"U.S. crude oil stocks rose 2.5 million barrels, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in its weekly report, contrasting with expectations inventories would be down 2.3 million barrels.
"The crude oil inventory rise was driven by a strong rebound in crude oil imports, which neared 8 million barrels per day," said John Kilduff, partner at Again Capital LLC in New York.
Crude oil imports from Saudi Arabia rose to 1.44 million barrels per day (bpd), up from 1.32 million the previous week, according to EIA data. Imports from several other OPEC-member countries also rose." CNBC
**********
"Peak oil, an event based on M. King Hubbert's theory, is the point in time when the maximum rate of extraction of petroleum is reached, after which the rate of production is expected to enter terminal decline.[1] Peak oil theory is based on the observed rise, peak, (sometimes rapid) fall, and depletion of aggregate production rate in oil fields over time. Mostly due to the development of new production techniques and the exploitation of unconventional supplies, Hubbert's original predictions for world production proved premature.[2]
Hubbert's original prediction that US Peak Oil would be in about 1970 was accurate, as US average annual production peaked in 1970 at 9.6 million barrels per day.[3] However, after a decades-long decline, the successful application of massive hydraulic fracturing to additional tight reservoirs caused US production to rebound, hitting 9.2 million barrels per day in early 2015.[4]"
wiki - peak oil
**********
"... there was never really a short term shortage of petroleum. The talking heads and the mindless anchors on TV business shows hyped and hyped the long term shortages until the unthinking came to believe in oil shortages as every day fact. Talib, in "The Black Swan" describes this phenomenon. Once something like the phony oil shortage became "fact" then the oil commodity was a good candidate for the "play" of traders of the wild eyed variety. Now, they are getting out. This reveals the lack of "fundamentals" underneath todays prices." turcopolier - 2008
--------------
Peak oil enthusiasts - Iranian oil is coming... You look pretty stupid now. pl
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil
http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2008/08/the-price-per-b.html
It appears a long time decline in petroleum usage as fuel beginning world-wide. Given PEAK OIL and other postulates about the energy future I have always wondered if the one that goes petroleum too useful to modern society to be utilized and perhaps used up as fuel. That concept is derived from the many many petroleum derived products including all plastic products.
Thoughts?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 23 July 2015 at 10:00 AM
WRC
Your response sounds more like an ideological or indeed theological position than a fact based view. What is the EVIDENCE for "peak oil?" I, too would like to see fossil fuels replaced with something else but what is the EVIDENCE for "Peak Oil?" pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 10:08 AM
Historically, the amount of developed oil reserves has always been price dependent. If we have fairly constant $150/bbl oil, people will be drilling and developing the oil reserves at the North Pole. There has always been a surplus of oil.
Oil prices are by nature, unpredictable. Try the following experiment: Mark down your best guess on your calendar for the price of WTI on Feb 1, 2016. Report back to SST then on how wrong you were.
Posted by: r whitman | 23 July 2015 at 10:32 AM
I've always thought Peak Oil meant, 'we've tapped all the easy stuff' that we can find. I worked for Chevron USA for two short years and that was the understanding. The rest of the petroleum was supposed to be too expensive to be economically viable to access. FYI, we did fracking but it was pretty limited.
And, I believe that was the key. The lure of rewards from higher prices for a barrel of oil seems to have resulted in development of more sophisticated technologies and knowledge of how to find the stuff (the Dakotas and Colorado, for instance) and access it. That gain is applicable anywhere world wide, to increase discovery and production. Coupled with efficiencies in cars and other items that use petroleum and we arrive at a place where production has exceeded use.
There have always been individuals who believe the planet has huge deposits of oil and gas that we simply are not yet equipped to detect, yet alone access. If that is correct, we are not even close to having used the planet's treasure of petroleum and gas.
Posted by: BabelFish | 23 July 2015 at 10:34 AM
Peak oil is simple mathematics, not ideology. Given a finite resource, extraction will peak. As your own "wiki -peak oil" quote shows, the easy oil has been extracted. What we're now extracting is more difficult to get, more expensive both monetarily and in terms of net energy produced.
Posted by: Karl Boyken | 23 July 2015 at 10:38 AM
Karl Boyken
Your argument is not an argument. It is an exhortation calling upon the "unwashed" ignorami like me to accept your word for what you think must be the situation. You offer no data. "Arithmetic?" Where are your numbers on ultimate available reserves? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 10:42 AM
Pete Deer
More theology. You express the self-righteous anger of the mother Gaea crowd against the "ravaging" of the planet. "many billions of dollars of Wall Street investor money was required to maintain the fracking boom that this country experienced over the past several years" Yes. "Wall street investor money" This is and was private money. The market prices the hoped for outcome against risks. So far, the calculation in private investment has been on the side of optimism. If that calculation was flawed then the investors will lose. Tant pis pour eux. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 10:54 AM
I am confident that peak oil will continue not happening as long as we continue tripling the percentage of business investment directed to exploration related activities each decade, as we did in the 2003-2013. It currently stands at 12%. There is an obvious limit to how long we can go on tripling this percentage.
http://www.businessinsider.com/energy-investment-a-small-share-of-gdp-2014-12
The article above says not to worry, as 12 percent of business investment is a small share of GDP. What this is really pointing out is that business investment within the US is a small share of GDP, but that is a separate topic, the secession of capital.
Posted by: MS2 | 23 July 2015 at 10:58 AM
If Swanson's Law continues to hold, and Colorado's efforts with wind can be duplicated or improved elsewhere, we might even reach a peak demand for fossil fuels in the not too far off future. Its a pipe dream to think they go away entirely, but they may lose out on a cost basis for a lot of what they do now, especially as the supplies of easy oil are depleted.
Steve
Posted by: steve | 23 July 2015 at 11:04 AM
PL the arithmetic is that oil creation is a very slow process taking many millennia, extraction is a very quick process taking a century or two. The oil will run out it if we continue to use it as fuel. The question is what can be used instead and how quickly can it be deployed in meaningful volume? The medium/long term answer is probably fusion if it can be made to work efficiently. My concern is the time scales, we need to ween our selves of fossil fuels, for electrical generation, quickly so they can be reserved for aviation fuel, and other uses for which there is no other light weight high energy alternatives. The related bottleneck is battery technology which has not advanced at the same pace as most other technologies.
I don't care if peak oil has been been and gone, or is yet to come, it is inevitable given the vast disparity in the rate of creation and the rate of extraction.
Posted by: JJackson | 23 July 2015 at 11:04 AM
I have no statistics for ultimate available reserves; I don't need any. Given a finite resource, extraction will at some point reach zero; ergo, there has to be a peak (or multiple peaks) at some point. As I said, that is simply math. As to when that peak will occur, I don't have any idea. I'm not a geologist.
Posted by: Karl Boyken | 23 July 2015 at 11:09 AM
Karl Boyken
"... when that peak will occur, I don't have any idea. I'm not a geologist." well, then, perhaps you should stop claiming that you know anything about this. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 11:25 AM
J Jackson
"The oil will run out it if we continue to use it as fuel." You don't know that. You are guessing. As I said, I also support substituting something else for burning fossil fuels. What do you suggest? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 11:28 AM
I don't have to know auto engineering to know that if I am sitting behind the wheel of a stopped car, I hit the gas, speed up, and then hit the brakes and stop again, that my speed will have peaked at some point. I don't have to know anything about producing Oreos to know that if I sit down and open a bag and start eating, at some point, all the Oreos will be gone, so at some point, the rate at which I ate the Oreos peaked. Take any finite resource, begin withdrawing from it, plot the rate of extraction, and you will have a curve that starts at ends at zero and has at least one maximum point--a peak. You don't have to know physics or astronomy or Zoroastrian mythology--that is simply a mathematical fact.
Posted by: Karl Boyken | 23 July 2015 at 11:31 AM
MS2
Private money is private money. is it not? If you want an argument talk about federal subsidies. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 11:32 AM
Karl Boyken
"any finite resource" You have no idea how "finite" this asset is. It must be finite but neither you nor I know what the numbers are. But you, nevertheless, insist that you know "the truth." pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 11:37 AM
IMO at this moment PEAK OIL not on the horizon!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 23 July 2015 at 11:40 AM
How much of the world's NAVIES nuclear?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 23 July 2015 at 11:42 AM
BTW most PROVEN RESERVE figures are rigged for many different reasons.
Production for domestic usage by the NOCs [National Oil Companies] increasing and most heavily subsidize their citizens and residents with cheap oil well below market. Include GB.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 23 July 2015 at 11:45 AM
Bablefish: Technological innovations is actually increasing the availability of the "easy stuff." Domestic oil production ramped quickly because old oil fields became viable again.
The problem is these fields deplete quickly so cheap oil makes them economically infeasible.
For a good summary, please see the book "The Frackers" by Gregory Zuckerman.
Posted by: Matthew | 23 July 2015 at 11:47 AM
Col: There is finite and then there is finite. Sunlight is finite, but I'm not worried about the Sun becoming a red giant in 5 billion years!
As you noted, the Peak Oil theory assumes we will run out of petroleum during the Fossil Fuel age. That seems like a dubious proposition.
Posted by: Matthew | 23 July 2015 at 11:51 AM
When and where did I insist anything, other than the math? I never claimed to know amounts or dates or anything along those lines. "You have no idea how 'finite' this asset is"--what the heck does that even mean? Something is either finite, or it is not finite. I agree with you, I do not know the numbers. I never claimed I do. I do not understand the vehemence, the insistence on putting words in my mouth.
Posted by: Karl Boyken | 23 July 2015 at 12:03 PM
Karl Boyken
you cannot cite "math" if you have no numbers. Try some other argument. This might best be expressed in iambic pentameter. I put no words in your mouth. Don't pretend that I did. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 12:49 PM
Pete Deer
"a Ponzi scheme of gargantuan proportions is a matter of little consequence." You don't know that. That is just an opinion. If you want to feel belittled, feel free to do so. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 12:59 PM
WRC
Is your point that crude prices are artificially low? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 23 July 2015 at 01:02 PM