An oil crash???

[Wino]

I love when guys stumble across the peak oil websites.

If they get all concerned, it just means they are about 35 or younger and don't remember the 70s. Or else they were too busy dropping "Tuning In, Turning on, and Dropping out" to pay attention to what was going on around them.

There were even cartoons on the sat morning TV as commercials to get us to conserve.

Peak oil has been predicted within the next 5 years every year since 1970. Just because oil costs go up does not mean we have reached the peak. Infact quite the contrary. The higher oil prices are the more oil there is because now oil that was uneconomical at 20 dollars a barrel is commerically viable at 50 dollars a barrel. (Samething for alternative fuels btw)

Face it we will NEVER run out of oil. It will reach a price where other things become more cost effective, and that is EXACTLY how the market should work.

To quote the Saudi's, (and I hate them btw) "The stone age didn't end because we ran out of rocks." And I will add that it didn't end with big government subsidies for research either. Just like the Bronze age and the Iron age, the economics of something better caused the end of Stone, Bronze, and Iron ages...

Cheers
Wino

 

[jetflyer]

You guys are something else,

First I support Bush. I never said I didn't.

Second, I present information to you guys and you don't read it. They're just "SOME ARTICLEs" to you. You guys do me a favor before you address me again and read what this member of Congress said to the House. If you don't listen and read any of the information I give you, maybe you'll listen to a Congressman.

READ THIS TRANSCRIPT from one of the most CONSERVATIVE Congressman in the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THIS SPEECH was given by Maryland
Congressman ROSCOE BARTLETT to the HOUSE on MAY 3, 2005 about PEAK OIL:

http://www.energybulletin.net/5948.html

It's a great presentation and has many, many charts, graphs, and other visuals to help support his arguments.

Jet
p.s. I looked into futures, you have to trade 1000 barrels of oil at a time! ($60,000!) I can't afford that, lol. I'm just an F.O. I guess my energy and precious metal mutual funds are going to be all I can do for now. I'm also looking into some individual stocks.

 

[Wino]

I got news for you,
I have read what you posted.

You are just too young to know any better.

Those charts are and sights are NOTHING compared to the charts, scientists, and predictions of doom that they used to implement the 50 mph speed limit nation wide in the 70s.

Yes you read that right the speed limit was 50 mph. Then they raised it to 55 in the late 70s, then in the 90s they raised it to 65 in some places and it went even higher since then.

Its not news, and you have been hoodwinked.


And you know what? ITs all the same adgenda. Make the car's less apealing and people will flock to the trains (Yeah right...) Trains aren't green, contrary to popular belief, but they are VERY easy to controll. Then people live where WE want em to live and do what WE want em to do...



Cheers
Wino

PS if you are SURE about your predicitons there are VERY many ways to trade on that knowledge without buying futures. Buy drilling stocks for example.

PPS. Edited to add
If you are really worried you should be looking at these guys http://www.changingworldtech.com/what/index.asp .

You will notice that with oil at 30 dollars a barrel this technology was a net loss. Above 35 or so and its PROFITABLE. IF oil will stay that high then these guys will be everywhere. Get oil prices high enough on a sustained period and these guys will be mining the old landfills. Then all recycling you did in the 90s will come back and haunt us because we will have reduced our reserves.

 

[Traderd]

You guys are something else,

First I support Bush. I never said I didn't.

Second, I present information to you guys and you don't read it. They're just "SOME ARTICLEs" to you. You guys do me a favor before you address me again and read what this member of Congress said to the House. If you don't listen and read any of the information I give you, maybe you'll listen to a Congressman.

READ THIS TRANSCRIPT from one of the most CONSERVATIVE Congressman in the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THIS SPEECH was given by Maryland
Congressman ROSCOE BARTLETT to the HOUSE on MAY 3, 2005 about PEAK OIL:

http://www.energybulletin.net/5948.html

It's a great presentation and has many, many charts, graphs, and other visuals to help support his arguments.

Jet
p.s. I looked into futures, you have to trade 1000 barrels of oil at a time! ($60,000!) I can't afford that, lol. I'm just an F.O. I guess my energy and precious metal mutual funds are going to be all I can do for now. I'm also looking into some individual stocks.

Jet,

The fact that you can't afford a $60K contract and actually think someone should "LISTEN TO A CONGRESSMAN" speaks volumes of your overall life experience. Do some real research. Find out who has what to gain from what is being said and you'll come out way ahead. Conservative or Liberal, there is always an interst of some kind behind the statements. I am quite the conservative, but when Mr. Dansforth spoke to limiting motorcycles to 100 HP several years ago, I could still call BS.

And by the way, I have been listening to politicians of all sorts since about 1972. Interesting that you claim "Bush lied" but then think we should "listen to a congressman". Be very careful with your money Jack, or someone will sell you magic seeds.

