This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

China Surpasses US As Largest Energy Consumer; World Has 46.2 Year Of Proved Oil Reserves; Crude Has Lots Of Upside In Real Terms

Tyler Durden's picture


In its just released must read Statistical Review of World Energy, BP has many critical observations, the key of which, while not a surprise to most, is that as of 2010, the US is no longer the world's biggest consumer of energy. The new leader, with a 20.3% share of global energy consumption: China. Keep in mind that the Chinese economy is still (in whatever centrally planned terms it discloses) not even half the size of the US, thus one can only imagine how far this number will rise should China ultimately succeed in its goal of converting from an export-led to a consumer-led society. And here we have a market worried about a few million bpd in quota courtesy of the now defunct OPEC. From the report: "World primary energy consumption – which this year includes for the first time a time series for commercial renewable energy – grew by 5.6% in 2010, the largest increase (in percentage terms) since 1973. Consumption in OECD countries grew by 3.5%, the strongest growth rate since 1984, although the level of OECD consumption remains roughly in line with that seen 10 years ago. Non-OECD consumption grew by 7.5% and was 63% above the 2000 level. Consumption growth accelerated in 2010 for all regions, and growth was above average in all regions. Chinese energy consumption grew by 11.2%, and China surpassed the US as the world’s largest energy consumer. Oil remains the world’s leading fuel, at 33.6% of  global energy consumption, but oil continued to lose market share for the 11th consecutive year." And in terms of production reserves: "World proved oil reserves in 2010 were sufficient to meet 46.2 years of global production, down slightly from the 2009 R/P ratio because of a large increase in world production; global proved reserves rose slightly last year. An increase in Venezuelan official reserve estimates drove Latin America’s R/P ratio to 93.9 years – the world’s largest, surpassing the Middle East."

There is much more in the full report, but three charts bear highlighting: the reserves-to-production ratio, the relative pricing of crude in real terms, and the major trade movement of Crude in the world in 2010. Bottom line: crude likely has a long way to go up unless the global economy promptly commences another 2008 mega deflationary episode.

Reserves-to-production (R/P) ratios:

And Real crude Prices since the Pennsylvania Oil Boom:

World trade movements of crude:

Full report.

BP Statistical Review

And the full booklet:

2030 Energy Outlook Booklet


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:44 | 1350788 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Oh goody....

Not only a thread on WWII, a bonus peak oil thread...


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:52 | 1350828 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

I'm sorry. Was there somebody holding a gun to your head forcing you to read them?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:28 | 1351010 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Not at all... they are two topics that I relish debate on...I am blessed by an abundance of riches...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:59 | 1350876 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:22 | 1350975 THE DORK OF CORK
THE DORK OF CORK's picture

Does not look pretty , maybe its time for the Martians to escape


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:35 | 1351045 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Oh goody....


Oh bady...

Issue with the article is that China oil consumption can not be treated as the US oil consumption.

This is a US world order and the world is organized to allow US citizens in their current standard of life.

Chinese work quite a lot for US citizens and their oil consumption exist to maintain that feature.

Ultimately, the US oil consumption based on calculation within national borders could sink and sink while other areas of the world could see theirs increase but the oil consumption could still be done in order to support the US way of life.

Until the Chinese really start to consume oil for themselves and enable themselves in a Chinese way of life, nothing to be seen, only the US concealing their oil consumption by outsourcing it.

The US consumption of resources is vastly underestimated in this US world order as the world is organized to support US citizens in their lavish life style.

Accurate accounting should include all the oil consumption done by the Chinese (and the rest!) in order to provide the material conditions for the US way of life in the US.

Of course repelled by the US as it would show what blob the US is on the back of the rest of the world (not that the current figures are any good in this regard already)

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 15:58 | 1352150 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Well, the headline notion that we have "46.2" years of oil reserves is horseshit.

Existing fields will not continue to produce at the peak rate until they are EMPTY.  Oil wells don't work like that.

Peak production on a well or field does not start at day 0 and proceed until complete depletion.

Production rises, hits a maximum, and then declines.  Extraction rates are not level.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:04 | 1352442 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

their extraction analysis is almost as good as their safety record

Thu, 06/09/2011 - 04:37 | 1353881 tonyw
tonyw's picture

It is unfortunate that in the ZH article up top that phrase is highlighted and suggests we can continue for another 46.2 years.

As you say production rises to a peak then falls, not a perfect bell curve but you get the picture. For sure BP know that but this ratio is always given and is a useful insight. Since around 1985 the ratio has been above 40 and below 50. Incidentally BP have been producing their excellent report for 60 years.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:45 | 1350789 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

World proved oil reserves in 2010 were sufficient to meet 46.2 years of global production, down slightly


The trouble is cost of production. Both in terms of money and energy now.  If the oil is on the moon, it's gonna cost. Same way super deep water rigs, oil sands and new onshore technologies are expensive. There may be some soda pop at the bottom of that glass, but it takes a whole lotta sucking to get it up through that straw. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:58 | 1350844 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Throw in wars and turmoil in the places most of the oil comes from.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 16:02 | 1352184 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Indeed SD1.
And let us not forget Deepwater Horizon, an ongoing disaster.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:00 | 1350856 redpill
redpill's picture

And at some point it costs more oil to get it than you yield. But the shit will have already hit the fan by then.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:04 | 1350909 Dreadker
Dreadker's picture

Also that is AT CURRENT RATES.... 46.2 years factoring zero growth for the next 46.2 years on a global scale... Good luck with that oil dependent world lol

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:12 | 1350929 tmosley
tmosley's picture

The US will be doing its part, as our economy is about to shrink by about 2/3rds, due to the economic consequences of MONETARY POLICY.

