Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 3, 2016
Alarmists won’t like it, but fossil fuel supply is abundant
T seems what’s good news for most of humanity is bad news for global warming alarmists.
In a recent article in the Journal of Economic Perspective, researchers Thomas Covert, Michael Greenstone and Christopher R. Knittel ask, “Will We Ever Stop Using Fossil Fuels?” They conclude: No. This disturbs them, since the three are adherents of extreme global warming theory. Yet their findings should be welcomed by anyone happy that human existence is no longer quite so “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short” as Thomas Hobbes described it.
“Peak oil” theory has been around for decades; innovation continues to postpone its occurrence. Covert, Greenstone and Knittel note that “for both oil and natural gas at any point in the last 30 years, the world has 50 years of reserves in the ground.” This is because innovation continues to identify and extract new resources even as consumption increases. From 2005 to 2014, global consumption of oil rose 7.5 percent, while natural gas use increased 20 percent. Yet the world has more proven reserves of oil and gas today than in 1980. In the United States alone, oil and gas reserves “expanded 59 and 94 percent, respectively, between 2000 and 2014.”
The researchers note oil from tar sands and oil and gas from shale deposits wasn’t even categorized as “reserves” until relatively recently, and that if technological advances continue, “there is a nearly limitless amount of fossil fuel deposits” that may become
economical to extract in the future.
Hydroelectric, solar, wind and nuclear are often touted as alternative energy sources that could displace oil and gas, but Covert, Greenstone and Knittel declare this “implausible.” For economic and political reasons, nuclear is out of favor. The price of solar energy has plummeted since 2009, but its average price remains twice that of natural gas.
The authors note most “examples of highly competitive prices for solar energy are from specific locations that are exceptionally well-suited for generating solar energy.” Furthermore, “the intensity of sunlight and the speed of the wind vary tremendously across space,” and both are “intermittent” sources of energy. Those are major logistical challenges.
The three men say electric cars could displace gasoline-fueled vehicles, but only if “several technology breakthroughs” occur. And even then the impact on greenhouse gas emissions would be minimal unless associated electricity generation is also from a “green” source.
“Otherwise, we could transition from oil-based transportation with moderately high carbon emissions to coal-fired-electricity-based transportation with even higher carbon emissions,” they write.
Also, due to various logistical issues, the authors calculate oil prices “would need to exceed $350 per barrel before the electric vehicle was cheaper to operate …”
Future innovation will undoubtedly improve electric cars’ efficiency and affordability, but the authors note the same holds true for the internal combustion engine.
Therefore, Covert, Greenstone and Knittel favor government policies that basically discourage use of oil and gas, regardless of economic and societal consequences. Yet innovation that makes oil and gas energy affordable and practical will surely find ways to mitigate any negative consequences of its use.
Covert, Greenstone and Knittel may view with horror their conclusion that “the world is likely to be awash in fossil fuels for decades and perhaps even centuries to come.” But that finding should be welcomed by those who understand that the comfort, efficiency and unmatched productivity of modern life are built upon a foundation of fossil fuels.
51 Comments on "Alarmists won’t like it, but fossil fuel supply is abundant"
GregT on Sun, 3rd Apr 2016 7:37 pm
If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
makati1 on Sun, 3rd Apr 2016 8:17 pm
“Alarmists won’t like it, but fossil fuel supply is abundant”
Actually it is the consumers inability to buy that will kill oil, not oil availability. I have been saying for years that there will be many billions of barrels still in the ground when the last well shuts down and there it will stay. Forever.
eugene on Sun, 3rd Apr 2016 8:47 pm
I’m not sure what “billions of barrels left in the ground” really means. I figure we will get more out of the ground at higher prices but I, also, figure there will be a lot of oil that is not available at any price. I am not a technology will solve all problems believer. I believe we will learn there are limits and it will be an extremely painful lesson.
I believe the “proven reserves” figure is pure BS. My read is we, some time ago, shifted from proven reserves to estimates and far too often, it’s guesstimates.
I compare our present situation to that of someone who has just been told they have terminal cancer. Wishful thinking kicks in and the person clings to every rumor/fantasy.
