Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Peak Oil News

Discussion in 'Preparedness & Survival' started by Lord Kimbote, Feb 8, 2011.

  1. Lord Kimbote

    Lord Kimbote Ellensburg Member

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    1
  2. willseeker

    willseeker N. Portland. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,570
    Likes Received:
    383
    Yes. it's true. But some are relegating "Peak Oil" to the same bone pile as "Climate Change". Both of these phenomena are happening and they're happening slowly.

    Pick up a copy of J. H. Kunstlers' book "The Long Emergency". He's against conspiracy theories, well, that's what he says, and gives a credible narrative on "Peak Oil".

    Don't be fooled by those that proclaim these events to be conspiracies...be prepared.

    Will
     
  3. Just Jim

    Just Jim Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,828
    Likes Received:
    6,266
    Look around you and realize your entire standard of living is due to oil.

    jj
     
  4. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    And the green movement is using it against you.
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Battle Ground Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    154
    There is enough oil, it is the commoditites market that make prices high by speculating what might or might not happen. I think the price increase is due to BP and a combination of the middle east and Egypt right now and the uncertainty.

    Scott
     
  6. OPAWY

    OPAWY NorthCentral Wyoming Member

    Messages:
    125
    Likes Received:
    2
    Scott, I agree. nothing magical about it.
     
  7. EZLivin

    EZLivin SW of PDX Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,164
    Likes Received:
    298
    Not enough "cheap oil." Speculation is responsible for short-term price swings only. Fundamentals are responsible for long-term trends (price trendline). Major oil fields are depleting. The cost of finding oil, and extracting it is a heckuva lot more than $80 per barrel these days. Asian and developing world demand is overwhelming supply (which drives prices up). Depreciating $US will contribute to higher $US cost of crude. The so-called "major oil companies" produce about 18% of the world's crude. They must purchase the remainder from the national oil companies.

    Americans are going to be paying a lot more for oil a couple of years for now, and the reason will not be "speculators."
     
  8. Decker

    Decker My house Active Member

    Messages:
    833
    Likes Received:
    110
    Agreed.

    Natural Gas is an environmentally costly option and shell oil isn't much better. Coal... meh, again, sucks for the environment. But unless we all want to go back to 1890's living...
     
  9. MikeE

    MikeE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Likes Received:
    500
    Right! The movement that tries to promote energy conservation and alternatives like solar and wind power is responsible for using up the cheap oil. Francis Fox Piven planned the whole thing an Al Gore is Satan.
     
  10. willseeker

    willseeker N. Portland. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,570
    Likes Received:
    383
    Well said, Jim.:thumbup:

    Everything arounds us. That includes not just autos and warm homes, it's the food we eat, clothes, etc...

    Will
     
  11. trainsktg

    trainsktg Portland OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,663
    Likes Received:
    798
    About 5 in 6 people today owe their very existence to oil.

    Keith
     
  12. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    Smartazz, sarcastic answers don't help Mike.
    The more the enviro movement shuts down domestic oil and gas exploration and production, the more oil and gas(NG) we import the more we put our way of life and economy at risk.
    Not to mention lining the pockets of despots in the middle east, and S. America.

    But if that's okay with your socialist side, just admit it!
    .
    I think solar and wind would be wonderful where applicable,... But for practical purposes as a mobile energy source, like gas and diesel are, they aren't suitable by ANY means.
    Get a clue mikey!

    Mobile, transportable energy sources need to produce large amounts of energy per pound, and/or cu-ft., and must be cost effective to produce.
    That means even hydrogen doesn't qualify, and won't until generation, storage and transfer methods are developed.

    We have enough petroleum in North America to run Canada and the U.S. for at LEAST another 100-200 years.
    But the green movement continually lobbies against it, and yes, Al Gore has a lot to do with that with his railing against CO2.
    FF Pliven, not so much. She's just an idiotic socialist that hates free markets and demonizes profits.

    Any other stupid/silly statements to make, or questions you want answers to?
     
  13. MikeE

    MikeE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Likes Received:
    500
    I do agree that oil is the most energy dense fuel we have and we are screwed without it. I also believe that climate change is very real and all you would need to do is talk to Bolivians or people in Nepal who depend on glaciers for their water to become convinced that a s...t storm is coming.
    It is very unlikely that we have 200 years of cheap oil in CONUS, or in the Middle East for that matter. Since the Pentagon has been strategizing about Peak Oil, I would say it's a very widespread concern/fear/panic.
    As an actual socialist (unlike the phony Obama kind), I think we need to declare energy conservation a matter of national security and begin to nationalize the oil industry, and make all utilities public utility districts. All profit to go to exploration/ tech/research and alternative energy. Rebuilding the national train system would also get top priority. Retrofiting buildings, replacing inefficient motors. Basically a national effort on the scale of WW2 mobilization.
    The alternative is to continue to turn denial into a national art-form until, like the financial crash, it's too late.
     
  14. Scott

    Scott Battle Ground Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    154
    Making the oil industry and public utilities government entities would be great. How many government agencies run very effectively? I think none.

    If we are going to run out of oil how do you figure that? First of all OPEC gives that information and they also don't diclose all of it. You should check into that. There is more oil than people think.
     
  15. MikeE

    MikeE Portland Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,092
    Likes Received:
    500
    For a good look at the wonderful efficiency of the for-profit oil industry, check out this incredible article - The Last Hours of the Deepwater Horizon in the NYT (and BTW, just why were they out exploring in those deep waters if easily accessed oil was so plentiful?):
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/us/26spill.html
     
  16. Sasquatchvnv

    Sasquatchvnv Port Orchard Active Member

    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    171
    I find nothing in this statement to disagree with... I would have given Richard Cloward a mention.
     
  17. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    Of course you would.
    All you socialistic types think violence and civil disobedience are great, until you, or one of your political favorites are the target.(see Rep. Giffords discussions)

    Then your politicos want to disarm everyone, and you come here and do your apologist thing, or start stupid arguments using terms like redneck/racism against those that you disagree with, and are armed.

    The truth of the matter is you refuse to acknowledge the success of free markets, all they do for innovation, and their benefit to the societies that live under them.
    Then there is the repeated failures of socialism, and the repression of people and ideas that come with it, that you embrace, failing to acknowledge the downside.

    In addition, you can't seem to grasp the "cause and effect" principle where excessive governmental regulation has harmed the nation's economy, and therefore the people of an otherwise free nation.
    Then you stand back and say things like:
    "See(!) the government needs to provide for the people,"...
    Failing to believe that, if left alone, we could provide for ourselves. Apparently you can't, so you think NO ONE can.

    So, since Obama doesn't meet your criteria as a socialist, who are you going to vote for in 2012? Hugo Chavez?
     
  18. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    They were exploring and recovering in the GoM because of restrictions and costly regulations on land based resources.

    Once again, your "cause and effect" circuits are either flawed, or non-existent.

    What you guys don't realize is when it comes to oil, the entire world operates on free market principles. Your idea that the dotgov should step in and nationalize the industry denies the FACT that the free market (industry) is capable of supplying our needs, as it has so far.
    You seem to think that the U.S. could survive the (rest of the) world's free oil market demands, by using the dotgov as our purchasing agent and distribution system. (Where, pray tell is the evidence of that?!?)
    Thereby subjecting our tax rates to the rest of the world and their demand for oil.
    You really believe that's a good thing?!?
    Or are you proposing to dictate that the rest of the world follow suit?
    (all the while decrying Bush's efforts at "nation building")


    You "gloom and doomers" have been peddling this crapola since the embargo of the '70s.

    Reality is, that if we were to dump just 20% of our oil resources (or even threatened to) on the market, prices would plummet, as other suppliers adjusted prices and output in their efforts to compete for revenues.

    Problem solved. But I doubt your faux socialist (corporatist) democrat politicos would dare defy their masters by doing that.
     
  19. willseeker

    willseeker N. Portland. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,570
    Likes Received:
    383
    Let's get back to the OPs original subject matter. You want to rail politically, go to NW Liberty.com.

    The definition of peak oil states that we have used up 50% of all the oil in the ground. Now whether you agree with this or not, is up to you. That means that there's still 50% left in the ground.

    Jamie, when you make a statement like, "we have enough petroleum to in No. America to run Ca. and the US for 100 to 200 years?" You may be refering to the Bakkan Oil fields? I'm not sure what you mean.

    Yes, the Bakkan fields have oil but it's locked up in shale and sand and would be prohibitively expensive to refine. You have to understand that when it takes close to a barrel of fuel to extract a barrel of fuel...Why do you think we aren't there already.

    The next 50 % left in the ground is going to cost a lot more to get. In 1859 we found oil in Pennsylvania (this was the beginning), then Oklahoma, Texas...but these were easy oil fiels to drill. AND NOW THEY'RE GONE. Now we're in deep sea exploration at a huge cost.

    This country peaked in 1973. Then came the North Slope of AK. and the North Sea oil. This gave our country a 20 year respite from reliance on foreign oil. But both of these
    have peaked and we are now beholden to The Saudis, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria and the list goes on ad naseum.

    I believe we'll see $5 to $8 a gallon of gas here in the near future. If we can get it.

    Happy Motoring guys.
    will
     
  20. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5 Western OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,192
    Likes Received:
    4,380
    Will, if we opened the arctic refuge to drilling/production, there is evidence that prices would drop to year 2000 levels within 12 months.
    If we built the infrastructure to run just 20% of our cars on natural gas, prices would likely drop even lower.

    The issue in question is the green paranoia over carbon, and environmental degradation. Until we get past that, we will pay, and the economy will stumble.
    We can't even build new, large scale refinery facilities without billion$ in environmental impact $tatement$ and legal fee$.
    And if your prediction of price is accurate (whether due to dollar devaluation or oil shortage) we are screwed.
    Welcome to third world America, to the benefit of corporatists and their benefactors.