Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Why the world is not running out of oil.
I've read the article on Economist.Com that supported the idea that peak would soon happen, but it wouldn't be a big deal because of our growing technology, enhanced methods of drilling oil, and future investments in alternative energy that can help keep the world running. They bring up the perspectives of other experts, that oil is finally running dry, and how the imminent oil peak "will eventually lead to an economic disaster." They ask, Is the world starting to run out of oil? And would hitting a global peak of production necessarily spell economic ruin?
They say that the world isn't running out of oil and that there is a lot more oil to be discovered in different parts in the world. Optimists believe that technological advances in oil extraction and alternative energy would prolong our production peak by decades. Global oil industries are changing from an exploration business into a technology manufacturing business. This meant that these oil companies are racing to manufacture fuels that blend to make petrol & diesel, which in return can extend the life of the world's remaining oil reserves. As a domino effect, the investment in manufacturing fuels blended to make petrol and diesel might open doors to firms that engage in alternative energy sources and "it may even result in a breakthrough that replaces oil altogether. Peak-oil advocates remain unpleased, because they debate that Western oil companies are struggling to replace produced oil. The world consumes two to three barrels in ratio to every one barrel found. The articles agree that firms are having a hard time replacing reserves but they debated that it still didn't mean the world was running out of oil. Its only that these companies did not have access to other oil reserves the world such as the vast oil deposits in Russia.
The optimists mentioned about tar sands and shale oil and if they were taken into account, the production peak will appear much further into the future. But unfortunately the effort and costs to extract the petroleum from these alternate resources are increasingly greater than extracting conventional oil. There is mention of beneficial technological break troughs such as the muti-lateral drilling which helped shift the 1980 predictons of decline in Britain's North Sea. This area is now just peaking according to the article. Technology such as the "4-D seismic analysis, steam injection process and electromagnetic direct detection of hydrocarbons " are lifting the recovery rate of oil production. Where as the oil industry only recovers about 1/3 of oil that exists in their oil reserves. So technological advancements can help increase the 1/3 recovery rate. The article also mentioned, "fancier technologies, oil business is drilling in deeper waters, more difficult terrain, and even in the arctic (which as global warming melts the polar ice cap) will perversely become the next great prize in oil." Many environmentalists would counter- attack to this claim by bringing up the result of hotter summers due to global warming from the continued burning of fossil fuels which would then increase demands for oil, and our next great prize would just be a small bite in our increasing oil appetite. Solutions from this article seems to be aiming for a more gentle declined in oil use, through development in drilling technology that can process the heavier oils, which can then recover our production rate. Plans for a more gentle decline encouraged Saudi Arabia to replace lost output of production with new developed fields. As for improvements, Saudi Arabia, invited Chevron to apply the steam injection technique to recover heavy oil in its reserves. This new hope can recover useful oil from 6% to 40%, thus helping the push our future peak further down in the time line. Here is an article that explains the steam injection process. (http://www.geoconvention.org/2006abstracts/189S0131.pdf)
Experts related this oil problem to, "the surprising outcome of another great motorcar race." As in 1894 Paris organized the first endurance race with vehicles without horses where different cars used different fuels. The best fuel came to be Petroleum, and now experts are saying, its time for another race to see what new fuel will take place. A step in competing in the next "motorcar race" was the Audi prototype R-10 which used diesel oil not made normally. The car used blended original diesel with a new form of diesel made from natural gas. Results in using this new type of blended energy source came out to be extremely clean and extremely powerful.This type of new diesel was named GTL, short for "gas to liquids." Countries like Nigeria is also pursuing the use of GTL. In terms of energy the north gas field in Qatar is "perhaps two times the size of Ghawar. (Ghawar is name of the largest oil field in Saudi Arabia)http://english.mofa.gov.qa/details.cfm?id=53 (Link to a little information on North gas field in Qatar) Because there is much more natural gas than fossil fuels in this world, it would be benefit us greatly and lightly increase the globes oil supplies.
Optimists believed that oil prices will eventually influence investments and pressure people into investing in new alternative energy. Leaving their hopes on oil, and prayers for new alternatives. Oil company Chevron commented, "price is our friend here, because it has encouraged investment in new hydrocarbons and also the alternatives."What the article presents as a solution to our future oil problem, is a technological advancement in improving oil production recovery and the plentiful alternative energy sources. These technological advancements are very beneficial in pushing our peak oil further into the future but we still have to deal with it in the long run. It is true that oil is being extracted at an increasingly rate but others think methods in drilling heavier oils, the oil prices pressuring investments in alternative energy, and blending natural gas with conventional oil would lighten our fall after the oil peak and give birth to a new energy production. Optimists thinks that oil companies are transforming from a "risky exploration business into a technology-intensive manufacturing business. Proof to this are the efforts of a newly created diesel fuel called GTL which is created by blending diesel created by natural gas with conventional diesel. The question that still remains is how long will this transformation take? Will our industry change its oil addiction in time before demands exceeds supplies? And how effective or damaging are these alternative methods and resources?
Analysis:
After reading both articles supporting different sides I feel as if this author is putting his trust in technology and the enhancements they provide in oil production. He believes that the large amounts of natural gas, and many other resources in the world that can be converted into energy and guarantee survival of civilization. He feels that firms who are struggling to replace reserves didn't mean that the globe's oil is running out but the fact that the remaining oil deposits are in parts of the world that is not accessible like the deposits in Russia, and the "locking out of Western Oil companies in Saudi Arabia." His tone of voice in this article is leaning more into telling readers not to panic about this oil issue because it's years to come, and to put their trust in our engagement in alternative energy and development in advancing energy extracting technology. What I think is that this guy isn't looking too much on how fossil fuels destroy our O-Zone layer which then increases the chance of cancer from UV rays, how it pollutes our air, creates global warming which melts our polar ice caps which then will heighten our tides and cause massive floods all around the world. Plus investing in technological advancements in extracting oil is a waste of money and time. With all the money invested in drilling technology, we can use it in alternative research and educating the public on how to live without oil. Investing in drilling upgrades will only deepen our dependence on oil. The author does mention that investing in upgrades in technology will help prolong the peak in production and as prices go up it can open doors to alternative energy investors. We might be able to predict when our oil peak might hit but can we predict if we can transform our oil dependent industry in time before the peak happens? So slow changes aren't going to be effective. We need to act immediately, because every year oil demands rise by the billions and no matter how much new reserves and advancements we make in drilling the oil, it may not even quench the thirst of half our exponentially growing population in the future. The author spends a lot of his time telling readers how there's so much natural gas in the world, and how hope is still there because of GTL fuels and new drilling techniques. But he doesn't give us the detail of the costs and effects of those new methods and the help or damage to the environment and the negative or positive side effects that humans will get from these methods due to atmosphere damage and pollution.
How I feel on the issue:
I feel that new terms of energy would help ensure the future of our survival as a race, but I feel as if in the end the ever growing human population would take its toll. For instance lets say every thing's good now at the year 2006, and population rises exponentially. Our new resources are still abundant. Lets wait now. Its been 800 years and now its the year 2806, our population is at about a trillion+. Technology has allowed humans to live up to 140, and theres cure to cancer and aids. We rarely have diseases. Our population continue to grow. What happens then? We will soon reach a limit to where the planet cannot support the people living in it. Alternative resources are the same as fossil fuels, they're all finite. As creatures living in this planet we cannot disrupt the natural balance.
They say that the world isn't running out of oil and that there is a lot more oil to be discovered in different parts in the world. Optimists believe that technological advances in oil extraction and alternative energy would prolong our production peak by decades. Global oil industries are changing from an exploration business into a technology manufacturing business. This meant that these oil companies are racing to manufacture fuels that blend to make petrol & diesel, which in return can extend the life of the world's remaining oil reserves. As a domino effect, the investment in manufacturing fuels blended to make petrol and diesel might open doors to firms that engage in alternative energy sources and "it may even result in a breakthrough that replaces oil altogether. Peak-oil advocates remain unpleased, because they debate that Western oil companies are struggling to replace produced oil. The world consumes two to three barrels in ratio to every one barrel found. The articles agree that firms are having a hard time replacing reserves but they debated that it still didn't mean the world was running out of oil. Its only that these companies did not have access to other oil reserves the world such as the vast oil deposits in Russia.
The optimists mentioned about tar sands and shale oil and if they were taken into account, the production peak will appear much further into the future. But unfortunately the effort and costs to extract the petroleum from these alternate resources are increasingly greater than extracting conventional oil. There is mention of beneficial technological break troughs such as the muti-lateral drilling which helped shift the 1980 predictons of decline in Britain's North Sea. This area is now just peaking according to the article. Technology such as the "4-D seismic analysis, steam injection process and electromagnetic direct detection of hydrocarbons " are lifting the recovery rate of oil production. Where as the oil industry only recovers about 1/3 of oil that exists in their oil reserves. So technological advancements can help increase the 1/3 recovery rate. The article also mentioned, "fancier technologies, oil business is drilling in deeper waters, more difficult terrain, and even in the arctic (which as global warming melts the polar ice cap) will perversely become the next great prize in oil." Many environmentalists would counter- attack to this claim by bringing up the result of hotter summers due to global warming from the continued burning of fossil fuels which would then increase demands for oil, and our next great prize would just be a small bite in our increasing oil appetite. Solutions from this article seems to be aiming for a more gentle declined in oil use, through development in drilling technology that can process the heavier oils, which can then recover our production rate. Plans for a more gentle decline encouraged Saudi Arabia to replace lost output of production with new developed fields. As for improvements, Saudi Arabia, invited Chevron to apply the steam injection technique to recover heavy oil in its reserves. This new hope can recover useful oil from 6% to 40%, thus helping the push our future peak further down in the time line. Here is an article that explains the steam injection process. (http://www.geoconvention.org/2006abstracts/189S0131.pdf)
Experts related this oil problem to, "the surprising outcome of another great motorcar race." As in 1894 Paris organized the first endurance race with vehicles without horses where different cars used different fuels. The best fuel came to be Petroleum, and now experts are saying, its time for another race to see what new fuel will take place. A step in competing in the next "motorcar race" was the Audi prototype R-10 which used diesel oil not made normally. The car used blended original diesel with a new form of diesel made from natural gas. Results in using this new type of blended energy source came out to be extremely clean and extremely powerful.This type of new diesel was named GTL, short for "gas to liquids." Countries like Nigeria is also pursuing the use of GTL. In terms of energy the north gas field in Qatar is "perhaps two times the size of Ghawar. (Ghawar is name of the largest oil field in Saudi Arabia)http://english.mofa.gov.qa/details.cfm?id=53 (Link to a little information on North gas field in Qatar) Because there is much more natural gas than fossil fuels in this world, it would be benefit us greatly and lightly increase the globes oil supplies.
Optimists believed that oil prices will eventually influence investments and pressure people into investing in new alternative energy. Leaving their hopes on oil, and prayers for new alternatives. Oil company Chevron commented, "price is our friend here, because it has encouraged investment in new hydrocarbons and also the alternatives."What the article presents as a solution to our future oil problem, is a technological advancement in improving oil production recovery and the plentiful alternative energy sources. These technological advancements are very beneficial in pushing our peak oil further into the future but we still have to deal with it in the long run. It is true that oil is being extracted at an increasingly rate but others think methods in drilling heavier oils, the oil prices pressuring investments in alternative energy, and blending natural gas with conventional oil would lighten our fall after the oil peak and give birth to a new energy production. Optimists thinks that oil companies are transforming from a "risky exploration business into a technology-intensive manufacturing business. Proof to this are the efforts of a newly created diesel fuel called GTL which is created by blending diesel created by natural gas with conventional diesel. The question that still remains is how long will this transformation take? Will our industry change its oil addiction in time before demands exceeds supplies? And how effective or damaging are these alternative methods and resources?
Analysis:
After reading both articles supporting different sides I feel as if this author is putting his trust in technology and the enhancements they provide in oil production. He believes that the large amounts of natural gas, and many other resources in the world that can be converted into energy and guarantee survival of civilization. He feels that firms who are struggling to replace reserves didn't mean that the globe's oil is running out but the fact that the remaining oil deposits are in parts of the world that is not accessible like the deposits in Russia, and the "locking out of Western Oil companies in Saudi Arabia." His tone of voice in this article is leaning more into telling readers not to panic about this oil issue because it's years to come, and to put their trust in our engagement in alternative energy and development in advancing energy extracting technology. What I think is that this guy isn't looking too much on how fossil fuels destroy our O-Zone layer which then increases the chance of cancer from UV rays, how it pollutes our air, creates global warming which melts our polar ice caps which then will heighten our tides and cause massive floods all around the world. Plus investing in technological advancements in extracting oil is a waste of money and time. With all the money invested in drilling technology, we can use it in alternative research and educating the public on how to live without oil. Investing in drilling upgrades will only deepen our dependence on oil. The author does mention that investing in upgrades in technology will help prolong the peak in production and as prices go up it can open doors to alternative energy investors. We might be able to predict when our oil peak might hit but can we predict if we can transform our oil dependent industry in time before the peak happens? So slow changes aren't going to be effective. We need to act immediately, because every year oil demands rise by the billions and no matter how much new reserves and advancements we make in drilling the oil, it may not even quench the thirst of half our exponentially growing population in the future. The author spends a lot of his time telling readers how there's so much natural gas in the world, and how hope is still there because of GTL fuels and new drilling techniques. But he doesn't give us the detail of the costs and effects of those new methods and the help or damage to the environment and the negative or positive side effects that humans will get from these methods due to atmosphere damage and pollution.
How I feel on the issue:
I feel that new terms of energy would help ensure the future of our survival as a race, but I feel as if in the end the ever growing human population would take its toll. For instance lets say every thing's good now at the year 2006, and population rises exponentially. Our new resources are still abundant. Lets wait now. Its been 800 years and now its the year 2806, our population is at about a trillion+. Technology has allowed humans to live up to 140, and theres cure to cancer and aids. We rarely have diseases. Our population continue to grow. What happens then? We will soon reach a limit to where the planet cannot support the people living in it. Alternative resources are the same as fossil fuels, they're all finite. As creatures living in this planet we cannot disrupt the natural balance.
# posted by Nian @ 6:26 PM 
