# Gas Prices



## huntingtim08 (Sep 17, 2004)

What is the price of gas around everybodys area. Here in McVille, ND it is currently $2.65 it is gonna go down again soon. Gas is getting spending and making it harder to drive anywhere for hunting BUT IT WONT STOP ME


----------



## HonkerExpress (Sep 23, 2005)

2.17/gal here in grand forks, it was yesterday anyway.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

2.31 / gal in St.Cloud and surrounding areas


----------



## dblkluk (Oct 3, 2002)

2.44 Here in the Magic City! Never thought I'd be saying I'll do back flips if gas was 2.00 a gallon!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

2.49 in Bottineau


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

$ 2.19 north fargo


----------



## swany25 (Sep 3, 2005)

$2.35 in Melrose. I paid $2.99 last year for my trip to ND. So thats a bonus!


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

Kinda of funny that the closer you get the oil fields the more expensive the gas!!


----------



## drjongy (Oct 13, 2003)

$2.19 in Grand Forks. Of course it drops after Labor Day weekend....what a scam!!!!!!


----------



## Phil The Thrill (Oct 21, 2005)

2.39 is the lowest ive seen it in brookings. Went down just in time for Duck season!! :beer:


----------



## cut'em (Oct 23, 2004)

$2.75 here in New York I run a diesel that costs me $3.17 a gallon Diesel don't seem to drop as fast as gas prices although it's easier to produce.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I also notice that about diesel. Not as refined a product, but cost more. I doubt it is supply and demand. I would guess there is more gas needed than diesel. If I am wrong the price should drop rapidly after harvest. It hasn't yet.


----------



## adam (Mar 17, 2005)

its around $2.30 here and is supposed to drop down close to $2


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

$2.75 today, after dropping down from over $3.00 a few weeks ago!

I just heard today that the US could possibly see a drop of over $1.50 a gallon within a few months, as the US has been stockpiling gas because of the war, instability in the various gas regions, and a the rebuilding of refineries with a slow hurricane season.

The lowest gas prices found in the most recent survey was $2.32 a gallon for regular in Des Moines, Iowa, and the highest was in Honolulu at $3.17.

They went on to say that gas could be less than $1.30 a gallon in many areas by early next year...

We'll see... I'll believe that when I purchase it myself!

Ryan


----------



## r_b_burg (Dec 24, 2004)

$2.04 here in Ohio. Hope it makes it down even farther before our 18 hour drive to NoDak!


----------



## SiouxperDave25 (Oct 6, 2002)

$2.39 in Bismarck


----------



## hoosier dhr (Jul 24, 2003)

2.26 here


----------



## nodakoutdoors.com (Feb 27, 2002)

$2.16 tonight down here where I'm at in Columbia, MO


----------



## SJB (Jul 2, 2003)

$2.75 in Denver / Front Range Area
$3.00 in the Mountain Resorts
It has only dropped about a quarter so far.


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

2.19 in South Fargo. If gas hit $1.50/gal I'm buying a 1000 gallon tank and sitting it on my buddies farm


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

Got to love crude oil, makes the world go round these days, LOL we cant live without it any more, sorry to report but the whole world is in the beginning of an energy crisis that we will be lucky ever to recover from, time to pray that technology saves our butts, but even that's a long shot. I am no expert on this, but I have been reading up on it for the last 4 years and you might as well spend the money on $2.50 gas now and get out and have a good time because it's only going to cost you more next year, in 3 years time you will be looking back at $2.50 gas and wishing you would have spent more of it. I have been working in the oil fields for 5 years now and meet a lot of people in the know about all of this. If you take the time to research it yourself, and keep your eyes open for all of the spin that clouds this subject I'm sure you will see that fact from fiction. But don't take my word on all this read up on it yourself.

Google, peak oil, the wolf at the door, End of cheap oil, energy crisis, hubbert curve

This is some of what you will find
For years, the experts have been warning of the dangers of oil depletion. They have been accused of crying wolf. This time, the wolf really is at the door. 
Everyday in the news, we hear of the threat of climate change. There are international conferences, television documentaries, books galore. Leaders meet regularly to discuss the issues and define programs. Yet, while climate change is undoubtedly a serious problem, the most dangerous aspects are not likely to threaten us for several decades and even then will be ambiguous in their results, bringing hazards for many, benefits for some, and little effect for a few.
But there is a danger whose consequences will be far more destructive and which will hit us much sooner. It is a danger that will effect everybody, rich or poor, wherever they live in the world. It will require enormous financial and scientific strides to defeat, strides which the world's governments show few signs of taking. It is a danger which, quite feasibly, could lead to the end of our industrial civilisation. It is the danger of peak oil.
I recently asked a question on a website about the financial dangers of peak oil and one reply ended with this:
I remember being told twenty years ago that there was only twenty years of oil left. We are now being told again that we have twenty years of oil left. I wonder if we will be told the same thing in another twenty years!
This is typical of the level of misinformation around about peak oil. Few people seem to be aware of it and many of those who are consider it a problem for the far future. I suspect that most people asked about "how long oil will last" would place the time hundreds of years in the future. If you don't already know, ask yourself this question:
Using the known amount of available oil and the present rate of consumption, how long would it be before all that oil is used up?
This is known as the R/P ratio in the oil business (the first bit of jargon). It may surprise you to know that in the BP Statistical Review for 2005 (using data from 2004), the length of time is 40.5 years. So, any person under the age of about thirty or forty would be likely to have to face a world without any oil.
The reality is not so simple as this but unfortunately the situation is far worse. Peak oil is not about when we run out of oil but, rather, when the production of cheap oil starts to decline. And, as we shall see, that is much closer than we think.

