Robert Rapier’s take…

  By Linda G | July 13, 2012 - 11:32 | ,

 

One of the things I appreciate about the “movement” prompted by the issue of “peak oil” is the number of impressive people (at least in my estimation) who have emerged into the forefront as analysts/contributors to this and related issues… Colin Campbell, Richard Heinberg, Nate Hagens, Nicole Foss, Rob Hopkins, and the list goes on and on…

One of these contributors is Robert Rapier, who here, in his latest youtube installment, takes up two recent articles that have apparently caused quite a “stir” among “peak oil” circles: the first about upcoming oil production and the second, a response to the first, which includes a discussion about potential consequences of that apparent production (for “climate change,” in particular).

Here’s the description that goes with Rapier’s video:

Enough oil to fry the planet?

by Robert Rapier

Description:

In this week’s episode of R-Squared Energy TV, I discuss the recently released paper by former Eni executive Leonardo Maugeri — in which he suggests global oil supplies will increase by 17 million barrels per day by the end of the decade — as well as George Monbiot’s highly publicized reaction to the report.

And here’s his video:

Written by: Linda G on July 13, 2012.
Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • TheModernMystic

    Folks why didn’t peak oil happen like we planned? Why didn’t the economy collapse like we hoped? I am stuck here living in some god for saken hole in France waiting for the world to end based on this stuff and nothing. I can’t understand half of what my neighbors are saying when they start talking fast and I think I am allergic to my cat. Comments Please

  • axionication1

    Thanks Linda.

    There appears ( at least in my mind) to be a great deal of academic defensiveness in much of the peak oil & climate change brigade. Really muddles my mind.

    As with most things, the picture is very complex with so many variables. Should any one of these variables disproportionately come in to play, it may suddenly render the picture a whole lot less complex.

    Pick a variable!? (~)

    • lgrinaker

      Hi, axion…

      We might, of course, have come upon different people in our respective exposure to these issues, but I have a very different experience than the one you describe.  (Just as an added note: many of the folks I am interested in are interested in a variety of inter-related issues, such as “peak oil” *and* “climate change,” along with others).

      Maybe because it’s so challenging to get these issues heard in a way that makes any headway, or because they face so many headwinds, many of the folks that I listen to, or read along these lines, have worked long and hard at presenting their positions as clearly and as intelligently and as calmly as they possibly can (without losing the urgency that naturally emerges from what they know about these issues). 

      Otherwise, if they do not develop such qualities, they simply won’t be heard, at least not by anyone outside of a small inner circle.  And the people that really draw me in are the people who care about moving more than just a small inner circle. 

      It’s not easy bringing up these issues, and yet they are determined to do so, and they have been doing so for a long time, many of them.  I have to say, I also admire their “staying power,” especially in the face of such headwinds.

      Like Hagens says, it’s so natural for human beings to discount things that are further in the future in favor of things closer to the present.  And so many of the most significant issues we face are more like a gathering storm than something we have to face as immediately as we have to face getting the kids off to school and getting ourselves off to work.

      I’ve attached this short interview with Nate Hagens a couple of times before, but this seems like a good spot to do so again.  (Hagens, for me, makes for an excellent example of somebody who exhibits the qualities mentioned above that I admire so much.)

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIThjusijQk

      My past few posts on Climate Change also have me thinking of what first really turned my head on this issue, and I think I’ll make a separate post on that.

      Linda

  • Emmazedbend

    Interesting video, seems like a nice man. I think his conclusions had a lot to recommend them; I’m surprised how TPTB have kept the plates spinning this long. I play badminton with an oil geologist and he’s very optimistic about new sources coming on line. As for me I agree with Rapier that things might change after 2015, but I wouldn’t like to guess how.

  • Ruud1963

    Hi Linda,

    Just a side note:
    Looking at ‘Total world oil (liquid) production’ in my view “Peak Lyte” is very applicable (current), because total oilproduction is still increasing, thanks to unconventional oil, but not enough to sustain on a timely basis sufficient increase in oilconsumption too ‘fuel’ a modest or high rate in world economic growth.

    Looking only at ‘conventional oilproduction’ (out of my head crude plus condensates) world oil production is on a plateau of about 74 million barrels per day since about the year 2005. (If I am correct) there is some consensus in peakoil circles that so long conventional oilprodcution is between 74 million + 4% and 74 million per day – 4% the world is still on the peakplateau.

    Some peakoilers say (assume) peakoil is already here because conventional world oilproduction is on a plateau for many years despite relatively very high oilprices. And that conventional oil is the ‘real oil’, because you can make (refine it to) easily petroleumproducts like gasonline or diesel from it.

    Others ‘look to peakoil’ from a total oilproduction (all liquids) perspective.

    So, in my opinion for both views is something to say.  (The other one does not be ruled out, depends on the perspective).

    But also (in my view) many  ‘moderate peakoilers’ assume that around the year 2015 (or a little bit later) total world oil production (bruto oilproduction) will reach a peak (plateau). Looking from a net energy perpective (it takes more and more usable energy ( money/ time/ efford) to extract a certain amount of oil) the picture is even more sobering.

    See the different types of oil(liquids) in the graph below (on Stuart Stanifords blog)
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kHNXPMWsj2c/T7pnrFPIjMI/AAAAAAAACt8/FbWC0pMWno8/s1600/Screen+shot+2012-05-21+at+12.04.14+PM.png

  • TheModernMystic

    Right so four comments total. You have to participate to keep up. Why do I even bother.

  • TheModernMystic

    I move here to this hellhole in France thinking we are about to hit peak oil, the economy would collapse but I would be fine because I would be outside the city. Mrs Mystic wanted to live in Paris so she could ride the Metro but I said no, that won’t be working much longer.

  • http://essay-writings.co.uk/ essay writing

    Watching interviews of diferent poeple is very useful, because they share they experience with other people.