Say Anything Blog

The flaw in your reasoning, Joel, is that even if we import no oil whatsoever, oil will not become worthless.  All we can really do is to dedicate ourselves to using only domestically-produced oil and oil from our non-terrorist allies.  Increasing the world supply of oil will lower the price, which will damage the terrorists economically.  This is a realistic program, which could be up and running in a fairly short time.  The idea that there is another energy source anywhere near as valuable and useful as oil is just a pipe dream under present conditions.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

The idea that there is another energy source anywhere near as valuable and useful as oil is just a pipe dream under present conditions.

Do you mean utilising current technologies?

Methane hydrate deposits are far more abundant than oil reserves, but the technologies available for mining them currently elude us.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

Joel

Muslims might then come to see the wisdom of moderating their thinking on a wide variety of subjects.

Otherwise, we will be obliged to protect our interests in the world with force--continually.

And if another country feels they should control something of ours..........like Alaskan oil, corn fields, etc coz they feel we are a threat to their way of life, is that ok?

Christians might then come to see the wisdom of moderating their thinking on a wide variety of subjects.

Otherwise, we will be obliged to protect our interests in the world with force--continually.

r108

oil from our non-terrorist allies

How about a list of those terrorist countries that we import oil from.

Increasing the world supply of oil will lower the price

They will just cut production and their reserves will last that much longer. Oil is priced in $$$. Cheap dollar = expensive oil. Keep printing(cut interest rates), see how high oil will go.

“We have a dollar that’s adjusting and I am for a strong dollar.....
Our dollar doesn’t buy as many barrels of oil as it used to and so therefore it’s more expensive for the American people”..... Bush 3/12/08

Increasing the world supply of oil will lower the price

And how far from Peak Oil are we? A couple of decades maximum, at current estimates.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

And how far from Peak Oil are we?

Scareology, based on hypothesis, like so-called Human-Caused Global Warming.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

They will just cut production and their reserves will last that much longer. Oil is priced in $$$. Cheap dollar = expensive oil. Keep printing(cut interest rates), see how high oil will go.

GIGO

Save America; boycott the MSM.

The idea that there is another energy source anywhere near as valuable and useful as oil is just a pipe dream under present conditions.

Do you mean utilising current technologies? That’s part of what I meant by “under present conditions”.

Methane hydrate deposits are far more abundant than oil reserves, but the technologies available for mining them currently elude us. You make my point.  We aren’t going to win the economic war by chasing rainbows at this moment.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Scareology

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

Peak Oil, is merely economics applied to the known resources of oil. Do you know that there are more known resources of oil now than in 1970, when lefties started peddling this particular hypothesis? Do you think that oil is an unlimited resource that we will still be using millennia from now? A few hundred years will do just fine.

The whole purpose of the scareology(like with HCGW) is to compress the time, leading to panic and the adoption of totalitarian socialist policies.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

There are not a few hundred years supply of oil, perhaps one hundred if we are lucky. Peak Oil will most likely be reached before 2030, although we won’t know it until afterwards. I do know that there are more reserves now than in 1970, but there is also more and increasing demand for oil.

Interesting paper here

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

There are not a few hundred years supply of oil, perhaps one hundred if we are lucky. That’s the hypothesis of the scareologists, at any rate. Peak Oil will most likely be reached before 2030, although we won’t know it until afterwards. Another hypothesis, based on the first hypothesis. Y2K I do know that there are more reserves now than in 1970, but there is also more and increasing demand for oil. If you know anything about economics, you would know that demand creates supply, not the other way around.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

However, supply can only last as long as the resource is available.

The scareologists (or scientists - as I like to call them), had better watch out. Before long the Handicapper General will be after them.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

However, supply can only last as long as the resource is available.

Only if you limit the definition of the word “supply”.
The “Peak Oil” hypothesis is based on the concept of “easily obtainable” oil, but continuing advances in both the technology of finding and extracting oil keeps expanding that definition.  I repeat, Y2K.  This is typical leftie scareology.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

So it is okay to talk about limits in technology when discussing alternative sources of energy, but when talking about oil ‘supply’ the limits of technology do not apply?

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

Surely, you talk of pipe dreams?

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

So it is okay to talk about limits in technology when discussing alternative sources of energy, but when talking about oil ‘supply’ the limits of technology do not apply?

Where to start?  The demand for oil fuels the supply, including the technology necessary to keep finding and extracting it; no such demand exists for so-called “alternative energy” sources, and there is no guarantee that any of them will every be economically feasible, thus the need for huge subsidies(bribes) to get them going.  No such bribery is necessary for oil.

Surely, you talk of pipe dreams?

Is that some sort of pun?

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Technology is not fixed in place.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

r108,

The idea that there is another energy source anywhere near as valuable and useful as oil is just a pipe dream under present conditions.

If future as yet undeveloped technology to harness alternative sources of energy is a pipe dream, then surely the same applies to those technologies not yet developed to improve oil extraction.

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

Though it could be a good pun, eh?

Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.

If future as yet undeveloped technology to harness alternative sources of energy is a pipe dream, then surely the same applies to those technologies
not yet developed to improve oil extraction.

Where to start?  In the first place, our economic history is of just that: creating the technology necessary to supply demand.  So-called “alternative fuels” have no actual demand, and thus it is a pipe dream to assume that those technologies will ever be developed(that’s the “pipe dream” part, btw).
In the second place, I submitted a Reader Blogs article a few weeks back about a deep water well in the Gulf de Mexico that has just come in; it’s an actuality that will expand our resources exponentially.  It’s a reality.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

the development of alternative energy technologies should become the object of a new Manhattan Project.

Robert,

I used the term “Manhattan Project” it’s now become a byword for an enormous breakneck effort involving vast resources and the best scientific minds in the world.

I was thinking more along the lines of “obsolete” technologies. Perhaps the title should have been:

If oil became obsolete...kinda a “what if” scenario....I mean nobody uses typewriters anymore...right?

the development of alternative energy technologies should become the object of a new Manhattan Project.

Here’s what I see as the flaw in both your reasoning and in your analogy:

Unlike so-called “alternative energy”, the demand for us to beat the Axis powers to a viable nuclear weapon(the Manhattan Project) was not only real, it was absolutely necessary.  Not so “alternative energy”.  Our present source of energy is just fine; we only need to develop new sources and bring them online.  The only thing preventing that is oppressive govt, i.e., taxation and regulation.  It’s a phony crisis, not a real one.
Demand still creates supply, and there is almost no economic demand for anything other than oil.
The clue here is the amount of govt coercion necessary to implement those programs, in contrast to the lack of coercion needed to develop our oil resources.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

If “Oil” Became Worthless

The bleeding hearts would demand more foreign aid for countries that formerly produced oil at a profit.