The End of Oil

When will the oil era end? Nobody knows.

Photo from Stockcake

The mother of money is evil

For over fifty years of prognostications have been made about the end of oil, every time wrong. It appears the first person to make such predictions was Marion King Hubbert, an American geologist and geophysicist who worked for Shell Oil as a researcher in a Houston, Texas laboratory. Hubbert was a well-known star in the industry for his Hubbert curve and Hubbert peak theory, which postulated the amount of oil under the ground in any region is finite and that the rate of discovery quickly increases initially, reaches a maximum, then declines. This seems obvious, as clearly any oil well is a finite resource. Trickier however is predicting specific declines.

In a 1956 paper, Hubbert presented his theory and predicted oil extraction in the US would peak between 1965 and 1971. He was correct, as oil production hit the ceiling at 10.2 million barrels per day in 1970, then declined over the following 35 years. In 1962, Hubbert also predicted that global oil production would top out around the year 2000 at 12.5 billion barrels per year. Once again he was correct in terms of conventionally harvested oil — but failed to account for fracking, which kept oil flowing, technology that was actually pioneered in the late 1940s.

If necessity is the mother of invention, then making money at any cost is the mother of evil. Fracking in earnest in began 2005, staving off peak oil. By drilling down, conventionally, then sideways, and injecting vast quantities of chemical laden water, previously inaccessible oil deposits trapped in shale rock became accessible, delaying our ultimate reckoning with a finite resource that is endangering life on Earth.

The tragedy of fracking

Inexcusably, the exact number of fracked wells in the US is unknown. The non-profit FracTracker Alliance indicates at least 1.3 million wells as of 2017 on their site, but the Department of Energy had this figure higher in 2013, estimating at least two million oil and gas wells had been fracked, and that of all new wells being drilled, up to 95 percent were hydraulic fracture operations. I find it perturbing that these figures both vary so widely and are so woefully outdated, because the hazards of fracking from groundwater pollution to earthquakes have been well established.

An excellent interactive map that includes all types of energy projects in the US, the National Energy and Petrochemical Map, can be found here. Its details include not just fracking projects across the US but, wind, geothermal, nuclear and more. The map also illustrates the vast tangle of oil and gas pipelines crisscrossing states, which regularly spill oil and constantly emit methane.

In 2005, when fracking ramped up on the way to making the US the world’s largest oil producer, atmospheric CO2 stood at just under 380 ppm (parts per million). As of August 22, it’s over 423.16 ppm. There’s a daily count to be found of this inexorable killer rise at CO2Earth. Preindustrial levels well established through ice core samples were just 280 ppm, and scientific consensus agrees that 350 ppm is the most CO2 in the atmosphere we can tolerate without the profound climate change catastrophes we are experiencing today, worsening drastically.

Average CO₂ levels in the atmosphere worldwide from 1959 to 2023

An interactive version of this graphic can be found here at Statista. Look at what we have accomplished since the age of fracking.

I remember when fracking was in the news frequently, the earthquakes, the corrupted water wells and ignitable natural gas coming out of water taps. Frustratingly, much of the information I was able to find on this topic tops out around 2017, about the time the US was becoming the number one oil exporter in the world. Coincidence?

Fracking has come at a tremendously high social and environmental cost, making record profits for the oil industry, while still being subsidized by tax dollars even as it hastens global warming and causes enormous environmental destruction. The bill is just beginning to come due. CO2 in the atmosphere today will linger for hundreds of years. Methane emissions, while shorter lived at 10 to 12 years, are 80 times more powerful in heat trapping capacity. In addition to the terrifying fires and floods taking place and destroying lives in recent years from global warming, other direct impacts on human health can be found in the toxicity of fracking.

From the research and policy center, Environment America, a 2016 article titled, “Fracking by the Numbers,” found between 2005 and 2015 fracking used at least 239 billion gallons of water, an average of three million gallons per well. Water alone won’t separate oil from shale, the process requires vast quantities of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals including:

• 5 billion pounds of caustic hydrochloric acid

• 1.2 billion pounds of petroleum distillates, which include toxic and cancer-causing agents

• 445 million pounds of methanol suspected to cause birth defects

• Unknown chemicals that are “proprietary” and allowed to be secret

Water used for fracking is rendered permanently toxic, unsuitable for use other than fracking more wells. It’s water forever lost for drinking or agricultural. Farmers are further impacted by fracking from the huge prices oil and gas companies can pay for freshwater. In Colorado in 2012, frackers paid up to $3,300 for an acre-foot of water, one hundred times that of farmers.

Dirty Dick and the Halliburton loophole

A study published on Science Direct in 2023, Outcomes of the Halliburton Loophole: Chemicals regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act in US fracking disclosures, 2014–2021, reveals that fracking companies used over 282 million pounds of hazardous chemicals from 2014 to 2021 with ZERO federal oversight.

The paper is the first to examine the “Halliburton Loophole,” which exempts fracking from federal regulation provided by the Safe Drinking Water Act. The exemption was passed by Congress as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and endorsed at the time by Vice President Dick Cheney, not coincidentally the former CEO of Halliburton, the world's second-largest oil service company also responsible for most of the world's largest fracking operations.

I could easily go on about Halliburton famously profiteering from a $7 billion closed bid contract in the Iran-Iraq War, or their involvement in the Deep Water Horizon oil spill, and a litany of other environmental crimes, but I won’t. This article is about the end of oil. I’ll save that venom for another day.

Let’s just point out that Cheney retired from Halliburton with a $36 million severance package. Then Halliburton got a $7 billion contract. Coincidence, I’m sure.

