Another worshiper of Peak with blinders on for shale and methane hydrates.
Glad to see a level-headed view of this bologna on the thread early. Those creating these charts never get the concept of dynamics and it really doesn’t matter whether we’re talking energy or economics. Things just don’t stay the same in any system and especially systems that interact with humans. That’s why they had to invent calculus...beyond just torturing non-math people, that is.
************************************EXCERPT******************************************
David Archibald says:
Larry Fields says:
November 13, 2011 at 6:42 pm
I first got interested in China’s coal reserves when I plotted up their production profile against the view that their reserves were of the order of 120 billion tonnes. Now that their annual production is 3,000 million tonnes per annum, the new power plants they were building were going to run out of coal before they wore out. Could the Chinese be so idiotic? No, the real number is somewhere north of one trillion tonnes. So they have at least three hundred years left at the current rate. Note this document, page two at the top:http://www.battelle.org/ASSETS/5C05BD3561BD4891888EB7090849541D/china_coal_industry.pdf
From the comments:
*************************************************EXCERPT****************************************
Crispin in Waterloo says:
@David A
Thanks for the analysis. I would like to contribute a couple of things. Willem Nel (University of Johannesburg) analysed the available fuels as ‘peak energy’ occurring in 2050, with peak coal in 2070. Obviously some assumptions have to be made about future finds etc.
Willem also arrived at a similar figure of about 530 ppm CO2 max for all known fossil fuels + 100% assumed still to be located. Certainly it will not get to 600 ppm unless it turns out oil is abiotic and produced under the surface of the Earth by heat, pressure and the plentiful H+C down there.
Re the coal available – Mongolia has huge coal deposits (some seams over 100 ft thick) and they have hardly started looking yet. I was surprised to see the figure for the US being so low and the Mongolian deposits not noted (which are I think certainly larger than 250 b/tons). Heaven knows what is under Siberia. It is enormous and right next door. I have heard that many countries have downrated their coal reserves (see what Germany did) for political reasons and that the actual deposits are much larger than stated. They started reporting ‘recoverable’ coal which of course depends on price. It was used as an excuse to say tehre was ‘nearly none’ and raise the price accordingly because after all, the oil guys have been getting away with that (flimsy?) argument for years.
The peak energy analysis also noted there is little Uranium available compared with Thorium. Geothermal looks good and on course there are vast hydro energy sites in Africa (far more than Europe generates total at the moment).
I agree transport will be electric. It is just so efficient in terms of vehicle cost and maintenance. The fertiliser from electricity angle was interesting.
This is actually the fifth time in modern history that we’ve seen widespread fear that the world was running out of oil. The first was in the 1880s, when production was concentrated in Pennsylvania and it was said that no oil would be found west of the Mississippi. Then oil was found in Texas and Oklahoma. Similar fears emerged after the two world wars. And in the 1970s, it was said that the world was going to fall off the “oil mountain.” But since 1978, world oil output has increased by 30%.
Just in the years 2007 to 2009, for every barrel of oil produced in the world, 1.6 barrels of new reserves were added. And other developments—from more efficient cars and advances in batteries, to shale gas and wind power—have provided reasons for greater confidence in our energy resiliency. Yet the fear of peak oil maintains its powerful grip.