“What If India And China Used Natural Gas And Oil Like The U.S.?”… What a wonderful world it would be!

Guest salivating by David Middleton, petroleum geologist

From Forbes

JUN 17, 2018

What If India And China Used Natural Gas And Oil Like The U.S.?

Jude Clemente , CONTRIBUTOR

BP’s just released Statistical Review of World Energy 2018 has got my wheels turning. The first thing you should know is that global energy consumption has essentially just begun: around 85% of the global population – 6 in every 7 humans – still lives in developing nations. They don’t live in rich cities, like San Francisco, Toronto, New York City, Los Angeles, London, or Tokyo; they live in poorer ones, like Mumbai, Lagos, Jakarta, Guangzhou, Calcutta, and Karachi. This is where the future energy action is man: at least 90% of future demand will be in nations that are currently not developed. We rich, “all the energy that we want at our fingertips” Westerners still aren’t grasping a sad and cold reality: most of the world is poor and energy deprived.

Given that economic growth, especially in the still developing nations where energy demand structures are still immature, is directly tied to more energy usage. So, this has got me thinking about the future energy demands of the world, which of course naturally focuses on the most most critical giants, India and China. These two coal-based titans have really just started to consume natural gas and oil. For the first graphic, don’t forget that “wealth is health.”

[…]

Natural gas and oil supply 60- 65% of the energy used in the world’s richest nations. India and China have 37% of the world’s population but consume just 9% of the world’s natural gas and 17% of the oil. So it becomes very apparent: latent gas and oil demand in India and China is immense.

So now the punch line. How much natural gas and oil will the future world need? Surely a lot more, but what if Indians and Chinese were to consume natural gas and oil like we rich Americans do? International energy markets would quake. Even using half of what we use would cause the gas and oil markets to explode.

The final graphic demonstrates why U.S. oil and gas exporters, as well as the others in the world, are salivating at the opportunity that lies ahead.

[…]

https3a2f2fblogs-images-forbes-com2fjudeclemente2ffiles2f20182f062fcapture

[…]

When considering how even in rich, developed Europe, where incremental demand was tiny, the Kyoto protocol to drastically curtail fossil fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions was a complete failure, and then considering the huge incremental energy needs of the poor countries that signed the latest climate agreement back in December 2015, is it any wonder: “The global Paris climate failure.”

After how rich, healthy, and long living, India and China have watched us oil and gas devouring Westerners become, can you really blame them for wanting to use more? But, somebody else summed up my “hey you can’t use the energy that I use” frustration much better. The headline of the decade: “Should climate scientists fly?”

Forbes

If Red China and India used oil & natural gas like Americans, we’d know pretty quickly how close the world is to Peak Oil and Peak Natural Gas.

What if India and China

The solid green line raises Red China and India crude oil consumption to current US levels while holding all other nations at 2017 levels. The dashed green line drops UK, France and Germany oil consumption to zero-point-zero in 2040. The solid red line raises Red China and India natural gas consumption in BOE to current US levels while holding all other nations at 2017 levels. Historical data from BP 2018 Statistical Review of World Energy.

It’s nice to dream big! Note what a huge difference it would make if the UK, France and Germany kicked to oil habit (of course that was a sarcastic remark, that’s why I made it.)

What’s more likely by 2040? A 150% increase in crude oil and 177% increase in natural gas production or a 2,898% increase in lithium, 1,928% increase in cobalt, 655% increase  in rare earths  and a 524% increase in graphite production?

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Latitude

What if America was some backward shithole like China and India?

….just asking

Alan Tomalty

You calling China a shithole?. They have 45% of the worlds skyscrapers. If you are referring to their lack of freedom and pollution then I agree with you

Shanghai Dan

You can tell from my handle that yes, I have spent more than my share of time in China (I lived there full-time for 6 years, married a local Shanghai lady, and still spend 5-6 months a year in China due to my technical skills and linguistic/cultural abilities to “bridge East and West”).

Walk down most of the streets in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Chengdu – the big cities in China. You’ll smell- excuse the language – shit rolling through the sewer right under you. Do you know why they keep the drains plugged in your sink all the time? Because P traps are basically unheard of – thus sewer gas comes right up. Check the feces and trash floating in all the canals in Shanghai.

And of course, just take a drive down any major road or freeway and you’ll see people pulled over to the side, defecating and urinating wherever – including in fields of food.

To a large extent, China is a 3rd world country with a few small islands (Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Chengdu, etc.) containing 1st world veneers – but it’s it’s over a 3rd world country.

JWurts

Shanghai Dan, I found this article fascinating, I’m curious as to your response.

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/how-to-meet-the-strategic-challenge-posed-by-china/

Jack

Andy in Epsom

I have been to China and walked under the apartment blocks and the residents have emptied their rubbish out of the windows into the streets. Yes it is a shithole!

Bruce Cobb

The world’s plants are salivating at the prospect.

paqyfelyc

It’s not a “what if ?”. It is a “when ?”, and at current rate it will be in ~20 years

InterZonKomizar

@paqyfelyc- I think 20 years is too optimistic because the big fields have been in production for a long time now and like Mexico and Saudi they are running on empty.
.
.
There have been fewer new field’s discovered each year because the majors cut way back on exploration in the fourth quarter of 2013. We have not been replacing the oil used each year with a new field at least that big.
.
.
I would predict that the production of oil will be down by 70% at the end of 2022.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

You have your head buried in oil sand.

Or, perhaps, and utterly without prejudice, perhaps you, Sandy, s h o u l d have your head buried in oil sands.
Your call, absolutely, as to whether it is normally attached at that time!

Your prediction [nightmare] requires the end of civilization in about 48 months.

Oooo-er, Missus!!

Auto, with good wishes to all non-fantasists, of course.

InterZonKomizar

Hi Dave. Thanks For highlighting the energy consumption and production problem. I believe going forward it will be a zero-sum game. As the underdeveloped countries try to grow they will take energy from the Big Ten.
.
.
Actually, the decline of civilization began in 1960 with the widespread use of the electric can opener. Long before flying Greenies, heh.
.
.
Mexico, a.k.a. Gangland, was the seventh-largest oil producer in the world as of 2006, producing 3.71 million barrels per day of petroleum products, of which 3.25 million barrels per day was crude oil.
.
Mexican oil production has started to decline rapidly. The U.S. Energy Information Administration had estimated that Mexican production of petroleum products would decline to 3.52 million barrels per day in 2007 and 3.32 million barrels per day in 2008.
.
Mexican crude oil production fell in 2007, and was below 3.0 million barrels per day by the start of 2008. In mid-2008, Pemex said that it would try to keep crude oil production above 2.8 million barrels per day for the rest of the year. Mexican authorities expected the decline to continue in future, and were pessimistic that it could be raised back to previous levels even with foreign investment.
.
Most of Mexico’s production decline involves one enormous oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. From 1979 to 2007, Mexico produced most of its oil from the supergiant Cantarell Field, which used to be the second-biggest oil field in the world by production.
.
Because of falling production, in 1997 Pemex started a massive nitrogen injection project to maintain oil flow, which now consumes half the nitrogen produced in the world.
.
As a result of nitrogen injection, production at Cantarell rose from 1.1 million barrels per day in 1996 to a peak of 2.1 million barrels per day in 2004.
.
*However, during 2006 Cantarell’s output fell 25% from 2.0 million barrels per day in January to 1.5 million barrels per day in December, with the decline continuing through 2007.
.
.
So … Mexico has been running on fumes for 10 yrs. Just like the Saudi. Notice the lack of promotion for their $5000 Bn IPO? They wouldnt let any experts audit, heh. The barn’s empty, hahahaha.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

Alan Tomalty

We will never run out of oil. Peak oil is bullshit. We have enough reserves for 50 years. If the reserves get drawn down the price goes up we then use less and explore and FIND more. That cycle has been going on for 100 years and will never stop.

InterZonKomizar

@Allan Tomalty- We may never run out, but if the price stays above $60, the global economy collapses, so will be left in ground. The majors cut back explore & develope 4Q 2013, and new discoveries have not replaced consumption. Shale plays are a subsidized banking scam.
.
.
Get a bicycle while they are still affordable, heh.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

Alan Tomalty

The only reason the price of gasoline is high is that 50% of it is government taxes. The price was already above $60 many times and the world economy did not collapse. Your alarmist take on oil reserves is just as bad as CO2 alarmists.

Robert W Turner

Every barrel of oil pulled out of the ground is literally creating wealth. New wealth, not redistributed wealth (like paying for a service) or a black hole that sucks wealth in and drains society (i.e. windfarms and ethanol fuel), but new wealth that stimulates the economy, creates jobs, and funds governments. Oil didn’t collapse the economy at $120/bbl (corrupt bankers/politicians did that) so I don’t know where you’re dreaming up that current oil prices will do that.

MarkW

Services create wealth. That’s why we are willing to pay for them rather than do it ourselves.

MarkW

The world’s economies are doing pretty good with oil prices having been above $60 for the last 6 months or so.

commieBob

The stone age didn’t end because of a shortage of stones.

I’ve been following ammonia as an energy storage medium. What impresses me is the number of projects going on. example

As you say, we don’t have to worry about running out of fossil fuels any time soon. Before that happens, the need for fossil fuels will probably be obviated by new, cheaper, technology.

I have way more faith in the working of free markets than I do in the prognostications of greenies and economists.

MarkW

Mexico’s declines have more to do with Mexico’s internal problems with corruption and incompetence.

Paul Penrose

You can’t claim a zero-sum game if you don’t know how much total resource there is and how long we will need to continue relying on it.

InterZonKomizar

@Paul Penrose said- You can’t claim a zero-sum game if you don’t know how much total resource there is …
.
.
Well, under the circumstances I did. Practically, if one developing country starts buying crude at a faster rate the price may go up marginally until the Big Ten discover what is going on. A lot will depend on how much production can be increased and how fast. Suppose one of the developing countries secretly makes long-term contracts for an extra 10 Mbpd. Then one of the Big Ten decides it needs an extra 3 Mbpd for it’s military to power tanks, aircraft carriers, and aircraft, so it can save some failing democracy. Because of the limited ability to make a rapid production increase, it can’t get it. It could take a few months to ramp existing fields if they arent at max output now ( i think many are). To get a new deposit online might take 3-5 yrs. Or they might just invade some small oil producing country and take what they need. That has always worked out well.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

dodgy geezer

If we started using natural gas like there’s no tomorrow, it would become economic to run freighters to Titan where there are oceans of the stuff.

Technically we could do this now – but there is no economic justification. Gas demand would provide this…

Alan Tomalty

The plants are going to love this. mmmmmmmmmmmmmm much more CO2 into the atmosphere hopefully and more photosynthesis going on. The downer is that no matter how much CO2 we humans add, the oceans always find a way to take it out of the atmosphere. But in any case the more CO2 emitted the better. We need more CO2 NOT less. The alarmists have it completely backwards.

Robert W Turner

I caught the tail end of a report this morning about protein content being up in winter wheat this year, averaging 12.5% which is 0.5% above premium. So much for the vegetable nutritional crisis.

Felix
Peta of Newark

quote
We rich, “all the energy that we want at our fingertips” Westerners still aren’t grasping a sad and cold reality: most of the world is poor and energy deprived.
endquote

This may be so but are they:
stressed out of their heads by endless do-gooders and contradictory advice on every aspect of their lives
relentlessly bombarded by Junk Advertising and other people wanting wanting wanting money money money
likely to engage in Road Rage, Supermarket-trolley Rage, standing in a queue Rage or simply Rage Rage
paranoid about almost everything – from CO2 to plastic to PM this that and the other
robbed at every turn by tax collectors and lawyers
fat & diabetic
subject to any one of 192 different autoimmune disorders
using opiates, alcohol, dope, caffeine in ever increasing amounts (also Ibuprofen, Paracetemol etc etc)
being made lonely & suicidal by so-called Social Media
being dumped by their wives in ever increasing numbers
spending the last 5 years of their lives as brain dead cabbages with the physical abilities of a new-born
as adults using more diapers than the babies within their society

Maybe they are happy in their little shit-holes
Maybe their children make them happy
Maybe, making their children happy, by simply being there, makes them happy
Maybe they don’t like the supposed ‘freedom’ to piss in waste paper bins while the richest guy in the world watches and records
Maybe they have friends and acquaintances who will help with almost anything and not send a bill, invoice, demand letter or legalised thug around to get the money
Maybe they don’t want endless ‘do-gooding’ folks swanking, loud mouthing and showing off
Maybe they just want to be left in peace.
Like the Boabab Trees

Maybe, Less is More.

Robert W Turner

Oh yeah I’m sure they rather enjoy problems like clean water to drink or even enough water to shower, reliable electricity, rationing food, and insanely dangerous infrastructure.

Paul Penrose

Yeah, I’m sure they don’t mind watching their children die at a young age of entirely curable diseases, or hell, just simple starvation. As long as they can avoid a stressful job and road rage. Sure.

Curious George

Now WUWT is promoting its own hockey stick graphs.

Robert W Turner

Something tells me that even if both nations were to become as economically robust as the USA, we’d find that there is still plenty of petroleum for a century. Only a few of the world’s resource rocks have been tested for their potential, and if the same ~50% success rate was had elsewhere than the world could easily produce 150 million bbl/day. Throw in more expensive untraditional plays, like the Green River Fm., and known stimulation methods just waiting to become feasible, then 200 M bbl/d @ $100/bbl is within the realm of possibility.

Imagine the wealth that would be created.

MarkW

We know where there is lots of oil here in the US. It’s just that the government won’t let us go get it.

Javier

Oil projections are useless. These are International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook projections since 2000.

comment image

My experience of adding a few bacteria to a sterile 100 mL culture medium flask is that you can project the exponential growth for a few hours, but then growth slows down as nutrients become more scarce and waste metabolites accumulation produce unfavorable conditions. Then the number of bacteria reaches a peak and starts decreasing.

One of the most amazing things is that if you use a 1 L or 10 L culture medium flask you get very little extra growth time.

So yes, we can project growth to infinity and beyond, but when growth will stop is anybody’s guess. There is no way to tell if we are reaching peak growth, but given the fast growth rate of the second half of the 20th century I would say it cannot be too far away regardless of the initial amount of resources. We can think of all the people that should become middle class and get their fair share of the world’s resources, but when growth stops, a lot of people will be too late to the party, and they are going to be pretty pissed off that the party ended before they got their share of the pie.

GoatGuy

Say the ‘nutrient limited’ endpoint for 1ℓ of bugjuice is 100,000,000,000 cells.
And that you start with 10 cells. That’s 10,000,000,000× the number of starting cells.

ln(10,000,000,000) / ln(2) = 33.2 doublings.

If you have a 10ℓ culture, same starter:

ln(100,000,000,000) / ln(2) = 36.5 doublings.

36.5 ÷ 33.2 = 1.10

Or about 10% longer to fill up the larger medium. Just saying. In really naïve numerical terms.
GoatGuy

D. J. Hawkins

You did catch the phrase “very little extra”, right?? Ten percent longer time for ten times the amount of medium is counter-intuitive to the man-in-the-street.

rovingbroker

Source for the UBS EV numbers …

UBS Evidence Lab Electric Car Teardown – Disruption Ahead?
https://neo.ubs.com/shared/d1wkuDlEbYPjF/

