Kuwaiti Researchers Predict Peak Oil Production in 2014
Researchers at Kuwait University’s College of Engineering and Petroleum recently published a study on world oil production that includes a new prediction of when conventional oil production will peak. (image: buthaina.wikispaces.com)
A new study published in the journal Energy & Fuels predicts that world conventional oil production will hit its peak in the year 2014, GreenCarCongress.com reported on Wednesday. The study, undertaken by researchers at Kuwait University and Kuwait Oil Company, looked at oil production in the top 47 oil-producing nations and found that humanity has extracted about 54 percent of total world oil reserves and that conventional oil production will reach its peak of 79 million stock tank barrels per day (an industry term, abbreviated as STB, that refers to the number of barrels of crude oil successfully extracted and “treated”) in about four years.
The study began with the Hubbert forecast model, named for peak oil pioneer M. King Hubbert, who successfully predicted that crude oil production in the US would peak in 1970. Though proven to be a useful tool in predicting peak oil, the Hubbert model has limitations when applied to more complex and diverse oil production methods and measures of the 21st century. The Kuwaiti researchers accounted for those limitations in the study, and also allowed for updates of their findings as new oil production data becomes available. The authors explained their methods in the study’s abstract:
Even though our approach originates from Hubbert model, it overcomes the limitations and restrictions associated with the original Hubbert model. As opposed to Hubbert single-cycle model, our model has more than one cycle depending on the historical oil production trend and known oil reserves. The presented method is a viable tool to predict the peak oil production rate and time. The model is simple, accurate, and totally data driven, which allows a continuous updating once new data are available.
It should be noted that the study, no matter how sound its methods, reports exclusively on conventional oil (liquid crude that can be extracted from the ground relatively cheaply), and in doing so paints an incomplete picture of world oil supplies and the expected arrival of peak oil production. If the study were to include data on unconventional sources such as Canada’s tar sands and oil shale deposits of the American West, the supply figures would grow substantially and the date of peak production would likely be pushed forward by at least a decade or two. However, because the technology and costs associated with extraction of unconventional oil vary widely and face an extremely uncertain future, it is logical that the study excludes unconventional oil figures.
This new fodder for the peak oil debate will probably do little to bring about a consensus on whether peak oil production is a real or imagined phenomenon and, assuming it is real, when it will occur. But the addition of new and complete data that can be updated over time will hopefully bring new insight to the world of oil supply data and help the world better prepare for the peak oil eventuality or something like it. The more prepared governments and citizens are for any supply declines that could lead to rapid price increases in consumer fuels like heating oil, diesel, and gasoline, the less disruptive those increases will be to our daily lives.
UK Scientists Say World Oil Reserves Are “Exaggerated” | HeatingOil.com says: says:
[...] Oxford avoids picking a date for peak oil, but says demand will outpace supply by 2014, the year that Kuwaiti scientists have predicted oil production will [...]
Josh Garrett says: says:
A good point, Larry. One of the many reasons why abiotic theory is much less widely accepted than peak oil.
Larry says: says:
Even if oil was abiotic this doesn’t change anything. In the real world oil fields become depleted, any possible input of new oil is far lower than the extraction rate. A trickle of abiotic oil slowly refilling fields would not stop a production peak and decline.
Josh Garrett says: says:
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, John. I am well aware that abiotic oil theory lacks widespread support from geologists, and is fairly considered a “fringe” theory in many circles. I brought it up only to illustrate that the peak oil debate has many different facets and points of view that must be considered in a broad overview of the issue. Though it is far-fetched, it is not impossible. In my mind, theories like abiotic oil deserve a mention, but nothing more. Much like the issue of man-made climate change, consensus on peak oil is clear, but not final.
To answer your question, I absolutely see the benefit of presuming the validity and imminence of peak oil. Much of the reporting we do on this blog focus on preparing heating oil users and all energy consumers for a future in which energy is more expensive and harder to get. We cover peak oil news in an attempt to bring clearer understanding of the how, why, and when of peak oil (and for that matter, climate change as well) to a wider audience. Your opinion that world oil production peaked in 2005 is certainly a plausible one. If you haven’t already, I would recommend reading up on economist Jeff Rubin’s take on peak oil, as it may be similar and perhaps complimentary to your own.
John says: says:
““abiotic oil,””
Count the number of geologists in the world that believe in “abiotic oil” verses the number that don’t and I think you will have a little insight.
The world is full of things that can’t be “proven”. Peak oil however is not one of them. A model (Hubberts model) was developed to fit the data. This model has been used in a forward looking condition to predict the peak and decline of many oil fields around the world. Is it perfect? No. The worlds oil consumption waxes and wanes depending on economic conditions. However the very fact the many countries with major oil fields (Mexico and the USA come to mind) have already peaked and low and behold the depletion rates are pretty similar to what a Hubbert predicted they would be.
Peak oil is ( and it’s repercussions) are as real as the sun in the sky.
The question I have is. Can you see the benefit in taking action without proof when the consequences of inaction could be so large as to destabalize most of the governments in the world? It just seems to me that a little push…like say a continued tax on gas would give more incentives to start-up companies to find ways around the energy crisis that IMO is already here. From my own personally analysis I have come to the conclusion that the peak was actually 2005, with an artificial peak created in 2008 as oil producers scrambled to produce more oil while it was 148 dollars per barrel.
Just some food for thought.
Josh Garrett says: says:
I take your point, Nick, but your excessively emotional babbling does detract from it. I agree that the evidence in support of peak oil production is very strong, but it has yet to be proven beyond a doubt. One theory, for instance, known as “abiotic oil,” proposes that oil is not in fact a fossil fuel, but the result of geological processes deep in the the earth. Although that theory in particular has much less scientific support than does peak oil, responsible observers of the peak oil debate cannot dismiss it outright until it is conclusively disproved. Likewise, as the editor of an information source that strives for objectivity, it is my responsibility to acknowledge dissent over the validity of peak oil theory.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but chastising those who so much as acknowledge the existence of an opposing point of view in a condescending manner will not change any minds, nor will puzzling exhortations to “turn of the television.” Take a deep breath, think and speak about the issue rationally, and you might find more people actually listening to you.
nick, oz... says: says:
“whether peak oil is a real or imagined phenomenon” ???
Peak oil production is a proven “phenomenon” unless one believes the laws of physics are not constant and possibly change with surrounding geography…
If I drop a peak oil conspiracy theorist from 1000 feet, does he fall in the USA, but floats of into space in oh, lets say, Saudi Arabia?
Whether in a single deposit, a field, or a nation peak oil is a result of the laws of physics that exist throughout the universe and the numbers prove it so why would anyone debate its existance on a global scale???
Anyhow, attempting to place a date on peak oil is a pointless exercise debated only by the ignorant…
Price as a function of supply vs. demand is all that matters in reality and I bet anyone 3 billion new and very thirsty consumers, or one zombie global economy already fighting tooth and nail against a deflationary spiral, that we are heading directly for a complete breakdown of our energy fueled global economy and 99/100 people do not have a single clue…
TURN OF THE TELEVISION…