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 : Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (3180)	11/18/2005 11:31:29 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24225

Way long article... Rep. Bartlett speaks in Congress about the Hirsch Report Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, transcript PEAK OIL -- (House of Representatives - November 16, 2005) ----- The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Jindal). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett) is recognized for 60 minutes. Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I have in front of me a document called Peaking of World Oil Production, Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management. As I look at the second page, it says this report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. That agency was the Department of Energy, and the organization that was funded to do this work was SAIC, a very prestigious, scientific organization. Dr. Robert Hirsch was a project leader. He was supported by Roger Bezdek and Robert Wendling in this very important work. It was submitted in February of 2005. What I would like to do this evening is to go through the salient points of this so-called Hirsch report. Remember, it was funded by the Department of Energy, and it was performed by a very prestigious scientific organization, SAIC. (16 November 2005) The Hirsch report gets more coverage here. xecu.net =========================================== 5. MITIGATION EFFORTS WILL REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL TIME Mitigation will require an intense effort over decades. This inescapable conclusion is based on the time required to replace vast numbers of liquid fuel consuming vehicles and the time required to build a substantial number of substitute fuel production facilities. Our scenarios analysis shows: Waiting until world oil production peaks before taking crash program action would leave the world with a significant liquid fuel deficit for more than two decades. Initiating a mitigation crash program 10 years before world oil peaking helps considerably but still leaves a liquid fuels shortfall roughly a decade after the time that oil would have peaked. Initiating a mitigation crash program 20 years before peaking appears to offer the possibility of avoiding a world liquid fuels shortfall for the forecast period. The obvious conclusion from this analysis is that with adequate, timely mitigation, the economic costs to the world can be minimized. If mitigation were to be too little, too late, world supply/demand balance will be achieved through massive demand destruction (shortages), which would translate to significant economic hardship. There will be no quick fixes. Even crash programs will require more than a decade to yield substantial relief.