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 of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (10064)	6/27/2009 10:06:06 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

The point in the third paragraph of my post is probably more important than the other two. The first two are just examples of why we shouldn't take his predictions as solid. That's not a knock against him, I don't think we should take anyone's predictions in this area as solid. That's a useful point in my opinion, but the real point was --- "Even if one does believe that oil production will peak in a given year, it is quite another thing to assume that catastrophic effects will necessarily follow. The timing of the peak and the nature of its aftermath are not pre-determined by geology; they are endogenous manifestations of the inter-temporal allocation of resources as determined by market forces. We demonstrate below that peaking may signal either scarcity or relative surplus, rapidly rising prices or constant prices, the near termination of production or its mere beginning. In other words, the phenomenon of peaking in a market-based economy is an ambiguous indicator of anything of fundamental importance to the economy. Therefore, efforts to date the peak should be of little interest to policymakers or the public debate."