Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on December 3, 2014
We Are Never Going to Run Out of Oil
In a chilling 2010 column, Paul Krugman declared: “peak oil has arrived.”
So it’s really not surprising that the national average for a gallon of gas has fallen to $2.77 this week – in 10 states it was under $2.60 – and analysts predict we’re going to dip below the two-dollar mark soon. U.S. oil is down to $75 a barrel, a drop of more than $30 from the 52-week high.
With prices returning to ordinary levels and a few centuries’ worth of fossil fuels on tap, this is a good time to remind ourselves that nearly every warning the left has peddled about an impending energy crisis over the past 30 to 40 years has turned out to be wrong. And none of them are more wrong than the Malthusian idea that says we’re running out of oil.
Each time there’s a temporary spike in gas prices, science-centric liberals allow themselves a purely ideological indulgence, claiming – as Krugman, Paul Ehrlich, John Holdren and countless others have – that we’re rapidly approaching a point when producers will hit the maximum rate of extraction of petroleum. Peak oil. With emerging demand, fossil fuels will become prohibitive. And unless we have our in solar panels in order, Armageddon is near.
In a 2005 New York Times Magazine piece, ominously titled “The Breaking Point,” Peter Maass warned: “Few people imagined a time when supply would dry up because of demand alone. But a steady surge in demand in recent years — led by China’s emergence as a voracious importer of oil — has changed that.” I can remember sitting through a number of editorial board meetings during the 2000s watching peak oil cranks pull out charts that, with pinpoint accuracy, predicted exactly when this tragedy would hit – even as enormous new deposits were being discovered and advancements in productivity were debunking those claims in real time.
And while everything is “finite” in a galactic sense, there has never been any consensus as to when oil, gas and coal will hit peak production. Probably because we’re never going to run out of any of them. Julian Simon is still right, and spikes in oil’s price only create more innovation and better productivity:
“The reason that the cost of energy has declined in the long run is the fundamental process of 1) increased demand due to the growth of population and income, which raises prices and hence constitutes opportunity to entrepreneurs and inventors; 2) the search for new ways of supplying the demand for energy; 3) the eventual discovery of methods which leave us better off than if the original problem had not appeared.”
One thing is for sure, the technological advancement we’ve seen in extracting fossil fuels is light-years ahead of the progress we’ve made in the state-planned alternative energy infrastructure. Yet, the same people who were skeptics of shale and are now skeptical of methane hydrate believe windmills will solve our non-existent crisis. Probably because progress can often be confused with wishful thinking.
After all, it might not be President Obama’s ideological obstinacy that sinks the Keystone pipeline, but economic reality. Saudi Arabia, the biggest OPEC producer, plans to cut its oil prices to preserve market share and hurt North American shale production. The Canadian Energy Research Institute estimates that the pipeline needs to extract a price of $85 a barrel to be profitable at all. The price is still right but it might not be for long.
So what’s the answer? Proposals to artificially spike energy prices, of course. One wonders why the left never takes more credit for high gas prices. Isn’t that the objective? There are numerous benefits to high energy prices. For starters, it’s a great opportunity for politicians to get those speculators, predators, gougers and rent-seeking Big Oil executives into congressional hearings where they can be properly berated for an imaginary hold on fungible commodity prices.
But the truth is Democrats should be thanking them. As Steven Chu explained in 2008, “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” President Obama conceded he favored a “gradual adjustment” in this direction. Now, an energy secretary doesn’t normally seek out ways to make energy more expensive, but these were heady times. There was still hope that Washington would pass cap-and-trade, a contrived marketplace that folds the arbitrary cost of progressive guilt into the price of energy use. Obama turned to other means to get the job done. But after six years of trying, we learned that the laws of economics can’t be circumvented. Which is great news for consumers, bad news for progressives.
21 Comments on "We Are Never Going to Run Out of Oil"
SugarSeam on Wed, 3rd Dec 2014 8:20 pm
lol fail…
also, pretty sure Krugman is on record as dismissing peak oil.
penury on Wed, 3rd Dec 2014 8:45 pm
We will never run out of oil or natural gas. A correct statement. We will however, run out of affordable oil and=or natural gas. Not all at once, or all of us at once, but the signs are already out there that the days of American style of living are drawing to a close for an ever increasing number of our populations. So for the first time in years I must reluctantly agree with Dr. Krugman.
Plantagenet on Wed, 3rd Dec 2014 9:12 pm
Obama and the Ds were never serious about instituting carbon taxes and phasing out oil and gas. A few dimwits believed O when he made those claims, but most people realized even then that O was lying.
