No more energy speculation?

Ya' know... when it comes right down to it, the Saudis don't actually produce that much more than the US. Anyhow, here's an interesting piece of news:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602099&sid=aeizyP_kACUc

They're cutting deliveries back some more. Hmm...

According to them, they cut back deliveries in order to influence prices by lowering supply. Of course, it is possible that they are actually trying to conserve a resource that is running dry, but then, there is no way to prove that one way or the other.

Until, of course, they actually do run out of oil. Then we're all screwed, Saudis and their customers alike, unless we've done a lot more to develop alternative fuels than we have to date.
 
Werbung:
Well, I wouldn't say we're all screwed in such a circumstance--they only represent about a tenth of world production. I guess it depends on how you view the concept of "screwed", whether it's an event or a slide.
 
Well, I wouldn't say we're all screwed in such a circumstance--they only represent about a tenth of world production. I guess it depends on how you view the concept of "screwed", whether it's an event or a slide.

I suppose it is a slide. losing a tenth of the world's production would most likely raise prices about as much as the OPEC manufactured crises did in the late '70s. It would be a huge blow economically. We did recover from the '70s, so we'd probably recover from that as well. Maybe, we'd even start to do some serious work on alternative energy, so the end result might actually be positive.
 
The decline in production from Saudi should drop only a small percentage per year. They can bring other fields online and have actually planned to do that. But it's still more expensive to do so and therein lies the problem as we've previously discussed. This is true for quite a few fields and regions today.

I take a good engineering look at every energy alternative that comes along that I hear about and can actually access. I've always thought that nuclear fusion held the most promise and it IS considered The Holy Grail of energy production. It has, however, not panned out so far because magnetic bottles tend to bleed.

Oh... almost forgot to mention... I haven't found anything even approaching the EROEI (Energy Return on Energy Invested) of hydrocarbons. Personally, I can't see any other way than that the ruling class will try to cordone off the resource and impoverish the rest of us sooner or later, it's only a matter of the timing. When phosphorus starts giving out, it will truly be over.
 
The decline in production from Saudi should drop only a small percentage per year. They can bring other fields online and have actually planned to do that. But it's still more expensive to do so and therein lies the problem as we've previously discussed. This is true for quite a few fields and regions today.

I take a good engineering look at every energy alternative that comes along that I hear about and can actually access. I've always thought that nuclear fusion held the most promise and it IS considered The Holy Grail of energy production. It has, however, not panned out so far because magnetic bottles tend to bleed.

Oh... almost forgot to mention... I haven't found anything even approaching the EROEI (Energy Return on Energy Invested) of hydrocarbons. Personally, I can't see any other way than that the ruling class will try to cordone off the resource and impoverish the rest of us sooner or later, it's only a matter of the timing. When phosphorus starts giving out, it will truly be over.

phosphorus? Surely, we're not thinking of using that as a fuel?:confused:
 
No, fertilizer. Commercial veins of the stuff aren't real plentiful. NPK fertilizer is Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium. We have to mine the phosphorus. Here's a scholarly article on our phosphorus production with Hubbert linearizations:

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/33164

Hubbert linearizations are pretty cool and very accurate. Unfortunately. The math is relatively straightforward. I don't guess I've waxed lyrical about that on here before, have I?
 
Werbung:
No, fertilizer. Commercial veins of the stuff aren't real plentiful. NPK fertilizer is Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium. We have to mine the phosphorus. Here's a scholarly article on our phosphorus production with Hubbert linearizations:

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/33164

Hubbert linearizations are pretty cool and very accurate. Unfortunately. The math is relatively straightforward. I don't guess I've waxed lyrical about that on here before, have I?

I'm not sure. I don't think I've ever heard anyone wax lyrical about phosphorus, by you do have a point. If we run out of that, we truly are screwed: widespread famine, wars over food supplies, really ugly times.
 
Back
Top