Some data from ORNL

#1
utgibbs

utgibbs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
7,394
Likes
0
#1
I was looking at some data from ORNL. The left column is millions of barrels of oil produced per day worldwide. I find it fascinating. We were able to turn up the tap almost 10% from 2000 - during the Clinton / Bush recession - to 2005, but haven't turned up the tap since.

Peak oilers have been warning about a transitional plateau on production capacity. Are we seeing this in the data?

2000 74.96
2001 74.86
2002 74.03
2003 76.57
2004 79.86
2005 81.35
2006 81.21
2007 80.91
2008 81.57
2009 80.25
 
#2
#2
You have to be able to drill the new fields. While I am not a big gov't guy by any stretch, energy is a strategic resource with direct ties to national security. I believe gov't has a role in planning and production.

We really do need to drill our own while we very aggressively build nuclear plants. While those are being built, we can use proceeds from oil tax revenue to fund/finance the nuke plants AND provide research funds for other alternative sources.

There is NO excuse for the fact that the left has prevented us from being a net energy exporter instead of being dependent on our enemies.
 
#3
#3
utgibbs said:
I was looking at some data from ORNL. The left column is millions of barrels of oil produced per day worldwide. I find it fascinating. We were able to turn up the tap almost 10% from 2000 - during the Clinton / Bush recession - to 2005, but haven't turned up the tap since.

Peak oilers have been warning about a transitional plateau on production capacity. Are we seeing this in the data?

2000 74.96
2001 74.86
2002 74.03
2003 76.57
2004 79.86
2005 81.35
2006 81.21
2007 80.91
2008 81.57
2009 80.25
Click to expand...

you are seeing a cartel manipulate pricing to suit its most powerful members' needs as they evolve.
 
#4
#4
sjt18 said:
You have to be able to drill the new fields. While I am not a big gov't guy by any stretch, energy is a strategic resource with direct ties to national security. I believe gov't has a role in planning and production.

We really do need to drill our own while we very aggressively build nuclear plants. While those are being built, we can use proceeds from oil tax revenue to fund/finance the nuke plants AND provide research funds for other alternative sources.

There is NO excuse for the fact that the left has prevented us from being a net energy exporter instead of being dependent on our enemies.
Click to expand...

US peaked in oil production in 1973 I believe. ANWR represents 10-days of oil under a neoliberal regime.

I will say this (much to your surprise?) - nuclear is THE green energy. There have been good reasons to bottle up the nuclear genie, but we are going to burn the planet to a crisp without nuclear. There is absolutely no question about that. We either get with nuclear or we 1. doom the planet, 2. return to the Pleistocene. I have yet to see a projection realistically suggesting clean coal is as cost effective as nuclear either.

That doesn't mean we increasing BTUs and teraWatts per annum. It has to be coupled with a program of supreme efficiency with essential attention paid to the biodiversity of the planet.

Drill, baby, drill is a scam, as the Gulf of Mexico should attest. We need something else(we need a lot else!), and when you get right down to it, Nuclear is green. We'll be MUCH better off with nuclear plants as opposed to coal-fired (which is all that will be left in our lifetimes).
 
#5
#5
BigPapaVol said:
you are seeing a cartel manipulate pricing to suit its most powerful members' needs as they evolve.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you can see that in the data at all.

Certainly the cartel you mention does hold all the cards, namely 67% or so of the remaining reserves.

However, I'm not so certain the said cartel can turn up the spigot up to 11. I can't wait for the next five years of data. What's the over / under whether the world ever produces 100M barrels / day? 85M barrels?
 
#6
#6
utgibbs said:
I'm not sure you can see that in the data at all.

Certainly the cartel you mention does hold all the cards, namely 67% or so of the remaining reserves.

However, I'm not so certain the said cartel can turn up the spigot up to 11. I can't wait for the next five years of data. What's the over / under whether the world ever produces 100M barrels / day? 85M barrels?
Click to expand...

Really, production actually decreased and you're saying it has something to do with the threshold rather than supply vs. demand?

You just don't like that supply and demand dictate economics and do so at every level.
 
#7
#7
utgibbs said:
US peaked in oil production in 1973 I believe. ANWR represents 10-days of oil under a neoliberal regime.
Click to expand...
There is more oil up there that can be had without significant effect on the environment. We have oil in the Rockies. There are rich shallow water pools off the coasts of Ca and the Gulf States. Oil reserves are still being found but cannot be the long term answer. But the short term plan doesn't work unless we drill and use our own oil resources. We need that revenue to fund the other stuff.

I will say this (much to your surprise?) - nuclear is THE green energy. There have been good reasons to bottle up the nuclear genie, but we are going to burn the planet to a crisp without nuclear. There is absolutely no question about that. We either get with nuclear or we 1. doom the planet, 2. return to the Pleistocene. I have yet to see a projection realistically suggesting clean coal is as cost effective as nuclear either.
Click to expand...
I am not all that surprised. Only the emotional left really demagogues nuclear these days... unfortunately they have ALOT of access and clout in the media, academia, and politics.

That doesn't mean we increasing BTUs and teraWatts per annum. It has to be coupled with a program of supreme efficiency with essential attention paid to the biodiversity of the planet.
Click to expand...
Another case where the genius of the founders would be superior to the activist gov't model. Educate the public. Impose use taxes and tariffs.

Drill, baby, drill is a scam, as the Gulf of Mexico should attest.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. The Gulf says nothing about "drill baby, drill". Drill baby, drill is an economic and national security argument... and a correct one.

I trust US to get it out of the ground safely much more than the places that are currently drilling. We MUST use that oil to tide us over and fund the transition.
We need something else(we need a lot else!), and when you get right down to it, Nuclear is green. We'll be MUCH better off with nuclear plants as opposed to coal-fired (which is all that will be left in our lifetimes).
Click to expand...

I don't disagree though nuclear fuel is a resource that will also run out eventually.
 
#8
#8
BigPapaVol said:
Really, production actually decreased and you're saying it has something to do with the threshold rather than supply vs. demand?

You just don't like that supply and demand dictate economics and do so at every level.
Click to expand...

He still buys the idea that engineered/directed economies can work and work efficiently... when every ounce of evidence demonstrates they can't.

On the world market where it is still very much a "free market" like the US enjoyed for the first 150 years or so there are very few binding laws. Commodities in particular respond to supply and demand. That system has clearly demonstrated superiority to every centrally controlled scheme that has ever been tried. It has some pain and problems... but is still the best available option.

There is a lesson to be learned from this about the policies that are best for our domestic economy. Free markets... are superior to gov't interference.
 
#9
#9
BigPapaVol said:
Really, production actually decreased and you're saying it has something to do with the threshold rather than supply vs. demand?

You just don't like that supply and demand dictate economics and do so at every level.
Click to expand...

Data looks exactly the opposite to me - plenty of growth potential, even during the Clinton / Bush recessionary years (up to 10%) and, suddenly, five years of stagnation ostensibly through a "recovery" period.

In addition, we've seen a huge spike in pump price ca 2005, if I remember correctly. One that has never returned to the early noughties price level.

I do believe prices convey an incredible amount of information (although I would probably differ with you on many supply and demand issues). The data seems to suggest there truly is no spare capacity in the system.

The next five years of data will prove VERY instructive.
 
#10
#10
sjt18 said:
He still buys the idea that engineered/directed economies can work and work efficiently... when every ounce of evidence demonstrates they can't.

On the world market where it is still very much a "free market" like the US enjoyed for the first 150 years or so there are very few binding laws. Commodities in particular respond to supply and demand. That system has clearly demonstrated superiority to every centrally controlled scheme that has ever been tried. It has some pain and problems... but is still the best available option.

There is a lesson to be learned from this about the policies that are best for our domestic economy. Free markets... are superior to gov't interference.
Click to expand...

I simply believe the needs of people supercede the needs of Capital.

Perhaps I should have reproduced more data, but the years 2000 - 2005 were representative of the last 40 years overall - steady growth of demand (and the consumption data will bear this out as well), steady growth of supply, until now.

Again, the next five years will prove very interesting.
 
#14
#14
utgibbs said:
I simply believe the needs of people supercede the needs of Capital.

Perhaps I should have reproduced more data, but the years 2000 - 2005 were representative of the last 40 years overall - steady growth of demand (and the consumption data will bear this out as well), steady growth of supply, until now.

Again, the next five years will prove very interesting.
Click to expand...

how is 3 years of decline and 3 years of growth "steady"?
 
#15
#15
utgibbs said:
I simply believe the needs of people supercede the needs of Capital.
Click to expand...
People need to be free... and need the gov't to leave their capital alone.

Perhaps I should have reproduced more data, but the years 2000 - 2005 were representative of the last 40 years overall - steady growth of demand (and the consumption data will bear this out as well), steady growth of supply, until now.

Again, the next five years will prove very interesting.
Click to expand...

IOW's, Bush's supply side solution for economic recovery worked... if he had only coupled it with spending cuts, right? Recessions and even depressions are natural cycles in economics... this one has been prolonged because Bush went along with Dems on the first stimulus and Obama doubled down on the same poisonous Keynesian, big gov't deficit spending.

Don't forget the ultimate cause for the severity of this recession... the housing bubble... which was the direct product of people who likewise thought that the wants (and votes) of people were more important than the laws of economics.
 
#16
#16
droski said:
your flaw is the assumption that the two are at odds.
Click to expand...

The health service seems to say otherwise.

So do the malaria victims.

And the water-stressed.

Oh yeah, and the current greatest market failure in history presently ongoing.

So do the suicides.

And those who need medications just to feel "happy."

Shall I go on?
 
#17
#17
utvolpj said:
how is 3 years of decline and 3 years of growth "steady"?
Click to expand...

I'll publish the full data set. I see the years you mean. The Early 1980s blip will correspond with the Volcker Shock across the world, and the Iran-Iraq war.

I'm just asking the question - is there spare capacity out there? Or, what's the over under on 85M barrel a day? 90M? 100M? Will we ever need that (China just bought more cars than the US for the first time ever)?

I agree completely we need a few more years' data.

1973 58.47
1974 58.51
1975 55.62
1976 60.21
1977 62.69
1978 63.24
1979 65.96
1980 63.03
1981 59.68
1982 57.09
1983 56.90
1984 58.38
1985 57.91
1986 60.36
1987 60.92
1988 63.18
1989 64.30
1990 65.13
1991 65.01
1992 64.96
1993 65.23
1994 66.57
1995 68.04
1996 69.53
1997 71.66
1998 73.03
1999 72.17
2000 74.96
2001 74.86
2002 74.03
2003 76.57
2004 79.86
2005 81.35
2006 81.21
2007 80.91
2008 81.57
2009 80.25
 
#18
#18
#22
#22
utgibbs said:
Oh yeah, and the current greatest market failure in history presently ongoing.
Click to expand...

Caused by gov't action... not inaction. It was the effort to engineer a socio-economic result and in the process suppressing and corrupting economic behaviors that caused this "market failure".
 
#23
#23
Is that what he meant by market failure? I thought that he may have been referring to the market failing to capture AGW externalities.
 
#24
#24
TennTradition said:
Is that what he meant by market failure? I thought that he may have been referring to the market failing to capture AGW externalities.
Click to expand...
Meant the black market sale of huge gorillas with neoliberal agendas.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top