4 ms·

Production is declining, but consumption is increasing, so it could be less than 30 years. I also believe that oil will be come more valuable as a pharmaceutic

by fnid2 16y ago

Production is declining, but consumption is increasing, so it could be less than 30 years. I also believe that oil will be come more valuable as a pharmaceutical base, for fertilizer, and plastics than for energy. We'll have other sources of energy that we will use to extract the oil, so the 1:1 rule may not apply. As long as the energy costs to extract it are lower than its value for all uses, it'll still be extracted.

RyanMcGreal 16y ago
We can't consume it faster than we can get it out of the ground. This is the main reason the oil price rose steadily through the 2000s and spiked in 2008: spare capacity shrank as demand rose against a maxed out supply until it disappeared entirely in 2007/08. The price super-spike was the market destroying excess demand the only short-term way it knows how.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- fnid2 16y ago
  We store oil and we find more places to extract it. Furthermore, as consumption leads to higher prices, we will produce more efficient and productive ways to extract it.
  - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
    >We store oil and we find more places to extract it. We've already extracted the lion's share of the fast, cheap, easy-to-reach stuff. What remains is slower, more expensive and harder-to-reach. Case in point: the deepwater well that's spewing 2,500 bbl of oil a day into the Gulf right now. >Furthermore, as consumption leads to higher prices, we will produce more efficient and productive ways to extract it. So I keep hearing. I'm highly skeptical that we can improve technique fast enough to start pumping oil out of the Alberta Tarsands at the same rate that we've been pumping it out of Ghawar for the past forty years. That's the real issue: whether some combination of conservation, new sources and new techniques can somehow manager to cover the escalating annual shortfall in conventional production, without painful demand destruction via price spikes. My sense from studying this stuff of the past several years is that we're going to spend a long time behind the eight-ball, lurching from economic crisis to economic crisis while our real living standards are slowly ratcheted down.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      > My sense from studying this stuff of the past several years is that we're going to spend a long time behind the eight-ball, lurching from economic crisis to economic crisis while our real living standards are slowly ratcheted down. I don't think I'm very happy about that vision, but I suspect it is on the money.
      - fnid2 16y ago
        There's not really any other option within the current environment of quarterly reports. We have to think with more vision. The best solution would be to stop using oil as an energy source now with any purpose except to get us over the hump. We don't even yet know how to get over the hump, realistically. The options are solar, wind, and gravity and all of those options require so much energy that we could exhaust remaining supplies making them productive enough to satisfy us all. It will take a lot of solar panels to cover the sahara, connect it to the grid, etc. In the meantime, we're powering inefficient combustion engines and growing corn to, you guessed it... power inefficient combustion engines...
        RyanMcGreal 16y ago
        The best - and by "best" I mean "most depressing" - thing about ethanol-from-corn is that it's a net energy sink. It actually takes quite a bit more energy to grow and process the corn than it produces in ethanol. There's on way an ethanol industry would even exist without the colossal American subsidies to the corn industry. Not to mention the fact that the ethanol itself has a lower energy density than gasoline, so mixing it in with gas is simply diluting the energy of the gas.

by fnid2 16y ago

RyanMcGreal 16y ago

We can't consume it faster than we can get it out of the ground. This is the main reason the oil price rose steadily through the 2000s and spiked in 2008: spare capacity shrank as demand rose against a maxed out supply until it disappeared entirely in 2007/08. The price super-spike was the market destroying excess demand the only short-term way it knows how.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
fnid2 16y ago
We store oil and we find more places to extract it. Furthermore, as consumption leads to higher prices, we will produce more efficient and productive ways to extract it.
- RyanMcGreal 16y ago
  >We store oil and we find more places to extract it. We've already extracted the lion's share of the fast, cheap, easy-to-reach stuff. What remains is slower, more expensive and harder-to-reach. Case in point: the deepwater well that's spewing 2,500 bbl of oil a day into the Gulf right now. >Furthermore, as consumption leads to higher prices, we will produce more efficient and productive ways to extract it. So I keep hearing. I'm highly skeptical that we can improve technique fast enough to start pumping oil out of the Alberta Tarsands at the same rate that we've been pumping it out of Ghawar for the past forty years. That's the real issue: whether some combination of conservation, new sources and new techniques can somehow manager to cover the escalating annual shortfall in conventional production, without painful demand destruction via price spikes. My sense from studying this stuff of the past several years is that we're going to spend a long time behind the eight-ball, lurching from economic crisis to economic crisis while our real living standards are slowly ratcheted down.
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    > My sense from studying this stuff of the past several years is that we're going to spend a long time behind the eight-ball, lurching from economic crisis to economic crisis while our real living standards are slowly ratcheted down. I don't think I'm very happy about that vision, but I suspect it is on the money.
    - fnid2 16y ago
      There's not really any other option within the current environment of quarterly reports. We have to think with more vision. The best solution would be to stop using oil as an energy source now with any purpose except to get us over the hump. We don't even yet know how to get over the hump, realistically. The options are solar, wind, and gravity and all of those options require so much energy that we could exhaust remaining supplies making them productive enough to satisfy us all. It will take a lot of solar panels to cover the sahara, connect it to the grid, etc. In the meantime, we're powering inefficient combustion engines and growing corn to, you guessed it... power inefficient combustion engines...
      - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
        The best - and by "best" I mean "most depressing" - thing about ethanol-from-corn is that it's a net energy sink. It actually takes quite a bit more energy to grow and process the corn than it produces in ethanol. There's on way an ethanol industry would even exist without the colossal American subsidies to the corn industry. Not to mention the fact that the ethanol itself has a lower energy density than gasoline, so mixing it in with gas is simply diluting the energy of the gas.