H07633
Headlines : InternationalPeak Oil Happened on 12/16/2005 says Deffeyes
Kenneth Deffeyes of Princeton is the first to give us numbers showing that planet Earth has passed peak oil production. This would be consistent with FTW’s analysis saying that we were at peak, plus or minus six months as of last fall. If Deffeyes is correct then total world oil production will never surpass what was being pumped last December. That won’t be hard to verify. If Deffeyes is wrong he will not be off by much.
_As this distinguished colleague of M. King Hubbert has observed, his career as a prophet is over and his career as a historian has begun. For the rest of us alarm bells should be going off everywhere. I agree with Deffeyes that planet earth will be back in the Stone Age, or well past the halfway point there, by 2025. For all of us, the sense of urgency must be doubled now. There is precious little time to waste. – Michael C. Ruppert_
[Posted By mkane]Republished from Current Events
Join us as we watch the crisis unfolding
February 11, 2006
In the January 2004 Current Events on this web site, I predicted that world oil production would peak on Thanksgiving Day, November 24, 2005. In hindsight, that prediction was in error by three weeks. An update using the 2005 data shows that we passed the peak on December 16, 2005.
“A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires” that I present an update on the data sources and the interpretation.
The underlying methodology is Hubbert’s postulate that the rate of new oil discoveries depends on the fraction of the oil that has not yet been discovered. Similarly, the rate of oil production depends on the fraction of oil that has not yet been produced. A test of Hubbert’s hypothesis, using the long history of US oil production, is on pages 35—42 of my book Beyond Oil. An algebraic result from the Hubbert theory says that the production rate peaks when half of the oil has been produced.
The most accurate measure of the eventual total oil comes from the “hits” graph on page 48 of Beyond Oil. The input data for that graph are the dates of the first well in each oilfield.
Posted by mkane
Michael Kane is best known as the most recent Energy Affairs Editor for www.FromTheWilderness.com (FTW) where he had written extensively on 9/11, energy and sustainability. Working in the tradition of Joseph Beuys, the artist who declared "everyone is an...
what do you think of the (terrifying) theory that the melting polar ice caps with expose new and abundant oil fields?
i say “terrifying” because it would allow this level of destruction to sustain itself for longer. the longer it lasts, the worse the damage to the earth. plain and simple.
Want a good healthy scare? Read more about peak oil here…
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
what i like about ruppert is that everytime he comments on an article…he says…” we have precious little time “ ...
he’s been saying that for 10 years now.
to me, he’s kinda like a more stable alex jones…but still an alex jones. haha. am i wrong bout the guy?
Oddly enough, I am of a somewhat similar opinion. At some level I actually welcome the idea we may have passed peak oil as there may still be a chance to avoid the some of the worst case scenario’s for climate change. Clearly we are unable limit our consumption and destruction, but we may be very lucky if it has been limited for us at this point in time.
lol GED that site is very familiar to me. thanks though = P
he’s been saying that for 10 years now.
what, do you think that’s a long time to be saying ‘any time now’ or something? that isn’t shit. 10 years is nothing.
but yes, setting definite timeframes is stupid, and often a sure-fire way to discredit yourself. there are too many factors that are unaccounted for and that can and do come into play. it’s impossible to predict accurately. all we know for sure is that the system as it is is terminally unsustainable. now that does not mean that it wont find ways to prolong its existence. but either way, it’s just a matter of time. it might be next year, next decade, next century, or maybe even longer. but as i said before, the sooner the better. that’s just logic.
Shift, curious to know what you think of the site? Credible? Whether or not it is, I think it is usefull in making a person realize just how much our lifestyle is dependant on oil. No?
an estimated 80% of the global human populous is artificially sustained. this cannot last, and it will come to and end. it is our job to bring it down as softly as possible, minimize the loss of life (human and non-human), and to create a homeostatic and sustainable human society. have fun!
the site is quite credible. but it’s a good idea to seek out the criticisms and critiques too, because peak oil science is very technical, and it’s easy to make mistakes. that tend to be the case with climate science too, and it happens a lot. but it’s usually a case of miscalculation or of overlooking some important factor or consideration, as opposed to intentional deception and misinformation. i am sure such false info exists, but i’d suspect it gets called out by the scientific community rather quickly. ultimately, it’s up to each of us to determine the credibility of any source for ourselves.
for example, even many peal oil folks confuse peak oil with the end of oil. peak oil has to do with the ability to extract. it doesn’t mean it’s actually running out. it just means we’re unable to pump it out at the capacity we’ve been able to. something like that. even my understanding is extremely limited. do some reading.
By 2025, we’re going to be back in the Stone Age.
It’s this sort of doomsaying that causes these people to lose credibility. As best I’ve been able to gather (and I have been looking into this a lot recently), there is a serious lack of concensus on when the oil peak will occur, so anyone who claims to know is suspect. And, assuming the peak dooms us to fall back to the stone age requires an incredible simplification of human society, behavior, adaptability and ingenuity over the course of recorded history.
Not that making people aware of this issue and encouraging conservation and active, urgent research into alternatives is a bad thing.
Ruppert has not been saying “We have precious little time” for the past 10 years.
He started FTW 8 years ago and the focus was entirely government corruption and CIA drug running operations. After 9/11 Mike found out about Peak Oil. Since the end of 2001 we have been writing about Peak Oil at FTW.
After Ruppert attended the 2nd ASPO Conference his rhetoric on Peak Oil increased dramatically – read that report here
That was just over 2 years ago – Ruppert has been crying wolf for that long. And just like in the story of the boy who cried wolf, eventually, the wolf came and ate all the sheep and the people who were not prepared.
And just like in the story of the boy who cried wolf, eventually, the wolf came and ate all the sheep and the people who were not prepared.
Sorry, but that’s a bad reading of the story. It wasn’t a matter of preparation for the wolf. It was that the boy had been crying wolf when there was no wolf. So when the wolf came, nobody believed the boy.
there is a serious lack of concensus on when the oil peak will occur, so anyone who claims to know is suspect
The lack of consensus on when peak will occur is due to different models being used for depletion analysis, what counts as “oil,” and the fact that peak will only be evident in hindsight. Deffeyes’ claim is that peak has already happened, which is quite possible and not the same as claiming to know when peak will happen, so I think using “suspect” is a poor word choice. Deffeyes’ analysis may be off, but his method is credible.
at least the oil-isn’t-biogenic-in-origin debate hasn’t surfaced here! I have had really motivated but sadly uniformed activists try to tell me that peak oil of false because oil doesn’t come from fossils or from biological (biogenic) sources at all! Their proof: oil has been found thousand of feet down! As if that somehow disproves the biogenic origins; what that claim really disproves is the claimant’s knowledge of geology., and the geologic record. Peak oil is perfectly valid concept; but as Shifty said, the timeframe is quite uncertain. Read Deffeyes book Beyond Oil for more insight…it is quite interesting.
All-oil-is-abiogenic people are funny.
assuming the peak dooms us to fall back to the stone age requires an incredible simplification of human society, behavior, adaptability and ingenuity over the course of recorded history.
I wouldn’t say simplification, so much as wishful thinking from primitivists who relish the thought of civilization collapsing.
I agree Shogo, and my choice of words was poor anyway. I should have said “requires ignoring human society, behavior etc…”
Energy conservation is by far the most important. Initiatives that are already engineered and ready to go are biodiesel from palm oil, coal gasification (for both gaseous and liquid fuels), high-efficiency diesel automobiles, and revamping our food supply.
Right….....
The problem with these models (and everybody out there supporting them) is that they dont count the fact that due to such high costs most of the world economy would be destroyed, and thus demand will crash, thus “increasing” the reserves and delaying the so called peak oil.
“Peak Oil Happened on 12/16/2005“
Oh Goody !!!
Hemp for Victory !!!
To me, one of the most interesting questions has been whether oil consumption will be forced to drop due to lack of supply, in time to prevent the worst forecasts of environmental disaster forecasted by scientists studying global warming.
What sucks is, of course, that we are most likely either quickly approaching, at, or just past peak oil, and already reports are cropping up in the UK press indicating that climate change has already reached the point of no return.
Anyone with brilliant solutions to offer, please chime in.
a recent article related to Deffeyes’ prediction:
OPEC Output Down 120,000 bpd in January
Overall crude production by oil cartel OPEC fell again in January, dropping by 120,000 barrels per day to 29.68 million barrels per day (mil b/d) from December’s 29.8-mil b/d, a Platts survey of OPEC and oil industry officials showed February 13.
That figure includes Iraqi production at 1.53-mil b/d. Excluding Iraq, which does not participate in OPEC output accords, the ten members with crude
production quotas pumped an average 28.15-mil b/d in January, 100,000 b/d down from December’s 28.25-mil b/d and just 150,000 b/d above their 28-mil b/d ceiling.
“The latest estimates show OPEC volumes at their lowest level in almost a year and mark the second consecutive month that OPEC production has been below 30-mil b/d.”
. . .
“There were no increases to offset the production losses seen in six countries.”
MORE
shogo – I wouldn’t say simplification, so much as wishful thinking from primitivists who relish the thought of civilization collapsing
I would say it is a simplification to categorize all such people discussing potential/likely collapse as primitivists.
I think people need to be much more careful about how they interpret The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Good call Rocketpenis.
where have you been corpy?