 

[skykid]

If you don't listen and read any of the information I give you, maybe you'll listen to a Congressman.

That statement is a sure-fire credibility loser. You might as well say Maybe you'll listen to Bozo the Clown.

 

[some_dude]

Most of those contracts are done on margin, meaning you don't need the $60,000, just 10% (or $6,000). If you are trading on margin you better be sure you are right, but it looks like you believe you are.

p.s. I looked into futures, you have to trade 1000 barrels of oil at a time! ($60,000!) I can't afford that, lol. I'm just an F.O. I guess my energy and precious metal mutual funds are going to be all I can do for now. I'm also looking into some individual stocks.

 

[klhoard]

.
.
.
Yeah, trading on margin, that's the ticket!!!. . . . .
.
.
.
You'll be just like all the pilots in my old squadron taking stock advice back in 1999 from one of our gunners. . . .
.
.
.

 

[ZOTAN]

Jet,

The most important thing you are forgetting about peak oil is that it is the MIDPOINT of global oil production. It means that we have only used HALF of the worlds oil supply. If oil follows a bell shaped curve, demand will also. When oil becomes to expensive to burn, we will switch to something else. Peak oil is a problem, but not as big as you are making it out to be. It seems like you, and a lot of other people believe everything they read on the internet.

Matt


By the was, this is my first post!

 

[jetflyer]

The U.S. doesn't have another Saudi Arabia to save it's arse this time, like we did when U.S. oil production reached its peak of 10million barrels per day in 1970 and has dropped to 5 million today. (Prudhoe Bay and the rest of Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico have only slowed the decline in the U.S.) The U.S. has never had a year over year increase in oil production since 1970, ever!! Only declines.
www.yubanet.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/8/15426

This is about to happen to the world. PEAK OIL.

The Canadian Oil Sands and the Alaska Wildlife Preserve are wonderful but will not save us unfortunately.


The U.S. uses 24 million barrels of oil/day. The world uses about 83mb+/- per day NOW. Exxon/Mobil (referenced in above post) has said non-opec countries will peak within 5 years. The reason they don't mention OPEC is because no information is released from them. All of the OPEC countries except Saudi Arabia have said they're pumping at full tilt though.

Demand is supposed to reach 86 million barrels per day(3 million barrels more than now) in the 4th quarter. Every oil producing country except Saudi Arabia has said they are producing at full capacity. If Saudi Arabia can't produce the extra than we're in trouble in the short-term. 5 Saudi OIL FIELDS that are over 50 years old produce over 80% of their oil. These fields are tired and ripe for decline and the Saudi's are pumping close NOW at their historic extraction rates. When you increase extraction in a field you actually can reduce the total amount that can ultimately be pulled out of the ground. The Saudi's will not be able to bring the extra capacity online. Ghawar their biggest field is already experiencing problems. It produces over 60% of their oil!!

The oil sands are going to be a WONDERFUL THING. They will help but only cushion really.

The oil sands aren't like regular oil fields. You have to MINE the stuff. You can't just open the tap like on an oil well.

Canadian Oil Sands: 2015 projection is for 2.2 MILLION BARRELS per day. (THIS WILL BARELY COVER THE SHORTFALL THIS YEAR IN THE 4TH QUARTER!!)Let's say they double that to 4.4 Mb/d. That could be done with a ton of investment. There also has to be the plants created to convert the oil sands into usable liquids and tons of natural gas are needed which is in VERY SHORT supply in North America right now. Let's hope they can do even more that 4.4 MBD!! We're gonna need it.

4.4mbd is pretty good, but will not outpace the depletion as we're on the BACKSIDE OF HUBBERT's PEAK and will only cushion the fall. We need to extract every bit out, don't get me wrong.

The Alaska Wildlife Reserve is going to be a WONDERFUL THING. KILL EVERY MOOSE IF WE MUST! We're gonna need that oil. This too will be even less of a cushion to peak oil unfortunately.

The first drops of oil aren't expected to come out until 2015. There will only be 1 million barrels per day for 25 years. THAT'S IT UNFORTUNATELY! Also unfortunately the US uses 24 million barrels per day. So if we could yank all the oil out in one year, and use it all ourselves, it would be gone in one year.

HAS ANYONE MENTIONED DEMAND FROM CHINA AND INDIA ARE INCREASING??

We're in a lot of trouble. The world needs to stop being skeptical like members of this board, READ THE STONE COLD FACTS, and wake up or we're gonna be in a LOT MORE TROUBLE.

DISCOVERIES OF OIL are almost NIL right now and have been declining severely to almost nothing in the last couple decades. There's not going to be some NEW FIND of oil.

I hope the US takes actions to begin liquefying coal now. We're gonna need to really soon. We unfortunately don't have enough facilities to create the massive amounts that are going to be needed soon, built yet. We also are going to have to begin mining the coal at much, much higher rates. Let's do this yesterday. Yes it's going to make for a dirty world, but it will help us bridge the gap to renewables. Hopefully the damage to the environment won't be too high.

Websites for PEAK OIL introduction:
www.yubanet.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/8/15426
and
www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
and here is a recent Associated press article:
http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?cat=news&referrer=welcome&id=20050528/4297ecc0_3421_1334520050528-950973917
Chat group dedicated to peak oil discussion:
www.peakoil.com

Good luck to you all,
Jet

 

[jetflyer]

Zotan,

Let's just hope, since we don't have all these needed alternatives yet, the damage to the economy doesn't become too great.

6 of the last 7 recessions occured with oil price spikes.

Let's hope our economy doesn't burn too much from these high oil prices that are going to only get higher each year.

To replace the amount of oil we use today is going to be a phenomenal thing. We use the equivalent of 3,528,000,000 gallons a day of gas a day on this planet. (84 million barrels per day which is the YEARLY average).

Uh, we need to hurry, and probably need the government to enact a Manhattan Project-like like approach to overcome the 2-5% declines predicted after peak.

Jet

 

[ZOTAN]

3,528,000,000 gallons a day of gas a day on this planet. (84 million barrels per day).

Transportations account for 90% of our oil usage. That number could probably be cut in half if we used more fuel efficient cars. If we (the US) raised the fuel efficiency on every car by just 1mpg, we could save double the amount of oil the ANWR would be able to put out in the same year. If we raised the fuel efficiency on our cars by just 7mpg, we could stop importing oil from the Middle East. Sucking more of the black goo out of the ground isnt going to help us; like you keep saying, its going to run out one day. We need to have more fuel efficient cars. Hybrids help, but to many IDIOTS drive gas guzzling SUV's down the road. Gas is over 5 dollars a galloon in Europe, yet their economies aren't crumbling. They drive cars just like us (much smaller ones though), but they also have better forms of mass transportation. We have built massive sub divisions in the US without building forms of mass transportation to support them. We get everwhere in cars, and thats gonig to have to change if we dont want any of the economic problems that come with peak oil.

 

[jetflyer]

Thank god our government is right on this and enacting HIGHER FUEL EFFICIENCY standards.

Jet

 

[jetflyer]

If you don't think inflation will be a problem consider this:

Borrowed from www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

Petrochemicals are key components to much more than just the gas in your car. As geologist Dale Allen Pfeiffer points out in his article entitled, "Eating Fossil Fuels," approximately 10 calories of fossil fuels are required to produce every 1 calorie of food eaten in the US.

The size of this ratio stems from the fact that every step of modern food production is fossil fuel and petrochemical powered:

1. Pesticides are made from oil;

2. Commercial fertilizers are made from ammonia, which is
made from natural gas, which will peak about 10 years
after oil peaks;


3. Farming implements such as tractors and trailers are
constructed and powered using oil;

4. Food storage systems such as refrigerators are
manufactured in oil-powered plants, distributed across
oil-powered transportation networks and usually run on
electricity, which most often comes from natural gas or
coal;

5. In the US, the average piece of food is transported
almost 1,500 miles before it gets to your plate. In
Canada, the average piece of food is transported 5,000
miles from where it is produced to where it is consumed.


In short, people gobble oil like two-legged SUVs.


It's not just transportation and agriculture that are entirely dependent on abundant, cheap oil. Modern medicine, water distribution, and national defense are each entirely powered by oil and petroleum derived chemicals.

In addition to transportation, food, water, and modern medicine, mass quantities of oil are required for all plastics, all computers and all high-tech devices.


Some specific examples may help illustrate the degree to which our technological base is dependent on fossil fuels:


1. The construction of an average car consumes the energy
equivalent of approximately 27 barrels (1,142 gallons) of
oil. Ultimately, the construction of a car will consume an
amount of fossil fuels equivalent to twice the car’s
final weight.



2. The production of one gram of microchips consumes 630
grams of fossil fuels. According to the American Chemical
Society, the construction of single 32 megabyte DRAM
chip requires 3.5 pounds of fossil fuels in addition to 70.5
pounds of water.



3. The construction of the average desktop computer
consumes ten times its weight in fossil fuels.



4. The Environmental Literacy Council tells us that due to
the "purity and sophistication of materials (needed for) a
microchip, . . . the energy used in producing nine or ten
computers is enough to produce an automobile."


When considering the role of oil in the production of modern technology, remember that most alternative systems of energy — including solar panels/solar-nanotechnology, windmills, hydrogen fuel cells, biodiesel production facilities, nuclear power plants, etc. — rely on sophisticated technology.


In fact, all electrical devices make use of silver, copper, and/or platinum, each of which is discovered, extracted, transported, and fashioned using oil-powered machinery. For instance, in his book, The Lean Years: Politics of Scarcity, author Richard J. Barnet writes:


To produce a ton of copper requires 112 million BTU's or the
equivalent of 17.8 barrels of oil. The energy cost component
of aluminum is twenty times higher.

Nuclear energy requires uranium, which is also discovered, extracted, and transported using oil-powered machinery.

Most of the feedstock (soybeans, corn) for biofuels such as biodiesel and ethanol are grown using the high-tech, oil-powered industrial methods of agriculture described above.

In short, the so called "alternatives" to oil are actually "derivatives" of oil. Without an abundant and reliable supply of oil, we have no way of scaling these alternatives to the degree necessary to power the modern world.

(Note: alternatives to oil are discussed in depth on Page Two)

Read more at www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

Jet

 

[jetflyer]

Take what you read from MATT SAVINAR at
www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
with a grain of salt.

I think he's a person that's genuinely scared and trying to get people to act, but I don't think things will get as bad as he says.

He does present a convincing argument though. He also backs every single thing up with REFERENCES that can be seen from LINKS attached right there. Especially look at the links to just a couple experts from other fields talking about Peak oil that can be found in the first couple paragraphs.

If you look at his site, explore the links as well, and it will be a good first step for you to learn more.

Jet

 

[ZOTAN]

www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net is a very, very bad source. Its written by an unemployed legal clerk. He likes to believe that peak oil is the end of the world, and that there is no hope for mankind. Humans are a pretty creative bunch and we will find a way out of this problem; how big or small it may be.

What you quoted from him isnt that big of a problem. Like I was saying earlier, when oil becomes to expensive to burn we will switch to something else. The only reason fossil fuels power our food supply is because it is cheap and easy to get a hold of.

EDIT: Jet- If you say we should take what we read from Savinar with a grain of salt, why do you always reference him? Should we take what you say with a grain of salt also? Savinar has facts and information, but he presents them in a way that makes the story completetly different than what it actually is.

 

[klhoard]

.
.
.
Well, I guess the end in near. . .
.
.
.
And you heard it right here on FlightInfo.com, folks!!!
.
.
.
Now how are we going to fix this Y3K thing? Did you hear that all of the world's computers are going to crash on midnight on January 1, 3000??
.
.
.

 

[ZOTAN]

.
Now how are we going to fix this Y3K thing? Did you hear that all of the world's computers are going to crash on midnight on January 1, 3000??

I heard about Y3k just a few weeks ago on www.lifeafterthecomputercrash.net. Its right up there on my priority list along with peak oil.

 

[jetflyer]

The best description of what peak oil is, comes from this site below. It does the best job of just describing peak oil. He also doesn't fill you full of all the theoretical problems that Matt Savinar from www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net guesses we will have to face.


Here is the best description:
www.yubanet.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/8/15426

Jet

 

[jetflyer]

Zotan,

I present it because his site actually lets people know there is a problem. I haven't found another site yet that presents and puts together such a convincing argument about the difficulties there will be with peak oil production. He also has many facts in his presentation that are undeniable. He links everything. The only problem with him is he thinks it is impossible to survive Peak Oil as a society. That is complete BS and is why I warn people about that.

I believe if we come together as a society and make sacrifices, put trillions into getting the new technologies to the people, we will be ok after years of troubling times.

First people have to stop DENYING there is even a problem. Then we can discuss how to fix it.

It's also good for people to see the extremes of every issue and then decide where they fall.

Most people the last 10-15 years have only had "WE HAVE ENOUGH OIL TO LAST OUR LIFETIME" BS fed to them.

"As the price goes up, we'll get the expensive oil" --This will slow the decline after peak or CAUSE A PLATEAU at the top, but the decline in oil is going to happen. It's a geological inevitability.

This is a finite resource. Peak oil will happen. It's a MATTER OF WHEN, NOT IF.

Most people don't even know there's a problem.

The only way we as a society are going to overcome the problems is by acting very soon. The more people that see there is a problem, the better our chances of not having the "END OF THE WORLD" like Matt Savinar thinks is going to happen.

Jet

 

[jimcav]

Hey zotan I guess Im an IDIOT because I drive an suv. This according to you. Grow up dude. I drive a Tahoe because I like the ride and I would have a very hard time fitting my wife and 3 kids and black lab in a Honda hybrid. And oh yeah, I can afford it. If you feel like a do gooder by advocating that everyone should drive a pregnant rollerskate then God bless you, but in the meantime stop referring to suv drivers as idiots. We're not as dumb as you think. I would love to see some tree hugger give me this holier than thou attitude to my face ,like at the gas station . Strange enough though it never happens. It sure would be fun if it did.