General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.
by shortonsense » Sun 23 May 2010, 21:02:48
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', 'H')ere is another clue:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=oil+spil ... ytd&sort=0I guess I don't understand what I'm supposed to see. It looks like a graph showing increased traffic related to the GOM spill? How does that relate to any possible traffic increase if the MSM does more PO stories than they do already? The GOM event didn't exist 6 weeks ago...its polluting the gulf, people are ticked off, its current events so of course people would be googling it more than a topic which has been around for decades....like PO.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Sun 23 May 2010, 23:04:08
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', 'H')ere is another clue:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=oil+spil ... ytd&sort=0I guess I don't understand what I'm supposed to see. It looks like a graph showing increased traffic related to the GOM spill? How does that relate to any possible traffic increase if the MSM does more PO stories than they do already? The GOM event didn't exist 6 weeks ago...its polluting the gulf, people are ticked off, its current events so of course people would be googling it more than a topic which has been around for decades....like PO.
Yes, it shows a huge increase of searches for the term "oil spill" while the searches for "peak oil" remains very low. If MSM started really pushing the term "peak oil" in their headline stories (MSM still has huge 'propaganda' power among the public) then the searches would massively increase for the term "peak oil". If people use for example Google, they would get something like:
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp& ... i=g10&aql=Peakoil.com is #3 on that search result list at the moment. Not bad!
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by Newfie » Sun 23 May 2010, 23:14:10
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eXpat', '[')b]Pops, I think a better question is: what has people been conditioned to believe?
And here is my answer: people, all over the world, has been conditioned to believe (the generations after WW2 that is) that they are the center of the universe, everything spins arounds them, even (to my surprise) in the 3rd world, and nothing, absolutely nothing, can stop the glorious path to a better future.
People that lives in the developed world think that nothing can stop the way to progress, is there a economical/financial crisis?, is just something temporary, that will let us "experience a bit of poverty" (like when you are in Uni) and then the great historical path to progress will resume. Is there a limit with the production of oil our civilization requires? no problem, alternative energy sources like: solar, ocean wave energy, wind, nuclear, etc. will step in to keep us cozy (without giving a second though about the impact of oil in this alternatives sources).
Much to my surprise, people in the developing word believe exactly the same!, they are in the lookout for economic or political news that affect their lives, but the very fundations of it, is taken for granted.
People will realize how dire is the situation after a week without electricity...
I sure agree with this eXpat. I just came from an all day meeting where that point was driven home to me. Without going into details about the event it became clear that some people, no matter what the evidence, including direct evidence in front of their eyes and ears, will continue to believe exactly what they want to believe. And nothing else.
Very, very frustrating.
-
Newfie
- Forum Moderator
-
- Posts: 18651
- Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
- Location: Between Canada and Carribean
-
by Anders » Mon 24 May 2010, 09:04:31
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'T')he GOM event didn't exist 6 weeks ago...its polluting the gulf, people are ticked off, its current events so of course people would be googling it more than a topic which has been around for decades....like PO.
Ok, that may be true, but remember that the oil spill is (hopefully) a relatively short-lived event, while peak oil will likely remain a huge concern for many years. It's just that ordinary people, even people in positions of power, are not yet aware of how grave the peak oil situation is. Mainstream media has enormous power in how they can choose what to focus on, and get the masses to follow. So it depends very much on how much MSM chooses to hype peak oil should they decide (together with politicians and other influential people I assume) to start disclosing the real facts about the current oil situation.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Mon 24 May 2010, 09:38:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'T')he GOM event didn't exist 6 weeks ago...its polluting the gulf, people are ticked off, its current events so of course people would be googling it more than a topic which has been around for decades....like PO.
Ok, that may be true, but remember that the oil spill is (hopefully) a relatively short-lived event, while peak oil will likely remain a huge concern for many years.
It has been a huge concern for many years. Jimmy was talking about it at the nation level more than 3 decades ago. Certainly after I lived through the peak oil of 1979 I never forgot about it, even if cheap gasoline returning in 1986 fooled many into believing the problem was over.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')It's just that ordinary people, even people in positions of power, are not yet aware of how grave the peak oil situation is.
Then anyone above the age of, say, 40 years old should have paid better attention the last time it happened. Certainly you can't tell that the situation is "grave" from the results of peak oil, 5 years after it has happened (or 31). And if you tell people, "Yup, peak oil happened a few years back, the situation is pretty grave", they are going to look around, glance over their shoulder maybe, then turn to you with a confused look and say, "What?".
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')Mainstream media has enormous power in how they can choose what to focus on, and get the masses to follow.
If the peak oil situation really were grave, the MSM couldn't hide it any better than it could the shortages and rationing of the 70's. The MSM might be great for trying to convince you to buy one brand of toilet paper over another, but it can't exactly hide the sort of consequences which really would make joe average think the situation was "grave", versus mostly superfluous to his daily existence.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')So it depends very much on how much MSM chooses to hype peak oil should they decide (together with politicians and other influential people I assume) to start disclosing the real facts about the current oil situation.
Nah...the MSM is irrelevant if peak oil had the power which was claimed for it. They can't hide something of the size and scope of shortages and rationing, it just can't happen. They'd be standing right there in the gas line, trumpeting the incompetence of whoever they chose to blame the event on, and we'd all get a good "I told you so" chuckle out of seeing it on TV.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Mon 24 May 2010, 09:57:59
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'I')f the peak oil situation really were grave, the MSM couldn't hide it any better than it could the shortages and rationing of the 70's.
It's only around 2005 we entered a real limitation in global oil production I think. And my conspiracy theory belief is that politicians together with MSM have created the climate change debate as a way of tackling the peak oil problem without having to tell the public about it. Politicians the world over need to step on the break so to speak in oil consumption, but they at the same time must prevent catastrophic results in the economy and in society.
Also the trillion dollar and euro bailouts have gone to massively subsidize the oil price is my guess. In short, I believe the current oil situation is extremely grave, and is a situation that has not existed before in the past (global plateau in production).
Another guess is that even the current economic recession has on purpose been created to reduce oil consumption.
All other problems in the world today pale in comparison to the peak oil problem, and at least the top politicians are aware of that, and they create smokescreens to tackle the problem in indirect ways so to not alarm the public.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by Anders » Mon 24 May 2010, 10:19:30
Here are some more conspiracy possibilities:
Alan Greenspan wrote that the Iraq war was largely about oil. At the beginning of the Iraq invasion around 2003 George W. Bush promised that the Iraqi oil production would double within a few years. What happened in reality is that the Iraqi oil production has barely been able to be kept flat!
So in comes Al Gore with plan B: An Inconvenient Truth (a convenient lie) in order to try to tackle the growing oil problem.
Plan B only has limited effect, so plan C is put into action: a staged oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico in order to program the masses with the idea that oil is really bad and problematic.
Plan D will involve Obama requesting the U.S. oil consumption to be reduced, and after that other countries will follow with similar programs and regulations.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by Ludi » Mon 24 May 2010, 11:27:26
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')
So in comes Al Gore with plan B: An Inconvenient Truth (a convenient lie) in order to try to tackle the growing oil problem.
That's right! Al Gore went back in time to make this movie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lgzz-L7GFg 
-
Ludi
-
by Anders » Mon 24 May 2010, 11:32:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')
So in comes Al Gore with plan B: An Inconvenient Truth (a convenient lie) in order to try to tackle the growing oil problem.
That's right! Al Gore went back in time to make this movie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lgzz-L7GFg And then changed his mind and started talking about a new ice age in the 70s.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Mon 24 May 2010, 22:01:27
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'I')f the peak oil situation really were grave, the MSM couldn't hide it any better than it could the shortages and rationing of the 70's.
It's only around 2005 we entered a real limitation in global oil production I think.
What limitation? Unlike the 70's when they would refuse to sell you gasoline, where has peak oil caused limitations since 2005? (beyond the normal hurricane induced interruptions and such completely unrelated to actual supply which some people try and confuse with a peak oil induced condition). Certainly in the worlds largest crack-hoe consumer of crude we should have seen SOMETHING, shouldn't we?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')And my conspiracy theory belief is that politicians together with MSM have created the climate change debate as a way of tackling the peak oil problem without having to tell the public about it.
Whoa Matilda! Thats a pretty big conspiracy, isn't it? I mean, considering they were trumpeting this running out of oil routine in the 70's, do you suppose that they concocted this conspiracy AFTER they had already let the cat out of the bag and hoped we would just all forget? Or does it predate even that running out of oil episode? Back in 70's they were busy telling us we were going to all freeze as the planet cooled into the next ice age, did they know then that it was actually warming, and were just trying to trick us at even another level? Left jab, right hook kind of thing?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')In short, I believe the current oil situation is extremely grave, and is a situation that has not existed before in the past (global plateau in production).
Well, I could agree with this because in 1979 we actually had a peak and decline, not much of a plateau at all. But I still think that peak was worse than the current one, or the current plateau.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')Another guess is that even the current economic recession has on purpose been created to reduce oil consumption.
In what way? Uncle Sam poisoned the water of American home buyers 5 minutes before they signed the mortgage paperwork causing them to be instantly struck stupid when they knew they couldn't afford? Thats a pretty big stretch Anders, I can see Uncle Sam convincing a couple of moron Americans to do that, but certainly not the millions who actually bought more house than they could afford.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Mon 24 May 2010, 23:22:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'I')f the peak oil situation really were grave, the MSM couldn't hide it any better than it could the shortages and rationing of the 70's.
It's only around 2005 we entered a real limitation in global oil production I think.
What limitation? Unlike the 70's when they would refuse to sell you gasoline, where has peak oil caused limitations since 2005? (beyond the normal hurricane induced interruptions and such completely unrelated to actual supply which some people try and confuse with a peak oil induced condition). Certainly in the worlds largest crack-hoe consumer of crude we should have seen SOMETHING, shouldn't we?
The economic model based on continuous growth is no longer sustainable with a foundation in oil. The current economic recession, created on purpose or not is an inevitable result of stagnating (flattened out) global oil production.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')And my conspiracy theory belief is that politicians together with MSM have created the climate change debate as a way of tackling the peak oil problem without having to tell the public about it.
Whoa Matilda! Thats a pretty big conspiracy, isn't it? I mean, considering they were trumpeting this running out of oil routine in the 70's, do you suppose that they concocted this conspiracy AFTER they had already let the cat out of the bag and hoped we would just all forget? Or does it predate even that running out of oil episode? Back in 70's they were busy telling us we were going to all freeze as the planet cooled into the next ice age, did they know then that it was actually warming, and were just trying to trick us at even another level? Left jab, right hook kind of thing?
The idea that the climate change debate is a smokescreen for dealing with peak oil is a SMALL conspiracy theory. 
The idea that the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico has been staged in order to deal with peak oil, THAT is a big conspiracy theory. 
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')In short, I believe the current oil situation is extremely grave, and is a situation that has not existed before in the past (global plateau in production).
Well, I could agree with this because in 1979 we actually had a peak and decline, not much of a plateau at all. But I still think that peak was worse than the current one, or the current plateau.
There has never been a global plateau in oil production before. Globally, oil production has increased over time until around 2005.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')Another guess is that even the current economic recession has on purpose been created to reduce oil consumption.
In what way? Uncle Sam poisoned the water of American home buyers 5 minutes before they signed the mortgage paperwork causing them to be instantly struck stupid when they knew they couldn't afford? Thats a pretty big stretch Anders, I can see Uncle Sam convincing a couple of moron Americans to do that, but certainly not the millions who actually bought more house than they could afford.
The economic growth model that worked in the past can be pictured as a car accelerating down a highway. Global peak oil can be seen as a sharp bend appearing in the road ahead. Politicians need to step on the break in order to safely drive the car through the curve.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Mon 24 May 2010, 23:58:17
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'I')f the peak oil situation really were grave, the MSM couldn't hide it any better than it could the shortages and rationing of the 70's.
It's only around 2005 we entered a real limitation in global oil production I think.
Certainly in the worlds largest crack-hoe consumer of crude we should have seen SOMETHING, shouldn't we?
The economic model based on continuous growth is no longer sustainable with a foundation in oil. The current economic recession, created on purpose or not is an inevitable result of stagnating (flattened out) global oil production.
The current economic recession, since ended here in the US, was the inevitable result of a borrowing binge based on fake housing values. Mos (he who leaves and returns and blames all of us for it) has argued effectively for this in reasonable detail. Certainly there are plenty of examples of economic growth without requiring additional oil consumption, entire countries have done it, and peak oil strikes me as meaning that someday the world will as well. Maybe thats now, maybe it isn't.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')The idea that the climate change debate is a smokescreen for dealing with peak oil is a SMALL conspiracy theory. The idea that the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico has been staged in order to deal with peak oil, THAT is a big conspiracy theory.
Around here, we tend to get what I would call "normal" conspiracy theories. Much better than the hairball/space alien/mind control stuff which thankfully resides elsewhere.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Well, I could agree with this because in 1979 we actually had a peak and decline, not much of a plateau at all. But I still think that peak was worse than the current one, or the current plateau.
There has never been a global plateau in oil production before. Globally, oil production has increased over time until around 2005.
It wasn't a plateau, it was a peak. Followed by a decline. Took like 15 years to get back to the same level. For those 15 years, there was zero increasing going on, it was just trying to get back to where it had been. It shows up quite well on global consumption of crude graphs...have you seen them?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')Another guess is that even the current economic recession has on purpose been created to reduce oil consumption.
In what way?
The economic growth model that worked in the past can be pictured as a car accelerating down a highway. Global peak oil can be seen as a sharp bend appearing in the road ahead. Politicians need to step on the break in order to safely drive the car through the curve.
Well, that might be your analogy, but how do you suppose a recession was created on purpose? How do you suppose millions of Americans were baited, forced, or convinced to do something inherently stupid related to mortgage products? Certainly it decreased oil consumption, but wouldn't it have been easier to just triple all taxes on fuels and let THAT cause demand destruction, rather than blowing away the housing sector instead?
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Tue 25 May 2010, 00:37:10
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')The current economic recession, since ended here in the US, was the inevitable result of a borrowing binge based on fake housing values. Mos (he who leaves and returns and blames all of us for it) has argued effectively for this in reasonable detail. Certainly there are plenty of examples of economic growth without requiring additional oil consumption, entire countries have done it, and peak oil strikes me as meaning that someday the world will as well. Maybe thats now, maybe it isn't.
But creating economic growth by creating more credit is not a sustainable solution. Money can be created out of thin air through fractional reserve banking. Oil cannot (without Star Trek technologies at least) be created out of thin air.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Around here, we tend to get what I would call "normal" conspiracy theories. Much better than the hairball/space alien/mind control stuff which thankfully resides elsewhere.
I would say that the climate change debate (Climategate) could reasonably safely be considered a conspiracy created by people in top positions of power to deal with the global peak oil problem.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')It wasn't a plateau, it was a peak. Followed by a decline. Took like 15 years to get back to the same level. For those 15 years, there was zero increasing going on, it was just trying to get back to where it had been. It shows up quite well on global consumption of crude graphs...have you seen them?
It was not a peak seen from the total global production, since the production increased after that even though it took several years to increase the production again.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Well, that might be your analogy, but how do you suppose a recession was created on purpose? How do you suppose millions of Americans were baited, forced, or convinced to do something inherently stupid related to mortgage products? Certainly it decreased oil consumption, but wouldn't it have been easier to just triple all taxes on fuels and let THAT cause demand destruction, rather than blowing away the housing sector instead?
The idea of giving many people easy credit for mortgages etc could have been a deliberately planned regulation to on purpose slow down the economy after a few years in order to meet a slowdown in oil production.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Tue 25 May 2010, 01:31:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')The current economic recession, since ended here in the US, was the inevitable result of a borrowing binge based on fake housing values. Mos (he who leaves and returns and blames all of us for it) has argued effectively for this in reasonable detail. Certainly there are plenty of examples of economic growth without requiring additional oil consumption, entire countries have done it, and peak oil strikes me as meaning that someday the world will as well. Maybe thats now, maybe it isn't.
But creating economic growth by creating more credit is not a sustainable solution.
"Sustainable solution" is an oxymoron. Nothing is sustainable given an appropriate timeframe. And credit isn't oil, any more than idiotic Americans signing mortgages they couldn't afford is. You appear to be trying to attach some huge financial causal factors to the most recent peak oil (or plateau) without any proof other than you believe it to be true. Do you have any reasonable evidence which you believe shows that economic growth is correlated strongly with increased oil production? I don't have a clue where credit comes in either...producing oil doesn't "create" credit any more than producing...say...boll weevils.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')Money can be created out of thin air through fractional reserve banking. Oil cannot (without Star Trek technologies at least) be created out of thin air.
Oh, I understand fractional reserve banking, trying to spin a correlation between it and the housing binge /lending disaster has potential, but it doesn't strike me as having much to do with oil production either. Myself, I don't have any objection to fractional reserve banking, within reason of course.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')It wasn't a plateau, it was a peak. Followed by a decline. Took like 15 years to get back to the same level. For those 15 years, there was zero increasing going on, it was just trying to get back to where it had been. It shows up quite well on global consumption of crude graphs...have you seen them?
It was not a peak seen from the total global production, since the production increased after that even though it took several years to increase the production again.
Its all in the timeframe perspective. To someone standing in 1980, peak was a done deal. And in 1981. And in 1982. And so on and so forth. We could be having this same argument back then, oil production is toast! (no its not!) rig counts are bad! (no they aren't!) the world is ending! (no it isn't!) and it would be no different than what we say today. One idea which sticks in my craw quite a bit around here is that there appear to be no original ideas. All of this stuff, from the fiat currency to the account deficits to oil running out to population being out of control, all it has been dredged up from the past.....with maybe a juggling of the consequences, but all the ideas are just repeats of old stuff. When you point this out to folks, they get cranky. Because obviously, the consequences the LAST time weren't the end of the world, why should they be this time?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Well, that might be your analogy, but how do you suppose a recession was created on purpose? How do you suppose millions of Americans were baited, forced, or convinced to do something inherently stupid related to mortgage products? Certainly it decreased oil consumption, but wouldn't it have been easier to just triple all taxes on fuels and let THAT cause demand destruction, rather than blowing away the housing sector instead?
The idea of giving many people easy credit for mortgages etc could have been a deliberately planned regulation to on purpose slow down the economy after a few years in order to meet a slowdown in oil production.
How is that possible? Its a plan that would only work if you could guarantee that millions of people would act in a stupid fashion, consistently. What would have happened if people had, god forbid, acted intelligently instead? Seems like a difficult plan to cause a recession, wouldn't it have been easier to just do something directly to cause a recession? Double interest rates for example? Presto...no one buys houses...banks crash, people stop refi'ing, they can't buy cars and junk...same result...and much easier to tell Bernanke what to do than put into action a plan which relies on millions of stupid Americans being....stupid...in just the way you want them to.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Tue 25 May 2010, 02:05:21
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')"Sustainable solution" is an oxymoron. Nothing is sustainable given an appropriate timeframe. And credit isn't oil, any more than idiotic Americans signing mortgages they couldn't afford is. You appear to be trying to attach some huge financial causal factors to the most recent peak oil (or plateau) without any proof other than you believe it to be true. Do you have any reasonable evidence which you believe shows that economic growth is correlated strongly with increased oil production? I don't have a clue where credit comes in either...producing oil doesn't "create" credit any more than producing...say...boll weevils.
My point is that it's oil that is the fundamental determining factor for the economy, and that credit and other financial means can only be altered to create temporary effects.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Oh, I understand fractional reserve banking, trying to spin a correlation between it and the housing binge /lending disaster has potential, but it doesn't strike me as having much to do with oil production either. Myself, I don't have any objection to fractional reserve banking, within reason of course.
Again, it's oil that is the bottom line determining factor. Financial means are secondary.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Its all in the timeframe perspective. To someone standing in 1980, peak was a done deal. And in 1981. And in 1982. And so on and so forth. We could be having this same argument back then, oil production is toast! (no its not!) rig counts are bad! (no they aren't!) the world is ending! (no it isn't!) and it would be no different than what we say today. One idea which sticks in my craw quite a bit around here is that there appear to be no original ideas. All of this stuff, from the fiat currency to the account deficits to oil running out to population being out of control, all it has been dredged up from the past.....with maybe a juggling of the consequences, but all the ideas are just repeats of old stuff. When you point this out to folks, they get cranky. Because obviously, the consequences the LAST time weren't the end of the world, why should they be this time?
In the past, peaks in production were only local and temporary. What we have today may be a lasting global plateau in production.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')How is that possible? Its a plan that would only work if you could guarantee that millions of people would act in a stupid fashion, consistently. What would have happened if people had, god forbid, acted intelligently instead? Seems like a difficult plan to cause a recession, wouldn't it have been easier to just do something directly to cause a recession? Double interest rates for example? Presto...no one buys houses...banks crash, people stop refi'ing, they can't buy cars and junk...same result...and much easier to tell Bernanke what to do than put into action a plan which relies on millions of stupid Americans being....stupid...in just the way you want them to.
I think they can predict fairly well how people, companies and banks will react to something like allowing easy credit. And I suspect they could have made choices so that an economic recession would be created after a few years.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Tue 25 May 2010, 02:38:26
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')My point is that it's oil that is the fundamental determining factor for the economy, and that credit and other financial means can only be altered to create temporary effects.
Well, we shall just have to disagree then because while I am perfectly willing to buy into the concept that oil is an important commodity, it isn't near important enough to base an entire world view on. I think if you tried to make the argument that energy is the fundamental determining factor for an economy, I can buy that, but not oil, nope.
As far as what credit can or cannot do, temporary effects or whatever, I would only venture that not using credit is good, and if I don't use it or depend on it, others can do as they wish and best of luck to them. It certainly isn't a requirement of life in the modern world, no matter how badly the big banks would want to convince us otherwise.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Oh, I understand fractional reserve banking, trying to spin a correlation between it and the housing binge /lending disaster has potential, but it doesn't strike me as having much to do with oil production either. Myself, I don't have any objection to fractional reserve banking, within reason of course.
Again, it's oil that is the bottom line determining factor. Financial means are secondary.
Again, if you said energy, I could at least squint and maybe see the point. But the world does not revolve around oil any more than it does any single other commodity, be it a fuel like natural gas or coal, or gold and platinum. While the fascination with oil is not unexpected at a website with the word in its domain name, it doesn't make your comment true.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')In the past, peaks in production were only local and temporary. What we have today may be a lasting global plateau in production.
And exactly the same comments could, and were, being said in the past. Today is different because.....you don't remember the same things being said 30 years ago, so this is your first time personally experiencing the hysteria which comes along with these things?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')I think they can predict fairly well how people, companies and banks will react to something like allowing easy credit.
Then you are more a man than I, and might have a career in economics.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
') And I suspect they could have made choices so that an economic recession would be created after a few years.
Myself, if my plan was predicated on Americans being stupid, I would worry that my plan....was predicated on stupid people. Some plans are tough enough when smart people are involved, who knows what stupid people might do. Nah....I would have told Bernanke to run interest rates up to 12% or so...much more foolproof than utilizing lots of stupid people who might go out and use that easy credit to buy bubble gum rather than the housing I wanted therm to.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Tue 25 May 2010, 02:50:54
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')Well, we shall just have to disagree then because while I am perfectly willing to buy into the concept that oil is an important commodity, it isn't near important enough to base an entire world view on. I think if you tried to make the argument that energy is the fundamental determining factor for an economy, I can buy that, but not oil, nope.
And exactly the same comments could, and were, being said in the past. Today is different because.....you don't remember the same things being said 30 years ago, so this is your first time personally experiencing the hysteria which comes along with these things?
Myself, if my plan was predicated on Americans being stupid, I would worry that my plan....was predicated on stupid people.
What I have heard experts saying is that our civilization today is crucially dependent on oil. I haven't expert knowledge about this myself, but it seems reasonable to me that oil really is that important.
This current global oil production plateau could be temporary, yes, but I don't think we have had a global plateau since 2005 because of financial or political reasons. I think it's a geological plateau that will be difficult to raise.
People, including myself, are lazy. That's what they base their plans on.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
by shortonsense » Wed 26 May 2010, 09:46:07
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')What I have heard experts saying is that our civilization today is crucially dependent on oil.
You would have to define "crucially" I suppose. It certainly is an important commodity. So are lots of other things. The peak oil movement, in part, is an attempt to convince others that it is unique in human history, rather than just another part of the human story.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')I haven't expert knowledge about this myself, but it seems reasonable to me that oil really is that important.
It is important. But will you shrivel up and die if the world produces 5% less next year? I certainly won't, no more than when it happened in the early 80's.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anders', '
')This current global oil production plateau could be temporary, yes, but I don't think we have had a global plateau since 2005 because of financial or political reasons. I think it's a geological plateau that will be difficult to raise.
I think most people now know that peak is really an economic effect. Ever at a place like this the coherent posters know that we've left untold billions of barrels in the ground, we keep finding more, we get better and better at fields like the one BP discovered (and is leaking) in the Gulf, utilizing heavy oil, etc etc.
But lets say it is a plateau, and we do slide off it soon. Some attach special significance to the event, you apparently believe it is an important turning point. Me, I think we'll get along with using less. Why not? We've already shown we can, its not like I'm postulating humans will have to grow a 3rd eye in the middle of their forehead to survive the experience.
-
shortonsense
- Permanently Banned
-
- Posts: 3124
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
-
by Anders » Wed 26 May 2010, 11:28:24
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')But lets say it is a plateau, and we do slide off it soon. Some attach special significance to the event, you apparently believe it is an important turning point. Me, I think we'll get along with using less. Why not? We've already shown we can, its not like I'm postulating humans will have to grow a 3rd eye in the middle of their forehead to survive the experience.
If we have reached a plateau and that it will be difficult to increase the global production of oil much in the future, I think it's a very serious situation, but not an alarming situation. It's serious in the sense that the economic model that has ruled for over a century is based on continuous economic growth.
In the future we will still be able to have economic growth, because of new energy technologies, so I'm very optimistic when it comes to the long-term future. The tricky thing is the near future. The industrialized world's infrastructures have almost 'grown out' of oil as the soil. Food today for example, requires a lot of calories of oil per calorie of food. Transportation, especially in the U.S., is today heavily dependent on oil and so on.
Therefore we need new energy technologies as fast as possible. Solar power for example, is, like technology in general, making exponential progress in price-performance. That's good, but it will still take a number of years before solar power really becomes a practical alternative. My favorite technology is zero point energy, which is the possibility of extracting energy from the vacuum. But that is only like science fiction at the moment, even though the existence of energy in empty space has been proven through the Casimir effect.
-
Anders
- Peat
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon 17 May 2010, 19:06:30
-
Return to Peak Oil Discussion
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests
