Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oil is at a 12-year low

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by gunnut View Post
    You haven't heard people say oil is running out? Peak oil theory?
    This board has been debunking that theory since 2006 :D

    The people who go on about peak oil spend more time talking about it than others that tried to look for more. Fortunately those other guys succeeded.

    Instead of peak oil, what about peak demand ?

    if the dems in your country get their way they will be in the WH for yet another term.

    They are going to push the climate change agenda. They will push it global.

    This is means laws that make it illegal or harder to use fossil fuels than before.

    Ask anyone in 2007 what he thinks the oil price will be at the beginning of 2016, the answer would not be $30. Ask anyone in 2014 the same question, the answer would not be $30.
    makes me wonder whether the Iraq war had any role in keeping it as high for as long.

    In theory it should have collapsed post 2008 but there was a lag time in there that took many years to play out.

    Here we are, with oil priced at near $30. One must ask, "are we really running out of this stuff?" Sure, there's a glut on the market. But there must be a lot of this stuff around in order to have a glut. Can't have a glut of something that doesn't exist in abundance.
    For the last forty years the price of oil is whatever the Saudis want it to be.

    We're at $30 because the Saudis are pissed off at you. They don't want competition and want to drive alternatives out of the market. Their own OPEC members cannot agree to cut production so they are trying to regain their leverage.

    With over a trillion in reserves they can keep this up for another five years. They still make a profit.

    I'm more concerned about the collapse in demand. If people don't think there is a market to sell to they won't build so they need less. This is a world heading towards a zero growth rate.

    At the same time every year a trillion gets saved by the importing countries. if they invest it wisely they can rebuild and recover sooner from the current slump.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 23 Jan 16,, 23:18.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by gunnut View Post
      And of course renewable energy doesn't need any infrastructure at all. I'm sure your electric car charges itself. I'm sure your house is off the grid, powered by batteries at night. Those batteries never have to be serviced. They don't need support structures. They magically show up in your house and will run forever.

      Solar and wind are supplements. They are unreliable and thus can never be the primary source of power.

      I encourage China and India to develop alternative energy. That just leaves more oil for me.
      Batteries can be recycled. In the PNW we do well enough with the combination of solar/wind/hydro and really don't need to burn a lot of fossil fuels. When we do, it is primarily natural gas. We even have so much that we send some down to California. California has a ton of potential for solar and wind generation. California also has some rather high efficiency standards which lessoned the need for new power generation plants. What I will grant you is choice. You can burn coal for all I care as long as you control the pollutants. Your state is not likely to give you that option though.
      As for myself, I am pushing for harnessing human power. Why have teenagers sit/lay around all day when you can hook them to a wheel and make them run a generator. Picture the early part of Conan the Barbarian 1984. Turn prisons into power generation plants. Schools? Every kid needs a couple of hours of exercise and fresh air, and the school needs electricity. Don't think you are getting off easy when you retire. Rest homes need electricity too. if you can run a walker……you can push a generator.
      Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by gunnut View Post
        I agree with her. Don't interfere the muslims when they are killing each other.

        I am against pulling out our troops.
        Let's pull them out, for kicks, and watch what happens to oil prices
        "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          No, it does matter where or what generated it. Unlike conventional energy, PV or Wind is actual direct access energy. There are several farmhouses and cottages even in the US countryside who have gone completely renewable, not because they were trying to be green but due to it being the most economic option. In many places, paying utility companies a set cost/foot to lay down new transmission lines, where none exist, is a more expensive option than generating your own electricity. Now imagine how deep of a pocket would be needed if someone tried to generate their own electricity indefinitely using only ICE generators! Sure, the PV system will be a high initial cost compared to an ICE generator, but think of the operating cost! How long until the ICE burns through your budget?
          Now you're talking the exceptions rather than the rule. The cost of setting up a few households in remote areas with off-grid power is cheaper than laying down transmission lines. But those households are the exceptions. I'm talking switching entire cities from conventional power to renewable. That's insanely expensive and inefficient. What if you have a city of 1 million people and only half of them have power? Do you want to set up half a million people with individual off-grid power? Or do you want to expand your existing grid to include the other half?

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          When you talk of using oil to generate mechanical work (which in turn generates electricity), you're talking about several layers of inefficiency and heat losses which makes this comparison with battery heat losses completely inane! Taking a perfectly reversible heat engine (theoretically, the Carnot cycle) you'd probably still be looking at maximum efficiencies of approximately ~50-60% in your current thermal power generation cycles. The fact that actually building a totally reversible system is physically impossible, you're looking at efficiencies which are on the lower end of 50%. Speaking of dissipating that heat 'safely', how do you imagine your common thermal plants do it? Ever notice how the temperature of the water source near the thermal plants is higher than normal?
          How efficient is PV cell? How much of the electromagnetic spectrum is converted into usable power? The sun puts out a shit load of power. Most of it is not usable by existing technology.

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          We'll never stop digging into the earth, but atleast we reduce dumping into the air. Lithium would be my choice as of now, till we come up with something better. It's recyclable and re-usable. Why it's not being recycled faster than it's being dug up is the same reason as why people still cling to oil. It's still relatively cheap to dig until the demand shoots up.
          And of course processing that lithium is pollution free.

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          Again, Batteries are not as big of a problem as they are made out to be. Infact, you may not be used to it in the States, but having lived in India, most middle-class households already operate inverters and batteries to store their energy for use during downtimes (power cuts are a regular occurrence due to a deficiency in power generation).
          What appliances do you run with those batteries?

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          Aren't your Macbooks, iphones, IBM/Lenovos, already funding the Chinese?
          Yes. Let's not fund more of them.

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          As for comparing oil with PV cells; not an adequate comparison. How about Lithium? Everyone would be funding the S.Americans; Bolivians, Chileans and Argentines mostly. The good thing with battery technology however is that it still remains very dynamic.
          Electric cars have been the car of the future for the last 100 years. It will still be the car of the future for decades to come. That should tell you something about battery technology.

          Originally posted by Tronic View Post
          Trust me, I'm the last person to complain. I work in an industry where the more oil and natural gas you're willing to use, the fatter my bonus at the end of the year. (Only thing that has really driven us to higher efficiency products is government regulation, not lack of consumer demand).

          Going with the most convenient option available is totally understandable. Renewable energy has only started to mature in the last decade, while conventional has almost half a century worth of infrastructure built into it. I'm just sometimes dumbstruck on some of the arguments against renewable. I can understand if you work in the oil industry and it happens to be your bread and butter; otherwise, resistance to renewable is likely the same resistance to change which every major technology before it has faced.
          I'm all for renewable energy, just not the ones liberals want. I love hydro. Unfortunately they are inconvenient for the fish and we've been blowing up our own dams to feed the fish.

          I am not resisting change. I am resisting expensive shit. I'll use whatever that is cheap. So far, we need massive subsidies to make electric cars and solar cells even remotely affordable for upper middle class here. I can't support that. Or more precisely, I can't afford that.

          The way to make alternative energy more affordable is to make it cheaper. What the enviro-whackos are doing now is to make conventional energy more expensive.
          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
            makes me wonder whether the Iraq war had any role in keeping it as high for as long.

            In theory it should have collapsed post 2008 but there was a lag time in there that took many years to play out.
            Iraq war had very little to do with it.

            A combination of huge increase in US shale oil production and a drop in industrial demand put pressure on energy prices.

            Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
            For the last forty years the price of oil is whatever the Saudis want it to be.

            We're at $30 because the Saudis are pissed off at you. They don't want competition and want to drive alternatives out of the market. Their own OPEC members cannot agree to cut production so they are trying to regain their leverage.

            With over a trillion in reserves they can keep this up for another five years. They still make a profit.
            They make a profit, yes. However, their budget is based on oil at between $80 and $100. Their bottom line is still red.

            They also need to take a class in economics. Predatory pricing doesn't work. As soon as they raise prices, oil becomes profitable again and we will restart our production. There maybe a lag time. But it's not enough for them to recover all their losses. Then they'll have to engage in predatory pricing again, cutting into their profits.

            Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
            I'm more concerned about the collapse in demand. If people don't think there is a market to sell to they won't build so they need less. This is a world heading towards a zero growth rate.

            At the same time every year a trillion gets saved by the importing countries. if they invest it wisely they can rebuild and recover sooner from the current slump.
            Well, this is the new global climate change economy. The greenies doesn't want economic expansion. It's actually quite racist as the advanced economies already have ours, the stall in development hurt poor people (black and brown) more than it hurts white people.
            "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by bonehead View Post
              Batteries can be recycled. In the PNW we do well enough with the combination of solar/wind/hydro and really don't need to burn a lot of fossil fuels. When we do, it is primarily natural gas. We even have so much that we send some down to California. California has a ton of potential for solar and wind generation. California also has some rather high efficiency standards which lessoned the need for new power generation plants. What I will grant you is choice. You can burn coal for all I care as long as you control the pollutants. Your state is not likely to give you that option though.
              One would imagine CA has good potential for solar energy.

              There's a new solar farm on I15, at the border of CA and NV, Ivanpah Solar Plant. It occupies something like 5 square miles of land, cost a few billion dollars to build, and puts out 1/4 of the power as original estimates. The excuse was "there are more cloudy days than what the survey showed."

              http://www.greentechmedia.com/articl...ity-production

              Originally posted by bonehead View Post
              As for myself, I am pushing for harnessing human power. Why have teenagers sit/lay around all day when you can hook them to a wheel and make them run a generator. Picture the early part of Conan the Barbarian 1984. Turn prisons into power generation plants. Schools? Every kid needs a couple of hours of exercise and fresh air, and the school needs electricity. Don't think you are getting off easy when you retire. Rest homes need electricity too. if you can run a walker……you can push a generator.
              Ah, but the problem with human power is people get hungry after a good work out. They need to eat. Food consumption costs a lot of energy.

              I saw the global warming gala in Copenhagen a few years ago where it featured some Christmas trees decorated by lights. Those lights were powered by small generators hooked up to stationary bikes. The greenies would take turn on the bike to power those lights. After that, they go home nice and hungry and consume a good hearty meal.
              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

              Comment


              • #82
                From the same article it sounds like they have a lot more issues than "not enough sun". As usual when developers smell money they tend to over estimate efficiencies. It also sounds like the people operating the plant are still going through a learning curve. California also has a history for overpaying for construction projects.

                If inmates can lift weights they can spin a generator. We all know that teenagers have an appetite no matter what they do. May as well put all those calories to good use.
                Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                  One would imagine CA has good potential for solar energy.

                  There's a new solar farm on I15, at the border of CA and NV, Ivanpah Solar Plant. It occupies something like 5 square miles of land, cost a few billion dollars to build, and puts out 1/4 of the power as original estimates. The excuse was "there are more cloudy days than what the survey showed."
                  All a cover story. That "missing power output" is actually used for the Archimedes Plant Defense System. And testing of the Archimedes II weapon system under development

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I'm wondering how that Ivanah Solar Plant affects the flight approach from Southern Cali to the East in general and Las Vegas in particular.

                    At certain times of day, the sun hits it just right and it looks like a giant spotlight thousand of times more powerful than the spotlight at the Luxor, which they had to shut down because pilots were complaining ruined their vision during approach to Mccarren.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                      Iraq war had very little to do with it.
                      ok, think about the prospect of more war. Back in 2008, there was uncertainty over Iran.

                      Consider the futures markets. If you believe there would be continuing unrest or more then oil at a later date becomes more valuable. More over priced. If you said in 2010 that oil is over priced and is heading for a crash they would point you to futures contracts a few years later selling for as much if not more.

                      A combination of huge increase in US shale oil production and a drop in industrial demand put pressure on energy prices.
                      you put two million barrels a day into the market and it took four years to have an effect. Some people blame that lag time on the futures market. Keeps prices elevated longer than necessary and when the fiction cannot hold there is a big crash.

                      They make a profit, yes. However, their budget is based on oil at between $80 and $100. Their bottom line is still red.

                      They also need to take a class in economics. Predatory pricing doesn't work. As soon as they raise prices, oil becomes profitable again and we will restart our production. There maybe a lag time. But it's not enough for them to recover all their losses. Then they'll have to engage in predatory pricing again, cutting into their profits.
                      The house of Saud is in a tough spot right now. They're tightening up slowly, no buying extra furniture or hosting big parties. I hear they did not like oil at $100+ a barrel instead they prefer it around $60. But the price history does not reflect that at all. It rose steadily over the years.

                      Their bet is demand will recover eventually as it does and their customers will stick to them. Then its only a matter of time.

                      Well, this is the new global climate change economy. The greenies doesn't want economic expansion. It's actually quite racist as the advanced economies already have ours, the stall in development hurt poor people (black and brown) more than it hurts white people.
                      Low oil price isn't good for greenies. What will they do ? make fracking illegal because its so polluting. And it is prolonging this addiction we all have :D
                      Last edited by Double Edge; 26 Jan 16,, 18:32.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                        All a cover story. That "missing power output" is actually used for the Archimedes Plant Defense System. And testing of the Archimedes II weapon system under development
                        Crap. I had to look that up and everything.
                        One thing I did have an issue with is that the navy has power plants in Idaho and much of the electricity is pumped into the ground to keep secret how powerful the reactors are.
                        Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                          All a cover story. That "missing power output" is actually used for the Archimedes Plant Defense System. And testing of the Archimedes II weapon system under development
                          75% of the output went to a single defense project?
                          "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by bonehead View Post
                            From the same article it sounds like they have a lot more issues than "not enough sun". As usual when developers smell money they tend to over estimate efficiencies. It also sounds like the people operating the plant are still going through a learning curve. California also has a history for overpaying for construction projects.

                            If inmates can lift weights they can spin a generator. We all know that teenagers have an appetite no matter what they do. May as well put all those calories to good use.
                            Not enough sun? Have you been there? That place has more sun than any of the coastal regions and the entire PNW. If that's not enough sun then we need to abandon that technology.
                            "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                              Low oil price isn't good for greenies. What will they do ? make fracking illegal because its so polluting. And it is prolonging this addiction we all have :D
                              Again, we are not addicted to oil. We are addicted to cheap energy. There is a difference.
                              "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian_Entertainment

                                Cripes Gunny, ya gotta put some kind of smiley face or the children will take it seriously.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X