[kokoda]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', ' ')
Saying that "no matter how much money or how much technology you throw at it, production declines" is simplistic. There has to be a reason that production declines ... and that can be expressed in financial terms.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ')...but take that fact and add colluding refiners who pump up their profit margins,

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')eak oil is a geolological event of declining production.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ')...but take that fact and add colluding refiners who pump up their profit margins,

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ') Where is the absolute proof of peak oil?

[jedinvest]

MonteQuest wrote:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')eak oil is a geolological event of declining production.

[kokoda]

If classic peak oil theory is correct we should be either in ... or about to enter a decline phase. There would be nothing that could be done to halt or even slow that decline. Increasing oil prices would be driven by reduced supplies.

On the other hand if economics is the determining factor then oil production will continue to grow ... but at an ever increasing cost ... right up to the point where the market deems that it is no longer affordable.

I would suggest that events in the real world seem to more closely resemble the second scenario.

[DantesPeak]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ')...but take that fact and add colluding refiners who pump up their profit margins,

[SevenTen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', 'I')f classic peak oil theory is correct we should be either in ... or about to enter a decline phase. There would be nothing that could be done to halt or even slow that decline. Increasing oil prices would be driven by reduced supplies.

On the other hand if economics is the determining factor then oil production will continue to grow ... but at an ever increasing cost ... right up to the point where the market deems that it is no longer affordable.

I would suggest that events in the real world seem to more closely resemble the second scenario.

[bobcousins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', 'I')f classic peak oil theory is correct we should be either in ... or about to enter a decline phase. There would be nothing that could be done to halt or even slow that decline. Increasing oil prices would be driven by reduced supplies.

On the other hand if economics is the determining factor then oil production will continue to grow ... but at an ever increasing cost ... right up to the point where the market deems that it is no longer affordable.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', ' ')On the other hand if economics is the determining factor then oil production will continue to grow ... but at an ever increasing cost ... right up to the point where the market deems that it is no longer affordable.

I would suggest that events in the real world seem to more closely resemble the second scenario.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'W')here is the absolute proof of peak oil? There isn't any, but we can make a reasoned argument, that it's true. You'll never do better than constructing a strong circumstantial case, Monte, as I can make a very strong circumstantial case for collusion at the refinery level.

[bobcousins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'S')eeing as there are no anti-gouging laws in the US and it's very difficult to prove collusion in an oligopoly, it's almost impossible to get clear cut evidence. Where is the absolute proof of peak oil? There isn't any, but we can make a reasoned argument, that it's true. You'll never do better than constructing a strong circumstantial case, Monte, as I can make a very strong circumstantial case for collusion at the refinery level.

[bobcousins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'A')re you unable to see how this situation helps to feed collusion and unable to understand that in a truly free market system, the sour crude problem would have been anticipated and in the interest of profits, capacity for refining sour crude would have been in the building stages and finished by now? Is this a form of gouging?

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bobcousins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'A')re you unable to see how this situation helps to feed collusion and unable to understand that in a truly free market system, the sour crude problem would have been anticipated and in the interest of profits, capacity for refining sour crude would have been in the building stages and finished by now? Is this a form of gouging?

[Zentric]

I'm agreeing with threadbear, who appears to be correct about the oligopolistic behaviors of the oil companies. They're enjoying the benefits of gasoline in short supply much like how Enron enjoyed it when California faced an acute electricity shortfall several summers ago. A similar case can be made for how oil companies are now "gaming the system."

If the oil refiners much cared about providing ample gasoline supplies to consumers during this summer's driving season, they would have made extra sure to import even more foreign gasoline to our domestic market ahead of time, would have purchased more of the expensive sweet and light crude for their domestic refineries, or would have added incremental refining capacity to their existing plants starting years ago. The fact that this has not sufficiently happened implies two things - that the refineries collectively prefer to make as much money for themselves as possible during a time of predictably tight gasoline supplies (and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this) and that there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that shows collusion and oligopoly in the oil business (not that there's anything wrong with this either - because, in the long run, it curtails consumption).

My own preference is that either the oil companies be taxed for their windfall profits, or that a hefty surcharge be added to each gallon of fuel sold - where revenues collected would be directed into things like publicly-sponsored alternative energy development or energy use reduction programs. But this is America and I'd just be kidding myself if I were to suggest we might actually go about doing things differently. So let the laissez-faire economics rip.

[DantesPeak]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zentric', 'I')'m agreeing with threadbear, who appears to be correct about the oligopolistic behaviors of the oil companies. They're enjoying the benefits of gasoline in short supply much like how Enron enjoyed it when California faced an acute electricity shortfall several summers ago. A similar case can be made for how oil companies are now "gaming the system."

If the oil refiners much cared about providing ample gasoline supplies to consumers during this summer's driving season, they would have made extra sure to import even more foreign gasoline to our domestic market ahead of time, would have purchased more of the expensive sweet and light crude for their domestic refineries, or would have added incremental refining capacity to their existing plants starting years ago. The fact that this has not sufficiently happened implies two things - that the refineries collectively prefer to make as much money for themselves as possible during a time of predictably tight gasoline supplies (and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this) and that there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that shows collusion and oligopoly in the oil business (not that there's anything wrong with this either - because, in the long run, it curtails consumption).

My own preference is that either the oil companies be taxed for their windfall profits, or that a hefty surcharge be added to each gallon of fuel sold - where revenues collected would be directed into things like publicly-sponsored alternative energy development or energy use reduction programs. But this is America and I'd just be kidding myself if I were to suggest we might actually go about doing things differently. So let the laissez-faire economics rip.

[threadbear]

Consumer Affairs:


"The FTC has become increasingly political, losing its traditional independence and favoring big oil, and the agency is too quick to point blame at small retailers rather than large refiners, despite the fact that a May 2004 U.S. Government Accountability Office report found that mergers in the oil industry have led to higher prices," said Tyson Slocum, Director of Public Citizen?s Energy Program.

"The FTC downplays the role of legal manipulation, by which refiners use their market power to unilaterally engage in anti-competitive practices, leading to higher prices for consumers," said Slocum.

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2 ... rices.html

[Zentric]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bobcousins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'S')eeing as there are no anti-gouging laws in the US and it's very difficult to prove collusion in an oligopoly, it's almost impossible to get clear cut evidence. Where is the absolute proof of peak oil? There isn't any, but we can make a reasoned argument, that it's true. You'll never do better than constructing a strong circumstantial case, Monte, as I can make a very strong circumstantial case for collusion at the refinery level.