so much drilling for gas - cause its getting damn hard to find. Check this out:
"Not very long, according to David Hughes, a petroleum geologist with the Geological Survey of Canada. Speaking before the World Peak Oil Conference held in Boston last week, Hughes painted a remarkably pessimistic picture of Canada�s energy future, especially regarding natural gas.
Despite record drilling activity, natural gas extraction volumes have slipped from the peak set in 2002, and output per well is now declining at an annual rate of 28%. Put another way, energy companies must add 3,000 more wells in 2007 on top of the 15,000 now in production just to keep output from diminishing.
That would be a daunting challenge even if there were spare rigs and drilling crews standing by. As it now stands, there is no spare capacity of this sort anywhere in North America.
With only eight years of proven reserves left in Canada, Hughes suspects that natural gas output is about to fall off a cliff. Barring a miracle or two, Canada will soon experience challenges in providing for its own citizens, let alone producing surplus volumes bound for American furnaces.
A potentially wrenching resource conflict is now brewing on our continent, thanks to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), under which Canada effectively gave up sovereignty over its fossil energy inheritance. As a signatory, Canada is prohibited from cutting back energy exports, even in the event of a domestic supply crunch. But how long would Canada honor its obligations under NAFTA if doing so resulted in its citizens freezing to death? American policymakers would be wise to explore how that scenario might play out.
If that weren�t enough, natural gas is also the key to expanding the production of oil from the tar sands of northern Alberta, the only oil-producing region left in North America that can increase output. The natural gas is the only available fuel for producing the pressurized steam needed to separate bitumen, a low-grade oil, from sand. Shrinking natural gas supplies would quickly reduce the flow of bitumen into the U.S., further complicating Canada�s energy dilemma.
The irony of sacrificing a premium energy source to make more low-grade fuel for export was not lost on Hughes, who closed with a quote from a Canadian energy executive. �Using natural gas to produce oil from tar sands is akin to turning gold into lead.�"
You wonder why there's so much drilling for gas - cause its getting damn hard to find. Check this out:
"Not very long, according to David Hughes, a petroleum geologist with the Geological Survey of Canada. Speaking before the World Peak Oil Conference held in Boston last week, Hughes painted a remarkably pessimistic picture of Canada�s energy future, especially regarding natural gas.
Despite record drilling activity, natural gas extraction volumes have slipped from the peak set in 2002, and output per well is now declining at an annual rate of 28%. Put another way, energy companies must add 3,000 more wells in 2007 on top of the 15,000 now in production just to keep output from diminishing.
That would be a daunting challenge even if there were spare rigs and drilling crews standing by. As it now stands, there is no spare capacity of this sort anywhere in North America.
With only eight years of proven reserves left in Canada, Hughes suspects that natural gas output is about to fall off a cliff. Barring a miracle or two, Canada will soon experience challenges in providing for its own citizens, let alone producing surplus volumes bound for American furnaces.
A potentially wrenching resource conflict is now brewing on our continent, thanks to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), under which Canada effectively gave up sovereignty over its fossil energy inheritance. As a signatory, Canada is prohibited from cutting back energy exports, even in the event of a domestic supply crunch. But how long would Canada honor its obligations under NAFTA if doing so resulted in its citizens freezing to death? American policymakers would be wise to explore how that scenario might play out.
If that weren�t enough, natural gas is also the key to expanding the production of oil from the tar sands of northern Alberta, the only oil-producing region left in North America that can increase output. The natural gas is the only available fuel for producing the pressurized steam needed to separate bitumen, a low-grade oil, from sand. Shrinking natural gas supplies would quickly reduce the flow of bitumen into the U.S., further complicating Canada�s energy dilemma.
The irony of sacrificing a premium energy source to make more low-grade fuel for export was not lost on Hughes, who closed with a quote from a Canadian energy executive. �Using natural gas to produce oil from tar sands is akin to turning gold into lead.�"
Signature Block.