My Aim
I am not an oil expert. All my knowledge of peak oil comes from books, websites and by studying the statistics. Up to the end of the last century, I was as ignorant of this crisis as the average person still is. Consequently, there is nothing on this site that the ordinary uninformed person cannot understand since I am also an ordinary person who was uninformed. The facts of peak oil are littered with oil jargon (see Jargon) and endless tables of figures. Every statistic seems to be defined differently by different authors and even a term such as 'oil' has a multitude of meanings. It is no wonder that the ordinary man or woman in the street is not aware of the problem.
The bulk of the statistics I am using in this site are from two sites: the BP Statistical Review and the ASPO News (The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas). I use these because the sets of statistics are easily available to download from the respective websites whilst much data is difficult to find and/or expensive. Neither set of oil figures can be relied on for total accuracy but, since the inaccuracy tends towards the optimistic (certainly in the BP figures), it will bring home to you the trouble we are in. If things seem bad with these figures, think how bad it really is.
I recommend that you go to the websites (if you can) and download the relevant statistics. Do not rely on my interpretations - check them out for yourselves. The data is all there. We just need to be woken up to what is written within.
As I point out, I am not an oil expert so I cannot guarantee that every word I write is correct, but I have tried to check as much as possible. That is the advantage of using downloadable statistics - you can check much of the interpretation for yourself. But if you don't trust what I say, I urge to to get onto the Internet and check things out for yourself. The questions of the general public brought global warming to the headlines, only a similar thing will wake the world up to the danger that awaits it.
The Hubbert peak theory, also known as "peak oil", concerns the long-term rate of extraction and depletion in conventional petroleum and other fossil fuels. It is named after American geophysicist Marion King Hubbert, who created a model of known oil reserves, and proposed, in a paper he presented to the American Petroleum Institute in 1956 [1], that production of oil from conventional sources would peak in the continental United States between 1965 and 1970, and worldwide within "about half a century" from publication.
United States oil production peaked in 1971 [2]. The peak of world oilfield discoveries occurred in 1962 [3]. Some estimates for the date of worldwide peak in oil production, made by Hubbert and others, have already passed. This has led to criticism of the theory's method and predictions. Supporters of peak theory suggest Hubbert's model did not account for the 1973 and 1979 OPEC oil shocks, which effectively reduced demand, thus delaying a world peak.
The theory is subject to continued discussion and controversy. Some oil industry executives, economists, and analysts doubt that Hubbert's peak theory applies on a global scale. However, Chevron has launched the Will You Join Us? [4] greenwashing campaign, seeking to alert the public to the possibility of petroleum depletion and encourage discussion. The campaign's website notes findings from the International Energy Agency's (IEA) World Energy Outlook 2004: "Fossil fuels currently supply most of the world's energy, and are expected to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. While supplies are currently abundant, they won't last forever. Oil production is in decline in 33 of the 48 largest oil producing countries, ..."
Opinions on Hubbert's peak range from prediction that the market economy will produce a solution, to predictions of doomsday scenarios of a global economy unable to meet its energy needs. [edit]Hubbert's theory The standard Hubbert curve. For applications, the x and y scales are replaced by time and production scales.
In 1956, Hubbert proposed that crude oil production in a given region over time would follow a bell-shaped curve without giving a precise formula; he later used the Hubbert curve, the derivative of the logistic curve, for estimating future production.
Hubbert assumed that after oil reserves are discovered, oil production at first increases approximately exponentially, as wells are drilled and more efficient facilities are installed. At some point, a peak output is reached, and oil production begins declining until it approximates an exponential decline.
The Hubbert curve satisfies these constraints. Furthermore, it is symmetrical, with the peak of production reached when half of the oil that will ultimately be produced has been. It also has a single peak.
Given past oil production data, a Hubbert curve may be constructed that attempts to approximate past data, and used to provide estimates for future production. In particular, the date of peak oil production and the total amount of oil ultimately produced can be estimated that way.
The standard Hubbert curve is a real-valued function of one real variable; in order to apply it to the real world, scales have to be chosen, one for time and one for oil production, based on the observed data. They are usually given implicitly by specifying the integral of the Hubbert curve, the ultimate total oil production Q∞, with a unit of billions of barrels, and the initial growth rate asymptotically reached for very early times, a, often expressed in percent per year.
Hubbert also proposed a method for determining the values for Q∞ and a based on empirical data, by considering the ratio of production at a given time and cumulative production to that point as a function not of time but of the cumulative production itself; if production followed a Hubbert curve, this function would have the form , a straight line. Thus, by considering the best linear fit to the function actually observed, estimates for a and Q∞ can be obtained.
A claimed derivation of the peak calculation is in "Beyond Oil" by Deffeyes, pages 35-51.
[edit]
