There's more in the article, like this:
Energy researcher Vaclav Smil suggests in The American that these developments should mean the end of "peak oil" anxieties:I'm much more in the corner of Nelder than Smil. Peak oil ain't dead.
Obviously, there will come a time when global oil extraction will reach its peak, but even that point may be of little practical interest as it could be followed by a prolonged, gentle decline or by an extended output plateau at a somewhat lower level than peak production.But others like journalist Chris Nelder argue that we've increased spending on oil production by tremendous amounts only to see global oil production edge up a bit. Older, cheaper oil fields are declining, and their oil is being replaced by crude from far more expensive sources. Nelder made his numerical case to the Washington Post like this:
In 2005, we reached 73 million barrels per day. Then, to increase production beyond that, the world had to double spending on oil production. In 2012, we're now spending $600 billion. The price of oil has tripled. And yet, for all that additional expenditure, we've only raised production 3 percent to 75 million barrels per day [since 2005].
No comments:
Post a Comment