That will take a lot of pressure off.  Other than the US and India, most nations produce enough oil to meet their own needs.  When our economy collapses, we will once again be in the position of being a net energy exporter, more than likely.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:15 | 1350959 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

"When our economy collapses, we will once again be in the position of being a net energy exporter, more than likely."

Yep, and we will either become wealthy again as a net energy exporter or become invaded.  Hedge accordingly.  Either way, with a fraudulent monetary and economic system and true price discovery and asset valuation being a total sham, possession of physical assets of real value (that can not be manipulated by harvard economists) will become the law.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:21 | 1350986 IslandMan
IslandMan's picture


..."Most nations produce enough oil to meet their own needs."


tmosley - that is complete bullshit, and you know it.  Of the approx 190 nations, how many produce enough oil to meet their own needs ? 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:16 | 1350951 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

As the US goes bankrupt the rest of the world can world can buy more oil without increasing current aggregate consumption rates.  It won't keep up 46.2 years but it will last longer than USD hegemony. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:52 | 1350791 66Sexy
66Sexy's picture

Statistical analysis originating from an oil company (BP lulz) concerning oil futures, should not only be considered lies.. but damned lies.

ZH clearly has the pumps ON for oil.... have to wonder why.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:52 | 1350814 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Because Goldman is "long"

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:51 | 1350826 plocequ1
plocequ1's picture

Im confused. I played this message backwards an heard I buried Paul

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:54 | 1350837 66Sexy
66Sexy's picture

In Goldman we trust?

Shouldn't we be thinking they are selling oil...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:00 | 1350852 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Well you can believe theyre selling oil...I think its going up.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:37 | 1350869 66Sexy
66Sexy's picture

a vast pool of derivative oil calls to choose from.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:00 | 1350879 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Precisely. After taking on the Fed it may be time to take on the Squid

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:15 | 1350958 falak pema
falak pema's picture

does this 46 year time line include non conventional oil reserves? Like Orenoco?

I can't see the graphic clearly on my comp!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 16:38 | 1352318 Conrad Murray
Conrad Murray's picture

This brings great joy to me. Slaughter those pigs.

It's time to get in the streets people. MENA is doing their thing, and Europe is starting to get rolling. Are we going to let them show US how to protest? Yea yea, the sheep don't know better and won't get off their asses...unless they see other's doing it. The rage is in the air, just talk to anyone you know and see how angry they are( ). All it takes is a few leaders to show the masses the time is now.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:15 | 1350960 scatterbrains
scatterbrains's picture

Tha'ts what he is saying I think... if GS is short then lets pump oil as high as we can kinda thing.  lol

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 16:07 | 1352190 reload
reload's picture

I`m doing my bit - the fun way (while it lasts) Ferrari F430 London to Le Mans tomorrow to watch the 24 hr race over the weekend . Plus I get to spend some Euro paper as well!   

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:51 | 1350824 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Because its going up, 66Sexy.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:55 | 1350825 That Peak Oil Guy
That Peak Oil Guy's picture

BP's Statistical Review is actually the best compilation of worldwide energy data out there, despite their industry position.

Oil is oxygen to the economy, which is why ZH is so interested.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:14 | 1350955 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Oxygen is oxygen to the economy.  Oil is food.  There are other types of food, but this one is a staple FOR NOW.  Just as charcoal once was, just as firewood once was, just as wheat once was (ie human labor).

Peak oilers LOVE to claim that oil is like oxygen, because there is NO replacement for oxygen.  But there ARE replacements for oil.  They might not be great, but we have lived without oil before, and we can do it again, if such drastic measures were necessary.  Just like we can live without wheat.  It might be difficult, and expensive, but it can be done.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:41 | 1351083 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

But we can't live without oil the way we live with oil. Many people have to go, also, since we are children of the oil age.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:43 | 1351586 Texas Gunslinger
Texas Gunslinger's picture

and there is Tmosely-claven.....   straight out of the starting gate, flat on his face.

When did we live without oil?  What year?  What was the world population, US population and US GDP? 

This is yet another example of a goofy, archaic, anarchic mindset that has absolutely no relevance to modern economies and populations and growth of current scale. Then again, I don't really think Tmosely is a true anarcho-capitalist because he openly admits to living off of government grants and handouts. 



Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:49 | 1351122 That Peak Oil Guy
That Peak Oil Guy's picture

You're right, it is more like food.  But I am happy to see that you have come around a bit more on the whole peak oil subject since you first told me this.  :-)


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:14 | 1351209 Toxicosis
Toxicosis's picture

Sure we can live without oil.  But not with a population of 7 billion.  One billion maybe, 7 not a chance.  We are a hydrocarbon dependent race, more than any other species combined.  Sure we can live without wheat, and I guess we can live without corn as well.  And then I guess we can live without meat, since they're ain't no corn to feed the chickens and cows there too pa.  Tmosley you are a true 'believing' troll, idealistic with fantastical delusions of grandeur.  To run modern societies requires extensive availability of hydrocarbon fuel.  Maybe we should just kill ourselves a few more whales to prove your point once we reach the $300-400 dollar mark in conventional and non-conventional oil, just so you're satisfied that replacements exist.  Hydrocarbon energy is not electricity.

This is a list of some of the products made from oil. Nearly everything in our lives is made from oil, made by machinery and systems dependent on oil, and transported by oil as either gas or diesel fuel.


Ammonia, Anesthetics, Antihistamines, Artificial limbs, Artificial Turf, Antiseptics, Aspirin, Auto Parts, Awnings, Balloons, Ballpoint pens, Bandages, Beach Umbrellas, Boats, Cameras, Candles, Car Battery Cases, Carpets, Caulking, Combs, Cortisones, Cosmetics, Crayons, Credit Cards, Curtains, Deodorants, Detergents, Dice, Disposable Diapers, Dolls, Dyes, Eye Glasses, Electrical Wiring Insulation, Faucet Washers, Fishing Rods, Fishing Line, Fishing Lures, Food Preservatives, Food Packaging, Garden Hose, Glue, Hair Coloring, Hair Curlers, Hand Lotion, Hearing Aids, Heart Valves, Ink, Insect Repellant, Insecticides, Linoleum, Lip Stick, Milk Jugs, Nail Polish, Oil Filters, Panty Hose, Perfume, Petroleum Jelly, Rubber Cement, Rubbing Alcohol,  Shampoo, Shaving Cream, Shoes, Toothpaste, Trash Bags, Upholstery, Vitamin Capsules, Water Pipes, Yarn


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:03 | 1351407 gorillaonyourback
gorillaonyourback's picture

exactly, loose oil and its toast for the environment with this many people on it, we would be cutting trees down like mad men

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:42 | 1352597 Rusty Shorts
Rusty Shorts's picture

yep, just like during the great depression, trees, the general enviroment, wildlife, all decimated.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:47 | 1351595 Texas Gunslinger
Texas Gunslinger's picture

oops.  Just saw your post.  I said basically the same thing.  Sorry about repeating it. 


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 15:55 | 1352134 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

This is also going to be the first time in human history where we will have to deal with future energy availability going down on a global basis.  Oil has/had the highest EROEI of any source in history.  Transitioning from the 21st Century to an 18th Cent. equivelent will be much harder than the ride up from the 18th to the 21st.

Look at the cultures that have had energy/resource collapses happen locally and you will see disaster after disaster [See Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies]. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:30 | 1352451 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

the collapse of complex societies...with simple minds

Good post

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:49 | 1350793 serndipity
serndipity's picture

How can that be?

China makes TVs while Americans watch TVs.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:49 | 1350798 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

Prelude to WWIII.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:23 | 1351485 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture


46 years of oil - then throw in mechanized food production, synthetic fertilizers and herbicides/pesticides, with the need for pumping/moving/purifying water - and WWIII over oil is inevitable.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:48 | 1350810 TexDenim
TexDenim's picture

If you play games with reserves and FX rates, you can make a weak case that China will be world's largest economy before 2015. What does the world look like with America displaced as Number One? Not sure. US will remain the richest nation, in the sense that the average American has 10 times as much disposable income than Chinese, and that will not change for several more decades.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:58 | 1350861 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

'Income' wow that can change at the drop of a hat. 30% unemployment and americans have good wages? I guarantee that will change soon. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:02 | 1350891 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

"average American has 10 times as much disposable income" current exchange rates

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:21 | 1350970 tmosley
tmosley's picture

EXACTLY.  Monetary games are coming to a close.  The paper that we have stored abroad will now swamp our shores once again, and we will have hyperinflation.

It looks like a "temporary", "technical" default has been added as one of the many triggers for this event, and it looks like its a hair trigger.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:32 | 1351032 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

you mean you can't just keep promising people you'll give them something of value in exchange for their goods and labor?  

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:07 | 1351196 OutLookingIn
OutLookingIn's picture

Oil per-capita consumption.

India/China (Chindia) = 2 barrels per day per person.

U.S.A. = 25 barrels per day per person.

Now. Who is the largest user of oil? The one who uses the most? Or the one who uses the most per person?

North American's still live an unsustainable life style that is on borrowed time and is terminally ill. Using that much oil to support the life style to which we are accustomed, is a crisis looking for a happening! I think it's found a home!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:32 | 1351288 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

India/China (Chindia) = 2 barrels per day per person.


How much of these barrels are allocated to support US way of life?

With outsourcing comes the outsourcing of consumption named production.

If it consumes x to produce a finished product, outsourcing the production reduces by x the global consumption on national basis.

Smoke and mirror. The US consumes much more than figures based on national borders indicate.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:38 | 1351317 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

Your numbers are wrong. U.S. uses about 20 million barrels a day. 20 million divided by 310 million = 0.0645 barrels per day. Even in terms of gallons it's only 2.7 gallons of oil per person per day.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:18 | 1351462 Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

25x300,000000=7,500,000,000 barrels per day ,I think not

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:52 | 1350812 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Came across this:

The take away is:

The solution presented was more exploration, but Shamsul also acknowledged that $2.4 trillion spent by oil companies around the globe between 2005 and 2010 served only to keep production steady. Between 1995 and 2004, the same amount of capex yielded an increase of 12.3 million bpd.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:56 | 1350832 That Peak Oil Guy
That Peak Oil Guy's picture

In other words, "Peak oil yes, but we're not going to call it that!"


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:55 | 1350841 r101958
r101958's picture

good input flak.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:50 | 1350813 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

And there goes WTI to $101. Hello US 3rd world, and world war 3 next. Hope you enjoy your bubble stocks while they last which wont be long at all.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:53 | 1350818 the not so migh...
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

Solar orbital platforms is our only hope. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:59 | 1350875 Greeny
Greeny's picture

Cars can run on water, but Oil mafia will not

let this happened. H2O see? 2 molecule of Hydrogen

use that, it's FREE. Even sea water works.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05 | 1350892 the not so migh...
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

not knocking hydrogen, never put all eggs in one basket.   Hindenburg had a hydrogen problem, I think that is what is holding that back.   Explosion proof hydrogen tanks for cars very heavy.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:31 | 1351030 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Wow... you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.... Umm, where does the H2 come from and what do you get when you burn it? Tell me how you win in this scenario...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:37 | 1351041 Silver Dreamer
Silver Dreamer's picture

You do know how hydrogen molecules are isolated from the water, right?  Nothing is free.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:34 | 1351310 Hulk
Hulk's picture

QE-n has everyone all confused...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:44 | 1351080 Coast Watcher
Coast Watcher's picture

See 2nd Law of Conservation of Energy, otherwise known as There Ain't No Such Thing As a Free Lunch. Then see how water=fuel=massive fail.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:19 | 1351483 Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

Try looking up Searl effect generator they work I have one ,the only problem is it keeps disappearing through the roof.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:50 | 1350821 RobotTrader
RobotTrader's picture

BP and OIH still waffling near the lows.

Unable to confirm stronger oil prices today.

GDX plunging into the abyss, no inflation to be found anywhere.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:52 | 1350827 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

WTI $101....who's unable to confirm what?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:51 | 1350823 Fancy Bear
Fancy Bear's picture

Bullish for solar.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:56 | 1350833 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Yep if you lay out $50,000 to install a small solar set up, your energy bill can drop by about $5 a month. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:15 | 1350944 juangrande
juangrande's picture

just installed a 2500 watt solar/wind system in my new home for $12k

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:55 | 1351626 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

At 5% carrying cost on that (subsidized) $12K, your lighting up at $240/MWh.  What's the market clearing at these days, chump?  $50?

Solar is an environmentalists wet dream that has been failing economically for four decades.

...but keep tryin'...yer almost there!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 21:45 | 1353330 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

when I have power.. to run the ac.. mutiple freezers.. all the T.V.'s and Lights in the house.. plus charge anything I want to charge.. and you are standing around waiting for someone to make your power supplier perform..


let me say this a different way.. I would hope that you take control over your water, power and food supply.. so that no other man / person / corporation has the ability to turn you water off, turn your power off and / or cut off your supply of food.


what power do you really have in your life?


What are the new solar programs FPL is implementing?
FPL is offering a set of six solar programs to spur clean energy investment in our state, plus one renewable research program. Rebates are available for installations of new photovoltaic (PV) systems (which convert sunlight directly into electricity) and solar water heating systems (which collect sunlight to heat water) in homes and businesses. The rebates are part of a five-year program authorized by the Florida Public Service Commission (PSC). Rebate funds are limited, and will be accepted on a first-come-first-served basis.

The six programs are: 

  • Residential Solar Water Heating – Customers may get a one-time rebate of $1,000 for installing a solar water heating system.
  • Residential PV – Customers may get a one-time rebate of $2 per watt of the DC rating of the solar panels, up to $20,000.
  • Solar Low-Income New Construction Program (Solar LINC) – A partnership with not-for-profit low-income-housing builders to install solar water heaters in low-income housing units. FPL will provide the full installation cost per premise.*
  • Business Solar Water Heating – A variable one-time rebate based on the size of the system installed, up to a maximum of $50,000 per premise* during the life of the program. Customers with multiple premises* can receive a maximum combined rebate for their premises* of up to $150,000 per funding year.
  • Business Photovoltaic (PV) – A variable one-time rebate depending on the DC rating of the solar panels, up to a maximum of $50,000 per  premise* during the life of the program. Customers with multiple premises* can receive a maximum combined rebate for their premises* of up to $150,000 per funding year.
  • Solar for Schools – FPL will install solar PV arrays on public schools as both an energy-producing program for schools and educational program for kids.
  • Renewable Research and Demonstration – A program that allows FPL to conduct a series of demonstration and renewable technology research projects to increase awareness of solar technologies and to understand and quantify the energy effectiveness of emerging renewable technologies and their applications. 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 14:06 | 1351670 Pancho Villa
Pancho Villa's picture

If you assume 2.5kw, 10 hours/day, 365.24 days/year, $0.10/kw-hour, that gives an electricity savings of $913/year. But these are generous assumptions. Most places don't 365 sunny days per year and most systems don't generate peak power all day. So my guess is that in most places you might get more like half that.