Energy return on investment When oil production first began in the mid-nineteenth century, the largest oil fields recovered fifty barrels of oil for every barrel used in the extraction, transportation and refining. This ratio is often referred to as the Energy Return on Investment (EROI or EROEI).
Since, for economic reasons, the cheapest and easiest to extract sources of energy are used first, the EROI decreases over time. Currently, between one and five barrels of oil are recovered for each barrel used in the recovery process. (Note: a chart would be helpful here.)
While any source of energy with an EROI near or below 1.0 would seem futile to exploit, there are special situations when this is not the case. Availability of cheap, but hard to transport, natural gas in some oil fields has led to using natural gas to fuel steam injection into oil fields. Similarly, natural gas in huge amounts is used to power most Athabasca Oil Sands plants. Cheap natural gas has also led to Ethanol fuel produced with a net EROI of less than 1, although figures in this area are controversial.
[edit]
Implications of a world peak
Main article: Implications of peak oil 
Oil depletion scenarios
A global decline in oil production will have serious social and economic implications without due preparation[citation needed]. Global economic growth relies on cheap energy[citation needed], and oil contributes significantly to the worldwide energy pool, particularly for transportation. A decline in energy supply would likely slow, if not reverse, growth[citation needed].
Initially a peak in oil production would manifest itself as rapidly escalating prices and a worldwide oil shortage. This shortage would differ from shortages of the past because the fundamental cause is geological, not political. While past shortages stemmed from a temporary insufficiency of supply, crossing Hubbert's Peak means that the production of oil continues to decline. Demand must be reduced to meet supply. The effects of such a shortage depend on the rate of decline and the development and adoption of alternatives. If alternatives are not forthcoming, then the many products and services produced with oil become scarcer, leading to lower living standards in all countries. Scenarios range from doomsday scenarios to relatively minor problems thanks to new technologies. In order to deal with problems from peak oil, Colin Campbell has proposed the Rimini protocol.
It is unlikely that the actual peak in global oil production will be the direct catalyst of global economic decline. Instead, severe economic turbulence will be precipitated by the realization of the financial and investment world that "peak oil" (and natural gas) is a real phenomenon, and is either imminent or has already occurred. Significant indications of economic volatility have manifested themselves in the largest increase in inflation rates in 15 years (Sept. 2005), due mostly to higher energy costs. Since natural gas is the single largest feedstock used to producion fertilizers, an increase in natural gas prices could provide upward pressure on food costs, in addition to the increase in the transportation component of food prices.
However, these likely cumulative impacts of peaking oil, exacerbated by global competition over scarce remaining oil supplies, have led many analysts to predict dire consequences for conventional oil-dependent economies. According to oil industry analyst Jan Lundberg, "Based on today's intensifying trends, warning signs and an understanding of history, one must be ready to see the fossil-fueled phase come to an end most abruptly. When common practices cannot be maintained and too many people suddenly begin hoarding scant supplies, the desired resource dries up. This causes ramifications that quickly compound whatever triggered the crisis." This scenario is referred to by Lundberg as Petrocollapse.
[edit]
Peak prediction
In 2004, ASPO predicted that conventional plus unconventional oil production would peak around 2007.
The Energy Information Administration predicts no peak in consumption before at least 2025. Source: International Energy Outlook 2004. The International Energy Agency makes a similar projection
Since the global petroleum supply is finite, alternative energy sources must be found in the future. Most critics instead argue that the peak will not occur soon and that the form of the peak may be irregular and extended rather than a sharp logistic curve peak. Like any mathematical model, the accuracy of the prediction is dependent on the validity of the model and further to that, by the accuracy of the input data. If variables such as consumption are estimated incorrectly, then the formula will yield different results.
In 1974, Hubbert predicted that global oil production would peak in 1995[5]. The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) was founded in 2000 by the geologist Colin Campbell. ASPO has calculated that the annual production peak of conventional crude oil was in early 2004. During 2004, approximately 24 billion barrels of conventional oil was produced out of the total of 30 billion barrels of oil; the remaining 6 billion barrels coming from heavy oil and tar sands, deep water oil fields, and natural gas liquids (see adjacent ASPO graph). In 2005, the ASPO revised its prediction for the peak in world oil production, from both conventional and nonconventional sources, to the year 2010[6]. Natural gas is expected to peak anywhere from 2010 to 2020 (Bentley, 2002).
In 2004, 30 billion barrels of oil were consumed worldwide, while only eight billion barrels of new oil reserves were discovered. Huge, easily exploitable oil fields are most likely a thing of the past. In August 2005, the International Energy Agency reported annual global demand at 84.9 million barrels per day (mbd) which means over 31 billion barrels annually. This means consumption is now within 2 mbd of production. At any one time there are about 54 days of stock in the OECD system plus 37 days in emergency stockpiles.
The United States Geological Survey estimates [7] that there are enough petroleum reserves to continue current production rates for 50 to 100 years. That is countered by an important Saudi oil industry insider who says the American government's forecast for future oil supply is a "dangerous over-estimate."[8] Campbell argues that the USGS estimates are methodologically flawed (although he does not claim to be an expert in probability theory)[9]. One problem, for example, is that OPEC countries overestimate their reserves to get higher oil quotas and to avoid internal critique. Population and economic growth may lead to increased energy consumption in the future.
Professor Kenneth Deffeyes, author of "Hubbert's Peak" (ISBN 0691116253) and "Beyond Oil" (ISBN 0809029561), asserts that the peak was passed on Dec 16, 2005 [10]. He also asserts that the total of world oil is 2.013 Trillion Barrels.
[edit]
Has it happened already?
World oil supply, Mbbl/day.Source: IEA
World oil production has been essentially flat since the beginning of 2005. Colin Campbell of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas (ASPO) has calculated that the global production of conventional oil peaked in the spring of 2004 albeit at a rate of 23-GB/yr, not Hubbert's 13-GB/yr. Another peak oil proponent Kenneth S. Deffeyes predicted in his book Beyond Oil - The View From Hubbert's Peak that global oil production would hit a peak on Thanksgiving Day 2005 (Deffeyes has since revised his claim, and now argues that world oil production peaked on December 16 2005[11]).
Setting off alarm bells around the world, after Hurricane Katrina, Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer, claimed that it simply could not increase production to make up for crude output losses sustained due to the Gulf of Mexico oil rigs shutdown. Furthermore, in April, 2006, a Saudi Aramco spokesman admitted that its mature fields are now declining at a rate of 8% per year, and its composite decline rate of producing fields is about 2%[12], implying that Saudi Arabia may have peaked. Additionally, Mexico announced that its giant Cantarell field entered depletion in March, 2006, as did the huge Burgan field in Kuwait in November, 2005.
Nor is the crisis restricted to petroleum. Traditional natural gas supplies are also under the constraints of production peaks, which especially affect specific geographic regions because of the difficulty of transporting the resource over long distances. Natural gas production may have peaked on the North American continent in 2003, with the possible exception of Alaskan gas supplies which cannot be developed until a pipeline is constructed. Natural gas production in the North Sea has also peaked. UK production was at its highest point in 2000, and declining production and increased prices are now a sensitive political issue there. Even if new extraction techniques yield additional sources of natural gas, like coalbed methane, the energy returned on energy invested will be much lower than traditional gas sources, which inevitably leads to higher costs to consumers of natural gas.
There are some countries that have already passed their oil production peak.
Alternative sources for oil
Main article: Alternative fuel 
Alternatives are energy sources other than conventional oil and natural gas which can be used instead in one or more applications, including; as a prime energy source to generate electricity, as a transportation fuel, for space heating, as an ingredient in plastics, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and fertilizers, and as a lubricant in industrial machinery and manufacturing. Alternatives include ethanol, biodiesel, tar sands, natural gas, natural gas liquids, oil shale, coal liquefaction, gasification, renewables and nuclear energy (fission or fusion).
Renewed interest is being shown by the oil industry since the beginning of the 21st century in Albertan tar (bitumen) sands, the subject of $100 billion of investment through 2010. Before about 1980, this resource was not cost effective to produce. Due to advancing technology and higher prices for crude oil, since about 2000 it has become economically feasable to use tar sands to produce low-quality, heavy-grade oil. The figure for estimated reserves of Albertan tar sands is increasing due to advancing technology and investment and is currently (mid 2006) around 180 billion barrels (cf. the Saudi Arabian reserve of about 260 billion barrels of conventional oil). Many analysts believe that the abundance of these low-grade forms energy might consign peak oil theory to the history books; others disagree citing that many experts doubt that labor and cost-intensive oil production from tar sands can exceed even 4MB/day by 2020 [13]. Furthermore, large inputs of costly natural gas and fresh water are required to separate the tar (bitumen) from the sands.
Syngas, created via coal liquefaction, requires no engine modifications for use in standard automobiles. As a byproduct of oil embargos during Apartheid in South Africa, Sasol, using the Fischer-Tropsch process, developed relatively low-cost coal-based fuel. Currently, over 50% of fuel (mostly diesel) used by automobiles in South Africa is produced from coal. With crude-oil prices currently around $70 per barrel, this process is now cost-effective.
Depending on when global oil production peaks, these alternatives may not yet be commercially available or scalable to replace conventional oil. To gain time to develop these alternatives, promoting conservation and improved efficiency are seen as the easiest and least expensive courses of action to deal with rising prices of scarce oil and natural gas.
[edit]
Current events pertaining to oil production
Main article: Oil price increases of 2004 and later. 
In late 2005 as oil prices rose, greater attention was focused on Hubbert's theory and its potential implications. While Hubbert himself is still not widely known, debates and discussions about the energy crisis have become commonplace in the media and elsewhere almost everywhere in the world. However, oil and gas prices are notoriously volatile and price increases have been caused by numerous other factors, though there is a general agreement that increased demand has been the major factor, with such increased demand bringing the Hubbert peak closer than would have been predicted otherwise. In June 2005, OPEC admitted that they would 'struggle' to pump enough oil to meet pricing pressures for the fourth quarter of that year. The summer and winter of 2005 brought oil prices to a new high. This may be a sign of increasing demand having started to outstrip supply or it may just be that the various geopolitical forces in the regions where oil is produced are limiting the available supply. One other explanation for the rising oil prices is that it has been a sign of too much paper money and not too little oil. In this view, dramatically higher prices of all commodities and real estate indicates rising inflation.
The Burgan Field, Kuwait's largest oil field, peaked in November 2005. In March 2006, Fernado Canales, the Energy Secretary of Mexico, announcedthat Mexico's giant Cantarell Field peaked in 2005. Burgan and Cantarell are among the largest fields in the world. Only Saudi Arabia's Ghawar is larger and it may have entered depletion in 2006.[14]
[edit]
Critique
Main article: Critique of Hubberts peak theory 
The implications of the model are controversial. Some petroleum economists, such as Michael Lynch, argue [15] that the Hubbert curve with a sharp peak is inapplicable globally due to the differences in oil reserves, political and military leverage, demand, and trade partnerships between countries and regions.
Critics such as Leonardo Maugeri point out that Hubbert peak supporters such as Campbell previously predicted a peak in global oil production in both 1989 and 1995, based on oil production data available at that time. Maugeri claims that nearly all of the estimates do not take into account non-conventional oil even though the availability of these resources is (supposedly) huge and the costs of extraction, while still very high, are falling due to improved technology. Furthermore, he notes that the recovery rate from existing world oil fields has increased from about 22% in 1980 to 35% today due to new technology and predicts this trend will continue. The ratio between proven oil reserves and current production has constantly improved, passing from 20 years in 1948 to 35 years in 1972 and reaching about 40 years in 2003. These improvements occurred even with low investment in new exploration and upgrading technology due to the low oil prices during the last 20 years.
More generally, the supply of oil may be somewhat elastic in both the short term and the long term. Higher prices may encourage greater production and the use of more expensive extraction approaches. Over time, the current higher oil prices may well cause increased investment. However, absent added reserves or alternative sources, this may only delay the peak, rather than eliminating the peak altogether, and accelerate the depletion of reserves.
Proponents of "abiotic oil" are also skeptical of statistical analyses containing, as a given, "fossil" origin theories of petroleum.
Part of the current debate revolves around energy policy, and whether to shift funding to increasing fuel efficiency, and alternative energy sources like solar and nuclear power. However, it should be noted that these two energy sources are not replacements for liquid motor fuels. Campbell's critics, like Michael Lynch, argue that his research data is sloppy. They point to the date of the coming peak, which was initially projected to occur by 2000, but has now been pushed back to 2010. However, Campbell and his supporters insist that when the peak occurs is not as important as the realization that the peak is coming. His most vocal critic has been Freddy Hutter. Throughout 2001-2003, in his monthly newsletters, Campbell maintained that his 1996 prediction of a peak in 2000 was unchallenged, despite Hutter's alerts of increasing production levels. Finally in his April 2004 Newsletter, Campbell relented and shifted the peak to 2010. Later this was brought forward to 2007 but in October 2005, was shifted back to 2010. These shifts between predicted dates occur because of the systemic lack of accurate oil reserve data--with no truly accurate data we will not know when the peak occurs.
Another controversy was the status of the Hubbert Peak of conventional oil. Hutter claimed throughout 2004 that Campbell's own data illustrated that the Peak had passed unceremoniously in the Spring of 2004. The ASPO Newsletter continued to show the extraction peak in 2005 and/or 2006. Finally in August of 2005, Campbell again relented and began publishing that indeed the Peak had passed in 2004.
Further, the "gloom and doom" scenarios constructed by peak oil proponents are said to fail to consider the proven feasability of backstop technologies such as ethanol-based fuels, coal liquefaction, gas-to-liquids (GTL) and other substitutes for crude oil. Coal liquefaction in particular becomes economically feasable, according to some estimates, at a sustained oil price of more than $32/barrel[16]- A price less than half the market price as of March 2006. Peak oil proponents point out that such technologies are much more costly than conventional oil and claim that they cannot be produced in sufficient quantities to replace declining supplies of conventional oil.
[edit]
References
•	"Feature on United States oil production." (November, 2002) ASPO Newsletter #23. 
•	Bentley, R.W. (2002). Global oil & gas depletion: an overview. Energy Policy 30, 189-205 
•	Greene, D.L. & J.L. Hopson. (2003). Running Out of and Into Oil: Analyzing Global Depletion and Transition Through 2050 ORNL/TM-2003/259, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 
•	Economists Challenge Causal Link Between Oil Shocks And Recessions (August 30, 2004). Middle East Economic Survey VOL. XLVII No 35 
•	Hubbert, M.K. (1956). Nuclear Energy and the Fossil Fuels. Presented before the Spring Meeting of the Southern District, American Petroleum Institute, Plaza Hotel, San Antonio, Texas, March 7-8-9, 1956, text version. 
•	Maugeri, L. (2004). Oil: Never Cry Wolf--Why the Petroleum Age Is Far from over. Science 304, 1114-1115 
[edit]
See also
Global fossil carbon emissions, an indicator of consumption, for 1800-2000. Total is black. Oil is in blue.
Prediction
•	Matthew Simmons 
•	Oil reserves 
•	Abiotic oil 
•	Hirsch report 
•	Ehrlich-Simon bet 
•	Energy crisis 
•	Ghawar Field (largest Saudi oil field) 
•	Olduvai theory 
•	Limits to Growth 
•	Global strategic petroleum reserves

