Heard an Interesting POV...
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
There are advances in technology happening every day.
You seem to want to suddenly stop using oil without any legitimate source to replace it.
I would like to drill now and use the resources that we need for production and internal security. When we develop cold fusion etc we can move to that source.
Our environment is cleaner in almost every way from 100 years ago.
You seem to want to suddenly stop using oil without any legitimate source to replace it.
I would like to drill now and use the resources that we need for production and internal security. When we develop cold fusion etc we can move to that source.
Our environment is cleaner in almost every way from 100 years ago.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Yes, there are advances every day but you are MR. free market are you not? A free market will not effectively deal with a society that depends so heavily on a diminishing resource. There will be no even transition to our next fuel source in a free market.
I don't want to stop using oil, I want to apply all the true costs of oil to the price and then artificialy increase that price as well.
You would drill now as though there is actually a whole lot more in the ground - here's news - there isn't. You would burn what will soon become a far more precious resource rather than preserve our drug and plastic feedstock.
Our environment is cleaner not because of oil but in spite of it, not because of business but in spite of it.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Seriously? You are proving that you dont really have any concept of a free market.
Once technology is developed that allows power to be delivered at a cheaper cost than oil people will jump on it. Especially if oil is becoming more and more scarce because that drives up the price.
Our current messiah's plan is to force utility costs to "Skyrocket" to compete with the current green technologies. It would require oil to be much more expensive than it is now. And funny thing, if Obama keeps getting in the way of all drilling in America (in Alaska, the gulf, and everwhere else) he will drive up the price and get what he wants at another great expense to the American taxpayer.
canndo
Well-Known Member
I am aware of how a free market works. It would seem that you havn't been keeping up with how the oil marketplace works. The price of fuel swings greatly for a number of reasons, because of this swing we don't have a slow steady increase of the price of oil. Let's say someone can actually come up with an oil alternative and it luckily happens to be a fluid so we can keep our delivery infrastructure - with me so far? Now this fluid becomes profitable when gasoline hits 9 dollars a gallon. As supplies (actually production but that is a different conversation) falls below minimum requirements the fluctuations in price grow ever more wild, 7 dollars for 6 months, 10 dollars for 3 back down to 8 dollars for a half a year. We see these sorts of fluctuations even now. No one is going to implement a new system that is based upon unknown profit for unknown lengths of time, not the manufacturers or the distribution system or the retail people. When that time finally comes that the price of oil is perpetualy over 9 dollar there will be a huge disruption - WHICH is what I originaly said.
This scenario has a crucial given - that there is some liquid alternative waiting in the wings - THERE ISN'T and you "the free market will save us" types simply don't see the big picture, unless the price of fuel is controled NOW we will be in a world of hurt when peak oil arrives. There is no science that will arrive at the last minute to rescue us all.
canndo
Well-Known Member
And by the way, There is no salvation in the Gulf and certainly no salvation in Alaska, we MIGHT encounter some relief at the poles - if we can figure out how to manage the overlaying ice - and I said MIGHT. There have been no substancial finds of oil for over 30 years and we have been DAMN good at finding oil for a DAMN long time.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
We are trying to develop an oil line from Canada to our refineries in the south. That would provide oil that was not from the middle east and help stabilize oil prices. In addition, drilling for oil in our own country oh I dunno like somewhere in the middle of the frozen arctic north sounds like a good idea. If a private company wants to have a go and thinks they can make money then let them drill where they want to.
This is the way to lower and stabilize gas prices, not continuously forbid drilling in the USA while spending billions on foreign drilling projects like Brazil. Obama talks about jobs, jobs, jobs and he seems to want to create them anywhere but America.
This is the way to lower and stabilize gas prices, not continuously forbid drilling in the USA while spending billions on foreign drilling projects like Brazil. Obama talks about jobs, jobs, jobs and he seems to want to create them anywhere but America.
canndo
Well-Known Member
I have no problem allowing drilling anywhere we didn't preserve for future generations - so drill allow all the drilling you want in the gulf. Of course, the chances are decent that we don't get light sweet crude in some of the places you mention - but never mind, right? Buy from Canada? fine, I'm all for it but there STILL is not enough left to "lower and stabilize gas prices" even if we could be certain that our oil companies didn't sell to Japan or China. The north slope fields lasted 10 years or so (at a couple of million brls a day if I recall), not much, and they were the big finds. You folks actually believe the rot you are told about oil being plentiful! I just can't understand why you don't do some of your own research and find out the truth - like that "Obama subsidized Brazil's drilling" rot you mentioned - look into it from a non-koolaide vending source.
Want the truth? the Saudis are pumping significant fractions of SALT WATER from nearly every field they have, one day soon they will not be able to take up the slack and my friend, Canada and every field in the U.S. and all the drilling we could do with NO regulations will not make one lick of difference, not one.
Truth? Drilling for oil takes up less than 2 acres of land and when they are done the pumps take up even less. Every fluid on the rig, including the detergent laden water used to scrub the damn thing to the mud they use as lubricant to any oil or fuel spilled when doing operations is collected and removed from the site.
Oil rigs don't cause a huge scar on the land like open pit mining. Their pretty damned ecologically sound.
We are running out of oil, prices will continue to increase until demand is met by something else. Honestly i like the Idea of Tesla..free energy for all from the ionosphere. Now if we could just figure out how he did it.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
They are continuously finding new sources of oil and new extraction methods using technology. Fracking is a relatively new technology.
So, your assertion that we know the exact amount of oil available seems a little arrogant.
And a free market will drive the price of diminishing resources high enough that at some point a new fuel source will be more economical. But at this point in time we dont know what that is. And the coolaid you are drinking will not power a vehicle. So, rather than artificially forcing fuel and energy prices skyrocketing to force the development of technologies that are not ready for mainstream consumption will only result in further economic problems, increase prices, decreased jobs and be generally bad for America, I recommend we use the current resources available while pursuing new technologies at a normal pace.
So, your assertion that we know the exact amount of oil available seems a little arrogant.
And a free market will drive the price of diminishing resources high enough that at some point a new fuel source will be more economical. But at this point in time we dont know what that is. And the coolaid you are drinking will not power a vehicle. So, rather than artificially forcing fuel and energy prices skyrocketing to force the development of technologies that are not ready for mainstream consumption will only result in further economic problems, increase prices, decreased jobs and be generally bad for America, I recommend we use the current resources available while pursuing new technologies at a normal pace.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Fracking aids in the recovery of natural gas, not oil and I do not maintain that there isn't much gas left - but gas needs a new infrastructure and new vehicles. I never said we know exactly how much oil there is available, I said there have been no major finds in 30 years (acutally much more). With oil as valuable as it is, why have there been no major finds? Most people who think that some set of technologies will arrive in the nick of time actually believe that finding oil is like finding gold, it's not, it is a very mature industry. Some of the larger saudi fields are a hundred miles long and many miles wide - in this day and age something that large would be found in 6 months. The reason we have not found any large fields is because there aren't any left. We will continue to find more and more small fields, the kind that produce half a million brls a day but those are mere drops in comparison to what we need.
What you are advocating is an uncontroled lurch into at least a temporary failure of energy supply to the world. This will result in an economic tsunami while your still emergent alternatives spend 10 to 20 years retooling the world for what ever alternatives you might imagine are out there. You claim to understand the market, what is your scenario should there be a global shortfall of one million brls a day and the Saudis, refusing to permanently harm their wells, refuse to make up that shortfall - do you actually think scientists and business innovators will jump into the breach and make everything all better? Really?
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
That was the argument 10-20 years ago. Think how much better off we would have been to ignore that argument.
But hey, lets just wait another 2 decades and see if things are better.
I am sick of the arguments of it isnt enough oil or it will take too long to get it...
Your whole argument revolves around moving to some source of energy where we dont use oil. Well, if we are going in that direction, why the hell do you object to us using the stuff now when it actually has value rather than pay higher prices now and be shit out of luck when it becomes useless?
canndo
Well-Known Member
I object to our using the stuff now - AT FREE MARKET PRICES. I know the polyannas are "sick of the arguments that there isn't enough oil" because they have their heads in the sand, as I said, the Saudis are pumping salt water with their oil in ever increasing percentages - any idea what that means? As I've said, I don't want to burn our drug and plastic feedstock - sure, we'll find substitutes but why should we have to?
canndo
Well-Known Member
Increasing a recovery rate by a percent or two or five or ten is very nice and it means more money for the company but it is a drop in the ocean.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I said they used fracking for oil, you said I was wrong it was for gas.
Someone proved that what I said was correct and you were flat out wrong and you simply try to qualify it in a way that in no way justifies your point.
You fail.
P.S. when would you like to admit that fracking is a relatively new technology and one that might be improved upon? Oh wait, you want no discovery, refining or usage of oil in the first place... Nevermind.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Predominantly gas, I will admit that fracking and EVERY OTHER recovery and drilling technology will improve, it will improve greatly I have no doubt. I have already said that I have no problem with drilling if that is what you actually want. You don't actually advocate for drilling, what you advocate for is reducing regulation and leasing more land to oil companies in the HOPES that they might drill when it becomes financialy prudent for them to do so, WHEN it suits them to do so.
I don't have any problem with discovery except when it offers false hope to folks like you who don't know the score and believe that somewhere there is another mega find that will carry us through. I see your sort of folks jumping up and down and calling me wrong each time we make a new find, until I point out that the find is capable of supporting the world's demand for energy for two months, or less, and then we spend three years finding another one like that.
Refining? sure, why not? I don't care if you refine, and I encourage a few plants to revert to refining the heavier crudes.
useage? You are correct, I want it curtailed because I believe in foresight and not idle fairytale dreams that we will be saved at the last minute just like the heroine is in every B film.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Companies want to drill now. They want to drill in Alaska, they want to drill in the gulf, they want to access fields. The regulations and government sanctions are stopping them. We havent had a refinery developed in the USA in 30 years. The reason is that the regulatory fiasco and cost it would take to build one right now simply makes it not worth it. The government is causing that kink in the free market. It is easier to truck the oil to a foreign country than to build a refinery here.
I want companies to be freed up to create whatever power sources we need. I am all for nuclear, natural gas, coal, and every other source. My goal is for energy to remain cheap in America. When the price of energy goes up the price of everything goes up. Lets not make the poor more poor by taking a bigger chunk of their income to pay for green utilities.
I want companies to be freed up to create whatever power sources we need. I am all for nuclear, natural gas, coal, and every other source. My goal is for energy to remain cheap in America. When the price of energy goes up the price of everything goes up. Lets not make the poor more poor by taking a bigger chunk of their income to pay for green utilities.
canndo
Well-Known Member
You REALLY believe that the reason no new refinery has been built is because of regulations? Man, where do you GET this stuff? You claim to understand economics. I own a company and my company is considering spending a billion dollars on a brand new refinery so that I can create more product for a relatively fixed rate of consumption - why would I consider such a thing for more than a second or two? The more product I make the less money I make on each gallon and I am considering capital expenditures to make that possible? Not a chance in hell. I am not going to build a new refinery until my old ones rust away.
Do you suppose that the oil companies have drilled in every inch of the leased land they now have NL? Do you? I am for nuclear, natural gas but not coal because, guess what? I kinda value the air and water and land and coal doesn't promote those ideas. The problem is that you have NEVER in your life actually paid what energy costs and you think you should continue to have all of your energy subsidized by the destruction of the commons. The government subsidizes each gallon of crude that is pumped - but that's ok with you because you think that we are entitled to cheap energy just because we always have been.
