Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

It's Official: We're Just a Few Years from Peak Oil

By George Monbiot, Monbiot.com. Posted December 21, 2008.


Until this year's report, the International Energy Agency mocked people who said that oil supplies might peak. Now they've changed their tune.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Can you think of a major threat for which the British government does not prepare? It employs an army of civil servants, spooks and consultants to assess the chances of terrorist attacks, financial collapse, floods, epidemics, even asteroid strikes, and to work out what it should do if they happen. But there is one hazard about which it appears intensely relaxed. It has never conducted its own assessment of the state of global oil supplies and the possibility that one day they might peak and then go into decline.

If you ask, it always produces the same response: "global oil resources are adequate for the foreseeable future." It knows this, it says, because of the assessments made by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its World Energy Outlook reports. In the 2007 report, the IEA does appear to support the government's view. "World oil resources," it states, "are judged to be sufficient to meet the projected growth in demand to 2030;" though it says nothing about what happens at that point, or whether they will continue to be sufficient after 2030. But this, as far as Whitehall is concerned, is the end of the matter. Like most of the rich world's governments, the United Kingdom treats the IEA's projections as gospel. Earlier this year, I submitted a Freedom of Information request to the UK's Department for Business, asking what contingency plans the government has made for global supplies of oil peaking by 2020. The answer was as follows: "the Government does not feel the need to hold contingency plans specifically for the eventuality of crude oil supplies peaking between now and 2020."

So the IEA had better bloody well be right. In the report on peak oil commissioned by the US Department of Energy, the oil analyst Robert L.Hirsch concluded that "without timely mitigation, the economic, social and political costs" of world oil supplies peaking "will be unprecedented." He went on to explain what "timely mitigation" meant. Even a worldwide emergency response "10 years before world oil peaking", he wrote, would leave "a liquid fuels shortfall roughly a decade after the time that oil would have peaked." To avoid global economic collapse, we need to begin "a mitigation crash program 20 years before peaking." If Hirsch is right and if oil supplies peak before 2028, we're in deep doodah.

So burn this into your mind: between 2007 and 2008 the IEA radically changed its assessment. Until this year's report, the agency mocked people who said that oil supplies might peak. In the foreword to a book it published in 2005, its executive director, Claude Mandil, dismissed those who warned of this event as "doomsayers". "The IEA has long maintained that none of this is a cause for concern," he wrote. "Hydrocarbon resources around the world are abundant and will easily fuel the world through its transition to a sustainable energy future." In its 2007 World Energy Outlook, the IEA predicted a rate of decline in output from the world's existing oilfields of 3.7 percent a year. This, it said, presented a short-term challenge, with the possibility of a temporary supply crunch in 2015, but with sufficient investment any shortfall could be covered. But the new report, published last month, carried a very different message: a projected rate of decline of 6.7 percent, which means a much greater gap to fill.

More importantly, in the 2008 report the IEA suggests for the first time that world petroleum supplies might hit the buffers. "Although global oil production in total is not expected to peak before 2030, production of conventional oil … is projected to level off towards the end of the projection period." These bland words reveal a major shift. Never before has one of the IEA's energy outlooks forecast the peaking or plateauing of the world's conventional oil production (which is what we mean when we talk about peak oil).

But that is as specific as the report gets. Does it or doesn't it mean that we have time to prepare? What does "towards the end of the projection period" mean? The agency has never produced a more precise forecast -- until now. For the first time, in the interview I conducted with its chief economist Fatih Birol, it has given us a date. And it should scare the pants off anyone who understands the implications.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: oil, peak oil

George Monbiot is the author Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning. Read more of his writings at Monbiot.com. This article originally appeared in the Guardian.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Professor Emeritus
Posted by: cjwirth on Dec 21, 2008 8:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We now know that Peak Oil was July of 2008. The IEA's projection of Peak Oil in 2020 is wrong.

Independent studies conclude that Peak Oil production will occur (or has occurred) between 2005 to 2010 (projected year for peak in parentheses), as follows:

* Association for the Study of Peak Oil (2007)

* Rembrandt Koppelaar, Editor of “Oil Watch Monthly” (2008)

* Tony Eriksen, Oil stock analyst (2008)

* Matthew Simmons, Energy investment banker, (2007)

* T. Boone Pickens, Oil and gas investor (2007)

* U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2005)

* Kenneth S. Deffeyes, Princeton professor and retired shell Geologist (2005)

* Sam Sam Bakhtiari, Retired Iranian National Oil Company geologist (2005)

* Chris Skrebowski, Editor of “Petroleum Review” (2010)

* Sadad Al Husseini, former head of production and exploration, Saudi Aramco (2008)

* Energy Watch Group in Germany (2006)


Independent studies indicate that global crude oil production will now decline from 74 million barrels per day to 60 million barrels per day by 2015. During the same time, demand will increase. Oil supplies will be even tighter for the U.S. As oil producing nations consume more and more oil domestically they will export less and less. Because demand is high in China, India, the Middle East, and other oil producing nations, once global oil production begins to decline, demand will always be higher than supply. And since the U.S. represents one fourth of global oil demand, whatever oil we conserve will be consumed elsewhere. Thus, conservation in the U.S. will not slow oil depletion rates significantly.

