2005: damn..we're screwed 2010: DAMN...we're really screwed 2018: LONG LIVE THE SHALE REVOLUTION!! 2020: DAMN!!....we're screwed

@antonywagner8079

5 жыл бұрын

the numbers are wrong. try we are in 2100. and that is around 30 years away. even then you then add on another 50 years about we even note it.

@easonjohn2618

4 жыл бұрын

Your Prediction is of so much value! Amazing! Respects! lmao

@meanscene914

2 жыл бұрын

2022...

Very Educational.....Thanks.

The answer of course is that we, as in our currently planned society, is dependant on the continued consumption of oil, specifically, the byproducts produced besides that of fuels for our transportation. Replace energy/fuels needed by our society due to oil and you are still left with the problem of replacing our plastics, petrochemicals, etc. That means no more cheap production materials. No more of these chemicals we use to increase our food production to feed our fast increasing population.

25:00 looking back now, that last prediction was correct, oil production actually hit over 9 million a day in the US in 2015

Always been my dream to go to Stanford

insightful. gives us all much 2 think on. thank u.

It's going to stop whether we change the system or not. The lack of production growth will force the system to adapt to either a much slower rate of growth or a steady state economy and that is assuming that we can keep the flow rate we have now for a long time, which is probably not feasible without very high prices to bring the worst oil to market.

You are welcome. I work in an industry whereas I must research all the time. I was interested in the definition as well. I think that I found some good data and the references were clear on defining uranium as a fossil fuel. It is sad that most people go with what they think they know instead of learning. I did not know uranium was defined as a fossil fuel.

It would be nice to get a 10 year update, but I have been following the peak oil story since 1998. From 1998 through about 2005, mainstream journalists and politicians totally ignored it. Then prices rose by a large amount from 2006 to 2008, and the mainstream began to grudgingly pay some attention to it, although mainly the business-oriented media, while the mainstream politicians that the non-financial media takes its cues from continued to pretend it was a just a price story rather than a geological phenomenon. Then fracking came on the scene, the mainstream quickly declared, "Saudi American! Peak oil is dead!" and then resumed acting as though peak oil was a fantasy rather than a geological and mathematical inevitability. In very recent years, some sources have begun to float the "peak oil demand" meme, and the MSM which ignored the peak oil story as much as possible readily picked up on the peak demand idea and it continues to crop up repeatedly, at least in the business-oriented media. I suspect this tendency will continue until the conventional oil peak of 2006 is followed by the hydraulic fracking peak. Then the price panic of 2008 will recur all over again and the MSM will start to take the peak oil dilemma half way seriously again, although I suspect the politicians will, once again, try to ignore it for as long as possible, or longer. Politicians are happy to scare us over non-events which they claim to have solutions to, such as global warming (which even "true believing" scientists on the green grant gravy train unanimously agree has been "paused" for the last 20 years, and which other scientists say was just part of a natural cycle), but a true problem such as peak oil is consistently evaded in public discussion, perhaps, I suspect, because they have no idea what to do about it.

@robbenvanpersie1562

2 жыл бұрын

Exactly. Infact no one can tell when peak oil will come or we have already passed it

So much for predictions.

Good stuff

Very good presentation, but it is several years old. It would be nice to see this updated. For instance current world oil production is up to 92.3 mb/d up from 85 mb/d then.

I'm only at 28:30 in the video and he has mentioned that we have burned through 1 trillion barrels of oil as of 2008. Using publicly available data, I discovered that from 1990 to 2011, we used 660B barrels. SO to take this back to 2008, you would subtract 93B barrels, so that by 2008, we had used 567B from 1990 to 2008. In other words, we have been using oil for 150 years burning a total of 1T barrels, and 567B of that in the last 18 years. How much longer can this exponential growth go on?

@robbenvanpersie1562

2 жыл бұрын

Don't worry renewables will lower this demand. But even renewables need oil that's the problem

I don't know why he put down Matt Simmons. Simmons never said Saudi Aramco damaged their fields, he said that during the period between the Saudi Gov announced that it was nationalizing their oil fields and the time that they actually did so, the companies running the fields were recklessly over producing the fields because they knew they didn't need to worry about the long term health of the field and wanted to milk as much as much as they could before they got kicked out.

Is EOR truly improving the ultimately recoverable oil or is it a super straw that speeds up the rate at which a field can be produced without significantly increasing the total amount the field will produce? Just because you are able to raise your production rate doesn't mean you will get more oil out of the well, it can just mean that a resource that would have taken 100 years to deplete is depleted in 20 years. How much more of the oil in place can a EOR method achieve?

Concerning his comments on EIA predictions about past and future US dom. oil production, it has turned out in the last few years that the EIA were right again. There has been a significant steady spike of production over the last 5 years.

@RolandsSmoked

10 жыл бұрын

hahahaha, and for how long ? :D and how much does increase :D? Up to 1960's level? :D Dont think so.

@juliehazelett9944

7 жыл бұрын

Actually, U.S. crude oil production has increased to the 1960 levels! It's interesting to look back at predictions at check there accuracy.

@rolandsj8880

7 жыл бұрын

crude oil production? Or extraction on US soil? Can you provide data you base your claim on, thanks in advance.

Enjoyable

Why couldn't we drain lake Mead and then remove all the silt? The silt has incredible value as replacement soil for places where soil depletion has occurred. The Hoover Dam hasn't even fully cured yet, it has centuries of stability left.

This was recorded in 08 it's the later of 2012 now and after hearing this shit i dropped uni and gonna start natural gardening learning how to raise hens and speak chinese. fuck schools aren't teaching this shit.

We have these huge energy companies that forecast and prospect sources of energy. I would think they're already getting ready to expand into a new form of energy regardless of the government. Gas to Natural Gas etc.. Also there should be a government agency that researches the amount of energy available in case the SHTF scenario occurs. Also, auto manufacturers would naturally move to alternative fuel vehicles once they were privy to fact gas is running out. Just so they can keep making money.

These past periods didn't involve doubling or quadrupling in 3 centuries. These changes happened over millions of years. However, we have a good period to look at. Right at the P-T boundary there was the biggest extinction event in earth's history. The Siberian traps opened up and released enough CO2 to raise the global temp by 5C, that in turn caused a release of methane hydrates which raised the temp 18C and caused over 90% of life forms to go extinct.

That's what it's referred to as in the industry.

@CrazyHorseInvincible Its possible. Renewable sources,geothermal and hydro power,provide effectively all of Iceland's electricity and around 80% of the nation's total energy, with most of the remainder from imported oil used in transportation and in the fishing fleet. Iceland is in talks to either put quick charge(for electric cars) or hydrogen stations (for full cell cars).

I love the irony; A shortage of young people entering petroleum geology fields, yet they are the first to leave after the lecture is over.

Lake Mead is like champagne glass, it narrows as it drops. In 2010 (I think that's the year) Lake Mead hit an all time low and dropped hundred of feet and was at 35% capacity. But say too much silt built up behind the dam, why not just drain it and remove the silt? You don't have to drain it in one day. Remember, I am talking after it can no longer function because of silt build up.

@teleporttours1 We have there are still a lot of area around the such as iceland for example is estimated to have 30 TW of extra hydropower that could be produced every year, whilst taking into account the sources that must remain untapped for environmental reasons. The average American home uses~2KWh =2*10^3 if they could use all 30TW a year that would be 2.884 GW a hour =2.884*10^9 which could power 1.442*10^6=1,442,000 homes in the USA and that just Iceland there still more hydro power.

Combined synthetic fuel production from coal, natural gas, and biomass is equivalent of 240,000 bbls per day. If oil production drops by 1%, that's about 800000 fewer bbls per day produced. Global production of synth fuel would have to more than triple to offset that 1% loss, assuming zero population growth.

@Theimmortalwhitewolf Iceland is unique in its ability to harness geothermal power. Their aluminum smelting facilities make extensive use of hydroelectric power, so they will be able to produce durable alloys for some time after peak oil. Investing in cars of any kind would be a bad investment on their part. It may be possible for them to fish with sailing ships, but it would be much harder to detach from car based transportation. Is the rest of the world in such a good position?

Its 6 years old and still the standard source of oil supply.

@pharmeden

9 жыл бұрын

aon10003 and I'll still be making the black gold until our generation dies

Oil as a feedstock to chemistry, plastics etc are all uses of oil that don't release the carbon back into the atmosphere. As you mentioned, oil, gas and coal are millions of years of concentrated sunlight stored in the form of hydrocarbons. Releasing all that in 3 centuries time is going to have catastrophic effects on the environment. When people say life beyond oil, they usually mean it as an energy source, not a chemical feedstock.

There's a difference between relevance and intelligence.

One thing he hasn't brought up is the nature of the King of kings, ghawar. It isn't one gigantic oil field with the same grade of oil throughout. Most of Ghawar is heavy crude, what they have been producing is the light sweet crude of the sweet spot in the field. They also are producing A LOT of water, in fact they produce more brine than oil.

@CrazyHorseInvincible For most European countries their life style can be maintained through the use of renewable energy. As for the traffic problem that has to do with they’re not being the funding needed to update and upgrade the current highway system to handle the new load on it. Also if public transportation could be improved to the level of many foreign cities then we wouldn't have a problem with transportation. I agree changes will have to be made, but most things will stay the same.

The graph at 53:40.

So the question is, how do we replace all of these needs that arise with the loss of oil production, wether it be gradual due to time or rapid due to human interference? Answer: We can not right now replace these things. But that does not mean we can not come to a solution that fixes the problem. If the problem can not be solved with our given tools and reources than it is us, as a global society, that must change to work within our new restrictions. Start using less and start learning more.

14 billion x $100 1.4 trillion in ND,and those recoverable amounts will only rise....America is the future of energy,growth,and innovation..

Dr Horne predicted, firmly, boldly, the world would never get above 90 million bpd. In 2016 the average was 92 million. OK, he wasn't off by much, but this was a firm, confident prediction. In the '30s, Danes like Niels Bohr had a saying: Prediction is difficult, especially about the future. He should take it seriously.

All small and big oil companies know that oil is being formed inside earth in a continuous manner.The only problem is that it takes millions of years. We started using oil only150 years ago..the oil which was being formed since millions of year..and look what we have done....our consumption rate is far far high compared to the rate at which earth is making oil. So..we will eventually run out of oil!

@antonywagner8079

6 жыл бұрын

I guess some time just after 2050

That "new" form of energy is old fashioned nuclear fission, but that's for keeping the lights on, NOT for producing plastics, petrochemicals (such as medicine), and keeping alive the auto industry. There is such a government agency. Google the Hirsch Report. It comes from the Department of Energy. The auto makers would do no such thing. They would ask for more bailouts. It's much cheaper than looking for alternatives, and much more certain.

The most sobering reality for trying to solve the problems caused by shortages in our current energy (oil, natural gas, coal, etc) is the fact that they are a finite resource. No matter how well we extract, it will run out. Just because that day is not now or in our immediate future, should we continue blindly until it is too late? Why not employ our current society into using every renewable "green" energy source we have to lessen the stress put on the finite fossil resources? .......(cont)

@robbenvanpersie1562

2 жыл бұрын

Profits . We will atleast need 25 years to be fully electric or maybe 70%

oil can't be replaced so easily as people think, most of us think at personal cars but only 2 bil people out of 7 are car users, the rest want food wich is oil clothes shoes, electronics all the stuff is made of oil, at the pace the population grows and developing countries develop even if we start now switching to electric cars if oil production goes down we are kind of fucked in this economic system we have.

@ramyth1946

3 жыл бұрын

there is a paradigm shift now in 2020 in view of the global fusion of hydrogen economy. Fossil fuel lost its charm and relegated to the background in view of the Paris agreement and GHG affecting adversely global environment and climate change. The dance and show of the middle east days are over. The show of renewables and hydrogen economy has begun with pomp splendour and pompous. Read the articles and reports by viewing the linkdocs.google.com/document/d/1g_cOKyJxk2C4fRx_gddnT-_o7jelDzUZ_EzC01IzjA4/edit?usp=sharing

but why let politicians and big government dictate the future of energy when the free market can naturally do it cheaper by whatever means necessary. What if we spend 5x's 10x's the cost per watt generating green power instead of using natural gas etc.? We may discover fission or geothermal power in the next 50 years, why should we spend an excess amount of money hampering the US economy on green power in the meantime?

I agree. Demographers say we will be at 9 billion by 2050, I think we will be below 7 by 2050 and back below 1 billion by 2100 unless there is a series breakthrough in other energy sources, such as fusion. But even fusion will probably not save the day even if they can get it to work, because of the capital investment. It must be a simple, cheap design. LFTR Fission with Thorium might be a game changer and we could use it to desalinate water and make liquid ammonia for liquid energy.

the economic system we have demands growth so it will never stop until we change the system, think about it like this we already bet on the future we took the loans, we have to pay it back with intrest, the only way we can pay the intrest is by taking larger loans, to do that people will have to trust that the future will be brighter, if at any point the majority of people realize that the future will not be brighter the system will collapse and the mad max or smart people make another system.

Why haven't we discussed much about the demand side? How is the improvement in technologies and increasing efficiency going to affect the future of oil? Will it extend the number of years in "oil age"?

@scottab140

9 жыл бұрын

Siddharth Shah Demand is zero and irrelevant when global economy changes their energy supply.

@rdyjur

6 жыл бұрын

LOL demand has grown by millions of bbl's PER DAY since you made your uninformed comment ! It's set to surpass 100 mmbbl / DAY in 2018. Your comment is pretty irrelevant tbh.

What happened on Mars, Ceres, iapetus, and Europa.

Fossil fuels or gas fuels are fuels formed by natural resources such as anaerobic decomposition of buried dead organisms. The age of the organisms and their resulting fossil fuels is typically millions of years, and sometimes exceeds 650 million years. These fuels contain a high percentage of carbon and hydrocarbons.

Any dam can be drained (if designed to do so). It will just take a long time to do so.

@CrazyHorseInvincible What im getting out every country has some form of renewable energy for the use it will mainly come form wind, solar, and hydro. As for the cars Iceland already makes enough energy that it could make all they hydrogen it needs to power its fleet of vehicles. Iceland still has some 50 TW wort of more renewable energy it could make a year from geo and hydro power. With a push from the government most 1st world countries could meet energy needs through renewables.

Uranium is fossil fuel? Hydroelectric is fossil fuel? I don't get that....

I would not dare to call uranium a fossil fuel, fossil is a world related to organic matter. Maybe he is taking the word "fossil" too literally, because it means obtained by digging

@RolandsSmoked

10 жыл бұрын

Fossils (from Classical Latin fossilis, literally "obtained by digging") are the preserved remains or traces from the remote past. Who cares what you would dare or not, your picture shows your low iq anyway.

@SuperMrBentley

10 жыл бұрын

You care, you just replied to me and you dont even have a picture.

@allgoo1930

6 жыл бұрын

SuperMrBentley says: "I would not dare to call uranium a fossil fuel,.." == Non-renewable.

Don't worry. They've been saying it was going to run out since I was born.(1970) They are right. it will run out. But I still think that people living today won't see the worst of it. Just the beginning of the end. it's the time frame from 50-100 years from now that will be scary.

@michaels4255

5 жыл бұрын

When the last barrel of conventional oil is pumped from the ground is not when the problem begins, but when the worst is over, since we have made an adjustment by then (and a population crash might be part of that adjustment). The worst part of the crisis begins when production begins to fall for geological reasons (rather than fluctuations in supply and demand). Since new fracking sites do not appear to be coming on line, that crisis is probably not far away. And peak oil is just the tip of the iceberg. The "business as usual" scenario that was modeled in the 1972 book _Limits to Growth_, far from having been wrong, has been developing as forecast. Although they did not forecast precise dates (that would be impossible so far in advance), their graph showed things turning down just after the first half of the century lasting from 1970 to 2070. Right now, that timing looks to be approximately right. I expect the next crisis to begin sometime between 2025 and 2035, and it will include peak world oil production (this time from all sources combined, not just the conventional peak of 2006), peak world uranium production, peak world coal production, and peak North American natural gas production. I hope I am wrong and we find ways to buy some more time and kick the can down the road for as long as possible, but I am not optimistic.

Super-Interesting The Oil Monopoly for Consumer Energy should be extinguished as soon as possible, nothing creates JOBS like technology.

right man it doesn't matter what is in the ground, people don't understand, our economic system needs to grow constantly so after a decade at most after the oil production reaches it's peak the system collapses, yeah we could bring another system maybe i don;t know i'm not that smart but this system will definetly collapse if oil production doesn;t grow, we already bet on the future we took the loans we consumed it, to pay the loans plus intrest we must get more stuff always.

@CrazyHorseInvincible As for boats Iceland is researching ways they could place hydrogen cells like in fuel cell cars into the boats.

They don't get it. Even IF oil was "abiotic" - the process is sooooo slow (taking hundreds of thousands if not millions of years) their theory doesn't answer the consumption problem here on the surface where we're all burning it. Just the USA alone swallowing 18 million (MILLION) barrels per DAY - you'd have to have quite a factory of abiotic activity putting it back! So why, before discovery of oil, weren't the oceans & land black in lakes of crude from the last billion years of abiotic?

pre US shale revolution video, so cute

@foodforthought204

8 жыл бұрын

+africa93 The shale oil in the US is ~300 billion barrels of expensive oil. And, the issue isn't just cost, it's how many barrels of oil need to be burned to produce a barrel of shale. Ignoring that, let's look at how long it will last. The world is expected to burn 35 billion barrels of oil in 2016. ASSUMING 0% INCREASE IN OIL CONSUMPTION it will last 10 years. But, a 0% growth is not expected, so it will last less. At 2% increase of consumption per year, it will last 8 years. That's not too bad. This will help us finish the bell curve model that assumes that more oil will be discovered. We are restricted to the area under (integral) of the curve, regardless of a specific year's production, which can be heavily manipulated. There is another factor as well. GDP is highly correlated to oil consumption. So, a small increase in oil consumption means a small increase in GDP. Since the global economic system requires growth, this is bad. That is the idea of "peak" oil. Eventually the trend of oil production will decrease. You can do many things to try to delay it and such, but that time will come. The world will not abruptly run out of oil. But, it will transition from a trend of growth to a trend of decline. Due to the structure of our economy, a trend of decline will have serious consequences. It won't be doom and gloom or the end of the world, but it will be difficult.

@rdyjur

6 жыл бұрын

You forgot to mention your assumption that US Shale oil would be supplying 100% of global oil demand - pretty god damn ridiculous and I have no idea what your point is.

@Theimmortalwhitewolf We have the tools to survive, but do we have the mentality? Our mental model of what makes for a good standard of living is still corrupted by no-value-added activities and a pathological living arrangement. We're still deluding ourselves that we can maintain the "privilege" of spending an hour in traffic every day to work, and landscapes built around this "privilege."

The truth is this: Free markets don't impute all costs. The long term costs of oil are clear. We overshot population because it appeared to be almost free. Issued debt as thought we could grow 3% per year forever. We're going to see human population shrink when we're no longer able saturated dead topsoil with petroleum based fertilizer. We'll also see currencies and governments fail. This is scary and undermines the critical ingredient that all economies must have...confidence.

I couldn't sleep after hearing and looking at peak oil. It is real and it will buttfuck humanity into submission. Good luck

obviously pre-deep water horizon.

Most of the fertilizer supporting the human population (ammonium nitrate) is produced with natural gas and coal, not petroleum.

But one could argue that these things would still be here because we could still use the oil to get them. This idea is flawed in our current market driven society. What is made available and affordable to the people in this world is due to the ability to turn a profit off of what it is you are providing. So,take the fuel and energy money made by refining oil and you lose the market that supports this industry. Thus, less people will produce and the price of anything associated with it will rise.

It's a great talk but you don't have to look any further than the meaning of the word "fossil" to know it's not a fossil fuel. It's a non renewable, or finite resource.

No we're not because there will be no such transition. All the people spouting off all these alternatives to oil, fail to realize that they take oil in order to happen, and even then, they can never replace oil.

@llothar68 FAIL. More than 95% of all copper ever mined and smelted has been extracted since 1900. The total amount of copper on Earth is vast (around 10^14 tons just in the top kilometer of Earth's crust, or ~5 million years worth at the current rate of extraction). However, only a tiny fraction of these reserves is economically viable, given present-day prices and tech. Estimates of existing copper reserves available for mining vary from 25- 60 years, depending assumptions such as growth rate.

He makes a very good observation which I myself have tried to tell peak oil people. Although he doesn't seem to state it, the US makes a bad model because the US has a totally free market in oil while most of the world has national oil companies. These national oil companies are not locked in the legal requirement to maximize shareholder value. A gov oil producer can produce or not produce oil for reasons of national income, longevity, to swing prices etc. The US is the WORST model for peak oil.

And how do you suppose they get ammonium nitrate from gas and coal? Still takes the consumption of oil. Besides that, you're still talking about a finite resource and still talking about fossil fuel.

I like the fact that the technology has so advanced that the first 20 minute of video becomes irrelevant

I think you miss the point. The point is, we can't use Uranium as a fuel source without expending fossil fuels in the process.

WTF!!! 0:01:28 did he just say that a Uranium is a fossil-fuel? I always though that Uranium (pronounced /jʊˈreɪniəm/ yoo-RAY-nee-əm) a silvery-white metallic chemical element in the actinide series of the periodic table with atomic number 92. It is assigned the chemical symbol U. A uranium atom has 92 protons and 92 electrons, 6 of the latter are valence electrons, but he does have a PhD, so he has to be right.

@llothar68 Wasted what in the world are you talking about? Copper is 100% recyclable without any loss of quality whether in a raw state or contained in a manufactured product. Copper is the third most recycled metal after iron and aluminium. It is estimated that 80% of the copper ever mined is still in use today. Plus i said at today's prices and tech. As the amount mined decreases, the price per ton increases those making more reserves that were once not economical, economical

I just must ask why MOST every earth science Professor at any accredited university would disagree with you and say that Oil is in fact running out, and that the way it is created, which as a "fossil fuel" is made by fossils, makes it limited in our world?

55:30 ... he is WRONG !!!!! HAHAHA

@imran_rasoli

3 жыл бұрын

Hahaha 😂

But how much of the sun's energy makes it to the plants in order to convert carbon dioxide to vegetation? Only half of one billionth of that energy is used. Furthermore, forests are being cut down so there's even less vegetation to absorb carbon dioxide.

@CrazyHorseInvincible Several countries do make a sizable amount of their energy from renewable. Austria currently produces 62.89% of their needed electricity from renewables. Denmark produces ~19-20% of its electricity . New Zealand produces 71% of its electricity. Norway produces ~99.5% of its power from renewables. As of 2009 Spain's renewable energy level was 12.5%. 2007 Germany had 14% ~ 7% of China's energy was from renewable sources in '06, rise to 10% by '10 then to 16% by '20.

stay in school man, the future we face is going to be extremly hard and only educated people will get us out of the shit we dug ourselves, survivors are very rare, yeah you learn to farm you make a nice farm but can you defend it when hoardes of hungy people from the city assaults you? trade and civilized people can only happen if the system keeps working when the system collapses it will be like in mad max, very hard to survive even with skills like farming.

Rose colored glasses. That outlook is based on a lot of speculation. A lot of things have to go right for that to happen. it's not likely at all. Still doesn't solve the problem even if that happened. Not even close.

How did you know I hated freedom of speech, thought, and opinion, by the way? I thought my fascism was a cleverly guarded secret.

could we use solar power to produce solar panels? no and no

I think you and I want the same end result we have different ways of achieving it. I'm coming from the libertarian / anarchist point of view I suppose, I thought the bailouts were a bad idea, ethanol subsidies were even worse, same with the banks. Failing companies need to fail, we cannot subsidize their inefficiency. All the government intervention was very anti-free market and wouldn't fly in a truly free market. If the Obama/McCain parties would just let GM / Banks die, it could work

I am very tired because of studying this field and I think in future there is lack of jobs in this field

@rdyjur

6 жыл бұрын

Oil demand set to exceed 100mmbbl / day in 2018, your job is pretty safe even if you're 18 years old.

Strange video. The presenter seems to trash peak oil and then ends up confirming it.

Still takes oil to even make electric cars. Still wouldn't solve the problem. Still takes oil to operate an electric car and just where do you intend to get the electricity to charge that car? Every solution people try to come up with, requires oil. Just less of it.

The man does a 1 hours presentation called "the future of oil". Does a single prediction, and was completely wrong about it. This is why people don't trust colleges anymore.

@tonyvu1853

2 ай бұрын

eroie declined. so no he's right. globalists trying to do scientific dictatorship with eugenics control is what will happen. don't be stupid

@DVFDrinkOrDie Not all oils are derived from fossil fuels, electricity is typically generated from fossil fuels but not oil(natural gas, coal). the fear isn't that oil will run out, just that it will be not economical as a fuel source. Decreased economic viability will make plastics and rubber more expensive, but will hardly cause a doomsday crisis.

well u cant expect something from a bought and sold institution to tell something that doesn't make nice w the powers that be. Remember the key is cheap oil. If you want to spend 200 dollars a barrel u can find plenty so u want to spend 15 dollars a gallon. Ask the lecturer.

I don't think you can call Uranium and Hydroelectric fossil. And Uranium doesn't burn.

Nope. The U.S. alone uses that amount. The world uses more than 80 million barrels a day.

His prediction: Not going to exceed production 90mbp in 10yrs: WRONG. From his charts it seems we have 3.5TBp of oil. At 100mbp/day usage , will take 90 yrs to run out of oil. So year 2050 will be half point in production.

@tonyvu1853

2 ай бұрын

its EROIE... don't be stupid

So lemme get this straight....a guy from Stanford can't figure out that just because uranium is (a) dug out of the ground and (b) burned, that doesn't necessarily mean it derived from fossils? Let alone the hydroelectric definition stretching it beyond the pale. Glad to know the credibility level early on though - next vid....

I didn't realize I was wasting my time talking to someone who believes in abiotic oil. I need to remember not to waste time talking to children.

totally BS ....

we are going to run out of oil in less than 40 years at our current pace we will drain the world of oil in 52 years but population growth will speed that up

@robertprechter6804

8 жыл бұрын

+Home of the Mad false...there is enough oil on earth to last 1,000 years

@homeofthemad3044

8 жыл бұрын

Robert Prechter proof?

@robertprechter6804

8 жыл бұрын

Home of the Mad geology

@homeofthemad3044

8 жыл бұрын

Robert Prechter what a troll

@robertprechter6804

8 жыл бұрын

Home of the Mad uneducated much?

"most any form of capitalism." So...are you saying there's a good form of capitalism? Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? What are you actually trying to say?

1:00:21 "I don't believe offshore drilling will lead to environmental castrophes" ... well, he couldn't have predicted Deepwater Horizon spill but this sounds much more like a prognostication to look back & (not) laugh than the production forecast.

@ronaldgarrison8478

6 жыл бұрын

BP, and the oil industry, survived their Chernobyl/Fukushima in 2010. But I guarantee you, they won't survive another one. And they know it. We'll see what happens.

@michaels4255

5 жыл бұрын

@@ronaldgarrison8478 , what does the oil industry have to do with nuclear power mishaps? I don't see any connection, and anyway we can't afford to lose the oil industry. It has to keep going for as long as possible because the contemporary world has no adequate substitute.

Oil consumption doubles every 10 years? That's woefully wrong. Oil consumption is 90 million bpd right now, in 1990 it was about 65 million bpd. That's not even a 50% in 22 years, much less double.

I am not a proponent of big government or politicians at all. Nor am I a proponent of delusional "green" power. I know, it's hard to believe, but it is actually possible to see facts and not merely choose a politically constructed reality. The free market, the cheapest and most ideal environment, will NOT deal with this situation by replacing oil with something that doesn't scale. Just accept it, this is going to hurt, and it's going to hurt humanity a hell of a lot even in the best scenario.

well of we start now making electrics at 80 mil a year it will take like 12 years to replace the cars we now use but by then it will be 2 bil cars on earth :)) and what about the other uses of oil for food all plastics other transportation ,if all the world will develop at european standards not crazy american other uses of oil will take all the oil production today ,soo tricky stuff not only electric cars will solve the problem of oil.

Uranium is a fossil fuel. Please read International Atomic Energy Agency, Uranium 2009: Resources, Production and Demand, (OECD Press, 2010). or read C. Gupta and H. Singh, "Uranium resource processing: secondary resources", p.55, Springer (2003). or reference Fossil Fissile Fuels, Nils Johan Engelsen, March 17, 2011, Submitted as coursework for Physics 241, Stanford University, Winter 2011. LEARN; THEN POST::::NEXT......