Peak Oil

Have a look at the following video.  It is interesting not only from the perspective of who are the major oil producers and how they have changed in the past 55 odd years.  But it is the total amount of oil produced which rose from around 32 million barrels per day in 1965 to 92 million in 2017.  A 3x increase.

Add to this the expected doubling of global LNG production in next 10 years.

So much for decarbonisation.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Peak Oil

  1. Nob

    If the warmists are right, then the worst (if warming is the worst) is inevitable and cannot be stopped.

    Whatever you believe, there is no justification for the colossal cost to humanity of RETs, RTS, subsidised wind, subsidised solar etc.

    Oil exploration had only scratched the surface anyway.

    I’ve no doubt something will replace oil in time, but it won’t be wind, solar, tidal etc. All these are location fixed and don’t come remotely close to the superb portability and energy density of oil.

  2. feelthebern

    Saudi America by Bethany McLean provides the best analysis of the US shale sector.
    When I have time later I’ll post a few points from it.

  3. Bruce of Newcastle

    Several process plants around the world convert coal to crude oil, especially in RSA and China.
    So it is economic to convert coal to oil.
    Peak oil has therefore been deferred for some thousands of years.

  4. And when you consider natural gas reserves, Australia’s known north-west shelf reserves are estimated to last at least 100 (or was it 1000?) years at current extraction rates, we have more than enough to last until nuclear finally gets the go ahead.

  5. RobK

    So it is economic to convert coal to oil.
    I recall reading an article, a decade ago, that said; if done in sufficient volume, coal to oil would cost around $57 per barrel.

  6. RobK

    I also see an avenue in this link i picked up a while ago at the Cat files.
    http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/index.aspx 

    Coal–Water Slurry Operation in an EMD Diesel Engine.
    The U.S. Department of Energy, Morgantown Energy Technology Center has assumed a leadership role in the development of coal-burning diesel engines. The motivation for this work is obvious when one considers the magnitude of the domestic reserves of coal and the widespread use of diesel engines. The work reported in this paper represents the preliminary engine experiments leading to the development of a coal-burning, medium-speed diesel engine. The basis of this development effort is a two-stroke, 900 rpm, 216-mm (8.5-in.) bore engine manufactured by Electro-Motive Division of General Motors Corporation. 

    Potentially, this early work, done in response to the oil crisis in the late 70s, could be an adjunct to gas peakers as they would run-up pretty quickly compared to steam, i think. It’s a beautiful thing running a deisel on coal slurry. The US dept of energy was ahead of the game.

  7. Diesel engines were even run on coal dust. Rudolph Diesel considered coal dust, amongst other combustibles, in his engine design.

  8. Dr Faustus

    So it is economic to convert coal to oil.
    I recall reading an article, a decade ago, that said; if done in sufficient volume, coal to oil would cost around $57 per barrel.

    The Sasol plants happily chugged away for the first 50-odd years with an oil price in the $1.50 to ~$20/bbl range (around US$25 – $30/bbl real). The synfuel economics are strongly supported by the co-production of dozens of high-value chemical by-products – in fact you can almost view the synfuel stream as a by-product itself.

    In a truly lucky country, there would be several versions of Sasol 3 in operation in the Bowen basin.

    As Bruce notes above, Fischer Tropsch is not Peak Oil’s friend…

  9. RobK

    https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/0809/LiquidFuel#_Toc216843791

    Introduction

    Australia has an estimated six per cent of the world’s recoverable resources of black coal, and also accounts for about six per cent of current world coal production.[1]Much of this is exported: indeed, Australia is the world’s biggest coal exporter. In resources, it ranks sixth behind the USA (31 per cent), Russia (21 per cent), China (13 per cent), India (eight per cent) and South Africa (seven per cent).[2] It is estimated that at current rates of production, Australia has enough black coal to last about 180 years.[3]Black coal represents about half of Australia’s total coal reserves: it also has about 25 per cent of the world’s recoverable resources of brown coal.[4] On the other hand, Australia is a net importer of crude oil and refined oil products, with domestic production of crude oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) meeting only about 53 per cent of domestic consumption.[5] These factors, together with a desire for increased domestic energy security, and protection from economic instabilities affecting global oil prices and supply, lead to the question of whether Australia should consider developing a coal-derived transport fuel industry to meet domestic demands.

    This paper provides information on production of liquid fuel from coal and its potential as an alternative to petroleum-based transport fuels in Australia. Presented first is information on liquid fuel production from coal including environmental aspects, followed by an overview of the status of the industry worldwide, and future prospects.

    The conclusion includes:

    As these studies indicate, environmental concerns together with high capital costs are likely to limit development and expansion of the CTL industry in Australia and elsewhere in the immediate future. However, there is considerable support for development of CCS from both industry and government,[33] and there will be indirect incentive for its development provided by the emissions trading scheme proposed for introduction in Australia in 2010, as well as by international schemes. If CCS technology and deployment matures, this may provide the economic conditions under which CTL could become viable.

  10. RobK

    Diesel engines were even run on coal dust.
    The beauty of the slurry, at 45-50% water is that it is safer to store, and is injected by standard, though modified, injectors.

  11. Dr Faustus

    Many years ago I was involved with an old Cooper-Bessemer diesel engine that had been run on a oil/water/coal dust emulsion. Even though it was a slow revving clunker, the erosion in the exhaust gas paths caused by the ash was a thing to behold.

  12. Damo

    RobK you know about running diesel on coal slurry or coal dust.
    What would the air pollution in cities be like if we were to run vehicles on it ?
    not CO2, the old school types of air pollution that foul china and india
    or is it only viable for power stations a thirsty long way from cities ?

Comments are closed.