Alternatives will not even begin to fill the gap. And most alternatives yield electric power, but we need liquid fuels for tractors/combines, 18 wheel trucks, trains, ships, and mining equipment. The independent scientists of the Energy Watch Group conclude in a 2007 report titled: “Peak Oil Could Trigger Meltdown of Society:”

"By 2020, and even more by 2030, global oil supply will be dramatically lower. This will create a supply gap which can hardly be closed by growing contributions from other fossil, nuclear or alternative energy sources in this time frame."

With increasing costs for gasoline and diesel, along with declining taxes and declining gasoline tax revenues, states and local governments will eventually have to cut staff and curtail highway maintenance. Eventually, gasoline stations will close, and state and local highway workers won’t be able to get to work. We are facing the collapse of the highways that depend on diesel and gasoline powered trucks for bridge maintenance, culvert cleaning to avoid road washouts, snow plowing, and roadbed and surface repair. When the highways fail, so will the power grid, as highways carry the parts, large transformers, steel for pylons, and high tension cables from great distances. With the highways out, there will be no food coming from far away, and without the power grid virtually nothing modern works, including home heating, pumping of gasoline and diesel, airports, communications, and automated building systems.

This is documented in a free 48 page report that can be downloaded, website posted, distributed, and emailed: http://www.peakoilassociates.com/POAnalysis.html

I used to live in NH-USA, but moved to a more sustainable place. Anyone interested in relocating to a nice, pretty, sustainable area with a good climate and good soil? Email: clifford dot wirth at yahoo dot com or give me a phone call which operates here as my old USA-NH number 603-668-4207. http://survivingpeakoil.blogspot.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thanks for this Posted by: kegbot1
» Now there's the rub, eh? Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Professor Emeritus Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» The Clock IS Running Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: Professor Emeritus Posted by: jlowelld
More foolishness
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Dec 22, 2008 1:31 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Peak oil, like much of the AGW conspiracy is not real. We will indeed see a decline in oil production in the near future, but that is primarily because of environmental groups closing off vast areas to oil development.

To put 95% of your resources off limits and then scream about their scarcity is beyond stupid.

In truth, the peak oil scare is about the money. As you look through these reports, ask yourself, would these people have jobs if they said that everything is groovy and we have 300 years of recoverable oil in North America alone, and it is actually replenishing itself? No, they would be putting tomatoes on Whoppers and sending out resumes.

Should we use less energy and be cleaner? Absolutely. Should we buy into the bullshit so that the researchers have a job?? No.

Peak oil, like most of the AGW ruckus is based on money and controlling the people through scarcity of resources. It is not founded in truth, or at least a significant part of the truth is being buried. Follow the money. Follow the people seeking power. Peak oil is a lie.

Nowhere in this article is the abiotic oil theory even touched on. Is it because the truth doesn't support the peak oil position, or is it ignorance of the whole theory?

One final point, by pushing these lies, aren't you pumping up oil prices and making the evil big oil corporations even more money in the long run?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: More foolishness Posted by: Socioecologist
» RE: More foolishness Posted by: bonzi
» peak oil is not real? Posted by: toddcory
» Oil prices are down. Posted by: Beck
» RE: More foolishness Posted by: arraya
» RE: More foolishness Posted by: FreeAmerica
» Replies to your replies Posted by: FreeAmerica
This is nothing new
Posted by: etvaugha@mtu.edu on Dec 23, 2008 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Experts" have been saying we're at peak oil since the 70s. Many of them predicted we'd be out of oil by 2000. These guys are paid well to spread fear. In reality we've only recovered a small amount of the available oil on Earth. Gas right now costs less than bottled water, and we're struggling with an excessive supply of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As oil becomes more expensive...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Dec 23, 2008 6:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...alternatives will become more viable...

...and then necessary.

That's why England's response to this long emergency has not been to light its hair on fire over your favored pet projects.

That, and burning hair releases (relatively) tons of sulfur (that's why ladies stink of brimstone after a day at perm palace...fitting, no?). Very bad for the environment, and they'd be required to purchase the sulfur equivalent in Carbon Creds from some astute young entrepreneur who was politically connected enough to own the Carbon Cash printer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PUKE OIL IS A MASSIVE LIE
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Dec 23, 2008 7:10 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
CONTRIVED SCARCITY TO RAPE YOU... ABOLISH THE 120 YEAR OLD GROSSLY OBSOLETE AND INEFFICIENT INTERNAL COMBUSTION CONTRAPTION

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

America's too fucking A-M-O-R-A-L to understand !
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 23, 2008 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just look at how bad traffic congestion along with major accidents and explosions have gotten as a result of artificially lowering the gas prices. The demand's already going back up only because people live under the delusion that oil is "cheap" when it really ain't. The more America trashes conservation, reusing, efficiency, and alternative renewables, the HARDER AMERICA WILL FALL LIKE HUMPTY DUMPTY !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Recessions, Depressions and Peak Oil
Posted by: Casey Burns on Dec 23, 2008 7:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They denied that we were in a Recession for the last year, saying things like "The Fundamentals of the Economy are essentially sound." Then it turns out that we have been in a Recession for the past year. And a bad one. Well duh!!!

Now they are denying that we are entering a Depression. The evidence (some economists are calling it the "Great Deleveraging" - deleveraging is what happens in a depression) is pointing otherwise, and I expect in a few years, they will say "We've been in a Depression."

Same thing with Peak Oil. Two years from now? Some are saying that the Peak took place 2 years ago. When doesn't really matter. Its going to get expensive again.

Few understand its current low price, and its relation to deleveraging. All the brokers are having to cover short positions and failing hedge funds so they sell everything they got, driving the prices down. What looks like good news is actually a symptom of something else. The price of oil is unrelated to its inherent scarcity. We will see the price bounce up just as fast as it fell - and then some!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ba
Posted by: mnstra on Dec 23, 2008 8:28 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Peak oil is best evaluated a couple of years out after it. It is hard to assess it during the Peak.But nevertheless, oil is running out and world demand by billions of new faces is unprecedented in human history.We do need to prepare now.Preparation is not sending troops to steal other countries oil. that is non sustainable in the long run.The main problem i see is howto get India and China to conserve
and reduce its consumption. Eve some idiot dictator can see the writing on the wall.
We in America need to cap usage , reduce speed limits reduce birth rates now....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sentence 2 should be Posted by: tommy_slothrop
Now we all know better than to believe this B.S.
Posted by: symcokid on Dec 23, 2008 8:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we were soon to reach peak oil, this government of ours wouldn't be telling the oil companies to drop the prices as drastically as they have in the last four months or so. Now that the gas prices are so low we will use up the fossil fuels faster than ever expected. Does anybody suspect that there was a little price manipulation going on - {POOF}!!!, just like magic the prices drop from $4.00 per gallon to about $1.70 per gallon at present.

Apparently we have oil and gas reserves that will last for millenniums and once we have absolute control over Iraqi's vast oil fields we are home free!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Best presentation on peek oil
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Dec 23, 2008 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
321energy.com/

editorials/simmons/simmons122408/show122408.html

Lots of new ideas and better estimates of where we are now, and not the usual ideological crap you usually get.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Holy craptasm, batman the kool-aid drinkers are out in force tonite!
Posted by: DaBear on Dec 24, 2008 8:42 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The denialists are harmless shitheads who can be ignored.

What concerns me much much more are the owning-class shitheads who still don't comprehend how finite resources and math actually works.

Trusting the owning class to mitigate the damage is like asking an arsonist to mind the bonfire, while you're moving it under the eaves of your roof.

While McCrazy woulda just torched the place, Obama will simply hand out more koolaid while his disciples declare anyone sane as a barbituate lefty. Wee hooo, what fuckin' great little craptasm we're in for...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The clock may have run out?
Posted by: bobtr900 on Dec 25, 2008 5:33 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually the clock may have run out. We, America began working on this problem under Pres. Jimmy Carter, who stood up to the oil companies and to the auto makers. Carter put forth legislation and conservation iniatives during his administration, way back in the day. Were those laws and initiatives maintained and strengthened we might well be ahead of the curve. But they were not.

Instead greed corruption and religious ideology put St. Reagan into the WH. Reagan got rid of Carter's laws and initiatives. Now just look at where we are.

We've had nothing but greed and corruption from the party of Pro-Life and Family Values and now America's families are in great jeopardy. America is killing for corporate profits. That is some Pro-Life coming from the Moral Majority, and they are still fighting us liberals every step of the way. Their hate is palpable.

Theo-Fascism abounds, in America. There is no stopping them, they are ABSOLUTELY SURE that God is telling them what to do. I recall that God helps those who help themselves.

When 59+ million Americans control the destiny of the other 240+ million Americans as well as that of the entire world there seems little that any of us hated godless liberals can do about anything. Either they come to some realization of what they have done, admit their culpability and enlist the aid of the other 240+ million of us or we ALL go into the dumper. So far they have NOT chosen to do that or even anything near that. When/if they do we'll know it.

So far all we ever hear is what we have always been hearing, hate radio and hate tv, which began under St. Reagan and daddy Bush. As long as they get what they want and get it ALL right now, this fiscal quarter, they care NOT about the future.

The Repubs truly are the political party of I, Me, and right now Theo-Fascist greed and self serving ideology. For a taste of whats to come just look at what is happening now and just watch at what THEIR experts say will happen throughout next year. Then they can tell me exactly where is the Pro-Life and Family Values in what THEIR economic experts admit is happening and will happen.

But then I'm just a 'bleeding-heart-liberal', so what could I know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Denying the problem makes people crazy
Posted by: Peak Shrink on Dec 25, 2008 1:05 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After the debate ends about when Peak Oil happens, we'll all be left with the stunning realization that an enormous task is ahead of us, in learning to live a much more difficult life, with a heck of a lot fewer resources. I wish it were as simple as producing electrified cars. Where's all that electricity going to come from? Why not focus on revitalizing US railroads and ports? An enormous shift in thinking is required, before we can even conceptualize the depth of the problems we face.

Two and a half years ago, I started a website Peak Oil Blues to learn how people emotionally respond to the awareness of an energy-depleted future, and what changes they’ve made in their lives as a result of it. I started it because as a psychologist, I was having my own dramatic emotional reactions to the logical consequences of peak oil. It turns out, I wasn't alone.

Adapting to Peak Oil may require mental preparation, but how is that different from just "acting mental?"

The site has become a clearinghouse that allows contributors to safely vent, and read about people who've made dramatic shifts in how they live, how they've re-arranged personal finances, and how they are living more sustainably. Initially, they feel isolated and often marginalized by others, when they try and share their knowledge. Their social group can't imagine how, if Peak Oil is "real," why aren't those in power actively doing something about it. We all are asking that question, and realizing we can't wait. We've got to start doing things ourselves.

Common shifts include efforts by contributors to simplify their needs, and learn to live a frugal and debt-free existence. Turns out, this is helping them, as the economy collapses and it reduces their carbon footprint. They report developing a new perspective on what brings meaning to their lives, but it takes often two years before they start settling into this new awareness and feeling less "crazy."

If you take the time to look into Peak Oil, and are feeling stressed and upset by what you find, check out Peak Oil Blues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Peak Oil is a Myth
Posted by: Poptech on Dec 25, 2008 5:39 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Peak Oil is a Myth

Failed Predictions:
- 1885, U.S. Geological Survey: "Little or no chance for oil in California."
- 1891, U.S. Geological Survey: "Little or no chance for oil in Kansas and Texas"
- 1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines: Total future production limit of 5.7 billion barrels of oil, at most a 10-year supply remaining.
- 1939, Department of the Interior: Oil reserves in the United States to be exhausted in 13 years.
- 1951, Department of the Interior, Oil and Gas Division: Oil reserves in the United States to be exhausted in 13 years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Energy vs. Water and Air
Posted by: cactus on Dec 26, 2008 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suspect we're already in the plateau that marks peak oil. The last discovery of a mega-size oil field was about 70 years ago. Since then the techniques used to search for and find new oil fields have become much more sensitive and accurate. The fact is that if there were significant and accessible oil fields out there we would know about it. There aren't any. All of the alternatives to traditional oil; oil shale, oil sands, natural gas, coal and nuclear power have unacceptable trade-offs involved the most important of which (IMO) is water; both excessive use of water and water pollution. We have yet to understand that (particularly potable) water is a non-renewable resource and we are running out of it rapidly. Below are just a few links to articles that point to just a few of the problems;

http://www.alternet.org/water/115017/how_the_west's

http://www.alternet.org/water/114537/water:_ethanol's

http://www.alternet.org/water/114023/global_warming's_us

Living in the desert just beyond the reach of Colorado River water with a local aquifer that is being both polluted by and sucked dry by local copper mines I'm learning the hard way that there is a lot we can learn to live without (like oil) though it may seem impossible but we cannot live without clean water or without clean air.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement