- 177
Zardoz
Animals eat a lot of plants. I just cut out the middleman (middleanimal?) and eat the plants myself. More efficient that way.
An apology to all future generations: Sorry we used up your oil...
- Thread starter Zardoz
- 438 comments
- 18,501 views
Animals eat a lot of plants. I just cut out the middleman (middleanimal?) and eat the plants myself. More efficient that way.
- 1,151
Found it on Search :
The Vegan vs Psychocarnivore Thread
The Vegan vs Psychocarnivore Thread
Yea, I used to buy a new car every few years, trading them in, but now buy good used ones. 3 years ago a got a '94 towncar for $2500 (gets 20mpg). I'll use it for 5 or 6 more years, then give it away, and the $30,000 or so that I saved will more than offset the higher price of gas.FoolKiller
- 2,208
Bad news for the UK (and the rest of us, as well...) :
Total indigenous UK production of crude oil and NGLs in the third quarter of 2005 decreased by 12.8 per cent compared with 2004
That's one steep production drop!
Scroll down to "Oil: Quarter 3 2005" :
"Seven new fields started production after September 2004 but production from these fields was insufficient to make up for the general decline in production from older established fields."
This sharp dropoff after the peak is what Hirsch was talking about here:
The bell curve has a sharp crest, and you can't see it coming.
Total indigenous UK production of crude oil and NGLs in the third quarter of 2005 decreased by 12.8 per cent compared with 2004
That's one steep production drop!
Scroll down to "Oil: Quarter 3 2005" :
"Seven new fields started production after September 2004 but production from these fields was insufficient to make up for the general decline in production from older established fields."
This sharp dropoff after the peak is what Hirsch was talking about here:
The bell curve has a sharp crest, and you can't see it coming.
- 2,208
This is worth listening to:
Robert Hirsch interview
"This problem is truly frightening. This problem is like nothing that I have ever seen in my lifetime, and the more you think about it and the more you look at the numbers, the more uneasy any observer gets. It's so easy to sound alarmist, and I fear that part of what I'm saying may sound alarmist, but there simply is no question that the risks here are beyond anything that any of us have ever dealt with. And the risks to our economies and our civilization are enormous."
EDIT:
Also, CNN now has what appears to be a permanent feature: "Oil Crunch 2006":
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/gasprices/
Slowly, but surely, this issue is oozing into the mainstream media.
EDIT 2:
Of course, all of our big problems are caused by overpopulation, but will we ever be able to start reducing it? :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4584572.stm
Robert Hirsch interview
"This problem is truly frightening. This problem is like nothing that I have ever seen in my lifetime, and the more you think about it and the more you look at the numbers, the more uneasy any observer gets. It's so easy to sound alarmist, and I fear that part of what I'm saying may sound alarmist, but there simply is no question that the risks here are beyond anything that any of us have ever dealt with. And the risks to our economies and our civilization are enormous."
EDIT:
Also, CNN now has what appears to be a permanent feature: "Oil Crunch 2006":
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/gasprices/
Slowly, but surely, this issue is oozing into the mainstream media.
EDIT 2:
Of course, all of our big problems are caused by overpopulation, but will we ever be able to start reducing it? :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4584572.stm
- 1,151
This is a repost from
Zardozes 1st post of an AlJazeera article quoting [WIKIPEDIA]Matthew Simmons[/WIKIPEDIA], basically it has to be done to underline the fierce fraud and sheer incompetence that runs the oil industry.
Oil companies have been well aware that Oil Discovery itself peaked in the year of our lord 1962.How many GTPers were even alive then ?(Just Barely i hear Duke say). What this means, coz i have to spell it out is that Governments + the Oil Industry have had the stat on Finite Oil in front of them for the past 40 years, all the time building a dreamworld upon this paradisal substance. So what? is easy and automatic and programmed into your soft little brain by television and movies. YA WTF, more like. . . Either, governments cannot do simple math ( very easy to believe, especially when dead bodies are concerned, in fact it could be a prerequisite for entry to some echelons ) or they much prefered to lie back on the couch like a roman emperor and indulge fantasies about themselves as being 'Modern' 'Forward-Thinking' 'Scientific( a quantifyable use)' 'Benevolent' 'Miltary Gods' etc etc. This latter is far more on stream with me as this would make taking up the finite nature of oil statistics and doing something real and human w/ PettyPowerPosition as equivalent to giving up Heroin and getting a Job, not the Sixties Iconoclasm or the Cold Seventies or the Open Eighties or the Secretive Nineties, nope not on the agenda down the dining club for Sheikh so-and-so or Minister Whatsisticket.
The Market is Benevolent and Concious of Catastrophe ( that's why Market Crash is an invalid term, eh );
I threw down a gauntlet in posts 122 and 125 of this thread that was, in the main, side-stepped. But i also promised to back up some of my theories.
Lets talk this year and have a bright&breezy look at the market w/USNews shall we? Wow, real depressing returns there, a real slump in US demand. But what about a little further afield and a little more like gov't intervention for oil futures ('hedging'), and this on the miniscule scale of your average subcontinent
Read between the lines thats today's news, Reuters, whats that reserve for ? If you ask me one component is called the M and another, not far away from there is called P. But i am an 'Oil Pessimist' if thats at all possible. A note about that, it seems there is a category i was unaware of ; Oil Realists are hounded and stifled by a gigantically rich industry, thus becoming 'Oil Pessimists' because they've lost some publication or position from not contracting the truth as they hold to it. Then there are the 'Oil Optimists' who are lavishly funded but produce thin to near invisible publications in favour of neato seminars where the buffet is warmer. But i now believe there are 'Oil Fantasists' not content with trying to cope with any scientific fact or statistical validation are willing to nail their colours to the mast of self-replenishing wells and abiotic sources, marvellous! & perfectly in the nick of time like all good superheroes !
Heres an interim link from Bloomberg(recent) that'll explain why demand for oil evaporates as the cents get added and we all invest sensibly in green technology, whilst i take a quick breather.
2007 is when i stated in the above linked posts that i would like to compare figures on global demand and such but heres an interesting blog that sniffs out the arguments being put about that oil pricing will dent demand and push the market into a Green Zone.Governments and Airlines also have the option to ignore a green shift by using the Futures segment of modern market trading but this can run into problems, not least of which is the [WIKIPEDIA]Contango[/WIKIPEDIA]
it is my contention that nothing of the sort is going to happen, that distastefull and hard-to-beleive as it is, the way modern soceity is constituted we will run right into a wall-of-pain scenario with supply and demand that is a civilisation wrecker, climate change brings people together as we battle the external forces of nature but a sudden global oil crisis that makes the 5%(supply disruption) OPEC embargo of the 70s look trivial is an internal, neighbourhood pandemonium affair that will push people poles apart, very very nasty and completely the fault of those in power the way the weather isn't ( climate will always change no matter what ).This is the link i got my 5% stat from, you can jeer at it's validity or al-jazeeras validity but i am actually waiting to post here in 2007 and see how you feel about current affairs then. I hope you understand .
Note; there are 5 external links in this post that aren't reposts etc. . .
Zardozes 1st post of an AlJazeera article quoting [WIKIPEDIA]Matthew Simmons[/WIKIPEDIA], basically it has to be done to underline the fierce fraud and sheer incompetence that runs the oil industry.
Oil companies have been well aware that Oil Discovery itself peaked in the year of our lord 1962.How many GTPers were even alive then ?(Just Barely i hear Duke say). What this means, coz i have to spell it out is that Governments + the Oil Industry have had the stat on Finite Oil in front of them for the past 40 years, all the time building a dreamworld upon this paradisal substance. So what? is easy and automatic and programmed into your soft little brain by television and movies. YA WTF, more like. . . Either, governments cannot do simple math ( very easy to believe, especially when dead bodies are concerned, in fact it could be a prerequisite for entry to some echelons ) or they much prefered to lie back on the couch like a roman emperor and indulge fantasies about themselves as being 'Modern' 'Forward-Thinking' 'Scientific( a quantifyable use)' 'Benevolent' 'Miltary Gods' etc etc. This latter is far more on stream with me as this would make taking up the finite nature of oil statistics and doing something real and human w/ PettyPowerPosition as equivalent to giving up Heroin and getting a Job, not the Sixties Iconoclasm or the Cold Seventies or the Open Eighties or the Secretive Nineties, nope not on the agenda down the dining club for Sheikh so-and-so or Minister Whatsisticket.
The Market is Benevolent and Concious of Catastrophe ( that's why Market Crash is an invalid term, eh );
I threw down a gauntlet in posts 122 and 125 of this thread that was, in the main, side-stepped. But i also promised to back up some of my theories.
Lets talk this year and have a bright&breezy look at the market w/USNews shall we? Wow, real depressing returns there, a real slump in US demand. But what about a little further afield and a little more like gov't intervention for oil futures ('hedging'), and this on the miniscule scale of your average subcontinent
Read between the lines thats today's news, Reuters, whats that reserve for ? If you ask me one component is called the M and another, not far away from there is called P. But i am an 'Oil Pessimist' if thats at all possible. A note about that, it seems there is a category i was unaware of ; Oil Realists are hounded and stifled by a gigantically rich industry, thus becoming 'Oil Pessimists' because they've lost some publication or position from not contracting the truth as they hold to it. Then there are the 'Oil Optimists' who are lavishly funded but produce thin to near invisible publications in favour of neato seminars where the buffet is warmer. But i now believe there are 'Oil Fantasists' not content with trying to cope with any scientific fact or statistical validation are willing to nail their colours to the mast of self-replenishing wells and abiotic sources, marvellous! & perfectly in the nick of time like all good superheroes !
Heres an interim link from Bloomberg(recent) that'll explain why demand for oil evaporates as the cents get added and we all invest sensibly in green technology, whilst i take a quick breather.
2007 is when i stated in the above linked posts that i would like to compare figures on global demand and such but heres an interesting blog that sniffs out the arguments being put about that oil pricing will dent demand and push the market into a Green Zone.Governments and Airlines also have the option to ignore a green shift by using the Futures segment of modern market trading but this can run into problems, not least of which is the [WIKIPEDIA]Contango[/WIKIPEDIA]
it is my contention that nothing of the sort is going to happen, that distastefull and hard-to-beleive as it is, the way modern soceity is constituted we will run right into a wall-of-pain scenario with supply and demand that is a civilisation wrecker, climate change brings people together as we battle the external forces of nature but a sudden global oil crisis that makes the 5%(supply disruption) OPEC embargo of the 70s look trivial is an internal, neighbourhood pandemonium affair that will push people poles apart, very very nasty and completely the fault of those in power the way the weather isn't ( climate will always change no matter what ).This is the link i got my 5% stat from, you can jeer at it's validity or al-jazeeras validity but i am actually waiting to post here in 2007 and see how you feel about current affairs then. I hope you understand .
Note; there are 5 external links in this post that aren't reposts etc. . .
- 2,208
Very interesting BBC Newsnight debate. Download the MP3 if you like:
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/news/605
They make several points I hadn't thought of before. Its definitely worth listening to.
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/news/605
They make several points I hadn't thought of before. Its definitely worth listening to.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
Zardoz
Didn't make it all the way through. It doesn't take long when talking about oil before they start bashing America over Iraq, which I don't understand because they're two completely unrelated issues. They talk about the war in Iraq having destabilized Iraqi oil production... which of course makes sense because we disrupted a lot of what happened in that region. It won't stay destabilized forever. But they also don't mention that America really wasn't getting oil from Iraq prior to the war, Europe may have been in Saddam's pocket, but we weren't. I guess the Europeans are still sore about losing their dictatorial supplier.
That was one of the more biased broadcasts I've seen. They make assumptions all over the place, especially the moderator. It was lazy reporting.
As for the population issue, I have two points to make. Yes, the third world population is booming, and yes the third world (as it develops) will start to want more and more oil. But it doesn't have the oil now, so if it can't get the oil there is simply no change for them. It isn't devastating, the oil would simply be unobtainable for people who have never had it before and whose lifestyle has developed without it.
The other point I want to make is that the populations in the worlds largest oil consumers are declining - or at the best remaining constant. The US birthrate is just below the necessary rate to sustain our population. Europe's birthrate is substantially below the value necessary to maintain their population. So European countries rely heavily on immigration to sustain their tax base - er I mean, population. Spain, for example, has a birthrate that works out to an average of 1 child per couple. That's a recipe for huge population declines over a generation.
So the developed countries, the major oil consumers are declining in number while the undeveloped countries are increasing in number. This means oil consumption doesn't have to go up.
- 2,208
danoff
Absolutely. The "end of the oil age" won't mean much to people who haven't been using a lot of it.
The highly-developed, oil-dependent world, on the other hand, is really in for it. The changes we'll have to make will be monumental. The only question is how we'll pull them off without major trauma.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
Zardoz
Even the people in the video you posted admit that there is plenty of oil, the problem is that it'll simply become more expensive. They explained how there is lots of oil in the ground, we simply are going to have to spend more and more money extracting it. The problem isn't running out, it's coping with the higher prices. But I can promise you that oil companies will get the price down for the tougher extraction far below what it is now.
...and I was pointing out in that post that population expansion isn't really going to cause more problems with oil availablility... only population expansion in developed countries will do that, and most of them are declining.
- 2,208
danoff
Define "running out". Sure, a few precious barrels will still be extracted here and there a hundred years from now, and sold for a million bucks each (j/k), but Dick Cheney thinks things are going to be getting pretty tough pretty soon:
http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/Cheney_PeakOil_FCD.pdf
Say what we will about our Veep, but the man does know the oil business. Those ExxonMobil guys do, too.
For the record, current consumption is 84 million barrels a day, up from 71 in 1999.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
Zardoz
By running out I mean inaccessible to the majority of the population in developed countries. Sure things are going to start getting expensive as they move from easy-to-tap oil to harder-to-get sources, but I think we'll develop some sophisticated methods to meet demand and keep things rolling long enough for alternatives to be developed.
Alternatives won't get developed until oil costs more. It's still too cheap right now. If oil companies have to start moving to more costly sources, it'll spur on investments in alternatives and eventually oil will be used only for those things which no alternative exists for.
Your video stated quite clearly that there is plenty of oil, it's just going to cost more to get.
- 2,208
danoff
I'll have to look at it again, because that isn't what I got out of it the first time. In any case, these heavyweights disagree:
Harry J. Longwell, director and executive Vice-President of ExxonMobil, later confirmed this number (World Energy, Vol5 No3, 2002): “The catch is that while demand increases, existing production declines. To put a number on it, we expect that by 2010 about half the daily volume needed to meet projected demand is not on production today – and that’s the challenge facing producers.”
Dick Cheney (1999): “From the standpoint of the oil industry obviously - and I'll talk a little later on about gas - for over a hundred years we as an industry have had to deal with the pesky problem that once you find oil and pump it out of the ground you've got to turn around and find more or go out of business. Producing oil is obviously a self-depleting activity. Every year you've got to find and develop reserves equal to your output just to stand still, just to stay even. This is as true for companies as well in the broader economic sense it is for the world.
"A new merged company like Exxon-Mobil will have to secure over a billion and a half barrels of new oil equivalent reserves every year just to replace existing production. It's like making one hundred per cent interest; discovering another major field of some five hundred million barrels equivalent every four months or finding two Hibernias a year. For the world as a whole, oil companies are expected to keep finding and developing enough oil to offset our seventy one million plus barrel a day of oil depletion, but also to meet new demand. By some estimates there will be an average of two per cent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead along with conservatively a three per cent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from?
"Governments and the national oil companies are obviously in control of about ninety per cent of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer greet oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow."
-
What would you expect an oil company executive to say:
"We have plenty of oil, but we are going to overcharge you anyway", or,
"oil is scarce, so we need to charge more so we can pay for exploration"....etc. (flashback to marketing 101 class..)
Russia is pumping oil from 30,000 feet, and is now the #2 exporter. It's evident there is plenty of oil to be found, getting to it is the issue.
"We have plenty of oil, but we are going to overcharge you anyway", or,
"oil is scarce, so we need to charge more so we can pay for exploration"....etc. (flashback to marketing 101 class..)
Russia is pumping oil from 30,000 feet, and is now the #2 exporter. It's evident there is plenty of oil to be found, getting to it is the issue.
- 2,208
And, as we all know, this is just the beginning:
Rising fuel prices burn through school budgets
Imagine what they'll be spending on fuel in five or ten years...
(The school districts mentioned are all in eastern New York state.)
EDIT:
As you read this story, keep in mind that the global consumption of oil at the moment is 84 million barrels a day:
Alberta oil sands
If, like many people, you were under the impression that the oil sands were going to solve the problem, consider this quote from the story:
"Suncor Energy Inc. and its predecessor, Great Canadian Oil Sands, have been developing the oilsands near Fort McMurray in northern Alberta since 1963. But the project was hobbled by the difficulties and expense of extracting crude oil from what is essentially an oily sand.
"Forty years later, production has risen to about 270,000 barrels a day, with plans to expand to more than half a million barrels a day by 2012."
Oh, great: 500,000 BPD when we're currently using 84,000,000. Any further questions about the Alberta oil sands?
Meanwhile:
"Looms large" is a bit of an understatement...
Those who thought the price would go down are in for a disappointment.
And:
Think it's a problem we'll have to deal with in the future? Ha! Guess again!
'Shell-shocked' companies call for freeze on energy prices. Further increases 'will put firms out of business'
It's inevitable:
Britons 'accepting nuclear power'
Rising fuel prices burn through school budgets
Imagine what they'll be spending on fuel in five or ten years...
(The school districts mentioned are all in eastern New York state.)
EDIT:
As you read this story, keep in mind that the global consumption of oil at the moment is 84 million barrels a day:
Alberta oil sands
If, like many people, you were under the impression that the oil sands were going to solve the problem, consider this quote from the story:
"Suncor Energy Inc. and its predecessor, Great Canadian Oil Sands, have been developing the oilsands near Fort McMurray in northern Alberta since 1963. But the project was hobbled by the difficulties and expense of extracting crude oil from what is essentially an oily sand.
"Forty years later, production has risen to about 270,000 barrels a day, with plans to expand to more than half a million barrels a day by 2012."
Oh, great: 500,000 BPD when we're currently using 84,000,000. Any further questions about the Alberta oil sands?
Meanwhile:
"Looms large" is a bit of an understatement...
Those who thought the price would go down are in for a disappointment.
And:
Think it's a problem we'll have to deal with in the future? Ha! Guess again!
'Shell-shocked' companies call for freeze on energy prices. Further increases 'will put firms out of business'
It's inevitable:
Britons 'accepting nuclear power'
Danoff
Premium
- 34,043
- Mile High City
Zardoz
500,000 BPD when we're using 84 million is remarkable when you consider how inefficient it is to extract that oil and how much more expensive it is to do so. Nobody is going to spend much money on anything that isn't worthwhile. Why would we invest much production capability into getting oil out of sand when it's so much easier to get it other places. However, when those other places dry up, you may find that a lot more oil can be gotten from sand than we're getting now. That means that price will go up - but I don't think anyone here is disagreeing with that.
- 2,208
We need to understand the gravity of the situation. At the moment we are all standing around glassy-eyed and oblivious, watching what is coming and refusing to accept the reality of it because we desperately don't want it to happen. We are in deep and profound denial. We think the powers that be are going to take care of us, and it's all going to be just fine.
The first shots of the energy wars are being fired. This is only the beginning, and it's nothing compared to what's coming. Get a grip on it. Deal with it.
Russia blamed for 'gas sabotage'
Meanwhile, a lot of people are hoping this story is not true. If it is, the real significance of it cannot be overstated:
Kuwait oil reserves only half official estimate-PIW
If this is true, it is the strongest indication yet that all of OPEC has been greatly overstating its oil reserves for the last twenty years, as this chart indicates:
The table's green areas show where countries reported that their oil stocks were "not declining", even though oil was being taken out, steadily emptying the wells.The red areas show where countries spectacularly increased the reported quantities of oil in stock, so that OPEC would recognize them as bigger suppliers and allow them to export more, increasing revenues.
Here's a denial, but with plenty of qualifiers like "I have no idea...I don't think...I don't know...I have no idea, but I don't think..." :
PIW's Kuwait report 'not accurate'
We're in deep manure. All of us. If the Kuwait story is right, it's deeper than any of us thought.
EDIT:
Glad to see that at least one Senator appears to comprehend what is happening:
McCain: U.S. Can't Be Held Hostage for Oil
The first shots of the energy wars are being fired. This is only the beginning, and it's nothing compared to what's coming. Get a grip on it. Deal with it.
Russia blamed for 'gas sabotage'
Meanwhile, a lot of people are hoping this story is not true. If it is, the real significance of it cannot be overstated:
Kuwait oil reserves only half official estimate-PIW
If this is true, it is the strongest indication yet that all of OPEC has been greatly overstating its oil reserves for the last twenty years, as this chart indicates:
The table's green areas show where countries reported that their oil stocks were "not declining", even though oil was being taken out, steadily emptying the wells.The red areas show where countries spectacularly increased the reported quantities of oil in stock, so that OPEC would recognize them as bigger suppliers and allow them to export more, increasing revenues.
Here's a denial, but with plenty of qualifiers like "I have no idea...I don't think...I don't know...I have no idea, but I don't think..." :
PIW's Kuwait report 'not accurate'
We're in deep manure. All of us. If the Kuwait story is right, it's deeper than any of us thought.
EDIT:
Glad to see that at least one Senator appears to comprehend what is happening:
McCain: U.S. Can't Be Held Hostage for Oil
Hmmmm, have you guys seed this? What do you think, fact or fiction?
http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?ID=409853
"Controlled nuclear fusion is seen as an efficient way for people to generate infinite, clean energy to offset the dearth of fossil fuels such as oil and coal.
Scientists believe that deuterium can be extracted from the sea and an enormous amount of energy can be obtained from a deuterium-tritium fusion reaction under huge temperatures of 100 million degrees Celsius. After nuclear fusion, the deuterium extracted from one liter of sea water will produce energy equivalent to 300 liters of gasoline.
If a device is developed that can withstand temperatures as high as 100 million Celsius degrees and control a deuterium-tritium reaction, it will be as though an "artificial sun" had been created able to supply infinite, clean energy for human beings. "
http://www.angolapress-angop.ao/noticia-e.asp?ID=409853
"Controlled nuclear fusion is seen as an efficient way for people to generate infinite, clean energy to offset the dearth of fossil fuels such as oil and coal.
Scientists believe that deuterium can be extracted from the sea and an enormous amount of energy can be obtained from a deuterium-tritium fusion reaction under huge temperatures of 100 million degrees Celsius. After nuclear fusion, the deuterium extracted from one liter of sea water will produce energy equivalent to 300 liters of gasoline.
If a device is developed that can withstand temperatures as high as 100 million Celsius degrees and control a deuterium-tritium reaction, it will be as though an "artificial sun" had been created able to supply infinite, clean energy for human beings. "
- 2,208
Fusion is a dream that may come true, somehow, in the last part of this century.
Meanwhile, the oil traders know what is coming, and are getting ready for it:
Oil for Delivery in 5 Years Rises on Supply Concern
The prices for futures at the end of this decade and beyond reflect the views of those who think that oil output is near its peak and will start declining as older fields are exhausted, or of traders who doubt that enough will be invested to pump more, said John Waterlow, an analyst at Wood Mackenzie Consultants Ltd. in Edinburgh.
"Some people just don't believe the resource is there, while others say that potentially the reserves are there, but ask whether investment will be enough to catch up with demand,'' Waterlow said. Both groups "aren't prepared to believe the market will remain well supplied. The jury is still out.''
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analyst Arjun Murti, who roiled oil markets in March by saying crude may reach $105 a barrel, last month wrote that view may be conservative if the "peak oil'' theory is right.
As I type this the price of a barrel of oil is at $68.55, down from $69.20. The pros know this is nothing compared to what is on the horizon.
Meanwhile, the oil traders know what is coming, and are getting ready for it:
Oil for Delivery in 5 Years Rises on Supply Concern
The prices for futures at the end of this decade and beyond reflect the views of those who think that oil output is near its peak and will start declining as older fields are exhausted, or of traders who doubt that enough will be invested to pump more, said John Waterlow, an analyst at Wood Mackenzie Consultants Ltd. in Edinburgh.
"Some people just don't believe the resource is there, while others say that potentially the reserves are there, but ask whether investment will be enough to catch up with demand,'' Waterlow said. Both groups "aren't prepared to believe the market will remain well supplied. The jury is still out.''
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analyst Arjun Murti, who roiled oil markets in March by saying crude may reach $105 a barrel, last month wrote that view may be conservative if the "peak oil'' theory is right.
As I type this the price of a barrel of oil is at $68.55, down from $69.20. The pros know this is nothing compared to what is on the horizon.
- 23,800
- Philippines
99% Fiction, as of now.
Magnetic containment can take the pressure and temperature, but we're not even close to the point of achieving break-even in fusion reactors (meaning we can't get nearly as much power out of fusion devices as we put into them.)
Whereas with fission, part of the problem is actually slowing down energy production enough to extract useable power from fissionable fuels.
Magnetic containment can take the pressure and temperature, but we're not even close to the point of achieving break-even in fusion reactors (meaning we can't get nearly as much power out of fusion devices as we put into them.)
Whereas with fission, part of the problem is actually slowing down energy production enough to extract useable power from fissionable fuels.
- 2,208
I'm posting this here and in the global warming thread because it's all related, isn't it?
Britain launches energy review in face of global warming
"...dwindling oil and gas supplies and the need to cut carbon emissions..."
It's all the same issue. There are too many of us, and we're burning too much fossil fuel.
Britain launches energy review in face of global warming
"...dwindling oil and gas supplies and the need to cut carbon emissions..."
It's all the same issue. There are too many of us, and we're burning too much fossil fuel.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
And I will post my same response.Zardoz
Even teh environmentalists groups don't believe that these guys are actually worried about global warming and teh article was full of quotes but thsi one summarized it.
In other words, they just want nuclear.
