Peaks Everywhere!

A view of the Himalayas from Lhasa

Tad Patzek, Petroleum & Geosystems Engineering, UT AustinDepartment of Astronomy, Robert Lee Moore Building 15.216B, 11/2/2010, 3:30-4:30 p.m.

Technology. . .. . . Challenges and reveals the Earth:

“Such challenging happens in that the energyconcealed in nature is unlocked, what is unlocked istransformed, what is transformed is stored up, whatis stored up is in turn distributed, and what isdistributed is switched about ever anew. ”

“Everywhere everything is ordered to stand by, to beimmediately on hand, indeed to stand there just sothat it may be on call for a further ordering.”

Technology is a “standing-reserve” of energy forhumans to order nature and, in turn, be enframed bytheir technology.

Martin Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology, 1954

– p.1/41

In Plain English. . .What Heidegger meant is:

We are an impatient species that regards astanding-reserve of energy as a must

Since we cannot control technology, technologycannot be our tool to control nature

We are a part of technology

We tend to think of technology as an instrument thatis outside of us. Instead, we are a part of a biggersystem that comprises us and technology

Our technological civilization is all about power (therate of fuel use), stupid!

– p.2/41

Summary of Conclusions. . .The global rate of production of oil is peaking now,coal will peak in 2-5 years, and natural gas in 20-50years

There is PLENTY of fossil fuels (“resources”) left allover the Earth

The resource size (current balance of a bankingaccount) is mistakenly equated with the speed ofdrawing it down (ATM withdrawals)

Few understand the ever more stringent dailywithdrawal limits imposed by nature on our ATMcards (oil & gas wells and coal mines)

Even fewer understand the high minimum balances(resource left behind) imposed on all oil, coal andgas recovery deposits

– p.3/41

Summary of Conclusions. . .Economists, business people, and policy makersgenerally have poor understanding of banking

They know what the rate of withdrawals (energydemand) should be, but have little idea about thewithdrawal limits (energy supply)

Offshore and unconventional fields will be producingan increasing portion of global oil supply

Solar energy flow-based solutions (wind turbines,photovoltaics, and biofuels) will require most radicalchanges of our lifestyles

Thermodynamically, industrial-scale biofuels are notsustainable, and will damage the Earth’s most vitalecosystems

– p.4/41

Oil Resides in Deep Subsurface

– p.5/41

Oil Resides in Small Pores

Alaska Peninsula-Bristol Bay reservoir (left), Naknek Formation (right)

– p.6/41

Accumulation vs. Production

Unrecoverable Oil, ∼2/3

Recoverable Oil, ∼1/3

Oil rate outVaries a lot

Accumulation = Piggy Bank, Coin Slot = Oil Wells, Injection Wells, and Surface Facilities

– p.7/41

Mean Ultimate Recoveries

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Middle East

FSU

Latin America

Europe

Africa

U.S.A.

Far East

Mean Ultimate Recovery, % Oil−in−Place

Sources: Laherrere, 2002; Thomas, 2007– p.8/41

Units in My Presentation. . .The fundamental unit of energy is 1 exa Joule (EJ)

1EJ = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 Jis the amount of metabolized energy in food

sufficient to sustain the entire U.S. population forone year @100 J/s-person = 100 W/person

continuously

Currently the U.S. uses 105 EJ/year; one hundredand five times more than we need to live

If we were to metabolize this amount of energy, wewould be 15 m long sperm whales, each weighing 40tonnes.

1 EJ/year = 32 GW of heat continuously ≈ 1 TscfNG/year = 1/2 million BOPD

– p.9/41

Homo Colossus Americanus. . .

1 Statistical American = 1 Sperm Whale

EUGENE ODUM, Ecological Vignettes, 1998

– p.10/41

Electricity generation: 39 EJp/y

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 20080

50

100

150

200

250

300

350D

ays

on E

lect

ricity

/yea

r

Coal

Natural Gas & Other

Nuclear

Hydroelectric

Rest

176

79

72

23

37% of U.S. primary energy use. Source: DOE EIA, accessed 03/28/2010– p.11/41

Electricity generation – Rest

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 20080

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22D

ays

on E

lect

ricity

/yea

r

Petroleum

Wood & Other Biomass

Wind

Geothermal

4

5

5

1

Solar thermal and PV = 1 hour of U.S. electricity. Source: DOE EIA, accessed 03/28/2010– p.12/41

Transportation Fuels: 33 EJp/y

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 20000

50

100

150

200

250

300

350D

ays

on F

uel/y

ear

Motor Gasoline

Distillate Oil

Aviation Fuels

Residual Oil

Ethanol

202

99

38

188

31% of U.S. primary energy use. Source: DOE EIA, accessed 03/28/2010 – p.13/41

California’s Oil Supply

1985 1990 1995 2000 20050

50

100

150

200

250

300

350D

ays

on P

etro

leum

/yea

r

California

Alaska

Foreign

144

55

166

Sources: California Energy Commission, DOE EIA, accessed 10/28/2010– p.14/41

Texas’ Oil Supply

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 20050

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4O

il C

onsu

mpt

ion/

Pro

duct

ion

Sources: Texas Railroad Commission, DOE EIA, accessed 10/28/2010 – p.15/41

The rare and unexpected. . .

The Lucas Gusher, January 10, 1901

Our ignorance the future should becalled anti-knowledge

Yet, we habitually form models of thefuture

Models are not necessarily bad, butthey are limited

We never know in advance whenthese models fail

The mistakes made using models canhave very severe consequences

Simple iterated/recursive models or of-ten better than complicated ones

– p.16/41

Complexity and emergent properties

When this clockwork is disassembled and put back together properly, its behavior is predictableThe dissected frog will not hop off the table, when her intestines are squeezed inThe living frog has emerging, autonomous properties that cannot be gleaned from her carcass

– p.17/41

Complexity and earth systems

Reductionist approach customarily applied to all systems does not work for complex systemsNew science, engineering, anthropology, sociology, political science, and psychology are neededSource: Dr. Larry Lake, PGE, UT Austin

– p.18/41

Predicting the Future. . .

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 20050

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Mill

ion

BO

PD

Production histories of 65 oilfields in the North Sea. Sources: Norwegian Government

(2009), Patzek & Croft (2010). The thick lines are Ekofisk and Ekofisk West – p.19/41

. . . Emergent Behavior. . .

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 20400

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5M

illio

n B

OP

D

A single Hubbert curve explains almost all of Norwegian production in the North Sea– p.20/41

A Future of Norwegian North Sea

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 20400

5

10

15

20

25

30B

illio

n B

arre

ls o

f Oil

Sources: Norwegian Government (2009), Patzek & Croft (2010)– p.21/41

North Sea: Ekofisk

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 20050

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40C

umul

ativ

e re

cove

ry, %

Oil−

in−

Pla

ce

Bub

ble

poin

t

Wat

erflo

od

Hor

izon

tal w

ells

Infill wells

Production dataWaterflood response

OIP=6.4 billion bbl. Sources: Norwegian Government (2009), Patzek & Croft (2010) – p.22/41

Emergent Behavior in the Gulf. . .

1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 20400

0.5

1

1.5M

ilion

BO

PD Shallow water

Deep water Patzek’sProjection

IndustryProjection

Sources: U.S. DOE EIA, MMS, and Patzek’s calculations– p.23/41

A Future of Deep Gulf

1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 20400

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Historic data

Industry Projection

Patzek’sProjection

Bill

ion

Bar

rels

of O

il

Sources: U.S. DOE EIA, MMS, and Patzek’s calculations – p.24/41

Total Gulf Oil/U.S. Oil Elsewhere

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 20100

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45G

OM

Oil

vs. R

est o

f U.S

. Oil,

%

Sources: U.S. DOE EIA, MMS, and Patzek’s calculations

Thunder Horse

– p.25/41

2006 Oil Data for GOM

1 10 100 10001

10

100

1000

Rank = Number of fields larger than a field

Mill

ion

barr

els

of o

il

Proven oil reservesCumulative oil produced

Source: MMS data, 2006Fractals everywhere! All that is relevant was discovered?

– p.26/41

IEA Demand Growth Scenario. . .

OECD/EIA 2008 scenario of annual energy demand in the world

Source: www.iea.org/speech/2008/Tanaka/cop−

weosideeven.pdf– p.27/41

IEA and an Oil Production Peak?!

There is an oil peak and 64 millions barrels of oil per day will be missing by 2030

Source: www.iea.org/speech/2008/Tanaka/cop−

weosideeven.pdf

50 million bopd

– p.28/41

Scaling

Global energy productionschemes cannot be devel-oped overnight, if ever. . .

– p.29/41

Stages of Oil Production

Time

Rat

e

10% 25% 10%

Primary as % of Oil−in−PlaceSecondaryTertiary

Primary recovery = 1 - 10% OIP, Secondary = 20 – 40%, Tertiary = 5 – 15%, Steam = 40 – 65%– p.30/41

Oil Recovery Processes

Adapted by Larry Lake from the Oil & Gas Journal, Apr. 23, 1990– p.31/41

Summary of EOR ProcessesFirst deliberate application in the 1950s:

Approximately 10% of U.S. production from EOR

U.S. accounts for 1/4 of worldwide EOR production

Chemical projects:Meteoric rise and fall in the 1980sLeast popular EOR today (exc. of FSU, China)Mostly polymer injectionFewer than 40 projects, 20 polymer projects inChina

Thermal projects:Accounts for 50% of EOR oilAround 165 projects, but declining

– p.32/41

Summary of EOR Processes, cntd.First deliberate application in the 1970s, in the PermianBasin in Texas:

Solvent projects:Substantial growth in last 10 years to 167 projectsAbout 116 projects are miscible CO2 and 14immiscible CO2

The other 37 projects are miscible and immisciblehydrocarbon gas injectionCarbon dioxide storage opportunities

Source: The Oil and Gas Journal, The Annual EOR Projects Survey, 2008.

– p.33/41

World’s EOR Projects: 2.5 MBOPD

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

USA

Mexico

Venezuela

Canada

Indonesia

China

Other

Major EOR Projects, Million BOPD

ThermalGas injection

Adapted from the Oil & Gas Journal; Thomas, 2007

– p.34/41

Mining of Canadian Tar Sands

Source: assets.wwf.org.uk/downloads/scraping_barrell.pdf– p.35/41

Canadian Tar Sands: 1.5 MBOPD

Source: earlywarn.blogspot.com/2010/01/tar-sands-production-graph.html

– p.36/41

EOR and Tar Sand ProductionThe three highest producing oil fields on the Earthhave been Ghawar, Cantarell, and Burgan

Ghawar produced perhaps 4.5 million barrels of oilper day (mbopd) in 2009, Cantarell declined from 2mbopd in 2004 to 0.5 mbopd in 2009, and Burgandeclined from 1.7 mbopd in 2005 to 1 mbopd in 2009

If one doubles current oil production from EOR, oneobtains 5 mbopd, not the 50 mbopd projected

By 2030, oil production from the Canadian tar sandsmay increase to 4 – 5 mbopd of syncrude oil andbitumen, but not 10 mbopd

It seems that the additional 50 mbopd of oilproduction will have to originate from the newly foundsupergiant oilfields (but how?!)

– p.37/41

Second and Third Hubbert Peak

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 21500

5

10

15

20

25

30M

arke

ted

NG

Pro

duct

ion,

EJ/

Yea

r

ProductionHubbert cyclesFuture UNG

Future Unconventional Natural Gas Cycle = 100 years of U.S. Supply– p.38/41

Unconventional Gas

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 20600

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000C

umul

ativ

e N

atur

al G

as P

rodu

ctio

n, E

J

Fundamental Hubbert peakAll peaks

Extra 1,200 Tcf = $4.3 trillion at $3.6 per mcf, mostly from unconventional gas– p.39/41

Energy Intensity of Manufacturing

1980 1985 1990 1995 20000

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Oil

All energy

BO

e/$1

mill

ion

in m

anuf

actu

red

good

s

Energy content of world trade, G. Wagner, Environmental Defense Fund

– p.40/41

Power Density

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Middle East

Europe

Africa

CIS

Latin America

Asia

Watts of electricity equivalents per square meter

Oil/gas fieldsWorld field averageSolar PV in U.S.Wind turbines

Adapted from Laherrere, 2003, Patzek, 2007

– p.41/41