Energy Bulletin…impact of oil prices on advanced countries
Spencer England writes:
This article is worth reading – it is at two sources: Energy Bulletin and Financial Times…is peak oil dead?
The marginal price of new oil is now in the $70 to $90 — where WTI has bottomed at its last three corrections. If we are at a bottom for the real price of oil and the real price will have to rise as we go forward to assure adequate supply for the third world countries like China and India. The important question may not be what will be the supply of oil, rather the important question is what will be the impact of rising real oil prices on growth in the advanced countries of Europe, Japan and North America. Will this be the driving force behind the Great Stagnation?
http://community.nasdaq.com/News/2012-03/epa-says-no-evidence-fracking-polluted-water-in-rural-pa.aspx?storyid=127938
Let the fracking continue to lower the prices.
If fracking expands, there will be a shortage of low-cost ice cream. Get yer priorities straight.
Oh, and get serious about how science is done. One report, early in the process of determining what the underground impacts of fracking are, is not the final answer.
Why do you think fracking is inexpensive or will lower prices?
here’s what you need to know about oil from shale:
http://www.nowandfutures.com/download/d4/TypicalBakkenWellProduction(north_dakota_govt).png
what this graph shows is that unlike conventional wells where you drill one & produce for 40 years, to continue to produce oil from the bakken you have to drill more & more wells…it’s a black hole for capital investment.. the same is true for fracking for gas in the marcellus…
source: https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/presentations/WBPC2011Activity.pdf page 10
Anonymous 2 asks: “One report, early in the process of determining what the underground impacts of fracking are, is not the final answer.” One Report. IIRC, this is the 2nd to confirm the results for this location. The Obama Administration: No Documented Cases of Hydraulic Fracturing Contamination
Here: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=70289BE8-802A-23AD-47
Even another report that counters the many unsubstantiated of damage.
Spencer
I don’t know anything about the economics of oil. for all I know the earth is made of frozen methane to the core and we will never run out of oil.
until we run out of air. or any kind of life worth living.
and what does “growth” mean? more cars? more labor saving machinery? or just more people?
i don’t think the paradigm of oil-fueled “growth” is going to work out well for us in the future.
what will be the driving force behind the new stagnation is an “economy” ruled by people with no imagination but the power to maintain gated estates, private armies, and a population fighting with each other over the contents of the scrap heaps of our “civilization.”
Other Anonymous,
Oh, TWO reports. Well, that makes it all scientifically better. Excuse me ever so much.
How does that saying go? The absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence? You really need to get a handle on how this business of scientific evidence works.
on the Pavillion contamination:
Last year — after warning residents not to drink or cook with the water and to ventilate their homes when they showered — the EPA drilled the monitoring wells to get a more precise picture of the extent of the contamination.
The wells also contained benzene at 50 times the level that is considered safe for people, as well as phenols — another dangerous human carcinogen — acetone, toluene, naphthalene and traces of diesel fuel.
The EPA said the water samples were saturated with methane gas that matched the deep layers of natural gas being drilled for energy. The gas did not match the shallower methane that the gas industry says is naturally occurring in water, a signal that the contamination was related to drilling and was less likely to have come from drilling waste spilled above ground.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=epa-finds-fracking-compound-wyoming-aquifer
RJS, Pavilion is a unique fracking environment. The gas and water tables are separated by just a few hundred feet. Natural pollution of the two is more likely. There is ample anecdotal evidence that the water in that area was gas polluted long before drilling began.
We need to wait for the Peer Review of the Pavilion EPA study. It has raised a lot of questions.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/26/1107648/-Fracking-Art-8-Pics-of-Utah-s-Open-Fracking-Waste-Ponds
Fracking Waste Ponds
“Will this be the driving force behind the Great Stagnation?”
Energy is an input, not a technology. Absolutely nothing in Alexander J. Field’s work suggests that energy prices play any role in the rate of Total Factor productivity growth.
The lead author of a recent University of Texas study that suggested that hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, does not contaminate groundwater is a paid board member and shareholder in a company that engages in the practice, a situation that critics are calling a conflict of interest and of which the researcher’s supervisors were unaware. “The report was presented as if it was an independent study of fracking when, in fact, the study was led by a gas industry insider,”
Groat, who did not respond to messages from the American-Statesman, has been on Houston-based Plains Exploration & Production Co.’s board for several years. Groat was paid $413,900 in cash and stock by the company in 2011, according to SEC filings reviewed by the Statesman, more than twice his salary from the university, and holds almost $1.6 million in the company’s stock.
http://www.statesman.com/news/local/fracking-researcher-has-ties-to-industry-2421142.html?cxtype=rss_news