Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Debate on Peak Oil

From: [email-masked] ("Hal Finney")
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:11:55 -0700 (PDT)

Dustin Wish writes:
> I had read an article about new exploration in the Gulf of Mexico using new
> technology, which they said shows a HUGE oil reserve almost twice the amount
> of oil as has been used up till today. That would be a turn around from the
> cheap oil economic times we have lived in.

On the other hand, this news from a Peak Oil site is discouraging for
Gulf of Mexico oil development: http://www.energybulletin.net/5438.html

"According to a new study published on Sunday by state oil monopoly
Petroleos Mexicanos, the potential for oil exploration in the Gulf of
Mexico has been greatly overestimated.

"Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, revealed that terrain in waters deeper
than 3,000 meters in the Gulf of Mexico an area known as the Abyssal
Plain were 'not suitable for oil exploration.' The statement represents
a serious setback for future drilling in the area, and, according to
petroleum analysts, jeopardizes any possible collaborations with foreign
investors.
...
"Pemex had initially earmarked a possible 54 billion barrels of oil
that could be drilled from the area. With that figure now cut in half,
Pérez Cruz says, exploration becomes economically unviable"

This is why I say that Peak Oil sites provide biased news.  They search
the press for all the bad things, but won't reprint good news (that
is, news which goes against their theories).  Unfortunately I have not
found a site which focuses on good news on this topic, so it is hard to
acquire a balanced picture.  I did order the book by Huber but it would
be nice to see a blog or some other source that discusses topics on a
day to day basis.  Of course an unbiased site would be best, but I've
given up hope in that regard!  At this point I just try to find a mix
of information sources.

Hal
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

---

From: Damien Broderick <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:44:59 -0500

At 12:11 PM 4/26/2005 -0700, Hal wrote:

>...Peak Oil sites provide biased news.  They search

Well, here's another, rather simplified but ...

<Dr Jeremy Leggett is chief executive of Solar Century, the UK's largest 
independent solar electric company, and a member of the Government's 
Renewables Advisory Board. His book Half Gone: Oil, Gas, Hot Air and the 
Global Energy Crisis will be published by Portobello Books in November. He 
will be addressing a conference, Peak Oil UK: Entering the Age of Oil 
Depletion, in Edinburgh later today >

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=632811

< I, like most people, have been in denial about oil depletion for years. I 
was once a creature of the oil industry. I taught for 11 years in one of 
its elite training houses, at the Royal School of Mines. I did so much 
consulting for big oil companies that I was once able to buy my daughter 
two horses. I did not believe the early toppers when their stories first 
became public in the late 1990s. I was an environmentalist by then, but 
still had a healthy respect for the oil industry. I made the snap judgement 
that the early toppers couldn't be correct. How could the industry I had 
grown up in be so wrong? >

---

From: Alfio Puglisi <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:49:30 +0200 (MEST)

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Hal Finney wrote:

>given up hope in that regard!

Have you given a look at the Wikipedia article on the matter?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

Wikipedia has a Neutral Point of View policy that tries to represent
competing viewpoints as objectively as possible. It doesn't work all the
time, but most of the time yes.

The article on Peak Oil has at the bottom a huge collection of links to
articles, websites and books.

Alfio