|
The
Letter.
Secretary
of Energy Samuel Bodman has asked THE
question. Will we have enough oil and natural gas to keep our
economy going? In a letter to Lee Raymond, Chairman of the
National Petroleum Council (NPC), Bodman has asked the Council
to predict the future:
- "What
does the future hold for global oil and natural gas
supply?"
- "Can
incremental oil and natural gas supply be brought on line,
on time, and at a reasonable price to meet future demand
without jeopardizing economic growth?"
- "What
oil and gas supply strategies and /or demand-side strategies
does NPC recommend the U. S. pursue to ensure greater
economic stability and prosperity?"
Energy
Secretary Bodman's letter describes several key issues:
"Perspectives vary widely on the ability of supply to keep
pace with growing world demand for oil and natural gas, the
point in time at which global oil production will plateau and
then begin to decline ("peak oil"), the implications
these may have for the U. S. and world economy, and what steps
should be taken to achieve more positive outcomes."
The
oil and natural gas industry has been asked to provide us with a
candid evaluation of the world's oil and natural gas resources
using internal industry data. The NPC, a federally chartered
advisory committee to the Department of Energy, has accepted the
request. Lee Raymond, who is also CEO of ExxonMobile, has the
task of documenting the industry's views on whether or not
supplies can keep pace with growing world demand, and if such
supplies can be provided at price points low enough to ensure
continued economic growth.
Framing
this report will be a tough challenge. The issues are complex
and there is a dearth of reliable data. Nonetheless, the NPC's
data, analysis, and conclusions must be irrefutable.
Importance.
If
we were to list the most important issues facing humanity, oil
and natural gas depletion has to be in the top three. The
economic and cultural destiny of mankind is inexorably tied to
the availability of fossil fuels. It is impossible to address
the problems of famine without oil and natural gas for
fertilizer, cultivation, and processing. Oil provides the
feedstock for thousands of products, including cosmetics,
medicines, plastics, heating and cooking fuels, and mobile fuels
for transportation. Natural gas is essential for the production
of fertilizers, electricity, and heat.
The
NPC is essentially being asked to characterize the size and
direction of the worldwide market for crude oil and natural gas,
including supplier exploration and production, the eventual
depletion of reserves, and finally - the impact such
depletion will have on consumers.
Each
issue raises multiple questions. Finding credible data will
exacerbate the challenge of thoughtful analysis. Although we
know NPC member corporations have better data than is generally
available to the public, are they willing to make it available
to the study team? How will the NPC deal with the paucity of
credible data from OPEC? How will collected data be organized
and synthesized? How will each hypothesis be developed and
tested? Is there one highly probable response? Or will the study
team be forced by uncertainty to offer a series of possible
scenarios?
Of
the more than 100 research projects I have done, depletion has
been by far the most complex. In the spirit of being
proactive and constructive, therefore, perhaps it would be
helpful to offer a few suggestions.
Issues.
Your
first problem will be to identify the key issue. Take my advice.
Although defining and quantifying reserves will be an important
component of your task, the key issue is NOT how much oil and
natural gas is left in the ground. Going forward, the key issue
is: How much oil and natural gas can we produce?
And that is an entirely different and very dicey question. If
you want to evaluate how much oil and natural gas we humans can
produce over the next 20 years, then you will have to examine
the entire supply chain from exploration through consumption
and then factor in the impediments of potential disruption.
Definitions.
One
of the most confusing aspects of the Peak Oil debate is embedded
in the definition of what constitutes reserves. Every agency and
nation appears to have its own method of accounting. We hear
about identified, proven, probable, and possible reserves.
Reserve volumes are estimated using 95 percentile, mode, mean,
or 5 percentile recovery data. Reserve "growth"
increases probable recovery. Emerging technology changes the
definition of what constitutes physically recoverable reserves,
and volatile crude oil prices change the definition of what is
or is not - economically recoverable oil.
But
in the end, there is one definition that takes precedence over
all others. Proven or identified reserves are less important
than accessible reserves.
"Accessible
reserves are those reserves of oil and natural gas that can
actually be found, produced, transported, refined, and
distributed without material disruption at a price the consumer
can afford to pay."
This
definition, or one like it, is important. Although we have
inherited a lot of oil and natural gas on this planet, it would
appear that only a small
fraction is accessible. The practical value of oil and
natural gas deposits will change over time in proportion to the
probability they can be physically recovered and transported to
a refinery at a cost commensurate with world market prices.
While the
Monte Carlo
simulations of probability used by the USGS in its studies are
interesting, we need to know how much oil and natural gas you
believe you can find and produce by poking a hole in the
ground. Then you need to factor in the supply chain challenges
of transportation, refining, and distribution. You will also
have to determine the price points against which oil and natural
gas prices begin to impede the American economy (and by
inference the world economy). And finally, you will have to
determine the probability all this can be done without material
disruption.
Chose
your definitions carefully. Not only will they frame your entire
study and its ultimate credibility they will also set
the world standard for oil and natural gas reserve definitions.
Data.
We
need better information. But it's not available. Nations tend to
treat resource statistics as classified information. That leaves
us with published reserve data of unknown quality, causing
confusion and mistrust. What methodology will be used to improve
the quality and quantity of the data you plan to use in your
report?
Questions.
Your
next task will be to frame the relevant questions. At a minimum,
you should be prepared to respond to the following:
- How
will you define and describe conventional oil and natural
gas resources by type?
- How
will you define and describe non-conventional oil and
natural gas resources by type?
- Can
you characterize future conventional and non-conventional
oil and natural gas exploration, production, transportation,
and refining by resource type, by year, and by producer
region?
- How
much oil do we have left? Where is it? Do you actually know
where these deposits are, or do you still need to drill
holes in the ground to confirm the availability, quantity,
and quality of the world's petroleum resources?
- Do
we know how much of the world's oil resources are
technically and physically feasible to produce? For
example, what is the recovery outlook for the world's
enormous deposits of oil sands and shales? Deep sea and
artic deposits?
- How
do you resolve the enormous shortfall between oil
consumption versus oil discovery since the 1980s?
- How
do you resolve the contention that increased drilling has
not provided significant mega-field reserve discoveries
since the 1970s?
- How
much natural gas do we have left? Where is it? Do you
actually know where these deposits are, or do you still need
to drill holes in the ground to confirm the availability,
quantity, and quality of the world's natural gas resources?
- Do
we know how much of the world's natural gas resources are
technically and physically feasible to produce? For
example, what is the recovery outlook for the world's
enormous deposits of stranded natural gas?
- What
is the estimated minimum annual oil and natural gas
production by producer region?
- What
is the estimated maximum annual oil and natural gas
production by producer region?
- What
are the odds that oil supplies will not match demand on
multiple occasions (surplus or shortage) between now and
2025?
- What
are the odds that natural gas supplies will not match demand
on multiple occasions (surplus or shortage) between now and
2025?
- Can
you project world refinery raw material product costs by
resource type, and by year through 2025?
- Given
the costs described in question 14, can you project refined
product prices by type, and by year through 2025?
- Cultural
conflict, environmental concerns, and national
selfish-best-interest are potential barriers to maximizing
world exploration and production. How do these challenges
figure into your supply chain equation? What is the
probability that regional conflict will disrupt exploration,
production, and transportation?
- As
oil and natural gas becomes more difficult to produce and
transport, the amount of energy required to exploit each
resource will increase. Given the conventional and
non-conventional resource definitions described above, at
what point do you estimate the EROEI of each oil and natural
gas category will drop below 1?
- Given
a definition of consumer regions, what is your projection of
regional oil and natural gas demand by year?
- Will
we be able to see adjusted data that includes 20 years of
history, and a forecast period of 20 years (to 2025)?
- For
each of the above questions, will your report discuss the
underlying assumptions used to reach your estimates?
- Given
the results of the above questions, what oil and gas supply
strategies and /or demand-side strategies do we need to
pursue in order to ensure economic stability and prosperity?
When do these strategies need to be in place?
There
are, of course, many more questions that need to be addressed,
and the NPC must certainly improve the quality of publicly
available information. Never-the-less, a clear and unambiguous
response to the above questions would provide sufficient
information for the development of proactive public policy.
Some
Advice
Samuel
Bodman's letter shows two concerns: the estimated availability
and price of oil and natural gas versus demand; and the
projected economic impact of availability and price on America's
economy. This bilateral apprehension encourages the NPC to flirt
with economic judgments. It will be tempting to compare future
oil and natural gas price points with the consumer's ability to
pay for gasoline, diesel, propane, heating oil and other refined
products. If you conclude there will be restrictions in the
supply of oil and natural gas versus consumer demand, then these
shortages will also impact every economy on this planet.
Disruptive changes to either price or availability will change
the outlook for GDP, unemployment, and inflation.
But
avoid the temptation to make economic judgments. Although you
have been asked to identify the economic implications for the
United States (and by inference the economies of other nations),
that highly controversial exercise properly belongs to those of
us who seek truth by laboring over incredibly complex
spreadsheets and econometric models. Since the economic
"implications" involve social judgment, the NPC would
do well to avoid the ensuing controversy. Just give us the
facts, the assumptions, and the caveats.
We
long for credible data.
The
Use of Scenarios
My
guess is that the NPC and its consultants will be compelled to
characterize a series of possible scenarios in the final report.
There are simply too many variables and too many unknown
quantums to permit one to establish, test, and conclude a report
on oil and natural gas using a single hypothesis.
Scenarios
are not predictions. Rather, they permit us to make, and then
test, a hypothesis. They become a tool that gives our
evaluations focus, permit us to deal with the unexpected, and
characterize the results of dynamic circumstances. You will
achieve greater credibility if you use the scenario approach to
organize internally compatible data sets.
Conclusion
With
his letter to the NPC, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman has
initiated a fourth Federal study of oil and natural gas
supplies. We have already read Joseph Riva's 1995 report
"World Oil Production After Year 2000: Business As Usual or
Crises?", and the February 2005 report "Peaking of
World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk
Management." by Dr. Robert L. Hirsch et al, for the
Department Of Energy (DOE). In addition, The Government
Accountability Office has started work on a report tentatively
entitled "World Oil Reserves and Production Peak" that
should appear in 2006.
I
expect an even-handed, relatively optimistic, response from the
NPC. The oil and natural gas industry will give us its view of
the relevant resource and supply chain issues through the
National Petroleum Council's report. When this document has been
completed, we will have in-depth reports on the world's oil and
natural gas resources from four American institutions and
multiple independent authors. The public will be encouraged to
understand the challenges of growing resource demand versus
emerging supply limitations. Our political institutions will be
confronted with the need to establish responsive public policy.
The
cumulative wisdom of these reports will describe reality.
Will
it be a truth that Congress chooses to ignore?
ฉ
2005 Ronald R. Cooke
The
Cultural Economist
Author, "Oil, Jihad
& Destiny" and "Detensive Nation"
Editorial Archive
CONTACT
INFORMATION
Ronald R. Cooke | 13365 Via Del Sol,
Auburn, CA 95602 | Website
|