sundevil777 102 #51 February 7, 2007 Quotethe point is that even if we did find massive new oil deposits or opened up restricted areas it would do nothing satiate our exponential demand. I understand and agree with the point, I just think it is a much longer term problem than stated. I agree with the goal of weaning ourselves from oil, and I think that imposing an oil boycott against unfriendly nations would have the effect of raising the price, and helping to bring about alternatives.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #52 February 7, 2007 QuoteI'm not assuming that. If oil made from the sands in Canada is price competitive, then that is the bottom line, unless they are being subsidized to create the final product. See, you're assuming.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #53 February 7, 2007 Rabbits!Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #54 February 7, 2007 QuoteRabbits! Yeah, There's some of those in Northern Alberta too.. Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #55 February 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteRabbits! Yeah, There's some of those in Northern Alberta too.. What colour*? *Canadian Spelling.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #56 February 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteI'm not assuming that. If oil made from the sands in Canada is price competitive, then that is the bottom line, unless they are being subsidized to create the final product. See, you're assuming. I think not. I did not assume they are free from subsidy. I don't know if oil from the oil sands is competitive. Do you have more info about subsidies to the process/companies?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #57 February 7, 2007 >If oil is still being used in mass quantities, then being the last to have >the last bit of it won't matter much, because it will all be gone very soon >anyway. So the last battle of a war doesn't matter? Currently all militaries run on oil, with very few exceptions (nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers.) If we had 50 years we could convert to, say, nuclear-RTG, methane or syngas. If we had 10 years and the political will to do so, we could convert as well. Unfortunately neither is true. >Your scenario is only worth considering if there was, and will be, >nothing else to replace oil. There are plenty of things that will replace oil eventually. We have proven to be very shortsighted about such things, and although I hope we get our heads out of our asses soon and start going after them, I very much doubt we will. It would take an effort the size of the Apollo Program to make them happen in ten years, and we'd much rather spend the money on wars. Other countries ARE going after them. They will be the ones who threaten us when our economy starts to collapse as cheap oil starts to run out. And again, at that point, I sure hope we have the domestic oil available to funnel to our military while we try to play catch-up and get other sources on-line. >Promising to leave Islamofacists alone is not likely to change their >stated goal of destroying western society . . . Who cares what they say? Are you in the habit of snapping to attention every time some idiot declares another jihad against the US? How about this - we defend the US against those who attack it. Al Qaeda attacks us, we destroy them. We don't use the opportunity to kick someone else's unrelated ass and let Bin Laden escape. >The ability of them to destroy our economy does not depend on their >ability to kill us, it is much more achievable than that. Correct. If they can get us mired in pointless unwinnable war after pointless unwinnable war, then they win in the end. That's how they beat the USSR in Afghanistan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jbanning 0 #58 February 7, 2007 Not everyone is an uneducated yahoo! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #59 February 7, 2007 QuoteIf oil is still being used in mass quantities, then being the last to have >the last bit of it won't matter much, because it will all be gone very soon >anyway. So the last battle of a war doesn't matter? I'm not at all concerned about your hypothetical of a last battle of a war using the last available oil in the world. That is a silly hypothetical, in my opinion. Quote>Promising to leave Islamofacists alone is not likely to change their >stated goal of destroying western society . . . Who cares what they say? Are you in the habit of snapping to attention every time some idiot declares another jihad against the US? How about this - we defend the US against those who attack it. Al Qaeda attacks us, we destroy them. We don't use the opportunity to kick someone else's unrelated ass and let Bin Laden escape. OK, so we agree that Al Qaeda is to be destroyed. Do you assert that we've accomplished that? I think Bush was correct in warning the rest of the world that if you assist Al Qaeda, then you will suffer a similar fate. A lot of political leaders from both major parties in the US thought that the overthrow of Saddam by military force was appropriate, not just Bush. Of course OBL escaping was bad, but that is a separate issue. If he had not escaped, would your opinion change about the Iraq war?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #60 February 7, 2007 >I'm not at all concerned about your hypothetical of a last battle of a > war using the last available oil in the world. That is a silly hypothetical, in > my opinion. 100 years ago, the idea of using atom bombs to end a war would have been a silly hypothetical, too. But less than 40 years later, those bombs killed 350,000 people. It doesn't matter what people think is silly. The facts here are that recoverable oil will run out, and that the world's militaries run on oil. Your "hypothetical" is that we will surely be smart enough to switch every humvee, F/A-18, and C-130 to nuclear power (or name your fuel of the future) before it becomes a problem. We will recognize a problem that might occur in 20 years and act swiftly and decisively to make the world a better, safer place for our children. I think it's safe to say that history does not support your hypothesis. Indeed, most conservatives are fighting tooth and nail so your hypothetical situation never comes to pass - and so far they have been fairly successful. >OK, so we agree that Al Qaeda is to be destroyed. Do you assert that >we've accomplished that? Not at all. They are growing stronger while we recruit for them in the deserts of Iraq, >I think Bush was correct in warning the rest of the world that if you >assist Al Qaeda, then you will suffer a similar fate. Nice message. But the reality is that Bush supports the man who created a sanctuary for them. That's the real message the world received loud and clear. If you pay lip service to the US, and you have nuclear weapons, Bush will support you even if you allow Bin Laden himself to live in your country. >If he had not escaped, would your opinion change about the Iraq war? Nope. I would have applauded the fact that we stayed in Afghanistan until the job was done, then hoped that we brought our troops back home after they had completed their mission. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #61 February 7, 2007 Quote >I'm not at all concerned about your hypothetical of a last battle of a > war using the last available oil in the world. That is a silly hypothetical, in > my opinion. 100 years ago, the idea of using atom bombs to end a war would have been a silly hypothetical, too. But less than 40 years later, those bombs killed 350,000 people. Quote That, is a really, crappy analogy. OK, our military will have enough foresight to have the ability to make oil from coal, sugarbeets, or whatever, so they can win the 'last battle' before the last drop of regular old fashioned from the ground kind of stuff. Either that, or we'll be sure to start a war in order to take control of the last bit of oil so that we can then later on win the last battle over that last bit of oil, because it will all be gone, none left to find, for the last battle, before the last bit of oil is gone... Even if tomorrow everyone left the Islamic world alone, as you would say, I assert that Islamofacism would not subside. I think your position is pretty much that of an isolationist, that relies on the Islamofacists to see the logic in that we have now started to leave them alone. Some may see promise in this strategy. I think not. They don't just seek a bit of land or freedom of religion, or just to be left alone. I think their demands aren't acceptable. I think recruitment for Al Qaeda was going to rise even if we hadn't invaded Iraq. I discount the importance and validity of the Iraq war as an Al Qaeda recruitment tool, and you discount the importance and validity of intelligence info (internal Al Qaeda communications) regarding how much they are being hurt in Iraq.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #62 February 7, 2007 >Well in case you hadn't noticed, North American natural gas and oil production have already peaked, and are trending downward. The rest of the world? Not even started!!! In the south of New Zealand there is oil seeping out of the ground. the south pacific ocean has only been touched very briefly with exploration. Yes, it is a rough ocean but the amont of oil that is said to be there through the minimal testing that has been done is absolutlety massive. In the 1970's it was too hard to get but with modern technology and current demands I would think that human beings are more than capable of making a profit out of it. I know something is in the woodwork at present to start drilling at the sites that were tested in the 1970's, Not too sure how far down the track they are but is is defintely happening. It is all very secret by the way so don't tell anyone. There is shitloads of oil! The wars in the middle east have not only been about the ownership of the oil there, but about what those particular owners do with the money they make from it. come buy some new zealand oil, much less hassle, and do a tandem while you're there we have plenty of those too."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #63 February 7, 2007 Cats say "meow."Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NCclimber 0 #64 February 7, 2007 Quote>Supply and demand? Good one. Yep. Supply went up, demand went down. Prices fell. Economics 101. How simplistic. Quote>Summer driving season ended? Looking at the previous decade, >crude rallied during September in 7 out of 10 years. Yes. Here in the US, oil demand peaked in Aug at almost 22,000kbal/day and then dropped to below 21,000kbal/day in Sept. So a 1.25% drop in worldwide consumption caused prices to drop 35%??? Quote>And some countries upped their output? Causing worldwide prices to drop by 1/3rd? Yep. Price swings are set partly by flexibility of demand. If the product has a flexible demand (like say barbie dolls) then small changes in supply result in small changes of price. If the product has a fixed uptake rate (and oil is more fixed than barbies; few people stop going to work when gas is expensive) then small changes in supply result in large changes of price, if supply is very near demand. Sounds like a bunch of doublespeak to me. The only tangible thing you've posted is about a 5% drop in domestic consumption. QuoteLook for a lot more swings in the future, and look for them to be larger. Yikes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 3 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
rhys 0 #62 February 7, 2007 >Well in case you hadn't noticed, North American natural gas and oil production have already peaked, and are trending downward. The rest of the world? Not even started!!! In the south of New Zealand there is oil seeping out of the ground. the south pacific ocean has only been touched very briefly with exploration. Yes, it is a rough ocean but the amont of oil that is said to be there through the minimal testing that has been done is absolutlety massive. In the 1970's it was too hard to get but with modern technology and current demands I would think that human beings are more than capable of making a profit out of it. I know something is in the woodwork at present to start drilling at the sites that were tested in the 1970's, Not too sure how far down the track they are but is is defintely happening. It is all very secret by the way so don't tell anyone. There is shitloads of oil! The wars in the middle east have not only been about the ownership of the oil there, but about what those particular owners do with the money they make from it. come buy some new zealand oil, much less hassle, and do a tandem while you're there we have plenty of those too."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #63 February 7, 2007 Cats say "meow."Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #64 February 7, 2007 Quote>Supply and demand? Good one. Yep. Supply went up, demand went down. Prices fell. Economics 101. How simplistic. Quote>Summer driving season ended? Looking at the previous decade, >crude rallied during September in 7 out of 10 years. Yes. Here in the US, oil demand peaked in Aug at almost 22,000kbal/day and then dropped to below 21,000kbal/day in Sept. So a 1.25% drop in worldwide consumption caused prices to drop 35%??? Quote>And some countries upped their output? Causing worldwide prices to drop by 1/3rd? Yep. Price swings are set partly by flexibility of demand. If the product has a flexible demand (like say barbie dolls) then small changes in supply result in small changes of price. If the product has a fixed uptake rate (and oil is more fixed than barbies; few people stop going to work when gas is expensive) then small changes in supply result in large changes of price, if supply is very near demand. Sounds like a bunch of doublespeak to me. The only tangible thing you've posted is about a 5% drop in domestic consumption. QuoteLook for a lot more swings in the future, and look for them to be larger. Yikes! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
