Report from ASPO: Dark clouds, no silver linings

| 4 Comments | 1 TrackBack

It is difficult to walk out of the peak oil meeting here in Houston and not feel miserable.

Yes, there are some attendees who might be considered a bit offbeat, ex-hippie types who see their long-held dreams of "the end of oil" nearing reality.

But the majority of the 500+ attendees at the US meeting of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil are not in that category. They are geologists, economists, professors, consultants, economists. And no matter who steps up to the podium to make a presentation, the forecast is grim.

The details differ, but the broad message is consistent. Saudi oil production has peaked, according to some; others see a peak in the future, but a peak nonetheless. Jeffrey Brown, an independent geologist, was particularly bleak on Thursday, showing how exports from the world's biggest exporters, including Saudi Arabia and Russia, are going to run up against a combination of increasing domestic demand at home and declining or flat production, and shipments to other countries are going to fall, if they haven't already.

David Hughes of the Canadian Geological Survey, echoed Matt Simmons, peak oil's best known proselytizer and the day's luncheon speaker, in saying that there will be a coming conflict between the world's desire to cut carbon emissions against sustainability of energy supplies, and that the latter will win out. He called it "the elephant that is going to be sitting on our chest."

The mainstream media is not covering the issue, thundered a few other speakers, and the world's leaders need to wake up the general public to the growing problem. (The Barrel was surprised, in an era of now $90 oil, that media attendance seemed to be minimal.)

And so on. That's the overriding message, but here are a few specific items:

--If there was one sort of optimistic, smiley-face place to be, it was outside the main hall, where a plug-in hybrid was on display. It was organized by Plug-in Partners, which is under the direction of the city of Austin, Texas.

Jamie Mitchell, who stood next to the converted Prius taking questions, is realistic about the car. None are made by any auto manufacturers, and if you spend the money to have your hybrid made into a plug-in, your warranty is yanked. The cost to convert the vehicle on display was more than $14,000.

But there's still something so futuristic about that plug running out of the left rear bumper. The car can go 30 miles before the engine needs to be activated, and when it draws power from the electric grid, it's as if you're buying gasoline at 75 cts/gallon.

Where plug-in hybrids are particularly intriguing is not in what they are doing when moving, but what they might do sitting still. As Mitchell noted, and others have pointed out, if the electric grid has excess input, say, for example, during a windy night when windmills are feeding lots of electricity into transmission lines, that electricity can be going to recharge plug-ins. But say that fully charged car doesn't leave the owner's driveway the next day, and it's 97 degrees F, and there's humidity to match. Electricity demand soars. Mitchell said if the car is plugged into the grid, power can be drawn from the battery back on to the grid to meet peak demand, so it's almost as if the batteries become a way of storing wind or solar power.

--David Pimentel of Cornell has long been academia’s leading critic of ethanol, but he has company. Dr. Kyriacos Zygourakis, a professor of chemical & biomolecular engineering at Rice, delivered his verdict on biofuels. His key points:
1) The only way you can consider ethanol to be a net energy provider is if you count the energy provided by the distillers' grain, which is essentially the corn with all the starches taken out of it. (It becomes animal feedstock). He noted that giving an energy credit to distillers' grain is not widely accepted as proper
2) If that is done, the improvement in energy yield is about 20%.
3) Moving some ethanol plants to coal-burning for cheaper energy costs is a step backward environmentally, and the greenhouse gas improvement created by ethanol is already mostly non-existent.
4) Cellulosic ethanol might have an energy yield exceeding a factor of eight. But he said there is disagreement about whether the burning of some of the crop to provide energy for the process is going to provide the energy that some analysts predict it will.
5) He was largely positive about biodiesel, because it can be produced and consumed on a local level, e.g., a farmer converts part of his soybean output directly into diesel to run his facilities.
6) Both biodiesel and ethanol are going to take up huge amounts of land to have any sort of significant dent in petroleum consumption. Pimentel has made this point previously, and ironically, was quoted Wednesday in a Wall Street Journal editorial. (Subscription only, so no link).

--Several speakers touched on a familiar topic, that even if the world wants to consume more coal, or build more nuclear plants, or put up more windmills, the rate at which that is going to need to occur is staggering. This was an extreme case, but Scott Pugh, a retired Navy captain, said in order to run all vehicles on hydrogen or nuclear fuel, and assuming we use nuclear power to extract the hydrogen, the world would need to build 10 plants per year for 100 years. Similar analogies by the speakers also provided a torrent of what appeared to be utterly unreachable infrastructure needs.

All in all, a terrific conference. But don't attend unless you've taken your Prozac.

1 TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://www.platts.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/886

Re: by 'we' you mean ... ? from tribe.net: www.platts.com on October 22, 2007 2:23 PM

More dark clouds from the Association for the Study of Peak Oil conference.. ... Read More

4 Comments

I spoke Friday morning at ASPO-Houston and I had several messages of hope.

The Best Economic Policy is also the Best Environmental Policy (and vica versa). The highest long term GDP (per Millennium Institute T21 model, downloadable) comes from a combination of a Push for Renewables plus by Electrification of Rail (Urban & Freight). By 2038.

Oil Use -62%
Greenhouse Gases -50%
GDP +50%

One can trade 20 BTUs of diesel or gasoline for 1 BTU of electricity by switching from rubber tires to electrified rail.

And the USA once did build MORE Urban Rail than I proposed. With just 100 million people, just 4% of today's GDP, and without advanced technology, the USA built subways in their largest cities and streetcars in 500 cities, towns and villages, all in 20 years.

It is quite possible to create a society and economy that uses essential no oil (I gave Swiss stats to prove my point) by moving towards electrified rail as a primary means of transportation (walking & bicycles secondary).

Yes a change is required (NO Brainer ! as oil exports decline), but it can be a VERY positive change.

Best Hopes,

Alan Drake

Yes, there are some attendees who might be considered a bit offbeat, ex-hippie types who see their long-held dreams of "the end of oil" nearing reality.

Once a hippie, always a hippie -- it's not something you register for like Democrat or Republican.

There are scads of terrific bike paths in the world, the one task remaining is culling herds of oil-burners that clog up the trails.

It looks like the future's best economic opportunities might rest in purchasing today's finished goods before they become mostly unavailable once the PEAK hits....

Biodiesel apparatus, solar panels, generators, wind turbines, personal defense and ammunition, quality hand tools, hooch, refridgeration, retreat properties, digging your backyard well, vacations to Europe (or anywhere else), optional surgeries and dental procedures, bulk clothing for all seasons, vaccinations; GET THEM WHILE THEY'RE CHEAP AND AVAILABLE before the media is finally forced to report the TRUTH and joe sixpack and the soccer mom's catch-on.

And remember that you'll have to repalce everything at least once in this lifetime... so double-up on everything so that you'll have something worthwhile to leave to you children; If the effects of Peak Oil do not destroy our generation's world...theirs will certainly be a mess.

Re: Peak oil meeting (ASPO conference in Houston) mostly discouraging

I don't understand why you are saying the ASPO conference in Houston was discouraging. The peak oil message is necessary for consumers so that they value this precious resource more and accept conservation measures. That would also be good for the oil & gas industry so that the transition is smooth and not chaotic and panicky, because this is the last thing we need.

Read my latest article on the crude peak in 2005, which I wrote together with an actuary from Atlanta, Georgia
"Did Katrina Hide the Real Peak in World Oil Production? and Other Oil Supply Insights" (main graph attached)
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3052
The PDF version:
http://sydneypeakoil.com/downloads/KatrinaAndPeakOil2005.pdf
The decline rate will be 4% pa, once a handful of countries still growing can no longer do so.

Matt, ASPO Sydney, Australia

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This entry was written by John Kingston and was published on October 18, 2007 7:59 PM ET.

Previous entry: Hold on: some new data on the highest price ever

Next entry: Looking for the all-time crude high

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Twitter Updates

Archives

September 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30