[agramante]

Ah, I see. Thank you. Still learning ins & outs of this site.

[ROCKMAN]

Pstarr - Not mellowed out…sleeping. LOL. Was up at 2 AM messing with a new well.

The POD isn’t anything new. We talk about it all the time. It’s everything: reserves, production rates, geology, tech, politics local and global, refining, pipeline permits, alternative energy development, military adventures, internal oil consumption by the exporters, etc. etc. Essentially all those factors that determine the quality of life with respect to energy for everyone on the planet. A lot more than some date the world may or may not have reached PO.

I specifically toss out the POD to get away from a myopic focus on the PO date. It would be great if life were that simple. But it ain’t.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '2')008 was the year that oil production could not meet oil demand and the economy was forced to contract.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '2')008 was the year that oil production could not meet oil demand and the economy was forced to contract.

[dolanbaker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '2')008 was the year that oil production could not meet oil demand and the economy was forced to contract.

[ROCKMAN]

donlan - Exactly. Again the reason for my silly little POD. When the discussion boils down to X caused this to happen or Y was really more important than little can be fully explained. And thus the endless debates. As you point out we are dealing with a complex system with many variables and feedback loops. Trying to resolve the situation by looking at just one or two factors either represent a profound lack of understanding of the dynamics or just an effort to follow some personal agenda IMHO.

[agramante]

To be fair, Rock, focusing on one element of the crisis can also be simply a means of following a line of inquiry into said complex system. As folks like us here on this board are generally aware, too many economists (both those we admire and those we don't) tend not to consider energy prices when they're discussing macroeconomics. That seems to be a bias on their part due more to laziness than ideology. For my part, not being an economist, I've been focusing and learning more about the role of energy in our economy than other things. In short, it is possible to study minutely some of the trees, and still not forget that you're in a forest.

[ROCKMAN]

a - that's valid. A system can only be understood by analyzing the individual components. You obviously understand that. And like most here you know each component doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's that very complex interaction of all the components that we strive to understand. Which is why an absolute focus on one or two components won't get you there. At the least it clouds the picture. At worse it distorts the entire picture.

[JV153]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('diemos', '2')008 was the year that oil production could not meet oil demand and the economy was forced to contract.

[ralfy]

Sorry, I was referring to 2004-2005, from around $30 to a hundred.

[Revi]

When fracking can't cover up the decline we'll notice peak oil again. I give it about 3 years, but it might be 5.

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'W')hen fracking can't cover up the decline we'll notice peak oil again. I give it about 3 years, but it might be 5.

[Pops]

"Blew it away!"

snort

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '&')quot;Blew it away!"

snort

[Strummer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'R')ather than debate why Tufte would have a field day with inappropriate scales on a 2 dimensional plot to hide the obvious

[Quinny]

Nice to see graphs with correct scales

[Gordianus]

John_A. I agree with Strummer - that chart is perfectly reasonable and well presented. Like all good charts, it tells a clear story. There is a lot of data in it.

I am also quite sure that any expert in data visualisation would have no problem with the chart (but I am not familiar with Tufte's opinions).

In response, you have offered a single, imprecise, data point: "the largest single-year growth in U.S. production". Apparently you think this refutes the position presented by Pops and strummer.

Your argument is not persuasive in the slightest. Perhaps you just don't like the story that the chart tells!

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Strummer', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'R')ather than debate why Tufte would have a field day with inappropriate scales on a 2 dimensional plot to hide the obvious

[John_A]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gordianus', 'J')ohn_A. I agree with Strummer - that chart is perfectly reasonable and well presented. Like all good charts, it tells a clear story. There is a lot of data in it.

[Strummer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John_A', 'T')ell it to Tufte. After he finishes telling you why it is designed to disguise the facts in question, you can come back and explain it to the rest of the class.