|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Jul 26, 2008 13:16
Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality is that the cost
of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year and there is little reason to
believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years, either by
drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other
strategy. Retrofitting all of one nation's trucks and buses to
natural gas will simply not have a significant impact on world oil
markets and, if many other countries followed suit, the coupling of
fuel prices would simply drag up the price of natural gas like a rag
doll.
Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem. The bigger effect is
the demand caused by the industrialization of China, India and other
nations. China's double digit growth rate is akin to the American
steel industry which increased in size by a factor of ten every decade
for 3 straight decades during the industrial revolution. The 19th
Century growth rate of that industry was not fueled by sales to a
richer nation so a U. S. recession now cannot be expected to have much
impact on China's growth rate. If current trends continue, in as
little as 6 years China's economy will be larger than ours.
|
| Show full article (2.27Kb) |
|
| | 99 Comments |
|
|
Author: Rod SpeedRod Speed Date: Jul 26, 2008 13:33
Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality
> is that the cost of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year
No it hasnt.
> and there is little reason to believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years,
We'll see...
> either by drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other strategy.
Wrong again.
> Retrofitting all of one nation's trucks and buses to natural gas
> will simply not have a significant impact on world oil markets
Doesnt need to. Its one way of reducing the dependance on oil from out of the country.
> and, if many other countries followed suit, the coupling of fuel prices
> would simply drag up the price of natural gas like a rag doll.
But its a lot cheaper than gasoline.
> Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem. The bigger effect is the
> demand caused by the industrialization of China, India and other nations.
The biggest effect on price is actually speculation currently.
As can clearly be seen from the current drop in price, when there
hasnt been an increase in supply or a decrease in demand by china.
|
| Show full article (3.74Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Jul 26, 2008 14:19
>> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality
>> is that the cost of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year
> No it hasnt.
Well? Don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs.
What do you think it's been?
-10%%?
>> and there is little reason to believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years,
> We'll see...
If we _wait_ and see then it's guaranteed that our only option will be
to pay $25/gallon in 6 years.
>> either by drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other strategy.
> Wrong again.
Angels going to descend from heaven with an endless supply of oil?
>> Retrofitting all of one nation's trucks and buses to natural gas
>> will simply not have a significant impact on world oil markets
> Doesnt need to. Its one way of reducing the dependance on oil from out of the country.
But that hardly changes the fact that we'll be paying $25/gallon in 6
years.
|
| Show full article (6.17Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Rod SpeedRod Speed Date: Jul 26, 2008 14:57
Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
>>> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality
>>> is that the cost of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year
>> No it hasnt.
> Well? Don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs.
> What do you think it's been?
> -10%%?
YOU made that claim.
YOU get to provide the real data.
THATS how it works.
>>> and there is little reason to believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years,
>> We'll see...
> If we _wait_ and see then it's guaranteed that our
> only option will be to pay $25/gallon in 6 years.
Wrong again. We waited in the 70s and saw the price drop to reasonable levels again.
>>> either by drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other strategy.
>> Wrong again.
> Angels going to descend from heaven with an endless supply of oil?
|
| Show full article (9.25Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Jul 26, 2008 16:25
>>>> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality
>>>> is that the cost of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year
>>> No it hasnt.
>> Well? �Don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs.
>> What do you think it's been?
>> -10%%?
> YOU made that claim.
Well, it's time for you to spout a number.
> YOU get to provide the real data.
> THATS how it works.
I'm satisfied that a hefty majority reading this agrees with me.
Now, to be sure, the majority is often wrong, but it's up to those who
believe the majority is wrong to correct the majority.
Not me.
>>>> and there is little reason to believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years,
>>> We'll see...
>> If we _wait_ and see then it's guaranteed that our
>> only option will be to pay $25/gallon in 6 years.
> Wrong again. We waited in the 70s and saw the price drop to reasonable levels again.
|
| Show full article (11.62Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: loradlorad Date: Jul 26, 2008 16:34
On Jul 26, 1:16Â pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality is that the cost
> of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year and there is little reason to
> believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years, either by
> drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other
> strategy. Â Retrofitting all of one nation's trucks and buses to
> natural gas will simply not have a significant impact on world oil
> markets and, if many other countries followed suit, the coupling of
> fuel prices would simply drag up the price of natural gas like a rag
> doll.
>
> Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem. Â The bigger effect is
> the demand caused by the industrialization of China, India and other
> nations. Â China's double digit growth rate is akin to the American
> steel industry which increased in size by a factor of ten every decade
> for 3 straight decades during the industrial revolution. Â The 19th
> Century growth rate of that industry was not fueled by sales to a
> richer nation so a U. S. recession now cannot be expected to have much
> impact on China's growth rate. Â If current trends continue, in as
> little as 6 years China's economy will be larger than ours. ...
|
| Show full article (2.54Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Rod SpeedRod Speed Date: Jul 26, 2008 17:10
Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:>>>>> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality
>>>>> is that the cost of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year
>>>> No it hasnt.
>>> Well? Don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs.
>>> What do you think it's been?
>>> -10%%?
>> YOU made that claim.
> Well, it's time for you to spout a number.
YOU made that claim.
YOU get to provide the real data.
THATS how it works.
>> YOU get to provide the real data.
>> THATS how it works.
> I'm satisfied that a hefty majority reading this agrees with me.
More fool you. You have no basis what so ever for that 'satisfaction'
> Now, to be sure, the majority is often wrong, but it's up to
> those who believe the majority is wrong to correct the majority.
You havent even established that thats what a majority believes.
|
| Show full article (15.17Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: NeolibertarianNeolibertarian Date: Jul 26, 2008 15:25
>
> Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem.
Other than enviro-marxist no-growth obstructionism in the United
States, there's no such thing as a "decreasing" supply of oil.
There is more oil available today than ever before in history. Yes, we
hear about "decreasing supplies" and "peak oil."
But there's no empirical evidence to show that there are, in fact,
"decreasing supplies."
The Simon-Ehrlich wager is ignored far too often.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Frank KetchumFrank Ketchum Date: Jul 26, 2008 18:48
>
> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality is that the cost
> of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year and there is little reason to
> believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years, either by
> drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other
> strategy.
To extrapolate current trends for 6-8 years to make your predictions is
foolish at best.
> Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem. The bigger effect is
> the demand caused by the industrialization of China, India and other
> nations.
Supply is not decreasing. Supply has steadily been increasing. It,
however, has not been able to increase as fast as demand has and thus the
increasing costs for all things hydrocarbon.
|
| Show full article (1.55Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: zzbunkerzzbunker Date: Jul 26, 2008 19:23
On Jul 26, 4:16Â pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:> Unless you are in a state of denial the hard reality is that the cost
> of oil has been spiraling 30%% a year and there is little reason to
> believe that 30%% rate will drop over the next 6 - 8 years, either by
> drilling, converting to another hydrocarbon fuel or by any other
> strategy. Â Retrofitting all of one nation's trucks and buses to
> natural gas will simply not have a significant impact on world oil
> markets and, if many other countries followed suit, the coupling of
> fuel prices would simply drag up the price of natural gas like a rag
> doll.
Hydorcarbons are for the stupid, rather than rich or poor.
That's why the idiots have been told for going on at least 50 years
nows,
that people with a sense of history, a taste of class,
a touch of benig out of the idiot AT&T town hall meetings,
are working on cruise missiles, electric SUVS,
microcompters, optical computers, auto-holograms,
PV Cells, and ozone batteries, rather than morons and hydorcarbons.
>
> Decreasing supply is only a part of the problem. Â The bigger effect is
> the demand caused by the industrialization of China, India and other
> nations. Â China's double digit growth rate is akin to...
|
| Show full article (2.84Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
