by TheDude » Thu 19 Jun 2008, 14:48:59
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'S')eriously though, Snik and I are on the same page I think. As long as prices stay high I'm in tall cotton. I can almost charge what I want as a consultant. A significant increase in production or reduction in consumption would only reduce my income potential. But I would gladly trade that for a chance to let the country adjust to the new reality.
It's good to have people around who can grasp the distinction. I'm not anti-corporate, or perhaps I should say, I'm resigned to their existence. They're part of industrialized society, what are you going to do?
It'd be ideal if we could find a way for energy companies to morph into servicing renewable energy projects or the like, but it seems they're largely one trick ponies. If we've moved away from hydrocarbons what does a petroleum geologist do? (Bet you guys have some examples!) 'Course we'll still be utilizing oil/gas on some scale for a long time.
But it'd be better if investment capital went in other directions. Some offshore should be part of the mix but ANWR is just too energy/capital/time intensive to warrant the yields, IMO. It does look like political will to oppose it will collapse soon, definitely if shortages begin; but perhaps we'll regret our decision to go down that road after 4-5 years. I'm reminded of the
WPPSS nuclear power boondoggle, which could have been prevented with more foresight.