Categories
Last 5 Donors
Robin A. | $ 30 |
Jerry B. | $ 50 |
clive p. | $ 5 |
Zachary K. | $ 10 |
Peter G. | $ 3 |
Syndication
Search Cloud
HTML
Torrent Info
Peak Oil - Ian Crane
The phrase "Peak Oil" has been coined to bring attention to the belief that the world is at, or very close to, the point where reserves of global hydro-carbon resources commence the downward path, which will ultimately lead to the complete exhaustion of global oil & gas resources.
Whilst the theory of "Peak Oil" is popularized by a sympathetic media, the oil industry, continues to produce in excess of 90 million barrels each day whilst enjoying record levels of profitability, yet remains remarkably silent on the issue.
The mainstream media is also strangely silent on the existence of alternative theories to "Peak Oil". Why is this? Does everyone in the Oil & Gas industry agree with the forecasts that the world is entering the last days of an oil-based economy? If not, what is the alternative viewpoint and why is it not given coverage by the mainstream media?
In addition, the proponents of "Peak Oil" conveniently ignore rapidly advancing well construction, reservoir management and stimulation techniques, which enable more than twice as much oil to be extracted than when oil was first discovered in the late 19th Century. Not to mention the development of production from unconventional sources, such as the massive Shale Oil deposits beneath Colorado, Utah & Wyoming.
Harvard PhD graduate Jerome Corsi wrote, Oil companies are making record $100 billion annual profits not because oil is scarce but because we believe it is.
Ian R. Crane, a veteran of a twenty-year career in international oilfield services, which provided him with the opportunity to live & work in the UK, Mainland Europe, Middle East and the USA, believes that counter theories to Peak Oil should be given equal consideration and people should be given the opportunity to see the truth behind "Peak Oil". Is it real decline in availability of resources or "perceived shortage", which has resulted in the price of oil escalating from $9.81 per barrel in 1999, to in excess of $90 per barrel today? What cannot be denied is that over the past five years, the major oil companies have achieved the greatest levels of profitability in corporate history. Over the same period, oilfield related stocks have increased in value by as much as a 500%, reaping enormous rewards for oilfield executives and industry investors.
Ian does not suggest that we should continue to burn in excess of 90million barrels of hydro-carbons each day but he is concerned that the proponents of "Peak Oil" are inadvertently playing into the hands of Big Oil. With the price of petrol now firmly set above the £1 per litre mark in the UK, it's time to hear the other side of the story.
Full DVD Rip 1hr21mins
| c323d9ae37c5b9794494b23f4acb65156588c7bd |
Tracker | |
Category | Documentary |
Uploaded by | Unknown |
Uploaded on | Jul 02, 2008 |
Number of files | 9 |
| 2391 |
| 512 |
| 12 |
5 Comments
'Whilst the theory of "Peak Oil" is popularized by a sympathetic media...'?
What sympathetic media?!
huh??!
What sympathetic media?!
huh??!
Jul 03 2008, 05:16 CEST
You know, that "liberal media" that's been such a pussycat for Bush, Cheney, the war in Iraq, and now John McCain.
A DivX or Xvid version of this would be welcomed. I can't afford 4GB for it.
A DivX or Xvid version of this would be welcomed. I can't afford 4GB for it.
Jul 03 2008, 17:17 CEST
Here are my notes on Ian's presentation:
The Jerome Corsi book "Black Gold Strangehold" mentioned in the presentation has been given very lousy reviews (see Amazon).
Ian Crane basically admits we may well be seeing the end of the age of cheap oil (which is what Peak Oil is about - not about running out of oil completely). Peak oil is also about production (flow rates) and is
not about reserves in the ground. What's important is the speed at which these can be extracted.
Ian states production from Oil Shale costs $35 a barrel. This is only a PROJECTION from Shell, they have yet to prove oil shale can be produced in commercial volumes at this cost. The U.S. General
Accountability Office writes (2007) "it is possible that in 10 years from now, the oil shale resource could produce 0.5 million to 1.0 million barrels per day." But the GAO noted that the development of
oil shale faces key challenges, including: "(1) controlling and monitoring groundwater (2) permitting and emissions concerns associated with new power generation facilities, (3) reducing overall
operating costs, (4) water consumption (it takes about 4 barrels of water to produce one barrel of synthetic crude oil) , and (5) land
disturbance and reclamation."
Quote from Ian Crane:
"Estonia hardly imports any oil at all"
Incorrect.
Estonia
Oil - production:
6,930 bbl/day (2005 est.)
Oil - consumption:
29,000 bbl/day (2005 est.)
(source: CIA World Factbook)
Estonia does produce most of its electricity from burning shale but that's not the same as producing synthetic oil from it. Nor does it account for other uses of energy such as heating. In 2002, about 97%
of air pollution, 86% of total waste and 23% of water pollution in Estonia came from the electric power industry, which uses oil shale as the main resource for its power production (see Wikipedia article on
Oil Shale for source).
He introduces a graph of world shale Resources as being world shale Reserves (there's a significant difference if you do your research)
Production from oil sands in Canada is at about 1 million barrels per day and may rise to several times that. However that is a small percentage of the 85mbd the world uses on a daily basis.
