Joe Clement Douglas Ide, while it's always cute to see people, particular guys like you, totally non-critically (yet totally predictably) fall for mainstream media spin and agressive marketing of stock prices, this isn't the thread for that discussion. Read http://theoildrum.com for ongoing analysis of that new set of myths. theoildrum is to energy extraction matters as bpl is to geeky ul chat. Let me put if very briefly and simply: shale oil (aka 'tight') is not a new thing, production from those long known and worked on resources happens when peak oil pushes prices up high enough to be economically viable. It's expensive both in dollars and energy to extract that tight oil, and each well has catastrophically steep decline rates, up to 80% in one year, which forces very fast drilling cycles. Drilling isn't free, nor are licenses on the land, and also, they are now drilling the best, ie, highest yielding, fields in those tight plays, which means it's not going to get better in those fields over time, it's going to get worse. Drilling firms study geological data when they pick where to drill. As for profit, ideally, enterprises, they pick the best sites first. Since there are no longer any good sites of standard oil in the usa, what they are left with is the garbage, like tight oil. The fact of high oil prices is the cause of this new production, it doesn't 'disprove' peak oil, it proves it, but to understand that, you'd have to have at least a hint of a clue about the topic. I'm including some links so you can start working on that, if you want. Or just keep believing fairy tales, if you want, personally I don't care what you do. Expensive production methods like those that tight oil extraction requires are enabled only once the overall oil price rises high enough (it's about 80 a barrel break even if I remember now for tight oil, about 60 a barrel for tar sands, compared to old stuff of 1 or 2 a barrel). When you start accessing known inferior oil supplies, like canadian bitumin aka tar sands, you aren't 'beating' peak oil, you are scraping the bottom of the barrel, and that's not disproof, its proof, since that junk was known for decades and ignored because it was too expensive to produce, and too low quality.
The difference between towns who have no plans and live in cornucopian fantasies spun by media and energy groups who are trying to dump their shares on suckers as fast as they can and Portland is that Portland actually has a plan, and are acting on it. Plans like this take decades to implement, it's not something you do when it's already too late, and you don't drop these plans based on a short term blip of tight oil production increase of about 700k barrels a day, give or take.
The alternate, which you two predictably demonstrated, is to do nothing, sit back, watch the news, uncritically, making sure only to believe what you want, then complain as prices rise, go out and buy a big vehicle, complain as it costs more to fill it. Then blame the liberals for geological oil production limits, while being totally and utterly ignorant of any actual facts, such as that the US has maybe 90% of the worlds total oil wells drilled, and is better at tertiary recovery of oil in place than anywhere else in the world (which is what helped smooth the downward, post US peak production since the '70s), and hit its own peak of production in 1970 or so, exactly as predicted, and that this recent shale/tight oil bump is just a little notch up in the overall decline. Then, having ignored all the actual facts and data, complain some more. Then one day, whine about no gas being available at your local station, which of course is incomprehensible since it's a fundamental american right to have all the gas they want, no matter what nature or geology has to say about it. That's a fine strategy, and I hope it works well for you, and I also hope you work on blaming others rather than creating solutions as things progress, which is the norm from what I can see from your types. To me that's not smart, but then again, that's why progressives work at progressing, and others work at complaining that the old ways aren't working anymore. Have fun. But objectively, I know perfectly well that whatever the mass media you pick tell you, you will believe, so we'll just have to see what they have to tell you as this stuff progresses.
Here's a few recent overviews (warning, these have big words and contain content and analysis based on real oil production data, and are not designed to pump up shale/tight oil producing companies).
Does the U.S. Really Have More Oil than Saudi Arabia?
Drumbeat: January 5, 2013
Search the comment threads for: ROCKMAN he's a conservative texas oil geo, and I like him particularly because he shows that not all conservatives are totally clueless. He's a real conservative, by the way, so you can feel comfortable with him, he's not a pretender or closet liberal. alaska_geo is good too, as is west texas, a lot of these guys are working or retired oil company guys. But ROCKMAN says it like it is, if you don't like what he says, then you don't like reality, which is probably I'm sure the case...
I could post hundreds of these links, but these are fine to start with. tod (it has a nickname too, like bpl) has had a good time chuckling at the way suckers fell for stock price pumping on shale gas and oil, plus the way a small blip in production has been escalated into some massive amount of oil that changes everything.
The second is a news overview they do 4x a week, the comments are generally also informative if you know which posters to pay attention to. Rockman is the best, he's a working texas oil engineer who basically can tell it like it is because his company is privately held and has no stock prices to protect. darwinian, though annoying, tends to be pretty on the spot with this production data. You won't find views based on ignorance tolerated there, by the way, so you might not feel at home.
Jennifer, consider this an example of why you want to live in a community filled with smart, forward looking progressive people, they can actually work on the future and not frantically cling to a fading past, being around those types of people is frankly sad and depressing when the data is so well understood in almost every area. It's not longer time to chat and babble, it's time to act, your instincts are absolutely right in this matter. What you want is to be around people working for a real viable future, not fantasies that simply mean: don't want to change, fear change, resist change. But that's what makes progressives progress, lol. Maybe I'll see you up there one day, we'll see. But do consider those two guys here way of thinking as the exact thing you are trying to get away from, and it's exactly why portland is one of the few US cities out there that actually makes sense long term to relocate to. Believe me, it's refreshing to have your daily world filled with people who are actually using their lives to change the norms.
Joe Clement Douglas Ide thanks a lot for providing Jennifer with an example of exactly what she's trying to get away from, and I do wish you luck on your plan of business as usual while business grows more and more unusual, while not a very interesting plan, I'm sure it is easier to follow than changing anything of substance in your lives.
Sean Heenan, you must not have tried very hard, maybe you need better gear, or better sources. The prediction by those who study the matter was for around 2005-2012. After that we'd be on an undulating plateau of production, which is exactly where we are now. Actual real oil total global production did in fact peak around 2005, the first article I linked to I think talks about some of the myths are you stuck in. All serious analysts put the peak at around 2000-2020, with the more serious middle case being around 2010, that proved to be exactly right. Of course, one no longer needs to even see the numbers, all one needs to do is see the prices, the global political and economic repercussions, and the moves, ini increasing desperation, to the lower energy yielding sources that lower prices had made very unattractive. You take the best first, when that is gone or going, you take what is left, and which you wouldn't have considered. Obviously, since this is a finite resource, production has to hit a peak, and equally obviously, since we grabbed the best and easiest to access first, at a certain point, we hit the peak. It's impossible not to, this is not magic.
My apologies for not adhering to the apparently standard format of posting a supposedly witty sentence or two in substitution of actual data or analysis, particularly on critical and core things involved with modern culture, I know that's how I'm supposed to do it, the less actual content I include the better, of course. Now if those pesky liberals would just stop quoting facts and figures and return to cute sayings and slogans, it would all work out better, I admit it.
I have to admit, I didn't think the peak oil comment would draw much attention, it's a small feature of portland that simply shows that they have people with understanding involved in the city, and this subsequent topic drift simply points to yet another great thing about portland, they are working in reality, not fantasy, and they are working for the future, not some misguided attempt to maintain business as usual, the plan most US cities seem to be embracing. So while boring and offtopic, I would consider this as a very concrete demonstration of just how progressive portland is, and why it's so desirable to live in such an area in these times. Working to the future doesn't happen by typing short terse comments in forums, it takes actual work, planning, long range changes, development changes, all kinds of things.
Now for the next witty short contentless rebuttals, sigh, repeating something without any actual data or background understanding.... I suggest y'all take it over to theoildrum.com I'll get a laugh out of reading that, but here, not so much, it's kind of boring repeating facts that are very well understood outside of the mass media. Another good reason to move somewhere like portland, of course.