InterZonKomizar

Here’s an excerpt about declining oil by Gail the Actuary ( link at end).
.
.
Matt Simmons was an energy investment banker and spoke frequently about peak oil. Matt was Chairman of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil-USA (ASPO-USA) Advisory Board. Matt was also founder and chairman of Simmons & Company International, and author of Twilight in the Desert.
.
.
Anyone who has attended a meeting of the ASPO-USA will remember hearing Matt speak. One of Matt’s big concerns was the lack of availability of transparent data with respect to oil and gas reserves, as explained in slides such as this one (from his talk at the 2009 ASPO-USA conference).
.
.
In his view (and in ours, too), way too many people hear about the huge reported reserves of Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries, and assume that this oil is really available for extraction. Matt makes the point that these reserves, and many others around the world, have not been audited. In fact, they seem to be political numbers, so we cannot depend on them. He also points out that we also do not have detail data with respect to historical oil extraction from individual fields in the Middle East, so we really do not know how close to decline Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries really are.
.
.
In 2005, Matt Simmons wrote a book called Twilight in the Desert. In it, he summarized what he learned about Saudi Arabian oil production by reading 200 academic papers. He concluded from his analysis that the oil extraction techniques being used there were techniques that one might use if the fields were quite depleted. Because of this, he doubted that we should believe stories that Saudi oil production can be greatly expanded. Instead, he raised the possibility that in the not too distant future, Saudi oil production will suddenly decline. Matt’s research underlying the book was no doubt behind his concern that oil reserves and oil production rates are not audited.
.
.
Another thing Matt is known for is his educational graphics about “what is really going on” with respect to oil extraction. For example, in his talk at the 2009 ASPO–USA conference, he shows this graphic of the amount of conventional oil discovered by decade.
.
.
It is pretty clear from the above graphic that “conventional” oil discoveries have declined since the 1960s, suggesting that most of the oil in liquid form in the world has already been discovered. While one can argue that there are other kinds of oil (oil sands, oil shale, and other non-conventional oil) that are not included in this graph, these other oil sources can be extracted only very slowly (and at great expense). Because of this, we cannot expect their growth in extraction to offset a decline in conventional oil production.
.
.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6831
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

HotScot

InterZonKomizar

I am Methane hydrate……..to the rescue.

Rocky,
Minister of common sense.

InterZonKomizar

@Rocky, minister of common sense- according to the wiki article unbridled optimism over methane hydrate is not justified.
.
.
~ ~ Excerpt-
Both Japan and China announced in May 2017 a breakthrough for mining methane clathrates, when they extracted methane from hydrates in the South China Sea.  However, industry consensus is that commercial-scale production remains years away.
.
.
Get a bicycle while they are still affordable, heh.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

HotScot

InterZonKomizar

Just in time for when the oil and coal run out.

Mine’ll be a methane hydrate powered bicycle, about 1,000cc, heh.

Rocky,
Minister of common sense.

InterZonKomizar

@Rocky- I’ll buy one of those. When I was younger I rode an 850cc Suzuki street trail bike. I never had an accident but it would go 0 to 60 in 4 seconds.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

HotScot

InterZonKomizar

I still have a 1200cc Suzuki Bandit. 0-60 in 3.5 seconds.

Would yours have gone faster if you had an accident?

Rocky,
Minister of common sense.

MarkW

“commercial-scale production remains years away”

Not a problem, we’ve got a couple of hundred years before we’ll need them.

D. J. Hawkins

Commercial scale production probably remains years away because fracked gas is so darn cheap.

Edwin

So the USA and EU are reducing their CO2 emissions increasing our energy cost and the greens are demanding we reduce our use of fossil fuels so the Chinese and Indians can have more. Have I got that right?

Lokki

All these comments and zero mention of Methane Hydrate.

“methane hydrate deposits are believed to be a larger hydrocarbon resource than all of the world’s oil, natural gas and coal resources combined. ”

https://geology.com/articles/methane-hydrates/

We have 50 years in which to develop extraction techniques. Japan, which has soured on nuclear energy, has already successfully performed test extractions. This technology will also, naturally be available to produce natural gas for India and China.

https://res.mdpi.com/energies/energies-10-01447/article_deploy/energies-10-01447.pdf?filename=&attachment=1

InterZonKomizar

@Lokki said- All these comments and zero mention of Methane Hydrate.
.
.
* I guess you didn’t actually read all the comments. Methane hydrates were mentioned previously and this is another clip from the same Wiki.
.
However, in the majority of sites deposits are thought to be too dispersed for economic extraction. Other problems facing commercial exploitation are detection of viable reserves and development of the technology for extracting methane gas from the hydrate deposits.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

D. J. Hawkins

Extracting the methane gas requires the highly technical, delicate, and complicated process of…dropping the pressure. You’re welcome for the solution. My invoice is in the mail.

InterZonKomizar

And in conclusion …
.
It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. Mark Twain
.
.
In 600CE a Zen Master said, “Dont let your ego prevent enlightenment.”
.
.
The progress of canonical science is often held back by torchbearers, until their torch goes out.
.
.
Sandy,
Minister of Future

When I did my early work on energy to create a lay presentation on the absolute realities of policies in terms of resources and sustainability under population pressure it was helped by the excellent Canadian engineer Douglas Lightfoot, who has always made the ultimately inevitable case for nuclear power very clearly. First saw his lecture at the UK IET (IEEE to Americans) in 2008, he had done all the work I was setting out to, David MacKay’s “arithmatic”, but in a more consumable way for lay people. I became even more KISS in approach at that moment..

If you consider about 1.5Billion people were using fossil fuels at sensible European developed economy rates until recently, not even at profligate waste rates as in USA, and then assume the future developed population may be 11 Billion at the same rates of energy use, how fast will that consume what fossil energy there is? Its the opposite of the rate of emptying of a reservoir, demand accelerates as supply is falling. But humans now have the technology to cope, and take us through the next ice age successfully, further south and lower down on the new shore line.

Nuclear is the ONLY option then, particularly for the USA, as it is the only energy source intense enough to support the profligate waste of energy and deliver all the health, wealth and happiness you can then afford, for as long as it rains and Uranium flows to the sea. Of course the American greens don’t want everyone else to enjoy what they have, hence the opposition. There is more nuclear binding energy available than most people could possibly imagine, or 11 Billion will need, with no environmental impact on a planetary scale. We can synthesise petrol for the resource intensive monster cars and global air travel for all from atmospheric CO2 and H2O, wholly sustainable recycling of hydrocarbons with nuclear energy, cleaner than diesel. David MacKay even helped me cost this, not cheap but doable, 5 or 6 times current cost of production? So we won’t ever run out of hydrocarbons, just natural hydro carbons, synthetic hydrocarbons will become available as the economics support the cost. Synthetic Ethylene for plastics as well.

The future will be fine, if energy use is the determinant, we have the (nuclear) technology when fossil inevitably disappears at an accelerating rate, and renewables just can’t meet even a subsistence energy economy demand level in most countries., on the physics facts. Just need some scientific reality to settle on the nonsense of climate change = renewables, when they cannot help as claimed re CO2 por anything else, and the effect of CO2 is probably insignificant compared to natural change, without the bogus assumptions re water vapour amplfication.

The CO2 control knob on the climate is a dummy, stuck there by the subsidy collectors of the climate industrial complex, using rigged models that cannot predict reality for that single inevitable reason. The guess is wrong. Doesn’t matter who makes it, if the PR doesn’t match nature, it’s WRONG! (Feynman composite.)

Hope the great CO2 fraud and its snake oil remedy don’t have to be seen to fail before the racket is ended, as it must on the science facts, and its proponents driven from power and office, as the lumpen proletariat who were told to believe in it realise they were very deliberately lied to on every aspect of the policies they were told must be supported to “save the planet” – by a greedy system of government, for the easy profit and jobs for insiders who sold the story, as well as the renewable subsidy collectors. The physics says the end of the state organised crime that is the climate change protection racket of renewable subsidy laws must come, the question is whether we can avoid an economic recession by ending the renewable energy / CO2 rackets before the serious effects arise?