Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

TIME's point/counterpoint: End of Oil/Oil here to stay

A forum to either submit your own review of a book, video or audio interview, or to post reviews by others.

TIME's point/counterpoint: End of Oil/Oil here to stay

Unread postby peakme » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 09:12:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]The Future of Energy: Viewpoints: It's the End of Oil / Oil Is Here to Stay by Kenneth Deffeyes 23 Oct 2005:
It's the End of Oil
World oil production is about to reach a peak and go into its final decline. For years, a handful of petroleum geologists, including me, have been predicting peak oil before 2007, but in an era of cheap oil, few people listened. Lately, several major oil companies seem to have got the message. One of Chevron's ads says the world is currently burning 2 bbl. of oil for every barrel of new oil discovered. ExxonMobil says 1987 was the last year that we found more oil worldwide than we burned. Shell reports that it will expand its Canadian oil-sands operations but elsewhere will focus on finding natural gas and not oil. It sounds as though Shell is kissing the oil business goodbye. M. King Hubbert, a geophysicist, correctly predicted in 1956 that oil production in the U.S. would peak in the early 1970s--the moment now known as "Hubbert's Peak." I believe world oil production is about to reach a similar peak. …
Time article

Sometimes when I read these mainstream pieces, I feel like I might be reading The Onion. Also, it's interesting to see whose point of view gets "last at bat." Thoughts on a) PO getting into Time magazine or b) the way they've presented the info?

The Onion
User avatar
peakme
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue 18 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine, USA

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby killJOY » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 09:46:09

Not bad, actually, for a sound-bite-driven corporate horseshit asswipe of a fucking magazine.

My FAVORITE moment, Huber says:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')onsense. Technology and politics--not geology--determine how much we pump and what it costs.


Let's change the punctuation a bit, as if it were a dictionary definition:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')i]Nonsense (n): Technology and politics--not geology--determine how much we pump and what it costs.


Now there's a truth for ya :lol: :lol: :lol:
Peak oil = comet Kohoutek.
User avatar
killJOY
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2220
Joined: Mon 21 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: ^NNE^

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby BabyPeanut » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 10:03:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'p')olitically painless for the U.S. to ban almost all new drilling off the Florida

Where Wilma would wreck the rig? Maybe they need to spend more money on developing hurricane-proof offshore oil rigs.
BabyPeanut
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby peaker_2005 » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 10:25:54

Note the title of Huber's book:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')eter Huber is the co-author, with Mark Mills, of The Bottomless Well


:lol:
User avatar
peaker_2005
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 686
Joined: Fri 02 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby nth » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 11:00:32

Well, Peter's claim of bottomless well is bogus. If you ask Peter if we will run out of oil in 100 years, he will not say no. I can't believe the Time editors allow him to contradict himself!
In interviews, Peter has mentioned several times that by the time the oil runs out, we will have found an alternative source.

Anyways, you guys like to dismiss the idea that oil production is limited by economic and political constraints. These factors do alter the peak date, but even if you factor these in, it will only buy you a few more years at most.
Instead of dimissing it, should explain that even factor in, it won't alter the date by much.
User avatar
nth
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby Leanan » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 11:16:13

I think the whole premise of "the bottomless well" is ludicrous. They argue that we should encourage profligate energy use, because the sooner we use it all up, the sooner new, better energy sources will be invented.

Funny, it didn't seem to work for the Easter Islanders...
User avatar
Leanan
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu 20 May 2004, 03:00:00

Re: TIME's point/counterpoint

Unread postby sameu » Mon 24 Oct 2005, 11:36:55

what a jackass

politics and technology are limitations on how much we produce
we can change/improve these to lower these limitations but they never ever change anything about the total amount of crude in the earth.
User avatar
sameu
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu 18 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Belgium, Europe


Return to Book/Media Reviews

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron