JJ and Others, RE: damn gas prices!

[xcelbeyond]

I got the info I talked about in the other thread. Unless you're willing to do some analysis with this info, it probably won't do you any good. I work with Engineers, Economists and Forecasters, people versed in Quantum Physics, and Nuclear Physics. This formula is not rocket science and is a proven theory.

Adding a HUGE increase in oil demand via China and India is not included in this equation!

Here's what I'm passing along, which tells how to determine if you're getting near the top of a Hubbert Curve - point at which oil supply exceeds demand:



Understanding Peak Oil in Four Easy Steps:


This analysis is based on Chapter Three of Kenneth Deffeyes latest book "Beyond Oil: The View From Hubbert's Peak." Dr. Deffeyes outlines a very simple method for predicting ultimate recoverable reserves and the production peak for a region. I am using Texas as a model. This takes less than five minutes. You might consider doing this since Peak Oil will profoundly affect each and every American.

(1) Obtain a piece of graph paper and draw two perpendicular lines that intersect and terminate against each other in the lower left hand corner (or graph it using a computer program).. The vertical (Y) axis is P/Q, where P = annual Texas oil production and Q = cumulative Texas oil production to date (for the corresponding year). The horizontal axis is Q.

(2) The P/Q (vertical) scale is from 0 to 0.08, in increments of 0.01. The Q (horizontal) scale is from 0 to 68 billion barrels of oil, in increments of four billion barrels of oil.

(3) Plot the following points (Q & P/Q), corresponding to Texas production numbers for selected years:

1940: (6.5 & 0.075)

1950: (13.6 & 0.060)

1960: (23.4 & 0.04)

1970: (33.5 & 0.036)

1980: (44.8 & 0.020)

1990: (52.6 & 0.012)

2000: (57.7 & 0.007)

The first few years are pretty noisy. Lower 48 data settled down into pretty much a straight line in the Fifties. M. King Hubbert made his famous and accurate prediction in 1956 (that Lower 48 oil production would peak in 1970).

If you plot the above points, the data settle down into a linear plot from 1960 on. Draw in your best fit for a straight line using the 1960 to 2000 data and extend the line to the horizontal axis. At the point where the extrapolated line intersects the horizontal axis, P would be equal to zero, which gives you ultimate recoverable reserves (we would have produced the last barrel of oil). When I plotted the best fit to the data, I came up with estimated ultimate recoverable reserves of about 66 billion barrels of oil.

(4) The assumption is that production peaks when about half of the estimated reserves have been produced. Therefore, the predicted peak would be when we had produced 33 billion barrels of oil, which was in 1970. The actual Texas peak was two years later in 1972. Texas oil production has been falling for 33 years. This model suggests that Texas has produced about 90% of all the oil that we will ever produce. Note that I used an estimate from the Railroad Commission of 3.8 billion barrels for production prior to 1935. The commission only shows 1935 and later data data on their website:


**broken link removed**

That's Peak Oil in four easy steps. Note that the technique picked the Texas peak within two years and note that Texas oil production has followed the predicted path downward.

Dr. Deffeyes has applied this same model to the world. The P/Q versus Q data points settled down into a linear plot after 1983. He is predicting that we peak this year and that conventional oil production will soon begin a permanent decline.

Current events seem to suggest that Dr. Deffeyes is correct. Oil prices closed at another all time (nominal) record high on Friday. There appears to be no excess light, sweet crude oil capacity in the world, and the IEA is talking about emergency oil conservation measures this winter. q.v. <http://www.energybulletin.net/5074.html>;

While we are (or were) producing a record amount of oil, worldwide we have not found a truly large oil field (a million barrels per day or more) since 1976. The latest EIA production data show falling world oil production. In my opinion, the only real question is how fast the industry can bring on oil production from tar sands and increase production of non-conventional liquid transportation fuels (primarily ethanol). In my opinion, non-conventional oil and non-conventional liquid transportation fuels will only serve to slow the
rate of decline of total liquid transportation fuel production.

My advice: cut spending, get out of debt and consider moving to much smaller, more energy efficient housing closer to where you work or closer to mass transit lines. This is the New Urbanism solution. Where possible, you should look into organic gardening. Small raised bed permaculture gardens can be pretty prolific. The other model is for organic farms clustered around small towns. Currently, for every calorie of food we consume, we consume 10 calories of fossil fuels used in food production.

 

[Gone1]

Bro

I am sure that is useful and informative information - one problem, my half illiterate ass does not understand a bit of it?

Please explain the point? Btw - thanks for taking the time to try and give a logical explanation ....

I used to have a friend who family supplied a large majority of Oil and Gasoline to Denver and Colorado Springs - He lived in Leadville and ran his fathers company. He passed away (only 30 years old) a couple years back... but he used to tell me that EVERYONE pays the same for gas - as far as gas stations. He only profited .02 from each gallon they sold but... they sold ALLOT. He was a very wealthy guy.
He used to tell me how TAXES ate gasoline up and if it wasnt for the governments high TAXES on the gasoline we wouldnt have many problems. The government COULD lower the taxes on gas to help the consumer ya know.
Why is that not an option? Not being a smart ass - just curious. I wish he was still alive because he would really be useful right now.

JJ Insane1

 

[xcelbeyond]

Here's an Article written by someone in my office

Washington Wakes Up to Peak Oil

Although the general trend inside the beltway is to live in the fantasy world created by the neo cons, two recent developments indicate the risks of an oil peak are beginning to dawn in Washington D.C.

What is Peak Oil?

The oil peak refers to the time when world oil production “peaks” and begins its decline. It is universally acknowledged that within several decades conventional world oil production will begin its inevitable decline. Some experts predict it will occur even sooner. The information gaps are so large, it could be occurring now. The U.S. became aware of its oil and natural gas peaks only after the fact.

This does not mean that world oil production will stop, but that each year we will have less and less oil available. The production peak has already occurred in many countries. The U.S. had its oil peak in 1970 and its natural gas peak in 2001

After a brief plateau, conventional production will decline by 1 to 5 percent per year. Non-conventional sources, such as heavy oil, take decades to develop. Ten years after the peak, the gap between oil production and demand may be as much as 30 percent, based on the production declines the U.S. experienced since 1970 and continued economic growth. The amount sold will, of course, equal the amount bought, but only at a very high price.

Yet the only proposed action by the President Bush is to open the Alaska Natural Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil drilling. This measure, even if wildly successful, will have a negligible impact on world oil supplies.

Recent Developments in DC

In February, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) received a report, titled Peaking of World Oil Production: Impact, Mitigation and Risk Management. The report by DOE consultants Robert L. Hirsch , Roger Bezdek and Robert Wending discusses the likely consequences when world oil production begins its inevitable decline.

“As peaking is approached, liquid fuel [gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, etc.] prices and price volatility will increase dramatically, and without timely mitigation the economic, social, and political costs will be unprecedented.”

The report notes that solutions to the decline in conventional world oil production will take decades to implement. If action is delayed until after production peaks, the only way to balance supply and demand will be through severe reductions in demand. Unlike previous oil crisis, the economic disruptions will last decades.

The second significant event was when Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (D-MD) talked about the oil peak on the House floor. With charts and graphs, he educated his colleagues on the impacts of peak oil and proposed immediate action. Rep Bartlett did not mince words:

“We are doing a lot of talking here in Congress about Social Security, and it is a big problem. But I tell the Members if the problem of Social Security is equivalent to the tidal wave produced by the hurricane, then this peak oil problem is equivalent to the tsunami. The impact and consequences are going to be enormously greater than the impact and the consequences of Social Security or Medicare or those two put together.”

A History of Optimistic Projections

U.S. oil production peaked in 1970. This event was predicted in 1956, by M King Hubbert, a geologist at Shell oil. At the time conventional experts scoffed at his prediction. It was only after several years when intensive drilling failed to maintain production that it became apparent production had peaked. Similarly, few anticipated the U.S. natural gas peak of 2001. Experts expected that new discoveries would make up for declines in existing wells

As recently as 2001, the U.S. DOE and industry experts were predicting U.S. natural gas production would grow from 19 trillion cubic feet (tcf) in 1999 to 27 tcf in 2020. Virtually all experts now believe that U.S. natural gas production has peaked and will decline. Since 2000 the U.S. has seen increased conventional drilling and production from previously unexploited gas deposits, such as tight sands and coal-bed methane. Even so, U.S. dry gas production fell 4.5 percent from 2001 to 2004.

Except for Alaska, annual declines of 2 to 4 percent are likely in the coming decades. Canadian production is also falling. Even with new pipelines to gas resources in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska and the Mackenzie River Delta, Canada imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) via ocean tankers will be needed to maintain current supplies. Current U.S. natural gas wellhead prices are triple the level of the early 1990s.

Can’t We Just Drill More?

U.S. oil production in the continental 48 states has declined an average of percent per year since 1970. This has occurred even with increased drilling in the 1970s and early 1980s and the use of advanced oil techniques, such as water and CO2 injection into wells to boost production. No amount of economic investment could reverse the inevitable decline. The advanced techniques used to slow the U.S. oil decline are still the best available. Because world oil resources are similar to the U.S. resource, the world decline will likely parallel the U.S. 2 percent decline.

For both U.S. oil and natural gas, it became clear that resource depletion rather than under-investment in exploration and drilling was the cause of the price spike. This awareness occurred 4 or 5 years after prices started to spike. If we wait until it is clear that world oil supplies are in inevitable decline, we will be 4 to 5 years into the oil crisis and will have done nothing about it.

Waiting Until the Crisis Guarantees Disaster

All of the major solutions to an oil peak will require decades to implement. Rep. Barlett put it this way :

“The market will indeed signal the arrival of peak oil. To wait until it does, however, is like waiting until we see the tsunami: by then it may be too late to do anything……”

All of the alternatives to conventional oil, whether demand or supply measures, require at least a decade to have a significant impact. Delaying action until we know we’ve peaked guarantees at least a decade of shortages. Vehicle efficiency improvements involve significant delays. Even if accomplished, efficiency alone will not completely close the gap. Alternative fuels are needed and will likely take even longer to develop.

Hybrid gasoline-electric sedans use less than half the gas of sports utility vehicles (SUVs), mini-vans and light trucks. However, even if auto dealers had unlimited supplies of hybrids, conversion of the vehicle fleet would require decades. Once the crisis is clear, it will take at least 5 years for vehicle factories to retool to make mostly hybrids.

Even though the gasoline used by the average car or light-truck might eventually decline by 30 or 40 percent, population and economic growth would offset part of this. Also, vehicle efficiency improvements are more difficult for heavy trucks, trains, ships and planes. Even with efficiency improvements, substantial alternative supplies of liquid fuels will be needed.

The oil peak is a shortage of liquid energy. Liquid fuels power 97% of our transportation. Electric alternatives (solar, wind, nuclear, etc.) will not produce liquid energy. Absent technology breakthroughs, we will need liquid substitutes.

Producing liquid substitutes for 30 percent of current oil supplies would require decades. Major supply additions might come from massive CO2 injections into old oil fields, the extraction and processing of oil sands in Canada and Venezuela (heavy oil), liquids from coal, and using natural gas to produce clean diesel and gasoline. All of these alternatives are commercially available and would likely cost less than $50 per barrel of oil. But none of these alternatives can ramp up quickly.

Other alternatives, such as ethanol, bio-diesel and electric vehicles powered by wind or solar generation, are more desirable. Renewables would not increase CO2 emissions that are causing global warming. Major reliance on heavy oil and coal liquids would yield massive increases in CO2 levels in the atmosphere with potentially catastrophic consequences. Unfortunately, the preferable alternatives are not commercially ready or would not produce nearly enough to close the gap.

ANWR production would be a drop in the bucket. Even in the most optimistic U.S. DOE forecast, production will never exceed 2 million barrels per day (mbpd). Production will decline to 1.3 mbpd in 3 years and 0.7 mbpd in 6 years. Production could not begin before 2015. (see http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ogp/methodology.html) Peak production would be only about 2 percent of world supplies and only for the first 4 years.

Since all the alternatives require decades to develop, waiting until the crisis is apparent guarantees the crisis will last decades.
40

Not Your Father’s Oil Crisis

The U.S. response to the oil crisis of the 1970s was to import more oil. Currently, U.S. net imports are about 60 percent of supplies and growing. The response to the current natural gas crisis is similar. Net natural gas imports are 15 percent and growing. Although higher prices created problems, supplies were available. Imports capped the price rises. The world as a whole does not have the option of increasing imports. We will have to deal with significant shortages for several decades. Another difference from the 1970s is that several poor countries have actually developed. They are demanding a larger share of the oil.

Oil demand is growing by more than 5 percent per year in China, India and many other developing countries. Use today in China is greater than the combined use of Italy, France and the United Kingdom. Demand is growing even more rapidly in many oil exporting countries. The increased wealth from the recent oil price rise is creating an economic boom. The population of oil exporting countries is almost 600 million and growing rapidly.

Even if world oil supplies were flat, growing use by other countries would require the U.S. to use less. Because U.S. population is also growing, even constant total U.S. use would require less use per capita.

Within a few years of the inevitable crisis becoming apparent, price increases will force U.S. consumers to reduce gasoline use by 30 to 40 percent. No matter what, the total amount of gasoline sold cannot exceed the amount of oil coming out of the ground. Gasoline prices will probably rise to $5 per gallon or more, even without a political disruption in the Middle East. European and Japanese prices are already at this level due to high gasoline and diesel taxes.

In addition to being high, oil prices will become more volatile once world oil production peaks. Less than 10 countries will be exporting oil. All but two or three of these will be in the Middle East. A political crisis in a single exporting country could cause gasoline prices to rise above $10 per gallon.

Is Oil Peaking Now?

As discussed above, we would know world oil production had peaked only after several years of sustained high prices. Only then would we see that higher prices were not increasing production.

The U.S. oil and gas peaks were a surprise and information on U.S. oil and gas fields is considerably better than for the rest of the world. Declines in existing oil fields in exporting countries are difficult to verify. These governments have significant incentives to exaggerate their capabilities. Production quotas for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) are based on self-reported production capabilities. Reported OPEC capabilities rose inexplicably in the 1990s. For years Saudi Arabia reported about 12 mbpd of capacity. Recently, it has become clear they cannot sustain production of even 10 mbpd. Current world production of crude oil and other liquids (LPG, propane, etc.) is about 80 mbpd.

The Aging Ghawar Oil Field

The Ghawar oil field in Saudi Arabia produces about 6 percent of world supplies. According to Glenn Morton (**broken link removed**), over 3,400 wells have been drilled into this field since 1951. Originally, the field was 1,300 feet thick. Now in many places it is less than 150 feet thick.

The field requires injections of huge amounts of sea water. Currently only about 40 percent of production is oil. The rest is water. If the oil fraction declines much below 30 percent, production becomes uneconomic and much of the field will have to be shut down. A collapse of the Ghawar field would create an immediate worldwide crisis. This may be happening now.

With higher oil prices Saudi Arabia and other oil producers have increased drilling and exploration. No one knows whether these efforts will be able to offset imminent declines at Ghawar and other old fields. Although world crude production in 2004 grew 3.6 percent from 2003 (Oil and Gas J., Dec. 20, 2004), it appears the growth in 2005 will be much smaller. Even if production grows, it must grow faster than demand to reduce prices.

If the current oil price of about $50 per barrel does not induce substantial oil discoveries by 2007, we will know that oil has peaked. Matthew Simmons, advisor to oil companies and Vice President Dick Cheney, told Aljazeera recently that “If Saudi Arabia have [sic] damaged their fields, accidentally or not, by overproducing them, then we may have already passed peak oil. Iran has certainly peaked; there is no way on Earth they can ever get back to their production of six million barrels per day.”

Consequences of an Oil Peak

With sustained prices over $5 per gallon, the resale value of SUVs, motor homes and other gas-guzzlers will plummet. In the late 1970s and early 1980s the resale prices of Lincolns and Cadillacs fell as gas prices rose.

Already, larger SUVs are piling up on dealers lots and rebates are escalating. General Motors forecasts it will post a first-quarter loss of about $1.50 a share, compared with earlier forecasts of break-even or better.

Gas price rises in the 1970 also caused declines in house prices in the suburbs and rising prices for homes closer to jobs. Houses beyond half an hour’s drive from significant employment will be in the most trouble.

High oil prices will increase inflation. This will raises interest rates, especially mortgage rates. This will make it difficult for people to move. Homeowners with fixed rates are only forced to pay higher mortgage rates if they move and sell their home. Once the oil price impacts hit, higher mortgage rates will make it harder for people to move closer to their jobs, even if the can’t afford to pay for the gasoline to commute.

What You Can Do

It is not certain that we are passing the oil peak. But the current price spike is consistent with a plateau. The peak could arrive in a few years. Virtually all experts expect the world oil peak within a few decades. It is extremely unlikely the U.S. government will engage in aggressive efforts, absent a crisis. Current high prices have not spurred an effective response. This guarantees a long and serious crisis once world oil production peaks.

You don’t have to wait for the government to respond. You can sell your gas guzzler now, before the resale value falls. You can get on a waiting list to buy a 45 mile per gallon gas-electric hybrid car. Start riding your bike. Walk instead of driving. Learn to use the bus.

If the oil peak hits, the cost of heating your home will go up. Imports of LNG will also be expensive and will not help bring natural gas prices down. Natural gas prices will not decline for 5 years in any case, as it will take that long to build new LNG terminals. High natural gas prices also affect electricity prices. Most of Oregon’s power comes for coal and hydro plants, but virtually all new power plants are fueled with natural gas. Homeowners with oil heat should consider switching to efficient electric heat pumps, especially if they have underground tanks that can leak.

If it is impractical for you to bike, walk, carpool or use the city bus, you should consider moving now. By moving now, you can lock in the low current mortgage rates on a home closer to your job. It may have to be a smaller house, but that will make it cheaper to heat. Once it becomes obvious that oil and gasoline prices are only going higher, it will be too late to move and gas-guzzlers will have little resale value.

 

[xcelbeyond]

He used to tell me how TAXES ate gasoline up and if it wasnt for the governments high TAXES on the gasoline we wouldnt have many problems. The government COULD lower the taxes on gas to help the consumer ya know.

I'm not saying that there isn't waste in government spending - by ANY MEANS. In my state (as well as MANY others), "gas" tax goes to the state Dept of Transportation to build new and maintain exisitng highways and roads. Sure the govmt is probably taking too big of an overhead from that but have you seem HOW MUCH it cost to make these improvements (which are done by "private companies" not the govmt) We had a reroute of a major I-5 intersection done at the cost of SEVERAL 100 millions of dollars - and that was for private industry to fix ONE damn intesection!

It only seems fair that the more gas you buy, the more miles you put on our roads - so you should pay your share (notice I didn't say "fair share" )

 

[xcelbeyond]

This fact NEVER crossed my mind

Currently, for every calorie of food we consume, we consume 10 calories of fossil fuels used in food production.

It how much energy it take to put food on the table.

Farmer uses gas to farm
Lot of transportaion - from farm to distributor to store.
Your transportation to get the food
Energy you use to cook the food.

But - big MUSCLES from food you eat!

 

[BigBoyJ]

Very good info, Excel. I always prefer good facts and logic to conspiracy websites. Seeing the science behind things is the way people SHOULD form their opinions. Unfortunately though, I think that people just love a good conspiracy. Either way, conspiracy, or matter of scientific fact, one thing looks inevitable...we're screwed!

 

[Boo]

Here in Canada ( Halifax, Nova Scotia ) self-serve gas is $1.04 per lit. That would be about $ 4.14 per gallon.

It's getting out of control!

 

[massmonster32]

Interesting read Excel but if gas tax funds are being spent on roads and highways what are they doing with the fee we pay for roads and bridges and highway when we buy a new sticker for our car every year. I also personally think that we are safe on oil for at least the next 100yrs. Buy then technology will have us using another type of fuel or something.MM

 

[Gone1]

Very good info, Excel. I always prefer good facts and logic to conspiracy websites. Seeing the science behind things is the way people SHOULD form their opinions. Unfortunately though, I think that people just love a good conspiracy. Either way, conspiracy, or matter of scientific fact, one thing looks inevitable...we're screwed!

See - AGAIN - you only see the NAME OF THE WEB SITE's i post. You dont see the FACTS - FACTS - FACTS that are proven on them.... a fact is a fact no matter where it is written.

JJ

 

[BigBoyJ]

See - AGAIN - you only see the NAME OF THE WEB SITE's i post. You dont see the FACTS - FACTS - FACTS that are proven on them.... a fact is a fact no matter where it is written.

JJ

But, I didn't see any science behind anything to PROVE it as FACT. Facts aren't facts when they aren't backed with proof. Excel provided mathematical proof along with previous predictions that turned out to be accurate. When your websites can do the same, (provide science and sound evidence) I'll accept them as fact.

 

[JETHRO TULL]

XCEL...THANKS FOR POSTING THAT INFO!

I HAVE A 3/4 TON DIESEL PICKUP...IN 2003 WHEN I BOUGHT IT...DIESEL FUEL WAS CHEAPER THAN GAS...NO IT'S COSTING ME 60$ TO FILL IT UP. THAT'S PUTTING A BITE IN MY STYLE! HAHAHA....VERY BAD DEAL.

JJ- I'LL TELL YOU WHAT.......I AM A CONSERVATIVE AND MY MAIN ISSUES FOR VOTING REPULICAN ARE FOR A STRONG MILITARY AND THE FACT THAT MOST DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES ARE TRYING TO IMPOSE GUN CONTROL WHICH I AM VERY VERY STRONGLY AGAINST. HOWEVER.......I AM SO PISSED OFF RIGHT NOW ABOUT BUSH'S STANCE ON THE BORDER ISSUE AND THE FACT THAT I HELPED ELECT A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY WHO ARE PUSSING OUT IN WASHINGTON! THEY ARE IN POWER.....STOP PUSSY FOOTING AROUND. SMASH THE FRIGGIN TERRORISTS...STOP MAKING THE WAR A PANSY ASSED POLITICAL WAR....YOU ARE GONNA PISS PEOPLE OFF ANY WAY...JUST DO IT, GET IT DONE AND BRING OUR GUYS HOME.

THESE FUCKING LIBERAL ACTIVIST JUDGES....FOR SHIT SAKES...TAKE A STAND AND DROP THE HAMMER...OVERWHELMINGLY THE STATES ARE AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES, YET THESE PRICKS TRY TO SHOVE IT DOWN OUR THROATS. THE 9TH CIRCUT..WHICH AFFECTS MY STATE..IS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL...THEY HAVE TOO MUCH POWER AND THE PUSSIES I HELPED ELECT ARE COWERING LIKE A BUNCH OF ASSHOLES!

I AM STARTING TO THINK CLINTON IS MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN BUSH......I KNOW WE DIFFER ON POLITICS.......BUT I THOUGHT I HELPED ELECT AN NO NONSENSE ASS KICKER...A DEFENDER OF THE US! INSTEAD WE HAVE A GUY WHO IS AGAINST CITIZENS GOING DOWN TO THE BORDER IN ARIZONA TO KEEP THE ILLEGALS FROM STREAMING ACROSS! HE ACTUALLY CALLED THEM 'VIGILANTES'.......WHAT AN ASSHOLE. WE MIGHT HAS WELL OF ELECTED STUPID ASS KERRY....HE COULD GO OVER AND BUTT FUCK KIM JONG ILL IN NORTH KOREA JUST AS EASILY AS BUSH TAKES AN ASS HUMPING FROM VINCENTE FOX.

I AM A DISGRUNTLED REPUBLICAN. VERY DISAPOINTED IN OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES.

WE HAVE A SOCIAL SECURITY CRISIS ...BULLSHIT. LET'S STOP SENDING MONEY TO THAT FUCKING THEIVING UNITED NATIONS AND ALL THOSE BITCHY LITTLE COUNTRIES THAT 'HATE' US ....THE BILLIONS WE SAVE COULD TAKE CARE OF ALL OUR TAX PAYING CITIZENS IN THEIR OLD AGE.

ARRGGGGHHHHH!

 

[BigBoyJ]

Now, Jethro, THAT I can agree with. I could go on a never ending rant about the way this country handles immigration. We invite the world's trash to come here so we can take care of them. Mexican mothers wait until their vaginas are dilated then haul ass across the borders so they can give birth to their illigitimate kids in the US. Then the mom and the kid are set for life. The more she breeds the more money she gets. What a fuckin' crock of shit.

 

[xcelbeyond]

I was on "hold" today when I called my Stock Broker. The hold was a radio talk show with an expert on "oil." He stated just what I said - ALL the predictions DO NOT INCLUDE China and India into the equation! He also talked about how difficult it is going to be to just "get" the oil out of the earth from "new" sources such as in Alaska (which will be 10 years at the earliest) - all the easy stuff has already been found.

 

[Big A]

Facts on China:

In 1989 China had 168miles of highways.
Since then it's been using 40% of the world's cement each year to currently have 18,500 miles of highway, on it's way to the end of their project which is 51,000 miles by 2008 (USA has 46,000 miles of highway).

Each year, 5.1million NEW vehicles get sold in China.

If China reaches the same number of cars per person as in the US (it's heading that way at an incredible rate), China would be using 24.8 million barrels of oil EVERY DAY! The worrying fact is that is the current daily world production of oil!

Can anyone say hybrid cars? Better start buying them now!

 

[woody00]

Facts on China:

In 1989 China had 168miles of highways.
Since then it's been using 40% of the world's cement each year to currently have 18,500 miles of highway, on it's way to the end of their project which is 51,000 miles by 2008 (USA has 46,000 miles of highway).

Each year, 5.1million NEW vehicles get sold in China.

If China reaches the same number of cars per person as in the US (it's heading that way at an incredible rate), China would be using 24.8 million barrels of oil EVERY DAY! The worrying fact is that is the current daily world production of oil!

Can anyone say hybrid cars? Better start buying them now!

my father has been working for a big oil company now for over 25yrs. the response you gave is basicly the same as his. he also said india went from using bicycles to big mercedez cars rather quickly(thus the increase in demand for oil). they had thought they would go to scooters and motorcycles(which consume less gas) like most countries but they havent.

 

[Gone1]

But, I didn't see any science behind anything to PROVE it as FACT. Facts aren't facts when they aren't backed with proof. Excel provided mathematical proof along with previous predictions that turned out to be accurate. When your websites can do the same, (provide science and sound evidence) I'll accept them as fact.

Ok - BBJ

Here are 2 facts that you can find on ANY site - conspiracy or "government controlled"

When Congress voted to authorize the use of military force in Iraq, it included two requirements.
The first was that the President prove that Iraq was in defiance of the United Nations by being in possession of banned weapons of mass destruction. T
he second was that the President have proof that Iraq was involved in 9-11. In his letter to Congress activating the authorization for the use of force, Bush claimed he had proof of both of those conditions.

Fact #1 - HE DIDNT HAVE PROOF OF WMD. I quote the invesigators as saying he was "DEAD WRONG" .. remember?

Fact #2 - HE NEVER PROVED IRAQ EVER HAD ANY TIES TO 9/11.. (Admited there never where any ties already)

Fact #3 - that means that the Congressional Authorization for the use of force in Iraq was not legally in effect when Bush ordered the military to invade!

Now, dispute those facts. (P-l-e-a-s-e- DONT give me the "CIA" set him up bullshit.... WE ALL KNOW BETTER)

JJ Insane1

 

[BigBoyJ]

Replied in other thread.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Here we go again

It seems like everything that goes wrong in someones life here, GW Bush is to blame! I have yet to figure out why people HATE GW so much that there blinded by that hatred. I'm curious to hear what the fuck they would do if they were President. The problem is they would do NOTHING, but maybe make Dbol legal. I dont care for Clinton, but I'm not going to blame everyhing that happened during his office on him. Next thing we are going to hear from these people is that the CA earthquakes, Southern Hurrincanes, Noreasters, Mid west tornadoes or because of George Bush I not going to name people here (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE). You know its funny, Liberals say the are for tolerance, but if you listen to the vile crap that comes from Coward Dean, The fat fuck Kennedy, and AL "I take it up the ass" Franken there is ZERO tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them. I think we should take liberals out in the streets by there hair and shoot them, but thats just me