Peak Oil

[tinpis]

Watch Four Corners (http://abc.net.au/4corners/special_eds/20060710/) last night?
End of oil as we know it in 2010?
Be some cheap buses and boings around then hay?:hmm:

[Buster Hyman]

Never mind that! Who wants to buy my 93 Fairlane???:uhoh:

[Charles Abetz]

Demand will increase but I don't believe that it will be as bad as everyone is predicting. I believe the oil dynsaty will finish in 2030.

[ballsdeep]

Demand will increase but I don't believe that it will be as bad as everyone is predicting. I believe the oil dynsaty will finish in 2030.


Yeah but did you watch 4 corners last night??? Im with tinpis, i think we are all screwed!!

What makes you think 2030? Because Saudi Arabia said so? You cant trust those bastards!!

[troppo]

Didn't see it...but I've seen the Mad Max movies...:}

[tinpis]

Its repeated weds on ABC TV

They used a few clips from Mad Max.

I think the Bogan hauler airlines be the first to go.
Followed closely by V8 Commodores and Falcons:ok:

[Chimbu chuckles]

I am beginning to think it's like global warming...a non event blown out of all proportion by doom and gloomers. I find it very difficult to believe that stuff that has been bubbling away deep in the earth for billions of years is likely to run out after 150 yrs.

[MOR]

Nah, you guys have no imagination. Run the V8 on LPG, fill all the aircraft up with used chip oil from the local fish and chip shop, and run buses on methane, just like they do in China. We don't need no steenking oil... := :=

We have a local loony in our neighbourhood who is really into this... check out www.oilcrash.com (but don't take it too seriously, most of this stuff comes from out-of-control greenies and other conspiracists... does anybody really believe we have found all the oil yet... or that we have exploited the stuff found so far...?)

[ballsdeep]

They said last night that we are burning 80 or 110 million barrels a day (i cant remember the nunber), and growing. Surly it cant last forever if we burn that much motion lotion a day.

[Buster Hyman]

MOR I didn't see the show but, from what I've read, the problem is not that the oil has run out, it's more that the easy to extract oil is running out. The hard to get stuff is still there, but it costs a hell of a lot more to get.

Best offers on the Fairlane guys...first to see will buy...:O

[tinpis]

And another thing ...how come LPG thats comes from OZ has quadrupled in price in the last 2 years?
Doubled in 6 months?

****e Dubya FFS dont invade anywhere else fer cheap oil willya?:uhoh:

[Avgas172]

Never fear chaps Capt Canola is here .... currently being produced for around 24cpl in many spots around Aust ... You can run all the machinery on it for mucho less $$$ than the steenky arab black crap and tell 'em to shove it back in the ground if not elsewhere. A problem you ask? :mad: .... yeh the govt sponsored oil companies. (oops there goes my shiny new red asic card) and for the petrol sniffing Fairlanes and LTD's (mines an 89 LTD) off to the sugar plantations for your ethanol. The lucky country ....you bet. If you feel a need to learn google envirodiesel and see what the world's doing. (won't stop global warming but have to get more drastic for that & I bags being f/o on the first camel outa town)
cheers :D

[Brian Abraham]

See http://www.peakoil.net for opinions of people who could be expected to have some idea and insight into the subject.

[W800i]

http://hytechapps.com/
Has anyone seen or heard anything about this mob in the US??
What do you think??

[John Eacott]

Australian web site here. (http://www.aspo-australia.org.au/)

4 Corners have the programme on line, here. (http://abc.net.au/4corners/special_eds/20060710/)

Just who do you believe? :uhoh:

[tinpis]

John Eacott I have reached a stage in my life that I believe I'm being bull****ted to by everyone..


Anyone convert their gas guzzler to LPG?

[Buster Hyman]

I had a quote for $2100 to convert, but then I had a $3000 repair bill for the transmission & other stuff...it's now got 270,000k's on the clock. I think I'll replace it first & then convert to dual fuel.

[MOR]

Buster

MOR I didn't see the show but, from what I've read, the problem is not that the oil has run out, it's more that the easy to extract oil is running out. The hard to get stuff is still there, but it costs a hell of a lot more to get.

Yeah, I get that, thanks... :ok:

There's a really good ad showing over here in Noo Zild, featuring a guy justifying his V8... saying "I don't give a stuff about the environment... I like my V8."

Not very PC, but I stood up and applauded anyway. There are far worse environmental problems than a few V8s running around NZ.

The stuff may be harder to get, but as the price is already artificially high, I foresee prices coming down at some point. Having said that, I'm putting my money into hydrogen fuel cells... ethanol has too many overheads (as in it causes more pollution to produce it than you would have otherwise created by using petrol in the first place). Ethanol is an urban myth.

[Chimbu chuckles]

If you guys wanna believe a bunch of BS from the extreme left of the green movement fill you boots.

Personally I have done enough research to feel comfortable that neither me, nor my child, or her children are going to face the appocolyptic die-off crap being spouted by a bunch of lunies who think either

1/. Their version of utopia is just around the corner via a mechanism, Peak Oil, that enforces a new aggrarian age...oh and unfortunately 90% of the world population will have to die..sorry!

Yes there are peak oil doomers out there actually suggesting that all immigration will need to be holted and the old, infirm should be 'humanely' euthanased. That capital punishment will need to be reintroduced and it's base broadened to include a larger swathe of crimes. That unhealthy babies be aborted either in utero or afterwards...'humanely' and 'painlessly' of course. All this to ensure the survival of the chosen few (them no doubt) in their utopian post oil/global warming world.

Because humanely and painlessly depopulating the world is much better than just letting people starve!!!!!

2/. That the great appocolyptic 'taking up,' or whatever the **** they call it, is upon us.

Peak oil is a myth as is global warming.

[Pinky the pilot]

I find it very difficult to believe that stuff that has been bubbling away deep in the earth for billions of years is likely to run out after 150 yrs.

I worked in the oil exploration industry for over six years prior to getting into Aviation and from what I saw/heard/etc in that time find the above quote from Chuckles to be fairly reasonable.

[Pass-A-Frozo]

Necessity is the mother of invention

[MOR]

unfortunately 90% of the world population will have to die..sorry!

Yeah and the first against the wall will be those with an inability to spell or construct sentences correctly... ;)

Seriously, I'm with you on this, Chimbu. Funny thing, when I was in school, the greatest threat reckoned to be facing the world was another ice age. There is about as much evidence for that, as for global warming.

I'm keeping my V8!

[Charles Abetz]

Well that is unlikely considering we have just been through one. (ice age). Yes I did see the 4 corners episode and think that oil is not running out it is just going to get more expensive that is all.
LPG is more expensive because there is excise on it and gst and now the government is going to stop subsidizing it.

[tinpis]

Some of the fullas have a beer and celebrate they dont have to give up the V8 Falcon coz they got euthanasia in Kiwi.

http://publicaddress.net/assets/img/speaker/Ans/ans6.jpg

[sixtiesrelic]

About twenty years ago I saw a thing on the ABC about the alternative petroleum we can have.
Out west of Townsville is country that was inundated with a noxious weed that had gotten away from people's gardens. From memory it was a vine with a pink flower from Madagascar.
This weed had been invistigated by the CSIRO because the milky sap is a form of "petroleum".
The scientists encouraged it's growth and discovered that by letting it lie and dry out after mowing (much like lucern before baling) the water dried out of the stems without loss of the oil.
This made harvesting easier because the bales are lighter.
Once processed the oil could be cracked to get petrol out and it burned cleaner, as it didn't have the nasties that corrode things like buildings.
The CSIRO said that it was a profitable exercize (BACK THEN!!).
The oil companies had donged the whole idea on the head so it never went any further... Now would we believe a thing like that?
After all, our government has done investigations into the oil companies and have found that crude oil goes up in price 10% to 15% every Wednesday at lunch time and those paragons of virtue have to lamentably increase the price of petrol or they'd go broke.
Methinks this "Green" oil might be going to start being produced soon and the poor darlings are getting the big money while they can.
The really interesting part of the story was the area under cultivation required to supply Australia was about 150 Miles square, up there in that reasonably poor country west of Townsville/Cairns AND it was a NOXIOUS weed. Anyone with a bit of land will know about noxious weeds that councils are getting onto them about... Bastards of things are almost impossible to control.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Sixtiesrelic, is this the vine?
http://www.weeds.org.au/docs/Rubber_Vine_Mgmnt-1.pdf

[glekichi]

Yep. In 10 years time petrol will cost $10 a litre.

A loaf of bread will be about the same, and the guy selling you your $25 value meal at McDonalds will be making $50 an hour.

The only problem is that GD will still be trying to offer $99 fares, and us pilots will be taking incremental pay cuts for each of those 10 years leaving 787 captains earning somewhere in the region of $20k:}

[Buster Hyman]

when I was in school, the greatest threat reckoned to be facing the world was another ice age.

You mean the last one? Killed the Dinosaurs right?

:E:ouch::suspect:

[Mariner9]

The really interesting part of the story was the area under cultivation required to supply Australia was about 150 Miles square, up there in that reasonably poor country west of Townsville/Cairns.

Oz's crude consumption is ~900,000bbls/day (~120,000tons/day.) A 150 x 150 mile square = 22,500 sq miles, therefore each square mile would have to produce over 5 tons every day. Dont know anything about the weed mentioned, but it'd have to be pretty impressive to have an oil output anything near that :8

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Most amazing thing about this thread is how different it is to the exact same one running on the other DG!

This must be the glass 1/2 full thread.

The other one is the ground 1/2 empty thread.

[sixtiesrelic]

Yeah Mariner 9 It was twenty or so years ago I saw the programme, so my fading memory is sus and the fuel requirements now would be more, but it is a way to get the oil from the bullies who have it all now and Oz is a big place.
The CSIRO were in the area where the weed was getting out of control, so it will grow well in a huge zone around that area.

[tinpis]

Makes yer wonder why the isnt some sort of subsidy in place to get trucks/cars etc converted to LPG if there was a serious problem?
Theres tons of the bloody stuff bubblin up in the ocean just off the coast here.
Do we have to give it all to China so they can fill the world with plastic **** made out of PETROCHEMICALS?:uhoh:

Caught a bit on the news that China is launching a CAR fer christs sake under $10 k in OZ.
We need another bloody CAR?

[Spinnerhead]

This sky is falling, oil induced panic attack by doomsayers is just like the one 30 years ago in the 1970's. I actually thought back then that becoming a pilot would be a waste of time, as oil was close to running out.

The oil squeeze is not because there is a lack of oil, it is because there is a lack of oil production capacity. Just like in Oz there is not a lack of coal, but there is definitly a lack of coal production capacity (world wide also), which has forced the price of coal up also.

Right now oil production capacity is so close to demand that every time supplies are threatened, the market goes spastic.

The oil companies have been caught out by a huge increase in demand from the like of China. It will take 3 - 5 years to increase production capacity to a level high enough above demand, that the market is happy with the level of extra capacity, and the price will fall back to reasonable levels.

Do some reading of serious world finance based magazines, rather than listening to the fast food crap that the popular media is producing, and you will agree with me.

[Capt. Queeg]

Seriously what are you guys thinking......

Here's the new plan, cuzz:

We invade some oil-rich countries, flog their oil, drain the middle east, then concentrate on our own supplies. When that begins to run out, we will allow the development of alternative energy sources which modern technology already caters for.

Meanwhile the camel jockeys will be back in the sand.

Why do you think petrol prices are so high in oil-producing countries......??? :confused: It's a no-brainer.

[ballsdeep]

Why do you think petrol prices are so high in oil-producing countries......??? :confused: It's a no-brainer.

Its not, in Saudi Arabia you can buy it for 30c a litre, according to 4 corners.

Any way, all you people that say there is nothing to worry about. Surly one day we will run out of crude oil. It cant be reproducing itself at the rate we burn the **** off. It has to run out!!. Agree????

Balls

[Capt. Queeg]

Dunno if I'd believe everything those leftists say. It's about 55c/L in the UAe and Abo Dhabi produces a shed load of the stuff. A lot cheaper than Australian prices, agreed, but not exactly dirt cheap considering they are swimming in the stuff.

Anyway I was referring to western nations....

Alcohol may have befuddled the thinking here.

PS: You screwed up the quote markers in your post.

[ballsdeep]

Happy now? :D

[rmm]

http://carsguide.news.com.au/story/0,20384,19712792-21822,00.html

AT THE PUMP

(a litre)
Turkey $2.99
Britain $2.40
Denmark $2.23
France $2.19
Egypt $1.96
Brazil $1.70
New Zealand $1.53
MELBOURNE $1.35
South Africa $1.26
United States $1.16
Argentina 81.6¢
Russia 78.2¢
China 73.1¢
Malaysia 71.4¢
Iran 13.6¢
Venezuela 6.8¢

[ballsdeep]

Venezuela 6.8¢!!! Holy **** balls.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Brunei - Premium .40 cents/liter
Diesel .20 cents/liter

And it has been thus for the last 12 or 14 years apparently....filling my Mitsibishi 'SUV' here is like filling my car was back in the 70s...about AUD$17:ok:

Remove all the taxes off petrol/diesel in Oz and the prices would be similar.

It's all very simple people...and not at all sinister, cynical yes but not sinister.

1/. For a bloody long time the oil companies scaled back their oil search activities because the a) crude prices were so low and b) they had already found a shedload of the stuff. Refineries were likewise not built and in some cases closed down...this is changing.

2/. All of a sudden demand went through the roof due mostly to China and India. No-one predicted that.

3/. Futures Trading in oil went from being miniscule to being almost out of control over the last 15-20 yrs. Futures Traders do not deal in oil they deal in what they think the price will be at some point in the future. This time frame can be as short as the time it takes a tanker full of the stuff to go from the wharf near the hole to the refinery on the US Gulf coast or it can be next year or the one after. It is just a form of gambling and adds no value to the product. Futures Trading in Oil has been the reason OPEC cannot control prices anymore despite the known reserves in Non OPEC countries dropping because they stopped looking for the stuff.

4/. At the same time as supply was getting tight due to high demand we got a few hits in the system by way of a few cyclones and accidents at refineries in the states. These things are always happening but usually without all the other factors adding heat to the situation at the same time...so they assume an import that is out of proportion to the event alone.

5/. The futures traders make money in a volatile market so Iran and North Korea are heaven sent for the feckwits at the NYMEX. Does anyone with a brain and the power of independent thought really think Iran with a nuke power stations, or even a bomb, presents much of a world threat? Iranians are intelligent people. They know as well as anyone that if they launch a nuke at Isreal or anyone else the US WILL turn Iran into a glass parking lot....not maybe but without doubt. Likewise North Korea... Kim Jong Il is definately a nutter but is he THAT stupid?

47% of the money in the world spent on stuff designed to kill people and break their stuff is spent by the USA. No one is in a position to take them on militarily and not be bombed back into the stone age. Economically is a different strory:E

6/. ALL of the above is missrepresented and or missinterpreted by the LUNIES in the appocalyptic Peak oil camp. This is some Judeo/Christian thing which convinces people that the world as we know it must end appocolyptically. Rome, Sodom and Gemmorah etc.

Increasingly the Global Warming Lunies are attracted to the idea of peak oil too. It plays well to their utopian dream of a return to a 1700s era aggrarian society. Some of these nutters are sufficiently extreme in their views that they are actually starting to postulate ways of reducing the population to 'sustainable' levels...Euthanasia of the elderly, sick, genetically damaged etc being just one. Even the White supremicists are jumping on the Global Warming/Peak oil bandwagon. The nutters have always been there too but again, like cyclones and feckups, not with the gravitas to assume an import out of all proportion to their Nutter reality.

Interestingly this appocolyptic outlook does not occur in Asian religions/society....they just get on with life.

Reducing our use of oil somewhat is a good thing and the current high prices will spur research into alternatives. It is spuring the digging of more holes in the ground and more refining capacity...although in Asia that capacity is almost soley aimed at Light Sweat crude rather than the relatively heavy, sulfurus stuff that is produced in the ME and Central America, Mexican Intermediate as an example. That is where the big 'shortages' are as a matter of interest...Light Sweat (easily/cheaply refined into petrol)...there is ****LOADS of the heavier stuff which has reached no where near $70/barrel...although standby because the Futures Traders are just discovering the stuff.

Demand will drop as economic activity drops due to the high prices. We are well and truly overdue for a recesssion (not a depression) anyway. Hopefully the US, with 6% of the world population using 25% of the oil, will see the same C change Europe/Australia saw in the 70s/80s and actually start to regulate petrol prices via taxation the way EU/Australia did which essentially halved the petrol usage in Europe permanently...but probably not:ugh: If they don't probably at some point Asia will dump (gently) their USD holdings and give the yanks the recession they so desperately deserve. Not just yet though and not appocolyptically because China doesn't want to damage their own economy with attendant huge civil unrest.

At some point in the next few years supply will again outstrip demand and oil prices will fall...quite probably drastically as supply overshoots demand. Perhaps not back to $20/barrel but $35 is probably a good guess.

Just like after the 70s and 80s oil shocks...which were caused by OPEC showing the west 'who was in charge'. They were wrong.

Interestingly, if it is true, the Russians have satisfied themselves that oil is not actually rotten amoeba and dinosaurs but comes from deaper in the earth and bubbles up through cracks where we have found it in the quantities we have. They have been drilling down 20 odd miles for a very long time in an effort to understand why their 'tapped out' wells were refilling...and finding ****loads more of the stuff. Vietnamese oil wells are apparently an example of this technology.

Interesting also is the increased recovery rates new technology allows. Back 30 or 40 years ago if they got out 30-40% of the oil in a well they congratulated themselves and declared that particular hole well and truly fecked. Use of CO2 to push more of the stuff out while simultaneously burying 'green house' gasses promises to increase known reserves enormously...some figures postulated indicate that the known reserves in the US could go from 22 GB (billion barrels) to 90GB....and that just from holes that were dug ages ago...not including Alaska wilderness etc. Imagine that technology applied to the Ghawar oil Fileds etc in Saudi Arabia which has current 'proven reserves' around 260GB.

Let alone if the Russians are right and the supply of the stuff is actually almost limitless if you dig deep enough?

If I don't sound worried it is because I am not...nor am I racing out to buy land and prepare myself to defend it with a gun while relearning to live like my great, great,great, great, great grandad did.

[nohumbug]

Well Chimbu I hope you're right .

For those of us in the GA queue it is , and I don't think I'm alone, a tad worrying and very depressing.

For a couple of years now, we have been shuffling forward at a snails pace and to think that when we finally get to the front, resume in greasy hand, that the door slams in front of us , with a sign saying "sorry you're 10 years too late...:{ :{ :{

For those of us who have been working long, hard hours, in machines held together with gaffer tape and laughable MR's that are barely day vfr, in all kinds of nasty IFR , being compressed and extended over thousands of bumpy miles as chauffers/sherpas to the great unwashed (alive, dead or decomposing, returning to a flea bitten "remote base", going through painful long distance relationships, suffering abuse from the likes of SW (HA to ppruners)... I don't want to think that it has been a waste of time.:ugh:

[Spinnerhead]

Oh my god, spare us the sob story. The GA queue is the shortest its been for a long long time.

[Chimbu chuckles]

indeed...if, and I think it is likely, we see a world correction and hiring of pilots dries up for a while it will be no different in effect, if not cause, to what has happened to most of us at one time in our careers or another.

That's just life. Some of us, me included, spent 10+ years in GA. Personally I had a ball but having said that would prefer not to go back to it again...but I would if it was the only option.

I did end up for a short while flying Conquests in between jet jobs a few years ago...I LOVED the fun flying it was just the pay that was hard to take.

The long boom we have been experiencing has fed unrealistic expectations into the bottom end of the system...neither the boom times or the expectations are sustainable.

[Ultralights]

cough cough "biodiesel" cough
if my memory serves me correctly, then BP have promised to increase biodiesel production to about 800,000 Ltrs! PA.

Modern airliners will still bore holes through the sky, but with turbines modified to run on Biodiesel or other similar fuel such as ethanol etc etc, just think of all the fuel we could produce in OZ with 75% of our coastal farming land being full of nothing but Sugar!

no oil = very much less global warming,

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Chuck,

I would have picked you as one taking a more scientific approach to the Peak Oil question.

Genuinley, I am curious as to how you arrived a the position of dismissing the (many and growing number of) doomsayers.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Easy.

Stephen H. Schneider, a leading climate change advocate, said in an interview for Discover Magazine in 1989...

"On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we'd like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This 'double ethical bind' we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both." [my emphasis added]

You cannot divorce science from our own human fears when those fears are so deeply rooted as to be subconcious.

The news media love a sensationalist story to 'entertain' their audience. People write books of doomsday scenarios and make a crap load of money. Take a look at the constant barrage of doomsday scenario programing on Discovery and National Geographic channels. They dish up a near constant stream of disaster scenarios where the world will end from perfect storms, meteors colliding with the earth, bird flu pandemics and an, and on!

And they are scientific channels!!!

The less sensationalist, scientific based stuff hardly gets a run because it is not 'sexy' enough.

Do a google search on Peak Oil and you need to wade through 100's of site proclaiming the world is about to end as we know it before finally finding one or two that suggest an alternative view.

Why should one view be held up at the expense of the other?

How the hell are you supposed to get a balanced view when the nutters are getting all the attention?

Somewhere on D&G recently someone posted that in a conference on Peak Oil in Vienna or somewhere the scientific audience made of of geologists etc was asked 'who believed that peak oil was real'? or something similar and 'approximately half' the experts in the room raised their hands. This is presented as proof positive that it is 'gaining widespread acceptance'.... But half the people didn't raise their hands...the unwriten assumption is...ahhh but they must be the delusional half that are just to stupid to see the writing on the wall.

Yeah...why?

On a recent flight the captain asked me whether I thought "We were destroying the future for our children?"

I answered no.

There ensued a VERY LONG conversation about GW and PO and I offered the alternative views my research has indicated are at least as valid as the doomsayer ones.

He got the ****s more and more until we had to change the subject.

What is it in our western psycology that makes some of us angry when we are offered a more optimistic but no less reasonable view of mankinds future on this planet?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Some links from my research

http://mclean.ch/climate/models.htm

http://mclean.ch/climate/Eye_opening.htm

One on Saudi oil

http://www.ceri.ca/Publications/documents/GoE_Oct05.pdf

[Mainframe]

Chuck, thank you for being the devil's advocate, and bringing some balance to this doomsday thread.

In the early 80's I had the dubious privilege of hearing Dr Miles Dunphy proclaim the absolutely imminent results of Global warming.

By the year 2,000 we would see Australian coastal suburbs facing creeping inundation, and other serious threats to the world as we know it.

Dr Suzuki earned significant personal wealth warning us of the ozone layer and global warming.

We have since established that Ozone layer and holes are a naturally occuring cyclic phenomenon,
not too distant from tides, El Nino, Southern Oscillation Index and other regularly occurring phenomenon.

We've had Ice Ages and global warming, and I predict the sun will rise most mornings next week.

Just as with Greenpeace (a commercial franchise), there is money to be made from reading tea leaves and chicken's entrails.

However, we have the Darwinian ability to adapt, and the intellect to innovate alternatives.

and in closing, back to John O'Brien:

In God's good time down came the rain;
And all the afternoon
On iron roof and window-pane
It drummed a homely tune.

And through the night it pattered still,
And lightsome, gladsome elves
On dripping spout and window-sill
Kept talking to themselves.

It pelted, pelted all day long,
A-singing at its work,
Till every heart took up the song
Way out to Back-o'-Bourke.

And every creek a banker ran,
And dams filled overtop;
"We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"If this rain doesn't stop."

Sift the chaff from the grain, and bring in a politician to save us from something we fear,
so that he can be re elected and ultimately retire a millionaire.

And there's still kerosene bearing shale in abundance waiting.

p.s.

our Government is collecting $0.51 per litre in excise and GST, are they alarmed? When they are, be alarmed.

M.F.

[Shitsu_Tonka]

OK,

But would you agree (Oh **** I sound like you know you), that the media 'hype' is a fairly new inredient in this argument? After all it has been around for ages, and a bit more 'under the radar'?

What do those in the 'doomsayers' camp have to gain if they are right - apart from glibly living with the devastation they predict? Surley it is not just to sell books and push their cars around with a smug 'I-told-you-so' smirk?

I am not arguing who is right or wrong by the way - just curious as to how others see the 'motivation'of the 'messengers'.

And how does one argue against the scienctific legitimacy of Hubberts Peak, when the decline in the US Oil reserves appears to have been well predicted, using the same prinicples, and apparently proven correct?

[Mainframe]

****su, you're getting warm and close to the mark.

"I am not arguing who is right or wrong by the way - just curious as to how others see the 'motivation'of the 'messengers'."

Don't shoot the messengers, give them the reward they are seeking, be it recognition or personal gain, for saving us.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Another interesting one on GW...I'll hunt out some PO stuff to help answer your question ST

http://mclean.ch/climate/Disputing_Kyoto.pdf

ST that link about oil in my above post is as good as any...it deconstructs the arguments put forward in one of the PO doomsday books currently selling like hot cakes. It also has some interesting writings on the fallacies around privatisation of electricity.

[Woomera]

Thirty years ago Lockheed had advanced designs for a hydrogen powered passenger aircraft based on the L10-11 capacity and design. I think the design failed at that time because oil was less than US$10 per barrel!

There are numerous links to Green Aircraft (http://www.bl.uk/collections/patents/greenaircraft.html) and a hydrogen powered Dornier 328JET (http://www.bl.uk/collections/patents/greenaircraft.html).

Interesting engine developments! (http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4404/ch10-2.htm)

I wonder if the plans will be dusted off and developed into a commercial reality?

Sunny Woomera

[Metro man]

Remember the Y2K problem and how the world was going to descend into chaos as we moved into the year 2000 ?

Seriously though, we and in particular the Americans need to stop wasting energy. Buildings don't need to be airconditioned to the extent were you shiver in summer, and sweat in winter. Do you really need a 5.0 litre turbo charged V8 for driving around the city etc etc etc

Unfortunately the profits and lobbying power of the big oil companies will prevail to get what's best for them.:(

[Chimbu chuckles]

Correct. In fact can anyone recall any doomsday forcaste which has ever been even close to correct?

I cannot.

Y2k =BS,
GW =BS
And now PO...almost certainly BS. Remember we have had doomsday scenarios for PO trotted out 3 or 4 times in the last 150 years. And before that Doomsday predictions for Peak Coal.

We are a very strange species.

This is interesting.

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/images/charts/Inflation_Oil_20050819.gif

[Dave Martin]

Chimbu chuckles,

Slight issue with your prediction: oil is indeed much harder to find and extract than ever before - just because there was lots of it once, doesn't mean there will be lots of it forever.

Also, until recently only a very small proportion of the population consumed oil in large quantities - that is set to change drastically as China, India and Latin America emerge. Unless you wish to deny them the use of it?

The real issue isn't the end of oil. It is the greater expense of extracting it COMBINED with an increasing rate of demand. It doesn't take much in the way of price increases to fork ones economy.

As for global warming being BS, suggest you check out our own home grown thread - http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=233265&page=4

No less, we have never been quite as dependent on oil. It is required for everything. The Mellenium Bug was a farce from square one and everyone knew it. Warnings of our need to curb hydrocarbon dependency have been around for some time, they are just getting more widely accepted.

[Chimbu chuckles]

I would ask you to carefully read my links above and then tell me you still think there are grounds to panic over global warming.

South America has ****LOADS of oil...yes not much Light Sweat crude but still VAST amounts of heavy and really gloopy black ****.

Back in the 80s the Vietnamese were told by the yanks they had NO OIL. The Russian said we'll find you some and if we don't our search won't cost you a thing...if we do we'll do a deal. Predicably the Viets said cool! The result, apparently using the Russian extremely deep drilling theories/technology is the White Tiger fields off Vietnam.

Can you gaurantee China won't find similar in their VAST country? How comprehensively has China been explored given the geopolitical situation there in the last 50 years?

Has India been explored properly for oil? I don't think so. For years oil companies were not really interested in exploration because oil was too cheap and plentiful to bother. In the last year or so, all of a sudden, India needs lots. If they haven't found lots MORE in India in 5 years I will be surprised.

Greenland has hardly been touched search wise. The geological formations are right they just haven't got around to actually drilling holes in about 98% of the place.

Alaska is virtually untapped and suggestions of eco disaster if (when) it is just reeks of greeny hysteria. What's under the Antarctic?

Iran has discovered two super size oil fields in the last 6 years.

23 out of 86 known fields in Saudi Arabia are currently producing. They haven't even touched the other 50 odd and then there is the rest of that huge sandpit they haven't bother drilling holes in yet....no need.

Iraq is pumping oil at a miniscule % of known current potential and they have vast tracks of their country that they haven't drilled holes in yet....sooner or later things will stabilise there politically and they will start producing at vast rates.

ST

Hubbert's Peak was predicted using 1950s technology. Just earlier this year the oil companies came up with the idea of pumping CO2 into oil wells to get higher returns. They predict that what is left in the current US oil wells could be increased from 22 GB to 90GB. That is 90 billion barrels. The inveterate optimists suggest applying this technology to Alaska etc could make the US a bigger oil producer than the DCs in Saudi Arabia...prolly that is a little too optimistic even for me:ok:

Hubbert's Peak keeps getting pushed out by better and better technology.

Can you logically extrapolate worldwide based on what was predicted to happen in the US when, for a goodly long period, they were not EVEN LOOKING very hard in the US, or world wide, because the price of crude did not justify the costs of exploration when cheaper crude was available in the ME?

What i would like to see...and I think they Yanks must do this...is for GWB to apply the same sorts of excise taxes as Oz and the EU apply and make US petrol prices a LOT more expensive than currently.

That would have the following effects.

Help the stupid plicks with their horrendous balance of payments problems and therefore minimise their exposure to an Asian, particularly Chinese, economic bitch slap if they decide to dump the USD.

FORCE the US population into smaller cars the way the rest of the world was 30 years ago. 6% of the worlds population responsible 25% of the oil demand:uhoh: If they could halve that demand the same way Europe halved theirs it would make a HUGE difference.

It would REALLY put the spurs to alternative energies. Common sense suggests viable alternatives to oil are never going to be more than 10% overall. Can anyone really see 75% of the east coast of Australia under sugar cane to produce ethanol? Biodiesel, ethanol, electric, hybryd etc etc can make ahuge difference though.

All of the above would have oil back at $20/barrel again in a relatively short time frame...or if you believe in PO push it back a few hundred years.

Unfortunately it might also get several million brain dead rednecks from bumfeck alabama to lock and load and march on the White House.:{

[gassed budgie]

I found the program quite interesting. Bottom line is, I don't expect we're going to run out of oil anytime soon. Most of the program was all doom and gloom, but what more would you expect from the latte sipping, tree hugging, socialist left wing trendies down at the ABC.
An even more enlightening programe is to be aired on SBS tommorow night (now today, 8.30pm AEST I think). It's evidentally about how to save ourselves from the yanks when the joint bases are established up in QLD and at Yampi sound. I think the words rape, pillage, slash and burn were mentioned in the station promo. How typical.
When the yanks do turn up, I'll be first inline to welcome them aboard.

[boogie-nicey]

Chimbu Chuckles: I'm with you but what can we do about the loony left that keep poisoning our society with their jealously inspired theories? They're the ones clouding further exploration whilst we could be simulataneously deriving practical ways in which to keep the planet healthy and clean. An oil installation is alot more tidy and self contained than a sprawling housing estate or a leftist rock concert and all the rubbish, muck and litter left behind. Therefore with careful planning we can have installations in the 'sacred' areas of Greenland, Alaska, etc. It will make no more of a blot than a small fishing village in these areas.

I know, let's all look forward to "Slap a leftie week"...... :ok:

[prospector]

The link to Saudi Oil given by Chimbu chuckles is very interesting, a lot of information that is for the most part opinions of many senior people in the oil industry. How can the experts, given the same set of facts, come up with such disparate conclusions??.

However, the value of these statements must be related to what we now know as facts.
" 1. The unanticipated surge in demand, particularly in Asia, including the sudden jump in Chinese oil consumption which was unforseen by virtually every analyst."

If the experts, both for and against peak oil, can not forsee such events, how much value can be placed on the remainder of their dissertations??

[Buster Hyman]

How many here were in ADL when that Tidal wave was predicted to hit? I think there may be some candidates amongst us that went up into the hills....:rolleyes:

[tinpis]

Chimbu there was an American mob (Offshore International) i personally know of drilling just off the coast of Vietnam during the war.

There were dozens of others.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Did they find any. Perhaps they were part of the mob that subsequently (apparently) told the Viets they had no oil?

I will see if I can find the link to that info.

[tinpis]

Cant tell yer ..its still top secret..:E

[Chimbu chuckles]

Below is a google link to a bunch of articles about it...some written by chaps who seem a little 'out there'....but no more so than the PO Doomsayers.:hmm:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=White+Tiger+Oil+Fields&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[prospector]

Interesting link, would not care to have some one like Joe Vialls on my side tho, some one who can claim 9/11 was caused by "planes electronically hi-jacked from the ground", or claims that vitamin B17 found in apricot stones or cassava roots cures cancer tumours. I think on balance the veracity of the pro oil peak advocates wins in my book.

In order to back the claim of abiotic outgassing, proponents must look to the mid ocean ridges, where new ocean floor basalt is created through the upwelling of the mantle. Sampling has been done along the mid ocean ridges, and while the results do suggest the production of methane and equally simple hydrocarbons from the mantle, the amount is negligible.15 More methane is produced annually from cow farts than from outgassing at the mid ocean ridges.

Another expert opinion??

Conclusion
Other questionable fields could be surveyed here, but for considerations of length. Suffice it to say that a sound argument for organic origin can be built for all other examples. The fields surveyed here constitute the core examples repeatedly adduced by abiotic adherents. And we have found ample evidence that none of these plays are of abiotic origin. As for volcanic outgassing, that too is explained by organic chemistry in conjunction with plate tectonics. The abiotic hypothesis remains just that, an hypothesis which has failed in prediction and so cannot be elevated to a theory. It is completely ignored by the oil industry worldwide, and even within Russia. And that is the final testament to its failure.

[tinpis]

Ok...Im convinced we not gonna run out soon and production henceforth will be pitched at keeping demand high and supply skinny.

Kinda like bananas huh ?
Yer reckon bloody Woolworths will ever let you have em for $2 a kilo again after its found punters will ante up $12?

[Buster Hyman]

$12 a kilo? Lucky bastard! $13.98 a kilo or $3 each down here!:eek:

[transonic dragon]

Seriously though, we and in particular the Americans need to stop wasting energy. Buildings don't need to be airconditioned to the extent were you shiver in summer, and sweat in winter. Do you really need a 5.0 litre turbo charged V8 for driving around the city etc etc etc
Unfortunately the profits and lobbying power of the big oil companies will prevail to get what's best for them.:(

This, for my thinking, is the absolute crux of the matter. Whether or not GW is truly the issue it's hyped to be, and whether Peak Oil is about to doom us all to another dark age, the waste is what really gets me mad. There is no doubt at all that oil is finite, and that everyone, including us in aviation, needs to accept the fact. Whether that finite endpoint is now, or in 20 years, or in 100 years, absolutely no-one can tell, any more than we can know how hot it's going to be (God knows it's hard enough to get an accurate TAF!)

Waste is abhorrent in all its forms, and my "green" bent is certainly not of the loony left variety. But if you can get a hybrid vehicle which burns 4L/100km, why not use it in favour of the V8? Why not use a paper bag instead of a plastic one? Why not use alternative fuels if they are indeed viable? Why buy processed crap food when you can buy organic? I've got a solar hot water system, and I surely don't miss paying all that extra money on electricity.

In every case, we're freeing ourselves from the junta established by the Middle East/US oil barons, and we can tell them all to get f....d. Why be a slave to all that crap? Why not get rich doing other things?

To reduce wastage is not a political statement, but surely a sensible practicality. I don't care to waste my money if I don't have to, and surely it makes good economic and business sense too. I'm no hippy - they are a true rarity amongst professional pilots, except for some seaplane dudes.

I do believe that aviation has done its bit as far as reducing dependancy on oil. Just look at the massive increases in efficiency which have been made since the 707/DC-8 days in moving from straight-pipe turbojets to massive, high-bypass turbofans. The newer engine/airframe combinations seen in the A330 compared to the similar-sized 767 of late-70s design, are a more recent example, with similarly large improvements expected in the next generation (eg 787). I don't think alternative fuels are a serious contender at this stage, but who knows what might be around the corner?

Anyway, that's my thought on the matter. I'd love to think oil was endless, but it clearly isn't. Like Chimbu, I definitely don't believe all the doomsayers re GW/PO either, but let's not be wasteful or ignorant either.

[tobzalp]

John Eacott I have reached a stage in my life that I believe I'm being bull****ted to by everyone..


Anyone convert their gas guzzler to LPG?


Sold my V6 and bought a 150cc Scooter. $7 a week to run. i am so environmentally friendly.

[tobzalp]

MOR I didn't see the show but, from what I've read, the problem is not that the oil has run out, it's more that the easy to extract oil is running out. The hard to get stuff is still there, but it costs a hell of a lot more to get.

Best offers on the Fairlane guys...first to see will buy...:O

From what I understand of the peak oil theory, this is the reason why it will all come unstuck. Items normally requiring transport/heat/whatever will become so rediculously expensive that they will cease to exist as will all transport and related things. There will still be Oil but it is be like Diamonds. The Peak Oil theory also assumes that nothing changes in usage and needs. Pretty flimsy theory but a good read none the less.

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Chuck,

I am listening - with an Open Mind.

But your graph, as enlightening as it appears, is out of date. Oil, as of today is $80 a barrell, pushing it up close to your 1989 (Jul 2005 Dollars) price.

[haughtney1]

****su...

Its at those levels for other reasons than there being any shortage.

Presently there is approximately a $30 USD premium being caused through political instability, sabre rattling, and the "war on terror".

Rest assured someone is making a killing at our expense.

My $30 USD quote comes straight from the head of OPEC....a speech at a meeting in the mid-east a month or so back:ok:

[Woomera]

I'm fitting an umbrella to the ride on mower and buying Ms Woomera a Malvern Star!

:}

Sunny Woomera

[Woomera]

Oil hit US$80 per barrel (159 litres/35 gal) today. Betcha a slab it hits US$100 before the Isrealis finish with their neighbours.:E

"Rest assured someone is making a killing at our expense."

Yeeeessss! Very interesting point! It seems the ticket fuel surcharge of $39, an 80% load factor on a DHC8-300, one hour average flight sector - 40 pax at $39 yields around $1,560......... My estimate that has to go very close to the total fuel cost??? :=

Anyone looked at the same fuel surcharge versus the total fuel cost on a B737 Brisbane - Sydney or Sydney - Melbourne?

Is the fuel surcharge in fact, an "under the radar" air fare increase? :yuk:

International ticket fuel surcharge is $104.

Not expressing an opinion. Just curious........???

Sunny Woomera

[Air Ace]

Woomera. Domestic and regional ticket fuel surcharges are funding international air fare discounts, whilst aircrew are expected to contribute to GOD's $1.2 billion "estimate" of increased fuel costs. :mad:

[Shitsu_Tonka]

haughtney1,

I could not agree with you more.

Mrs ST is or has been a futures, options/derivatives and Forex trader and knows how a lot the 'market makers' work their stuff. Whilst not understanding a lot if it, I find some of the goss is fascinating and equally frightening. The conflict of interest for these (mostly young male who only have known bull market times) traders and speculators, is that they personaly make more when they can push the price of a commodity to a higher 'resistance level'.

They did this last week by raising 'fears' about the North Korea missile tests - anyone care to guess how Pyongyang has an effect on oil supply? Well - it doesnt. But it's fear - and that is the real 'commodity' of the GW Bush post 9/11 era.

So when the Israeli's started dropping bombs on Beirut, well the traders saw opportunity again. This is the unreal reality of global market speculation. It is a crock.

If bird flu breaks out I am sure that will add a dollar or two as well. It's stupid, and it is a bubble market.

Supply is one thing - exploitation, profiteering and gouging are another - and they destabilise the entire world market, ultimately to the downfall of these wunderkind traders.

[Chimbu chuckles]

ST the most interesting aspects of that graph (and I agree it is a year old) is the comparisons to be seen.

Pre the 70s oil shock, caused by the towelled ones turning the tap off, oil was a rock steady, near constant price.

After the 70s/80s oil shocks, about the time futures traders discovered the money to be made in derivatives, it's a near constant sawtooth graph.:hmm:

Anyone, with hand on heart, prepared to suggest that sawtooth pattern is not manipulation:mad:

Through the 80s and into the 90s it averages around the inflation corrected price it was all through the 50s, 60s and early 70s.

It then climbs through the roof again in the last few years...as you so rightly point out, due mostly to supply/demand and opportunistic trading.

As far as waste is concerned I could not agree more strongly. I am constantly amazed as I cross the world, mostly back of the clock, at the grotesque waste of countries light up from one end to the other..at 0300LT:=

The other hugely wasteful practice is the beancounter driven, globalisation practice of central manufacture and extended distribution. Instead of the old days of factories spread all over producing whatever and a fairly localised distribution network.

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Chuck,

Some of the PO advocates are making exactly the same argument about globalisation - they then get derided about having a 'leftie green' agenda, which somehow is supposed to extinguish the validity of their arguments.

Whilst not a crash helmet wearing anti-globalisation campaigner, I personally see it as a cynical exploitation of cheap labour, literally enabled by a cheap finite resource - oil. It also leads to the de-skilling of regions and even entire countries.

There is the old joke about selling ice to eskimoes - which equates to Australia importing Bananas, Pineapples, Oranges, Lychees, Cut Flowers, and just about anything manufactured. Is generating this demand on oil a good use of such a resource when the impact on our economy and growth is starting to become negative?

[Pass-A-Frozo]

constantly amazed as I cross the world, mostly back of the clock, at the grotesque waste of countries light up from one end to the other..at 0300LT:=

What ever happened to the old days of the street lights going out at (was it) 3am? Used to be great for star gazing.. :{ Probably wasn't as good for NVFR though :p

[Chimbu chuckles]

Agreed...I distrust globalisation completely.

Keating said while he was PM that Australia 'needed' a population of 55 million people to 'support' the economy...or words to that effect.

Politicians and economists have it completely ass backwards in my view. Is the population there to support the economy or is the economy supposed to support the population?

Australia, as a landmass, cannot support a 55 million population...it just doesn't have sufficiently ariable land.

So how do politicians and economists define an economy and a population?

I have come to believe that they (shareholders, economists, CEOs, Multinational corporations, futures traders etc) see themselves as 'the economy' and we, the population, exist to support them. This can only happen in an ever expanding economy where 'they' convince us constantly that we 'need' ever increasing amounts of 'consumer items'.

This is why we have 'design obselescence' (sp) in almost everything we buy. Remember when things were refered to as 'consumer durables'? These days its an oxymoron. What is so wrong with a mobile phone, car, toaster, stereo, airconditioner, fridge, TV etc that will last 10 years instead of 2 to 5?

Answer?

It is not good for 'the economy'.

Why do things cost LOTS more to repair than replace?

Because its good for 'the economy'.

Why should Australia be importing food?

Because its good for 'the economy'.

Why is every city around the world, and the surrounding suburbs and towns lite up all night long?

Because it is good for 'the economy'.

**** me you should see India from the cockpit of a 767 at 0200LT...it is a near constant sea of lights from coast to coast..Pakistan the same from border to border...all of Europe from the western border of Afghanistan to the west coast of UK. Afghanistan is a huge black hole, apart from Kabul which looks like Roma from the air at night, you would be LITERALLY hard pressed to count 4 individual lights between the Pakistani border and the Uzbekistan border.

Imagine the energy savings if every city in the world turned off 70% of the lights between local midnight and dawn?

I drive a 95 model LWB diesel Pajero. The reason I like it is because it has NO COMPUTERS to crap out when it's 5 years old...it still runs beautifully and is in fantastic condition overall and any half decent Malay mechanic can fix it very cheaply. Lucky if a full service costs AUD$70.00.

I point blank refuse to buy a new car (or any car run by computers with colour coded 'no go' areas under the bonnet) for that reason alone...once you buy one you end up in a constant cycle of trading in for new every 5 years...my sister and her hubby (DINKS) do that...buy new and trade 10 seconds before the warranty expires, and the fecking thing becomes REALLY expensive to keep running, for another new car.:ugh:

Cut down on even 30% of the waste and we would never be having a discussion on Peak Oil...and despite the waste GW is a crock of ****e...amazingly:ok:

[Trash Hauler]

The current crisis in price and the peak oil "train smash" is prompting ,much R&D into alternative fuels. During WWII Germany developed a processs (Fischer-Tropsch) for producing liquid hydrocarbon fuel from any source of hydrocarbon (eg natural gas, coal etc). The production processes were not very effective however the growth in technology has overcome the these problems. The other driver is cost.

In April I had the opportunity of discussing this issue with an engineer on the USAF syn-fuel program. The high price and peak oil has pushed their program ahead to the extent that they have gas turbine engines running on syn-fuel and will fly a B52 later this year powered by syn-fuel. See link below.

NY Times article on USAF syn-fuel program (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/us/14fuel.html?ex=1305259200en=35f7d36ad391425dei=5088partner=r ssnytemc=rss&pagewanted=print)

Planet Ark article (http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/37086/story.htm)

This technology has the potential o convert incredibley vast reserves of gas and coal to liquid HC fuel. Ultimately the issue will be cost and from what I heard syn-fuel will be 80-100 USD per barrel to produce.

Cheers

TH

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Chuck,

Agreed. Reading between the lines I think you have more in common with the PO lobby than you realise / reveal!

How is this theory? - The disposable society you speak of has actually led to the surge in Child Care - why? All the **** that everyone absolutely must have (new mobile, PDA, XBOX, Plasma TV [separately funded - ironically - by JH Good Heterosexual Christian Tax Cut, a.k.a. "Baby Bonus"] new Car every couple of years, Home Theatre etc. etc.... it needs two incomes. Kids have to be farmed out somewhere - no wonder so many of them appear to just watch TV, play computer games, eat Junk Food and be socially dysfunctional.

But as Chuck said - it is all for the economy.

Is it so bad if the economy contracts instead of grows? The economicists say yes. But this is what more and more people on a personal level are actually choosing to do - it's call downshifting - reducing workload, moving out of expensive try-hard suburbs, spending time with their kids, re-establishing community links. They seem to love it. Are they smarter and realise that the continual push for growth and productivity is a means with no ends?

[tinpis]

Chevron just announced discovery of new humungous gasfield off the NW WA coast

And...http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,19786899-951,00.html

Pity no one has come up with a suitable way of using gas in airplanes
Turbine engines run well onnit they use them for maintaining pressure on gas pipelines .

[Trash Hauler]

The Fischer-Tropsch converts natural gas to liquid hydrocarbon suitable for jet engines. B52 to fly in September on this fuel. See my previous post for links.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Agreed ST.

I don't consider myself a greenie and I don't believe GW is happening other than naturally...as my brother in law says "GW? Absolutely happening..what do you think ended the last ice age?"

People who study this stuff suggest there have been as many as 8 'ice ages' in the last 800,000 years...sure sounds natural and cyclic to me.

I don't think our current oil prices are more than manipulation coming on top of a lack of foresight....but am prepared to accept that oil is probably finite...just not that we could burn it up in 150 yrs when mother nature has been laying it down for BILLIONS of years.

But I am REALLY getting sick of marketers, economists and politicians.

If the people running 'the economy' give themselves 65% payrises it's perfectly ok but if 'the population' looks like getting a 3% gross payrise, not even keeping up with published inflation let alone real inflation, then the world is about to end!!

The morons running the Central Bank in Australia think a interest rate hike is called for while 'the population' is drowning under artificially inflated fuel prices!

The FECKING MORONS in Govt suggest there is no 'underlying inflation' being caused by high oil prices when everything we buy is either made with oil or transported by oil...they must really think 'the population' is stupid...they might be right.

And then you look around at the waste..and electricity is the most obvious and wonder who benefits. Can't be 'the population' via employment because power stations became heavily automated 50 years ago...you'd be lucky if the average power station employs more than 50 members of 'the population'.

Must just be 'the economy' I suppose.:mad:

Edit:

Wanna hear something really (not) funny?

Pine Rivers Shire Council, along with most, have been encouraging people to conserve water...and they have been...they have conserved so much that it is impacting on Shire revenue and so they are bumping up water rates, among others, by HUGE %s.

When will enough of 'the population' wake up the the stupidity (beaurocrats) that runs our lives?

[tinpis]

Chuck to lazy to google after it but recall somewhere that a load must be kept on generators hence the lighting on otherwise an artificial load is required .
Ill get shot down I know but it goes something like that.:hmm:

[Chimbu chuckles]

That sounds fair up to a point...but does it mean the world needs to be kept lite up from dusk to dawn?

[M.25]

Makes yer wonder why the isnt some sort of subsidy in place to get trucks/cars etc converted to LPG if there was a serious problem?
Theres tons of the bloody stuff bubblin up in the ocean just off the coast here.

Good point. In WA there has actually been a government rebate in place for the fitting of LPG to vehicles for years. (Don't know if it is still being offered though) I am not sure if this was due to a forcast oil crisis or for environmental (emissions) reasons. From memory I had a quote in WA to fit LPG to my 253 for about $1200 (a few years ago). Recently I got a quote outside of WA to have LPG fitted to a modern 6cyl. The quote came to about $2400! The rebate definitely makes the difference between going ahead and not going ahead with it.

[barit1]

Don't give up (http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/articles/06/oil.html) on petroleum just yet!

[Trash Hauler]

barit1:
The issue of peak oil isn't that we are about to run out rather the ability to supply oil at a rate to meet demand cannot currently be met. The beauty of options such as Fischer-Tropsch is that it provides another source to help meet the demand. This then keeps the price in check.

TH

[barit1]

No quarrel, TH, just pointing out a few more options. :ok:

[Trash Hauler]

Agree with you on the options and the fact we have plenty of hydrocarbon based fuel available. Unfortunately as punters we suffer from the high pricing of oil due to the supply/demand and quite frankly my budget has had enough of it!

[archangel7]

This is all because of the greedy Americans.....the USA consumes just over 30% of the worlds oil EVERY DAY..... which is about 19 million barrels a day... In practical and considerably oversimplified terms, this means that if 2000 was the year of global Peak Oil, worldwide oil production in the year 2020 will be the same as it was in 1980. However, the world’s population in 2020 will be both much larger (approximately twice) and much more industrialised (oil-dependent) than it was in 1980. Consequently, worldwide demand for oil will outpace worldwide production of oil by a significant margin. As a result, the price will skyrocket, oil-dependant economies will crumble, and resource wars will explode. by 2020 we are projected to need 120 million barrels per day by 2020.

[gassed budgie]

And the yanks probably punch out 30% of total world production of everything every day of the week. Always someone around to dump on the yanks.

[404 Titan]

archangel7 and all the other DOOMS DAYERS out there

Economics 101 says there is a fundamental flaw in your and the whole dooms day scenario argument. As demand increases and supply decreases prices rise, yes. But only to a point and that point is fast approaching. If there was a reduction in supply as you would argue this will only speed up the inevitable. Once consumers incomes can’t absorb the ever increasing fuel prices and everything else that goes with it anymore, demand for everything not just fuel will collapse taking the price of oil with it. If you don’t believe me have a look at history. It’s all happened before. And the worst effected countries are usually the emerging markets, i.e. China, India etc.

It is also worth pointing out that the longer oil prices remain high the more the pressure is on to find more oil and alternative fuels. While the use hybrid vehicles and the use of such fuels as natural gas and bio fuels in road transport, which is by far the greatest consumer of oil, is commendable, it is in my opinion only a stop gap measure. I believe if we come back and looked at this topic in 30 to 50 years almost all cars and other road transport will powered by Hydrogen fuel cells. The internal combustion engine will be a thing of the past due to its very inefficient conversion of the fuels potential energy into kinetic energy. Infact in the not to distant future I can see governments around the world banning them as newer technology becomes available.

In short high prices are good because it eventually brings everything back into balance and also encourages development in new fuel technology which has been sadly lacking in the last 15 years or so due to very very low oil prices in real historical terms.

[barit1]

... Consequently, worldwide demand for oil will outpace worldwide production of oil by a significant margin. As a result, the price will skyrocket, oil-dependant economies will crumble, and resource wars will explode...


Remember Paul Erlich of "The Population Bomb"? He was one of many doomsday writers who always seemed to get it wrong, exemplified by this bet (http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=44)with Julian Simon.

(Where's the icon for foot-in-mouth syndrome?)

[Andy_RR]

...in 30 to 50 years almost all cars and other road transport will powered by Hydrogen fuel cells. The internal combustion engine will be a thing of the past due to its very inefficient conversion of the fuels potential energy into kinetic energy. Infact in the not to distant future I can see governments around the world banning them as newer technology becomes available.

I doubt this will be the scenario. People have been predicting the demise of the IC engine for decades and it's still going strong. If you do some research into fuel cells, you'll discover they are faily resource intensive and ultimately, they aren't that much more efficient than a hydrogen IC powertrain.

The problem we face is that, even with massively inflated oil and fuel prices, fuel is still not a very significant cost in running a vehicle. By far the biggest running cost is depreciation, which will only get worse as new technology is thrown at the problem. Technology will only make gradual inroads into improving fuel consumption (there will be no gigantic leap!) so the rate of adoption of new technologies will be about as fast as it is today.

In short, nothing will change very dramatically and the laws of thermodynamics won't change at all.

A

[archangel7]

believe if we come back and looked at this topic in 30 to 50 years almost all cars and other road transport will powered by Hydrogen fuel cells. The internal combustion engine will be a thing of the past due to its very inefficient conversion of the fuels potential energy into kinetic energy. Infact in the not to distant future I can see governments around the world banning them as newer technology becomes available.
barit...what about Aeroplanes? what will power them?
I was reading in an article on the NGEO that NASA has found evidence for Methane on Mars, which is a petroleum product, so since petroleum exists on Mars; OIL exists on Mars too. does that mean that George Bush and his buddys will go and invade Mars, use tax payers dollars and steal all the oil and get rich?? anyways, I know it sounds crazy, but its just a thought...nahh but seriously about the methane on Mars thing... so when we run out we can go to Mars? hahahah this sounds funny I know, but you never know ay?

Shortage of oil is certainly in the air...I ask you people this, whats the shortage? well.. the demad of oil outstrips the capacity to produce it.And if we dont do something now to prepare for the shortage and deal with it....it is going to be one hell of a ride! It will most prossibly be in my life time and it seems to be very soon!
And as for doomsday.. the way we are going,we arent far away either, But who knows ay?? as we can see people are becoming ever more corrupt, Godless, wicked and cruel. the second coming of christ maybe? if you believe in that stuff. But, what i've noticed from 1998 and now is global warming, melting polar ice caps, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes erupting, etc. major catastrophic earth events....I'ts happening now!
Anyways the biggest load of crap i've heard is the number of the beast mentioned in the biblical book of revelation, is really a date: 06/06/06 or 2006-JUN-6. nothing happened! lol I personally dont think the world will ever end, we just need to be more cautious with they way we treat the planet and more environmentally friendly.. other then that, I strongly believe that Earth will likely be hit by another large stellar body in 2-3 million years, like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs. Our solar system is presently in a dense region of our galaxy such that the possibility of the Oort cloud being perturbed to send a comet on a collision course is more likely but this could be avoided because aparently NASA has the technology to divert such a collision provided, I think, if only we find the object in enough time. This in my mind could never happen not in another million years or more. The planet might be big but compared to the rest of the universe, the Earth is very small.Compared to a person, on the other hand, the Earth is enormous. It has a diameter of 7,926 miles (12,756 kilometers) at the equator, and it has a mass of about 6 x 1024 kilograms. The Earth orbits the sun at a speed of about 66,638 miles per hour (29.79 kilometers per second). Don't dwell on those numbers too long, though, to a lot of people, the Earth is Inconceivably, mind-bogglingly big. And it's just a fraction of the size of the sun and the sun is a bee’s dick compared to other stars and planets in the universe. These figures are extraordinary and we are not even a pixel to what is out there. That’s why I think it will never happen..In theory, it could hit us. While the threat is real, the odds are in our favor. 1 in 2million chance of it happening! Most comets or asteroids completely miss us or never come close... We are lucky because we have these gigantic planets surrounding us shielding them off... so apart from that people and the oil most definitely running out, I say enjoy the wonderful "lucky" lonelyplanet and Happy Flying

[barit1]

...I was reading in an article on the NGEO that NASA has found evidence for Methane on Mars, which is a petroleum product, so since petroleum exists on Mars; OIL exists on Mars too...

Does this mean that petroleum is not necessarily of biological origin? :uhoh:

[archangel7]

Yes, good point
from what I read there is a theory that crude oil or methane - unlike coal and other fossil fuels - could have an inorganic source.. does that mean that there is oil on the moon to? I doubt it very much!

It is a certainty that D-type asteroids HAVE impact on Mars which carry Kerogen, a precursor to 'oil' which is a chemical they use in petrolium. But you never know its just a theory... it could also prove that there was once life forms on Mars? marine life forms.Since it got so hot in Mars the oceans dried out so that could be a reason as to why the Marsis has detected all this.. I don't know much about Mars and chemistry so if I left something out or I misunderstood please fill me in or explain it better otherwise I'll try and find the article tomorrow

:0

[tinpis]

Anyways the biggest load of crap i've heard is the number of the beast mentioned in the biblical book of revelation, is really a date: 06/06/06 or 2006-JUN-6. nothing happened! lol....

It did...the price of crude hit a record level. :sad:

[tinpis]

Now this (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19867874-643,00.html):confused:

[M.25]

There was an interesting feature on beyondtomorrow the other night about a vehicle in Brazil that runs on four different fuels (including ethanol)

Tetra fuel car (http://www.beyondtomorrow.com.au/stories/ep44/tetra.html)

[404 Titan]

M.25

Yep I saw that as well and was very impressed. I still think that cars like that are only a stop gap until producing Hydrogen in sufficient quantities becomes a viable solution. If we can over the next 20 to 30 years get enough cars on the world’s roads running on hydrogen I think we will delay the inevitable of the world running out of petroleum products for at least 300 – 500 years and also greatly reduce the pollution we pump into the atmosphere.


Andy_RR

At present the internal combustion engine is more efficient, mainly because the infrastructure is in place to support them but with time I believe they will become a dinosaur and a costly noose around anyone’s neck that tries to run one.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells (http://www.burntplanet.com/hydrogen-fuel-cells/)

Do a search of the internet. The number of sights is staggering as well as the strides that have been made in the last five tears or so.:ok:

[BlueWolf]

Oodles of the black stuff in the Great South Basin, more than was ever under the North Sea. We might even cut the cable and spend some of it on a new Air Force ;)

[outbacknightpilots]

lets go to canada, those oil flatts are looking very attractive...

[archangel7]

Who cares about cars, cars are borring! I could not careless to be honest.... Cars can be replaced by Public Transport, like Trains, Trams etc

what about Aeroplanes? what will power them? Thats more important I think...

[Trash Hauler]

Peak oil is not about the end of oil - it is about demand exceeding supply and thus the price goes ballistic. There will be fuel for aircraft for many years to come. The problem is that it will cost a lot more (unless other economic sources of fuel come on line) and this will increase the cost of flying for the average punter.

At least the high price provides revenue for the oil industry to develop new technologies for oil extraction and processing so hopefully in the next few years we will see a turn around in the cost.

Look at what the head of BP thinks the future holds.

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1795824,00.html

TH

[404 Titan]

Trash Hauler

And that is the point I was saying before. If the price climbs too much it will break the back of the consumer and a recession will follow. Prices are not entirely based on how much of the black stuff there is in the ground but how much the consumer is prepared to pay for it. It is becoming quite obvious that that time is fast approaching. It is widely accepted that high oil prices have the same effect on world economies as high interest rates. You can’t just keep jacking them up and not expect something to give. With both of them rising the limbs at the end of the branch are starting to look awfully thin indeed.

archangel7

Who cares about cars, cars are borring! I could not careless to be honest
You should because they are by far the largest consumers of crude oil on the planet. Fix that problem and the rest go away.
Cars can be replaced by Public Transport, like Trains, Trams etc
No they can’t. Public transport wouldn’t even go close to moving the same number of people around the world each day if oil ran out tomorrow.
what about Aeroplanes? what will power them? Thats more important I think...
And that is why fixing the problem of what cars in the future run on is so important. The more that can be weened off petroleum fuels the longer it will last for transportation methods like air transport that can’t be changed so easily.

[archangel7]

404titan,

Do you use public transportation? Of course you do. Even if you live out in the country, you use public transportation when you drive to the city..."No, I don't," you reply. "I drive all the way into the city. I don't change from my car to a train or bus."
That may be true, but you still use transit to help you get around. How? If it weren't for public transportation, there would be thousands more cars on the road. You would spend hours more driving in or out of the city, because congestion would be far worse than it already is. So even if you don't ride public transit, you still use it, and it is still working for you.Reducing traffic congestion for people who drive is just one way but there are many more! It is also more cost efficient to use public transportation, particularly in business and urban areas, helps promote cleaner air by reducing automobile use and it can also significantly reduce dependency on petrol, reducing auto fuel consumption by 1.5 billion gallons annually. Of course it is also the safest way to travel! There is, however, another reason why we need to move cars and trucks out of cities: the space they consume. A two-track rail system can transport 48,000 passengers per hour in each direction (with seats for everyone); a two-lane road can transport 2000 cars (say 2400 passengers) in each direction. Since a metro track is the same width as a freeway lane, the space savings are about 20-fold, without even considering parking requirements. In some center-cities, as much as 70% of the land area is dedicated to roads and related infrastructure.

Titan, have you ever been to Melbourne? It has one of the world's most extensive tram networks, one of the few tram systems in Australia. Maybe the best PT system in Australia, maybe even the best in the Southern Hemisphere. Sydney has a good PT system as well, when I lived there for 17 months, I traveled to bankstown everyday to and from work. Not once have I waited for over 15-20 minutes for a train and it was never late... the trains where always packed thousands of people on board moving students and all types of different workers etc..
cars are not needed and they are a waste...if we improved our transport system including the GA we could move more people to and from work... But this would require a lot of hard thinking and planning...with the rising prices in fuel, naturally you then wonder if you can do without cars at all.

[404 Titan]

archangel7

Yes I have been to Melbourne. I go there all the time. I think you need to do a little research into Public Transport the world over before saying such stupid things as “Cars can be replaced by Public Transport, like Trains, Trams”. The reality is that in Australia’s capital cities only 10% of people use public transport on a regular basis. To put it another way imagine the chaos that would result if the public transport infrastructure in Melbourne and Sydney suddenly increased by ten times the current levels. It quite clearly wouldn’t be able to handle it. In Hong Kong where I live which has one of the best public transport systems in the world, only about 20% of the population use it on a regular basis. Again it would crumble under the strain of five times more people using it overnight. The other major problem with most public transport systems around the world is that it is focussed on transporting people from the suburbs to the centre of the city. If you need to get across town the system breaks down as it wasn’t designed to move people in that fashion. If you need to get across town you can spend hours trying to get there which quite clearly isn’t practical if you have to do it twice a day, five days a week. Oh and by the way I grew up in Sydney and currently spend quite a bit of time there and the public transport system is to put it bluntly, very unreliable, especially the rail network. Time tables may as well be written on toilet paper because that is all they are worth. And yes I do use public transport on a regular basis in both Sydney and Hong Kong but also own cars in both locations because of the limitations of the public transport systems in both cities.

Public Transport Users Association Victoria Australia. (Myths) (http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/real.shtml)

Public Transport Users Association Victoria Australia. (Problem) (http://www.ptua.org.au/melbourne/problem.shtml)

Commission for Integrated Transport. (http://www.cfit.gov.uk/pn/010718/02.htm)

[clv101]

If you guys wanna believe a bunch of BS from the extreme left of the green movement fill you boots.
Urm... extreme left?

http://www.bnp.org.uk/peakoil/index.htm

Peak oil spans all political persuasions, the most active US politician on peak oil is a Republican member of the House of Representatives Roscoe Bartlett and the best selling peak oil author is Matthew Simmons, a former energy adviser for President Bush.

The fact that peak oil (not running out but just the peak in the rate of extraction before it starts to fall back down) is likely to occur within a decade and most likely before or around 2010 is proved in my opinion.

The alternative view of a peak at some 120 million barrels per day in 2030 is fanciful (yet less than 25 years away so even that far off we should take action now), it isn't rigorously supported by the data. The evidence point to peak around 2010.

As you may be aware there are two distinctly difference approaches to evaluating the timing of peak oil;

a) The annalists approach considering the production profile of all fields, those in decline, those in ascension, those holding steady then to this add the new projects we know about – and over the time scale of six years we have complete visibility because it takes that long to bring a new project on line. This analysis is predicting a global peak around 2010. There just aren’t the projects post 2010 to offset depletion.

b) The geologists approach based on two key points, an estimate of ultimately recoverable reserves (URR) and that the profile of the extraction rate curve is the derivative of the logistic curve and follows the well known bell-shaped curve, the area under the curve representing the URR. These two points and historic extraction data allows the complete curve to be calculated complete with date and extraction rate at peak. This approach has been verified on many individual fields and countries – it follows that the summation of the many oil producing countries in the world will behave similarly. This analysis (developed by Shell’s chief consultant in general geology M. King Hubbert and successfully carried out in 1956 to predict the peaking of the lower 48 states of the US in 1971) also predicts a global peak around 2010.

I really don't see how people have difficultly accepting peak oil, the available evidence is pretty clear on the matter.

This article covers some of the reasons why peak oil is probably about now (http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/3/1/3402/63420).

Finally, to extract oil first one must discover oil. Here is the oil discovery profile:

http://www.clv101.plus.com/Forums/growing_gap.gif

The amount of oil discovered to date produces a peak around 2010, the die are already cast.

[757manipulator]

The geologists approach based on two key points, an estimate of ultimately recoverable reserves (URR) and that the profile of the extraction rate curve is the derivative of the logistic curve and follows the well known bell-shaped curve, the area under the curve representing the URR. These two points and historic extraction data allows the complete curve to be calculated complete with date and extraction rate at peak. This approach has been verified on many individual fields and countries – it follows that the summation of the many oil producing countries in the world will behave similarly. This analysis (developed by Shell’s chief consultant in general geology M. King Hubbert and successfully carried out in 1956 to predict the peaking of the lower 48 states of the US in 1971) also predicts a global peak around 2010.


So your suggesting that an estimation that is 50 years old..and presumably based on 50 year old technology, has as much relevance as it did 50 years ago?

This information also fails to show the present shale sand deposits in the US, (conservatively estimated at 3 times the original known Saudi reserves) or the fact that 80% of the current survey work is done on the North american continent.(the rest of the world gets a measley 20%)

Peak Oil IMHO is a completely self-serving phenomona in so much that the oil companies and government agencies (regulators & theocracies) are the ones to gain when prices are high. It is as simple as failing to invest in refining capacity (there has been a lethargy on the part of oil companies to increase capacity since the last major oil price spike), couple this with increased (although in a historical sense..not really) political instability..and hey presto, you have a license to print money.
Whatever the estimates consider, I am of the opinion that this is perhaps a very cynical money making exercise, the latest news of the problems associated with a certain Alaskan pipeline highlight just how ridiculous the situation is! (by admission there is no shortage of supply..merely a refining shortfall, so this technical issue should have no impact on the overall picture...and yet a $2-3 USD price spike ensued)

Its all rather artificial really.

[clv101]

So your suggesting that an estimation that is 50 years old..and presumably based on 50 year old technology, has as much relevance as it did 50 years ago?
Not at all - the analytical methodology was developed 50 years ago - and has since then been proved correct time and time again. Applying that methodology to the world returns the 2010 date.

This information also fails to show the present shale sand deposits in the US, (conservatively estimated at 3 times the original known Saudi reserves)Which is irrelevant to peak oil in 2010, it's a flow rate problem not a lack of oil shale or tar sands problem.

or the fact that 80% of the current survey work is done on the North american continent.(the rest of the world gets a measley 20%).Suggesting that if only the rest of the world was drilled as much as the US more oil would be found? Rubbish, the US drilled like crazy in the early 80's, completing some 25,000 wells per year. Did it improve their extraction rates - nope, they have been declining since 1971. So no the rest of the world hasn't been Swiss cheeses like the US but that absolutely doesn't mean there's vast amounts of oil yet to find.

Peak Oil IMHO is a completely self-serving phenomona in so much that the oil companies and government agencies (regulators & theocracies) are the ones to gain when prices are high. It is as simple as failing to invest in refining capacity (there has been a lethargy on the part of oil companies to increase capacity since the last major oil price spike), couple this with increased (although in a historical sense..not really) political instability..and hey presto, you have a license to print money.
Whatever the estimates consider, I am of the opinion that this is perhaps a very cynical money making exercise, the latest news of the problems associated with a certain Alaskan pipeline highlight just how ridiculous the situation is! (by admission there is no shortage of supply..merely a refining shortfall, so this technical issue should have no impact on the overall picture...and yet a $2-3 USD price spike ensued)
Its all rather artificial really.
The refining issue is more complex than you make out and has actually arrisen due to peak oil. As you know oil comes in different densities and different sulphur content. Different oil needs different types of refinery. Where previously the distribution of oil grades matched the distribution of refinery capacity that now isn't the case. The spread price between the light sweet oil and the heavy sour oil has increased. This isn't because there's less light sweet oil refining capacity (the cheapest) available, it's because there's less light sweet oil about. Global supply of light sweet oil peaked back in 2004 and is now declining - the affect of refineries on oil price is real - it is real evidence oil supply peak.

[757manipulator]

This isn't because there's less light sweet oil refining capacity (the cheapest) available, it's because there's less light sweet oil about. Global supply of light sweet oil peaked back in 2004 and is now declining

The various oil companies have known that this has been the case for the past 20 years!! and yet have failed to invest in infrastructure...your point is valid, so however is mine.

Which is irrelevant to peak oil in 2010, it's a flow rate problem not a lack of oil shale or tar sands problem.

Flow rate is based on the rate of extraction..(or lack of), again a problem that has been known about for a significant length of time. OPEC and the OECD have published details on their respective websites from as far back as 1986 stating that refining capacity would present a problem with the then lack of investment.

Suggesting that if only the rest of the world was drilled as much as the US more oil would be found? Rubbish, the US drilled like crazy in the early 80's, completing some 25,000 wells per year. Did it improve their extraction rates - nope, they have been declining since 1971. So no the rest of the world hasn't been Swiss cheeses like the US but that absolutely doesn't mean there's vast amounts of oil yet to find

It also means that there may well be un-discovered reserves, your argument is only as valid as mine, however the balance of probability is in favour of what I have stated. My suggestion is based apon current survey and extraction techniques, and does not take into account further technological advances (which will improve detection rates)

[tinpis]

I presume you all have access to Schlumbergers well-logging records for the last umpteen years ?? :hmm: