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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (148474)	3/29/2011 4:39:01 PM
From: Jim P.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206326

For the most part the statement "oil will be gone" has no teeth. On the other hand current technologies in a large degree have advanced like rungs in a ladder. As a new technology improves on an old one society steps up the ladder to the next rung. The next rung while it might be more energy efficient almost always requires an economy of scale that in aggregate does not decrease total energy use. As we get another rung or 2 up the old technologies die out and that rung below us gets cut off. When the problem of resource scarcity starts impacting the upkeep of the same technologies that allow for efficient extraction of more and more marginal energy sources then we will see a rude transition to a less comfortable lifestyle. I am not smart enough to guess even within 10 years when that will be but since I am almost 50 I expect it will probably happen in my lifetime. Peak oilers have been too pessimistic but their voice is a much saner one then planning that tomorrow will always look like today. Not intended to reflect on you Bob, just think there is more to the story than peak oil or that production will exhibit an asymptote decline. Jim

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (148474)	3/29/2011 4:41:57 PM
From: old tx oiler	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206326

Hi BC. Far be it from me to argue with more knowledgeable posters such as yourself but look at this projection of world population: Year Total world population (mid-year figures) Ten-year growth rate (%) 1950 2,556,000,053 18.9% 1960 3,039,451,023 22.0 1970 3,706,618,163 20.2 1980 4,453,831,714 18.5 1990 5,278,639,789 15.2 2000 6,082,966,429 12.6 2010 6,848,932,929 10.7 2020 7,584,821,144 8.7 2030 8,246,619,341 7.3 2040 8,850,045,889 5.6 2050 9,346,399,468 — Provided by U.S. Census Bureau Fifty years from now we could have 10 billion people. In the past fifty years we have better than doubled the population. Just think how many more "gadgets" we have today than 50 years ago. My point is in the next 50 years, with the increased amount of humans, presumably at least a googleplex or two more energy eating gadgets, I just dont believe the last 50 will look much like the next 50. I think oil may be available in some quantity at some price as you suggest, but its hard to imagine w/o some form of population control and a much lower standard of survival, that we will have energy as we know it today. Anyway, that is for you youngsters to worry about. GLTA, Bob

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (148474)	3/29/2011 8:55:14 PM
From: kormac	4 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206326

Jacob and Bob, Both of you take to task writers who make statements to gain a certain effect. But then you repeat different kind of errors. It matters little if the asymptote is never reached. It it the yearly decline which is important. The asymptote is zero by definition. So what the context? Oil will be abundant 10 years from now.....for $150/b....or higher. Abundant for whom. It is abundant for the top 1 percent of the country, it that relevant? So what is it? 30 percent of the population cannot afford $80 oil 40 percent of the population cannot afford $120 oil 50 percent of the population cannot afford $200 oil etc. I clearly do not know what the actual percentages are, but these are kind of numbers that ought to be part of the discussion, rather than the asymptote is never reached and oil abundant for some few.