Skip to main content

Crying Wolf (is gas the issue)?

It is interesting to listen to people's reasons for not wishing to consider hydrocarbon depletion.

One is that people have "cried wolf" before. The point about that story is that in the end there was a wolf.

Another is the Vince Cable (who used to be an economist for Shell) position who argues that as the price goes up there will be more oil extractable. There is some truth in this position, but it still does not deal with the fact that there will be a year of peak production and after that production will come down.

This is faced by the fact that the deposits of oil and gas people are going after are now smaller. Ramco's saga where they went for a gas field and found it didn't work as expected will happen more and more frequently. There will be a resource cost issue and a risk management issue for this.

The interesting question rests with some of Chris Vernon's analysis of potential gas shortages. It sounds nice and easy to import gas. There was a good photo in the press of a boy stealing gas in a big balloon and cycling away with it. Transporting gas is not easy. You either need a pipeline or to liquify it (liguifaction takes a lot of energy). It remains that the gas needs to come from somewhere.

40.6% of our primary energy consumption is Natural Gas and 31.8% Petroleum.

Comments

Simon said…
See this article on the depletion of oil reserves. Although it was published nine years ago, nothing has occurred since to diminish its relevance; if anything, current events are bearing out the author's thesis.
Apollo Project said…
Actually Peter, but borrowing Tabman's password).


We had a look at this issue on the apollo project (as mentioned below) (http://liberalism2010.blogspot.com/2005/08/when-will-oil-run-out-hemming-cable.html).

I didn´t think there was a conflict between your psoition and Cable's (at least necessarily). Cable's statement should be true until it is appraent that peak production is upon us (or behind us). I hope you succeed in shedding more light on this.

Incidentally I think I have seen two sets of comments from Cable on the subject of price. In the first peice he was (IIRC) quoted as saying that prices won´t hit 1000USD but will settle back at around 50USD. In the other piece he points out that oil firms are not investing where extractions cost exceed 20USD (implying that prices might drop back a very long way).
TheStarFromAfar said…
What is the present Lib Dem position on nuclear energy in the context of providing power for Britain John?
Christine said…
Another issue is how much hydrocarbon we can actually afford to burn. According to reliable estimates, existing reserves of hydrocarbons are already several times more than the amount we can safely burn without causing catastrophic climate change, so it defeats me that governments and corporations are still investing in extracting more oil and gas as a supposed solution to hydrocarbon depletion. Really, we need to complete the move away from hydrocarbons as a matter of urgency, *before* depletion forces us to, if we are to stand any chance of tackling global warming.
john said…
This was the issue we discussed this morning. Apart from coal I am pretty certain that the estimates you refer to are not accurate. I am not sure about the position with coal.

Coal creates its own problems.
Christine said…
I'll have to do some more research on this but in all honesty, if there are conflicting estimates I'd rather take a 'better safe than sorry' approach. After all, if we assume we need to stop using hydrocarbons now, the worst that can happen is that we'll have to confront the economic dislocation that will cause a bit earlier. If we assume it's ok to continuing burning what we've got and turn out to be wrong, the worst that can happen is the destruction of the world as we know it. To me this is a no-brainer.
john said…
The Kyoto and Uppsala protocols both talk about a reduction in the use of fossil fuels.

One key to this is air flight. Through the "dash to gas" the UK emissions (of CO2) have gone down with a consequent increase in H02.
This and certain changes in the chemical industry are the main factors influencing the fact that the UK is online.

My view is that the first step the UK government has to accept is that air flights cannot increase as they plan.

A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.
Peter Pigeon said…
"I'll have to do some more research on this but in all honesty, if there are conflicting estimates I'd rather take a 'better safe than sorry' approach. After all, if we assume we need to stop using hydrocarbons now, the worst that can happen is that we'll have to confront the economic dislocation that will cause a bit earlier. If we assume it's ok to continuing burning what we've got and turn out to be wrong, the worst that can happen is the destruction of the world as we know it. To me this is a no-brainer."

The trouble is you can´t take such a decision. As long as hydrocarbons are cheaper than the alternatives, people will use them. A decision by one country to withdraw their use would simply mean that somone else would burn the fuel instead. It is just about conceivable that we could reach agreement to slow down the use of hydrocarbons by for example changing the tax regime for aviation fuel. And that is about it.

So if we are going to switch, either other sources will need to become cheaper or oil prices will have to rise bvecause it is becoming scarce.
TS said…
Nice Blog!!!   I thought I'd tell you about a site that will let give you places where
you can make extra cash! I made over $800 last month. Not bad for not doing much. Just put in your
zip code and up will pop up a list of places that are available. I live in a small area and found quite
a few. MAKE MONEY NOW

Popular posts from this blog

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…