> At least one article claimed that percentage of sour oil in
> Saudi output increased, while very few refineries can process
> the output. Guaranteed, the answer to this does not avoid
> peak. However if the current constraint is processing
>capacity and not production capacity, then the peak may be farther away.
Some of the peak crowd believe the absence of new refineries (since the 1970s, I believe) is a sign oil companies don't expect to have more oil to refine. But existing refineries have been expanding, and improving their equipment -- but why not to process the sour stuff?
One problem of interpretation is assuming that the oil companies are acting sensibly with secret plans. That may be mere optimism. Maybe no one is planning anything just out of ignorance, incompetence and inertia, which usually explain more than conspiracy.
> "but China and India will still grow" - nope, when US sneezes, these countries catch serious
> bronchite....The peak may be again delayed for 5 years or so,
> dependent of course on the oil decline from here.
Yes. Supposedly the 70's recession (as well as conservation efforts) explains why the peak is already delayed from King Hubbert's predictions.
> Any scenario that buys time is in the end positive, since
> market (and governments) can try to come up with solutions in
> the meantime
I agree. A pessimist might say 5 years is not enough, but its wayyyy better than zero; especially if during that 5 years we do enough to reduce usage to continually stay ahead of the peak. The peak is inevitable; but not that demand has to exceed supply.
> Finally, I wonder if the pesimists saying that 2% annual
> reduction of oil is horrible have counted the elasticity of
> demand for non-first-need items. E.g. carpets are made from
> oil (plastics :))
That can go one for awhile --- as someone pointed out, we are in part protected by our waste. Europeans use much less energy per capita, and arguably live better in many cases.
But reducing purchases slows the economy and also slows the oil use further; but also reduces the surplus needed to *do* things -- build nukes, windmills, bicycle paths, coal-burning steam engines, whatever. No one, especially not the doomsday crowd, actually has a plan, so what needs to be done and what resources will be available to do them, and how doing one thing will affect everything else is all a mystery -- to me at least.
- Charles |
