REPORT: IEA hiding truth about dwindling oil reserves
How much oil is left in the ground? No one knows precisely, but groups like the International Energy Agency are supposed to offer us a good estimate. Knowing how much oil is left helps set the price of the fuel and also determines how much public and political pressure there is for gasoline alternatives. So, it's kind of big news that a whistleblower says that the IEA has been "deliberately underplaying a looming shortage for fear of triggering panic buying." The unnamed "senior official" told the Guardian that the U.S. was a driving force behind clouding the situation.
The numbers work like this: this year, the IEA said that the world could produce 83 million barrels of oil, then raised that to 105 million. Supporters of the peak oil theory – the idea that the world has already produced at much oil in a year as it ever will and it's all downhill from here – called shenanigans. The whistleblower says that the IEA's 2030 predictions – once claimed to be 120 million barrels but was since downgraded to 105 million, "is much higher than can be justified and the IEA knows this. [...] Even 90m to 95m barrels a day would be impossible but there are fears that panic could spread on the financial markets if the figures were brought down further. And the Americans fear the end of oil supremacy because it would threaten their power over access to oil resources."
The reality of what's available underground is tremendously difficult to know – we've seen all sorts of estimates – but to hide whatever truth you do know from the public is worse than running out, don't you think?
[Source: Guardian]
Photo by johnny choura. Licensed under Creative Commons license 2.0.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Doug 1:05PM (11/11/2009)
That's two typo titles in a row...
Reply
meheaney 1:50PM (11/11/2009)
The hard-Left Guardian publishes a story with information from an alleged "senior official" (anonymous, of course) - and you consider this to be newsworthy? You could have at least pretended to be a real journalist, and done some fact-checking of your own (you know, by calling people who'd actually use their real names) before immediately jumping to the conclusion that the US is involved in some ridiculous conspiracy.
Reply
Nick From Montreal 1:58PM (11/11/2009)
Your right about the questionable source.
However, oil companies have very sophisticated imaging technology for evaluating the size of an oil deposit. For example, here in Canada, it's possible to know how much oil is left to drill and plan accordingly.
Yet, in some countries (Middle-East, Russia, etc.) they refuse to publish the current status of the exploitable sites. So in the absence of transparency, it's normal that we have these crazy conspiracy theories.
Scatter 5:07PM (11/11/2009)
Hard left?
skierpage 2:32AM (11/14/2009)
The Guardian has now published another article that does name names, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/12/oil-shortage-uppsala-aleklett :
``Kjell Aleklett, professor of physics at Uppsala and co-author of a new report "The Peak of the Oil Age", claims oil production is more likely to be 75m barrels a day by 2030 than the "unrealistic" 105m used by the IEA in its recently published World Energy Outlook 2009. The academic, who runs a Global Energy unit at Uppsala, described the IEA's report as a "political document" developed for consuming countries with a vested interest in low prices.''
and he corroborates the original Guardian report.
However, it is entirely coincidental that we may be arriving at peak oil just as we realize the dangers of increasing greenhouse gases. Fossil fuel use has to be curbed NOW, instead of hoping for $5/gal gasoline.
Mike!!ekiM 1:52PM (11/11/2009)
Yes, as a shareholder in FORD, I expect Ford's CEO to ACT on the Actual Estimate and not the Fantasy number. Similarly, I expect Exxon and the Coal Industry to see their days are numbered and DIVERSIFY into Clean Tech Today, not after a Crisis has Developed.
Reply
polo 1:52PM (11/11/2009)
bullsh!t.
If you believe this anonymous source (with no proof other than their alleged employment at the IAE) then the inclination is we should be spending MORE on oil subsidies and investments, to find what little trickles of the black goo there are left....this is just more disinfo being put out to weaken the blunt of:
(1) the G20 agreeing with Obama to END oil subsides at their Pittsburgh meeting in September:
http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10002149/week-in-oil-gas-g20-axes-subsidies-obama-hu-climate-rhetoric-and-chevron-sues/
(2) a UN study showing eliminating oil subsidies will improve the global economy (saving it $300Billion) and fight global warming:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/08/un-study-scrapping-fossil-fuel-subisides.php
The oil industry has 300,000,000 reasons to use "anonymous sources" placed in big institutions to push lies like this. Don't fall for it.
