Oil Crisis

Status
Not open for further replies.
DubStyle said:
Oil Shale, Oil Sands, Liquefied Coal, Coal
Click to expand...

Here is a good example a good citizen, who just heard something on the (most likely rightwing) radio, absolutely clueless about the issues and just spits out a few talking points.

Anybody who wants to be considered seriously has to crunch the NUMBERS to see that neither of those substitutes will help us in the long run. Except the last one those are still oilproducts... We need alternatives.....I don't think we will or should go back to steamcars....
 
The fallacy of classical economics.

Only economic illiterates look at a graph and conclude that a line runs straight ahead forever. Thomas Malthus, a classical economist did so and concluded that England would starve to death within his lifetime, and he lived hundreds of years ago, and England did not starve. Karl Marx was a classical economist and he made rigid, classical assumptions about the value of labor, etc., and all of these proved false. Classical economics is indeed the economics of Peak Oil and it is as rigid and fallacious now as it was Malthus' day. There is nothing in economics as in life that is a sure thing, despite every Keynesian and statistical effort to claim otherwise.

Economic literacy must be acquired over time through study.

It is unfortunately almost impossible to pour economic literacy into people's heads simply by stating its principles. Like other forms of literacy it takes time; ultimately it provides the determined student with a rigorous frame of reference that includes certain bedrock principles. As these prove out - and they do - knowledge turns to certainty, though it is a certainty that is hard to convey, anchored as it is in years of study that others have not undergone. Thus, it is convenient (easier) to point out that the rhetoric of Peak Oil is recycled from over 30 years ago - and was in fact a propagandistic effort then as now, and a cynical one at that. Those who float such phantasmagoria are often among the most educated and powerful; they certainly know better - for it is they who have attempted with some success to wipe out all understanding of free-market economics and to substitute elaborate bureaucratic rituals for Mises celebration of private action.

Inevitably it will not work! Their struggles are growing more desperate and their momentum builds to an uncontrollable speed. Hamlet killed a King and the 20th century global power elite created an Internet. One was a crime, the other a miscalculation but both likely end in rage and tears. Power was so close and once upon a time the world was almost so small you could grasp it!

Anthony Wile

Sure, there are more factors than what I used calculating the years remaining for oil use. I oversimplified, because people like BR and Godless don't understand SIMPLE concepts (anybody who is denying peak oil itself is an idiot)
Click to expand...

So far as I see it you have proven yourself to be the fucking idiot, you assume you know where oil comes from, you think it's a fossil fuel, a theory that has not been proven, yet you continue as if this where reality, but yet your no geologist, you only trust those whom you happen to agree with and discredit those whom you deem unsupportable, by west's scientist. The science is that the theory of oil's origin is unknown, yet you make your case with certainty, only serves you to make an idiot of you, if 30 years from now we are still talking about peak oil, and calculating yet another 30 years to go.

I'm no geologist either, but yet I don't buy the gloom and doom bull shit "Peak oilers" such as your self spout about, this is not "idiotic" in my part, or that I don't understand the goddamn economics, further can be from the truth, I do well speculating on stocks, and do well economically on energy companies, it's all economics, and the trick is keep them guessing lets make a goddamn profit. Name one goddamn oil company that has not profited big time with this oil "crisis" bull shit!

The thing one has to come to a conclusion is if we are running out of the black gold, why are these oil companies closing refineries that are profitable?
To make a profit of course, they know the peak oil scare, and use it to profit from producing less then capable.

Farid said it wasn't unusual for maintenance work to occur during the peak driving season instead of the traditional spring maintenance season. Rob Schlichting, a spokesman for the California Energy Commission, agreed with that assessment.

But Jamie Court, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica, said he believed Shell was up to no good.

"They are cutting back production coming into the busiest driving holiday of the year," Court said. "That's incontrovertible proof that Shell is artificially limiting supply in order to drive up prices."
Click to expand...
http://www.energybulletin.net/717.html

That's just one example of how these oil companies know they are a force upon our economy and how well they can "legally" manipulate their output to profit from scarce resources.

Do you think things like this don't happen all over the world? How else do you think I've made my money? LOL...Knowing their greed, and knowing that their stocks will rise, once demand increases for what they limit their output for.

Like I mentioned you fail to see the greed of these companies, and the bottom line is if stocks are skyrocketing because demand, their capacity is limited to maximize that profit.

Now with out burying your head up your ass, and having an open mind you can read debates on abiotic oil theory. Just keep an open mind, I'm not suggesting that you accept the theory at all, I'm only presenting it as something that needs further study.
http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/peakoil1.html

And please don't assume I'm a goddamn idiot! Unless you can provide evidence otherwise that oil is completely fossil in origin. After spending a few minutes reading that website above.
 
If you read my post called Do I have ADD? you should know you have to make a point in the first 3 sentences, otherwise I am not reading your post at all....
 
But I did catch this sentence:

Godless said:
And please don't assume I'm a goddamn idiot!
Click to expand...

Unfortunatelly you haven't provided anything to the contrary. You bring shame to the good name of atheists everywhere... :eek:

You are neither logical nor factual. Anybody who brings up abiotic oil or questions peak oil is a damn idiot by definition. Nothing personal just stating the obvious.

Nuff said.... (Im am done with this thread)

P.S.: The stupidest argument of yours was: "Hey I work in the oilindustry making a good living, so there must be plenty of oil around."

OK, you probably don't get it, so I will spell it out: In 1970 oilmen were laughing at Hubbert because they were pumping more oil than ever. Of course, because that was the definition of peak oil (in the USA).
 
Good since Syzgys is out of the way & done with this conversation, let's us just bid him farewell yet again, and don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out!

Here's a bit of scientific data that presents my case that abiotic oil is possibility of existence.

n a report of the US National to the IUGG :

" New evidence from field, laboratory and quantitative studies has firmly established that in geologic-time scales lateral fluid migrations within sedimentary basins can occur over length scales of hundreds of km and vertically through crystalline rocks to depths greater than 6 km". (American Geophysical Union, 1995)

In a lecture Kropotkin (1985) presented some interesting arguments in favor of a non-biogenic origin of petroleum especially the studies of Boiko, Eigenson and Gold.

G.E.Boiko studied the relations of isomers in the hydrocarbon system from 322 oil samples from various fields of the world and the result of these analyses was published between 1950 and 1975. The thermodynamic calculation of the complete hydrogen composition of oil has shown that it is in equilibrium state at a temperature of 1600 to 1800 degrees Kelvin and pressures of 2 to 4x 10³ Mpa. Oil of geosyncline and platform areas does not differ significantly in the temperatures corresponding to this equilibrium composition. Boiko concluded that the synthesis of oil takes place in the upper mantle at a depth of 40 -160 kilometers. In any case it could not be synthesized within the sedimentary blanket where temperatures and pressures do not correspond to the isomeric relations characteristic of all oils.

Theories of a biologic origin are based on the presence of so-called molecular fossils, like phophyrin complexes. Chlorophyl in green plants is magnesium phophyrin. Eigenson wonders why in oil no even traces of iron and magnesium complexes have been found, but only vanadium and nickel ones.

The discovery of oil, deep in crystalline rocks of the Baltic shield is an strong argument for the abiogenic origin of oil. Gold (1997)

Gold (1992,1994,1996,1997) is a strongly believes that hydrocarbons have been formed in deeper parts of the Earth by non-biological processes. He thinks that the biological origin of some sets of molecules (hopane, pristine,phytane, steranes and certain porphyrins) found in all commercial oil are not of the biological origin of the oils themselves, but equally well or better by a contamination with microbial (bacteria) materials in all oil wells. The stability of hydrocarbon molecules against thermal dissociation is greatly increased by pressure.

Gold does not have much support in Western scientific world with his provoking ideas. This will not prevent us to mention his ideas. It is anyhow worth thinking of the possibility.

He mentions arguments in favor of an origin of petroleum from deeply buried material incorporated in the Earth when it formed:

1. Petroleum and methane are found frequently in geographic patterns of long lines or arcs, which are related more to deep-seated large scale structural features of the crust, than to smaller scale patchwork of sedimentary deposits.
2. Hydrocarbon-rich areas tend to be hydrocarbon-rich at many different levels, corresponding to quite different geological epochs, and extending down to the crystalline basement that underlies the sediment. An invasion on an area by hydrocarbon fluids from below could better account for this than the chance of successive deposition.
3. Some petroleum from deeper levels lack almost completely the biological evidence
4. Methane is found in many locations where a biogenic origin is improbable or where biological deposits seem inadequate: in great ocean rifts in the absence of any substantial sediments; in fissures in igneous and metamorphic rocks even at great depth; in active volcanic regions even where there is a minimum of sediments, and there are massive amounts of methane hydrates (methane-water combinations) in permafrost and ocean deposits where it is doubtful that an adequate quantity and distribution of biological source material is present.
5. The hydrocarbon deposits of a large area often show common chemical or isotopic features quite independent of the varied composition of the geological ages of the formations in which they are found. Crude oil examples anywhere from the Middle East can be distinguished from oil in any part of South America or from the oil of West Africa.
6. The regional association of hydrocarbons with the inert gas helium and a higher level of natural helium seepage petroleum -bearing regions have no explanation in the theories of biological origin on petroleum.

(Helium has two isotopes. Helium 4 is formed by radioactive decay of uranium and thorium, while helium-3 was present at the time the earth was formed. Its transport from deeper to lower parts of the crust is dependent on hydrocarbon gas. Helium 3 is present in volcanic rocks that are spewed up by the so-called upwellings from deep inside the earth that give rise to the islands chain of the midoceanic ridges such as the Hawaiian islands. Commercial helium is produced from oil and gas wells).

Gold has shown horizontal and vertical patterns of hydrocarbon fields. First, he points to the fact that the 2700 km long oil-rich belt in the Middle East is composed of completely different geological and topographic features. The various oil deposits are in different types of rock, in rocks of different ages and quite different cap rocks overlie them. "It cannot have been a matter of chance that this connected region has so prolific a supply of oil and gas, but resulting from totally different circumstances in different parts of the region. Very remarkable is the fact that the chemical composition of the Middle East oil is similar over the whole region".http://www.egoproject.nl/Links.html#link9
 
OilIsMastery said:
The oil crisis is being created by the poltical left who won't let people drill in the United States.
Click to expand...

Tsun Tsu's "The Art of War" touches upon using up the resources of the country you invade rather than deal with the need for a supply chain, both because it's quicker to use their resources while you there and because it takes the resources from your enemy.

This would mean not using your own resources because they are a 'Reserve', after all burn everybody else's oil, where's the world going to turn when it needs some?

Straight forwards economic tyranny.
 
It's impossible to use up a renewable resource like petroleum. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe and carbon is the fourth most common element in the universe.
 
Of course, there is lots of evidence that the hydrogen and carbon in the universe are coming together under our feet to produce oil.....
 
guthrie said:
Of course, there is lots of evidence that the hydrogen and carbon in the universe are coming together under our feet to produce oil.....
Click to expand...
Give some then. Specificially, I want to read an argument in a reputable journal supporting this POV - not just some newspaper story.
 
I'm not allowed to post links yet but this is "Raining Hydrocarbons" from Geotimes:

Below the Gulf of Mexico, hydrocarbons flow upward through an intricate network of conduits and reservoirs. They start in thin layers of source rock and, from there, buoyantly rise to the surface. On their way up, the hydrocarbons collect in little rivulets, and create temporary pockets like rain filling a pond. Eventually most escape to the ocean. And, this is all happening now, not millions and millions of years ago, says Larry Cathles, a chemical geologist at Cornell University.

"We're dealing with this giant flow-through system where the hydrocarbons are generating now, moving through the overlying strata now, building the reservoirs now and spilling out into the ocean now," Cathles says.

He's bringing this new view of an active hydrocarbon cycle to industry, hoping it will lead to larger oil and gas discoveries. By matching the chemical signatures of the oil and gas with geologic models for the structures below the seafloor, petroleum geologists could tap into reserves larger than the North Sea, says Cathles, who presented his findings at the meeting of the American Chemical Society in New Orleans on March 27.
Click to expand...
 
OilIsMastery said:
It's impossible to use up a renewable resource like petroleum. Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe and carbon is the fourth most common element in the universe.
Click to expand...

Processing and chemical recovery costs money. The main reason that renewable fuels weren't being used previously was just that, they were renewable, how can you go about generating over inflated prices for something unless it's a 'commodity'? (After all the price of Diamond's isn't down to the fact they sparkle, but down to the process that made the Diamond in the first place. Because it's in low yield in comparison to other things it fetches a high price.)
 
There are many factors why supply has not met demand. Demand from China and India for example are growing faster than anticipated. Another reason is that the political left won't let people drill for oil in the United States. And there are many factors for the high commodity price. Inflation and the worthlessness of the US dollar being a major one. Another factor is that the industry, OPEC, Saudi Arabia and Russia all have a vested interest in a high commodity price.
 
So they had a vested interest in a high price yet the price was so low for so long?

Can you tell us how much oil for how long would be available if they drilled in the USA?

And you still have not answered the question of oil formation on the earth and its relations so interstellar hydrogen and carbon.
 
guthrie said:
So they had a vested interest in a high price yet the price was so low for so long?
Click to expand...
The industry, the national oil companies, and the exporters, have a vested interest in a high commodity price. This has always been the case.

Can you tell us how much oil for how long would be available if they drilled in the USA?
Click to expand...
We don't know. So-called "environ"mentalists (emphasis on mental) won't let people drill in ANWR, offshore California, offshore Florida, etc.

And you still have not answered the question of oil formation on the earth and its relations so interstellar hydrogen and carbon.
Click to expand...
Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe and carbon is the fourth most common element in the universe. It's absolutely absurd to think, as Colin Campbell of British Petroleum does, that hydrogen and carbon atoms on the Earth only bonded at two brief periods in the Earth's history. That's just nonsense. Hydrocarbons are being formed all the time. http://www.geotimes.org/june03/NN_gulf.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top