The Chamber of Commerce Newspaper – “Soon the oil will run out”: Volvo AB supports peak oil research / Handelskammartidningen – ”Snart sinar oljan”: Volvo AB stödjer Peak Oil forskningen

Stockholm’s Chamber of Commerce publishes a magazine named, “Handelskammartidningen” and it can easily be read on the internet. This year’s first issue is now available and on page 36 is an article with the title, “Soon the oil will run out”. Last autumn the article’s author, Per Widman, was in Uppsala to interview me. However, it is only now that the article has been published. The danger always exists that some statements can become outdated with the passage of time but I think that everything that was said is as valid now as it was when I discussed the issues concerning oil with Per last year. If anything, the recent events in Libya have made the issues even more critical.

The most interesting aspect of the article for me is to read the comments that accompany the article from a number of other well-known people in Sweden. First, Christian Azar [Prof. of Physics at Chalmers University] says that our research is interesting but that “[Kjell] has, for example, an all-too-pessimistic view of how much coal we can produce”. He made a similar statement recently in the Gothenberg Post and it is getting a little tiresome receiving these attacks without Christina Azar showing us where our peer-reviewed scientific articles on this issue are in error. When I make statements on coal I do so on the basis of our research results.

Ulf Svan is the managing director of The Swedish Petroleum Institute – an organization representing the interests of Sweden’s petroleum industry. Naturally, he will not say that he believes in peak oil because then he would be out of a job. As usual, Marian Radetzki [a national economist] discusses resources and, as usual, he has not understood that the reality of resource availability is about transforming a resource into a reserve – i.e. something that is profitable for resource extraction – and then to generate a flow of material from this reserve that can be converted into usable products.

For a couple of years now I have asserted that politicians cannot handle peak oil because they are dependent on current public opinion, i.e. as shown in monthly opinion polls, and most of the public does not wish make a sacrifice now in order to have an improved life in 20 years time. The only activity where 20-year forward planning is prioritised is in industry so what we need are visionary business leaders. The last opinion of interest in the article is from the managing director of Volvo AB:

“Volvo closely follows issues around traditional as well as new energy sources using our own experts and the research of others. Therefore we are very familiar with Kjell’s research. Since our products currently mostly use diesel fuel the peak oil issue is of central interest to us. Personally, I have no doubt that access to oil will decrease and that we must prepare to efficiently use other sources of energy for our products. However, the peak oil issue is very complex and how quickly oil disappears will be affected by many factors. Therefore, properly based research that generates ever more refined theories on this issue is very important.

Thank you Leif Johansson for your support for our research.

(Swedish)
Stockholms handelskammare ger ut en tidning som heter Handelskammartidningen och det går utmärkt att läsa tidningen på nätet (läs tidningen på nätet). Årets först nummer är nu ute och på sidan 36 finns en artikel med rubriken ”Snart sinar oljan”. Det var i höstas som Per Widman var här i Uppsala och gjorde en intervju med mig men det är först nu som artikeln publiceras. Det finns alltid risk för att några uttalanden kan föråldras under så lång tid, men jag tycker att allt är lika aktuellt nu som då vi diskuterade oljans problem. Det som händer i Libyen har snarar förstärkt problematiken.
Intressant för mig är att läsa kommentarer från några kända personer. Vi har först Christian Azar som säger att vår forskning är intressant men att ”Han har till exempel en allt för pessimistisk syn på hur mycket kol vi kan komma att utvinna”. Ett liknande uttalande gjorde han nyligen i Göteborgsposten och det börjar att bli lite tröttsamt att få dessa påhopp utan att Christian Azar i vetenskapliga artiklar visar att vår fackgranskade artiklar är felaktiga. Då jag uttalar mig om kol gör jag det utifrån vår forskning.

Ulf Svan som är VD för Svenska petroleuminstitutet, en intresseorganisation för landets bensinhandlare, kan naturligtvis inte säga att han tror på Peak Oil för då skulle han förlora jobbet. Marian Radetzki diskuterar som vanligt resurser och har som vanligt inte förstått att verkligheten rör sig om att förvandla en resurs till reserv, dvs något som är lönsamt att ha som bas för utvinning, och sedan skapa ett flöde från denna reserv och att detta flöde sedan skall omvandlas till användbara produkter.

Jag har sedan ett par år tillbaka hävdat att politiker klara inte utav Peak Oil för man är beroende av allmänhetens röster i nuet, helst varje månad i en opinionsundersökning, och folkflertalet vill inte avstå från något nu för att det skall bli bättre on 20 år. Den enda verksamhet där man prioriterar 20-årstänkandet är inom industrin så vad vi behöver är framsynta företagsledare. Sist i raden att uttala sig är VD och koncernchef för AB Volvo:

”Volvo följer noggrant både genom egna experter och andra forskare frågor som rör traditionella såväl som nya energikällor. Därför är vi väl införstådda i Kjells forskning. Eftersom våra produkter för närvarande utnyttjar diesel i första hand så är frågan om Peak Oil central för oss. För mig råder det inte något tvivel om att tillgången på olja kommer att minska och att vi därför måste förbereda oss för att effektivt kunna utnyttja andra energikällor för våra produkter. Peak Oil-frågan är dock mycket komplex och hur fort oljan kommer att sina påverkas förstås av en mängd faktorer. En kvalificerad forskning som skapar alltmer förfinade teorier är därför mycket viktigt.”

Tack Leif Johansson för ditt stöd till vår forskning.

Obama’s speech on energy

If we look back in time, we find that all the presidents in the United States since Nixon’s time will sooner or later make a statement which indicates that the U.S. must become less dependent on imports of energy and especially oil. On March 11 it was time for Obama to make his statement on future energy supply at a press conference in the White House. I will come back with comments, but in this post you can read what Obama said:

Let me say a few words about something that’s obviously been on the minds of many Americans here at home, and that’s the price of gasoline.

In an economy that relies on oil, gas prices affect everybody -– from farmers and truck drivers to restaurant owners and workers as well as consumers. Businesses see rising prices affect their bottom line. Families feel the pinch every time they fill up the tank. For Americans already facing a tough time, it’s an added burden.

Of course, rising prices are not a new phenomenon. Three years ago, before the recession hit, a combination of factors, including rising demand from emerging economies like China, drove gas prices to more than $4 a gallon. The worldwide recession and the decrease in demand pushed prices back down. But over the past year, as the economy has picked up steam and global demand for oil has increased, prices have increased again. Turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East has added uncertainty to the mix and lost production in Libya has tightened supply.

Now, here’s the good news. The global community can manage supply disruptions like this. Other oil-producing nations have committed to filling any gaps –- and we will continue to coordinate closely with our international partners to keep all options on the table when it comes to any supply disruptions.

Here at home, everybody should know that should the situation demand it, we are prepared to tap the significant stockpile of oil that we have in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. We’re also using the resources at our disposal at the federal level to monitor any possible manipulation in the oil markets. And I’m asking the Attorney General and relevant state — relevant agencies to work with state attorneys general to monitor for price gouging to make sure that nobody is taking advantage of working families at the pump.

In addition, America is better prepared for supply disruptions than we used to be. Today, we use 7 percent less oil than we did in 2005, even as our economy has grown since then, partly because our economy as a whole is more efficient. We’re adapting. We’re producing more oil and we’re importing less. Our automakers, for example, are manufacturing more fuel-efficient cars -– some that now get more than 50 miles to the gallon –- and our consumers are driving more of these cars.

In December, Democrats and Republicans came together to pass a payroll tax cut that is already helping to grow our economy and create jobs. In the wake of rising gas prices, it should also help act as a cushion for working families. This doesn’t lessen our commitment to do everything that we can to get gas prices down, but that tax cut will total about $1,000 for the average working family this year, or an extra $80 or so showing up in your paycheck each month. And that tax relief package is a key reason that even with these higher prices, economists and investors like Warren Buffett believe we should still expect solid growth and strong private sector job creation this year.

Now, the hard truth is, is that as long as our economy depends on foreign oil, we’ll always be subject to price spikes. So we’ve got to get moving on a comprehensive energy strategy that pursues both more energy production and more energy conservation. We need to increase our access to secure energy supplies in the near term, and we’ve got to make our economy more energy-efficient and energy-independent over the long run.

Let me be more specific. First, we need to continue to boost domestic production of oil and gas. Last year, American oil production reached its highest level since 2003. Let me repeat that. Our oil production reached its highest level in seven years. Oil production from federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico reached an all-time high. For the first time in more than a decade, imports accounted for less than half of what we consumed.

So any notion that my administration has shut down oil production might make for a good political sound bite, but it doesn’t match up with reality. We are encouraging offshore exploration and production. We’re just doing it responsibly. I don’t think anybody has forgotten that we’re only a few months removed from the worst oil spill in our history. So what we’ve done is to put in place common-sense standards like proving that companies can actually contain an underwater spill. And oil companies are stepping up — we’ve approved more than 35 new offshore drilling permits that meet these new safety and environmental standards.

There is more we can do, however. For example, right now, the industry holds leases on tens of millions of acres –- both offshore and on land –- where they aren’t producing a thing. So I’ve directed the Interior Department to determine just how many of these leases are going undeveloped and report back to me within two weeks so that we can encourage companies to develop the leases they hold and produce American energy. People deserve to know that the energy they depend on is being developed in a timely manner.

We’re also taking steps that will enable us to gather data on potential gas and oil resources off the mid- and south Atlantic, and we’re working with the industry to explore new frontiers of production, safety measures, and containment technology. We’re looking at potential new development in Alaska, both onshore and offshore. And when it comes to imported oil, we’re strengthening our key energy relationships with other producer nations, something that I will discuss with President Rousseff when I visit Brazil next week.

All these actions can increase domestic oil production in the short and medium term. But let’s be clear -– it is not a long-term solution. Even if we started drilling new wells tomorrow, that oil isn’t coming online overnight. And even if we tap every single reserve available to us, we can’t escape the fact that we only control 2 percent of the world’s oil, but we consume over a quarter of the world’s oil. T. Boone Pickens, who made his fortune in the oil business — and I don’t think anybody would consider him unfriendly to drilling — was right when he said that “this is one emergency we can’t drill our way out of.”

We can’t place our long-term bets on a finite resource that we only control 2 percent of -– especially a resource that’s vulnerable to hurricanes, war, and political turmoil.

So beyond increased domestic production, if we want to secure our long-term prosperity and protect the American people from more severe oil shocks in the future, the way to do it is to gradually reduce demand and then do everything we can to break our dependence on oil.

For example, last year we established a groundbreaking national fuel efficiency standard for cars and trucks. It’s going to save consumers money while conserving about 1.8 billion barrels of oil. And we’re working with automakers, autoworkers, and states to ensure that the high-quality, fuel-efficient cars and trucks of tomorrow continue to be built right here in the United States of America.

To satisfy our broader energy needs, we’re working to diversify our entire portfolio with historic investments in clean energy. Right now, all across America, our farmers are producing homegrown fuels, our scientists are looking for the next breakthroughs, and our workers are back in once shuttered factories, manufacturing wind turbines and solar panels and advanced batteries that will help our cars get hundreds of miles to the gallon. These are jobs that didn’t exist two years ago, and we want to create millions more of these jobs.

And in this year’s State of the Union address, I set a goal for America: By 2035, 80 percent of our electricity will come from a broad array of clean energy sources –- from renewables like wind and solar and homegrown biofuels, along with natural gas, clean coal, and nuclear power.

So these are just some of the steps that we’ve already taken to secure America’s energy future. And over the course of the weeks and months ahead, we will take more.

But the bottom line is this. We’ve been having this conversation for nearly four decades now. Every few years, gas prices go up; politicians pull out the same old political playbook, and then nothing changes. And when prices go back down, we slip back into a trance. And then when prices go up, suddenly we’re shocked. I think the American people are tired of that. I think they’re tired of talk. We’ve got to work together -– Democrats, Republicans, and everybody in between –- to finally secure America’s energy future. I don’t want to leave this for the next President, and none of us should want to leave it for our kids.

“The oil of the Arctic is not worth the risks”

(K. Aleklett: The newspaper Sydsvenskan, Sweden, published this debate article on March 13 under, “Current Issues”. In May, Sweden will take over chairmanship of the Arctic Council for the period 2011-2014. Drilling for oil and natural gas will be an important issue during this period. The article is an attempt to highlight the issue to public debate.)

“The oil of the Arctic is not worth the risks”. The oil companys’ assert that it is necessary to drill for oil in deep water, including in the Arctic. But the oil reserves concerned are not greater than could be provided by a number of simple savings, writes Kjell Aleklett, Professor of Physics at Uppsala University, Sweden.

Carl-Henric Svanberg, the chairman of BP, delivered his speech and then left by the back door when the World Maritime University and International Maritime Organization held a conference in Malmö, Sweden, on the handling of risk and oil spills. In his speech Svanberg noted that one must drill in the deep ocean, including in the Arctic, to meet the future’s energy needs. His statement is, naturally, advertising for BP’s future activities. BP notes that “without new additions to production provided by deep-water drilling we have a restricted future in front of us”.

It is time to review BP and the other international oil companies and their contribution to global oil supply from deep water. From the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) after the Deep Water Horizon rig exploded we know that BP operates there together with other international oil companies.

“Deep-water” begins at 500 metres. In total there are around 70 oilfields in the Gulf of Mexico that are at least this deep. The total production from these wells is 800,000 barrels of oil per day (b/d). BP’s flagship the Thunder Horse platform contributes about 250,000 b/d. They will maintain this maximum production for about 5 years and it will then begin to decline.

Mars-Ursa is the largest oilfield in the GOM. Production began in 1996, gave maximum production of 270,000 barrels per day from 2001 to 2004, and now production has dropped to 150 000 barrels a day. In a few years it will be finished. New oilfields in deep-water or in the Arctic will experience the same brief history. Those 800,000 b/d that today are produced in the Gulf of Mexico make up approximately 1 % of global production. The reality is that it would be fairly easy to do without all of this production.

When Carl-Henric Svanberg says that it is necessary to drill in deep water including in the Arctic he means that it is necessary for BP and the international oil companies, not for the world. During the 1960s when global oil consumption was around 10 billion barrels per annum (Gb/a) most of the world’s largest oilfields were discovered and we now know that this amounted to 56 Gb/a of discoveries. These numbers have, for many years, been a well-kept secret in the oil industry since general awareness of such huge reserves of oil would otherwise have led to a lower oil price.

In the annual report of an oil company it has always been most important to show that they can replace the oil that they produced that year with new reserves. During the entire 20th century it was simple to do with the help of the hidden reserves. Now it is no longer possible.

Last year ExxonMobil confessed for the first time that the company had not managed to replace all its produced reserves with an equal volume of oil, even though they purchased the reserves of other oil companies. BP also buys up other’s reserves, including in Russia, but if the company does not find any new oil in deep water they face red entries in their accounting of new reserves.

In an editorial of 7 March Sydsvensan discusses if BP will be made a scapegoat for the Gulf of Mexico catastrophe. The answer is, of course, yes. In the same way, we should make Shell face responsibility for the huge environmental destruction they have caused in the Niger Delta in Africa.

Our thirst for oil seems to be unquenchable but there will come a time when it cannot be quenched. Ten years ago, when the oil price was $20 per barrel (/b) I said that, in 2010, we would have problems with quenching our thirst. At that time the World Bank and leading economic institutes believed that the oil price in 2011 would still be $20/b.

It is always difficult to warn of events a long way in advance but sooner or later the reality arrives. The expression “peak oil” was coined by ASPO, the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas, ten years ago and today it is on many people’s lips. On 4 March it was the lips of Shell’s managing director Peter Vosers who said; “One day we will face a situation where production does not satisfy demand.” That means we have reached peak oil.

BP has recently presented a future scenario to 2030 in which there is no shortage of oil. Instead, oil production is continuously increasing. It is time for even Carl-Henric Svanberg, the chairman of BP, to recognize reality.

“Arktis olja är inte värd riskerna”

Sydsvenskan publicerade denna debattartikel den 13 mars under “Aktuella frågor”.

“Arktis olja är inte värd riskerna”
Oljebolagen hävdar att det är nödvändigt att borra efter olja på djupt vatten, bland annat i Arktis. Men de oljereserver det totalt handlar om är inte större än att motsvarande mängd enkelt skulle kunna sparas in, skriver Kjell Aleklett, professor i fysik vid Uppsala universitet.

Carl-Henric Svanberg, BP:s styrelseordförande, levererade sitt tal och smet sedan ut genom bakdörren när World Maritime University och International Maritime Organization i veckan höll konferens i Malmö om riskhantering vid oljeutsläpp. I sitt tal markerade Svanberg att det är nödvändigt att ge sig in på djuphavsborrning, bland annat i Arktis, för att möta framtidens energibehov. Hans uttalande är naturligtvis en marknadsföring av kommande aktiviteter. BP markerar att utan nya tillskott från produktion från djupa vatten så har vi en kärv framtid att vänta.

Det är dags att granska BP och de andra internationella oljebolagen och deras bidrag till den globala oljeförsörjningen från djupa vatten. Genom katastrofen med den havererade oljeriggen Deepwater Horizon vet vi att BP opererar i Mexikanska golfen tillsammans med andra internationella oljebolag.

Gränsen för djupvattenproduktion går vid 500 meter, och totalt finns det cirka 70 oljefält i Mexikanska golfen som är på dessa djup. Den totala produktionen vid dessa fält är 800 000 fat olja om dagen. BP:s flaggskepp Thunder Horse bidrar med 250 000 fat om dagen. Denna topproduktion kommer man att uppnå under cirka fem år, sedan börjar den sjunka.

Mars-Ursa är det största fältet i området. Produktionen började 1996, höll maximal produktion på 270 000 fat om dagen från 2001 till 2004, och nu har produktionen sjunkit till 150 000 fat om dagen. Om några år är det över. Nya oljefält på djupt vatten eller i Arktis kommer att genomgå samma korta historia. De 800 000 fat om dagen som produceras i Mexikanska golfen utgör ungefär 1 procent av den globala produktionen. Verkligheten är att det ganska lätt skulle gå att spara in hela den produktionen.

Då Carl-Henric Svanberg säger att det är nödvändigt att ge sig ut på djuphavsborrning ibland annat Arktis så är det inte nödvändigt för världen utan för BP och de internationella oljebolagen. På 1960-talet, då den globala konsumtionen var 10 miljarder fat om året, hittade man många av världens största oljefält och nu vet vi att fynden uppgick till 56 miljarder fat om året. Dessa siffror har under många år varit en väl bevarad hemlighet inom oljeindustrin, då dessa ofantliga reserver skulle leda till lägre pris på oljan.

I årsbokslutet för ett oljebolag har det alltid varit viktigt att visa att man kan ersätta årets produktion med nya reserver och under hela 1900-talet har det varit en enkel match med hjälp av de gömda reserverna. Nu går det inte längre.

Förra året fick Exxon Mobil för första gången erkänna att bolaget inte klarade av att fylla på sina reserver med samma volym som man producerat, fastän man köpt upp andra bolags reserver. BP köper också upp reserver, bland annat i Ryssland, men hittar bolaget ingen ny olja på djupt vatten står man inför röda siffror vad det gäller tillskott av nya reserver.

I en ledare den 7 mars diskuterar Sydsvenskan om BP skall göras till syndabock för katastrofen i Mexikanska golfen. Svaret är självklart ja. På samma sätt skall vi göra Shell till syndabock för den gigantiska miljöförstöring som sker i Nigerdeltat i Afrika.

Vår törst på olja tycks vara osläckbar, men det kommer en tid då den inte kan släckas. För tio år sedan, då oljepriset var 20 dollar per fat sade jag att vi runt år 2010 skulle få problem att släcka vår törst. Då trodde Världsbanken och ledande ekonomiska institut att oljepriset 2011 fortfarande skulle vara 20 dollar per fat.

Det är alltid svårt att varna för händelser långt fram i tiden, men förr eller senare hinner verkligheten ifatt. Uttrycket peak oil myntades av Aspo, Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas, för tio år sedan och idag är det på mångas läppar. Den 4 mars var det Shells VD Peter Vosers läppar som sade:

”Vi kanske en dag står inför en situation där produktionen inte möter upp mot efterfrågan.”

Det betyder att vi har nått Peak Oil. BP har nyligen lagt fram sitt framtidsscenario fram till 2030 och där finns det ingen brist på olja utan en ständig ökning. Det är dags att även Carl-Henric Svanberg blir medveten om verkligheten.

KJELL ALEKLETT

The IEA’s journey towards reality and peak oil / IEA:s resa mot verkligheten och Peak Oil

Yesterday there was reason for me to summarise the various prognoses on future oil production that the International Energy Agency (IEA) has made every year in its World Energy Outlook (WEO) reports. IN WEO2000 that was published in November 2000 they estimated that production in 2010 would be 95.8 million barrels per day (Mb/d) and by 2020 it was to have grown to 114.7 Mb/d. There was no estimate for 2030. 2002 was the year that we had our first ASPO conference in Uppsala and was also the first year that the IEA give a prognosis for 2030. It was production at 120.0 Mb/d. Two years later they had increased their production estimate for 2030 to 121.3 Mb/d. It was then that I made my first analysis of the IEA’s prognoses, an analysis that the IEA attempted to convince me to remove from the internet (The Uppsala Code). Then they began to correct their prognosis for 2030. In WEO2006 it was 116.3 Mb/d and in WEO2008 it was 106.4 Mb/d. Their most recent prognosis for 2030 in WEO2010 was 93.6 Mb/d. In that prognosis they gave the volume of natural gas liquids (NGL) in barrels and did not correct for the fact that these liquids have a lower energy content than conventional crude oil. Presumably we will see a similar prognosis when WEO2011 is published but, who knows, by the time WEO2012 comes around maybe peak oil will even be reality for the IEA.

(Swedish)
I går fanns det anledning för mig att göra en sammanställning av de prognoser av framtidens oljeproduktion som International Energy Agency (IEA) gör varje år presenterar i World Energy Outlook (WEO). I WEO 2000, som publicerades i november 2000, beräknar man att produktionen 2010 skall vara 95.8 miljoner fat om dagen (Mb/d) och fram till 2020 skall den öka till 114.7 Mb/d. För 2030 finns det ingen beräkning. År 2002, samma år som vi hade vår första ASPO konferens i Uppsala, var första året som IEA lämnade en prognos för 2030 och det var 120.0 Mb/d. Två år senare hade man uppgraderat prognosen för 2030 till 121.3 Mb/d. Det var då som jag gjorde min första analys av IEA:s prognoser, en analys som IEA försökte övertala mig att ta bort från webben. Sedan börjar man korrigera sina prognoser för 2030, WEO2006 – 116.3 Mb/d, WEO2008 – 106.4 Mb/d och nu senast i WEO2010 – 93.6 Mb/d, alla värden är för år 2030. I sin prognos anger man naturligt flytand gas, NGL, som antalet fat och korrigerar inte för energiinnehållet. Förmodligen kommer vi att se liknande prognoser då WEO2011 kommer, men vem vet, då WEO 2012 kommer kan vi kanske se att Peak Oil blir verklighet även för International Energy Agency.

Oil security and peak oil / Oljesäkerhet och Peak Oil

“Wonderful but Dangerous” is the headline of the lead editorial in today’s Sydsvenskan [“Southern Swede”, a newspaper] and they declare that it is necessary to minimize the risks involved in oil production and oil transport. The reason for the editorial is that today BP’s chairperson Carl-Henric Svanberg is visiting Malmö to participate in a conference on handling of oil spills.

It seems as though the editorial does not want to lay too much of the responsibility for the Gulf of Mexico oil leak on Svanberg, “Still, it is too simple to make BP a lone scapegoat. Drilling for oil at sea involves risks. Transporting oil also involves great risks. Security measures must be considered rigorously but accidents happen and when they happen they cause severe environmental damage.”

They continue by discussing the importance of oil for our welfare, “Oil has been a blessing. Without it many more of the world’s people would be poor and economic development would be far below today’s level. Our welfare has, literally, been pumped up out of the ground.”

Then they continue by stating that the age of oil has passed its prime and peak oil is mentioned, “The International Energy Agency, IEA, estimates that peak oil, the maximum capacity to produce oil, was reached in 2006. When reserves are shrinking at the same time as demand is constantly growing then the risks increase.”

There is a great deal that could be said about extreme oil extraction and how peak oil will affect us but for now I am just very pleased that Sydsvenskan mentioned peak oil on my birthday!

(Swedish)
Härligt men Farligt är rubriken på dagens huvudledare i dagens Sydsvenskan och man konstaterar att det är nödvändigt att minimera riskerna kring oljeutvinning och oljetransporter (läs ledaren). Anledningen till att ledaren om olja kommer just idag är att BP:s styrelseordförande Carl-Henric Svanberg gästar Malmö för att delta i en konferens om hantering av oljeläckor (läs om konferensen).

Det verkar som om ledaren inte vill lägga allt för stort ansvar på Svanberg och BP då det gäller utsläppet: ”Ändå är det alltför enkelt att göra BP till ensam syndabock. Att borra efter olja till havs innebär risker. Att frakta olja innebär också stora risker. Säkerhetstänkandet måste vara rigoröst, men olyckor inträffar och när det händer ställer de till svåra miljöskador.”

Man fortsätter med att diskutera oljans betydelse för vår välfärd: ”Oljan har varit en välsignelse. Utan den skulle långt fler vara fattiga i världen och den ekonomiska utvecklingen skulle befinna sig på en nivå långt under dagens. Vårt välstånd har, bokstavligt talat, pumpats upp ur jorden”.

Sedan fortsätter man och konstaterar att oljan haft sin tid och Peak Oil kommer med i bilden: ”Det internationella energiorganet. IEA, beräknar att peak oil, den maximala produktionskapaciteten, nåddes redan 2006. När tillgångarna minskar, samtidigt som efterfrågan hela tiden ökar, växer riskerna.”

Det finns mycket att diskutera om extrem oljeutvinning och hur Peak Oil kommer att påverka oss, men det känns lite extra festligt är att man tar upp Peak Oil på min födelsedag.

Jack 2 and Wall Street Journal

Dear readers of my blog. I’m just now working on my book ”Peeking at Peak Oil” that Springer will publish in November and I’m looking for an article that I cannot find on the web. On September 5, Chevron was announcing the discovery of Jack 2 and the next day NYT has an article that mention that Wall Street Journal on September 5, 2006, was the first to report about the finding. Can anyone help me to find the text in this article?

(NYT)

Thank you, I have now the article “In Gulf of Mexico, Industry Closes In On New Oil Source“, WSJ

Gaddafi’s rehabilitation with the West and Libya’s current oil production / Gaddafis väg in i finrummet och dagens oljeproduktion i Libyen

Libya’s time of greatness as an oil-producing nation was around 1970 when they had their maximum production of over 3 million barrels per day (Mb/d). This then declined to a stable production of 2 Mb/d until 1980. During the 1980s their production sank for a few years to just above 1 Mb/d. It was clear that Libya’s oilfields had past their first phase of oil extraction during which the fields’ innate initial pressure is the force driving oil flow. They needed help with modern technology to increase oil flow. Despite the “Lockerbie” attack on Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988 it seems as thought the required help arrive since production increased to around 1.4 Mb/d during the 1990s. Despite this increase, there was still the possibility of further expansion but that would require the advanced technologies possessed by the international oil companies and could not occur in secret. The September 11 attack on the World Trade Centre in 2001 opened doors for Gaddafi and he played his cards well. In a French documentary recently broadcast in Sweden one could see how keen were all those from the West who wanted access to Libya’s oil. The highpoint for Gaddafi was when he was invited to meet President Bush. The result of the West’s efforts was that oil production began to increase in 2004 and now lies at around 1.8 Mb/d. Libya’s domestic consumption is low at, maybe, 100,000 barrels per day so most of Libya’s oil is exported to the West. The total volume of world oil production that is exported is a little under 50 Mb/d and Libya’s share of this is a bit over 3%.

The International Energy Agency asserts that current global reserve capacity is high – at least 6 Mb/d – and that should mean that a loss of 1.5 Mb/d from Libya is easy to cope with. However, the rising oil price is telling a different story. For a long time I have stated that the world’s reserve capacity is overestimated so it will be interesting to see how the situation develops in the near future.

The current situation for oil production in Libya looks like this: When the unrest began the production level was 1.6 Mb/d. The international oil companies such as Italy’s Eni (that produces 250,000 barrels/day, b/d, in Libya) and Spain’s Rapsol (producing 45,000 b/d) have closed down their production. German Winterhall (100,000 b/d) and French Total (60,000 b/d) are thought to be producing only a fraction of former volumes. Deliveries of natural gas to Italy which account for approximately 10% of Italy’s imports are closed off. Today the head of Libya’s National Oil Corporation said that oil production had been halved (although by that he could mean either that half of Libya’s production is stopped or that half of the company’s production is stopped). They will keep producing for as long as they can but their international expertise has left the country.

Saudi Arabia has large underground stores of oil that can be tapped relatively quickly but only for a limited time. According to our research and that of the IEA, crude oil production from the world’s existing fields is falling by 4 Mb/y (6%) per year. The world’s oil companies must continuously replace this oil and to do this while simultaneously compensating for Libya’s decreased production during the next 12 months may be more than they are capable of. But it also means that the oil from Libya that we would otherwise have used today can now be used in the future.

Libya has a refinery in Ras Lanuf that can meet that nation’s oil product needs if it can be run without foreign expertise.

(Swedish)
Libyens storhetstid som oljeproducerande land var runt 1970 då man hade en maxproduktion över 3 miljoner fat olja om dagen (Mb/d) för att sedan minska till en stabil produktion med 2 Mb/d fram till 1980. Under några år sjönk produktionen till straks över 1 Mb/d under 1980-talet. Det var helt klart att de Libyens oljefält hade gått igenom första fasen av utvinning av olja där fältets naturliga tryckegenskaper är den drivande kraften bakomproduktion. Man behövde hjälp med medern teknologi. Trots ”Lockebie” attentatet på Pan Am Flight 103 år 1988 så verkar det som om hjälpen kommer och produktionen ökar till runt 1.4 miljoner fat om dagen under 1990-talet. Det fanns mer att ge, men nu behövde Gadaffi hjälp av de högteknologiska internationella oljebolagen och det kunde inte ske i smyg. Attacken på World Trade Center den 11 september 2001 blev en dörröppnare för Gaddafi och han spelade sina kort väl. I en fransk dokumentärfilm som nyligen sändes i Svensk TV kan man se hur angelägna alla från Väst är att få tillgång till oljan i Libyen och höjdpunkten för Gaddafi blir då han blir inbjuden till president Bush. Resultatet av ansträngningarna blev att oljeproduktionen började öka 2004 och nu ligger man på en nivå runt 1.8 miljoner fat om året. Den inhemska konsumtionen är låg, kanske 100,000 fat om dagen, så det mesta går på export till väst. Den totala volymen olja som exportera i världen är lite under 50 miljoner fat om dagen och Libyens andel är lite över 3 procent. International Energy Agency hävdar att den globala reservkapaciteten är hög, minst 6 Mb/d och det skulle betyda att ett bortfall med 1.5 Mb/d skulle vara en enkel match, men ökningen av oljepriset indikerar något annat. Jag har länge hävdar att reservkapaciteten är överskattad och det skall bli intressant att se vad som händer med den globala oljeproduktionen den närmaste tiden.

Vad det gäller dagsläget i Libyen gäller följande. Då oroligheterna i Libyen började låg produktionen av olja på 1.6 miljoner fat om dagen (Mb/d). De internationella operatörerna som italienska Eni (250,000 fat on dagen) och spanska Rapsoil (45,000 fat om dagen) har stängt sin produktion. Tyska Winterhall med 100,000 b/d och franska Total med 60,000 b/d beräknas bara producera en bråkdel av detta. Gasleveranserna till Italien, ungefär 10% av Italiens import är stängda. Idag har chefen för Libya’s National Oil Corperation, sagt att produktionen halverats och det kan vara av den totala eller 50% av bolagets egen produktion. Man kommer att hålla igång produktionen så länge man kan, men de internationella experterna har lämnat landet.

Saudiarabien har stora underjordiska lager av olja som kan tömmars relativt snabbt, men bara under en begränsad tid. Enligt oss och IEA minskar råoljeproduktionen från existerande fält med 4 Mb/d under ett år. Denna minskning måste oljebolagen kompensera för och att samtidigt kompensera för Libyen under ett år kan vara bortom vad man förmår. Det betyder att den olja från Libyen som vi skulle ha använt kan vi nu använda i framtiden.

Libyen har ett raff i Ras Lanuf som täcker landets behov av produkter om man kan köra det utan experter från utlandet.