Do you remember the “peak oil” scare? That was the claim, heard everywhere in the early 2000s, that nearly all the world’s discoverable oil had already been found, and we would shortly enter a time of inexorably declining production and rapidly escalating prices. This 2018 article in Forbes by Michael Lynch traces the “modern” version of the “peak oil” scare to a 1997 piece in the Oil & Gas Journal by a guy named Colin Campbell. Campbell argued that oil reserves were “rapidly depleting,” that there was “comparatively little left to find,” and that “the world’s economic and political stability, which relies on an abundant supply of cheap oil, is in serious jeopardy.”
Campbell was joined in ensuing years by a chorus of assenting voices. Among many others quoted by Lynch are Joe Romm of the Center for American Progress in 2009 (“I have blogged endlessly on the painfully obvious reality that we are at or near the peak”) and Rex Wehler of Greenpeace in 2012 (“Oil company cheerleaders proclaiming huge supplies of oil are dead wrong. Peak oil is as real as rain, and it is here now. Not 2050. Not 2020. Now.”)
And, of course, the usual: “[T]hose who disagreed were treated with derision.”
Then came the fracking revolution. By 2014 prices for oil (and gas as well) were plummeting. The “peak oil” scare quietly faded away, never to be mentioned again — although I haven’t noticed any of the promoters of the scare publicly admitting that they were wrong.
Oil production isn’t at a peak, and never was. But here’s something closely related that really is at or near a peak from which rapid decline should be expected: Oil-Hysteria. Oil-Hysteria is the delirium that holds that the production and use of oil (and for that matter other fossil fuels) for the benefit and happiness of humanity are grave sins and are destroying the planet. Lately that hysteria and delirium have reached a fevered pitch, untethered to reality and reminiscent of great stock market bubbles and tulip manias.
And thus today, after reviewing the evidence, the Manhattan Contrarian has announced the arrival of “Peak Oil-Hysteria.” It is here. Not 2050. Not 2030. Now.
The evidence is far too profuse to cover all of it in one blog post. But consider if you will a few data points:
- President Joe Biden came into office on a crusade against against the fossil fuel industry. Executive Orders issued in his first few days in office essentially did everything within the President’s power, absent new legislation, to restrict and hinder fossil fuel production. This included blocking new pipeline construction, ending fracking and drilling on federal lands, and ordering up various other regulations to make production more difficult and expensive. By August, with retail gas prices up about 30% since inauguration, Biden began urging OPEC members to increase production. On Saturday, at the G20 meeting in Rome — with retail gas prices up yet another 10% or so since August — Biden again urged major producing countries to ramp up supply. From Reuters, October 30: “U.S. President Joe Biden on Saturday urged major G20 energy producing countries [including Russia and Saudi Arabia] with spare capacity to boost production to ensure a stronger global economic recovery as part of a broad effort to pressure OPEC and its partners to increase oil supply.”
- While in Rome, Biden ridiculously conjured himself up a motorcade of some 85 of the biggest armored gas guzzlers ever known to man. Here is a picture of the extravaganza from the New York Post:
Do you think that Joe’s people rented all those specialized armored vehicles from Hertz? I haven’t been able to find confirmation, but I think it’s a completely safe bet that all of the vehicles got flown over from the U.S. on giant military transport planes. This has to be a Guinness Book of World Records occasion for carbon footprint for one guy’s trip to anywhere. On November 2 Senator John Barrasso sent a letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm demanding details on Biden’s expenses and carbon impact for this trip to Rome and Glasgow. The letter notes the “tone of insincerity” on carbon emissions set by Biden’s ridiculously extravagant travel entourage. That’s an extremely gentle way of putting it.
- The opening of the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow was accompanied, as these things always are, by enormous backups of private jets trying to fly into the local airports. The Daily Mail noted a “huge traffic jam” of some 400 private aircraft.
- President Biden was photographed having fallen asleep at the conference listening to some functionary drone on.
- Lots of heads of state showed up, but not the most important ones. Xi Jinping of China — the largest consumer of fossil fuel energy — was a no show. So were Vladimir Putin of Russia and Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia — the two largest producers of fossil fuel energy other than the U.S. China made no new pledges about cutting emissions, and instead reiterated its supposed pledge to reach “net zero” emissions by 2060. The year 2060 is obviously calculated to be well after the demise of every current world leader, and thus sufficiently far away that China will never be held to account for its completely phony non-commitment. But India (third largest emitter of GHGs after China and the U.S.) whose leader Narendra Modi did at least show up, went even one better: India said it would reach “net zero” by 2070! Oh, but India did say that it would build a slew of solar and wind facilities, but only if Western countries chipped in $1 trillion to pay for them!
- According to today’s Wall Street Journal, Biden remarked that Russia and China had made a mistake by not showing up, and they would “cede influence” in climate discussions. OK, we already knew this guy was dumb. Russia and China may have their problems, but clearly their leaders are smart enough to realize that the right strategy is to sit back and let the West commit suicide.
- Biden himself was of course empty-handed at the conference, having failed to move his multi-trillion dollar spendapalooza in Congress. Even if it all gets passed it would never make a noticeable difference in world emissions. As an example, completely missing from Biden’s multi-trillions is anything towards India’s latest trillion dollar demand. And don’t even ask about Africa.
- So in the absence of anything even remotely meaningful, the Wall Street Journal reports today that the delegates turned their attention to something still more peripheral — methane emissions: “Global leaders at the Glasgow climate summit pledged Tuesday to sharply curtail methane emissions, with President Biden saying the U.S. would tighten regulations on oil and natural-gas production to reduce leaks of the potent greenhouse gas. The effort spotlighted growing concerns about the environmental harms of methane, a byproduct of drilling. . . .” Once more, it’s the attack of the journalist English majors, who have no idea that methane, which is the main component of natural gas, is not a “byproduct” of drilling, but rather the whole point.
- On October 24 Iran’s Fars new agency reported that China is buying on the order of 1 million barrels of oil per day from Iran.
- And suddenly, some members of Congress are finding it politically advantageous to get on the sane side of the climate craziness. If you haven’t watched it, check out Representative Byron Donalds of Florida at the Congressional hearing on October 28 called by Representative Carolyn Maloney (of Manhattan) to try to embarrass the CEOs of the oil majors. Excerpt: “Somebody needs to go and call Merrick Garland, tell him to get in here and watch the intimidation that came from this very panel today,” Donalds said. “Because this is not about defending big oil, or defending big anything. It’s about defending the ability of people in our country to be free: say what they want, think what they want, spend their money how they choose. And if we are not going to be any better than the Chinese, how do we ever expect to beat them on the world stage when we’re cutting our neck when it comes to energy production while they are burning more coal, burning more oil, they’re increasing their emissions and they’re not showing up in Scotland. . . . [T]hey’re interested in building an economy.”
Note that I’m not saying that the whole climate scam is going to collapse tomorrow. Just that the hysteria has reached a peak beyond which it has nowhere to go. From here it will have to be a long decline.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Back in the good old days we learnt about peak oil, which was almost upon us, while at secondary school in England.
but that was 48 years ago !
the graph hasn`t changed much
There is no shortage of hysteria, mainly due to lack of education.
The lack of education is due to institutional education, not doing any education- instead
the focus is daycare and brainwashing.
It’s only after leaving these prisons of so called education, that any kind of education could
begin.
So, have no shortage of hysteria, because we spend trillions of dollars generating hysteria.
This is not a modern thing, it has been ongoing, but one could claim the industrial method of education has been fueled by public concern about the general lack of education- which is widely evident. Or the generation of hysteria has been supercharged within the last few decades, due to dumbness pumping more funds at the enormous stupidity of wasting the lives of children.
The children are taught that Earth is getting too hot, and we are in the coldest 2 million years of the 34 million year ice age.
No one knows how much warming of done by rising CO2 levels.
What is know, we have left what is called The Little Ice Age- a coldest period within many thousands of years, and for some reason we want the average global which about 15 C, return to temperatures of 13 to 14 C has were the temperature of Little Ice Age.
Everyone knows “alternative energy” is a scam. And we no where near peak oil.
But it seems to me China is getting closer to peak coal. And China is not desperate to depend on any “alternative energy” unless you want call nuclear energy as an alternative energy {which it actually, is}.
Same old story like a broken record droning on year after year, decade after decade and now in its third century. The same story comes every few years since the early of the 1860s when “Peak Oil” was declared at the start of the Pennsylvania Oil Rush.
Something that isn’t understood, or at least appreciated, is that the predictions of Peak Oil were based on the then known methods of extraction. The development of horizontal drilling with hydraulic fracturing was a technological innovation almost as profound as solving the barriers to controlled thermonuclear fusion. It is a new game! But, that doesn’t mean that alternative sources of crude oil relieve us of the issues of a finite resource. It simply extends the time to Peak Oil. Just because one’s cancer goes into remission doesn’t mean that you can then expect to live forever! The good news is that the reprieve may allow us enough time to find an alternative source of energy that isn’t unreliable and intermittent.
Known reserves is not the same thing as economically available reserves. We are very likely at or slightly past the point at which oil extraction became less viable economically; production may have already peaked.
Wanna bet?
You got that right. Recall the military transport plane that crashed in Wyoming while transporting gear for the Clintons.
I learned about the Hubbert Curve in the 1970s as a student taking a petroleum geology class. It was always understood that the global production curve and the US curve were two different things with peaks 50 years apart. Also the curve applied to existing technology: extraction from sandstone and carbonate reservoirs. It was understood that new technology opening up new reserves (horizontal wells in oil shales) would be a game changer. Even so, the depletion curve for an oil shale is much steeper than for a conventional well (it must be replaced faster). But it is a game-changer opening up new reserves.
I listen to the public debate and always come back to uncovered details. Petroleum products are used not just for fuels but for materials. About 25% goes to gasoline, mineral spirits and aviation gas. 25% goes to intermediate distillates, mostly diesel fuel and jet fuel. Fuels are not that interesting. The other 50% goes to lubricating oils, asphalt, synthetic fibers, paint, artificial rubber, wood stains and finishes, plastics, etc. It is the 50% used for materials that will be missed most and is the most irreplaceable.
Hubbert’s curve has been extended in time due to technology reaching new reserves. It has not been invalidated. There remains another untapped reserve: clathrates (gas hydrates). Nevertheless, conservation is good policy. It would be prudent to replace existing coal and natural gas power plants with geothermal (in the west) and nuclear (in the east) as “base power”. This is my measure of whether environmentalists are serious. When they abandon the pipe dream of wind and solar, temporary solutions without a valid battery technology, and go to something that works, then and only then will I know they are serious.
Life throws you curve balls. I studied for a graduate degree in petroleum engineering in the 1980s after completing my scholarship obligation to the Army. Of course the great bust occurred in 1986. It was then I learned that it is possible to study a specialty engineering subject and never work in it. I was not recruited on campus along with all of my classmates. Oil companies will not hire somebody without experience. How do you get experience? You are hired by on-campus recruiting. But there was no on-campus recruiting in the late 1980s. So I clean up toxic messes on military installations instead. These messes were created not out of negligence but from bad environmental engineering practices from lack of understanding of fate, transport, and toxicity. 40 years after CERCLA was signed we are still paying for cleanup. Wind and solar are similar. Being thrown out there without an understanding of environmental problems they create (every solution creates a new problem), without the necessary battery storage technology, they are tomorrow’s cleanup.
if humans were a fair and decent minded lot, we would understand the importance of saving some for whatever life springs up after the next meteor strike.
Mr. too: Yes, it’s critical that we act now to save the planet from the future you imagine.
“the world’s economic and political stability, which relies on an abundant supply of cheap oil, is in serious jeopardy.”
At least Campbell got that right. Unfortunately, the enviro/progs are busy trying to crush our economic and political stability with their “keep it in the ground” hogwash.
Of course they were!
Only by pre-inspecting and arming Biden’s fleet, can the Secret Service fully vouch the vehicles are safe.
No, they’re not likely to announce where, how or when these vehicles are transported. That is a critical security issue.
It would take several C5 Super Galaxies to transport 85 hardened, armored and likely armed Biden escort ICE vehicles.
Capable of carrying 176,610 lbs, (80,110 kg) of cargo means that at least two Super Galaxies were used, likely three.
Then there are the support aircraft; escort fighter planes, F/A 18E/F super hornets, and F35 Lightning strike fighters; A couple of E3 AWACS sentry aircraft; USAF flying tankers to keep all of the planes fueled; and the support crews both Air Force and USN needs to keep all of these planes flying.
There are likely countries that emit less CO₂ than Biden’s flying circus of losers and morons.
I think more than weight is floor space.
Cargo can be put on tall pallets and stacked.
Do they do that with these vehicles?
I tend to doubt it…that would take an awful lot of time, and also a bunch of people, both of which present problems of security and practicality.
“The C-5 features a malfunction detection analysis and recording system to identify errors throughout the aircraft.[33] The cargo compartment is 121 ft (37 m) long, 13.5 ft (4.1 m) high, and 19 ft (5.8 m) wide, or just over 31,000 cu ft (880 m3). It can accommodate up to 36 463L master pallets or a mix of palletized cargo and vehicles. The nose and aft cargo-bay doors open the full width and height of the cargo bay to maximize efficient loading of oversized equipment. Full-width ramps enable loading double rows of vehicles from either end of the cargo hold.[50]
The C-5 Galaxy is capable of moving nearly every type of military combat equipment, including such bulky items as the Army armored vehicle launched bridge, at 74 short tons (67 t), from the United States to any location on the globe;[50] and of accommodating up to six Boeing AH-64 Apache helicopters or five Bradley Fighting Vehicles at one time.”
If those vehicles are about the footprint of a Bradley FV, it would seem that it took 17 of them to carry 85 vehicles.
One may wonder in awe at the Almighty Creator who filled our cosmic blue pearl with such vast quantities of oil, gas and coal. Does He intend to keep us warm and comfy as we learn to transition to nuclear energy? The pope is tragically uneducated.