I want someone to answer a few things for me...

by **Divest** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:38:59

See, no one at any other board will engage me in a debate about this. Everyone seems to do nothing but jump around the issues that I bring up.

"Let's debate"
"There's no point"
"Because peak oil is a superstition and nothing more"
"Not uh, we just don't have facts"
"What?"

Here's what I wrote at another forum:

We are not running out of oil. There have been recent finds in North Dakota(3.5 + bln), Brazil (330 bln), and of course we still have Anwar. OPEC also has the capacity to bring more oil to the market. We also have untapped resources in Colorado much like Canada has oil sand. The current price of oil does not reflect the “scarcity” of oil at all, rather oil prices have been propped up by a falling US dollar, which has allowed more investors from Europe and other investment houses to invest in oil and use it as a hedge, much like gold has been used in the past, against a falling dollar, and a cooling US economy. If you would take the time to look at the graphs, oil prices have retreated each day the US dollar has gotten stronger (losing over 2 dollars yesterday and 70 cents today), and visa versa.

As for your stance of another attack on US soil by Iran, I very much doubt that will happen, especially with a new president being elected this year.

Your concern for food prices, while that is justified, I doubt that the US will succumb to massive food shortages, we will simply stop exporting food before we let our citizens starve. And as ethanol becomes less and less of a good idea, you’ll see corn start coming back into the food market; as for rice, that will have far more of an impact on Asian countries that it will have here in the US, and with better weather next year the food cost of rice will abate.

Anybody?

by **Divest** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:39:55

*edit* dp

by **Cashmere** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:50:22

The experienced people on this board have been predicting/expecting Peak Oil for a few years.

Everything they have predicted has come to pass.

When you make several predictions on a certain subject over time and they all start become reality, you tend to believe that your entire predicted paradigm is correct.

You are just some newb who has wandered in here looking to scrap.

Whether oil is connected to a flight from U.S. currency is entirely irrelevant to Peak Oil.

Every question you have - or point you have posed - has been covered in depth in many posts on this site.

If you really want to "debate", then find some idiots near where you live, eat some apple pie, and debate until you're horse.

If, instead, you really want to learn, then spend the next 20 days doing nothing but reading this site, without posting.

Read about the virtual worthlessness of shale and tar sand. Read about crashing production in Mexico, North Sea, Russia.

In short, STFU and read, not write.

I will offer you one response . . .

You wrote:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s for your stance of another attack on US soil by Iran, I very much doubt that will happen, especially with a new president being elected this year.

by **joeltrout** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:53:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Divest', '
')
Anybody?

by **emersonbiggins** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:54:20

A major tenet of your assertion is outright dubious. Oil is up versus all major currencies; it's run-up is merely exaggerated by the laggard USD.

by **UncoveringTruths** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:55:00

No one that has studied Peak Oil issues for any length of time has ever said "we will run out of oil" that is what the deniers say we have said. It is about flow rates unconventional oil(tar sands etc) and hard to reach oil will not have the same flow rates as conventional easily extracted oil. Which we have sucked up most of the easy stuff first to maximize profits so we have harder stuff to get to now which is more expensive to develop and it will not flow as easily as before.

Also look into EROEI.

by **dbruning** » Thu 01 May 2008, 14:59:28

"We are not running out of oil. There have been recent finds in North Dakota(3.5 + bln), Brazil (330 bln), and of course we still have Anwar. OPEC also has the capacity to bring more oil to the market. We also have untapped resources in Colorado much like Canada has oil sand."

I don't think too many people here are saying we're running out of oil. What they are concerned about it that the global demand for oil is increasing, the new production that is coming online has a certain portion of it going to offset decline in existing fields, and as the quality of the oil is not often the light sweet crude that is so nice (especially for things like tar sands), the cost of extraction and refining is going to make oil prices go through the roof.

As the price increases (I agree the weakening US dollar is not helping) many people around the world will find themselves unable to buy the basic food and heating they require to sustain life.

"As for your stance of another attack on US soil by Iran, I very much doubt that will happen, especially with a new president being elected this year. "

Firstly, I agree, an attack on Iranians would be foolish. However, if one was to pull such a stunt, attacking right at the end of ones term might in fact be thought to be a plus, not a minus. But I think the main point here is this: you and I think this attack is foolish...do the people giving the orders agree with us or not? Some think they don't or may be privy to information that we are simply not aware of.

Personally, I see a build up of force in the middle east on both sides. I see the guys in charge of these countries constantly saying mean things about each other. I see the possibility that even an accidental attack could easy escalate into something no one could control. It's happened in the past. It is a valid concern in my opinion.

If you chose to believe the US and Iranian leaders are beyond such mistakes I salute your confidence. We disagree, but that's ok.

"Your concern for food prices, while that is justified, I doubt that the US will succumb to massive food shortages, we will simply stop exporting food before we let our citizens starve."

True, but keep in mind a quanitity of those food exports are charitable donations to starving populations that are dealing with drought, disease, and a ton of other problems. Cutting off that support will result in many deaths.

Bottom line, we live on a big planet. As our species grew in numbers and technological prowess, we didn't need to learn that our collective actions had an impact - we were still too small and insignificant on a global scale.

Today, we have the ability to do serious harm merely from our numbers, let alone some of the things we have developed for war. Our actions DO impact the entire planet now. And the habits we should have developed to protect our environment are non-existent - in fact, destroying it actually gives the biggest rewards.

I simply don't see how anyone could be optimistic in the face of this.

by **Jack** » Thu 01 May 2008, 15:22:58

You've found us out, Divest!

Peak Oil is a myth! We're not running out, and we never will.

You see, in a secret government lab at Area 51, communication has been established with the angelic host. And they're going to strap little buckets to their legs, then go to Titan to retrieve hydrocarbons, and fly them back to our refineries!

We were just keeping it secret so we could all manipulate the oil markets and make big bucks. Oh, well.

Quick, buy the biggest SUV you can find while the prices are still down!

Yes, my post is utterly absurd, totally ridiculous, and a waste of bandwidth. In other words, appropriate.

by **Aaron** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:02:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', 'Y')ou've found us out, Divest!

Peak Oil is a myth! We're not running out, and we never will.

You see, in a secret government lab at Area 51, communication has been established with the angelic host. And they're going to strap little buckets to their legs, then go to Titan to retrieve hydrocarbons, and fly them back to our refineries!

We were just keeping it secret so we could all manipulate the oil markets and make big bucks. Oh, well.

Quick, buy the biggest SUV you can find while the prices are still down!

Yes, my post is utterly absurd, totally ridiculous, and a waste of bandwidth. In other words, appropriate.

by **BigTex** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:24:06

Divest,

You will get some excellent discussions here if you will educate yourself first.

Read the archives for a while. There's not too much that hasn't been covered (on the peak oil topic as well as other topics).

Before you start, give yourself a gentle tap on the noggin with a hammer to loosen things up.

You will feel like you are drinking out of a fire hydrant before you know it.

Have fun.

by **efarmer** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:27:31

Divest, you have walked on stage with a kazoo to taunt a
symphony orchestra. This site has hours of the arguments
you seek where you can read them from almost every
type of personality and discipline. There are a lot of heads
that have fed this vast site, you would be best to soak
for awhile and then present any subset of your arguments
that are not so already covered, that just reading them
will make you look like Rip Van Winkle.

Best of luck on a great big chunk of information digestion.
Have fun and good luck!

by **Divest** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:34:16

You people are hopeless!!

Global demand for oil will abate as economies cool. The US has seen a year over year decrease in oil and gasoline demand, and as the US economy cools the European and Chinese export markets will also start to receede, thus reducing the overall demand. It’s already started, most economists agree that the cost of oil ($112/b) has nothing to do with supply/demand economics.
I think you’re being over dramatic when you say "many people around the world will find themselves unable to buy the basic food and heating they require to sustain life." whom are you refering to? Europeans; doubt it because the euro is strong..$112 cost per barrel is like 60 euro to them, Chinese? nope, the chinese government subsudieses the cost of oil, Russians have their own internal supply..besides the poor nations, who will get help from the IMF and the world bank, there won’t be much.

There is much evidence to support that a conflict between the US and Iran won’t happen, Iran having any sort of agreements with Iraq is directly supported by the US. As well as the deterant factors of both China and Russia being indirectly supportive of Iran and any activity by the US and its westren european allies against Iran will be hotly contested by both those countries would suggest that the US would be in a world of hurt if it attacked Iran. Besides, Iran has been behind much of the US troop deaths in Iraq; they arm and fund the militias, such as the one in Sardar city and the US has not conducted any actions against the Iranians.

People dying in a far away land is a much diffrent issue then people starving here. When it comes down to it, people of each country will do whats best for that country, meaning before we hit the point of shortage of food in this country we’ll simply stop exporting or giving charatible donations; case in point donations to charities have already decreased since the economic slowdown has hit.

Try not to be over dramatic in the future, you’re no better then the media when you promote off the wall ideas that serve no propose other then to scare people; the so called "food shortage" here in the US..you can’t buy more then 80 lbs of rice / visit to sams club now? its hardly a crisis worth mentioning, 80lbs of rice is a lot of rice.

by **Twilight** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:38:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Divest', 'W')e are not running out of oil.

by **skyemoor** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:42:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')I warned you about disclosing our super double top secret scam to outsiders!

by **Divest** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:45:56

Twilight,

While I reply to that part, would you mind responding to the second part I posted?

Thanks

by **peasea** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:49:15

Here's what I wrote at another forum:

We are not running out of oil.
A.- true - we agree but thats NOT the problem. its cheap oil we're running out of. North Sea for one - didnt take long to run that one find down , did it?

There have been recent finds in North Dakota(3.5 + bln), Brazil (330 bln), and of course we still have Anwar.
A. this is actually not much oil compared to what we use as the world and Anwar is uproven - 5 years supply for all at best and not easy to get out = expensive

OPEC also has the capacity to bring more oil to the market.
A. - but chooses not to - or can't or maybe doesn't have capacity. who knows ? they're keeping mum , or maybe letting the cat out of the bag now.

We also have untapped resources in Colorado much like Canada has oil sand.
A. gah! its not oil but tar please! again not easy to get out = expensive - otherwise we would have exploited it already! and it does not come out of the ground fast either - see flow rates.

The current price of oil does not reflect the ?scarcity? of oil at all, rather oil prices have been propped up by a falling US dollar, which has allowed more investors from Europe and other investment houses to invest in oil and use it as a hedge, much like gold has been used in the past, against a falling dollar, and a cooling US economy.

A. please remember gold doesn't get burned so stays around :-)

. but, if true, hedge funds are short term so any effects will play out soon. but they haven't have they? no more $30 oil here or even $10 inflantion adjusted ?? Oil at the peak flow will dip and rise on the market but will end up higher overall. look at the data!

If you would take the time to look at the graphs, oil prices have retreated each day the US dollar has gotten stronger (losing over 2 dollars yesterday and 70 cents today), and visa versa.

A. Oil against a basket of currencies is higher than you would expect from plentifull supply , I conclued we have a shortage of oil from this. You may disagree - lets leave it at that.

As for your stance of another attack on US soil by Iran, I very much doubt that will happen, especially with a new president being elected this year.

A. I think you meant US attack Iran, others have pointed out the falsehood of the US GOP claims .

Your concern for food prices, while that is justified, I doubt that the US will succumb to massive food shortages, we will simply stop exporting food before we let our citizens starve. And as ethanol becomes less and less of a good idea, you?ll see corn start coming back into the food market; as for rice, that will have far more of an impact on Asian countries that it will have here in the US, and with better weather next year the food cost of rice will abate.

A. Maybe, ethanol from food crops was GW idea, the Chinese I beleive , banned it. Perhaps growing potatoes would help , you get 4 x the crop when compared with Wheat. Perhaps we can use potatoes to make ethanol ? actually it would not be a good idea at all we don't have the space or the gas to make fertilizer to make this worht while - see EROI posts for further details.

and , oh, welcome to Peak Oil. look at the data , not emotions, look at the facts and see that we need to do something now

cheers,

P.

not a doomer but a fact checker

by **Leanan** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:52:53

Gold isn't buying as much oil as it used to

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') talking head on television this weekend was discussing the worldwide price of rice, and noted that its relationship to gold had changed little. Over the past several months, she said, the amount of rice that an ounce of gold would buy had not changed significantly.

This, of course, led The Barrel to check what had happened to the relationship between gold and oil these last few months. The numbers are sobering.

...The change since then has been remarkable, and it strongly undercuts the idea that the rise in the price of oil is simply a financial phenomenon. If gold is the ultimate storehouse of value and the currency of last resort, a commodity that is being driven primarily by currency factors should not be strengthening against that currency.

by **BigTex** » Thu 01 May 2008, 16:56:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Divest', 'T')wilight,

While I reply to that part, would you mind responding to the second part I posted?

Thanks

by **Pops** » Thu 01 May 2008, 17:18:16

From the home page under What is Peak oil...

World discovery of oil peaked in the 1960s, and has declined since then. If the 40 year cycle seen in the US holds true for world oil production, that puts global peak oil production, right about now; after which oil becomes less available, and more expensive.

Everything else is just detail...

by **zzzpeakoil** » Thu 01 May 2008, 17:19:14

Divest.

1. If u want to prove peak oil as a myth, I think that you must prove that oil is a renewable resource. Do that please if you can.

2. You making account on "PeakOil.com" and saying up front peak oil is myth is like me (atheist) logging on a Christian forum and saying up front "your religion si bullshit". => we both lose our time, and other's time as well. The only notable difference would of course be , that I would saying the truth.