Economics
•	Gross domestic product per barrel 
•	1973 energy crisis 
•	1979 energy crisis 
•	1990 spike in the price of oil 
•	Oil price increases of 2004-2006 
•	Petrodollar 
•	OPEC 
•	Iranian Oil Bourse 
•	Biophysical economics 
Technology
•	Energy conservation 
•	Energy development 
•	Renewable energy 
•	Tar sands 
•	Fischer-Tropsch process 
•	Karrick process 
•	Future energy development 
•	Soft energy path 
Society
•	American way of life 
[edit]
Voices
•	Amos Nur - Professor, Stanford University, California [17] 
•	Chris Skrebowski - Editor, Petroleum Review [18] 
•	Jan Lundberg - CultureChange.org [19] 
•	John Darnell - Energy Advisor, U.S. Representative Bartlett [20] 
•	John Howe - Farmer [21] 
•	John Spears - Energy Manager, Gaithersburg, MD [22] 
•	Marion King Hubbert - Oil Geologist, deceased [23] 
•	Pat Murphy - Professor, Antioch College, Community Service, Ohio 
•	Robert L. Hirsch - Petroleum Geologist [24] 
•	Roscoe Bartlett - Scientist, U.S. Representative, Maryland, [25] 
•	Richard Heinberg - Professor, New College, CA [26] 
•	Colin J. Campbell - Petroleum Geologist, Ireland [27] 
[edit]
Critics
•	Daniel Yergin, Russia 2010 : And What It Means for the World, 1995 
•	Daniel Yergin, The Prize : The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power, 1993 
•	Julian Lincoln Simon (deceased), The Ultimate Resource 2, 1998 
•	Michael C. Lynch - Energy Analyst, Strategic Energy & Economic Consulting [28] 
•	Peter W. Huber, The Bottomless Well: The Twilight of Fuel, the Virtue of Waste, and Why We Will Never Run Out of Energy, 2005 
•	Freddy Hutter - TrendLines Peak Oil Scenarios Graph 
[edit]
Books
•	Ahmed Rashid, 
o	Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia, 2003 
o	Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, 2001 
•	Amory Lovins, Winning the Oil Endgame: Innovation for Profit, Jobs and Security, 2005 
•	Colin J. Campbell, 
o	Oil Crisis, 2005 
o	The Coming Oil Crisis, 2004 
o	The Essence of Oil & Gas Depletion, 2004 
•	Dale Allen Pfeiffer, The End Of The Oil Age, 2004 
•	David Goodstein, Out of Gas: The End of the Age Of Oil, 2005 
•	James Howard Kunstler, The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of the Oil Age, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes, 2005 
•	Kenneth S. Deffeyes, 
o	Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak, 2005 
o	Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage, 2001 
•	Lutz C. Kleveman, The New Great Game: Blood and Oil in Central Asia, 2004 
•	Matthew R. Simmons, Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy, 2005 
•	Matthew Yeomans, 
o	Oil: A Concise Guide to the Most Important Product on Earth, 2006 
o	Oil: Anatomy of an Industry, 2004 
•	Peter Tertzakian, "A Thousand Barrels a Second," 2006, McGraw-Hill 
•	Richard Heinberg, 
o	Powerdown: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World, 2004 
o	The Party's Over: Oil, War, and the Fate of Industrial Societies, 2003 
•	Sonia Shah, Crude: The Story of Oil, 2004 
•	Vaclav Smil, Energy at the Crossroads: Global Perspectives and Uncertainties, 2005 
[edit]
Movies
•	The Electric Wallpaper Co. - The End of Suburbia: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of the American Dream [29], 2004, 78-minute documentary film 
•	Global Public Media - Richard Heinberg at the Vancouver Planetarium, 2003 (viewable online) 
•	Tropos Dokumentar - PEAK OIL - Imposed by Nature, 2005 
•	Aerobar Films - "Oilway To Hell", 2005 (viewable online) 
•	Mad Max, film set in a society that is suffering from a prolonged fuel shortage 
[edit]
Extra
•	M. King Hubbert, "Energy from Fossil Fuels", Science, vol. 109, pp. 103-109, February 4, 1949 
•	Jeremy Rifkin, The Hydrogen Economy: After Oil, Clean Energy From a Fuel-Cell-Driven Global Hydrogen Web, Blackwell Publishers, 2002, ISBN 0745630421 
•	Paul Roberts, Last Stop Gas, Harper's Magazine, August 2004, pp. 71-72 
•	Dismissal of the Claims of a Biological Connection for Natural Petroleum. 
•	join the wikireason debate 
[edit]
External links
[edit]
Sites
•	Culture Change 
•	ASPO Ireland 
•	Global Public Media 
•	Hubbertpeak 
•	Post Carbon Institute 
•	Life After the Oil Crash 
•	The Watt 
•	Will You Join Us (Chevron Corporation) 
•	Daily Peak Oil News, Articles and Energy Resources 
•	Crisis Energética 
•	Peak Oil News Latest News and a Peak Oil RSS Tool 
•	Energy Bulletin Peak Oil News 
•	Peak Oil News And Resources 
•	Global Oil Watch - Breaking Oil News and Resources 
•	Peak Oil Directory 
•	Dry Dipstick - a Peak Oil metadirectory 
•	U.S. Government pipe dreams 
•	Why are oil prices going up? - Sunil Thacker 
[edit]
Articles
•	The Future of Oil from Foreign Policy 
•	Peak Oil Basics 
•	The End of Cheap Oil - Colin Campbell & Jean Laherrère, Scientific American 
•	International Energy Agency press release 
•	The End of Oil? - Mark Williams, MIT Technology Review 
•	The End of Cheap Oil - Tim Appenzeller, National Geographic 
•	The New Pessimism about Petroleum Resources - Michael C. Lynch 
•	Oil shale back in the picture - Robert E. Snyder 
•	Will We Run Out of Energy? - Mark Brandly 
•	El mundo ante el cenit del petróleo Fernando Bullón Miró 
•	Peak Oil and Permaculture - An interview with David Holmgren 
•	America must end its dependence on oil from the Financial Times, by former national security advisor Robert McFarlane and former director of the CIA James Woolsey 
•	We Will Never Run Out of Oil (About.com), by Mike Moffatt 
•	The Price of Gas, Are You Ready to Pay More?, by Paul Skarp 
[edit]
Reports, essays and lectures
•	Roscoe Bartlett explains peak oil in US Congress 
•	Energy Prediction: The energy Crisis (click Oil and war button for article) 
•	Review: Oil-based technology and economy - prospects for the future The Danish Board of Technology (Teknologirådet) 
•	M. King Hubbert on the Nature of Growth 
•	Peakoil conference 19-20 October 2004 
•	graph showing oil production in lower 48 US states following Hubbert's predictions 
•	Peak Oil presentation by Dr. Campbell, TU Clausthal 
o	Video 
•	Rep. Prof. Roscoe Bartlett's hour long Peak Oil presentation to (an empty) U.S. House of Representatives 
•	An Introduction to Peak Oil by Jim Bliss 
•	Dr. Albert Bartlett: Arithmetic, Population and Energy - Explains the peak oil problem very clearly 
•	David Holmgren talks about Peak Oil and Permaculture (July 28, 2004) [archive.org] 
[edit]
Blogs
•	Crude Oil Blog 
•	The Peak Oil Media Coverage Database 
•	The Oil Drum 
•	Peak Energy Blog 
•	Peak Oil Optimist 
•	Peak Oil and Energy(Spanish/English 
•	Peak Oil Debunked 
•	Peak Oil News Blog 
•	Peak Oil Premonitions 
•	The Spare Can 
•	LiveJournal Peak Oil Community


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Thats gotta be the longest post in NODAK history!!!! Gives me a headache just looking at it!!!! uke:


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

LOL knowledge is power, hope you liked it all. there is plenty more where that came from LOL


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

So, without reading your book, did you cover the 300billion barrels of oil in Alberta? They turn a profit on that stuff @ about $20/barrel. The estimates are as high as a trillion more barrels with extraction techniques, that's 1.5x more than Saudi Arabia has. Also, does your long post address the largely un-exploited lands of Russia? I expect that petrolium products will be an issue for the next 50 or 60 years I'm alive. I believe we should use up all the oil in the middle east before we use up our own reserves. I think we need to have our ducks in a row though and have the infrastructure in place and ready to go when we need it.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

It ain't rocket science! The reason oil prices are coming down is because there is an election in November! Let's not make this any more complicated than we need! The biggest threat to world oil will come from a billion Chinese and a billion people from India trying to act like Americans and using their fair share of oil reserves. Hopefully, technology can help us to stay ahead of the oil curve and discover new and efficient ways to utilize existing supplies and develope alternative energy sources. Anyway, I would say the price of gas will be going up after the November election. Of course they will say it is because of demand for heating oil but we will know.....!!!


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

Well like I said I'm no expert on this, just know what little I do from reading some things here and there and talking to BP and Shell guys at work, as for the 300billion barrels of oil in Alberta, that's only a rough estimate, and from my understanding that's not all that much oil when you look at the fact that the U.S. alone is using something like 21 million barrels a day!!! And that number keeps going up every year. On top of that extraction costs for Alberta are still to high for companies to go after it, maybe when crude hits $150 per barrel we will be able to start refining it. Don't forget that we will have to take over Canada first of course, after all it is there oil  But since you didn't bother to read much of the post. You probable didn't catch the part about the END OF CHEAP OIL, not the end of oil over all. In short every expense you have in your life, gas, food, heating, electricity, and everything else in-between, will at least doubling in price over the next 5 to 10 years. The only thing that wont double during all of this is your PAY-CHECK, that is if of course you are even lucky enough to be working in a job field that doesn't collapse under the strain of a shortage of petroleum byproducts  as for sucking the middle-east dry as a bone. What do you think we have been doing since the 1970's, only bad part is now we have to play ball with China and India. And those boy's are going to do whatever it takes to get there's. as for Russia your right on the money, they are not yet overly well explored but I'm sure they will be thinking the same thing as us, and trying to save it for last. 
Now hop on the net and do a bit more reading, if you find out anything neat, send me a PM I always enjoy learning something new


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

MR. DJRooster. I like how you think


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

Current cost of producing a barrel of "synthetic" oil from the tar sands in Alberta is $10/barrel. In development is a new technique that will produce another trillion barrels from the region. Info from the July 2004 issue of Wired Magazine.

It's been said by analysts that investment in the oil sands of Alberta today is very similar to investing in oil in the middle east in the 1940's. If I were running Canada's version of homeland security that region would be 1st on my list of things to protect.

I don't disagree with you Wiskodie 1, just pointing out where supply is likey to come from in the future.


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

No problem with me Horsager. I like the sounds of your predictions better then the stuff I hear at work. I hope something works out for us. There is still a lot of technology out there that can help us, but one of the draw backs is going to be higher cost per barrel, and that will reflect in every area of our economy. Along with slower production times and less petroleum byproducts, which will still mean you get a lot less bang for your buck. I never said that in 5 to 10 years we would be out of oil, just cheap oil is all, and that's going to hurt our petroleum based economy. With any luck we are able to phase into new areas of energy without suffering overly much from restructuring. 
Good info by the way, ill do more reading on Alberta  
If you want to check into something neat look into termite enzymes. They might change the face of personnel transport. But I wouldn't start raising them in your back yard just yet 


----------



## waterfowl10 (Sep 15, 2006)

2.80  yea it stinks but im still in high school and my dad drives me and my bro


----------



## dosch (May 20, 2003)

$ 2.10 in south fargo.


----------



## adog (Aug 14, 2006)

3.39 a gallon and I can see 2 refineries from my house. 1 oil company alone operates 1400 wells within 25 miles of my house. Gotta love the Canadian gov't. :evil:


----------



## nutmeg honkers (Dec 21, 2003)

You guys are killing me. I just filled the truck up on the way home tonight; $2.79 and we're happy as pigs because its down from $3+ Filled my boat up on the water earlier this year and paid $3.69.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Geeez............. the election has nothing to do with the price of gas. Neither congress nor the executive branch has any control over gas prices. Somebody needs a reality check. Your seeing the workings of supply and demand, but most importantly is the skids have been put on the stock market speculators who are the real culprits that drive up prices. As for diesel which is in fact cheaper to produce. don't expect a very rapid drop in price. The same refineries that produce diesel for vehicles also produce heating oil from the same stuff so supply is less in that area but demand is even higher considering the fact that just about everything the military uses in Iraq and Afghanistan is run on diesel so you can see why it is still high. As long as crude oil continues to drop, so will gas at the pump. Crude starts to go back up, so will gas at the pump.


----------



## wiskodie1 (Sep 11, 2006)

Hi Gohon
I'm in full agreement with you, neither congress nor the executive branch can control the price of oil, and supply and demand have a tremendous amount to do with the price of crude oil. For example, the more energy we need to keep the country running and growing, means we demand more supply from OPEC, the more crude oil they supply us means the more reliant we become on them which in turn gives them more power, which they can use to increase the price of crude oil, on top of that more advanced technologies are needed every year to meet those demands, which also increases the cost per barrel. Now the OPEC countries of the middle east have invested a lot of there money right back into our country, which they also see I nice little return from, they are also dependent on us to supply them a large amount of natural resources and technologies that they don't have access to in there own countries, such as food, water distilling equipment, weapons, and industrial machinery. Now we aren't the only country that can supply them these things, there are many others willing to do so. but since they are already heavily invested into the united states, and we make special trade concessions to them, allowing them to buy from us what they need cheaper then other countries can sell it to them for. that ensures we get the crude we need before they meet the demands of other countries. So come election years when the people are ****** at the price of gas at the pump, it becomes advantages for OPEC to lower there costs of crude oil. Which in turn looks good for the candidates they are backing, don't think for a minute that they don't care who the president is, depending on who is sitting in the oval office and congress will mean the difference in billions of dollars worth of trade and concessions for them. So what's happening? Big business is cutting back on there profit for a few months in order to stack the deck (congress and executive branch) in there favors. MORE MONEY FOR THEM IN THE LONG RUN!!!! As for the speculators on wall street. Well they now what the word crisis means. They are sticking all there money into energy now. Which is inflating stock prices, but Im not sure how much that affects us on the consumer end, ill have to look into that part more. Next time you hear the words ENERGY CRISIS on the news take a minute to ponder what it means. During a crisis there tends to be a bunch of people running around screaming and waving there arms in the air like there hair is on fire, but because the white house and media don't so much as raise an eyebrow when they say it, the America people don't pay it any mind. And don't bother to think about what's going on. Reminds me of a bunch of cows out in the field chewing there cud. That's one of many reasons why there are so many countries out there that hate us. Its because we are clueless to what is going on around the world both inside and outside our borders.

Well I hope I typed that all out in a way that made some sort of since  
Take care all, have fun, enjoy the hunt


----------



## Hunter_58346 (May 22, 2003)

http://northdakotagasprices.com

There is one for minnesota too.


----------



## quackwacker (Aug 12, 2003)

We went to Sam's club this morning and it's $1.99. It's strange how the prices vary throughout St Louis. I've seen some stations in the $2.20 range still. The average is $2.08.

Maybe I'll stock up before we make the trip up North.
:beer:


----------



## adog (Aug 14, 2006)

Good idea quackwacker. With a cold winter forecasted it will only rise again.


----------



## goosebusters2 (Jan 13, 2006)

cheapest I saw today was 2.11, never thought I'd get excited about 2 dollar gas


----------



## lake 17 (Sep 25, 2004)

paid $2.08 in Grand Forks this afternoon


----------



## gundogguru (Oct 7, 2003)

Damn ya'll it is still $2.38 down here in South Carolina.


----------



## jd mn/nd (Apr 8, 2004)

$2.20 in St.Cloud, Mn Today sure would like to see it get below that before Oct 1st. somewhere closer to $2.00 would be awesome!!!


----------



## ADN (Sep 27, 2005)

Elections have nothing to do with oil prices?

Consider this possibility.

Before the drop in prices, the cost of fuel was on almost everyone's tongue. A candidate sees that it is a significant issue of concern for the public. This candidate decides to come up with a plan for regulating the US oil industry. This threatens the autonomy of the oil industry. To decrease the concern over fuel costs, prices drop as elections approach.

You don't think it is possible? Other industries have come under regulation and scrutiny by the Federal government due to the public reliance upon it.

Whether or not elections are affecting the price of gas will be known in time. Either way, there is only so much oil in the world and globabl demand for oil is increasing. Prices are going to increase.

You can guys can either keep pissing and moaning about the price of fuel or look to the future. Lower gas prices now just mean we engrain ourselves even deeper into the oil addiction.

The best thing would be a slow and steady increase price so that we begin to move away from some of our current habits towards more sustainable practices.


----------



## keith_collins (Sep 24, 2006)

*wiskodie1 - Thanks wiskodie1, I thoroughly enjoyed reading the write up you laid out [• Why are oil prices going up? - Sunil Thacker], really gives a indepth insight.

For those who wish to read this, you can acess the article at [http://sunilthacker.ammas.com/a1/advisors/index.cfm?r=va&qid=105316&cid=3340600]

Thanks again! Really appreciate that Wiskodie!

Cheers!**

Keith*


----------



## Daren99 (Jul 6, 2006)

The theory that diesel is a supply and demand thing doesn't wash with me, up until the last few years diesel was always cheaper than gas. I think less people heat with fuel oil now than they did years ago, sure there are more trucks than in the past but just about everyone is driving an suv or a pickup so I would think the gas demand is at least at the same pace or higher than diesel.


----------



## dlip (May 16, 2004)

$1.97 for unleaded.


----------



## hoosier dhr (Jul 24, 2003)

The prices go down every year after labor day. 
We do not have elections every year!


----------



## H20fwlIowa (Feb 1, 2006)

1.95 a gallon this moring. Mna its nice to spend $40 instead of $70 to fill the truck. Oh and all he sudden the truck went from geting 12.9 a gallon to 14.5 in the last week according to my digital read out


----------



## mthunter (Dec 25, 2005)

This should let you check just about everywhere.

http://www.gasbuddy.com/


----------



## zettler (Sep 7, 2002)

It is $1.97 here in the Springfield, IL today and it was $2.28 in the Marion area this weekend...


----------



## doinit (Sep 26, 2006)

What about diesel? It is 2.89 here in OH


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

Do gas prices really matter that much. Sure, the higher prices hurt, but I'm not going to stop doing what I love to do. If prices break 4.00 a gallon, I'll start to think. But till then, who cares. I'm going hunting!


----------



## ADN (Sep 27, 2005)

People will always find something to b*tch about. Gas prices are a fact of life. It's much easier to complain than to do something to change the situation.


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

Ruger 1, I'm with you. 1150 gallons between the tow vehicle and boat this summer, yep it was expensive, nope I'm not going to quit fishing. Hunting season is a blessing because fuel mileage goes from 11 while towing to 16ish without the boat, and most of the trips are shorter.


----------



## Rick Acker (Sep 26, 2002)

$2.02 in G.F...Considering it was a $1.80 ish for most of last years hunting season...I'm still not happy!


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

I may have to rethink my previous statement.


> If prices break 4.00 a gallon, I'll start to think.


We paid 4 something a gallon in canada a few weeks ago on our moose trip. 3200 miles round trip. I have to say I didn't flinch. I was going moose hunting.

Spend it all boys, let the banker figure it out when you get home. Can't take it with you when you are dead.


----------



## SiouxperDave25 (Oct 6, 2002)

2.29 in Bismarck


----------



## zettler (Sep 7, 2002)

Was $1.97 at Noon and it is now $2.24 - go figure!


----------



## H2OfowlND (Feb 10, 2003)

$1.98 on Barksdale, AFB, LA, usually drops a couple pennies to a nickel a day at times.

H2OfowlND


----------

