Skip to main content

View Diary: The 4 biggest oil fields in the world are in decline (197 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Oil field between Norway and Russia (none)
    I had someone tell me the other day that there is a new field recently discovered between Norway and Russia and that it was going to supply 30% of the oil over the coming years once they negotiate who gets the use of it.

    Since I haven't heard this any place else and would think that a discovery like that would be trumpeted, do you know what he was referring to?

    GWB: best argument I know of to refute "Intelligent Design"

    by Pandora on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 07:00:59 AM PST

      •  Not Ghawar replacements (4.00)
        Norway-Russian border: 1.3 billion barrels
        Brazil : 0.7 billion barrels

        Ghawar: 60 billion barrels

        You'd need  60 finds like that to replace Ghawar. It's a lot of oil, true, but it's not enough to keep up with the world's enormous thirst for crude.

        •  What were early estimates of Ghawer? (none)
          when it was first discovered?  How reliable are any early stage reserve estimates? or late stage estimates, for that matter? I recall reading that recent (caveat: pre-Bushco II) estimates of Gulf State reserves have doubled on average from what they were in the 1970's
          •  They doubled because ... (none)
            As has been discussed in earlier diaries, the doubling of the claimed reserves in the 90s had to do with individual OPEC companies being committed to only pumping X% of their reserves in a given period, so by raising the estimate for the size of their reserves they could pump more in the short term without violating the letter of their OPEC agreements.

            There are few honest business people in this world outside of Scandinavia, and almost none of them are in either the American or the Neareastern oil business.

    •  It's a gas field (none)
      (or several actually) - you probably heard about Shtokman, which Gazprom hopes to develop with a foreign partner in the coming years, and use as a source a gas for LNG exports (i.e. by boat instead of by pipe) - which would make the US market accessible.

      There are a couple of other big fields up there - and there is an area in the sea disputed by Norway and Russia which has not been explored but holds a lot of promise for more hydrocarbons... (See some info here: http://www.eurotrib.com/...)

      I am not sure what the 30% would refer to.

      In the long run, we're all dead (Keynes)
      Read more on the European Tribune - bringing dKos to Europe

      by Jerome a Paris on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 07:16:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting sidenote on all these artic oil-gas (none)
      deposits: they are located in areas that have  always been (ie for the last 500 million years) cold/low sunlight polar/arctic  (>60-70 degrees north latitude) regions since before the explosion of complex life in the Cambrian and Carboniferous Periods before the break-up of the Pangea Supercontinent

      So there never has been very much  sunlight and warmth available for plant/algae/dinosaurs to grow in these oil-gas rich arctic Barrent Sea regions (and get converted to  "fossil" fuels, according to the biological oil formation dogma prevailing in the US).

      So how did all that alleged decayed dino oil and gas get there?  

      •  Shumard (none)
        You obviously, based on your posts, don't believe that peak oil is a problem to worry about.  Can you point us to some good (and credible)alternative sites for competing viewpoints?

        I'd appreciate it.

        •  Don't know about good sites but (none)
          can suggest links to the recent works (rather technical, unfortunately)  of Russian petroleum geologist proponents of abiotic oil formation theory, Thomas Gold's The Deep Hot Biosphere, and a short but good  experimental paper in PNAS : Generation of methane in the Earth's mantle: In situ high pressure-temperature measurements of carbonate reduction  

          Wikipedia also has a decent discussion of abiogenic/biogenic oil formation theories.

          Finally there is this: Oil Myths, which doesn't get into the biogenic/abiogenic debate but argues that that oil supply is not dwindling, and is not the problem (global warming is).

          •  BS theories (none)
            What a waste of time even thinking about this crap.  Even assuming oil is created through other processes for the sake of argument, it's all highly irrelevant because the lack of large recent finds shows that we are using oil at a rate much faster than it is being created (if it is).  Oil reserves really are dwindling and quite rapidly.  

            In Britain they admit to having royalty. In the United States we pretend we don't have any, and then we elect them president.

            by Asak on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 04:14:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site