Declining Net Energy Exports - Short-Term Fall Or Long-Term Trend? Oil Drum./ASPO

[hatrack]

The Export Land Model and Two Case Histories

In previous articles posted on The Oil Drum we outlined a simplistic export model for a hypothetical country with Ultimate Recoverable Reserves (URR) of about 38 billion barrels (Gb), labeled the Export Land Model (ELM). The model showed the effect on net exports of a country that hit peak production and started declining at 5% per year. The exporting country consumes 50% of its production, and that consumption is increasing by 2.5% per year. The 5% decline rate is loosely based on the post-peak Texas decline rate of about 4% per year. The ELM is shown graphically below, Figure One.



First, assuming ultimate recoverable reserves of 38 Gb, and assuming that Export Land peaked when it was about 55% depleted, Export Land would have about 17 Gb of remaining recoverable reserves, after peaking. The model shows that only about 1.7 Gb, or 10%, of remaining post-peak recoverable reserves would be exported.

Second, the overall exponential net export decline rate, about 29% per year over the eight year net export decline period, is much more rapid than the production decline rate of 5% per year, because net exports in a given year are the net difference between two exponential functions: exponentially declining production and (generally) exponentially increasing consumption.

Third, the net export decline rate in a given year accelerates with time, from an initial year over year change in net exports of -12.5% to a final year over year change in net exports of -47.6% (last year of net exports). So, how does the simplistic ELM compare to real world case histories? Actually, two recent case histories, Indonesia and the UK, showed sharper net export declines than the ELM. Figure Two, shows the year-over-year changes in net exports, from the start of the most recent production declines to the (apparent) final year of net exports (EIA, Total Liquids).



EDIT

http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=218&Itemid=91

[4dsc]

1. Just a sign of things to come

I keep wondering just how many more reports like this it will take before the American people wake up to the coming oil crisis??

[hatrack]

2. I don't think price alone is going to do anything - actual shortage will be the only effective hook

Of course, it's already happening - not that you'd know from watching the tee-vee.

I reported a story about a week ago about how diesel shortages are appearing all over Corn Belt states like Nebraska, Minnesota and the Dakotas. Farmers are having to wait hours in line to get the newly mandated low-sulfur diesel fuel. Thing is, since these shortages are taking place in rural areas, they may as well be happening on the surface of Io, as far as most of the country is concerned.

On another note, just think about it - fuel shortages directly affecting our ability to get the harvest in. Still, it's not like food is important or anything like that . . . :eyes:

[hunter]

3. I think there is a very strong incentive to disguise production shortages.

Shortages will always be blamed on something else because exposing the reality would make the market for oil unstable, unpredictable, and almost certainly less profitable.

The oil companies and their politicians have charted a course and they are sticking to it.

[phantom power]

4. What's interesting is, they can blame it on anything they want, but...

the rate of production will continue to decrease over time. What they blame it on may influence what solutions people attempt implementing, however. For instance, prolonging the "Denial" phase of the process.