Reply
Mike!!ekiM 1:55PM (11/11/2009)
We should be Diversifying out of oil. Especially in transportation. High priced oil can drive us into recession and create transport-expense based shortages.
polo 1:53PM (11/11/2009)
If you believe this anonymous source (with no proof other than their alleged employment at the IAE) then the inclination is we should be spending MORE on oil subsidies and investments, to find what little trickles of the black goo there are left....this is just more disinfo being put out to weaken the blunt of:
(1) the G20 agreeing with Obama to END oil subsides at their Pittsburgh meeting in September:
http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10002149/week-in-oil-gas-g20-axes-subsidies-obama-hu-climate-rhetoric-and-chevron-sues/
(2) a UN study showing eliminating oil subsidies will improve the global economy (saving it $300Billion) and fight global warming:
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/08/un-study-scrapping-fossil-fuel-subisides.php
The oil industry has $300,000,000 reasons to use "anonymous sources" placed in big institutions to push lies like this. Don't fall for it.
Reply
Mike!!ekiM 1:59PM (11/11/2009)
Saudia Arabia has yet to increase production even with $80 per barrel oil. 60% of the country's that pump oil are already at peak.
Peak oil, isn't really news, except if it were actually acknowledged by the industry.
meme 5:19PM (11/11/2009)
Saudi Arabia deliberately, repeatedly *lowered* oil production in a major way this spring to try to prop prices up. They have repeatedly stated in recent years that they want oil to cost $70-80/barrel.
Mike!!ekiM 2:07PM (11/11/2009)
Remember, Peak Oil "theory" first started with oil geologists. Here's a good article on the current situation:
http://www.postcarbon.org/blog-post/44016-just-tell-us-the-truth
Reply
William 2:08PM (11/11/2009)
Fox news would know about this!
Reply
Matt 2:55PM (11/11/2009)
Heck, I knew about this... when I graduated from middle school. Didn't they teach this in every 8th grade science class??? We will run out of oil. It's not IF we run out, or we MIGHT run out, we WILL run out, it's just a question of when. Does it matter when? Won't that oil still be useful even if we don't depend on it and use as little as possible? Why are we still clinging to this sinking ship?
Alan 2:55PM (11/11/2009)
Peak oil isn't refutable, since it's physically impossible to extract more and more oil every year from the earth which is of a finite size. Everyone is just debating the date when it will happen, which is totally pointless since there are too many variables involved none of which follow any predictable pattern. The other side to oil though is the Net Energy Return (or Energy Returned On Energy Invested - that they insist on calling it!), I think we can safely assume that whilst the peak production can be pushed out to a later and later date the Net Energy Return will simultaneously be hard to keep down. Anyway it looks like there are plenty of alternatives in the sidelines, I'm sure we'll adapt but it might not be non stop fun along the way!
Reply
meme 5:22PM (11/11/2009)
Fischer-Tropsch.
There's your refutation.
Alan 5:32PM (11/11/2009)
Fischer-Tropsch
What's that got to do with peak oil? Oil extracted from the ground?
Alan 5:38PM (11/11/2009)
Oh.. and the Fischer-Tropsch process uses inputs that are infinite does it?
stevejust 10:13PM (11/11/2009)
I think the only refutation is if you believe in the Abiogenic theory of oil. I don't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin
Fischer-Tropsch relies on inputs that are of a similar finite supply. But by that analysis, then technically even the abiogenic theory is probably finite.
I really don't care about the anonimity of the source. I think it's clear peak oil has already happened, probably circa 2005.
All you have to do is think about the fact that every country has an incentive to inflate their reserves because of access to credit, etc.,. that comes with those alleged reserves to realize we can't possibly have more oil than we think we do, and we have very real incentives leading to the conclusion we have a lot less than we think we do.
Mark Kiernan 3:58PM (11/11/2009)
Why do people stick their heads in the sand, oil will come to a halt. It won't be overnight but a slow dragged out process which will see the price slow rise and rise. Governments should be looking to other sources, don't wait for the oil companies to supply it though as they will milk this thing till the last drop.
Reply