Apneaman on Sun, 3rd Apr 2016 9:49 pm
NewsOK is Oklahoma’s most trusted source for breaking news.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iYY2FQHFwE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lGs-tXWpR4
makati1 on Sun, 3rd Apr 2016 9:56 pm
eugene, I am talking about the inability to recover oil at a profit. As the ability to buy continues to contract, the price will go below what can sustain the recovery. At some point the wells will be shut and the Age of Petroleum will be over. Permanently. The remaining oil will stay in the ground. That day is fast approaching. Think about total systems, not the numbers you see in the news.
Anonymous on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 1:30 am
Oklahoma? Only two things come from Oklahoma. Steers and fundamentalist republinuts
sxm on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:14 am
No alarmist want to suffer their prediction. They just try to advertise cauction and earn money.
Davy on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 5:23 am
LOL, anonymous from Toronto, more Bric hypocrisy. I mean are we going to cherry pick this leak and say some is right and some is wrong. Putin is smart but got a little sloppy. This is better news than OK stuff.
“Russian Bank Chief Denies Putin Link to $2 Billion Offshore Loans”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-04/vtb-chief-says-putin-isn-t-linked-to-2-billion-offshore-loans
“The head of a major Russian state-owned bank dismissed as nonsense reports that President Vladimir Putin is linked to as much as $2 billion in offshore transactions allegedly involving people close to the Kremlin leader.”
“Mr. Putin was never involved. It’s bulls**t,” Andrey Kostin, chief executive officer of VTB Group, Russia’s second-largest lender, said in a Bloomberg Television interview on Monday. He also rejected allegations that the lender made unsecured loans through a Cyprus-based subsidiary to a close friend of the president.”
GregT on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 5:41 am
Bloomberg.
Practicalmaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 6:06 am
Not to be worried folks, we can always live in old coal mines and try to grow food in artificial environments. I’m sure it will.work out great, who needs food water and clean air and water when you have difficult to extract and process hydrocarbons.
seen from sirius on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 6:40 am
Well good news then for the Cornucopians, we will b e able to release more CO2 in the atmosphere, accelerating thus climate change…ououps sorry that is “alarmism”!
Davy on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 7:13 am
Poor guy, he is a finacial illiterate and can’t sift through relevant news and trash. Typical of people with agenda problems.
onlooker on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 7:16 am
This is a case and I think most of us know it here, that prolonging modern civilization will just make it worse over the longer term.
makati1 on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 9:09 am
I keep saying that we need to collapse now and save something for our kids and theirs to survive on.
GregT on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 10:12 am
“Typical of people with agenda problems.”
The article that you linked to has nothing to do with the OP Davy.
Now tell everybody, who has an agenda problem?
Oh, and it’s still Bloomberg. Bloomberg has a serious agenda, and a big part of that agenda is to focus the attention of the herd on big bad evil Russia. As we should all well know by now, this sort of propaganda is usually a precursor to war.
Davy on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 10:20 am
Greg, why didn’t RT say anything about Putin in the release of the leaks? We know why
Poor gregger can’t sift through the shit. Zero hedge is not good because it does not agree with him. I couldn’t believe that one because you should be a zerohedge junkie. Bloomberg is a mainstream site with a wealth of finacial info. Wade through the shit and quit being a pussy.
GregT on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 10:31 am
According to Bloomberg, Putin (“The Richest Man on Earth”) has a net worth of between 40 and 70 Billion.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-09-17/vladimir-putin-the-richest-man-on-earth
According to Newsweek, “Of course, it’s entirely possible that Putin simply isn’t worth $1 billion”.
http://www.newsweek.com/why-putin-isnt-forbes-billionaires-list-310818
According to Wikipedia, Michael Bloomberg, “As of September 2015, his net worth is $41.1 billion, making him the 6th-richest person in the United States and the 8th-wealthiest in the world.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg
Bloomberg also happens to be a Zionist.
Outcast_Searcher on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 11:19 am
“Therefore, Covert, Greenstone and Knittel favor government policies that basically discourage use of oil and gas, regardless of economic and societal consequences. Yet innovation that makes oil and gas energy affordable and practical will surely find ways to mitigate any negative consequences of its use.”
This is the silly part of the article. The usual corny assumption that we can continue to destroy the planet all we want via AGW producing FF burning, and due to unnamed future tech, wala, there will be NO consequences!
Except there are already clearly consequences, and anyone but a die hard AGW denialist can see that the warming (and the consequences) are accelerating at a frightening pace.
So instead of behaving intelligently and trying to moderate the danger (as we should have seriously been for a good 50 years), let’s just go ahead and play chicken with nature. Sure. I’m sure future generations will be so “thankful” for the corny can kicking.
shortonoil on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 11:26 am
“From 2005 to 2014, global consumption of oil rose 7.5 percent,
We wonder where they got their data, “Mad Magazine”?
Output from EtpPro – Production using the EIA data set.
2005-2014
Conventional Crude
Total Years – 10
Average Change – 0.317 Mb/d/Yr
% change from year 2005 – 4.3%
Average Yearly Change – 0.43%
Total Production – 270.1 Gb
Of course if one wants to count liquified cow farts (NGLs), and Kentucky Moonshine (ethanol) the numbers will be different. But the authors did say “oil”, and the EIA, and everyone else says those two aren’t oil! If it isn’t a liquid hydrocarbon that can be processed into, and used as a liquid fuel it’s not oil.
“Also, due to various logistical issues, the authors calculate oil prices “would need to exceed $350 per barrel before the electric vehicle was cheaper to operate …”
Also from EtpPro – Production the GDP / Total Petroleum Cost ratio has fallen form 65.45 :1 in 1960, to 28.80 : 1 in 2012 and the price of oil is now $36/barrel; even still world inventories continue to grow. $350/ barrel – good luck with that!
The price of oil is now range bound:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
Those values are derived from energy calculations, but we could hardly expect economists who equate cow farts with petroleum to understand that!
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
Davy on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 11:51 am
Putin owns Russia you can’t put a price on that. To get to that point he has to be considered the most able, ruthless, and smartest of modern leaders. He is still a criminal being a murderer, thief, and liar but he is the best of the best so you have to admire him. He deserves of prize not Obama. Putin outmenuvered obama and ridiculed him time and time again. Putin is truely an amazing leader in many ways. How’s that for an American take on Putin gregger?
ghung on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 12:34 pm
…“examples of highly competitive prices for solar energy are from specific locations that are exceptionally well-suited for generating solar energy.” … just as examples of highly competitive oil are from locations that are exceptionally well-suited for the production of quality oil at prices the economy can afford. Of course, they generally skip that part, just as they ignore the negative consequences and externalities of burning shit.
PracticalMaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 1:13 pm
Yeah, the cost remains twice the cost of Natgas, I am going to assume they are saying that the price of electricity of natgas is half the price of solar, at the powerplant, not you’re home. This is also probably going off of record low natgas prices. Solar will go down in cost and gas up.
They say several tech breakthroughs are needed to make ev competitive, what are they talking about? They have a solar plane, GM had a solid electric car decades ago, what tech is needed? I can lease a ev smart car for about what I spend a month on gas now… given I do not trust those tiny cars when people you are sharing the road with are in 6000 lb suvs. But how is that not competitive?
shortonoil on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 1:52 pm
And – exactly where is the energy going to come from to produce all the parts that go into making a solar panel, and getting it to market!
http://www.jayhanson.org/MoreCurves.html
The energy needed to produce oil is going up – and so is everything else! The world is on a one way energy street, and the end is not going to be pretty!
Plantagenet on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:03 pm
We’re in an oil glut.
Cheers!
PracticalMaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:05 pm
Outside of the aluminum framing, which I believe there are good alternatives to, the energy needed to heat and refine silicone out of sand and make glass out of sand could be achieved in the south west using a solar concentrating scheme.
A while back I saw an article discussing the towers for wind turbines in Europe getting to big to be able to transport, so they started framing some of the towers out of timber, wrapped in plastic. Local less energy intensive materials, where there is a will there is a way.http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Energy-Voices/2012/1022/Building-wind-turbine-towers-from-wood
I have also seen articles a while ago about Japan building ground mount solar on post and beam timber frames.
PracticalMaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:06 pm
OMG sarah palin just graced us with her presence.
