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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Heinz Blasnik- Views You Can Use -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: yard_man who wrote (2711)	6/26/2003 10:13:39 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Respond to of 4905

cost of oil and NG go up enough and these other sources become economic there is some truth to this, to be sure. at the same time, as oil and NG go up, other sources of same become feasible. like LNG. but there are at least two problems here: (1) a lot of the reason these resources are more expensive is that it takes more energy to exploit them (like liquefying NG, then shipping it as LNG, then converting it back to gas, all of which takes a lot of NRG, not to mention the billions in capex requirements), so there is less net energy from their production; thus not sustainable in the long run. (2) in economic terms, "more expensive" means a bigger tax on the economy. this is bad for the US and the global economies. the US economy in particular is structurally predicated on cheap fuel. many people commute 45 minutes by car each way. if the alternatives have an effective price of, say $20-gallon gas, what is the economic impact on our residential geography, for starters? the 80-mile round-trip commute costs $40 a day even in a fuel-efficient 40mpg car, and of course $80 a day in the 20mpg vehicle which typically hits the lots today. how many people can pay $40-$80 a day for their commute? not many, so they move or become jobless. the suburbs dry up. but perhaps this is not such a bad thing. reminds me of the opening line to Pork Lips Now: "Chit! Suburbia!" i also wonder what this will do to food prices.

To: yard_man who wrote (2711)	6/26/2003 10:46:49 AM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4905

I think Grace said a lot when she mentioned the consultant who said.. "No. People want big cars, SUVs, the bigger the better and they want luxury. They don't want to be rolling down the highway in some little compact car anymore." Too true. I wonder how much time the average American spends being enslaved behind the wheel? I don't like being stuck in a small car either, never mind having to drive it. Thats why I like to take the train. The USA must be ripe for a new inter city transport system. It's a big place. Just think of the freight that has to move too. Of course not many people in the UK have the same view as me, and they spend a large portion of their lives being stuck in traffic. I would not like to live in a city and own a car these days. I know my elderly neighbours lives have improved considerably since they left the Merc in the garage and started catching the local bus. The are more active, fitter, and met loads of people they have not met in decades. Interesting to hear what Jim Rogers would say if he travelled around the world using public transport instead of private. Wonder if he would have got a different impression on any of the countries he visited? Message 19048037 My experience is it's a very different world. You can do some useful work while travelling for instance. Or even spend some of that elusive "quality time" with family etc.

To: yard_man who wrote (2711)	6/26/2003 4:33:05 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4905

Hi tippet, Kerry hit the nail on the head -- cost of oil and NG go up enough and these other sources become economic. To be fair, there are other problems to overcome, not the least of which is that petroleum dominates many facets of our lives and our societies. There are those people and businesses and countries that have an extreme vested interest in the stable welfare of petroleum, gas and coal. Somewhere back in this thread, someone mentioned the phrase "exogenous shock" with regards to economic policies. Well, the petroleum industry also worries about exogenous shocks. By way of example, suppose I came up with some new invention tomorrow, that with a low cost retrofit, everyone in the world could run their cars efficiently and cleanly on simple tap water, with no environmental impacts or harmful by-products. The introduction of such a device would have a profound and immediate impact on the stock market, on politics within oil-producing countries, perhaps civil disorder in some regions of the world, on individuals dependent upon the sale of gasoline for their livelihood, on governments that depend on gasoline taxes as a significant source of revenues, etcetera... The picture is fairly obvious. Therefore, politics, geopolitics, business and industry, and even individuals will do whatever it takes to protect the current system from this type of shock. Alternative sources of energy will eventually find their way into the marketplace. It will be a gradual sort of thing; no shocks to the existing system. No sudden loss of revenues to existing business... Just my opinion though... KJC