New unit of energy, 1 cubic mile of oil (CMO)

[snowman]

A new unit of energy is being proposed by Hewitt Crane at SRI International, Menlo Park, CA. The new unit the CMO for cubic mile of oil is being proposed to normalize all energy to a unit that makes sense in terms of world energy consumption. The CMO is exactly like it sounds, oil, 1 mile x 1 mile x 1 mile of it. Currently the world consumes approx 1 CMO per year.

To further put this in perspective 1 CMO equals the total of the following for a period of 50 years (thats 1 years worth of oil is equal to the TOTAL of 50 years of the following): 104 coal fired plants + 4 three Gorges Dams + 52 Nuke power plants + 32,850 Wind turbines + 91,250,000 Solar panels. Chew on that for a while until it really sinks in, 50 years of ALL of the above only equals 1 CMO!!!!!!

Lets assume the entire world has 100 miles by 100 miles of oil one mile deep. Seems very conservative to say the least. Thats 10,000 years at present rates of consumption!!! Known reserves are about 500 years. Heck just Iraq may have this much oil. The surface area of the earth is what? Approx 500 million square miles.

What does this mean? Alternative energy? there is NONE for a very long time to come. Running out of oil? Not likely anytime soon.

As counterintuitive as it may sound the same sources state that Brazilian fuel control systems that lets cars run on gasoline, ethanol and natural gas will be near term winners. You might want to invest in Magneti Marelli, see www.magnetimarelli.com

[jyl]

Would be interested to see your supporting facts for the above. In particular the 100 x 100 x 1 speculation or guess or ?

[Nostril Cheese]

same here.

[nostatic]

WAG (wild ass guess)

Just because we have stuff doesn't mean we have to waste it. Of course I don't believe we actually have that much...

[Moneyguy1]

Nor do industry spokespeople.

I wonder how many cubic miles of carbon dioxide and how many gigajoules of heat would be released by 1 cubic mile of oil?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Pshaw. I bet the world's 911s leak that in one month.

[lendaddy]

I did the calculations myself a while back and came to the exact same conclusion. Roughly one cubic mile of oil a year right now. Look at a globe and try to imagine a single cubic mile in there, it's nothing.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Then why is it 60 bucks a barrel?

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Then why is it 60 bucks a barrel?

Because we've gotten amazingly efficient at getting it out of the ground, I would also expect it to be higher.

[Dantilla]

Originally posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Then why is it 60 bucks a barrel?

Supply and demand.

The supply side of the equation is what is currently for sale, not the entire planet's reserve. We know there's lots of oil that is not being drilled, so that oil has no impact on today's price.

The oil we're using today is very easy (cheap) to obtain. As prices rise, it will be ecenomically feasable to go after more difficult reserves.

In a thread a while ago, I seem to recall Lubemaster poo-pooing the idea that we will run out of oil soon, that even at our current increases in demand, there is at least a thousand years worth of oil.

[sammyg2]

Maybe because alot of the old wells are loosing production and
alot of new wells are in deep water and cost billions to build. Refineries cost billions to build. It cost's a heck of a lot of money to get the oil out of the ground, transport it, turn it into gasoline, and then get it to the gas pumps. It isn't cheap, it is just done with a small profit margin and mark up that keeps the price down. the economy of scale and careful control of costs also contributes to keep the price down.
$60 a barrel is a bargain.

[jyl]

According to an OPEC site, the world has 4.5 x 10^12 (4.5 trillion) barrels of "potentially recoverable oil". See http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/oil/ This is not the conventional "proven reserves"; this includes all known deposits of oil in any form that is potentially recoverable, e.g. oil sands.

1 barrel = 5.6 cubic feet. http://www.eppo.go.th/ref/UNIT-OIL.html

So the world has 25.2 trillion cubic feet of potentially recoverable oil.

1 mile = 5280 feet. 1 cubic mile = 0.147 x 10^12 (0.147 trillion) cubic feet.

So the world has 25.2 / 0.147 = 171 cubic miles of potentially recoverable oil.

Not the 10,000 cubic miles that snowman says (but won't/can't provide any basis for).

Let's suppose the world currently uses 1 cubic mile of oil per year, as he also says.

