Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage
Flesh on the bones of Mexican oil production
Euan Mearns, The Oil Drum: Europe
…I wanted to put some production geology flesh on the bones of Mexican oil production. The main points I want to make are:
1. Forecast production decline of 14% per annum in Cantarell sounds alarming but it is in fact the result of planned reservoir management.
2. The forecast decline of Cantarell is due in part to the diversion of nitrogen injection from Cantarell to the neighbouring Ku-Maloob-Zaap (KMZ) complex of fields. Production at KMZ is forecast to rise to around 800 MBD and this will partly offset production falls at Cantarell.
3. Cantarell / Mexican production is predominantly heavy crude, and it is postulated that any production declines in Mexico may be met by additoinal production of Saudi Arabian heavy crude forward to 2012.
4. Notwithsatnding point 3, Mexican oil production decline means that 4 out of 5 major OECD producers are now in decline (Norway, UK, USA and Mexico), leaving only Canada with growing production and this presents the OECD with a growing problem of energy security.
5. The Hubbert Linearisation (HL) for Mexico reflects reservoir management (gas lift and nitrogen injection) and new field developments but the interpretation remains equivocal. A brief description is given of why Pemex have used gas lift and nitrogen injection to boost production at Cantarell.
…we must also remember that Mexico has a vast unexplored deepwater area that may yield some major discoveries in the years ahead. This will have no impact upon peak oil which I see in 2012 ± 3 years, but deep water Mexican production may have a significant roll to play in keeping the hybrids running post 2020.
(7 Feb 2007)
IEA: 2006-2011 Global Oil Demand Growth Seen Rising 2% a Year
Spencer Swartz, Dow Jones Newswires via Rigzone
Global oil demand growth is seen rising 2% annually through 2011, the International Energy Agency said Tuesday, in a forecast that is more optimistic about the rate of future energy consumption compared with previous five-year periods, because of rapid growth in Asia.
World oil consumption growth is expected to rise on average by 1.8 million barrels a day over the five-year period, from 84.5 million barrels a day in 2006 to 93.3 million barrels a day in 2011, the Paris-based IEA forecast in its medium-term report for 2006-2011.
The 2% annually growth rate in consumption compares with growth of 1.8% in 2001-2006, and 1.4% in the 1996-2001 period.
The 2006-2011Ioutlook assumes a downward revision in consumption of 385,000 barrels a day due to high energy prices, fuel substitution in industrialized countries and changes to U.S. economic growth, the agency said.
(6 Feb 2007)
Australia report urges vehicle congestion charge
AAP, The Age
Australia must reduce its reliance on oil and consider imposing vehicle congestion charges in major cities, a key report on the country’s future oil supply suggests.
The analysis by the Senate’s bipartisan Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport committee also calls for increased funding for ethanol research to help develop the biofuels industry.
The document, tabled in parliament on Wednesday, contains 10 recommendations aimed at shoring up Australia’s future energy supply and making the country less dependent on fossil fuels.
…The report comes as “peak oil” theory experts and environmentalists link growing concern about global warming to the overuse of oil.
…The report warned Australia’s demand for petroleum is projected to increase by two per cent a year, reaching 1.2 million barrels a day by 2030.
…It called for more money for research into ethanol as an alternative energy source – which was immediately welcomed by the Greens as well as Nationals senators Barnaby Joyce and Fiona Nash.
(7 Feb 2007)
Before Australia jumps on the ethanol bandwagon, it would be wise to do some research and see why some in the U.S. see ethanol, at least corn ethanol, as a big mistake. Some mainstream publications here are coming to the same conclusion. -BA
ASPO Australia response to Senate report on future oil supply
Bruce Robinson, ASPO Australia
We had hoped for much better, but it is a useful step forward.The report follows almost exactly the same path our conservative government has been taking for years with Global Warming. Australia stands in the US shadow as the only other big country refusing to sign Kyoto.Only in the last month or so, with Australia gripped by drought, has the official smug complacent approach to global warming started to crack as Australians see through the business-as-usual spin from Canberra, and the community is forcing a change of policy.
The approach to Peak Oil is similarly sad and shortsighted. The Committee Chair, Government Senator Bill Heffernan, said in his tabling speech that Peak Oil was forecast in 20-40 years. This is in stark contrast to the many reliable forecasts that global oil production may probably peak in say 3-5 years or thereabouts. He failed to mention that side of the probability curve at all. Inquiry originator, Senator Milne (Greens) was much more honest in her summary speech, thankfully.
The report downplays and ignores the documented risks, gives very high credence to biased US Government information and policies, and discounts the warnings from independent scientists. The International Energy Agency is the OECD oil consuming nations’ counterbalance to the OPEC cartel, so it is far from unbiased. The IEA view is given far more credence and coverage by the Senate Committee than would be proper in an independent assessment of our oil vulnerability. However, the detailed report is more encouraging than one would assume from reading just the executive summary.
ASPO-Australia calls for an Intergovernmental Panel on Oil Depletion to be formed under the existing IPCC structure. It should provide a science-based view of the world oil production data, as free as possible from the political constraints which have bedevilled the Australian Senate report and the US Government oil production estimates and those from the IEA.
We also call on Australians to challenge the inertia and complacency of the Federal Government on the Peak Oil issue, just as is now happening with Climate Change. We should be preparing, well in advance, for the Petrol Droughts which are very likely to come far sooner than Senator Heffernan would have us believe.
(7 Feb 2007)
An associated .doc press release includes the following recommendations, a crude summary of ASPO Australia’s detailed submissions to the inquiry (all available at header link):
Highest priority must be Community Awareness and Engagement so people understand the problems and accept that serious precautions and countermeasures are needed. Second is Frugality. We can not afford to be as profligate with fuel and travel as we are now. Third is Efficiency. There are lots of ways of doing things better or just as well with less fuel.
Lowest priority should be Alternative Fuels. This is because it is not physically possible to grow enough biofuels nor to make enough coal into oil, for instance, soon enough and without enormous environmental damage. ..
