06-07-12, 09:16 AM #41
I suggest you go back and read my previous posts. I suggest you do a little research on your own. You obviously have no clue about economics – much less science.
As previously pointed and out and definitively proven many times in this thread and many times ignored by you in this thread, is that energy is not solely sourced from petroleum products – a big hole in your premise. Two you have repeatedly ignored the fact that the definition of recoverable oil reserves has expanded greatly through the years because of technological advancements. Three, your argument has no time line. Economic growth today is certainly possible because it is occurring. Will finite oil reserves at some time in the future prevent economic growth? Well not in the foreseeable future. Which brings us to point four, it has been pointed out to you that we are in the midst of an oil glut. Oil supplies exceed demand – another big hole in your thesis that limited oil supplies prevent economic growth.
1. Oil is not preventing current economic growth because economies are growing.
2. There is no current shortage of oil now or in the foreseeable future (excluding a man-made crisis).
3. Oil is not finite, as it can and is being commercially created from other sources.
4. Oil is not the only source of energy and you fail to acknowledge current proven reserves of other fossil based fuels (e.g. natural gas) that could fill/reduce the demand for oil based energy.
5. You fail to account for the role of technology in accessing new sources of energy, improving efficiencies, and finding new sources for existing energy sources.
6. You fail to understand and account for the market dynamics of supply and demand.
And each of the above points have been repeatedly proven to you beyond a shaddow of a doubt. Your continued refusal to acknowledge fact, evidence and reason does not invalidate reality. To date you have not been able or even tried to defend your broad and erroneous claims. Instead you have made vain attempts to defend your claims by refusing to acknowledge reality and the mountian of evidence that makes rubble of your unsupported claims.
Unsupported denials, are not proofs.
Last edited by joepistole; 06-07-12 at 10:53 AM.
06-07-12, 09:31 AM #42
Energy will not be limiting until after you are dead:
To whom will the US sell its planned LNG exports?
06-07-12, 09:44 AM #43
06-07-12, 10:16 AM #44
BTW, as I mentioned in another thread, this surge in cheap NG supplies is, IMHO, why the completed (two years ago) large (1M ID, I think) NG pipeline from Russia to China, is not in use. - They can not agree on long term contract (take or pay, I think) price. Russian trade with China is currently worth 80 (or 84?) billion dollars annually but not one dollars is used. They have agreed to boost it to 200 billion annually by 2020.
The volume of world trade not using dollars is rapidly growing, even in Africa. In December of 2011 Japan & China agree to cease using dollars in their ~350 billion of annual trade. China has "currency swaps" in place with I think all five of the BRICS and several dozen Asian nations with which its trade is growing by double digits each year. - The day when the RMB is as important as the dollar is not far away. HSBC has just opened in London an RMB exchange center (for companies to borrow RMBs with "Dim Sum" bonds) for their Asian investments.* Iran, is scheduled to open an oil trade bourse this year, which will not uses dollars. - That is real reason why US is so hostile to Iran, despite IAEC inspectors saying their is no evidence of nuclear bomb directed activity.
Also worth noting is that even if there were an Iranian bomb program, it would be a decade before Iran could have two, (one to test) and US is not bent all out of shape by the many dozens that unstable Pakistan and some others already have. I.e. like the Iraq war´s invented WMDs danger, any war with Iran will really be about it selling oil with no dollars required. Essential to US economic health is the preservation of the "PetroDollar system" with the "recycling of its dollars" back to buy US treasury bonds.
* China is already the world leader in FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) even though getting RMB has not been easy, but now is with two large centers issuing Dim Sum bonds. (First was Hong Kong, and MacDonald´s was the first to borrow RMB there a few years ago and Catepillar was the second to borrow RMB about 1 month later.)
Last edited by Billy T; 06-07-12 at 10:56 AM.
06-07-12, 09:05 PM #45
I'm done addressing your psuedo-scientific babbling. Now where's the link to the replacement fuel technolody that I will slam like I did you last one? If you don't have that, then my discussion with you is at an end. Back up your claim or this is over.
06-07-12, 09:11 PM #46
06-07-12, 09:36 PM #47
Last edited by joepistole; 06-07-12 at 09:48 PM.
06-07-12, 11:13 PM #48
Link to a replacement fuel. Back up your claim or shut up. Enough of your textbook narcissism.
Let me remind you, your last link was to fungus. There is is not enough land to grow grass to put in those barrels. So, you lost that argument. But mysteriously you say they have another fuel that you refuse to give a link to. It reminds me of "you can't prove there isn't an invisible, unseeable God." or "Ha ha, I know something you don't. And I'm not going to tell you. Nanny, nanny boo boo." That's what you sound like joe. A real grown ass man child.
But don't limit yourself to this fantasy link that doesn't exist. Give me something credible, just link to an alternative. JUST ONE! But why don't you just admit you are full of it. There is no replacement fuel joe. There is no link. Now is there? You are wrong and you cannot prove a replacefull fuel exists, so all your nonsense about trust in fossil fuel estimates is WRONG and a threat that is leading catastrophic consequences. So you play this childish game and troll an intellectual forum. Ain't that right?
If you think you can win with smart alec remarks, I better at that too. Bring it on.
Last edited by steampunk; 06-07-12 at 11:29 PM.
06-08-12, 12:18 AM #49
As for this “mysterious” other fuel you are referencing, I have no clue as to what you are referring. I can only assume it is yet another delusion. I and others in this thread have repeatedly shown you that there are other fuels that can supplement our energy needs. Oil is neither finite nor is it a factor preventing economic growth as you have claimed in this thread.
By the way, pounding on your chest is something apes do. I am not impressed. I would be more impressed if you could make a coherent argument using real evidence.
I repeat my challenge to you to address the previously identified holes in your claims. My guess is based on your behavior to date you will not do so. I am betting you will continue in your efforts to obfuscate.
06-08-12, 03:27 AM #50
You have chosen not to back up your claim of a replacement alternative energy for oil. Later dude.
06-08-12, 08:10 AM #51
Solazyme is a commercial publicly traded company that makes oil from plant materials today - oil that is used to fuel vehicles in the US military for one. And Solazyme is just one commercial company offering an alternative to traditional oil. Natural gas is yet another replacement fuel for oil, a fuel for which we have a huge abundance as I and others in this thread have pointed out to you.
How about responding to the many questions and issues that have been put to you? You cannot and have not responded because your many claims in this thread are bogus. Fact and reason do not support your claims. You have yet to put forth one coherent argument to support your claims. And you have repeatedly failed to answer even on of the many questions put to you. Your claim that economic growth is not possible due to a lack of energy is just nonsense and flies in the face of reality.
Last edited by joepistole; 06-08-12 at 10:57 AM.
06-08-12, 08:51 AM #52
You, in contrast, are making a forecast the future about. I.e. that there will be no replacement fuel, ever. Some how you must know that controlled fusion, etc. is impossible - I.e. mankind will never be able to fusion the hydrogen of the oceans into helium. etc.
I have not followed thread closely, but what of yours I have read has been false misstated nonsense or demonstrably in error by factor of 10 million (see post 40).
Last edited by Billy T; 06-08-12 at 08:59 AM.
07-29-12, 04:52 PM #53
Steampunk....I can tell you have a more complete understanding of this problem than others here. It may be helpful to include more on the limits of the planet in relation to fuel usage. For instance I could argue that economic growth is possible for quite some time as long as poverty levels increase with it. Another useful tool could be to look at the history of world population and fossil fuel production. They mirrored each other during the first half of world production because of the low cost. Even with fracking, horizontal drilling and any other "miracle of technology" the supply is finite and price will rise. So...your idea to move towards balance is much more authentic and realistic. The current economic system based on constant growth is unsustainable and most economists already know this, it is however, not a palatable idea for the spoiled masses that got here from cheap fuel.
By kmguru in forum Business & EconomicsLast Post: 09-20-09, 08:58 PMReplies: 0
By river-wind in forum Biology & GeneticsLast Post: 03-22-09, 08:21 PMReplies: 439
By coberst in forum Business & EconomicsLast Post: 10-14-08, 07:49 PMReplies: 24
By TruthSeeker in forum Business & EconomicsLast Post: 02-17-08, 11:22 PMReplies: 0
By Fraggle Rocker in forum Business & EconomicsLast Post: 10-03-07, 11:21 PMReplies: 20