An apology to all future generations: Sorry we used up your oil...

[K_Speed]

Dont start bringing things from north to south pole man, lol. This topic is about the OIL.

Really makes me think that 2 countries use more oil than the rest of the world. Or did I read the graph wong?

 

[Zardoz]

...makes me think that 2 countries use more oil than the rest of the world. Or did I read the graph wong?

That chart was per-person, per-day usage.

These show approximate percentages, although this kind of graph is good only for a basic visual idea. You have to roughly estimate how much each color-coded region is compared to the total:

Breakdown of oil consumption by region and nation

 

[Young_Warrior]

You do realize that the taxes paid on that tank of gas are more than the price of the petrol itself?

Yes. But in turn look at the profits of shell and BP. They are way into the billions.

 

[THE ED3]

its hard to blame oil companys for over charging. they are privite companys. they have a right to charge whatever they like for their product. why would a company make 8 billion a year when they could make 10 billion? the only reason they might ever lower the price is to raise sales but they would still make money by volume. with the way things are going these days though i ca see why it costs so much.

if you want to blame anyone, blame the government. its their fault they arent drilling in places they should be, its their fault they dont have more refinerys, its their fault we dont have more nuclear plants, they tax the stuff...

 

[Small_Fryz]

I have 1 thing to say.

The things us humans can do when we really need to do them is amazing.

Look at the war how quickly things got made and discovered. Even if the Oil was to suddenly dry up in only 10 years from now, in those 10 years we will have fixed it.

simply phase out the old stuff, just like Unleaded petrol compared to leaded/super. New cars come out with electric/hybrid and only old cars are gas. Wont be long until more and more and more are hyrbid. People can only buy what manufactuers sell. If there isnt a gas car for sale then they cant buy it.

Im not too woried, when things have to be done we go about it very quickly and effiecently.

once Gas gets too much money people will look for alternatives.

 

[Flame-returns]

it would cost a person £100 US dollars.

You know, you actually have a "$" symbol, its just abouve the "4" key come on now. Shift, 4. Shift, 4.

 

[DeLoreanBrown]

I have to thank Zardoz for refocusing on this issue & ime 100% certain , given 5 or so years these quandries in the media will seem less like crankiness & lack of faith in our great civilization , progress & the economy and more like a frickin' air raid siren .

There are two other related threads w/ links & qlty discussion one climate-related , the other economy-based which you might like to peruse .

To add to the database there are 3 v.recent publications ( wood ) on exactly the subject of Peak Oil that i found to be Informative & Scarifying .
1)
The End of Oil by Paul Roberts . This is the least statistical and the most accessible of the three , a thriller .
2)
The compelling red sky at morning by James Gustave Speth takes an active approach and is more enviropolitical , but don't be put off it's not hippiedom but sober researchers probing immediate solutions .
3)
Last but by no means least is Andrew McKillop's The Final Energy Crisis . This is volume is the most Peak Oil and statistically orientated & Mr McKillop is very NetVocal , publishing his research findings in petroleumworld , Here at oilcrash & a plethora of others , this Venezuelan article is v.palatable & quickly highlights how current & complex the issue really is.

my own personal take has changed slightly recently w/the realization that there are no priors for this global economic experiment we are enmeshed in . Therefore it is fundamentally difficult to visualize the actual situation let alone initiate correct and unflinching action.
the reason i now come to surmise is that , economically speaking, when we set about utilizing the highly transportable OilFossilEnergy we had no real conception of seven to ten billion daily consumers of this product in such a pervasive and dependant manner. nobody was at the helm worried about finitism or diminishing finds of this deposit at the time when it more than any other substance furled the Science engine . Scientific enlightenment was a joyous delving into natures Bounty & no horizon was perceived .
population explosion is a twentieth century understanding ( if a Malthusian conception ) , but a 21st century WEIGHT .
Thusly there are no parables , paradigms or neato metaphors that are going to fit a viable Picture . We are in the dark , fumbling w/ Mugabwe's uranium , bits-and-bobs and thimbles. . .

 

[Young_Warrior]

its hard to blame oil companys for over charging. they are privite companys. they have a right to charge whatever they like for their product. why would a company make 8 billion a year when they could make 10 billion? the only reason they might ever lower the price is to raise sales but they would still make money by volume. with the way things are going these days though i ca see why it costs so much.

if you want to blame anyone, blame the government. its their fault they arent drilling in places they should be, its their fault they dont have more refinerys, its their fault we dont have more nuclear plants, they tax the stuff...

Yeah but who gives the right for a person to dig a hole in the sea and claim the oil as theyre own.

 

[DeLoreanBrown]

Quote:
Originally Posted by THE ED3

its hard to blame oil companys for over charging. they are privite companys. they have a right to charge whatever they like for their product. why would a company make 8 billion a year when they could make 10 billion? the only reason they might ever lower the price is to raise sales but they would still make money by volume. with the way things are going these days though i ca see why it costs so much.

if you want to blame anyone, blame the government. its their fault they arent drilling in places they should be, its their fault they dont have more refinerys, its their fault we dont have more nuclear plants, they tax the stuff...




Yeah but who gives the right for a person to dig a hole in the sea and claim the oil as theyre own.

Ile address Y_Ws comment first ; Nobody gives the right , it is taken w/ gunships , force , murder , violence , suppression of facts , oppression of vocal minorities et c etc . Then the 1st guy there w/ a reasonable drill bit who can suck the hardest quickest . . wins

Now The ED3 ; Oil Companies are the most secretive companies in the world , they rival governments in the power they wield & believe youme they have'nt even begun 'overcharging' for 'gas' , governments have little , if anything to do withit .
The price of oil is NEVER lowered to raise sales it is ALWAYS lowered as a political and/or aggressive move to FORM , STABILIZE & MAKE DOMINANT the OIL CARTELS . There is more politics in oil then religeon & wmd put together , but ure sassy ass will swallow anything as long as ure in a protected coccoon of twilight truths , if ever the delicate balance of the oil political machinery is ripped away the festering instabilities of world politics are truly revealed...RE ; 1973 etc etc

 

[Danoff]

The price of oil is NEVER lowered to raise sales it is ALWAYS lowered as a political and/or aggressive move to FORM , STABILIZE & MAKE DOMINANT the OIL CARTELS .

This is false. It misunderstands the market.

Oil prices are lowered to influence purchasing decisions and to encourage the use of one company over another. Oil prices are lowered on speculation about how much supply will be available in the future.

If oil companies raised the price to something astronomical. They know that they'd push their market away from oil. They know that they'll lose customers to alternative technology and further encourage investment in even more alternatives. So they raise the price temporarily and then lower it again... to increase profits but prevent major investment in alternatives.

If oil companies raised prices to something astronomical people would sit on the oil they had and wait for the price to go down if they thought that the supply was there. People would switch suppliers and another companies might open new wells.

That's why there is a natural market limit to the price of oil.

 

[DeLoreanBrown]

This is false. It misunderstands the market.

Oil prices are lowered to influence purchasing decisions and to encourage the use of one company over another. Oil prices are lowered on speculation about how much supply will be available in the future.

If oil companies raised the price to something astronomical. They know that they'd push their market away from oil. They know that they'll lose customers to alternative technology and further encourage investment in even more alternatives. So they raise the price temporarily and then lower it again... to increase profits but prevent major investment in alternatives.

If oil companies raised prices to something astronomical people would sit on the oil they had and wait for the price to go down if they thought that the supply was there. People would switch suppliers and another companies might open new wells.

That's why there is a natural market limit to the price of oil.

It's not so much a case of the companies as the cartels . Iran sat on it's oil for a while , but Iran does'nt need oil the same way America needs oil.Result ; economic depression , panic . To opine that these are free market forces at work is a little naieve , Danoff & I know ile get shot down if i even mention Iraq . The situation w/ oil is vastly different from any other mineral commodity e.g gold .
Also , it's not a matter of 'new wells' ANYWHERE , i suggest you read one of the , quite authoratative, books ive listed 4 posts above . The oil companies are not really concerned w/ customers 'switching' ( oil is not games consoles , it is a necessity at present like water and AS FOOD ) , nor are most oil companies worried that customers will go 'green' and forget about oil , therefore decreasing demand , demand will never ever slack off , not even one iota , not with civilization constituted as it is at present .
Maybe your statements are good market analysis per se , but the research ive done recently they seem slightly absurd .

 

[Danoff]

Also , it's not a matter of 'new wells' ANYWHERE , i suggest you read one of the , quite authoratative, books ive listed 4 posts above .

There can always be new wells. We know about oil that we're not tapping right now because it would be expensive to do so. If the price goes up, we'll tap it. Right now it would be a loss for the company. The possibility of new oil will keep the price down.

The oil companies are not really concerned w/ customers 'switching' ( oil is not games consoles , it is a necessity at present like water and AS FOOD ) ,

Don't get ahead of yourself. Oil is not as much a necessity as food or water - that much is obvious. But food and water are harshly competed commodities by thousands of companies... much more market driven than oil - so they don't help make your point.

nor are most oil companies worried that customers will go 'green' and forget about oil , therefore decreasing demand , demand will never ever slack off , not even one iota ,

This is preposterous. I am a consumer of oil. I personally consume gasoline and am aware of my options in that regard. I can choose to carpool. I can choose a more fuel efficient vehicle. I can choose to ride a motorcycle (yes many of them do get 50mpg). I can choose to ride my bike to work (I know a guy who rides his bike over 20 miles to work - 40 miles for the day). I could choose to move closer to work... recently I have chosen to move closer to work.

My personal oil consumption has cut in half over the last few months. I expect it to cut in half again by the end of the year. I could cut it in half YET AGAIN if I wanted to after that.

Don't tell me demand won't go down if prices go up. I gaurantee that it will go down.

 

[ledhed]

In the future they can look at my head stone ..it will say ..." I GOT MINE Bwaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha "

 

[DeLoreanBrown]

Danoff , your car and it's gasoline is not the only thing driving oil demand . Most & i mean nearly all of the world's food production is dependant on oil-based fertilizers . You may have green choices to sway shell or chevron but China is already sold on the need for a car to go with the family habitation , that fact in itself is enough to destroy the notion that 'western' oil frugality will have any impact whatsover on the SOARING GROWTH of oil demand & the oil cartels , the ones that OWN ALL KNOWN DEPOSITS ( with the mathematical probability of new discoveries exponentialy diminishing as to make practically no percentile difference ( although this is hotly disputed by certain vested interests , after all this is what PEAK OIL means)), yes the cartels are fully aware of the situation and what is paramount to them is stability & not any need to woo demand .

 

[Zardoz]

...a frickin' air raid siren...

The Final Energy Crisis

...my own personal take has changed slightly recently w/the realization that there are no priors for this global economic experiment we are enmeshed in. Therefore it is fundamentally difficult to visualize the actual situation let alone initiate correct and unflinching action.

the reason i now come to surmise is that , economically speaking, when we set about utilizing the highly transportable OilFossilEnergy we had no real conception of seven to ten billion daily consumers of this product in such a pervasive and dependent manner. nobody was at the helm worried about finitism or diminishing finds of this deposit at the time when it more than any other substance furled the Science engine . Scientific enlightenment was a joyous delving into natures Bounty & no horizon was perceived.

Thusly there are no parables , paradigms or neato metaphors that are going to fit a viable Picture . We are in the dark...

I've been doing a lot of researching and reading on this subject, and I haven't seen any summary of what is going on that is more insightful than yours, DB.

From the introduction to the book in the above link:

"The CEO of ExxonMobil Exploration in September 2003 gave his corporation's estimate of how much new oil production capacity must be found, proven, developed or upgraded to cover yearly losses of about 3.25 Million barrels/day due to both economic and geological depletion. Exxon's estimate is that 36 Million b/d must be developed by 2015 to cover depletion. This is "four new Saudi Arabias", or "twelve new Venezuelas". In 11 years.

This is at the least unlikely to be possible. All the world's biggest oil and associated gas fields were found before 1969 - no more 'super giants' are likely to be found. New discoveries are smaller sized, more difficult to find and access, and always more expensive and often slower to develop."

This is ExxonMobil's estimate of what it would take just to maintain current global production levels. It doesn't even take into account the increased demand of growing industrialization and population.

And we don't even know what the real figure is for "proven reserves". As you said, DB, we are in the dark.

 

[Danoff]

Danoff , your car and it's gasoline is not the only thing driving oil demand . Most & i mean nearly all of the world's food production is dependant on oil-based fertilizers . You may have green choices to sway shell or chevron but China is already sold on the need for a car to go with the family habitation , that fact in itself is enough to destroy the notion that 'western' oil frugality will have any impact whatsover on the SOARING GROWTH of oil demand & the oil cartels , the ones that OWN ALL KNOWN DEPOSITS ( with the mathematical probability of new discoveries exponentialy diminishing as to make practically no percentile difference ( although this is hotly disputed by certain vested interests , after all this is what PEAK OIL means)), yes the cartels are fully aware of the situation and what is paramount to them is stability & not any need to woo demand .

Gasoline accounts for close to 45% of US oil consumption. Another 10% is electiricy, which can be provided for by alternatives and conserved readily. Unother chunk is non-electric home heating - which can be replaced similarly.

Don't tell me that the largest consumer of oil in the world's ability to reduce gasoline consumption - something that accounts for nearly HALF of their oil - doesn't affect demand.

China has the same levers and buttons that we do. China can reduce their oil consumption in much the same way the US can. Don't tell China they're powerless in the face of big bad oil.

Just admit it. You were wrong about the demand-can't-go-down claim. Just own up to it and let's move on.

 

[Danoff]

New discoveries are smaller sized, more difficult to find and access, and always more expensive and often slower to develop."[/i]

^^ BLAMO BABY! 👍

What have I been saying?

 

[Zardoz]

In the future they can look at my head stone ..it will say ..." I GOT MINE Bwaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahaha "

Exactly.

We all got ours. Hence, my apology to everybody who comes after us.

 

[DeLoreanBrown]

Gasoline accounts for close to 45% of US oil consumption. Another 10% is electiricy, which can be provided for by alternatives and conserved readily. Unother chunk is non-electric home heating - which can be replaced similarly.

Don't tell me that the largest consumer of oil in the world's ability to reduce gasoline consumption - something that accounts for nearly HALF of their oil - doesn't affect demand.

China has the same levers and buttons that we do. China can reduce their oil consumption in much the same way the US can. Don't tell China they're powerless in the face of big bad oil.

Just admit it. You were wrong about the demand-can't-go-down claim. Just own up to it and let's move on.

When demand does go down , PM me , ile own up . In the meantime , I really wonder not about vehicle fuels , because science can get on that case . It's WHEN not IF the Petrochemical Industry's polymers , plastics etc that have been behind nearly all Modern Technological advances and the raw material for those categories of items-taken-for-granted is Depleted beyond all Economic Feasability , What Then ? It's not a scenario of alternative meaning replace-with but alternative meaning shift-of-lifestyle . These are certainties , yet because there is no easy paradigm it just does'nt seem real or day to day enough and that's precisely the sort of difficulty that leads to extremely dangerous tardiness . Oil used be microscopic plant&animal life , yet certain parties have made the hemp plant a crime & a sin worldwide , the perps being those-who-are'nt-george-washington-but-believe-the-$-is-god . That's one useful gift from my direct mother & being-giver that has been raped in a socioeconomic sense , simply because oil-based market alternatives were replacing good sailcloth and if Anslinger ever had a toke he'd have got so paranoid he'd have hung himself. The list of trajedies incurred by this god called the market is nearly endless ; Alcohol is a damn good fuel , a little trickier to combust properly in a chamber but all it needs is sunshine & sugarcane . . .yet it's Socioglamour model forms a yin/yang w/ it's 'adult prohibitive' model & deprives us of Footballing Gods ,
Ime not all that today & ure ime-all-right-jack will never win in the proof stakes . Gissa list of alternatives or strategies but don't tell me ime talking codswollop just because you believe what is generally and therefore easily accepted and i believe what has been won out painfully and may not be at all apparent or comfortable.

 

[Danoff]

When demand does go down , PM me , ile own up .

That's a solid, well-reasoned, logical, thought-through argument right there. Good job!

 

[MrktMkr1986]

That's a solid, well-reasoned, logical, thought-through argument right there. Good job!

Demand constantly fluctuates. It will go down and it will go up. That's how the market works.

The problem is the elasticity of demand. Dan? How do we reverse that? How do we change people's way of thinking to make demand more elastic?

...other than raising the price...

 

[Plague.Ghost]

(Oh, by the way, you seem to know about a jet-fuel substitute that nobody else is aware of. Please enlighten us on how the air travel industry will even exist in the future.)

Ionic, hydrogen-powered, matter-anti-matter, nuclear. . .


Oh no, it must be alcohol, then.

 

[Zardoz]

Ionic, hydrogen-powered, matter-anti-matter, nuclear. . .

Sci-Fi Channel original movie.

Ever stood at the end of a runway and had an airliner take off right over your head? Its a vivid demonstration of the power of JP-4.

Your so-called "examples" are all limp-wristed, anemic, wussy little weaklings by comparison. They could barely get a one-man ultralight into the air, much less a 500-passenger, million-pound Airbus.

Get serious...

 

[Zardoz]

...Just admit it. You were wrong about the demand-can't-go-down claim...

What do you think about this? :

Higher oil prices barely dent demand growth

"There is no clear sign that higher prices have seriously reduced demand growth."


Is energy like food? Higher food prices would not reduce the demand for food.

 

[Plague.Ghost]

Sci-Fi Channel original movie.

Ever stood at the end of a runway and had an airliner take off right over your head? Its a vivid demonstration of the power of JP-4.

Your so-called "examples" are all limp-wristed, anemic, wussy little weaklings by comparison. They could barely get a one-man ultralight into the air, much less a 500-passenger, million-pound Airbus.

Get serious...

Actually they're not.

For one, a satellite is to be launched by 2009 (date? Maybe sooner; not sure) and it's going to be powered by ionic thrusters.

2- Matter/Anti-matter technology is well documented and is currently being developed at CERN (the same place where the INTERNET was invented) and it has a 100% energy coefficient-- that is, no wasted energy, no by product...just extremely difficult to harness. Its' combustible power is tenfold that of nuclear fusion.

3- Nuclear energy is perfectly viable...just not on an aircraft. Maybe as things get smaller, lighter and safer, it will be seen in mass-made portsble objects, but for now it's slightly out of reach.

 

[MrktMkr1986]

What do you think about this? :

Higher oil prices barely dent demand growth

"There is no clear sign that higher prices have seriously reduced demand growth."


Is energy like food? Higher food prices would not reduce the demand for food.

Yet again, this is an example of the elasticity of demand. Demand constantly fluctutates.

Yes, the demand for food will go down if prices are raised -- just not significantly.

 

[ledhed]

Do you realy care ?

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Do you realy care ?

To who? About what?

 

[Zardoz]

...For one, a satellite is to be launched by 2009 (date? Maybe sooner; not sure) and it's going to be powered by ionic thrusters.

2- Matter/Anti-matter technology is well documented and is currently being developed at CERN (the same place where the INTERNET was invented) and it has a 100% energy coefficient-- that is, no wasted energy, no by product...just extremely difficult to harness. Its' combustible power is tenfold that of nuclear fusion.

3- Nuclear energy is perfectly viable...just not on an aircraft. Maybe as things get smaller, lighter and safer, it will be seen in mass-made portsble objects, but for now it's slightly out of reach.

Ion thrusters

"Ion thrusters can deliver one order of magnitude greater fuel efficiency than traditional liquid fuel rocket engines, but are generally constrained to very low thrusts by the available power."

Ion drives will burn for many thousands of hours, making them ideal for long space probe missions, but they put out hardly any thrust. They have no functional use as drives for craft that operate in the atmosphere. The spacecraft you are talking about will be lifted into orbit by conventional rocket engines. Its ion drive will not be lit until it is out of the atmosphere and ready to begin its slow acceleration away from Earth.

Are you really betting on "anti-matter engines" to power airliners?

And, as you said, nuclear power is not viable on aircraft.

This guy does not share your optimistic outlook on the future of commercial air travel:

Peak Oil: The Coming Global Crisis and the Decline of Aviation

"There's no readily available source of energy that can replace oil as it steadily declines over the coming decades. In their present form, alternative energies are simply not capable to replace fossil fuels at the scale, rate and manner at which the world currently consumes them.

The public, business leaders and politicians are all under the false assumption that oil depletion is a straightforward engineering problem, but humankind’s ingenuity is unlikely to overcome the basic facts of geology and physics. Fossil fuels allow us to operate highly complex systems at gigantic scales. Renewables are simply incompatible in this context and the new fuels and technologies required would take a lot more time to develop than available and require an abundant fossil fuel platform from which to work."


Sorry, but the reality is that nobody has yet advanced a solid solution on how the commercial air travel industry will survive in a post-oil world. There is no plan in place to replace jet fuel. Nobody has advanced a truly practical alternative. When oil gets short, jet fuel will get short, and not many people will be flying.

 

[Danoff]

What do you think about this? :

Higher oil prices barely dent demand growth

"There is no clear sign that higher prices have seriously reduced demand growth."


Is energy like food? Higher food prices would not reduce the demand for food.

Demand for food will go down if prices go up. People will even start growing their own food if prices get high enough. If food prices went up, you'd see more and more of a return to staples - potatos, rice, etc. Low cost calories. You'd see a lot less health food and other high priced items.

Just because rising prices haven't reduced demand doesn't mean that it won't reduce demand in future. There is a lag to the oil industry due to the amount of time needed to make changes. Plus, you can't just look at the demand, you have to look at the rate of change of the demand. If demand was increasing and now it isn't - that's a difference.

Basically the real issue is that oil is still really cheap. People aren't going to make big demand-changing decisions until oil gets significantly more expensive - not this little piddly nothing business everyone has been talking about. I'm talking about big 100%, 200% price swings.

Demand constantly fluctuates. It will go down and it will go up. That's how the market works.

The problem is the elasticity of demand. Dan? How do we reverse that? How do we change people's way of thinking to make demand more elastic?

...other than raising the price...

Just about the only way to do it is to raise prices. The alternative is to dump money into federally funded research for alternatives... personally I prefer the raising prices technique.