but what about increasing efficiency in the extraction of oil? that is, for each 1 gallon of oil the companies get out of the ground, suppose that instead of leaving 1 quart behind, they leave 1 pint -- and then the next year they leave only 1/2 pint? also, what if they figure out (as they are already doing) how to get more oil out of fields that have already been deemed "uneconomical."
this kind of thing can easily push the "peak" time far into the future. On 9/8/07, Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What you say will not affect my point. Plot the level extraction over time, > even if > 1/4 of a gallon is left untouched. There will necessarily be some peak point > in > time. Admittedly, if the peak is less than 1/4 gallon, it is possible that > one > final rush of extraction of the last remaining 1/4 gallon in a single period > could > create a new future peak, but in any case, a peak is a certainty (although 2 > or more > periods) could be in a tie as peak periods). > > On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 03:18:01PM -0700, Jim Devine wrote: > > On 9/8/07, Michael Perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Assume, for the sake of argument that you know the total quantity > > > available -- let's > > > say it's a gallon. Each period you remove some until you reach some > > > point where it > > > is uneconomical to continue. At some point, you reach a peak. Of > > > course, it is > > > probable that the decline will not be monotonic, but the peak will remain > > > the peak. > > > > what if the amount you take out gets smaller and smaller over time, as > > the price rises? that is, as it slowly becomes "uneconomical" to take > > oil out of this fixed pool, people find substitutes for oil and figure > > out how to use oil more efficiently (driving Priuses, etc.) With > > increases in efficiency, the pool of oil may be constant or shrink, > > but the effective benefit received can increase. > > > > the issue about the meaning of inevitability is crucial. Sure, the > > collapse of capitalism is "inevitable," since the system is > > anti-human. It will kill either itself or humanity. If the latter > > goes, so does capitalism. QED. > > > > However, there are _counteracting forces_ which should always be > > remembered. Abstract tendencies can be expressed very differently in > > practice. > > -- > > Jim Devine / "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not > > an act, but a habit." -- Aristotle. > > -- > Michael Perelman > Economics Department > California State University > Chico, CA 95929 > > Tel. 530-898-5321 > E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu > michaelperelman.wordpress.com > -- Jim Devine / "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." -- Aristotle.
