[DantesPeak]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Waterthrush', 'W')ell, the CNBC folks briskly disposed of the WSJ report 10 minutes into their 6 am Squawk Box show - Peter Buetel, oil "expert", immediately pointed to the Brazil oilfield as proof that there's much more oil out there to find.

According to Buetel, the problem is OPEC - they're not giving us enough of our oil ... I heard this kind of entitlement thinking on Bloomberg last week as well. I heard the commentator there actually refer to "our oil" when speaking of Iran and Venezuala.

The financial media simply cannot really comprehend what the implications of peak oil are. Even when they are mouthing the words about peak oil, their minds are telling them "everything will continue the way it is."

[Carlhole]

The WSJ article is not a peak oil article; it's an undulating plateau article.

And it implies that the US energy supplies are threatened by foreign governments. It would seem to be a good rationale for permanently stationing troops in Iraq!

[h20]

The more I see of society's response to peaking oil, the more I am reminded of Neville. The depth of denial is infuriating.

[roccman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'T')he WSJ article is not a peak oil article; it's an undulating plateau article.

And it implies that the US energy supplies are threatened by foreign governments. It would seem to be a good rationale for permanently stationing troops in Iraq!

[mididoctors]

A sustained plateau is a interesting idea.. what happens one day the oil just stops when it is all used up.

I am also getting a bit peeved off with various experts trying to co-opt the data and or PO in general as thou they were on the case to start with.

there is a muddled conflation. Goldman sachs are given as a example of a group who saw this coming despite saying they do not believe in "magical inflexion curves" in that super spike report.. which was wrong anyway oil went back down after they dropped all their stock.

Boris
London

[whatpeak]

{thread merged by emersonbiggins}

Peak oil mentioned in this morning's Wall Street Journal

Oil Officials See Limit Looming on Production

Though they never say how Peak Oil theorists were proved wrong so often. Whatever.

[h20]

Follow the conversation on this article
http://blogs.wsj.com/energy/2007/11/19/ ... t-to-peak/

[h20]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('whatpeak', 'T')hough they never say how Peak Oil theorists were proved wrong so often. Whatever.

[DantesPeak]

The Wall Street Journal did respond to my question (and h20 is right about the source of their comment):

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')----- Original Message -----
From: Gold, Russell
To: DantesPeak
Cc: Davis, Ann
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 12:07 PM
Subject: RE: Peak Oil

Dear Mr. Peak:

Thank you for getting in touch about the “Oil Officials See Limit Looming on Production” article in this morning’s Wall Street Journal.

You asked about the sentence: “They've been proved wrong so often that their theory has become debased.”

We were referring to the numerous times in the past when peak oil theorists have predicted a specific date the peak will occur and decline begin. For instance, in a 1991 book, Colin Campbell predicted world oil production would peak around 1995.

My co-author and I were referring to this history of predicting peaks when we wrote the sentence.

Thanks again for bringing this to our attention.

Rgds,

Russell




Russell Gold

The Wall Street Journal

Eml: russell.gold@wsj.com

[oowolf]

So Campbell is just full of shit and not actually the world's foremost petroleum geologist, and the rest of us "outsiders" are thoroughly debased.
Check out the Lahart article on page C1 comparing the mortgage mess and impending credit implosion to the "Y2K" hysteria.
Typical corporate media newspeak; i.e.: Whoopee, weak dollar means we can sell more Boeing "Dreamliners"!

[RedStateGreen]

Peak or plateau in supply, they haven't even addressed demand. They act like global demand is going to stay flat, when it is in fact increasing exponentially.

*sigh*

[Aaron]

You folks are brutal... & very very smart.

Great Thread(s).

[AirlinePilot]

Why does any of this surprise any of us in here anymore? Ive been saying for at least a year that denial and the fear associated with this knowledge is going to paralyze any action destined to do anything which might mitigate the effects of PO.

None of this is surprising to me. The "all is well, nothing to see here, move along" crowd is going to drown out the PO alarmists until its to late.

IMHO we've already missed the bus.

[DantesPeak]

Right now, there is a 600 foot (200 meter) wave you may call PO is about to crash on the shore, but the WSJ and others have so far only stated there is a storm brewing. I have increasingly been getting that unpleasant gut feeling that events are about to overwhelm even most of us here who think they can see what’s coming.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'T')he peak oil issue is starting to percolate up into the mainstream. Obviously the US press is going to be the last to take it seriously, but it seems to be exploding now in the UK. Because the UK being an english language country, americans are going to read a lot of it via Google News. It will eventually bleed into the US press.

I think next year is the year that everyone starts to talk about it around the water cooler. That's assuming oil passes $100/bl and gas prices spike even more. I just don't see how it can be swept under the rug much longer.

[RedStateGreen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', 'N')ot unlike Baghdad Bob

[h20]

CERA's Daniel Yergin:





The Infamous Baghdad Bob:

[TheDude]

Lots more like that out there.

Did someone link to the WSJ blog? Peak, Plateau — What’s the Difference? Comments section. Part of the URL is "to-peak-or-not-to-peak." That is the question! tale-told-by-an-idiot coming soon, I imagine.

[h20]

Talking about Danny "Baghdad Bob" Yergin, I hear he's starting to get worried:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FT.com', '�')��Until recently, there has been less concern about oil in the $90s than there was when it was $60 or $70. But it is obvious that oil at $100 is going to have much more impact than oil at $70,” said Daniel Yergin, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates

[h20]

Talking about Danny "Baghdad Bob" Yergin, I hear he's starting to get worried:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FT.com', '�')��Until recently, there has been less concern about oil in the $90s than there was when it was $60 or $70. But it is obvious that oil at $100 is going to have much more impact than oil at $70,” said Daniel Yergin, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates