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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Snowshoe who wrote (120916)	6/19/2005 5:15:02 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

Many experts say we are close to peak global oil production, and that annual global oil production will soon being declining. That is the "Hubbert's Peak" theory. We are not there yet because we still have a tremendous amout of unexplored area in the gap. Plus a lot of what is explored is way underdeveloped. You never have more than about seven years of proven reserves. Because companies cut back on exploration when we reach that number. There is no need for a push by the Government for a "new" fuel. In fact the worst way to go at it is to have the Government get involved. "Mr Market" takes care of that problem.

To: Snowshoe who wrote (120916)	6/19/2005 5:19:35 PM
From: kech	Respond to of 793838

Many experts say we are close to peak global oil production, and that annual global oil production will soon being declining. If true, then the proper market response is to produce oil substitutes (and increase fuel efficiency) rather than building new refineries for nonexistent oil. Peak oil cannot mean peak in global oil production. It simply means peak oil production of low cost reserves. There are at least three hundred years of oil shale reserves available that can be produced at higher costs.