The Halliburton Loophole study found that from 2014 through 2021, 62 to 73 percent of reported fracking projects each year used at least one chemical that’s harmful to human health and the environment under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Chemicals included carcinogens in the form of 1.8 million pounds of formaldehyde, 590 pounds of arsenic and 7.5 million pounds of benzene; possible carcinogens with 4.6 million pounds of acrylamide and 10 million pounds of naphthalene; 250 million pounds of ethylene glycol (antifreeze), which can damage the kidneys, nerves and respiratory system and more than a dozen other chemicals spared the Safe Drinking Water Act.

That was fun, Geoff, but when is the end of oil?

Because of fracking, Hubbert’s predictions ultimately proved wrong. Given that continued burning of oil will continue increasing the ferocity, frequency and scale of floods, fires and heat and create more days of unsurvivable conditions for outdoor laborers, including farmworkers, hello, when will we scale oil consumption to zero, or when will it simply run out?

Unfortunately, this question has no clear answers, although there’s a 100 percent certainty that oil will become economically unviable to get out of the ground as the energy needed to harvest it inevitably results in less than can be retrieved. That’s a huge Catch-22, carefully left unspoken of. We’ll get to that.

This October 2023 article from Reuters indicates the International Energy Agency (IEA) sees world fossil fuel demand peaking by 2030 with more electric cars and slower growth in China's economy as they shift towards cleaner energy and burn less coal. To be clear, there is no such thing as clean energy. Mining for batteries and producing steel and concrete for gargantuan wind turbines is in no way clean. It is also dependent on fossil fuels, particularly diesel, for heavy equipment to harvest from our thoroughly scarred planet. Did I mention a Catch-22? Without fossil fuels, there is no build out or maintenance of all that renewable energy we’re being promised. It also leaves power in the hands of those trustworthy billionaire types currently profiting from destroying the planet.

In June 2023, the IEA predicted oil demand to “slow significantly” by 2028.

OPEC, on the other hand, foresees oil demand rising long after 2030, anticipating $14 trillion of investment will be needed until at least 2045. Well, of course it does and most shockingly, the industry is doing everything possible to slow the transition to so-called renewables surprise, surprise.

Just a few years ago in their report, World Energy Outlook 2021, the IEA’s opinion was that the world's oil supply will be needed to continue meeting growing global energy demand until at least 2050, a forecast closely aligned with OPEC.

From the report's executive summary:

A lot more needs to be done by governments to fully deliver on their announced pledges. Looking sector-by-sector at what measures governments have actually put in place, as well as specific policy initiatives that are under development, reveals a different picture, which is depicted in our Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS). This scenario also sees an accelerating pace of change in the power sector, sufficient to realise a gradual decline in the sector’s emissions even as global electricity demand nearly doubles to 2050.

However, this is offset by continued growth in emissions from industry, such as the production of cement and steel, and heavy-duty transport, such as freight trucks. This growth largely comes from emerging market and developing economies as they build up their nationwide infrastructure. In the STEPS, almost all of the net growth in energy demand to 2050 is met by low emissions sources, but that leaves annual emissions at around current levels. As a result, global average temperatures are still rising when they hit 2.6°C above pre-industrial levels in 2100.

Natural gas demand by scenario, 2010-2030 (IEA)

Measured in billion cubic meters

From an overview of the report:

An outlook based on today’s policy settings, the Stated Policies Scenario (STEPS), shows aggregate fossil fuel demand slowing to a plateau in the 2030s and then falling slightly by 2050, the first time this has been projected in this scenario. Almost all of the net growth in energy demand comes from low emissions sources. Nonetheless, the global average temperature rise in this scenario passes the 1.5° C mark around 2030 and would still be climbing as it reaches 2.6°C in 2100.

Oil demand demand by scenario, 2010-2030 (IEA)

From the press release titled: World Energy Outlook 2021 shows a new energy economy is emerging – but not yet quickly enough to reach net-zero by 2050:

The Stated Policies Scenario represents a path based on the energy and climate measures governments have actually put in place to date, as well as specific policy initiatives that are under development. In this scenario, almost all of the net growth in energy demand through 2050 is met by low emissions sources, but that leaves annual emissions still around today’s levels. As a result, global average temperatures are still rising when they hit 2.6 °C above pre-industrial levels in 2100.

AS A RESULT, GLOBAL AVERAGE TEMPERATURES ARE STILL RISING, WHEN THEY HIT 2.6° C ABOVE PRE-INDUSTRIAL LEVELS IN 21OO.

Yes, that needed emphasis.

So this scenario, the path we’re actually on, with even inadequate goals NOT being met shows that growing energy demand offsets the benefits of projected renewable growth, aligning with OPEC’s prediction that oil demand will not decrease until much later than 2030, like at least 20 years later.

No worries, there’s plenty of oil left to finish cooking ourselves

For decades, industry experts have said there are around 50 years of oil left based on known reserves. Don’t worry, oil majors like BP are right on it. This 50 year figure doesn’t change much because of how it’s calculated: The number of years until oil runs out is equal to the current known reserves divided by the annual global demand.

According to a 2023 survey by RystadEnergy which bills itself as an “independent research and energy intelligence company, equipping clients with data, insights and education that power better decision-making,” globally, around 1.6 trillion barrels of recoverable oil remain. Frightening.

There's also the wildcard, recoverable oil we haven't yet discovered, which is a hazier number. In 2012, the U.S. Geological Survey put that at 565 billion barrels of oil and 5,606 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

And just this March and April, there were brand-new finds off of China and Namibia! It makes a boy giddy. So when will the oil era end? Nobody knows.