Denial on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:10 pm
the working and lower classes are going to be slowly boiled in a pot of water….it will probably take 20 years before this gets to the upper classes…so everyone on here is part right the SHTF but all the baby boomers will be dead by the time the show starts….which means about 80 percent of the commentators on here and elsewhere. It is those of us in the younger generation who are really getting fu*ed but we are too stupid and powerless and saddled with too much debt to do anything about it…
PracticalMaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:12 pm
Short, getting it to the market? Really? I tell you what, hook me up with some free panels and I will get a trailer for my bicycle, deliver them within a three state area, you just have to give me a panel free for everyone I deliver. That green enough for you? I mean the main ingredient in PV is silica bearing sand, one of the most common parts of the earths crust, they just found a site in Canada where vikings were smelting Iron about 1500 years ago. Using wood, not coal. Carbon neutral baby…
More like a glut of potential disasters. http://www.wsj.com/articles/brazils-samarco-disaster-mining-dams-grow-to-colossal-heights-and-so-do-the-risks-1459782411?mod=WSJ_article_EditorsPicks_3
PracticalMaina on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:16 pm
Correction, viking site was 1,000 years old, there I go trying to sensationalize shit. 🙂 not bad for some violent conquerors.
twocats on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 2:55 pm
The article is whistling past the graveyard of low prices. Oil companies and op nations need a higher price than $40 to keep up exploration and development in new fields. And the price is threatening to go down again. Need to keep an eye on reserve replenishment ratios. I saw an article recently that was talking about 67% in 2015 for US. Majors?? I do believe shale does provide a significant buffer since it can ramp up so quickly. But that buffer has limits and a shrinking one at that.
Plantagenet on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 3:12 pm
We’re in an oil glut that has caused a collapse in oil prices. When the oil glut ends the price of oil will rise and oil drilling will resume. Eventually —perhaps 20 years from now— there will be another glut, another cycle of price collapse, and then another shortage and then higher oil prices.
Boom and bust cycles are an intrinsic part of the oil biz—they’ve been going on for 150 years now.
Cheers!
GregT on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 3:35 pm
“How’s that for an American take on Putin groggier?”
One person’s take, who by chance happened to have been born within the borders referred to as the USA? I’m sure many of your fellow ‘country folks’ would agree with you, just as I am sure that many would not.
Your above statement would have been far more correct if you had of said; “How’s that for one American’s take on Putin groggier?” If that was what you meant, then I would agree, rightly or wrongly, that you have
the right to your own opinion. I don’t happen to completely agree with you in regards to Putin, however. My sources of information obviously differ from yours.
Apneaman on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 3:37 pm
Planty, it’s a infrastructure deferment glut.
Washington Metro, 40 and Creaking, Stares at a Midlife Crisis
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/washington-metro-40-and-creaking-stares-at-a-midlife-crisis.html
$2.4 Billion Subway Stop Was Leaking Before It Opened
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/nyregion/documents-reveal-early-concerns-about-leaks-at-hudson-yards-subway-station.html
Once a Ground-Breaking Transit Option, BART Is Not What it Used to Be
Many of the Bay Area Rapid Transit system’s parts have to be custom made, making repairs and any maintenance projects lengthy and expensive.
http://www.govtech.com/fs/Once-a-Ground-Breaking-Transit-Option-BART-Is-Not-What-is-Used-to-Be.html
Dooma on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 4:26 pm
Putin bashing seems to be the in thing in the Zionist run media of the US.
I am sure that he does not lose a wink of sleep from any of it.
Cool, calm and collected is how I would describe this person.
Apneaman on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 5:24 pm
The Future of Oil Is Here—and It Doesn’t Look Pretty
As prices plummet and oversupply continues, the once-unsinkable industry is foundering.
http://www.thenation.com/article/the-future-of-oil-is-here-and-it-doesnt-look-pretty/
shortonoil on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 5:47 pm
“Boom and bust cycles are an intrinsic part of the oil biz—they’ve been going on for 150 years now.
Cheers!”
The petroleum industry lost more money last year than they had made in the previous eight. Crude prices averaged $48.67/barrel in 2015; they will be lucky to hit $35 in 2016. That is not just singing past the graveyard; it is doing all of Beethoven 5th while standing on your head.
makati1 on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 7:29 pm
Do some on here even use the internet for education? Take a look at these facts:
How much energy does it take (on average) to produce 1 kilogram of the following materials?
Wood (from standing timber): 3-7MJ (830 to 1,950 watt-hours).
