I guess Saudi Arabia doesn't have oil spare capacity they and our government claimed they did...

Saudi Aramco to Ramp up Exploration in Attempt to Meet Rising Demand

Saudi Aramco, the world's largest oil company in terms of proven reserves, has announced plans to drill as many as 48 new exploration wells and a further 300 development wells this year. Interestingly, the news came in the same week that the state-backed Saudi firm reassured the globe that the world's largest oil field, Ghawar, had plenty of life left in it and still has many years of production still ahead of it.

It seems that while Saudi Aramco believes that current output is sufficient to meet demand, the firm expects rising demand in years to come to stretch even its own vast resources. Unsurprisingly, the bulk of this rising energy demand is expected to come from two energy-hungry BRIC nations in particular: China and India.

This projected demand has prompted the Saudi major to shift its strategy towards new exploration projects, as mentioned above. Being state-backed, the Saudi Supreme Council, which is comprised of members of the royal family, industry leaders and government ministers, is responsible for petroleum and natural gas policy-making, including contract review, as well as Saudi Aramco's strategic planning.

...snip...

Furthermore, 50% of Aramco's drilling programme this year will be targeted towards natural gas. The important news though is that the firm's exploration activity, which accounted for just 5% of all drilling as recently as 2008, is set to rise to 14% of drilling this year.

...snip...

http://www.oilvoice.com/n/Saudi_Aramco_to_Ramp_up_Exploration_in_Attempt_to_Meet_Rising_Demand/1d97a7a1c.aspx

Sure Ghawar has lots of oil left. If it's just peaking or has already peaked, then it still has half of its recoverable oil. And it does have many years of production still ahead of it. But that will be declining production. They will need more and more energy to recover what's left as they have already been injecting it with sea water to bring the oil up. And it will go exponentially faster and faster than it did on the way up.

And, last I heard (and I follow oil news EVERY DAY) Saudi Arabia was holding 4 million barrels a day (mbd) in spare capacity. That's the number that's been holding for about 18 months. Now, looks like they are going to spend money to find...well...more capacity. And at a time that demand is down globally and is down some 3.5% in the U.S., according to today's news. If they were to allow an independent evaluation of how much oil they really have, I wonder what it would find since most of OPEC, including Saudi Arabia, has overstated their reserves several times over the years? And Saudi Arabia's own estimates of it's future capacity used to be 20mbd; then it was 15mbd; in 2008 it was 12mbd. And now they have said they were holding back 4mbd to maintain a price of $75/barrel and due to slack demand during the global recession. Yet, now they feel they must explore for more oil. Funny that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8142135">Mexico is our second largest supplier behind Canada. It's oil production is crashing and Mexico will become a net importer inside 5 years. And we'll lose our second largest supplier. So, not only will we have to find a replacement for our second largest supplier, we'll be competing with Mexico as an importer.

The situation continues to worsen with regard to oil.

Get us off that dependence on foreign oil (and oil in general) and let other countries be OPEC's bitches and worry about the stuff running out. Being self sufficient in energy, especially renewables, would relieve this country of a lot of stress. I know I'm not saying anything original but, god damn it, it's important enough to repeat.

than that. Though renewables will make their contribution, they can never scale up to the level of oil consumption as a transportation fuel. And no one even knows yet what they will cost. We cannot risk that we were wrong in thinking there will be a replacement for oil. Which means that, should oil become too expensive, or worse, go away, trucks carrying food to our local grocer many not arrive. Therefore, we must begin to do more for ourselves. We need to become less consumers and more self-sufficient. One of these days the oil will stop flowing, at least to proles like us. We need to begin adapting to a lower energy lifestyle now. And doing so will do wonders for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change.

Welcome to DU, AmericaIsGreat! :bounce:

of another Brazilian well coming on line?

HOUSTON -- A drillstem test of the Wahoo #1 in the deepwater pre-salt Campos basin offshore Brazil flowed at a rate of 7,500 b/d of oil and 4 MMcf/d of gas, reports Anadarko Petroleum Corp.

The well, in block BM-C-30, is producing 31° API crude and the flow is limited by equipment.

"Next, we plan to move the equipment to our Wahoo #2 well, approximately 5 mi (8 km) to the north, to conduct a second drillstem test," says Bob Daniels, Sr. VP, Worldwide Exploration. "The data from these tests will be important as the partnership works to select an optimum development plan for the field, which has an estimated gross resource potential of more than 300 MMbbl of oil."


RIO DE JANEIRO – OGX Petróleo e Gás Participações SA reports the find of an oil-bearing interval in the Aptian strata of well 1-OGX-8-RJS in shallower waters of Santos basin block BM-C-41 offshore Brazil. Drilling continues below the carbonate pay.

The well, named Fuji, is 82 km (51 mi) offshore state of Rio de Janeiro in 125 m (410 ft) water depth. Diamond Offshore’s Ocean Star is doing the drilling.

04/01/2010


The potential of Brazil to become one of the biggest oil producers in the world was highlighted today when BG – the former exploration arm of British Gas – reported a "supergiant" field with up to two billion barrels of recoverable reserves.

The Guara discovery builds on a series of other major successes in very deep waters off Brazil and dwarfs rival strikes such as Tiber in the US Gulf which was announced with great fanfare by BP last week.

The Brazilian oil rush not only undermines claims that the world may run out of oil soon but threatens to upset the political balance in Latin America where Hugo Chávez's Venezuela has held sway as the continent's dominant energy provider.

The BG find comes as the Brazilian government proposes laws that will tighten its grip on its newfound oil wealth through a state-owned management company.



Petrobras estimates that production in Brazil could reach 3.9 million barrels by 2020, up from more than 2 million a day now. Proven oil reserves would rise from 14.4 billion barrels to more than 30 billion barrels, according to government estimates, putting Brazil in the same league as such major oil exporters as Qatar, Canada, Kazakhstan and Nigeria.

market with a total of one year's worth of oil.

That's a fact that's easy to check. The world uses 31 billion barrels per year. If a field the size of Ghawar (170 billion barrels recoverable and the largest single oil reserve ever discovered) were to be found today and production was able to begin immediately, it would be enough oil to last just over five years.

Today we are using more oil per year than is discovered to replace what we use. Oil discoveries peaked in 1965 at ~57 billion barrels. In 2000, just 15 billion barrels were discovered. In 2008, only 10 billion barrels of proven reserves were added to the world's known oil supplies, or just over 4 months worth. The amount expected to be discovered off our eastern shore is about 7 billion barrels, according to the last survey in the area some 30 years ago. While there may be more, let's go with the 7 billion barrels figure. That's enough oil to last the world a little more than 3 months, if it were all available for the market today.

Most of the oil currently discovered will take years to begin producing. Oil that is yet to be discovered will take years longer. So many years, in fact, that the current depletion rate of 4.5% (which will accelerate to up to 10% once we reach the tipping point) will overtake most future projects, rendering them moot as the EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) drops to a 1:1, with 100:1 being the rate when Drake discovered oil in Pennsylvania. Today the rate is 10:1, and that's probably optimistic.

What's startling to those of us who are watching the situation with oil is how little everyone else seems to care about this impending crisis.

Reading your response I am reminded again of how useless discussion of many things in discreet numbers is so misleading.

For example any discussion about the national debt is worthless unless it is put in terms of percent of GDP.

All discussion of reserves should not be in terms of billions of barrels but in terms of percent of yearly use.

If I understand your numbers correctly I am guessing that the world has about 600 billion barrels of known reserves identified.

Try "Armed Madhouse"

there is no shortage of oil, we are not even near peaking, it's an industry created myth.

I really used to think we had already or were near peaking, but after reading Palast, who runs one of the largest and most comprehensive investigative reporter teams in the world, I'm thinking there is no shortage. There is a contrived shortage, the original Hubbard was working for the oil companies, restrict supply and it drives up the price. They invaded Iraq, not so much to take the oil but to control and restrict supply.

Just looking at the rate that technology has advanced in the last 200 years there's no way we are not going to implement alternative energy sources before oil comes close to running dry.

the oil-watching community is quite disappointed that Palast isn't more informed on the issue, especially considering the aforementioned investigative resources. His own network, BBC, though disagrees with him. Palast can say that all he wants. It doesn't make it true. I study this issue every single day and have done since 2005. Palast hasn't and is wrong. And there's alot of other experts who's opinion/facts on this topic I'd believe over Palast. Hell, I'm more of an expert on oil matters than Palast is.

Also, the EIA and IEA are not parties to any 'industry created myth'. They both are sounding the alarms regarding the ability of oil producers to meet growing demand. And for there to be a major problem we don't have to be out of oil, just not have enough of it.

I suggest before you go taking Palast's word in "Armed Madhouse" (which I did read) regarding oil, you should visit places like http://www.theoildrum.com">The Oil Drum, where there are knowledgable people, including oil industry professionals/geologists/analysts who know more about the situation than Palast does. Also study up on EROEI, investments, oil projects, discoveries, and exponential growth.

Palast does get one thing right though. There is plenty of oil - for a few more years. Then what?

Edited to add: Just went to The Oil Drum myself. They have a very interesting article right at the top of the page entitled: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6360">Tipping Point: Near-Term Systemic Implications of a Peak in Global Oil Production based on a http://www.theoildrum.com/files/Tipping%20Point.pdf">report from The Foundation for the Economics of Sustainability, which I have already read. A very worthwhile read - and not an 'industry created myth'.

you underestimate the propaganda power of the richest companies on earth

""His own network, BBC""

end of discussion, don't even have to read the rest of your post but I will later when I get time

BBC is PWND!!!!

thanks for your analysis of Greg Palast and the BBC, though they are not what this thread is about.

Since you won't be preparing for a world with less oil, you won't be in the way of those of us who are.

Don't assume because I don't agree with the oil corporations "peak oil" scam that I'm not an environmentalist. I recycle and reuse, drive a Civic, clean garbage from the waterways and beaches, plant trees, donate to environmental charities.

Greg Palast is the best at what he does. He's a muckraker and he has about 100 people working for him. For instance he was talking about Enron 10 years before they collapsed. Oil company insiders are telling him it's a scam. I would trust him long before your oil company connected think tanks or experts of unknown origin. I agree there is such a thing as peak oil, I just don't agree with the numbers that come from the people that are increasing their profits by telling us demand is about to outstrip supply.

Hubbert was the first to cry wolf and he's been outed as being connected to the oil companies. Another thing not taken into account is the first world population already peaked, it did so around 1975. Look at Russia, Iraq. China now also is going to plateau with their one child no girls policy. Total world population is not increasing as fast as predicted 30 years ago either.

Besides we already have electric car technology ready to go, it's been viable for several years now. It's not perfect from an environmental standpoint but it's better than petroleum engines. Why do you think the oil companies crushed the electric car? Because they still have plenty of oil to sell you. Another point would be the last 15 years they haven't increased the required fuel mileage for auto manufactures, why? Because they don't need to, there's plenty of oil.

By assuring the world there is no impending crisis, development of alternative energy sources is being hindered thus protecting the value of their precious resource for many many decades. By the time we do find out the truth it will probably be too late to do anything about it.

So why did US oil production peak 30 years ago. US oil owners just decided they wanted to make a lot less money (trillions of dollars) to perpetuate this myth.

Peak oil is scary and people will cling to anything rather than accept the reality.

Like a terminally ill patient in denial.

""So why did US oil production peak 30 years ago.""

because the US land mass is a small fraction of world total and we don't have any really large deposits? (except for Alaska, which we are just sitting on).

""US oil owners just decided they wanted to make a lot less money (trillions of dollars) to perpetuate this myth.""

Economics 101, price is driven by supply and demand. If you can fake the supply use and demand numbers because you have a virtual monopoly you can set the price.

Saddam was periodically dumping on the market, it's the main reason he was taken out. Look at where the price went after we invaded.

This news supports that contention. Thanks for posting. It is disturbing many still ignore/dismiss the impending crisis the shortage of oil will bring.

a factor for daily consumption and the market will create tremendous demand for renewable energy sources.

It may be the critical factor in combating climate change.

They weren't being assholes. They knew $146 wasn't sustainable. So if it isn't sustainable why not sell more at $146 (rather than $80, or $60, or $35 later).

They simply couldn't.

Peak oil is a reality and it will only get worse.

Oil hit $146 because the Oil Co's took control of the 2nd largest reserves in the world from a dictator that was periodically dumping on the market. The Saudis didn't fill the gap because there was no gap to fill. When the price went over $4.00 in the US people started driving less, there was no need to pump more oil.

Peak oil is a reality it's just not happening when Hubbert the oil company insider says it is.

until then. It's an element of geology and not so much corporate profits.

but we really should be investing in our own alternative methods of bulk oil production. Lots of other things are made from oil: lubricants, asphalt, plastics, jet fuel, waxes, road tar, synthetic rubber, fertilizer, some medicines, etc. Wind and solar power may replace gasoline, kerosene, and diesel fuel, but it can't replace plastics.

Fortunately, we do have something that does produce oil, and from bio-mass no less:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/11/1125_031125_turkeyoil.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2003/may/22/research.highereducation1

I'd love to see some serious amounts of money put into this on a production scale. It'll never replace petrochemicals for current domestic uses, but it'll prove to be a valuable strategic resource when supplies eventually get scarce.