Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysis

Discuss research and forecasts regarding hydrocarbon depletion.

Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysis

Unread postby LaLaLand » Thu 12 Apr 2007, 23:35:48

The Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank, takes on peak oil and government regulations involved in the petroleum extraction, refining, and distribution industries.

Energy Alarmism: The Myths That Make Americans Worry about Oil
LINK
User avatar
LaLaLand
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu 16 Dec 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby auscanman » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 00:09:24

Thats one of the most delusional analyses I've read for a while. No need to have troops in the Middle East to keep the oil flowing, or threaten anyone who dares to challenge the petrodollar.... The comment that really caught my attention is that peak oil is definitely not here, as past experience apparently shows that market forces have always ensured adequate supply. Unfortunately for them peak means a whole change to that state of affairs. Even though I was fervently against the war in Iraq, these misguided antiwar groups who think oil demand will just magically be met and that our way of life is non-negotiable almost piss me off more than honest pro-war crowd.

Another great example of how extrapolating from historical experience combined with blind faith in infinite growth economics leads to flawed conclusions.
User avatar
auscanman
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed 28 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby pea-jay » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 05:08:49

They're idiots, but unfortunately some rightwingers spout their thinking from time to time, reinforcing their idiocy.

I'll read the main document a little later, but given their track record, Im not holding out much hope for them.
UNplanning the future...
http://unplanning.blogspot.com
User avatar
pea-jay
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1547
Joined: Sat 17 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: NorCal

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby ALBY » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 12:06:04

idiots ? delusional ?

that is probably the most compelling (albeit left handed) indictment of us foreign policy of the last 50 years that i have ever read.

cato rarely produces crap. if you are looking for self reinforcing feedback for your pre-conceived ideological or geological notions, then im sure you were disappointed.

where i think cato has underestimated 'peak oil' is in the assumptions of world economic growth and the 'new' production needed to satisfy this demand. this is a non linear problem in that not meeting these economic goals by even a little bit will have a huge, asymetric impact on the world economy.

but, the main point of the piece is that US foreign policy is a clusterfuck and counterproductive to the energy security it claims as it's central premis. pretty much undeniable, doncha think ?
User avatar
ALBY
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri 30 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Baltimore County, Md

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby Guest » Fri 13 Apr 2007, 16:26:49

I haven't read their argument yet, and I doubt the first two posters did either. I'm going to read it this weekend. I can say this, Cato will always approach any issue from the small government "keep your hands off my property" stand point. They will call out any type of central planning entity every time and blame its interference on whatever problems might arise. Most of the scholars/policy wonks/media personalities at Cato aren't "anti-war" per say, they simply see war as a means to an end in regards to state power, as well as an interference on people's personal lives. Natural law is what it is, 0 interference.

I would agree a lot of what they say, albeit sensible, is not very realistic when you look at how the modern capitalist state really works. As any Marxist would argue; Capitalism will consume until there is nothing left to consume. That's how Capitalism works. Combine that with a socially conservative culture that doesn't change very much and bam. I can see why some people are freaked out by oil depletion due to a unsustainable lifestyles that everyone and the mother wants. Now the Chinese and Indians want it too...

I guess it's time to go nuk-lear as G. Bush would say...
Guest
 

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby NWMossBack » Sat 14 Apr 2007, 01:54:06

Here's my favorite quote:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cato Wingnuts', 'G')eologic features determine the location and quantity of oil deposits, but they do not determine "oil supply" in any meaningful sense.


It's all so simple: we don't need middle eastern oil with all the nasty geopolitical ramifications. Market forces will trump geology and allow profitable oil production in friendlier places! :P
User avatar
NWMossBack
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed 24 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Pacific NW USA

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby Concerned » Mon 16 Apr 2007, 16:29:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NWMossBack', 'H')ere's my favorite quote:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cato Wingnuts', 'G')eologic features determine the location and quantity of oil deposits, but they do not determine "oil supply" in any meaningful sense.


It's all so simple: we don't need middle eastern oil with all the nasty geopolitical ramifications. Market forces will trump geology and allow profitable oil production in friendlier places! :P


Of course not everyone knows that. Why? Because of the magical self regulating nature of market forces. The mystical invisible hand.

When xyz commodity became to expensive companies adapt and find ways of using less, something else or going without.

The going without part (demand destruction due to skyrocketing prices) is reserved for the poor masses. So if there is a food or fuel shortage the people with money say you and me get to eat and drive the people with less money say some farmer in Bangladesh, India or some other 3rd world hell hole gets to tie a rope around their neck and swing from a tree.

It's all very magical and self regulating and based on the "marginal added value" an individual can add to production.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box."
-Italian Proverb
User avatar
Concerned
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Thu 23 Sep 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby Vogelzang » Tue 15 Jul 2008, 21:21:24

User avatar
Vogelzang
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby cube » Sat 26 Jul 2008, 07:36:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pea-jay', 'T')hey're idiots, but unfortunately some rightwingers spout their thinking from time to time, reinforcing their idiocy.

Libertarians are NOT right-wingers
Image

Libertarians believe in BOTH personal freedom and economic freedom.
So basically you get to have (gay marriages + abortions) and (low taxes + small government)! 8)
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby dohboi » Fri 01 Aug 2008, 17:17:25

That chart makes libertarianism look like it's the opposite of popular!

I know, I know, it's populist, not popular, but it does make libertarians look like some kind of elitists.

Libertarians mistrust government power, but they seem to have no problem with enormous concentrations of power in the hands of mega-corporations or enormously wealthy individuals. Why is the one kind of power so frightening while the other is seen as totally benign?

Cato is always blinkered by their narrow ideology, but they have sometimes come up with a clever analysis. This does not look like one of them.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19990
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 03 Aug 2008, 18:45:22

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ALBY', 'b')ut, the main point of the piece is that US foreign policy is a Fark and counterproductive to the energy security it claims as it's central premis. pretty much undeniable, doncha think ?


That is the main point of the study and for this it has merit as it is an indictment of the failed neo conservative agenda. The faithfulness of market forces solving the problem together with technology is the part of the study that is almost frivolous. It lacks real integrity in that it doesn't even closely look at the geology of oil supplies seriously or at issues like EOREI but rather blames peak oil as a negative belief and one of fear mongering.

The part that addresses the complexity of supply and demand and how that relates to OPEC was good. It is interesting to question how long this alliance of oil producers will be necessary once supply constraints become more permanent.

The report is not loyal to the facts that are unfolding in the real world but rather faithful to a market philosophy of infinite growth based only on the dynamics of supply and demand.

I don't worry about that because as the saying goes......The truth will set you free.

It won't be long for the Cato Institute to have to question some of the pillars of their dogma. The geological reality of peak oil is currently seriously undermining this foundation.

I have recently stopped even getting angry or incredulous over these types of reports. It is no longer a debate over two conflicting philosophies as it perhaps once was a few decades ago.

It is now all about reality threatening long held belief systems. Why get angry anymore when we all know that even the Cato Institute will soon have to yield to realities. They may succeed in putting the breaks on faster mitigation and acceptance by the status quo but this is the very part of the process of transition. Institutes defending the status quo until reality imposes new truths. The more dogmatic your belief system the more unlikely you are to recognize and identify the early stages of a major threat such as peak oil and simply dismiss it. That is why an institute as prestigious as the Cato Institute can actually be so obtuse and blind to the reality of Peak Oil which really staring them in the face.

We are simply witnessing the unwinding of a dying paradigm.
Last edited by Ibon on Sun 03 Aug 2008, 19:08:47, edited 1 time in total.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9572
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama
Top

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby wxman » Sun 03 Aug 2008, 19:00:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LaLaLand', 'T')he Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank, takes on peak oil and government regulations involved in the petroleum extraction, refining, and distribution industries.

Energy Alarmism: The Myths That Make Americans Worry about Oil
LINK


Anyone notice that the date on that analysis is April, 2007, when oil was hovering between $60 and $70.

edit - NYMEX price on April 9th: $61.51
User avatar
wxman
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 03 Aug 2008, 19:10:19

I actually thought it was April 2008. It would be interesting to follow up with the authors if they remain faithful to the main points of their study.
Patiently awaiting the pathogens. Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9572
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Mon 04 Aug 2008, 12:35:24

Ibon,

It seems like we're back to the same repeated problem with the PO message: different parties trying to use PO to forward a seperate agenda. Like you, I don't brag on the results of US policies overseas. But you can bet, regardless of the date or subcontext, of reports like this one from the CI that it will be worked into the media circus and just confuse the angry viilagers all the more.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby TommyJefferson » Mon 04 Aug 2008, 17:35:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', 'L')ibertarians mistrust government power, but they seem to have no problem with enormous concentrations of power in the hands of mega-corporations or enormously wealthy individuals. Why is the one kind of power so frightening while the other is seen as totally benign?


Because government power is based upon violence and private power is based upon voluntary agreements.

Bill Gates can't legally pull my car over and take my cash just because I can't prove where I got it. Exxon Mobil can't legally bust into my house and shoot me because a confidential informant said I had some weed.
Conform . Consume . Obey .
User avatar
TommyJefferson
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1757
Joined: Thu 19 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Texas and Los Angeles
Top

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby mgibbons19 » Mon 04 Aug 2008, 17:47:05

It'd be cool to work for Cato
mgibbons19
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby CarlosFerreira » Mon 04 Aug 2008, 18:10:31

Concerning the date on the study: I still wonder if CI wouldn't happily agree today that prices are being kept deliberately high. They are right in a point, market mechanisms are ultimately what determines the PO impact, although (maybe they haven't got this part covered yet), market mechanisms aren't the cause for PO, Geology is! I sometimes wonder if all the "man controlling nature" mambo-jambo hasn't simply become pure reality in these peoples' minds...
Environmental News and Clippings:
http://www.google.co.uk/reader/shared/1 ... 4898696533
Environmental Economics and Systems
http://enviroecon.wordpress.com/
CarlosFerreira
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Wed 02 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Canterbury, UK

Re: Cato Institute's new "Energy Alarmism" analysi

Unread postby dohboi » Thu 07 Aug 2008, 22:20:03

"Because government power is based upon violence and private power is based upon voluntary agreements."

Thanks for that clear explanation, TJ. I still think it is naive to think that in this day mega-corporations don't control you just as much as governments do, partly because they control much of the government. If you got rid of government, the corps would soon be wielding much more military power, I have no doubt.

But your explanation is very clear and I hadn't heard it put that way before, so thanks.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 19990
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 04:00:00

Re: Cato Institute's new

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 27 Jul 2009, 15:33:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dohboi', '
')Because government power is based upon violence and private power is based upon voluntary agreements.

Bill Gates can't legally pull my car over and take my cash just because I can't prove where I got it. Exxon Mobil can't legally bust into my house and shoot me because a confidential informant said I had some weed.


I'm a libertarian, but someone will end up in power, and too much power makes whoever it is a bad actor.

Consider the banks recently. Unless you are financially completely strong/responsible (I know - not being that way is mostly a choice) - banks have become literally criminal enterprises in how they treat their credit card customers - by retroactively and dramatically changing the terms of already outstanding loans, for example. They don't break your legs (so far), but this behavior is just as immoral, IMO.


Medical insurance is another example. Although, in theory, I like free markets and less government, I actually support the current idea of a public option to COMPETE with private insurance. Why? Because medical insurance is so crucial, and the insurance companies have become too powerful and now behave badly. My carrier has raised my rates about 45% in just two years, and I only go to the doc. once a year and my health hasn't changed. How much profit margin is enough? How afraid of their phalanx of lawyers is it reasonable for me to be if I actually get seriously ill?

It's all about balance. With a full generation as an adult to sit back and watch the world work, perhaps I'm getting senile, but I suspect I'm a lot less idealistic than I was in my 20's, and perhaps a bit more objective.

The mixed system we have is messy, wasteful, and often stupid in the short term, but in the LONG term, it provides quite a bit of balance. I suspect that's why it holds together as well as it does.

To claim that dealing with private individuals is always better because we are theoretically free not to deal with them doesn't cut it in the modern first world complexity when bad actors with sticky products (like finance and medicine) have the concentrated power to do major harm to their customers, and those customers can do little to fight back without government controls.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 10142
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
Location: Central KY
Top

Re: Cato Institute's new

Unread postby Cloud9 » Mon 27 Jul 2009, 16:39:52

Indeed T.J.
User avatar
Cloud9
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed 26 Jul 2006, 03:00:00


Return to Peak oil studies, reports & models

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron