Talk:Peak oil/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 01:32, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello! I will be reviewing this article. --Cerebellum (talk) 01:32, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, overall I agree with Insertcleverphrasehere (talk · contribs) and the editors at the GAR that the article is outdated. However, I do not agree with the criticism of the prose in the GAR. The prose seems good to me. The graphics are all pretty much updated; it's just the prose that is a problem. I've identified a few issues below, and I'm placing the article on hold for seven days so they can be addressed. Let me know if you need more time. --Cerebellum (talk) 00:26, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

1. In the second paragraph of "Peak theory," why do you say that Hubbert's model was accurate? The next paragraph says that his model was the best, but none of the models were accurate.
2. Need ref for statement In his publications, Hubbert used the term "peak production rate" and "peak in the rate of discoveries".
3. In the conventional sources section, you say that heavy oil has low gravity. I recommend linking to specific gravity here if that is what you mean.
4. Need source for statement “Some economists predict that a substitution effect will spur demand for alternate energy sources, such as coal or liquefied natural gas.”
5. A few citation needed tags; make sure you provide citations.
6. Need ref for the statement in Oil industry representatives - "overly focused on a single country: Saudi Arabia, the world's largest exporter and OPEC swing producer."
7. There are several dead links; a couple are marked, but others include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], and [9].
8. Outdated statements:

1. These fears were not without a basis, since the high oil prices began having an effect on the economies, as, for example, indicated by gasoline consumption drop of 0.5% in the first two months of 2008 in the United States.
2. References to North Korea missile launches, 2006 Israel-Lebanon war.
3. It was estimated that by 2010 internal demand would decrease worldwide exports by 2,500,000 barrels per day (400,000 m3/d) – has this prediction come true?
4. According to the report, in April gas consumption had been lower than a year before for the sixth straight month, suggesting 2008 would be the first year US gasoline usage declined in 17 years. Did this come true? What has the trend been since 2008?
5. Chinese Export data released on 10 March 2012 confirmed a deep slowdown in exports, as China entered an unexpectedly large trade deficit. According to [10], China now has a trade surplus again.
6. Of the world's largest 21 fields, at least 9 are in decline. Is this still the case?
7. A more rapid annual rate of decline of 5.1% in 800 of the world's largest oil fields was reported by the International Energy Agency in their World Energy Outlook 2008 - What is the current rate?
8. As of 2008, however, only 15% of those reserves were currently exploitable – needs a citation, and an update.
9. After reaching a high of 85.6 million barrels (13,610,000 m3) per day in 2007, world consumption decreased in both 2008 and 2009 by a total of 1.8%, despite fuel costs plummeting in 2008 – Not too relevant anymore, should be updated.
10. This sector also has the highest consumption rates, accounting for approximately 68.9% of the oil used in the United States in 2006 – is there a more recent figure?

Responses to Peak oil/GA2 review

I will shortly use this page to respond to the reviewer's comments individually. Please note, rather than attempt to update outdated information as requested in some of the above comments, I would rather just delete the original outdated comment or fact. This is because you can spend a lot of time trying to do this and not necessarily find a suitable reference. I hope that is acceptable.

Also, see my other comments on the Peak Oil article Talk page and also on also (talk). Blandx (talk) 03:30, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

1. In the second paragraph of "Peak theory," why do you say that Hubbert's model was accurate? The next paragraph says that his model was the best, but none of the models were accurate.

US production peaked in 1970, so Hubbert’s prediction was accurate in this case. The latter statements are regarding global production where, due to unconventional oil production, his predictions have been less accurate.

2. Need ref for statement In his publications, Hubbert used the term "peak production rate" and "peak in the rate of discoveries".

A reference has been added to this statement.

3. In the conventional sources section, you say that heavy oil has low gravity. I recommend linking to specific gravity here if that is what you mean.

This correction was made.

4. Need source for statement “Some economists predict that a substitution effect will spur demand for alternate energy sources, such as coal or liquefied natural gas.”

A suitable reference was added.

5. A few citation needed tags; make sure you provide citations.

All “citation needed” tags have been addressed.

6. Need ref for the statement in Oil industry representatives - "overly focused on a single country: Saudi Arabia, the world's largest exporter and OPEC swing producer."

A reference was added.

7. There are several dead links; a couple are marked, but others include [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], and [9].

I think I have removed as many dead links as possible. However, it was difficult locating them on the page from the info provided. Please let me know if there are additional dead links.

Outdated statements:

Let me state that I am not of the opinion that data or publications cited in the article are necessarily out of date. We can try to get the most recent information available. However, this is dependent on whether studies are conducted and when researchers publish this information. Information is not updated on an annual basis. Therefore, a fact dating from 2008, for example, is necessarily out of date. It would be out of date if it is irrelevant or incorrect. It is unreasonable to suggest that every fact or reference date from the last 1-2 years. Please take this into consideration.

1. These fears were not without a basis, since the high oil prices began having an effect on the economies, as, for example, indicated by gasoline consumption drop of 0.5% in the first two months of 2008 in the United States.

This sentence is now irrelevant and was removed.

2. References to North Korea missile launches, 2006 Israel-Lebanon war.

This section is a discussion of historical oil prices. Mentioning that other geopolitical factors contributed to oil price rises in the recent past is not outdated. Therefore, I have not removed this sentence.

3. It was estimated that by 2010 internal demand would decrease worldwide exports by 2,500,000 barrels per day (400,000 m3/d) – has this prediction come true?

It would be very difficult to source the data for these types of predictions. In any case, I don’t believe the statement to be of great significance. Therefore, this outdated sentence was removed.

4. According to the report, in April gas consumption had been lower than a year before for the sixth straight month, suggesting 2008 would be the first year US gasoline usage declined in 17 years. Did this come true? What has the trend been since 2008?

Again, it would be very difficult to source the data for these types of predictions. Instead, this outdated sentence was removed.

5. Chinese Export data released on 10 March 2012 confirmed a deep slowdown in exports, as China entered an unexpectedly large trade deficit. According to [10], China now has a trade surplus again.

This outdated sentence was removed.

6. Of the world's largest 21 fields, at least 9 are in decline. Is this still the case?

I have replaced this comment with information from a 2013 study of giant fields. In addition, I have updated information of the super-giant Ghawar field which has been in decline since before 2009.

7. A more rapid annual rate of decline of 5.1% in 800 of the world's largest oil fields was reported by the International Energy Agency in their World Energy Outlook 2008 - What is the current rate?

I have added a sentence of average decline rates from a study of giant fields from 2013.

8. As of 2008, however, only 15% of those reserves were currently exploitable – needs a citation, and an update.

This point is contained in the news item referred to in the previous sentence. To make this clearer, I have added a second reference to the news item. However, as for updating this information, it would be nearly impossible for me to determine the degree to which the reserves in those regions could be currently exploited. I am not privy to private data in the oil sector.

9. After reaching a high of 85.6 million barrels (13,610,000 m3) per day in 2007, world consumption decreased in both 2008 and 2009 by a total of 1.8%, despite fuel costs plummeting in 2008 – Not too relevant anymore, should be updated.

This sentence is made in the context of a discussion of historical changes to demand for oil. Hence, it is appropriate for that section.

10. This sector also has the highest consumption rates, accounting for approximately 68.9% of the oil used in the United States in 2006 – is there a more recent figure?

This figure was replaced with one from 2013.

As I have now responded to all of the above comments, I have removed the “outdated” tags in the article. Please let me know if there are additional issues that need fixing.Blandx (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Blandx: Thank you for making all of those corrections! I know I placed a heavy burden on you and as you noted on my talk page, a lot of the things I brought up were not written by you. You're also right that not everything can or should be updated, it's okay to have historical material material in their. This article now clearly meets the GA standard, I'm happy to pass it. Thank you again for your hard work. --Cerebellum (talk) 13:14, 21 November 2015 (UTC)