Newfie on Wed, 3rd Dec 2014 11:03 pm
“science-centric liberals.” Imagine that ! People who believe in Science of all things. LOL.
marko on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 3:42 am
In my opinion this kind of texts are good,because the whole 7billion cannot survive, unfortunately must say.
gordianus on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 3:46 am
I have no idea how any writer could produce this article and expect to be taken seriously. I hope they didn’t expect to get paid!
But it is an example of a style I see a lot in political discussion in the US, which genuinely puzzles me:
First it states the issue, then mischaracterises the opposing point of view. Then it ascribes that opposing point of view to ‘liberals’ who are deemed to be Democrats. These Democrats are then deemed to hold all the political beliefs and forecasts that have been recently proposed by liberals. Finally, it states that because some of those forecasts were wrong, the entire ‘liberal’ position is invalid.
And thus the author completely avoids addressing the original issue.
How did this rhetorical nonsense become a substitute for political debate?
Aren’t both Republicans and Democrats insulted by the idea that they must mindlessly agree with their party’s position on every issue?
Kenz300 on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 8:19 am
If the world is to have any hope of dealing with Climate Change we need to be on a path to reducing our need and use of fossil fuels.
The fossil fuel industry, the top 1% and their spokesmen, the RepubliCON party and Faux Noise are doing all they can to keep the world hooked on fossil fuels…….. Fossil fuel money is driving the RepubliCON party to extremes……
Committed to Carbon Goals – NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinion/joe-nocera-committed-to-carbon-goals.html?emc=edit_th_20141125&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=21372621&_r=0
Lawfish on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 9:15 am
Great reference work to support those figures. A report from the “Institute for Energy Research,” a 501(c)(3) organization that doesn’t accept government money, only private donations (hmm, from perhaps oil companies?). The report begins by citing the figures of 272 trillion cubic feet of natural gas “proved reserves,” but then uses the figure 4.244 quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas as “recoverable,” which is contradicted two pages earlier by the figure 2.744 quadrillion cubic feet as “recoverable.” If we use only the proved reserves figure, it gives us a natural gas supply of 36.8 years, not 575. With support like that, the entire article can be tossed into the trash can as pure cornucopian BS.
gwb on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 10:20 am
The Institute for Energy Research is funded by Koch Industries. The CEO, Robert Bradley, used to be a speechwriter for Enron CEO Kenneth Lay, and the president, Thomas Pyle, was a lobbyist for Koch. VP Daniel Kish was a long-time Republican staffer on Capitol Hill. None of them are oil or gas guys. ‘Nuff said…
Northwest Resident on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 10:50 am
gwb — I’m sure you will agree that George Orwell’s dystopian future envisioned in his novel “1984” is now the reality we live in. Doublespeak is everywhere. TPTB portray illusions of reality that are the exact opposite of actual reality. Non-profit organizations with noble-sounding names are actually funded by wealthy industrialists intent on maintaining their own huge slice of the pie while preying on the sentiments and altruistic intentions of those they pretend to represent. Deceit, manipulation, threat and fear are all tools used to control us, wielded by the very same powers that we were taught as children to trust and put our faith in. But in terms of just how insane it can get, I’m sure we haven’t seen anything yet.
baptised on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 1:15 pm
Northwest I like that statement a lot. Very interesting times.
GregT on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 1:31 pm
Once again, NWR proves without a shadow of a doubt, that he is as far removed from being a ‘moron’, ( a true resident moron here recently suggested) as a person can possibly get.
Davy on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 1:54 pm
NR, IOW, right is wrong and wrong is right. Sounds like a pole shift and the end of an age.
Northwest Resident on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 1:59 pm
GregT — Now is a time I think to feel pity for Cornucopians such as the individual you are referring to. Their whole world view is crumbling before their very eyes. The bubbles of denial and rationalization that they have lived in for so long are being stressed like never before. That’s why the individual you refer to is grasping for straws, proclaiming that shale plays outside of the USA and Canada are just now starting up — a totally false and easily disproved slab of BS if ever there was one. But he is under attack by realities and facts that threaten his view of reality. So, he lashes out with insults and accusations. The fact that he chooses me as his primary target is actually a compliment, now that I think about it. It means I am “getting to” him. And THAT is one of my driving motivations in posting on this forum. I am on a mission to dispel illusions, to rub noses in hardcore reality, to pop bubbles of denial and bring as many people as possible into the “doomer” fold before it is too late. At the same time, I apologize to many of the readers and visitors here who probably view my exchanges with the individual you refer to, and a couple of others, as rather unpleasant. Yes, it is conflict, it is aggression on my part, it is offensive and it is uncomfortable for many. I really do apologize for that. But as long as I’m hanging out on this forum and being one of the community of regular posters, I’m not going to let blatantly false and/or pompously ignorant B.S. pass unchallenged. I try to keep it on a logical and civil level, but when somebody starts slinging accusations and name-calling at me (i.e., moron, ignorant, etc…), my response is likely to be full nuclear retaliation. Again, my apologies to everybody. But driving it all is my quest for truth and my intolerance for lies and bullshit.
Don on Thu, 4th Dec 2014 2:45 pm
What a fine piece of demagoguery we have here. It reminds me a lot of articles where someone equates thinking that killing babies is wrong to hating women, or wanting to drug test people before giving them welfare equals hating black people.
I think someone needs to remind David that both President Bush and President Carter publicly discussed the problem of peak oil which kind of takes the wind out of the sails of PO being a partisan subject.
marko on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 3:21 am
NORTHWEST
excellent comment
Davy on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 6:29 am
NR, to be fair, you need to take the same medicine given me on this board with my extreme dislike for the board propaganda bitch. We both have our justifications but we also need to show restraint. I only say this because there is truth to it. Yours and my fiend is ours but not the boards. We have to allow diversity and tolerance at least until a dictatorship takes over this board. I can say this to you because you mention the same to me in regards to the board propaganda bitch that constantly disrespects me and my people. Your fiend does not bother me like it does you. My fiend is not that bothersome to you. Funny how animals like us react to other animals. I see that at the bird feeder. I am an avid bird feeder person. I have a serious bird feeder setup. Anyway just some morning coffee talk.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 9:39 am
Good advice, Davy. If “my fiend” would refrain from accusing me of being ignorant and avoid calling me names such as “moron”, then my responses would be much more tame. I rarely take the time to post a response to the complete manure that my fiend, and when I do I just try to question that fiend’s BS so that other potentially peak oil novices just passing through might understand that there is an alternative point of view. My fiend’s responses to my posts are most often rude, obnoxious, accusatory, off-target and unworthy of anyone except a dim-witted and mentally disturbed troll.
BTW, your fiend’s posts disturb me as much as they disturb you — or close. You may have noticed that I sometimes respond with near total disagreement. The difference is that your fiend does not pretend to be an “oil expert”. Your fiend tends to display his madness up front, clearly, with every prediction of nuclear war and America self-destruction that he posts. My fiend tends to be more subtle, introducing lies and unsubstantiated crap carefully disguised as truth and fact. That’s why, sometimes, I feel like I have to post a rebuttal, which makes my fiend fire off insults and false accusations — his specialty — in response. You know, I can tolerate stupidity — or easily ignore it — after all, we’re surrounded by it, so we have to be able to tune it out. But when stupidity and ignorance masquerade as pompous know-it-all expertise, that’s when I feel obligated to grab a baseball bat and beat it to death. My fiend is a poster child for the ignorant stupidity masquerading as expert. It’s amazing that I am able to hold my contempt and annoyance with my fiend in check so often!! But yeah, I get all of what you’re saying. Whatever. Like BAU, this situation will soon resolve itself. Thanks for your feedback.
Kenz300 on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 9:54 am
Koch pipeline company owns or operates more than 4,000 miles of pipelines that transport crude oil, refined petroleum products and chemicals.
Flint Hills Resources Breaks Ground on New Project at its Corpus Christi West Refinery. Flint Hills Resources is a subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc. .
Koch Industries is pushing the RepubliCON party hard to get the Keystone pipeline approved……
The RepubliCON party has become a subsidary of the Koch Industries.
Davy on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 12:02 pm
Alright NR, you know you poke me every now and then on my inability to write, spell, and my attacks on the board propaganda bitch. I saw the opportunity to slap you. It was a friendly slap. You and I would make good platoon leaders cause we don’t tollorate the enemy well.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 5th Dec 2014 12:39 pm
Davy – Your feedback is highly valued. Get in my face any time with any issue you might have. (That goes for anybody else too — just please refrain from name calling and false/unfounded accusations). I’ll deal with it. Yeah, low tolerance to ignorant bullshit seems to be a commonly defining trait between us. And that’s a good thing!