Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 67891011121314 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 328
  1. #226
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    running from what?

    Obama lied again...and again...and again....
    1) If Obama is fudging, it would be productive for you to tell us what and how, if you know.

    2) What I gave wasn't my opinion.

    US oil reserves represent 1.3% of world total. (page 22)
    US oil production represents 7% of world total. I was wrong tho. It used to be 10%. My bad. (pg 30)
    OPEC represents 44% of world production of oil.
    http://www.opec.org/opec_web/static_...B2010_2011.pdf

    OPECs ability to set prices is severely limited by the fact that the cartel does not represent even 50% of the world's oil production.

    United States has added refinery capacity in each of the last five years, BTW.
    (page 38 of the statistical extract for 2010)

    That is why I "act" as if oil prices are set by market forces.


    My "gotcha" has relevant data, backed up by sound economics. I am going to bookmark/save this thread.

    You can try to back up heritages' bull if you want. You will fail, because you let yourself get lied to, as I have pointed out. I hope you will try, maybe then you can see for yourself, instead of making me do the work you should have done in the first place.

    That is not a nice thing to say, and I realize you are at heart a decent person, but if you suck this stuff up without a modi of understanding or fact checking, solely because you *want* to believe it, I'm sorry.

  2. #227
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Half-truth #3: Oil is not enough. America has only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves.
    President Obama frequently uses this number to push federal investments in alternative sources of energy that cannot stand the test of the market. The reality is that he uses this number deceptively. According to the Ins ute for Energy Research:
    [A]lthough the U.S. is said to have only 20 billion barrels of oil in reserves, the amount of oil that is technically recoverable in the U.S. is more than 1.4 trillion barrels, with the largest deposits located offshore, in portions of Alaska, and in shale in the Rocky Mountain West. When combined with resources from Canada and Mexico, total recoverable oil in North America exceeds 1.7 trillion barrels, or more than the world has used since the first oil well was drilled over 150 years ago in usville, Pennsylvania. To put this in context, Saudi Arabia has about 260 billion barrels of oil in proved reserves.
    One reason to view “reserves” estimates with caution is the fact that they are constantly in flux. In 1980, the U.S. had oil reserves of roughly 30 billion barrels. Yet from 1980 through 2010, it produced over 77 billion barrels of oil. In other words, over the last 30 years, the U.S. produced over 150 percent of the proved reserves that it had in 1980. If the massive quan ies of U.S. oil are made available to explore and produce, the current estimated reserves of 20 billion barrels would certainly increase, providing much more production over decades to come. In other words, reserves are not a stagnant number.[4]
    This is another collection of lies by omission.

    Technically recoverable = possible
    Technically recoverable does not equal economically recoverable.

    You can get all the oil you want to get at $1000 bbl, but no one will buy it.


    If the massive quan ies of U.S. oil are made available to explore and produce, the current estimated reserves of 20 billion barrels would certainly increase,
    Yes it would. The big question is whether those reserves will increase faster than they are drilled out of the ground. Globally, we have pumped oil out of the ground faster than we have discovered it since 1984.

    The really big, easy to drill formations were sucked dry of oil a long time ago. What is left requires more effort, more drills and more money to get at, even with all the fracking you want. As the size of the deposits goes down, you have to find more and more at faster rates to maintain production rates.

    In 1980, the U.S. had oil reserves of roughly 30 billion barrels. Yet from 1980 through 2010, it produced over 77 billion barrels of oil.
    Again, leaving out a few things. Sonic imaging vastly improved in the time, as has drilling technology. We have reached the diminishing returns portion of the production curve. Sorry. There will be no magic to save oil production going forward.

    The other portion left out is that the reserves they are pumping up and cherry-picking data to make their case with tend to be locked up on oil sands. Oil sands have gotten a lot more economical because of gas prices (the oil must be heated by burning natgas), but getting that full "technically recoverable" figure means strip mining HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SQUARE MILES. Possible yes, but at a huge cost, even if one incorrectly ignores the environmental costs.

  3. #228
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    This has been done to death, so I am going to go off my memory as much as possible.

    Datapoints and given important principles, numbered for quick reference.:
    1)Oil is fungible, and a global market. All inputs get dumped into the same tub, and taken out by buyers, who don't care where it comes from. PRICES ARE GLOBAL.
    2) US produces 10% of global supply
    3) US consumes 25% of global supply
    4) In 1993, China was an exporter of oil. In 2009, it passed Japan as the #2 importer. It is projected to surpass the US within 10 years if current trends continue. Combine these two datapoints, and 100% of Chinese imports represent completely new demand that was not there 20 years ago.


    Half-truth #2: Increasing oil production takes too long and would not impact the market for at least a decade.
    This has been the mantra of the anti-drilling crowd for years, and the longer politicians listen to the message, the longer the nation’s oil resources will remain undeveloped. If access to areas that are currently off limits is increased, it will take time to explore and extract that oil. But that does not change the fact that the nation needs it today and also in the future. Furthermore, some of this oil can reach the market in much less than a decade if the permitting process is streamlined and the Keystone XL pipeline—which could bring up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day from Canada to the Gulf Coast refineries—is built.
    This is a lie because it omits the small detail that this oil will get to market somewhere, somehow. Keystone or not. THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE WILL HAVE NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER ON THE GLOBAL PRICE OF OIL.

    Added to this is that the oil that is "off limits", usually a code word for offshore, require billion-dollar ships and platforms to get to. There is a huge backlog in building the ships. The bottleneck is not having enough area to drill in, it is getting the ships online. Oil companies are hesitant to spend too much on these things, because they got burned in the 1990's by low oil prices and are leery of large capital expenditures.

    "off limits" also generally refers to ANWAR, another tried and true vacuous talking point. ANWAR, if extracted would supply the US with less than four months supply of oil. Then it would be gone. It is simply not large enough to make a difference in the long run.

    It mixes in some truth, but omits some key points. Either the author doesn't know how the market works, or is leaving it out.

  4. #229
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Bottom line:

    Unless you want to impose goverment restrictions on domestic oil producers forbidding them to sell on a global market, you will ALWAYS be vulnerable to oil supply shocks in the Middle East or elsewhere.

    Further, if we drilled enough oil to actually put a dent in global prices, all that does is increase our vulnerability to those shocks, as it makes our economy more dependent on oil itself.

  5. #230
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Hopefully the reason why you misunderstood is because I didn't explain it well but it would be safe for me to assume you are just being wh 2.0. Those were the two reasons why I wouldn't read entire pages.

    FWIW I usually only block people if they never add anything to the conversation. Everytime I get curious to see what they put, I am always encouraged that I made the right decision.
    I added some very tangible things to the conversation, and directly refuted your entire OP. I was even fairly nice and respectful about it.

    If you want to lie about why you won't respond, don't ask me to buy it.

    You have neither data, nor market priciples that can support the OP.

    Hand waving, i.e., "its just your opinion, RandomGuy" is akin to waving the white flag.

    If that's all you got, go sit in the corner with Cosmored.

  6. #231
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,735
    This is another collection of lies by omission.

    Technically recoverable = possible
    Technically recoverable does not equal economically recoverable.

    You can get all the oil you want to get at $1000 bbl, but no one will buy it.




    The exact same argument can be made against solar, wind, and biofuels.

    At least be intellectually consistent.

  7. #232
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    a silly point

    solar, wind prices are dropping, and dropping indefinitely while post-peak oil's price is trending up indefinitely, and probably dramatically, thanks to market manipulators and increasing demand.

  8. #233
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672


    The exact same argument can be made against solar, wind, and biofuels.

    At least be intellectually consistent.
    To some extent you bump up against production curves for any good, yes.

    The "exact same argument" does NOT hold for goods that are produced other than in the Middle East and imported for energy.

    Increasing the supply of solar or wind means that we are less subject to oil supply shocks.

    You aren't saying that we import solar panels or wind turbines from Saudi Arabia or Venezuala, are you?

  9. #234
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    a silly point

    solar, wind prices are dropping, and dropping indefinitely while post-peak oil's price is trending up indefinitely, and probably dramatically, thanks to market manipulators and increasing demand.
    AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY TRENDS

    China’s auto sales exceeded 15 million units in 2010, with passenger vehicle growth and sales the highest among major global markets.
    # of cars per 1,000 people, China = 37 (as of 2008)
    # of cars per 1,000 people, US = 808 (as of 2009)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...les_per_capita

    While the level of growth is falling somewhat, demand for new cars will only go up.

    For all of 2011, analysts said the industry sold about 12.8 million cars and trucks,
    Even at a slower growth rate, the Chinese will have more than twice as many cars as we do within a decade or so.

    That is a lot of gasoline and a lot of oil.

  10. #235
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,735
    To some extent you bump up against production curves for any good, yes.


    You aren't saying that we import solar panels or wind turbines from Saudi Arabia or Venezuala, are you?
    No, we get those from China.

    And again, your argument concerned the cost of DOMESTIC production, not imported oil.

  11. #236
    Controversy Koolaid_Man's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Post Count
    41,430
    When I'm surfing the net and posting on ST I let this play in the background...


  12. #237
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    No, we get those from China.

    And again, your argument concerned the cost of DOMESTIC production, not imported oil.
    We don't entirely get them from China. That said, once the initial capital cost is done, then we are independent from other inputs, other than the kinds of maintenance that CAN'T be out-sourced.


    My statement had to do with the interplay of domestic production in conjunction with external prices.

    The OP seemed to imply that there is this huge amount of oil out there, if we just tap into it. While that is correct, the cost of getting 100% of that oil is prohibitively expensive.

    You rightly point out that solar and wind have supply curves, just as oil does.

    The piece of the puzzle you are missing was that which boutons supplied.

    Solar and wind are both manufactured goods, and this makes them MUCH different than natural resources.

    Technology to improve solar and wind will bring down costs of production, and, even if this was not the case, increasing capacity will gain more efficiencies of scale, not to mention learning curve gains in the manufacturing processes.

    Oil to some extent can get some gains from technological advances, but physics is physics. The technology does not currently exist to extract all oil locked in the shale profitably. You can only do so much with fracking.

    You can't make the exact same argument, because they are not the exact same sources of energy, and have some very crucial differentiating charactoristics.

    The primary difference is that oil is a globally traded commodity. Solar and wind collection systems are manufactured goods, and once installed have little to no ongoing costs.

    Oil will ALWAYS be vulnerable to supply shocks.

    Solar and wind will not.

  13. #238
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Europe, with much less solar energy that USA, is way ahead, per capita, with solar than USA. Big payoffs:

    German Solar Bringing Down Price of Afternoon Electricity, Big Time! (More Charts & Facts)


    http://cleantechnica.com/2012/03/23/...=Google+Reader

    ==========

    SA govt should direct CPS to setup time-of-day pricing and residential/commercial feed-in tariffs for solar and wind rather than screwing around trying to new nuke plants and more coal to handle peak afternoon loads.

  14. #239
    Independent DMX7's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Post Count
    21,198
    Boutons - solar is for pussies. You've discounted that fact.

  15. #240
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Europe, with much less solar energy that USA, is way ahead, per capita, with solar than USA. Big payoffs:

    German Solar Bringing Down Price of Afternoon Electricity, Big Time! (More Charts & Facts)


    http://cleantechnica.com/2012/03/23/...=Google+Reader

    ==========

    SA govt should direct CPS to setup time-of-day pricing and residential/commercial feed-in tariffs for solar and wind rather than screwing around trying to new nuke plants and more coal to handle peak afternoon loads.
    That is what happens when you let cool-aid drinkers run energy companies.

  16. #241
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    SNC has abandoned his own thread.


  17. #242
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Exxon Mobil’s Tax Rate Drops To 13 Percent, After Making 35 Percent More Profits On Rising Gas Prices In 2011

    Exxon Mobil, the most profitable of the big five oil companies, made $41.1 billion in profits last year. Although Exxon made 35 percent more profits since 2010, its estimated effective tax rate actually dropped. Citizens for Tax Justice reported Exxon paid only 17.6 percent taxes in 2010, lower than the average American, and a Reuters analysis using the same criteria estimates that Exxon will pay only 13 percent in effective taxes for 2011. Exxon paid zero taxes to the federal government in 2009.

    Reuters compares the 45 percent tax rate Exxon claims it pays to the effective rate estimated by Citizens for Tax Justice — a rate that’s even lower than Mitt Romney’s tax rate. Chevron, which made $26.9 billion profit in 2011, paid 19 percent:

    Citizens for Tax Justice considers U.S. profits and U.S. taxes paid only. By that measure, Exxon Mobil paid 13 percent of its U.S. income in taxes after deductions and benefits in 2011, according to a Reuters calculation of securities filings.

    It is a far cry from the 35 percent top corporate tax rate.

    Still, the three-year average for telecom companies is 8 percent; for information technology services companies, it is 2.5 percent, according to CTJ.

    http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/...ofits-in-2011/

  18. #243
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Sen. Rand Paul: When Big Oil Screws Americans At The Gas Pump, ‘You Should Want To Encourage Them’

    Instead of punishing them, you should want to encourage them. I would think you would want to say to the oil companies, “What obstacles are there to you making more money?” And hiring more people. Instead they say, “No, we must punish them. We must tax them more to make things fair.” This whole thing about fairness is so misguided and gotten out of hand.

    “We as a society need to glorify those who make a profit,” Paul concluded.

    In his floor speech, Kyl claimed that ending the tax breaks would be “discriminatory.”

    http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/...ncourage-them/

    =========

    Damn, these libertarians are truly nothing but shills for the 1% to the 99%.

  19. #244
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Bouton's, I don't know what you think you have here, but I agree with Rand...

    Ask them what the obstacles are.

  20. #245
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,425
    lets stick to holding him accountable for real issues like the constant erosion of civil liberties under his watch, adding more to the debt in 3 years than bush did in 8, and setting the precedent that its cool to attack other countries without congressional approval all while technically not even being eligible to be present. cmon guys, focus you can do it!
    We have; you weren't paying attention. We didn't miss you.

  21. #246
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,596
    all while technically not even being eligible to be present
    I will pretentiously ask what this means.

  22. #247
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    They are making solar cells that look like pulled out accordians which can get more energy out of the waning hours of sunlight which is leading to increases in production of up to 20 times! Pretty darn cool.

    http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/28/m...cient-heights/

  23. #248
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    while technically not even being eligible to be present.
    I assume you meant "president". oh gawd, you're one of "those people".


    You do realize, regarding the deficit, that a lot of that was structural right?

    Economy slows = less taxes coming in
    Unemployment = more demand for social programs, i.e. higher costs


    While I do agree we need to get deficit spending under control, let's be a bit more realistic about how much any president has control over this kind of stuff.

    Letting the Bush tax cuts expire is a good start. Cutting defense and getting out of Afghanistan is another.

    I will more than willing to cut back on en lements in return.

  24. #249
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    They are making solar cells that look like pulled out accordians which can get more energy out of the waning hours of sunlight which is leading to increases in production of up to 20 times! Pretty darn cool.

    http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/28/m...cient-heights/
    This capacity gain, made possible by an efficient harvesting of sunlight during less optimal hours of the day, could be especially helpful in powering regions prone to overcast or wintry climates.
    Useful for New Yorkers. Not so much Texans.

    Still, as the tech progresses and costs come down, it will shift the economic viability of solar northwards.

  25. #250
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    Useful for New Yorkers. Not so much Texans.

    Still, as the tech progresses and costs come down, it will shift the economic viability of solar northwards.
    Understood, and I feel like the 20x's increase in efficiency would be up north, which doesn't mean that we won't receive some increase in efficiency (say 5x??) either way improving the efficacy of solar in the north will bring down the costs for us in the south due to higher adoption rates, economies of scale, etc.

    (and imagine what it will do for a country like Germany who is actually being responsible and showing a great commitment to it)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •