Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Economics vs. ETP

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 08:31:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('regardingpo', '
')
I am saying that it has successfully predicted


This is not what you said, you are misleading us. This is what you said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')urns out we're talking to someone to whom we need to spell out why knowing the price of oil at some point in the future is useful.


This is something fundamentally different. Predicting the past has zero utility.

The more you promote this scam, the more you look like a scam promoter.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby regardingpo » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 08:47:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('regardingpo', '
')
I am saying that it has successfully predicted


This is not what you said, you are misleading us. This is what you said:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')urns out we're talking to someone to whom we need to spell out why knowing the price of oil at some point in the future is useful.


I was not talking about the model when I said that.

That was a generic statement. I said that if you can somehow know future oil prices - that's useful.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', 'P')redicting the past has zero utility.

Agreed.
But that's not the what the model did.
It predicted in what will happen in late 2014 and 2015 BEFORE IT HAPPENED.
There is no debate about that, everyone on this site knows about it.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', 'T')he more you promote this scam, the more you look like a scam promoter.

I am not promoting it.

Let me repeat my questions without using the word ETP. I just want to know where you stand, because that's where I think you and rockman are different:
1. Let's say that there is model XXX which is valid and accurate. Would you consider model XXX useful?
2. Do you think the concept of EROEI is valid and do you think it's useful to know about it?
Don't follow this link: http://bit.ly/2dtWSrZ
User avatar
regardingpo
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 20 Aug 2015, 15:36:52
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 10:09:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('regardingpo', '
')I was not talking about the model when I said that.

That was a generic statement. I said that if you can somehow know future oil prices - that's useful.


So, you are now effectively revoking your assertion about the utility of the "model". What is its utility then? And what's the point of all your posts where you attempted to mock rockman, given that this revocation makes your posts essentially void of any sensible content?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') just want to know where you stand, because that's where I think you and rockman are different:
1. Let's say that there is model XXX which is valid and accurate. Would you consider model XXX useful?
2. Do you think the concept of EROEI is valid and do you think it's useful to know about it?


Look, I would have responded to your questions if I'd wanted to, right? If I am not responding, this means that I am not interested in having this discussion.

I have no idea whether model XXX would be useful or not if it was valid. Lots of valid models have no practical use.

In order to understand whether a model is useful or not, you need to understand what kind of utility this model possesses, right? - And coming back to the specific "model" under "review": this is exactly the question that rockman asked, and that you volunteered to answer.

Now, as we figured out above, your answer was total rubbish. You have no idea what the utility of the "model" is. Why do you readdress this question to me then? What do I have to do with it? Particularly, given that I am on the questioning side, effectively? And that I know that the whole thing is fake and scam? Are you aware that responding to a question with a question is supposed to be a foul trick that disqualifies you from discussion?

Once again - it is expected from you to explain what the utility of this "model" is. Otherwise what is the purpose of your typing all these messages here?

But of course you can try to readdress this question to rockman if you'd like to. He is asking "What's the utility?". You respond: "You tell me". Maybe he'll be OK with it, who knows.

In relation to EROEI: broadly, EROEI is a skewed version of the "useful work coefficient", or "efficiency" from physics, derived from Carnot's works. The physics concept of "efficiency" is obviously tremendously important and useful when applied to the physical systems and objects. This concept has been known and utilised for ages.

EROEI skewes the concept mainly by introducing the words "return" and "investment" into the definition, and positing that it applies to finance/economy, thus exploiting the freudian dream of scientists to grab hold of the financial matters. As the properties of financial/economic systems are fundamentally different from those of the physical ones, EROEI is essentially meaningless for all practical purposes, and as such is little more than a psychological chimera.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby regardingpo » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 12:43:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('regardingpo', '
')I was not talking about the model when I said that.

That was a generic statement. I said that if you can somehow know future oil prices - that's useful.


So, you are now effectively revoking your assertion about the utility of the "model".


No, I merely corrected you on things that you misunderstood. You're welcome.

I stand by everything else. Go back and read my old posts again if you are still unclear on some things. I feel like I made all my points and I'm done.
Don't follow this link: http://bit.ly/2dtWSrZ
User avatar
regardingpo
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 20 Aug 2015, 15:36:52
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 13:39:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('regardingpo', '
')
No, I merely corrected you on


No, let's put it straight - you are repeatedly attempting to mislead us with regard to what you actually said in your previous posts. See you.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby tita » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 14:04:52

Each time we try to debunk the inconsistencies of the ETP model, we end up debating over multiples pages of arguments, defenders looking more like members of the Jehovah's witnesses as they behave like true believers that can't be wrong... Repeating over and over that facts have not proved them wrong.

I for myself read their website, and found so much bullshit without no ground to support their model that I still don't understand why we still argue.

From their website: http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_023.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he ETP Model calculates this value through numerical analysis which produces a conversion efficiency of 20.45 %. This is equivalent to a source temperature of 214 �F, and a sink temperature at STP of 77 �F.This is very close to the thermal operating efficiency of an internal combustion engine; they constitutes 83% of petroleum usage.

It took me a while to understand that they took the efficiency of a car as the basis for their calculation. I thought they ended up with this figure through deep analysis of the oil sector, calculating the efficiency to transform 1 barrel of oil in the ground to gasoline through the different steps (extraction, transport, refinery)... which would end up with something quite higher. But no, they used the efficiency of a car for a reason that can't be understood (yeah, 83% of oil is used in cars, but 99.9% of cars are used for other stuff than producing oil).

And then, they make some kind of calculation that means... well let's see.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')onverting $634.73 billion of crude consumed into goods and services required: $634.73/0.2045 = $3.104 trillion.

The $634 billion figure is the value of oil consumed in the US in a year at 94$. As everybody know, the price depends on the demand/supply side, an economic value that has a lot of volatility with stuff unconnected to physics (like greed, war, terrorism, natural disasters, etc.). And they use it with the efficiency of a car (a physical value) to calculate something that should significate the value of goods and services required to produce the petroleum. WHAAAT?? And HOW can anybody think more than 1 second that we spent 3 trillion dollars in a year to produce oil and gas?? This is just NONSENSE.
Then:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '3')5.1% x GDP = $5.6733 trillion

35% is the part of oil in the total primary energies used in the US. It makes some sense, but it's nonetheless an extreme simplification that 35% of our GDP is due to the energy brought by oil. So, let's mix it with the nonsense number that we got earlier and:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')ercent of total petroleum dollars used to extract, process, and distribute it:
$3.104 trillion/ $5.673 trillion = 54.7%

They tell that 54.7% of the GDP generated by oil is used to produce it. Which is what they call the halfway point, which happened in 2012.

So, for my part, the ETP theory is a total SCAM full of BULLSHIT made from very STUPID thinking, that has no F***ING SENSE.

And I'm pretty sure that some ETP jeovah witness will answer me, explain me that I didn't understood the model, try to convert me that it's true because what was predicted by it is really happening, etc. etc. So, don't bother to do it, my grandad chased them away with his pitchfork, and I would do the same (figuratively of course).

PS: sorry for the bad words I used.
Last edited by Tanada on Wed 12 Oct 2016, 14:14:44, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: removed profanity
User avatar
tita
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Fri 10 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby Tanada » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 14:40:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '(')Tanada, I am responding to your megaposts in blocks of three. See you soon :) )

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'A')s a point of fact I just did a search. You have been banging the drum of your thermodynamic misunderstanding of oil production since all the way back in 2007. Possibly longer. When the world civilization refused to collapse from the 2008 excursion to $147/bbl you went quiet for a while trying to come up with some way of explaining away the real world based on your thermodynamic beliefs.


Actually much of the world did collapse. It was very obvious (to me at least) that $147 oil and bread lines all over the ME resulted in some very bad behavior there. What country has really rebounded? Has the US yet fixed its failing infrastructure? How is Flint, Michigan?


Things are far from perfect, never said otherwise. But the grand collapse followed rapidly by the zombie apocalypse and massive cannibalism has not appeared. The economy, whether from the series of financial band-aids applied by governments and central banks, luck, fracked oil or whatever I did not mention has managed to keep operating after a fashion.

At some point the banks/governments will no longer be able to manipulate the debt game to keep up the so called economy and there will be a lot of heartache and economic devastation. That does not have to mean a total collapse to caveman levels of technology with a few or no savages roaming the devastated landscape :oops:

When the debt bubble bursts it is going to be really ugly, just like it was when the USSR collapsed and became the many individual countries that exist on that same territory today. But a financial collapse doesn't actually destroy much in the way of real property. If you own a home or farm or car outright then when the debt bubble bursts you will still own that same thing. The fields of food crops will still be right where they were the day before the pop. The oil bearing rock formations will still be in place and the factories and mines and on and on of real things will all still be there. Someone will create a new currency, call them Amero's or IMF's or Greenbacks or whatever you want. Then those 'new currency' units will be declared legal tender by the government and the old currency will have a fixed exchange rate for a limited time span. This will let the system reset and the wealthiest amongst us will certainly well taken care of in the process, because that is the way it almost always happens. The debt-inflation game will start all over again, but this time there will be the idea that growth will be regional at best, not global. The remaining oil producers, if they keep their sovereignty, will be able o grow because they will be exporters of high value raw material. The USA and EU will have to accept that places that produce oil can still grow, but places like NYC and LA will be in a world of financial pain because growth in financial instruments is dependent on total economic growth, not just regional.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby regardingpo » Wed 12 Oct 2016, 17:34:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tita', 'A')nd I'm pretty sure that some ETP jeovah witness will answer me, explain me that I didn't understood the model, try to convert me that it's true because what was predicted by it is really happening, etc. etc. So, don't bother to do it, my grandad chased them away with his pitchfork, and I would do the same (figuratively of course).


In case you were suspecting me of doing something like that (because some wannabe troll accused me of working with scammers in this topic), lemme assure you that I have no intention of doing that. You are making claims that you are supporting by arguments. You're not screaming that something is a scam without having anything to back that up. You're not deliberately misinterpreting other posters no matter how many times they clarify themselves. Those are the types of posts I respect.
Don't follow this link: http://bit.ly/2dtWSrZ
User avatar
regardingpo
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 20 Aug 2015, 15:36:52
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby ralfy » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 11:48:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '
')
How do you know that the global middle class will grow?

(And what is the point in this insane quotation of the entire article? It takes awful lot of space with no purpose.)


Most people worldwide want more than just basic needs. That's why investors ultimately cannot avoid finding new oil, as all those numbers in hard drives are basically backed by more material resources and energy that need to be consumed by expanding markets. Given that, the only way for the title thread to make sense is to find something that's as good as or better than oil.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 12:50:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '
')Most people worldwide want more than just basic needs. That's why investors ultimately cannot avoid finding new oil,


Cannot understand the link between most people's wishes and investors. Most people's wishes is the most people's problem, why should investors care.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby onlooker » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 15:41:44

Because ultimately investors need the consumer class
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10957
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 13:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 16:24:23

"Because ultimately investors need the consumer class"

How do you imagine that? Investors running around looking for consumers asking them in desperation to take their money and consume, and consumers reluctantly accepting and go shopping? Would you give your own money to somebody to make sure that they "consume"?

Investors don't care about consumers. They care about returns. If they see no returns, they simply don't invest. The consumers can enjoy themselves.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby onlooker » Thu 13 Oct 2016, 18:21:27

How can you say that Radon? The investor class does not exist in a vacuum. It depends on a healthy general Economy. https://mic.com/articles/15097/us-gdp-i ... .roooUYa30
US GDP is 70 Percent Personal Consumption
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10957
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 13:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 04:26:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', 'T')he investor class does not exist in a vacuum. It depends on a healthy general Economy. https://mic.com/articles/15097/us-gdp-i ... .roooUYa30
US GDP is 70 Percent Personal Consumption


Who are the investor class, specifically? How do they depend on the third-world consumers, to avoid ambiguous references to some "healthy general Economy"? What does the US GDP have to do with "the world's growing middle class"? The topic is on the third world consumers, not on the US consumers.

All these new subjects that you introduce totally blur the focus of the discussion - "the world's growing middle class", which is predominantly third-world. Stay focused please.
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby ralfy » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 11:14:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '
')
Cannot understand the link between most people's wishes and investors. Most people's wishes is the most people's problem, why should investors care.


Because the only way that investors will get their returns from investing in businesses is to see those businesses sell more goods and services to expanding markets.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby ralfy » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 11:23:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '&')quot;Because ultimately investors need the consumer class"

How do you imagine that? Investors running around looking for consumers asking them in desperation to take their money and consume, and consumers reluctantly accepting and go shopping? Would you give your own money to somebody to make sure that they "consume"?

Investors don't care about consumers. They care about returns. If they see no returns, they simply don't invest. The consumers can enjoy themselves.


Investors want businesses to grow so that their returns increase. Businesses can only grow if they sell more goods and services, and that ultimately means more people buying more of the same. Hence, investors, businesses, and consumers are dependent on each other.

That's why investors actually care about consumers. That's why they want to see healthy, growing economies, which means more people borrowing and spending.

Investors do not want a situation where they "simply don't invest." That's why together with businesses they always plan and implement the same to make sure that businesses grow. Not surprisingly, governments and consumers also want growth, and for reasons shared by investors and businesses.

Finally, all that growth is ultimately dependent on more oil and various material resources, together with more energy, used to make more goods or provide more services. Unfortunately, a world with physical limits cannot provide such in the long term. Hence, we see problems like peak oil.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby ralfy » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 11:31:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '
')
Who are the investor class, specifically? How do they depend on the third-world consumers, to avoid ambiguous references to some "healthy general Economy"? What does the US GDP have to do with "the world's growing middle class"? The topic is on the third world consumers, not on the US consumers.

All these new subjects that you introduce totally blur the focus of the discussion - "the world's growing middle class", which is predominantly third-world. Stay focused please.


Investors need more goods and services produced and sold each time. That's the only way that the businesses that they invest in can give them good news.

Unfortunately, there's a limit to goods and services that First World consumers can buy, and markets have to keep expanding to ensure that more goods and services produced are sold. That means expanding markets in other countries.

That's why after the U.S., consumer spending became more dominant in Europe and East Asia, where more people started buying cars, refrigerators, etc. After that the rest of the Americas and then later the "tiger" economies followed. After that came the rest of BRICS and over forty emerging markets:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS

Not surprisingly, as U.S. investors started engaging in business outside the country (as seen in outsourcing, the formation of affiliates, factories, and branches abroad), more investors (especially in Asia and the Middle East) started investing in U.S. companies (and in several cases, even bought them), and then started forming their own.

Thus, not only do we see a global middle class, we also see a global investor class. And both are dependent on growing businesses so that they can get their higher pay and returns on investment.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby radon1 » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 15:02:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '
')Investors need more goods and services produced and sold each time.


Who are these people, specifically?
radon1
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013, 06:09:44
Top

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby shortonoil » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 16:07:36

Comparing the Etp Model to economics is like comparing a cyclotron to a Ouija Board. They both missed each other by 500 hundred years.
User avatar
shortonoil
False ETP Prophet
False ETP Prophet
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: Economics vs. ETP

Postby ralfy » Fri 14 Oct 2016, 21:16:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '
')Who are these people, specifically?


The investors who want to see a return on their investments.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron