Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
| Tesla to build new 5 BILLION dollar factory in Nevada; Another Blow to California | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 4 2014, 09:41 AM (1,941 Views) | |
| z34-5speed | Sep 6 2014, 05:50 AM Post #46 |
|
Formerly "Tech Certified"
![]()
|
Edited by z34-5speed, Sep 6 2014, 05:52 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Akagi | Sep 6 2014, 11:38 AM Post #47 |
|
The Genius Who Descended Into the Metro
![]()
|
And given that the world has likely already surpassed the global peak in oil production, we're gonna have some problems. Edited by Akagi, Sep 6 2014, 11:38 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Cubey | Sep 6 2014, 01:26 PM Post #48 |
![]()
|
People seem to relate the world "conservation" to meaning "dirty pinko liberals"... but it just means to make something last as long as possible. The US mindset of having "unlimited everything forever at little or no cost" (as, not paying for it.. ie: debt) is what's killing us. |
![]() |
|
| Rondawg | Sep 6 2014, 04:13 PM Post #49 |
![]()
|
Oh jeez here we go again. I am a fiscal conservative. I live BELOW my means. I would like our elected leaders to live WITHIN their means. I guess to them dirty pinko leftists I am a greedy capitalist that wants to take away crippled folks wheelchairs and force seniors to live on dogfood? |
![]() |
|
| Cobrajet25 | Sep 6 2014, 06:09 PM Post #50 |
![]()
|
Lol...that's another thing the world "has been hearing for the last 30 years". That we are almost out of oil. Or gonna run out soon. Like, tomorrow, or something. None of these predictions take into account advances in oil production technology. We have enough to last a while yet, and I have read that the US alone has about 300 years worth of natural gas. |
![]() |
|
| Cobrajet25 | Sep 6 2014, 06:15 PM Post #51 |
![]()
|
It's the classic liberal false dichotomy. Either you quietly support the exact, ever-increasing amount of government they clamor for, or they accuse you of being an anarchist who hates public parks and schools and supports having NO government at all. But yeah, sometimes it's difficult to convince people that there actually is a middle ground. |
![]() |
|
| Akagi | Sep 7 2014, 06:17 PM Post #52 |
|
The Genius Who Descended Into the Metro
![]()
|
Not run out - peak. All natural resources follow a bell curve of production. You don't just magically drop to zero one day. Advances in production technology have made us more efficient at depleting the resource. There is still a finite quantity of ultimate recoverable reserves. A resource is not measured in years. Sure, we may have 300 years of gas at current levels, but what does that mean? That means if, and only if we have 300 years of zero growth in gas consumption. When you factor in steady growth, the resources will last something like within the life expectancy of people born today. Check out the following presentation for a more in depth view. |
![]() |
|
| Cobrajet25 | Sep 8 2014, 03:05 AM Post #53 |
![]()
|
Right...but we have supposedly been "peaking" for 20-30 years now. As I have said before, I know oil is a finite resource. But we can't just swear it off because a few people have decided that it's "icky". That process will follow a bell curve as well, and it won't have much to do with the arbitrary wishes of the green crowd...especially since oil does not have a viable green "heir apparent" yet. Steady growth will certainly account for a shortening of supply of a resource, but that tends to be countered by increases in efficiency. Using the fuel consumption rates of 1970s automobiles to calculate how much oil we would have today turned out to be inaccurate in large part because the vehicles we drive now, on average, go father on a gallon of gas. The same will be true in the future. Edited by Cobrajet25, Sep 8 2014, 03:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Freeman | Sep 8 2014, 05:44 AM Post #54 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
So!![]() ![]() They have digital dashes and clusters. That's pretty neato if you ask me. I'm actually okay with them in this instance. Usually, I don't like all that electrical jazz in a car. But since the whole thing is electric, who cares at this point?! |
![]() |
|
| Akagi | Sep 8 2014, 07:20 AM Post #55 |
|
The Genius Who Descended Into the Metro
![]()
|
Jevon's Paradox |
![]() |
|
| Freeman | Sep 8 2014, 08:19 AM Post #56 |
|
The Family Man
![]()
|
Johnny rain cloud over here. 'ing on my common intuition.
|
![]() |
|
| perfesser | Sep 8 2014, 09:46 AM Post #57 |
|
Elite Member - Former Metro owner
![]()
|
I took an energy course close to 40 years ago. The professor really knew the oil industry and everything related to it. He told us that peak oil would be reached by 1980 at the latest. Proven, extractable US reserves now are more than twice what they were then. Color me unconvinced. BTW - According to Al Gore, the Arctic is supposed to be ice free as of several years ago. The ice pack now is at record highs. I question every "forecast" put out by anyone with a vested political and/or financial interest in it. |
![]() |
|
| Akagi | Sep 8 2014, 10:27 AM Post #58 |
|
The Genius Who Descended Into the Metro
![]()
|
Back in the '50s during a large petroleum conference, Marion King Hubbert predicted based on the known Ultimate Recoverable Reserves (URR) and estimated reserves remaining to be discovered, the U.S. would peak as an oil province around 1970. Naturally, nobody believed it. Oil was cheaper than drinking water at the time. His critics printed with glee "Remember that guy M. King Hubbert who said we were going to run out of oil? Well we've never produced more oil than this year!". That year was 1970, the year the U.S. peaked. The U.S. has been on a downhill slope of oil production ever since then, despite our efforts to turn it around. Drilling more did not reverse the downhill slope. It put some bumps on it, to be sure, but the actual data followed the predicted model very closely - the bell curve. 1994 was the first year we had to import more oil than we could produce domestically. It's all part of the depletion process. Now due to the export land model, more OPEC nations are using more of their oil production. So they produce less due to depletion, and they use more of what they do produce internally. This has led to some OPEC nations ceasing oil exports altogether and leaving OPEC. I'd also like to highlight something senior geologist Dr. Colin Campbell pointed out:
So since Kuwait added 50% overnight due to the OPEC quota war to try to increase production and get greater market share, and as you can see after years of production they actually revised the figure up a bit and then just recycled that same number year after year, then we can reasonably assume, given that 25% of the reserve statement is bull and they haven't been deducting for production, that they probably have about half the oil they say they do.With that in mind, consider the following: Kuwait oil reserves only half official estimate
Despite the false reserve statements they put out for official publication, for the purposes of running an oil industry, they have to know themselves how much they are working with. The point is to deceive everyone else, not themselves. It is for this reason that they have internal records, which are much more accurate. It appears those records got leaked and exposed what Dr. Campbell had been saying all along - that a large chunk of world oil was actually fictitious bull .Which leaves us to question how much oil the rest of OPEC has left, since they spurously revised their figures upward during the quota war and won't submit to external auditing. The obvious reason for resistance being that they have something to hide - their depletion status. Edited by Akagi, Sep 8 2014, 10:42 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| me2 | Sep 8 2014, 10:43 AM Post #59 |
![]()
|
You are arguing about where the blips are on the bell curve of oil consumption. So , someone gets a blip wrong. Are you saying the curve doesn't exist? Then you take a subject that has nothing to do with the bell curve of oil consumption put forth by a man who is not a scientist and say it negates your understanding of oil consumption. So, I say, Al Gore eventually figured out that tobacco kills people and is immoral to grow- there fore Al Gore's ideas on oil are spot on. (I don't know what his ideas are on oil but as soon as I find out I'm going to use them) Estimates of oil reserves tend to be off by about 96%-- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/22/two-thirds-write-down-us-shale-oil-gas-explodes-fracking-myth There will be blips on the bell curve of oil , both up and down, I'd like someone to argue that humanity is not going run out or that the curve is a fundamentally flawed concept. Edited by me2, Sep 8 2014, 10:45 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Cubey | Sep 8 2014, 11:58 AM Post #60 |
![]()
|
DANG! You didn't even read what I said. You just argued against my statement about being in favor of fiscal responsibility by saying you want fiscal responsibility.
Edited by Cubey, Sep 8 2014, 12:00 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.






'ing on my common intuition.


9:25 AM Jul 11