Oil nears $110/bbl

[American Air Surf]

They need the profits? Pardon me while I try and work up a tear. Every company needs profits. Those that are successful will get profits, those that are not will fail. I do not see the need for government to support them on my dime. The fact we have been been 'supporting' the oil companies in one form or another has delayed the inevitable.

I do not know where you get the 4% from but if we would ave been investing in solar/wind for home power and alternate fuels (fuel cells/electric/hydrogen) for the past several decades (like when Carter suggested it) I am certain we would have replaced far ore than 4% of our oil use.

The Telsa has a 200 mile range. Each house could have a solar panel on the roof that would generate more than enough power to charge the battery for the car each day. The more people who buy a Telsa and a solar panel the cheaper they become. Do you realize how much oil would be saved if each person commuted in an electric car that was charged by a small solar panel on their roof? Do you realize how quickly the advances in solar/electric power would come if there was a demand for it? Hell look at the cell phones from 10-15 years ago to today. Look at the computing power on your desk top and compare it to 5 yeas ago much less 10 or 15 years.

Finding more oil is not going to help anyone or anything. Getting rid of the oil companies and investing in clean power is what will save us.

If you would click the link, I provided, and "click" the links in that article. THE ANSWERS ARE THERE. LQQK FURTHER UP THIS POST.

1.) Wind, solar, Nuclear do nothing for TRANSPORTATION. There is NO replacement for JET-A, (There are extenders though- 50/50 mix). We in the US have passed peak already for Natural Gas, and Coal (Gas to Liquids), will be in decline also. The Oil in the Canadian Oil Sands in Alberta, is a lower grade Oil, it has to be mixed with present stock...

CLICK THE LINK....., THERE IS MORE INFORMATION THAT THIS....., YOU WANT, I WILL POST...

 

[Garfield1966]

If you would click the link, I provided, and "click" the links in that article. THE ANSWERS ARE THERE. LQQK FURTHER UP THIS POST.

1.) Wind, solar, Nuclear do nothing for TRANSPORTATION. There is NO replacement for JET-A, (There are extenders though- 50/50 mix). We in the US have passed peak already for Natural Gas, and Coal (Gas to Liquids), will be in decline also. The Oil in the Canadian Oil Sands in Alberta, is a lower grade Oil, it has to be mixed with present stock...

CLICK THE LINK....., THERE IS MORE INFORMATION THAT THIS....., YOU WANT, I WILL POST...

So if the electric car were advanced with solar panels to charge them, that would not reduce the oil usage? If solar panels were advanced and put on houses to power them, that would not reduce coal and Natural gas usage? If the rail lines were electrified and we used solar/wind/hydro to power the rail lines that would not reduce oil usage?

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

UH!?!?! Bears, perhaps you should convert that to the price per GALLON, rather than the price per LITRE!!! The lowest in bufallo is $3.12 per GALLON. Do the conversion and I think you might find that you just completely negated your argument. (i.e., i can almost guarantee you that the Canadian price is more than $3.12 per GALLON).

You still standby your statement that half of Buffalo NY is getting gas in Canada this morning???????



Maybe that is why they are paying more across the river.




Your patience will be tested. You are going to have to wait a while because I have no idea what you are even asking! Does anyone else? (see your question again below, and maybe rephrase)
V
V
V



?!?!?!?!?!? :wacko:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Lily,

First I stand corrected on the litre/gallon mistake....MY BAD


Now, My question to you, is that "I THINK" you said earlier, that due to Capitalism/What The MARKET will Bear etc., that if you are a gasoline consumer, that "YOU UNDERSTAND", when the attendant says..."Lily, your total is..$75(SUV)...$50(full size auto).......$30(compact), to fill er' up.

 

[American Air Surf]

So if the electric car were advanced with solar panels to charge them, that would not reduce the oil usage? If solar panels were advanced and put on houses to power them, that would not reduce coal and Natural gas usage? If the rail lines were electrified and we used solar/wind/hydro to power the rail lines that would not reduce oil usage?

Well, LQQKS like I am going to have to spoon feed you. This is the Hirsch Report- To to page 37 (VI. MITIGATION OPTIONS AND ISSUES)

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/other...eaking_NETL.pdf

Your answers will be there- No More spoon feeding :blink:

 

[American Air Surf]

Who here believes that the oil companies are going to invest in technology that will reduce or eventually eliminate their company? The R&D they are doing is either to figure out whats out there so they an buy the patents and for PR.

The tax breaks should be rescinded and money should be given out like the private firm did for the "X" prize for the first space flight by a private enterprise. The government could also be giving research grants to various universities and groups for R&D. The fact that we put a man on the moon over 30 years ago yet we are still using an internal combustion engine that is over 100 years old just does not make any sense to me.

Here is the break down, straight from CNN

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/13/news/econo...sion=2008031317

 

[USAir757]

The funniest part of the CNN article by far:

Nonetheless, $40 billion - or any of the record profits seen by most oil companies over the last few years - is certainly a lot of money, and it has put Big Oil in lawmaker's cross hairs.

Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., has called the chief executives of the five biggest oil companies to testify on the industry's record profits on April 1st. Markey's office swears it's no April fool's joke.

It will be interesting to watch these guys testify on the hill... especially since the U.S. government has absolutely no leverage to change what these companies are doing. Big oil doesn't even need to justify their profits (even though they'll probably try just for PR sake). The Government wants to keep Big Oil happy so they don't crunch us and our economy even harder than they already are.

Yet, correct me if I'm wrong, but go back a few years to the 90s, didn't we give tax credits to people who would purchase SUV's and trucks from GM or Ford since those vehicles had the highest profit margins for the auto companies? Either way, we reep what we sow, folks. The SUV was the best thing ever when we were ignorant to fuel prices, now they have us where they want us, and we pay for our misjudgement!

The best thing we can do is continue to develop more efficient and affordable hybrids, and put more investment into alternative fuel sources. The only way we can hit big oil where it hurts is to decrease demand - on a large scale.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Lily,

First I stand corrected on the litre/gallon mistake....MY BAD


Now, My question to you, is that "I THINK" you said earlier, that due to Capitalism/What The MARKET will Bear etc., that if you are a gasoline consumer, that "YOU UNDERSTAND", when the attendant says..."Lily, your total is..$75(SUV)...$50(full size auto).......$30(compact), to fill er' up.

Bud,

I still don't really know what you are asking. Please forgive me if I am completely missing the obvious, but to me, this question still doesn't make much sense. But, as I attempt to make sense out of the question... Yes, I understand what the attendant is saying when he/she says: "Lily, your total is..$75(SUV)...$50(full size auto).......$30(compact), to fill er' up."

Am I reading the question right?

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Well, LQQKS like I am going to have to spoon feed you. This is the Hirsch Report- To to page 37 (VI. MITIGATION OPTIONS AND ISSUES)

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/other...eaking_NETL.pdf

Your answers will be there- No More spoon feeding :blink:

I just read your link. It actually supports what Garfield said about an advanced electric car.

1) The electric option is listed under MITIGATION OPTIONS. This suggests that it can mitigate the oil peaking problems.

2) The link states, "In the future, electricity storage may improve enough to win consumer acceptance of electric automobiles."

3) The theory of oil peaking suggests that gasoline prices will continue to rise as oil supply is depleted. The link states that "extremely high gasoline prices may cause some consumers to find electric automobiles more acceptable, especially for around-town use."

Yes, the link says the shift in public preference is unpredictable and that it would take years and lots of money to tranfer to electric; but it does offer it as a viable option.

Air Surf, why the defeatist attitude? You think we are so doomed that you don't even appear to want to make attempts at alternative energy sources.

 

[American Air Surf]

I just read your link. It actually supports what Garfield said about an advanced electric car.

1) The electric option is listed under MITIGATION OPTIONS. This suggests that it can mitigate the oil peaking problems.

2) The link states, "In the future, electricity storage may improve enough to win consumer acceptance of electric automobiles."

3) The theory of oil peaking suggests that gasoline prices will continue to rise as oil supply is depleted. The link states that "extremely high gasoline prices may cause some consumers to find electric automobiles more acceptable, especially for around-town use."

Yes, the link says the shift in public preference is unpredictable and that it would take years and lots of money to tranfer to electric; but it does offer it as a viable option.

Air Surf, why the defeatist attitude? You think we are so doomed that you don't even appear to want to make attempts at alternative energy sources.

Lilly... Read the entire article. The "key" here is this, "MITIGATION FROM PEAK OIL, IS A "MINIMUM" OF 10 YEARS, "OPTIMAL" 20 YEARS TO STEP AWAY FROM OIL, TO OTHER TECHNOLOGIES, WITHOUT- CATASTROPHIC ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES. YOU WOULD ALSO BE WELL TO READ THE OTHER REPORTS, ALONG THIS SAME LINE FROM THE (GAO) , IF PEAK OIL ARRIVES BY 2010, I WOULD SAY WE ARE OUT OF ROAD, WOULDN'T YOU?

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07283.pdf


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

(Although this is Wiki, The facts are true to form, It doesn't get any simplier than this....

Also, note "Oil Peak projections" Click the links for the info....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report

I would say we are screwed.......

 

[Gilding the Lily]

So, again, it is a viable option. Regardless of the time and effort, it is a viable option and it should be pursued, which is what Garfield is arguing.

This whole "it is hard, so lets just give up" attitude won't get anyone anywhere. You are right that we are currently heading down a bad path; it is hard to argue with that. Where I disagree with you is what to do about it. You seem to suggest that we should except certain doom and do nothing about it but wait.

All your links say the same thing: Peaking can occur in between now and 2040. DOE projects that the technologies could displace up to 34 percent of U.S. consumption in the 2025 through 2030 time frame, which is well within the possible peaking time frame. "If the peak occurs in the more distant future, however, alternative technologies have a greater potential to mitigate the consequences." In fact, one of the links even encourages the Secretary of Energy to advise Congress on likely cost-effective areas where the government could assist the private sector with development and adoption of alternative technologies.

(I am only repeating what YOUR links say!)

 

[jimntx]

American Air Surf, if you had ever read any of my other posts you would have discovered that we are on the same side. What I said about gas prices at the pump is true, and remains so to a great extent.

The truth is that yes we are screwed. As a friend of mine (who's gone to glory) once said, "The American people are totally incapable of denying themselves anything for any reason." She was a Lt. Commander in the US Navy during WWII. She said it during the first Arab oil embargo in 1973(?) when observing how people would sit in lines at the gas station for hours rather than park the car and ride the bus. She also mentioned that during WWII (yes, there are a few events in history that are before my time. I was born right at the end of the war.) people cheated like bandits with their ration stamps.

It was only 3 months ago that my sister decided that driving her Lincoln Navigator 80 miles round trip for tennis games 5 times a week was getting a little expensive; so, she bough a Honda Hybrid. (She did not, however, get rid of the Navigator. "We need it to tow our boat." The 30-ft. boat has been kept in a marina on the Alabama Gulf Coast for over two years and has only been out of the water to have the hull scraped in that time. )

 

[American Air Surf]

So, again, it is a viable option. Regardless of the time and effort, it is a viable option and it should be pursued, which is what Garfield is arguing.

This whole "it is hard, so lets just give up" attitude won't get anyone anywhere. You are right that we are currently heading down a bad path; it is hard to argue with that. Where I disagree with you is what to do about it. You seem to suggest that we should except certain doom and do nothing about it but wait.

All your links say the same thing: Peaking can occur in between now and 2040. DOE projects that the technologies could displace up to 34 percent of U.S. consumption in the 2025 through 2030 time frame, which is well within the possible peaking time frame. "If the peak occurs in the more distant future, however, alternative technologies have a greater potential to mitigate the consequences." In fact, one of the links even encourages the Secretary of Energy to advise Congress on likely cost-effective areas where the government could assist the private sector with development and adoption of alternative technologies.

(I am only repeating what YOUR links say!)

There are a few key points you are missing "The Super-Giant Oil Fields".. So..., sit back, relax, click on these links(s) (Microsoft Media Player), or which ever you prefer.. Start from the bottom, and work up. This should help, also reading "Twilight-in-The-Desert" by Mr. Simmons, would be a plus !

www.financialsense.com/Experts/2007/Simmons.html

 

[Gilding the Lily]

There are a few key points you are missing "The Super-Giant Oil Fields".. So..., sit back, relax, click on these links(s) (Microsoft Media Player), or which ever you prefer.. Start from the bottom, and work up. This should help, also reading "Twilight-in-The-Desert" by Mr. Simmons, would be a plus !

www.financialsense.com/Experts/2007/Simmons.html

I beg to differ. You are missing a few key points. In EVERY link you post, they all say that alternative fuel sources are possible, and all appear to encourage the development of alternative fuel sources. YOUR above link has this gem: "So if we basically end up having very high oil prices and we unleash the biggest wave of technology we’ve ever done, to try to invest in some sustainable biofuels and some forms of energy that actually scale, it’s possible over the next five to seven years that we actually open the door to some forms of energy." (notice the shorter time frame?)

Here is another gem from YOUR link: "Go on an R&D program the likes of which we’ve never done to create some new forms of energy."

Yet everytime I show you in YOUR OWN links that they all suggest viable options, you post another link in an attempt to discredit them. Unfortunately, you are only discrediting yourself by arguing that alternative fuel sources are not viable.

Keep your defeatist attitude and go ahead and post some more links...

 

[American Air Surf]

I beg to differ. You are missing a few key points. In EVERY link you post, they all say that alternative fuel sources are possible, and all appear to encourage the development of alternative fuel sources. YOUR above link has this gem: "So if we basically end up having very high oil prices and we unleash the biggest wave of technology we’ve ever done, to try to invest in some sustainable biofuels and some forms of energy that actually scale, it’s possible over the next five to seven years that we actually open the door to some forms of energy." (notice the shorter time frame?)

Here is another gem from YOUR link: "Go on an R&D program the likes of which we’ve never done to create some new forms of energy."

Yet everytime I show you in YOUR OWN links that they all suggest viable options, you post another link in an attempt to discredit them. Unfortunately, you are only discrediting yourself by arguing that alternative fuel sources are not viable.

Keep your defeatist attitude and go ahead and post some more links...

I am not a defeatist, I wish to be an optomist, and a realist. Everything I have posted is true to form and factual. It is not that alternatives, cannot make a difference, they can. But the question is- If Peak Oil occured in 2005 (as production figures indicate), or if it occurs in 2010, or a "bit" thereafter. Is there time, to mitigate? This link (.pdf) will step you through production, depletion, alternatives, and the "gap" between demand, all alternatives, and Oil

http://www.energyfiles.com/presentationfil...Apr%202007).pdf

Additionally, articles by National Geographic- The End of Cheap Oil- June/2004

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406...ure5/index.html

and National Geographic- After Oil, Powering the Future- August/2005

and The Oil Poster....(Click to Enlarge)

http://www.oilposter.org/index.html

AND, Depletion Atlas, and date of Peak Production...


http://www.davidstrahan.com/map.html

My personal view, is we are late to the game, in the 11th inning, and time is of the essence. I seriously doubt we have until 2030. CERA's, USGA, numbers do not add up. IF Saudi-Arabia as the "Swing Producer" could produce more, I believe they would, but their fields are now in decline.....as is the North Sea, Prudo Bay, Mexico (Cantarelle). One third of the oil produced, comes from the Super-Giant-Fields, that were found almost 50 years ago, (Ghawar, the largest, 1948), are now in decline, and the number of Oil fields to replace their decline, will be very, very hard.....

 

[American Air Surf]

American Air Surf, if you had ever read any of my other posts you would have discovered that we are on the same side. What I said about gas prices at the pump is true, and remains so to a great extent.

The truth is that yes we are screwed. As a friend of mine (who's gone to glory) once said, "The American people are totally incapable of denying themselves anything for any reason." She was a Lt. Commander in the US Navy during WWII. She said it during the first Arab oil embargo in 1973(?) when observing how people would sit in lines at the gas station for hours rather than park the car and ride the bus. She also mentioned that during WWII (yes, there are a few events in history that are before my time. I was born right at the end of the war.) people cheated like bandits with their ration stamps.

It was only 3 months ago that my sister decided that driving her Lincoln Navigator 80 miles round trip for tennis games 5 times a week was getting a little expensive; so, she bough a Honda Hybrid. (She did not, however, get rid of the Navigator. "We need it to tow our boat." The 30-ft. boat has been kept in a marina on the Alabama Gulf Coast for over two years and has only been out of the water to have the hull scraped in that time. )

Ok... The thing that most people should remember is, don't expect our government, to do anything until, it absolutely has too. This is proven in Pearl Harbor, Katrina/Rita, etc.., If anybody can F**k somthing up, it will be them, and we the populace will pay the price, socialize the cost(s) just like with the current Credit/Liquidity crunch, subprime-housing mess. That is why, the U.S. will be caught short in Peak Oil, and it will be here much sooner than most people think- The pain has just begun, enjoy the ride... 😱