If one can’t rely on Daniel Yergin for soothing reassurances about the state of the global oil market, who you gonna call?
Daniel Yergin and his associates at Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) have consistently predicted a 20% to 25% increase in global total liquids production (which consists of crude oil, condensate, natural gas liquids, refinery gains and other liquids such as low net energy biofuels).
Reasons for interest in electric power generation from wind are multifold. First, wind is a renewable energy source. It is not likely to deplete over time, which is not the case for oil, coal, and natural gas.
Second, wind electric power generators use no water, which is in declining supply in many places in the world.
The 2011 ASPO-USA Conference, held in Washington, DC November 2-5, in the shadow of the U.S. Capitol, attracted more than 300 participants from many walks of life. These attendees were brought together, presumably, by a belief that we are entering an era of inexorable decline in fossil fuel production and a desire to face head-on this very serious yet underreported predicament.
Last week we and other representatives of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas USA (ASPO-USA) stood on the steps of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to call for “Truth in Energy” concerning one of the most serious threats to our economy, national security, and environment: the prospect of an impending decline in world oil supply. The consequences of this milestone are far-reaching and potentially catastrophic. After a news conference at DOE, we delivered a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu summarizing our concerns and requesting answers to specific questions about DOE’s response to this monumental challenge.
By itself, the concept of having to get by on just a little bit less oil each year seems to be manageable enough. Some think that a steadily, or even sharply, rising price will merely reduce demand and promote exploration and that everything will more or less normally work itself out through well understood market mechanisms. Perhaps it will, but I think the odds are stacked against a smooth transition to a future of less net energy.
This week, we would like to present our agenda for the 2011 ASPO-USA Conference – Peak Oil, Energy & the Economy to be held November 2-5 (Wednesday – Saturday) in Washington DC.
Wednesday is a pre-conference day featuring visits with Congressional offices and Congressional staff. Thursday will focus on the latest information on oil and energy trends, and analysis of their implications for the economy. Friday will focus on strategies and opportunities to adapt to a new energy and economic reality. Finally, Saturday will focus on interactive roundtable sessions where YOU will have in-depth discussions with speakers and other invited guests.
As we previously forecast, the decline in world oil production is likely to occur in the next 1-4 years, a year having passed since we forecast 2-5 years. Some believe that weak worldwide economic conditions will significantly extend the onset of decline. We believe that the delay will be essentially negligible.
Because of the myriad of variables, the timing of the onset of the decline of world oil production cannot be predicted with certainty. In the early 2000’s when we began our world oil production studies, we thought that future world oil production might peak sharply, similar to U.S. production, which sharply peaked in 1970.
Daniel Yergin’s 2004 and 2005 Predictions for Oil Prices, Production and Exports – Three Strikes and You Are Out?
Daniel Yergin, whom the media have consistently designated as one of the world’s premier experts on energy matters–and who has a consistent track record of predicting higher oil production levels–has been very visible of late, especially with a full page essay in the Wall Street Journal, focused on why concerns about Peak Oil are misplaced.
The trouble with apocalypse is that most people have already seen it at the movie theater, watched it on television, read it in a book, or heard all about it from the pulpit. So inundated with the language of crisis, that we have become immune to it. From the perspective of the historian our age has been chock full of “great transformations.” And, it is, after all, the historian’s business to write about great change even if he or she has to invent some.
My friend, Rob Dietz, has reminded me about these words by Aldo Leopold: “One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds.” But when I mention the assorted causes of my internal bleeding to my wife and friends, they all look at me with disbelief and impatience. They do not feel the way I often do. What if their thinking is wiser and reflects what really can be done in a world overrun by seven billion people, who always want more than they have at any given moment and place? For most people on the Earth, “more” means safe water to drink, fresh food to eat, and a shelter with a cook stove and an outhouse. For the very few “more” means a $2.5 million watch and unlimited access to all conceivable resources to be used at will.