Now consider that $12k could generate $360/year in interest payments @3%. Also consider depreciation costs of $600/year if the system has a 20 year lifetime and solar energy doesn't seem like much of a bargain.

On the other hand, solar is gradually getting cheaper. And conventional energy is getting more expensive. Also, tax incentives in some places could make a big difference.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:27 | 1352527 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Of course the other way to think about solar is the cost/utility of actually having power when others don't because of high prices & rolling blackouts. . .


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:18 | 1350952 Fancy Bear
Fancy Bear's picture

$<1/watt already. Think big picture. Think Arizona. Do some research.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:03 | 1351167 Wannabee
Wannabee's picture

Nice job Juan & Bear. For others that have an interest, search Grape Solar on

Prices are coming down and you can take some action....

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:59 | 1351632 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Prices are being subsidized, esp. in NJ of all places.  But solar is still miles away from being stand-alone economical.  Been that way since way back when John Denver was singin' Rocky Mountain High...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 14:30 | 1351757 malek
malek's picture

Yep, if you ignore the costs for storing the created energy, so you can use it anytime...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:29 | 1351000 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Silicone isn't the only solar platform out there.  New graphene panels should come onto the market within the next five to ten years.  As production on those ramps up, your solar panels will be as cheap as newspaper per square foot, have efficiency similar to current panels, and be practically indestructible.  Only a VERY hot fire, or a special catalyst knife will be able to harm your panels.

Or any of a thousand other disruptive technologies will have a similar effect, if you don't like that one.

Also, has panel systems now that cost about $12,000 for a system that will handle the average monthly use of an average AMERICAN home (well, two of their $6,000 systems).  That means that half the year, your meter runs backwards, and the other half, it runs forward.  You pay nothing over the course of a year.  Or, of course, you could slightly decrease your use, and get PAID for energy production year round.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:36 | 1351033 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Silicone is for breast implants.... or sealing your bathtub...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:39 | 1351056 falak pema
falak pema's picture in silicon valley! Lol, Flak you are being mean!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:43 | 1351061 Fancy Bear
Fancy Bear's picture

Costs are already low with current tech (check out slide 15). But yes, the picture is still improving.


Someone needs to set up a SW land REIT


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 14:20 | 1351722 Pancho Villa
Pancho Villa's picture

Can you supply a link to support your claims? Graphene has no band gap, so it doesn't seem like a natural candidate for solar cells.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 16:34 | 1352320 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Shhh, details like that ruin things for a techo-cornucopian...but in all fairness, I think the graphene was not being used in that way...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:31 | 1352540 falak pema
falak pema's picture

laser beams?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:54 | 1350836 scatterbrains
scatterbrains's picture

Maybe XOM and CVX can soldier the dow on to new highs ? Maybe ease a few refiners to the basket while no one's paying attention, toss out some of the laggers and there you go, dow 30,000 hats all around while the sheep graze on dirt cookies

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:54 | 1350839 RobotTrader
RobotTrader's picture

$xau/$gold ratio now at new lows for the year

gold equities are pricing in deflation near term

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:03 | 1350905 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

Momo, have you blown a fuse? You are even more random than usual.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:11 | 1350942 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

RainbowTrader is now just posting totaly random nonsense...yes like a fuse is blown or just stuck in some repeating feedback loop. You need the Maytag repairman there Rainbow?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:43 | 1351095 Coast Watcher
Coast Watcher's picture

I still maintain he gets paid based on the number of junks he gets.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:11 | 1350943 jesusonline
jesusonline's picture

For the year, hmm. You mean QE2 soon runs out and that is being priced in alongside with the world's economy on a downward trajectory as well? Too bad that's only short-term.

Longer term picture:

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:21 | 1350974 Boston
Boston's picture

Treasuries are pricing in disinflation, in the near term too.  At least right up until QE3 gets pre-announced.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:56 | 1350847 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Article is evidence the eco-freaks need to go bug China for the next 50 years and leave the West alone. Eco-nazi's are actually making the planet dirtier

By shutting down the West with tough regulations, energy development is moving to the unregulated parts of the planet -- like the Niger Delta where the surface water burns from spilled oil and there is constant threat from terrorists. The point of 45 years of regulations in the West was to make it safe, not to to shut it down and make us pay higher prices for dirtier oil.

Let's drill here, drill now and also get the natural gas while we're at it. We are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05 | 1350918 Greeny
Greeny's picture

Who told you that Nat Gas is cheap, they are lairs.

When I fill up my 4 gallon Grill Tank it cost me $16

so? how's 4$ a gallon is cheap??? Besides mileage if used

in cars are worse than on Regular Gas.

