Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
messychopper

Cnn

Recommended Posts

Nothing about Diesel from coal, I agree with the program in the respect that we do use to much imported oil but the alternatives are just around the corner.

Coal to oil, bio fuel, ethanol, hydrogen fuel cell, hybrid.

According to Lord Brown @ BP in his interview there is no shortage of crude on the world market, I'd say just tax the oil companies to take back all of the proffit over the $60 a barrel mark and give it back to the people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say just tax the oil companies to take back all of the proffit over the $60 a barrel mark and give it back to the people.

Thus making sure there's a future shortage of oil, rationing and so on.

Supply and demand are balanced by one of two means. Either by the well known price mechanism or by rationing during scarcity. Health care in some countries is effectively rationed via "waiting lists". Without the price mechanism, the rationing in due course becomes permanent and increasingly severe (as with health in some countries today). It will be the same with oil if we don't let the market do its job and balance supply and demand via price.

The problem is that the use of rationing as the supply and demand balance largely destroys the incentive to develop the alternatives we so surely need due to lack of profit potential. We wouldn't be using computers now if someone hadn't been allowed to make massive profits, likewise practically everything else. Indeed we wouldn't have had oil and cars in the first place if it were not for the profit motive.

You'll know the real oil shortages are on the way when government gets involved. It will happen IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Lord Brown @ BP in his interview there is no shortage of crude on the world market...

Hmm.... He would though wouldn't he, he wants people to keep on investing in BP. Not likely to say;"Yes crude is running out, head for the hills."

Chevron is debating the oil supply issue on their very classy website, in the simplest of terms, they are alerting people to the realities.

I like this quote, "It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil. We'll use the next trillion in 30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing about Diesel from coal, I agree with the program in the respect that we do use to much imported oil but the alternatives are just around the corner.

Coal to oil, bio fuel, ethanol, hydrogen fuel cell, hybrid.

According to Lord Brown @ BP in his interview there is no shortage of crude on the world market, I'd say just tax the oil companies to take back all of the proffit over the $60 a barrel mark and give it back to the people.

As with so many, you have missed the essential ingredient of the current energy supply. Until very recently the world has had greater oil production capacity than it has needed, and thus our economies have flourished off lavish bastings of cheap, abundant oil. We have had something that societies have almost never managed to attain in history, but when they have attained it, they have always grown slovenly and licentious. The Romans had abundant water thanks to their aqueducts, but they then became dependent and vulnerable. Same with the Mayans and corn - until they had drought. We have had abundant oil, now we are dependent as babies and vulnerable. Many things can replace oil, especially if you are talking about the small scale and having a bit of time to make the change, but nothing can replace abundant, cheap oil. Nothing at all. When that resource goes into decline, so will our societies. From expectation of plenty and more plenty, we will reverse to expectations of austerity and then concentration on saving what we can.

Coal to oil? Uh-huh, you have to build the plants, and that takes time and money - and coal. The US currently uses all its coal to generate power.

bio fuel? Uh-huh, you have to grow the crops (using oil) on land we need for feeding the world.

Ethanol? Where from? It's bio-fuel, see above.

Hydrogen fuel cell? Sorry, hydrogen is a store of energy like a battery, making hydrogen is energy intensive.

Hybrid? As above for hydrogen.

Actually, there is no way out of this one, it's just that it takes a while to make the mental adjustment to run through the possible lifeboats you thought we had, to realise that there are no life boats.

I suspect that is why the US Army has chosen to go its own way and pursue energy independence irrespective of what the federal government does. This means it has recognised that mass society is in danger of disintigrating. Its paper "Energy Trends and Implications for US Army Installations" concludes with the ominous statement: "The Army needs to present its perspective to higher authorities and be prepared to proceed regardless of the national measures that are taken". Now what do you make of that? It sounds perilously close to becoming a "state within a state".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll use the next trillion in 30.

Indeed, and as far as anyone can see, that it equivalent to "we'll use the last trillion in 30".

You'll know the real oil shortages are on the way when government gets involved. It will happen IMO.

Governments want to get involved in anything that makes them more powerful, and lets them grow. That's what governments are about.

Edited by Levy process

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, there is no way out of this one, it's just that it takes a while to make the mental adjustment to run through the possible lifeboats you thought we had, to realise that there are no life boats.

Yes, there is no way out. Nearly all alt. fuels are a derivative of oil. There is no replacment to oil - and to think we are going to use our techical ability to get out this one is stupid.

I've heard the saying "well we put a man on the moon so this can't be as difficult". Did we put a man on the man, or was it the fact we have oil that allowed us to do it? Think about it, nearly every acheivement in the last 100 years has only been possible because we have had cheap oil. Take away oil and what do you have?

Actually, there is no way out of this one, it's just that it takes a while to make the mental adjustment to run through the possible lifeboats you thought we had, to realise that there are no life boats.

That's a good analogy.

The builders of the Titanic only had a few lifeboats to give passengers a sense of security. In reality there were no-where near enough life boats for everyone. The same is true with alt. energy. There will - never - be enough alt. energy to serve our current needs, let alone future requirements of China and India. All this alt. energy talk is giving people a false sense of security - just like the builders of the Titanic did.

Oh yeah, what about Nuclear? Uranium is in short supply.. there's not enough for everyone and you still have to dump the waste somewhere.

We have far more pressing problems than the price of property.

Edited by Pluto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As oil gets more expensive it will become in people's interest to become more efficient - especially if there is a recession in the developed world.

More people will get wall and loft insullation - At the moment cost of heating an office isn't a consideration - in 10 years time I am sure I will pay more to rent one with decent insullation.

People will buy cars that do 60-70mpg instead of 20-30mpg, as people become aware of increasing costs car companies will push the benefits in their advertising.

My big estate car does 55mpg, even though it weighs a tonne, steal and glass, and is packed full of unneccesary features.

People will look more and more at energy efficient appliences, and leave less things on standby. I leave my computer on when I'm not using it at the moment, because it only cost £20-£30 a year more.

Ways to make electricity will become more viable. For example, some factories generate waste water at ~70oC. It is not efficient to add a generator to the factory to turn that waste back into electricity because it takes 9 years to pay for itself, but as prices increase it becomes viable.

I am sure that a vast number of people could cut their petrol/gas usage by 40%-50% without significantly affecting their lifestyle.

Increased oil prices will also bring many benefits - local businesses will be more competative against cheap imported produce with high transport costs, less waste, less polution.

I don't think increasing oil costs are going to have any effect on people's life styles in the next 5 years other than slight changes in their efficiency.

It would save me about £10 a year if I replaced my crt monitor with a tft - that's £70 over 7 years, it costs £99 - come on higher energy prices then I can justify it ;)

I found this graph showing oil prices adjusted for inflation:

http://www.fintrend.com/ftf/images/charts/...ation_chart.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with so many, you have missed the essential ingredient of the current energy supply. Until very recently the world has had greater oil production capacity than it has needed, and thus our economies have flourished off lavish bastings of cheap, abundant oil. We have had something that societies have almost never managed to attain in history, but when they have attained it, they have always grown slovenly and licentious. The Romans had abundant water thanks to their aqueducts, but they then became dependent and vulnerable. Same with the Mayans and corn - until they had drought. We have had abundant oil, now we are dependent as babies and vulnerable. Many things can replace oil, especially if you are talking about the small scale and having a bit of time to make the change, but nothing can replace abundant, cheap oil. Nothing at all. When that resource goes into decline, so will our societies. From expectation of plenty and more plenty, we will reverse to expectations of austerity and then concentration on saving what we can.

You sound like you have already read it, but I would recommend taking a look at Collapse (How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed) by Jared Diamond. Whilst the title suggests it will be an alarmist diatribe by a yoghurt weaving eco-loon, the book itself is well researched, thoughtful and accessible. Particularly relevant are the discussions around the actions of resource dependent societies as that resource dwindles (in our case energy and peak oil). It soon becomes clear from the archaeological and historical evidence that the options we face as western society now, are merely a replay of those faced innumerable times throughout the course of human history. Highly recommended (by me anyway!)

Defining collapse as "extreme decline," the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Guns, Germs, and Steel (1997), which posed questions about Western civilization's domination of much of the world, now examines the reverse side of that coin. Diamond ponders reasons why certain civilizations have collapsed. With an eye on the implications for the present and future, he bases his analysis on his newly phrased version of an old maxim about what history teaches: "The past offers us a rich database from which we can learn." Drawing examples from this database, from Polynesian culture on Easter Island to the Viking outposts in Greenland to the Mayan civilization in Central America, the author finds "the fundamental pattern of catastrophe" that is apparent in these populations that once flourished and then collapsed. The template he holds up is a construct based on five factors, including environmental damage, climate change, and hostile neighbors. In addition, Diamond casts his critical but acute and inclusive gaze on the issue of why civilizations fail to see collapse coming. A thought-provoking book containing not a single page of dense prose. Expect demand from civic- and history-minded readers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Lord Brown @ BP in his interview there is no shortage of crude on the world market, I'd say just tax the oil companies to take back all of the proffit over the $60 a barrel mark and give it back to the people.

You're a little naive, the profit generally goes to the producer national and the big oil companies (that only represent 6% of global production anyway) sit on their margin. Tax them to death by all means, just don't complain when they have no money or incentive to invest in new production, thus driving the price even higher. Gordon Brown doubled windfall taxes on North Sea production early this year, new exploration was no longer economically viable so a number of rigs went elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be pleanty of oil about ^_^

here and here

Not sure I go along with peak oil.

Sorry if this sounds like it is jumping down your throat, its not intended to. More a request for others to look into the subject.

IMHO peak oil is THE issue for this world given our total reliance on oil and non-renewable fuel sources. So I think you should be either sure you go along with it or sure you don't - its at least worth spending an afternoon attempting to educating yourself with the facts on something potentially so significant. The internet is a wonderful tool, go forward and surf, do some research and come to your own conclusions. As a starting point simply try searching for Peak Oil on google, once you've got an idea of what the hell it is, try and debunk it. Pretty soon you will pick up enough knowledge to be able to spot when someone is pulling the wool over your eyes with a statement in either the pro/anti camp and arrive at your own conclusion (even if it then is a 'not sure' :D )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hydrogen fuel cell? Sorry, hydrogen is a store of energy like a battery, making hydrogen is energy intensive.

Hybrid? As above for hydrogen.

Not the answer to everything, admitedly. It also depends on the damn thing actually lighting when they fire it up, however fusion could potentially go a long way to solving some of these issues.

Check out

ITER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry if this sounds like it is jumping down your throat, its not intended to. More a request for others to look into the subject.

IMHO peak oil is THE issue for this world given our total reliance on oil and non-renewable fuel sources. So I think you should be either sure you go along with it or sure you don't - its at least worth spending an afternoon attempting to educating yourself with the facts on something potentially so significant. The internet is a wonderful tool, go forward and surf, do some research and come to your own conclusions. As a starting point simply try searching for Peak Oil on google, once you've got an idea of what the hell it is, try and debunk it. Pretty soon you will pick up enough knowledge to be able to spot when someone is pulling the wool over your eyes with a statement in either the pro/anti camp and arrive at your own conclusion (even if it then is a 'not sure' :D )

I have read quite a bit about peak oil, including "Life after the oil crash" and "Peak oil scam". I remain to be convinced either way.

Edited by watchinandwaiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read quite a bit about peak oil, including "Life after the oil crash" and "Peak oil scam". I remain to be convinced either way.

My personal position is that peak oil is a raging certainty - by definition a non-renewable fuel source must at some point peak, therefore I believe the debate should focus on whether this production decline is in the near/medium/long-term future and whether it will take the form of a soft plateau transition or be much more abrupt. I assume this is what you are talking about when you say you remain to be convinced either way, rather than being open to the possibility that oil will never peak?

Edited by RobertPaulson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal position is that peak oil is a raging certainty - by definition a non-renewable fuel source must at some point peak, therefore I believe the debate should focus on whether this production decline is in the near/medium/long-term future and whether it will take the form of a soft plateau transition or be much more abrupt. I assume this is what you are talking about when you say you remain to be convinced either way, rather than being open to the possibility that oil will never peak?

Google Vietnam oil!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google Vietnam oil!

It is true that some new oil is being found, but most of it is in difficult places. Mexico just recently announced a major find, which could be the largest field discovery in the last six years if their pre-hype is anything to go by. But it won't make much difference. Kuwait recently revised its reserves down , taking 5% out of the world's reserves. And that is only the beginning of unravelling a process of exaggerated reserves by a number of countries.

The new Mexico field is believed to contain 10 billion barrels of oil. If that is true, it will be amongst the ten or so very largest fields ever found - yet its total yield would only keep the world going for four months. Do you now start to see the problem? It's the scale of the activity. Imagine the old Wembley stadium. Imagine it full right to the brim, and then imagine seven such stadia. That is how much oil the world uses EVERY DAY.

I don't know if you have ever visited the banks of Loch Lomand. It's a body of water amost thirty miles long and up to 600 feet deep and three miles wide. Just think of all those miles and miles of water. That is how much oil the world uses in a year. That is why we have a problem. Not that we are short of oil, on the contrary we've got literally lakes of the stuff, but there's too many people, too many cars, too much consumer expectation, too much waste. There just isn't infinite quantities of the stuff around. Oil was formed in fairly unusual circumstances. Even giant finds like the new Mexico discovery are a triviality next to a world guzzling the stuff as we do. The only reason we haven't run into problems already is thanks to a few super-giant fields like the Ghawar that were discovered just before WW2. Those fields are all pretty old and mature. Most of them are already in decline. The Ghawar is the only super-giant field that is not known to be in decline. The failure of Saudi to increase production during the last 18 months, given the stress on supplies, is pretty ominous.

Peak Oil will happen - there is no informed dispute about that. It's just a case of when. On balance, we'll probably be able to sustain production, or increase it a little, for the next three years or so, but after that all bets are off. Most folk who have looked closely at the problem cannot dispute that conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google Vietnam oil!

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. Vietnam has had some decent field discoveries in the last few years, something which is likely to increase as development continues. However, they still only rank 34th in the world for proven reserves and the net output figure (after domestic consumption) is fairly small, something like 200k bpd and whilst production will increase as new fields come online, so too will domestic consumption with the completion of new refinery projects (Nam is a big importer of petroleum products at the moment). Even if they double their proven reserves figure, with only .2% of the worlds reserves to start with, it's not going to be big news (and would probably bring them a whole heap of unwelcome attention from bejiing if they did).

In context the Ghawar field in Saudi would rank 10th in the world on its own when discovered and the Cantarellfield (link to latest news) in Mexico at 13th (the original estimated reserves from both combined is around 96,000,000,000bbl or 9% of the total world reserves estimate (bit of an old estimate though). Both are declining

Ghawar Production Decline

Cantarell Production Decline

The issue many get confused by with peak oil is that it does not concern us running out of oil, very few are disputing the fact of huge future reserves of oil to be (and being) discovered, the main issue is when oil production peaks - i.e. are we finding enough new fields with high enough production rates to replace those being exhausted. Then consider the huge growth in demand from developing countries such as India, China etc. and the strain this will put on the ability globally to get enough bbl out of the ground each day to match supply with demand. As we have seen over the last few weeks, the peaking of North Sea gas has resulted in vicious price spikes in the UK market with demand only just coming slightly close to exceeding supply.

I've just noticed that DrBubb has set up a new board, which will focus on this and other issues, so this probably isn't the place to get into a detailed discussion about it, but hopefully I will see you over there if you feel it is something worth posting about.

EDIT: Damn you beat me to it malco! BTW if you follow my link on Ghawar, there is fairly reasonable evidence it is already in decline. As OPEC countries production limits are set according to estimated reserves there is a strong incentive to over report - most have not decreased their total figures for the best part of 30yrs.

Edited by RobertPaulson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coal to oil? Uh-huh, you have to build the plants, and that takes time and money - and coal. The US currently uses all its coal to generate power.

The US have plenty of coal, production accounts for 27% of world total, 200 years worth!

Reserve/production ratios for top producers,

Russia 590 years

China 118

India 318

Oz 295

World 233.

Coal liquefaction is viable above $50 barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US have plenty of coal, production accounts for 27% of world total, 200 years worth!

Reserve/production ratios for top producers,

Russia 590 years

China 118

India 318

Oz 295

World 233.

Coal liquefaction is viable above $50 barrel.

To expand production to make up for oil shortages will take time and money.

The world has to all intents and purposes no capacity in liquefaction. If oil depletion and increased demand combined create an oil shortfall of 4% per year, that is around 3.5mb/d production capacity. That is not going to spring up overnight. Coal liquefaction is energy intensive. To give you some idea of what I mean, the Canadian tar sands project is expected to produce only about 3mb/d by 2020.

It can all be done, but the world will have to get used to using oil in a much more frugal way. If the world was one, well-ordered and coherent society with rational, respected leadership I would not see there being too much of a problem. It's the mass irrationality and the political incompetence and cowardice that will be the real killers. For instance, the failure to restrict motor car use and size for fear of upsetting the voters, leading to financial crises and mass starvation in the Third World. Consider the solution proposed of bio-fuel. If this were to become politically popular, there would be competition between feeding people and feeding vehicles. If oil prices go up enough, it becomes economically preferabe to feed the gas-guzzlers and let the Third World starve. Knowing what we do of the complacent indulgence of Western consumers and the cowardice of governments to arrest that indulgence, what do you think would happen?

Put it this way, Hitler did not have to get as far as he did. Had they stamped on him in 1938 he'd be a footnote. But there was evasion and cowardice and the problem was allowed to get out of hand. My fear is that something of the same will happen once PO starts to bite.

Edited by malco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps in a way, the world would be better off without oil. How many people died in the 20th century in wars that would be impossible to prosecute without oil.

You mean like the The Punic Wars, the Thirty Years' War, the Napoleonic Wars, the American Civil War? Regrettably we never needed oil to kill each other. The Battle of Cannae in (approx.) 220BC, at which Hannibal defeated a Roman army, stands to this day as the greatest massacre in a single day in military history (50,000 Romans were killed). In the Sixth Century the Byzantine Empire sent an expedition to occupy Carthage - composed of 100,000 troops. It got wiped out.

There is a theory that we have all been so nice to each other since 1945 because oil has salved us with plenty and kept us sweet and too distracted to kill each other, have violent revolutions etc etc. I suppose nuclear weapons might have had something to do with it too.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps in a way, the world would be better off without oil.

Err... oil isn't just something you put in your car, it underpins everything in our society from the production of crops, through to the manufacture of drugs, polymers (plastics), goods and basically anything of worth or utility in our economy.

Whimsically wishing for a world without oil is akin to demanding a return to living in caves.

Edited by BuyingBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.