The Oil Drum: Europe

In recent years, natural gas consumption in the United Kingdom has grown rapidly. At the same time, there has been an abrupt change in UK natural gas supplies, brought about by depletion and decline. In the first part of this two part series, I look at historical developments in EU and UK natural gas consumption, production and imports and the challenges posed by declining production.

In the second part of the series, I use a simulation approach to test the likely adequacy of natural gas supplies during the upcoming heating season. In these simulations, I use data from the UK Department of Business, Enterprise, and Regulatory Reform (BERR), UK National Grid, as well as information about recent UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) and Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) develpments. Based on what I refer to as the reference scenario, it seems likely that the UK will increasingly have to rely on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) imports to secure adequate supplies.

This is a guest post by James Ward. James has a background in science and engineering and is ASPO-Adelaide coordinator for ASPO-Australia. This post appeared previously on Energy Bulletin.

Abstract
By fitting a bell curve to historical phosphate production data, the best fit is obtained by assuming an ultimate recoverable resource of approximately 9 billion tonnes (of which about 6.3 billion tonnes have already been mined). This yields a peak in around 1990. Of course, the USGS claims an ultimate recoverable resource of some 24.3 billion tonnes (i.e. 18 billion remaining); however using this value yields a bell curve that is an inferior match to the historical data. A hypothesis is thus presented whereby phosphorus is considered in two broad forms: “easy” which is able to be mined quickly, but already peaked in 1990, and “hard” which has large remaining reserves and is yet to peak, but cannot be mined as quickly. (In reality there are probably many different forms ranging from very easy to very hard.) Just as with oil, estimates that lump all types of reserve in together will yield a theoretical peak that is high and distant, however the true system may involve periods of decline after exhausting easy-to-get reserves before other supplies come online to replace them. Ultimately we must develop a recyclable phosphorus supply if humans are to continue living on this planet.

An intermittent but longstanding theme here on theoildrum is that dollars do not sufficiently inform us of the long term details of energy depletion, and that the inexorable race between technology and depletion can be better understood using biophysical methods. Essentially this post suggests that it is requiring more and more energy to procure the same amount of natural gas in Canada, and this trend will likely continue into the future. This update makes the initial analysis too pessimistic on the rate of EROI NG decline but also too conservative on the absolute level of energy return. It is going to be a very interesting few years as Canada declines, Barnett peaks, and Haynesville and other unconventional plays ramp up. The treadmill spins on.

This is a post by Richard Heinberg, Senior Fellow of The Post Carbon Institute and author of Peak Everything, The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies, Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World, and The Oil Depletion Protocol. A special thanks to Global Public Media for facilitating publication of Heinberg's work; GPM is a wonderful resource and plays an important role in peak oil activism. This article is a draft chapter from a forthcoming book, currently titled Coal’s Future/Earth’s Fate.

With oil and natural gas prices rising and coal prices still relatively low, the return of the US to a greater reliance on coal might seem inevitable. However, several recent reports suggest that coal reserves, which have shrunk dramatically during the past century, may still be overstated. Coal prices are likely to rise precipitously during the next two decades due to transport bottlenecks and higher transport costs, falling production trends in many current producing regions, and the lack of suitable new coalfields. This information should give pause to any agency planning new coal power plants today.

After a day like today--I feel like I have been on a herky-jerky roller coaster for ten hours straight--I think we need some comforting thoughts. Jamais Cascio, someone I respect greatly, obliges:

http://www.openthefuture.com/2008/05/fifteen_minutes_into_the_futur.html

My thoughts under the fold.

Peak oil has made us aware that many of the resources on which civilization depends are limited.

M. King Hubbert, a geophysicist for Shell Oil, found that oil production over time followed a curve that was roughly bell-shaped. He correctly predicted that oil production in the lower 48 states would peak in 1970. Other analysts following Hubbert's methods are predicting a peak in oil production early this century.

The depletion analysis pioneered by Hubbert can be applied to other non-renewable resources. Analysts have looked at peak production for resouces such as natural gas, coal and uranium.

In this paper, Patrick Déry applies Hubbert's methods to a very special non-renewable resource - phosphorus - a nutrient essential for agriculture.

I thought that, with the indulgence of the more technically qualified of the commentators, I might take a little time to explain in my own way, some of the many issues that were debated here at TOD over the past week. So, this post is going to be a little bit of a simplified technical explanation of some of those issues--and I will try to bring in some of the comments explaining the issues that appeared somewhat far down the list in our comment threads as well.

But first there was an interesting piece of data that I hadn’t seriously noted until I saw the article. It relates to the actual size of the reserves that remain in Saudi Arabia, a subject I usually shy away from since production rates are more interesting. However, given the numbers it is worth consideration and debate as to what these particular values mean.

This is a guest post by Miquel Torres.

A recent post by Martin Sevior has invigorated the nuclear energy debate causing over 240 comments with the most diverse opinions. I would like to further pursue this debate, as the question of whether nuclear power can provide a big part of the worlds energy needs is extremely important in the Peak Oil debate, because it is the only alternative energy source beside coal providing the type of electricity production necessary for the current electric grid model: big, base-load capable power plants. If that role is fulfilled, the current electricity production system can continue beyond Peak Oil, and even expand to provide the energy necessary for electrified transport. If it falls short, a new energy model is needed.

We know that some countries (around 56) have seen their production peaked (also called type III depletion). The remaining group consists of 17 countries that have the potential to grow or maintain their current production (the type II group). I propose to apply the HL technique only on the total production from the the type III group and try to assess the future production decline coming from that group. My observations are the following:

• The type III group (~56 countries) seems to have peaked around 1999 at 40 mbpd with an URR around 1.0Tb and a cumulative production of 600 Gb in 2005.
• The decline rate in the group III is currently around 1% per year but will accelerate with time and possibility reach 2% after 2010
• When a high case scenario for the production derived from the Canadian Tar Sands is included, the decline rate will be reduced around 0.5% per year until 2010.
• In order to satisfy a relatively moderate demand growth at 1.5%/year, the supply coming from the type II group should be around 3.5-4.0%/year and reach a production level of 56-59 mbpd in 2010 (from 40 mbpd in 2005).
• The total production from Russia and Saudi Arabia that are leading the type II group, is almost flat since mid-2004 despite record oil prices.

Production from the type II group added to the logistic curve modeling the production coming from the type III group. The dots represents the actual values for the world production of crude oil + NGL.

Cautionary note: In this story, I'm talking strictly about production of Crude Oil plus Condensate and NGPL (CO+NGL in short).