And #3 Ones they turn 16-wheelers to run on Nat Gas, it's going

to double in price..

The only advantage is National Interest. It's local and we

don't have to send billions to terrorists.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:17 | 1350966 juangrande
juangrande's picture

you are using propane not nat. gas. Propane is a by product of oil refinery. When I was a kid they used to burn it in flares at the local plants. Now it's 2.25 a gallon! The problem w/nat gas is the method(fracting?) of extraction contaminates local ground water. One day we might realize we need clean water a little more than cheap fuel!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05 | 1350919 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

After we get smart and start developing our own resources, the first thing we need to do is convert the air fleet to LNG to bring down the price and increase air travel. 5% growth/year in any/all parts of the economy should be easy 'cause that would take more than 14  YEARS to double. In 14 years we could be mining the Moon for oil.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:55 | 1350982 falak pema
falak pema's picture

In fifteen years we would bury you there as the first casualty to moon shining on the moon.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:57 | 1351082 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You forgot the /sarc flag... otherwise that was hilarious...

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:24 | 1350997 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Article is evidence the eco-freaks need to go bug China for the next 50 years and leave the West alone. Eco-nazi's are actually making the planet dirtier

By shutting down the West with tough regulations, energy development is moving to the unregulated parts of the planet -- like the Niger Delta where the surface water burns from spilled oil and there is constant threat from terrorists. The point of 45 years of regulations in the West was to make it safe, not to to shut it down and make us pay higher prices for dirtier oil.


Article is only the evidence that in this US driven world, the West has achieved nothing like clean production  and that US citizens can not face that.

The West, in a typical US style, has only shifted the burden of high energy consumption on other people. They take the good side of energy abundant society and let the other foot the bill.

Behaving does exist (even if in this US world order, behaving is counter-productive) and the dangerous, polluting extraction is performed by US driven corporations that take advantage of poor regulation existing elsewhere as they can not deliver without that.


Once again it appears that the US world order is characterized by the chase of imbalances, places where people can not resist lethal practices, DSK being the expression of that tendency on an individual level.


Not only the US can not live up to its expectations without those weakly enforced law environments but they are looking for them desesperately in order to keep pretending.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:00 | 1350848 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:59 | 1350850 solgundy
solgundy's picture

Bullish for solar.



is that a Joke?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05 | 1350890 RobotTrader
RobotTrader's picture

FSLR and LDK at new lows.

Solars are among the worst performers ever.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 10:57 | 1350857 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

peak oil/hydrocarbons is WAY overstated - remember that oil wells are only 'depleted' to one third of full capacity before being mothballed and EOR is coming on leaps and bounds - using UCG you can recover an additional third from a ridiculous number of 'depleted' oil longer the need to find a nearby CO2 field - am not doubting oil will go up in price but very definitely arguing agianst 'peak hydrocarbons' - if you do your research on UCG-CTL and UCG-EOR you will discover that the scaleability of both totally changes the global hydrocarbon picture.   happy to provide more info if people decide to fight me....but dont bother if you know nothing about the above.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:08 | 1350910 r101958
r101958's picture

Yes, please teach us some about EROEI and tell us how that affects the level of complexity in our economy/society. In particular, I would like a comparison of EROEI between conventional cheap oil and Coal to Liquid gasification.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:17 | 1350956 string
string's picture

Yup. could be 400 billion years worth of 'oil' in the ground. But if the ERoEI is low, we will not be living like we are now. Which is probably a good thing anyway.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:07 | 1350926 string
string's picture

What's the ERoEI of UCG-CTL and UCG-EOR?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:38 | 1351044 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Read this, and look at the video, then you tell us:

Ionic liquids are about to revolutionize oil production.  All this "peak oil is here" crap is about to go flying out the window, as this process will essentially bring the energy investment to ZERO for extraction, and will reduce the cost of refining.

And for those morons who bitch about how "this was only developed at one university" like dumbshit faggots who don't know anything about science, there are several publications by the American Chemical Society on this subject.  Google is your friend:

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:48 | 1351119 falak pema
falak pema's picture

This has been around for five years...But its going down the experience curve. That I do admit. Like solar thin film panel technology. All these new developments will be economically viable when conventional oil is priced at 150+ on a stable basis. So R&D and new solutions for new technologies, a whole myriad of them, closely linked to conventional oil price; the ONE economic driving force in our society during the twentieth century which is now drying up in its conventional form (PEAK OIL).

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:00 | 1351151 string
string's picture

We can do without the angry homophobe rhetoric.
Yes, these ionic liquids technologies look promising.
The ERoEI in a scaled up production capacity is what is going to matter.
Peak Oil is just a fact.
The ERoEI of these new technologies needs to be > 10:1 just to maintain our current 'standard of living'. and much greater than 20:1 to have the kind of 'growth' our current economic systems require.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:09 | 1350931 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

The bottom line remains the same, no one is going to invest in any energy source if the capital investment is more than the return on that investment.  If the oil cost more to extract than it can be sold for, no one will go after the oil, period.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:25 | 1350989 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

fully costed barrel of ucg-ctl synthetic deisel is $30 a barrel and should come down with additional efficiencies

peabody and fording are really keen to do a jv on ugc in powder river basin - this is the real deal....80% of world's power comes from coal and 80% of the worlds coal seams are known but 'stranded' - and about half of those would be perfect for UCG either into deisel or into bespoke small power stations.

obama clean energy task force has written a piece on ucg being the future of US energy needs

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:15 | 1351214 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I suggest you look at SASOL and their margins. After all they have only been in the CTL business for ~25 years. $30 is fantasy.... do a little computation taking into account the capital costs to get to 4 mmbpd. Let me know what you come up with.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:24 | 1351250 falak pema
falak pema's picture

60-80 USd is more nearer the truth. IMHO. But I am twenty five years from when I was into this thing on a daily basis.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:22 | 1351254 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

doh! sasol doesnt do ugc!  irrelevant comparison, come on....

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:26 | 1351275 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I believe you mentioned CTL in your misguided post above. Given that GTL is basically the same process, the capital costs are similar. Care to comment on the source of fresh water for all this?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:34 | 1351318 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

CTL/GTL its an issue of semantics used by this emerging industry - linc hap[pen to use the UCG-CTL moniker.  That is why i used it.  You create the gases using ucg and then for $30 FULLY COSTED (including a scaled-up commercial ugc/gtl/ctl facility) you end up with barrels of 'greener' synthetic diesel.  Call up Linc and discuss it with them, not me, you very evidently don't have the remotest clue what the process is, read up before spouting your brand of 'misguided' drivel.  as for your fresh water comment, what are you on about?!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:45 | 1351355 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Do you know what the Fischer-Tropsch process is?

You might want to investigate Syntroleum, ticker SYNM

Like I said, lay off the bong in the morning..

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:55 | 1351389 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

hahahahahahahahahahahaha give me strength!

sorry to disappoint you but the company i am talking about is scaleable and REAL unlike syntroleum, what a joke.  also more than ten times the size and has all the top tech people from sasol who have joined over the past 5 years as they see that (but you know more than THEM lets not forget)...but dont let the facts get in the way of your story

anyway, bong time for you flak

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:06 | 1351419 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Wow so SASOL is not relevant but this fabulous company has recruited over the past 5 years from SASOL....

That was truly rich....

And you still haven't demonstated that you have any idea what the F-T process is...

There is a word for people like you. It is "shill"

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:07 | 1351440 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

look flakey i dont ant to be rude but unlike you i actually meet these companies

the point i am making is that the techies in the ctl/gtl sector (ie at sasol) are all migrating because they know who the market leader is...whateva treva you crack on.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:21 | 1351494 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Well good for you... you still appear befuddled by what the F-T process is. I do suggest that you learn the science, it will help you make better investing decisions.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:13 | 1350954 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

You clearly have not thought about EOR very carefully or fail to grasp what is occuring... It is not about reserves, it is about flow rate. And with EOR, it also about EROEI...

Every EOR project has boosted production from an otherwise "dead field" to have the rate turn over shortly after. Kern River is a classic example. The Kern River will provide oil for a long long time, drop by drop, 50 mm bbl recovered over 25 years is nice but we need that flow over 1 year....

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:20 | 1350981 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

thanks for saving my breath!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:25 | 1350999 r101958
r101958's picture

stopTNWO.......I think he is refuting the input earlier regarding how CTL etc, etc. is going to be the save all be all. It is not. Precisely for the reasons pointed out by flak.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 12:24 | 1351267 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

what i meant was this is why i cant be bothered to argue with you lot when you dont know anything about it....this sasol crap is just ridiculous, a COMPLETELY irrelevant comparison.  $30 a barrel is fully costed including capex for a commercial ucg-ctl facility.  the company is linc energy, do your dd before coming out with facile drivel

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:26 | 1351506 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture


SASOL is irrelevant but this company is hiring the SASOL people...

Kemosabe say "White man speak with forked tongue"

Go be a shill elsewhere...


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:27 | 1351525 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture


sasol DONT DO UCG.....doh

thats why you cant compare the costs 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 13:28 | 1351528 stopthenewworldorder
stopthenewworldorder's picture

methinks a primer on ucg should be your next port of call 

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:00 | 1350858 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

 Number 1 this is a BP report. It thus must be considered self serving.

Number 2 oil is now all about cost of production. How much oil is proven in reserve is meaningless until the price tag for production is added.

Plenty of up side for oil. Even with weak economic growth in many places, India and China are looking to upgrade to US lifestyles. China is the biggest car market now. Lots of up side for oil? You bet!!!

And let's not forget polictical instability in oil countries in the Mid East.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:04 | 1350887 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Yep and here we sit in bankrupt USA faced with raising a debt ceiling we dont have the money for and no means to borrow, and an all-time record bubble stock market with no clear means to keep juicing. Somethings got to give, violently.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:10 | 1350924 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

Indeed Sheep Dog. AND we are locked in two or three wars depending on how you count them. Over a trillion spent so far. All borrowed!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:21 | 1350973 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture

I have read every reply/ post you have written today sheep dog.

You have a good handle on the overveiw.

Keep it up and educate all newbe's.

The air is fairly crackling with the grinding sound of failure to follow the path to its logical and only solution.

"It's the debt" Ben - your drowning in it stupid. 


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:01 | 1350863 r101958
r101958's picture

World proved oil reserves in 2010 were sufficient to meet 46.2 years of global production.......

should be continued and read 'at current production levels'. Which means that there would be no growth....imagine that. Without actually coming out and saying it.....they are confirming peak of conventional oil production.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:06 | 1350898 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

Current production levels going ahead for nearly 50 years assuming "no growth". That almost defines "peak oil".

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:06 | 1350899 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

How about 90 years of production at an average of 1/2 of the current rate....  


How about 138 years of production at an average of 1/3 of the current rate....

Anyway, I think you get the idea.  

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:14 | 1350936 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

Correlates directly into 1/2 the current population for 90 years or 1/3 the current population for 138 years.  I like where you are going with this Flakmeister!

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:27 | 1351004 r101958
r101958's picture

Thanks flak....always like your common sense (which is not all that common) input.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:12 | 1350932 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

hate it when math makes them look bad

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:33 | 1351028 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture

I refer you to rule '72'

One train is 'production of oil' travelling at a fixed speed - the other train is 'population growth' travelling toward it on the same track at a 2% increasing speed.

rule '72' - at 2%growth in 36years you double your energy/food/water/air and wastes. the algorithm is not hard and it isn't purdy but its mathematically a fact.

They are confirming it's a population problem. everything is energy.

Pearls to pigs really-- Edit I see it is being discussed above

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:02 | 1350868 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

So South America is gonna get very rich... or very invaded.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:16 | 1350950 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Venezuela's version of an IPO.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:05 | 1350889 MisterAmbassador
MisterAmbassador's picture

Oil is used for much more than just energy.  If oil didn't exist, technology and science probably wouldn't be much farther along than 1870 or so.  The modern world  cannot exist without oil.  The planet cannot support much more than 1.5 billion people without oil.

I highly recommend the 2009 movie "Collapse" with Michael Ruppert if you want to understand how oil is necessary for pretty much everything.  Be high or drunk when you watch it, though.  Depressing.

Also, The History Channel had him on a presentation called "The Prophets of Doom".

You can torrent the movie "Collapse".

Or you can read about it, but reading is for queers.

I wouldn't worry about China.  Too many people there for them to ever become a superpower, at least like America.  They could never bring a majority of their people up to a high enough standard of living overall - the planet simply doesn't have the resources.

We should just launch all the nukes and get it over with.

The dinosaurs had their shot.  We've had ours.  Move over for the next species.


Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:07 | 1350906 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Prophets of Doom was very good... the star was Nate Hagens though.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:07 | 1350923 MisterAmbassador
MisterAmbassador's picture

Yeah, he was good too.  But, if we discovered like ten trillion barrels of oil in Texas, we could actually grow out of the debt and financial problems.

I liked the guy who was worried about robots.  He was like completely shocked that we couldn't possibly get to that point because of all the other problems.  He just takes oil for granted - like most.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:23 | 1350979 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Yeah... I forgot the AI guys name, it was clear that he didn't think about the big picture. The water guy was also good....

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:30 | 1351023 MisterAmbassador
MisterAmbassador's picture

They were all good.  Everyone should watch the financial guy, if no one else.  America has a lot of freshwater, so maybe that could help us.  I saw the Jesse Ventura conspiracy theory about the freshwater thing.

China is having problems with their Three Gorges Dam.

If we actually had an American President, instead of a guy who believes he is the president of the world, we could actually profit from our freshwater.

But, I suppose it might actually make more sense to conserve it.  But, then again, you gotta love Las Vegas - a huge, sprawling city in the middle of the desert - only in America.

I think we should just withdraw from the world, batten down the hatches, and threaten to defend ourselves with nuclear weapons.  But, that won't happen.  The globalists want a united world.  But, that won't happen, either.  The Tower of Babel story is a metaphor for that.  I'm not so much a Christian, even though I went to a Jesuit high school, but the Tower of Babel is symbolic of the European Union and, indeed, trying to create one world government.

Whoa, went off on a tangent there.  Adderall is a helluva drug.

Just gotta live for today.  Can't worry about this stuff.

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 17:42 | 1352575 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Totally - my wife and I were both looking at each other saying "he just doesn't get it."  Toward the end the lightbulb seemed to light-up however.


Billy: I'm scared Poncho.
Poncho: Bullshit. You ain't afraid of no man.
Billy: There's something out there waiting for us, and it ain't no man. .  .   We're all gonna die [bitchez].

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:07 | 1350908 MisterAmbassador
MisterAmbassador's picture

I forgot about OPEC, though.  They can always just increase production because they are immune to peak oil.  Right?

Does oil serve a purpose inside the planet?  Do they replace it with anything when they take it out?  If not, could the earth's crust just kind of collapse in?  Sinkholes?  Does taking it out cause more earthquakes?

Wed, 06/08/2011 - 11:33 | 1351017 schizo321437
schizo321437's picture

OPEC just shrugged.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!