Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (4450)	3/30/2002 1:47:29 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12231

<...it is in the interest of oil producers for the price of oil to fluctuate. The occasional periods of low prices scares off investment in competition or substitution. Alternatively, the occasionally high prices might scare off development of oil-intensive technologies. The trouble with the latter argument is that I can't think of an oil-intensive technology that isn't well developped. > Ashley, at the time, I could see the argument, but didn't conclude whether you were right or not. Now, I think that volatility is actually a negative for oil. That's because volatility introduces another cost for oil consumers; they have to be prepared to swing to something else when oil goes through the expensive times and switch back when it gets cheaper. By using an energy supply which is more reliable, they avoid the switching costs. By buying futures contracts, they can continue operating during the times when oil would be cheaper. Enron was no doubt offering such futures contracts as part of their trading strategies. Therefore, when somebody considers whether to buy oil-burning equipment, they'll be circumspect about temporarily low prices and unless they can be sure of avoiding the high prices, they are likely to decide to do something else with their money - such as buy a convenient coal mine, nuclear reactor, gas field, hydroelectric dam, photovoltaic array or insulation. An oil-intensive technology which isn't well-developed is Orimulsion pdvsa.com Technologically it's fairly well developed, but from a market point of view it isn't. Venezuela is an OPEC state. Their huge bitumen reserves could increase their market share if prices get a bit higher... Mqurice

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (4450)	3/31/2002 4:36:09 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 12231

Ashley, it's true that there are many factors required for plant growth apart from CO2, but since those factors are randomly available and there are always plants on the edge of survival, due to shortages of one, some or all of the factors which are required for their successful growth, I'm sure the plants would like it if one of the variables was made always plentiful. There can't be too much CO2 for them [in the context we are discussing], so the more the merrier. <Plants need more than just CO2. CO2 fertilization works well in greenhouses, where there's a surfeit of everything else. In practice, CO2 might stimulate growth in some places, but not in others. A bigger stimulant to growth is expected from a longer growing season: a longer period above the temperature at which plants are dormant. > So, outside the greenhouse, more of the plants will have a more satisfactory CO2 supply, which, for some of them, might be the limiting factor for their growth. That is apparently true. Which makes sense, thinking about how evolution works - nature takes living things up to the limits of growth to maximize survival prospects. If CO2 increases have the happy benefit of also increasing climatic temperatures, plants, as you say, will enjoy a longer growing season to enjoy the extra CO2 - like a 3 month holiday in the French Riviera instead of 5 days. Mqurice