Steel (from recycled steel): 6-15MJ (1,665 to 4,170 watt-hours).
Aluminum (from 100 % recycled aluminum): 11.35-17MJ (3,150 to 4,750 watt-hours)
Iron (from iron ore): 20-25MJ (5,550 to 6,950 watt-hours)
Glass (from sand, etcetera): 18-35MJ (5,000 to 9,700 watt-hours)
Steel (from iron): 20-50MJ (5,550 to 13,900 watt-hours)
Paper (from standing timber): 25-50MJ (6,950 to 13,900 watt-hours)
Plastics (from crude oil): 62-108MJ (17,200 to 31,950 watt-hours)
Copper (from sulfide ore): 60-125MJ (16,600 to 34,700 watt-hours)
Aluminum (from a typical mix of 80% virgin and 20% recycled aluminum): 219 MJ (60,800 watt-hours)
Silicon (from silica): 230-235MJ (63,900 to 65,300 watt-hours)
Nickel (from ore concentrate): 230-270MJ (63,900 to 75,000 watt-hours)
Aluminum (from bauxite): 227-342MJ (63,000 to 95,000 watt-hours)
Titanium (from ore concentrate): 900-940MJ (250,000 to 261,000 watt-hours)
Electronic grade silicon (CVD process): 7,590-7,755MJ (2,108,700 to 2,154,900 watt-hours).
Now multiply those numbers by a billion or so and see why no ‘renewable/alternative’ will be possible in quantity when there is no oil/NG/coal. Not to mention the energy used to mine, transport, shape, assemble, and distribute the product. Dream on techies. Your world is a temporary blip on the time scale of humanity.
makati1 on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 7:30 pm
Ref. for the above, which I forgot to add…
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/what-is-the-embodied-energy-of-materials.html
Pass the popcorn.
dissident on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 8:19 pm
“Putin owns Russia”. Bugger off Yanktard. You know about Russia only what your lie factory media tells you. The same media that claimed that Iraq had WMD. The same media that didn’t notice that the US anti-Daesh campaign was pure smoke and mirrors.
Interesting how any claim about Russia including nutjob tinfoil hat conspiracy theories without a shred of evidence are treated as divine revelation by the idiot masses in NATO. Worry about your own problems first before wallowing in hate projection, pinheads.
twocats on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 8:26 pm
between the continued siphoning of oil energy to make more alternative energy, and the increasing amount of oil energy siphoned off to produce “The Glut”, there just won’t be enough spare energy to meet increases in demand in the very near future. Certainly not the laughable 20 year cycle that plant is suggesting.
I believe one way or another, contrary to what mak says, profits won’t matter so much, the oil will get produced so long as the EROEI is even modestly good. I know some have suggested that an average net number below 10 (to 1) would spell “the doom”. I think the breaking point output number will be somewhat lower, closer to 5 (to 1), but that’s because I believe a post-war traumatized population will be very easy to manipulate into working for gruel and a hut.
Do they make pumps for oil extraction that can be run be a team of “workers” yet? They should start now while we can still make decent metals.
Apneaman on Mon, 4th Apr 2016 8:44 pm
cycles are predictable, so where’s the evidence for this pattern over the last 150 years? What causes it? Cycles/patterns are not debatable if there is enough evidence. Correlation is not necessarily causation and all that. Just because there have been booms and busts doesn’t mean there is a pattern/cycle. If there is a true cycle then it should be no problem predicting the date of the next price increase and decrease. Also, there should be no problem showing evidence of past accurate price predictions from a single methodology. Where is the prediction for $140 plus oil?
makati1 on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 12:33 am
Sorry twocats, you can disagree, but the globalized world runs on a capitalist financial system currently. When the loans run out and have to be repaid, the corporations recovering oil will close. It is more extend and pretend till the end type of lies and obfuscations. Nothing more.
The collapse of the oily world has begun. If you don’t see the accelerating decline, you are blind or in deep denial. But if you live in the Us, you can be excused as here is nothing but lies there. No facts to base a realistic picture on.
Bring on the collapse. It will end a lot of even worse events, or precipitate them. Either way, we will get the pain over with. Set the broken bone and maybe the patient will live.
Kenz300 on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 8:26 am
Climate Change is real…… utilities need to deal with the cause (fossil fuels)
100% electric transportation and 100% solar by 2030
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBkND76J91k
Exxon’s Climate Change Cover-Up Is ‘Unparalleled Evil,’ Says Activist
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/exxon-evil-bill-mckibben_561e7362e4b028dd7ea5f45f?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green§ion=green
HARM on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 12:31 pm
Bummer I missed out on this thread. Basically reaffirms the point I’ve been trying to make here for days: oil and FFs in general are WAY more abundant than we assumed. Hubbert’s peak has been moved out at least a generation, perhaps longer. There’s enough economically extractable “oil” to fry us all.
Apneaman on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 12:41 pm
HARM, since you are 100% certain/know for a fact that peak oil won’t happen in your lifetime then I guess we won’t be hearing from you any more eh? What would be the point? BTW, you got a link so I can order me up one of those crystal balls like you have?
HARM on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 2:26 pm
@apneaman,
I’m only in my 40s, so “a generation” (~20 years) is, barring accident, murder or fatal disease, still within my life expectancy.
Ignoring the obvious snark for a moment, no crystal ball is necessary when you have global production, storage and consumption numbers. Fracking worked, oil production is up–way up, oil is below $40/BBL, and the stockpiles are stacking up. Classic glut scenario that is not likely to be reversed anytime soon. Hubbert’s Peak has deferred for at least a generation –ipso facto.
GregT on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 2:39 pm
“Fracking worked, oil production is up–way up, oil is below $40/BBL, and the stockpiles are stacking up.”
If that oil was affordable Harm, our economies would be growing at leaps and bounds, the central banks wouldn’t need to be firing off every trick in the accountant’s book, and fraking companies wouldn’t be going tits up. There would be no need for bailouts, and nations would not be going bankrupt.
“Hubbert’s Peak has deferred for at least a generation ”
I suggest that you read Hubbert’s papers, because you are not displaying any understanding of Hubbert’s Peak at all.
GregT on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 2:52 pm
“I’m only in my 40s, so “a generation” (~20 years) is, barring accident, murder or fatal disease, still within my life expectancy.”
Your average life expectancy is about another 40 years Harm, and a generation is around 80 some odd years. Within one generation’s time from now, if we do by some miracle manage to stave off the 6th mass extinction event that we have already triggered, the remaining human beings left on Earth will probably wish they were dead.
Apneaman on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 3:29 pm
HARM, have you ever heard the expression “often wrong but never uncertain”?
20 years is a generation. OK, lets take a look at a few things that have happened in the last 20 years, 1996 – 2016.
1997–2000 – dot com bubble/bust
2001 – 9/11
2003 – Iraq invasion (one of the all time military misadventures)
2008 subprime crash and $147 oil
2011 Fukashima
2012 – Climate change models under estimated by upwards of 75 years in some cases. WHOOPS.
Currently – major economic inequality, international sabre rattling by major powers, increasing authoritarianism and a never seen before Orwellian global police state and “The Donald”.
These are just a few of the thing that caught everyone unaware and many could be reasonably classified as black swans.
One could very well come up with similar lists for other 20 year periods like 1914 – 1934 (wwI & great depression) yet you are fucking telling me you are certain of the future of oil is secure? Oil that depends on a functioning global economy in a new and increasingly deadly global climate (CO2 highest in 15 million years, Ice sheets and glaciers in melt down, Droughts all over), ocean acidification and a host of other major enviromental problems and predicaments, over population and still growing at 80 million a year? All that and you are completely certain of the future?
I guess that crystal ball comes with a big fucking jug of Koolaid.
makati1 on Tue, 5th Apr 2016 7:50 pm
Signs of the times:
“In Miami, Facing Risk of Zika With Resolve but Limited Resources”
“Apple users complain of iCloud outage”
“How They Brainwash Us”
“We’re Not Going To Make It without real sacrifice”
“Millions of hours of magnetic tape will be lost forever”
“U.S. military suicides remain high for 7th year”
“Chicago’s murder rate soars 72% in 2016; shootings up more than 88%”
“Welcome to Bruni, Texas — where water comes with arsenic at eight times the federal limit”
“LA’s new rule: homeless people are only allowed to own one trashcan’s worth of things”
And on and on… All at: http://ricefarmer.blogspot.fr/