Ian states it's more difficult to extract synthetic crude from oil sands than oil shale, he's got this the wrong way round. There is commercial production of synthetic crude from oil sands as noted
above, there is not major commercial production from oil shale.
The highest production from oil shale was under 44 million barrels (46 million tonnes times 40 U.S. gallons divided by a barrel of oil (42 U.S. gallons)) of synthetic crude in the whole of the year of 1980
(ibid). Current world oil consumption is in excess of 85 million barrels PER DAY.
In my opinion he fails to present a strong case that unconventional oil will be produced (as opposed to lying underground) in significant quantities in the next few decades. He also doesn't mention their major environmental impacts (not just CO2), water usage and the relatively low amount of energy they return on energy invested (EROEI).
The exploration of the Arctic region for oil shows in my opinion how desperate the world has become for oil. The oil in this region is very expensive and difficult to get to.
The "evidence" for Gull Island is basically hearsay. There's no independent evidence for it at all.
Matthew Simmons, John Deutch and John Schlesinger are members of some of the same organizations. This hardly proves a conspiracy to get the peak oil meme out there. Ian also doesn't explain why they would tryto dupe 9/11 conspiracy theorist Michael Ruppert as convincing him of peak oil is hardly going to get the meme into the mainstream.
quote:
"The only known substitute for aviation fuel is a synthetic fuel manufactured from coal"
In October 2007 Green Flight International completed the world's first jet aircraft flight powered by 100% biodiesel. note: I am NOT endorsing biofuel - just pointing out that there are alternatives.
I think the rise in the stock price of Peabody (the U.S.'s largest producer of coal) had a lot more to do with growth in the world demand from coal (primarily from China) than its potential as a substitute
for jetfuel.
The abiotic theory of oil is about the origin of oil. It does not disprove the peak oil model. To quote Patrick Goetz: Even if oil *is* being created abiotically in the core of the earth; i.e. even if new oil is constantly being created, the rate of production would have to be so slow as to be practically meaningless; otherwise we would
literally be swimming in the oil created during the millions of years that humans weren't using any oil at all. To illustrate using a simple analogy, if water is dripping into a basin at a rate of one drop per hour, but you are removing water from the basin at a rate of 1 gallon per hour, the basin will be empty after some finite amount of time even though the water in the basin is constantly being replenished. Once the basin has been emptied of all stored water, the usage must be reduced from one gallon an hour to one drop per hour; i.e. for all
practical purposes water can no longer be drawn from the basin.
If abiotic oil and gas is established as a reality it may be important to scientific understanding that doesn't mean it exists in economically viable quantities. The oceans contain trillions of dollars of gold, but it's not economically viable to extract it.
Only a single well has ever been reported to have refilled after it was presumed empty of recoverable oil (and as Ian admits there are many competing theories). One well out of the millions drilled hardly proves there is no shortage of oil. I also couldn't find any evidence that the Russians (or anybody else) is using the abiotic theory of oil
to guide their exploration efforts.
His mention of the guys in Ireland (Steorn) is pretty laughable. They tried to show their "invention" worked in July 2007 and their demonstration failed. "Free energy" has a long history of conspiracy
theories, crackpots and hoaxers.
However Ian's reference to the Sony Pictures' "Who Killed the Electric Car" is a documentary well worth watching. This has more to do with economic forces that want to perpetuate the existing energy
infrastructure than supposed assassinations of scientists that have made breakthroughs.
Conclusion:
The peak oil model has been proven. Hubbert correctly predicted the peak in U.S. conventional oil production. I believe it's valuable to explore important issues such as oil from multiple angles so I'd still encourage you to watch this film along with "pro" peak oil films such as "A Crude Awakening" and "The End of Suburbia".
You can also find a wealth of information and facts on:
http://www.theoildrum.com
The Jerome Corsi book "Black Gold Strangehold" mentioned in the presentation has been given very lousy reviews (see Amazon).
Ian Crane basically admits we may well be seeing the end of the age of cheap oil (which is what Peak Oil is about - not about running out of oil completely). Peak oil is also about production (flow rates) and is
not about reserves in the ground. What's important is the speed at which these can be extracted.
Ian states production from Oil Shale costs $35 a barrel. This is only a PROJECTION from Shell, they have yet to prove oil shale can be produced in commercial volumes at this cost. The U.S. General
Accountability Office writes (2007) "it is possible that in 10 years from now, the oil shale resource could produce 0.5 million to 1.0 million barrels per day." But the GAO noted that the development of
oil shale faces key challenges, including: "(1) controlling and monitoring groundwater (2) permitting and emissions concerns associated with new power generation facilities, (3) reducing overall
operating costs, (4) water consumption (it takes about 4 barrels of water to produce one barrel of synthetic crude oil) , and (5) land
disturbance and reclamation."
Quote from Ian Crane:
"Estonia hardly imports any oil at all"
Incorrect.
Estonia
Oil - production:
6,930 bbl/day (2005 est.)
Oil - consumption:
29,000 bbl/day (2005 est.)
(source: CIA World Factbook)
Estonia does produce most of its electricity from burning shale but that's not the same as producing synthetic oil from it. Nor does it account for other uses of energy such as heating. In 2002, about 97%
of air pollution, 86% of total waste and 23% of water pollution in Estonia came from the electric power industry, which uses oil shale as the main resource for its power production (see Wikipedia article on
Oil Shale for source).
He introduces a graph of world shale Resources as being world shale Reserves (there's a significant difference if you do your research)
Production from oil sands in Canada is at about 1 million barrels per day and may rise to several times that. However that is a small percentage of the 85mbd the world uses on a daily basis.
Ian states it's more difficult to extract synthetic crude from oil sands than oil shale, he's got this the wrong way round. There is commercial production of synthetic crude from oil sands as noted
above, there is not major commercial production from oil shale.
The highest production from oil shale was under 44 million barrels (46 million tonnes times 40 U.S. gallons divided by a barrel of oil (42 U.S. gallons)) of synthetic crude in the whole of the year of 1980
(ibid). Current world oil consumption is in excess of 85 million barrels PER DAY.
In my opinion he fails to present a strong case that unconventional oil will be produced (as opposed to lying underground) in significant quantities in the next few decades. He also doesn't mention their major environmental impacts (not just CO2), water usage and the relatively low amount of energy they return on energy invested (EROEI).
The exploration of the Arctic region for oil shows in my opinion how desperate the world has become for oil. The oil in this region is very expensive and difficult to get to.
The "evidence" for Gull Island is basically hearsay. There's no independent evidence for it at all.
Matthew Simmons, John Deutch and John Schlesinger are members of some of the same organizations. This hardly proves a conspiracy to get the peak oil meme out there. Ian also doesn't explain why they would tryto dupe 9/11 conspiracy theorist Michael Ruppert as convincing him of peak oil is hardly going to get the meme into the mainstream.
quote:
"The only known substitute for aviation fuel is a synthetic fuel manufactured from coal"
In October 2007 Green Flight International completed the world's first jet aircraft flight powered by 100% biodiesel. note: I am NOT endorsing biofuel - just pointing out that there are alternatives.
I think the rise in the stock price of Peabody (the U.S.'s largest producer of coal) had a lot more to do with growth in the world demand from coal (primarily from China) than its potential as a substitute
for jetfuel.
The abiotic theory of oil is about the origin of oil. It does not disprove the peak oil model. To quote Patrick Goetz: Even if oil *is* being created abiotically in the core of the earth; i.e. even if new oil is constantly being created, the rate of production would have to be so slow as to be practically meaningless; otherwise we would
literally be swimming in the oil created during the millions of years that humans weren't using any oil at all. To illustrate using a simple analogy, if water is dripping into a basin at a rate of one drop per hour, but you are removing water from the basin at a rate of 1 gallon per hour, the basin will be empty after some finite amount of time even though the water in the basin is constantly being replenished. Once the basin has been emptied of all stored water, the usage must be reduced from one gallon an hour to one drop per hour; i.e. for all
practical purposes water can no longer be drawn from the basin.
If abiotic oil and gas is established as a reality it may be important to scientific understanding that doesn't mean it exists in economically viable quantities. The oceans contain trillions of dollars of gold, but it's not economically viable to extract it.
Only a single well has ever been reported to have refilled after it was presumed empty of recoverable oil (and as Ian admits there are many competing theories). One well out of the millions drilled hardly proves there is no shortage of oil. I also couldn't find any evidence that the Russians (or anybody else) is using the abiotic theory of oil
to guide their exploration efforts.
His mention of the guys in Ireland (Steorn) is pretty laughable. They tried to show their "invention" worked in July 2007 and their demonstration failed. "Free energy" has a long history of conspiracy
theories, crackpots and hoaxers.
However Ian's reference to the Sony Pictures' "Who Killed the Electric Car" is a documentary well worth watching. This has more to do with economic forces that want to perpetuate the existing energy
infrastructure than supposed assassinations of scientists that have made breakthroughs.
Conclusion:
The peak oil model has been proven. Hubbert correctly predicted the peak in U.S. conventional oil production. I believe it's valuable to explore important issues such as oil from multiple angles so I'd still encourage you to watch this film along with "pro" peak oil films such as "A Crude Awakening" and "The End of Suburbia".
You can also find a wealth of information and facts on:
http://www.theoildrum.com
Jul 04 2008, 03:17 CEST
There is a DivX version here
http://btjunkie.org/torrent/Peak-Oil-Ian-Crane-divx/4495ac7c419f1afd7d541bd1b1779edfbed859c93769
I am just downloading this so I don't have any info about the torrent (quality etc.) but seems ok.
http://btjunkie.org/torrent/Peak-Oil-Ian-Crane-divx/4495ac7c419f1afd7d541bd1b1779edfbed859c93769
I am just downloading this so I don't have any info about the torrent (quality etc.) but seems ok.
Jul 05 2008, 01:38 CEST
Your Comment
Get E-mail notification about new comments. (LOG IN first)