Please stop this!
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:53:24AM -0400, sartesian wrote: > I hardly know where to begin, given the amount of misinformation, and > misconstruction of facts and theories in your post, but........ > > 1. Super-giant fields explored. This is unknown. There are those in > the industry who argue that only the surface super-giants have been > explored. Western Iraq may hold reserves equal to all currently known > reserves in Iraq. Then again it may not. > > But either way-- the supposed negative correlation of field sizes and > dates of discovery is another of the peak oil mis-theories. > > 2. "My solution" is precisely not to "throw money," mostly because > there is no evidence that peak oil is a problem, that peak oil is > driving any single aspect of capitalist activity. The invasion of Iraq, > and the planned invasion of Iran, had and have absolutely nothing to do > with declining supplies. Rather, the invasion, like the OPEC price run > ups, have everything to do with declining rates of return and > overproduction of oil, where the ease and reduced cost of production > caused the price collapse of 1998. Since then, it's all been about the > petroleum majors aggrandizing more profit. Check the portion of total > profits reported by S&P 500 that is actually claimed by the petroleum > companies. > > 3. As far as devaluing our currency and everyone getting bailed out with > valueless dollar-- first, it's not my currency, and I couldn't give a > rat's ass if and when it gets devalued, overvalued, undervalued, and or > goes to zero. But as far as this mythology of the US valueless > dollars, and its fiat money, and its now looming weakness in the face of > BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and why not Japan, another big > holder of US currency instruments?)-- that's just that, a mythology. > > People should look at Bernake's address in 2005 about the global savings > gluts-- and keep in mind that since 2001, US industries, US producers, > have spent far less of their earnings on investment and capital > expansion, than they have retained to their own accounts. The > "unlocking" of US housing equity to finance the "expansion" of the > economy, is based on that fact, as the quickening of US household debt > was financed to replaced US corporate investment, and provide the market > for our now so much "stronger" trading partners. > > The other component of this is the rapid and dramatic swing of the US > govt accounts from surplus to deficit-- a swing of some 7% of GNP in > about 2 years, as once again, reduced taxes and expanded military > spending put the retainer in retained earnings. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "The Buffalo In Da' Midst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 9:46 AM > Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Peak Everything > > > > On 9/8/07, sartesian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How about it? How about this: Reserves, are by definition an > economic > > > category not geological. By definitions reserves are an amount of > oil > > > that can be produced in a specified period of time, using the > currently > > > available technology, and at a profit. > > > > > > You should look it up. > > > > > > The fact that every single peak oil theorist and advocate either > > > ignores, obscures, or is simply unaware of the definition of > reserves > > > tells us all we really need to know about the theory, the theorists, > its > > > inevitability, and where the butter is on the bread. > > > > > > > I'm aware of what reserves are, and the structure of geological > > formations that allow FOR the creation of oil to fill those reserves > > (...all found, with ALL KNOWN super-giant field explored, except > > perhaps the planetary poles) and the difficulty the oil companies are > > going to have replenishing those reserves with increasingly smaller > > geological formations that DON'T replenish either... at least not for > > a loooooooong time. > > > > If your solution is 'throw money into exploration, development & > > recovery', the Iraq (and perhaps soon-to-be Iran) war, and the ongoing > > strife in Nigeria and other parts of Africa are an example of the > > expenditures in cash (almost a half-trillion dollars for Iraq > > currently) & social stability (MEND or some other player will > > eventually destroy the Nigerian government unless the U.S. wants to > > 'Somalia' them at another massive cost of war), then tell me how the > > oil companies would recoup their investment? > > > > Pass it on to the consumer buying increasingly expensive oil into an > > decreasingly valued dollar? > > > > I'm assuming of course that the continuation of wars made blatantly > > for the sole purpose of acquiring oil will devalue our currency and > > cause major sociological disturbances that will disrupt consumption > > patterns as well. > > > > ...or does everyone just get bailed out finally with valueless > dollars? > > > > lcm > > -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