At what rate will annual consumption grow? Look at three scenarios: +2%/yr, 0%/yr, and -1%/yr.

At +2%/yr growth in oil consumption, 171 cubic miles runs out in 75 years. At 0%/yr growth, it runs out in 171 years (duh). At -1%/yr, it runs out in - well, basically it never runs out, it asymptotes.

So in the +2%/yr scenario, if oil consumption grows at somewhat below current global GDP growth, the oil will run out in very roughly 75 years, even if we can recover oil sources that are today unrecoverable. At some point in that 75 years, oil price will soar, due to growing scarcity and rising cost of extraction. As oil breaks $100/bbl then $200/bbl, oil consumption will be forced to fall. Recession/depression, gas shortages, falling GDP, etc. So we won't ever actually "run out" of oil. It'll just be traumatic to get there.

In the -1%/yr scenario, if conservation and alternative energy combine to very gradually reduce oil consumption, the oil never threatens to run out. Oil price doesn't inexorably soar, though short-term things like MidEast instability or OPEC action still matter. Same as the first scenario, we never "run out", but getting there isn't traumatic - doesn't require $200/bbl oil, gas lines, oil-induced recessions/depressions, etc.

Anyway, that's my thinking.

[lendaddy]

OPEC is certainly not going to overstate reserves. It would be interesting to find what they said the total recoverable reserves were 20 years ago.

[lendaddy]

"At the World Petroleum Congress held in Johannesburg on Sept. 25-29, ExxonMobil admitted that world oil resources are so huge that they cannot be fully estimated. ExxonMobil offered their best guess, however, estimating that the level of conventional oil-in-place is today between 6 trillion and 8 trillion barrels, plus an additional 3 trillion barrels in oil shale deposits. "

[JSDSKI]

Very interesting. Using jyl's calculations and lendaddy's reportage - a rough estimate would maybe change the length of time available for the end game scenario John proposes to 100-125 years. The question is really "what do we do with the knowledge we have" ?

I favor government sponsorship for new energy resource and technololgy research along with gradually imposed regulation (10-20 yr) that imposes reduced, cleaner, and more efficient petroleum use. As the technologies are developed they will be transferred to private industry to compete with petroleum based industries.

The oil industry would benefit from increased competition and so would the planet.

(great post John!)

[island911]

Originally posted by nostatic

Just because we have stuff doesn't mean we have to waste it. ...

What makes you think that we're wasting it?

If you just look to the ever increasing energy efficiencies, it's hard to say that we will be wasting future sources.

The Liberal indoctrination runs deep in some here.

[island911]

Originally posted by sammyg2
. .. cost billions ... cost billions . . . is just done with a small profit margin . ..the economy of scale . .

= billions in profits.

So what percentage is put back into new refineries?

[nostatic]

Originally posted by island911
What makes you think that we're wasting it?

If you just look to the ever increasing energy efficiencies, it's hard to say that we will be wasting future sources.

The Liberal indoctrination runs deep in some here.

You say that like it's a bad thing. But so does the conservative blindness.

Single drivers of 5K lb vehicles. Yeah, that's efficient. designing cities with large footprints and little thought to energy consumption or waste management.

Forget oil...what about potable water?

It's about a mindset...the prevailing mantra is "consume at any cost...we'll just make more." I think that is short sighted and morally wrong. The earth is not our to use with reckless abandon. ymmv.

[JSDSKI]

What about natural resource trusts - "common wealth" ? You could write a law that assigns all "potable water" in US to US citizens in total. Any use would be licensed and controlled by free market forces. Citizens would get their shares as tax credits. Do the same thing with any resource, oil, gas, coal, land, timber, gold, fish ... etc. Eventually move to international trusts.

[island911]

Dr. no,

Just because you can point to conspicuous consumption, here and there, does not mean that is the 'norm'. (Well I suppose you do live in LA-la-land)
Anyway . .. Most good consumers look to optimize their power (buying power, BTU's...). Most are not interested in wasting resorces, because they feel it in diminished dollars.

Of course some also induce (liberal) guilt for existing on others . . as a perverted way to absolve themselves of wasteful ways. .. guilt that would make a Catholic blush.