Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Peak Oil Perspective

physics.ucsd.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 89 posts

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#41

Post by harshreality »

jofer wrote: post #4

As a geologist in the oil industry, this is one of the few articles I've seen on peak oil that absolutely nails the salient points. (And even gets the geology correct.) To quote: "Most simply, peak oil is about rates, not amounts." Yes, there are a lot of unconventional resources. They're just a lot harder, more expensive, and most importantly in this context, slower to produce. On the upshot for me, and the downshot…

"Most simply, peak oil is about rates, not amounts."

See also, Arithmetic, Population, and Energy, wherein Dr. Albert Bartlett comments on the inability of most people to reason about concrete examples of exponential growth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vII-GxsrR2c

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#42

Post by joshuahedlund »

geden wrote: post #37
joshuahedlund wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that assumes we already know how to build the fire escape, how much it costs, how long it takes, and what it's supposed to look like.

erm, it's time to at least start finding out!

Fortunately, we've been working on it for decades. The issue is not so much about whether or not to "do nothing" as it is about whether or not to devote how many more (and whose) marginal dollars toward it, and how.

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#43

Post by Zaephyr »

It would be interesting to see plots of per capita oil consumption against population over time to see to the proportions of which the problem is being driven by current lifestyle/modernisation trends and by global population growth.

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#44

Post by fleitz »

rybosome wrote: post #18

> The risk is asymmetric: starting a crash program toward replacement of finite fossil fuels too early has great up-sides and marginal downsides (opportunity cost); but failure to act has enormous downside for marginal upside. - See more at: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/peak-oil-perspec... This is a more intelligent way of stating something I've been saying for years. I always explain my position on pe…

Agreed, which is why we should all believe in God, since although the possibility that he exists is slim to none, the risk of him actually existing is quite great to non-believers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#45

Post by ctdonath »

How about the math of supply and demand? Oil dominates because it's cheap & efficient. When it's not, other existing but relatively uncompetitive energy systems will become viable within a sensibly short time purely as a matter of demand & competition. Remember, oil (as we're speaking of it) was practically nonexistent not all that long ago, yet a vast robust infrastructure has sprung up around it.

Keep lofty-goal government subsidies out of it, as they distort the reality of what's viable, boosting lesser technologies while denying funds to what really will work as a matter of economics & physics.

In the meantime, put some of your own energy & money into getting "off the grid": make an alternative energy source viable by actually making it happen on a personal scale, not just hoping somebody somewhere will make it happen the way you want it to.

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#46

Post by jofer »

fleitz wrote: post #40
jofer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is "awash" in oil at $110, but that oil simply can't be produced fast enough to meet demand. That's the fundamental problem.

The oil business does not get disrupted by 3 kids in an apartment with $20K. If you want to open an oil field or a refinery you need billions of dollars and a financial projection that says the oil will stay at $X dollars for at least Y years. Since most people aren't convinced that oil will stay at $110 dollars for the foreseeable future they'd rather not risk billions of dollars. If you can accurately predict oil p…

You misunderstood what I'm saying. It has nothing to do with economics or disruption. It has _absolutely everything_ to do with geology.

The hydrocarbons that become economic at higher oil prices fundamentally cannot be produced as quickly as conventional reserves. It's a matter of permeability. Not a matter of economics.

Also, I'd wager I'm far more aware than you think of the investments required to explore, develop, and produce a prospect. (I know nothing about refining, though.)

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#47

Post by refurb »

rybosome wrote: post #21
fleitz wrote: post #5

Peak oil depends on oil price, the world is awash in oil at $110. Even up to 2005 oil's peak price was $60. Peak oil also depends on consumption, with cars like Tesla coming out we'll see a sharp decline in consumption over the next 20 to 30 years, at $300/bl a Tesla starts to make a lot of sense. The world will never run out of oil, its price will simply continue to increase until other alternatives become economica…

This makes sense economically, but that doesn't address the difficulties we will face as oil becomes too expensive for common, important uses. Our fleet of oil-consuming vehicles won't magically convert themselves. The oil-backed electrical grid will take a hit. Food will become incredibly expensive (or more scarce) since the vast majority will come from far away, and have been transported via oil.

Oil won't be going up overnight. There will be a time period over which prices rise. As they rise various users of oil will reduce consumption as alternatives suddenly become cheaper. Hell, look at oil consumption in the US! I can't find the stats right now, but oil demand for personal transportation has been flat or dropping despite the increasing number of cars on the road.

If a gallon of gas ends up at $10 ten years from now, how much do you think people will complain about having to wait an hour to recharge their electric car? Not much I'm guessing.

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#48

Post by fleitz »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #13
fleitz wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries tax oil heavily. Europe and Canada come to mind.

Yeah. Last time I was in Europe the local gas tax was more than the entire price of gas in the USA. Our low gas tax is, in effect, a subsidy, because we (as a society) choose to ignore the externalized costs of burning gasoline. Gas is currently 2CHF per liter (about $8 per gallon) in Zurich, in case you haven't been out of the USA lately.

You could call it externalizing the costs of burning gasoline, or you could call it internalizing the profit of burning gasoline. The rest of the world burning gasoline results in cheap credit for the US.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci12-9/ci1...

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#49

Post by dasil003 »

fleitz wrote: post #44
rybosome wrote: post #18

> The risk is asymmetric: starting a crash program toward replacement of finite fossil fuels too early has great up-sides and marginal downsides (opportunity cost); but failure to act has enormous downside for marginal upside. - See more at: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/peak-oil-perspec... This is a more intelligent way of stating something I've been saying for years. I always explain my position on pe…

Agreed, which is why we should all believe in God, since although the possibility that he exists is slim to none, the risk of him actually existing is quite great to non-believers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

Of course that's a bad analogy because we can define God any way we want; we could easily define him to be angry at people who do believe.

Whereas a fire escape or even peak oil is at least somewhat quantifiable risk.

Re: Peak Oil Perspective

#50

Post by lukifer »

rybosome wrote: post #18

> The risk is asymmetric: starting a crash program toward replacement of finite fossil fuels too early has great up-sides and marginal downsides (opportunity cost); but failure to act has enormous downside for marginal upside. - See more at: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/peak-oil-perspec... This is a more intelligent way of stating something I've been saying for years. I always explain my position on pe…

The same logic applies to asteroid strikes, climate change and potential ecology collapses as well. Whatever the odds are, they are decidedly non-astronomic, and therefore should be taken seriously.
Post reply on HN