Let's be clear: Louis Proyect and I are the only list members who can
legitimately claim expertise in oil forecasting. The rest of you are just a
bunch of amateurs.
But that's okay. Louis will continue sharing his wisdom by Lexis-Nexing an
endless stream of well selected journalistic articles,
Julio wrote:
#1 At this point in time, is there an absolute amount of oil in the
depths of our planet, say, the absolute reserve?
Yes, of course. There must be. If we had an infinity ability to
MRI-scan our planet, we would know it for sure.
#2 Is global oil production near, at, or beyond its
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
It's fascinating that the concept of time is missing in all the PEN-l
discussions of oil, except in Tom's postings.
At 6:47 PM -0400 6/1/04, Doug Henwood wrote:
Someday we may run out of oil, but I suspect we'll choke ourselves or
ruin the climate completely before we do.
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
It's fascinating that the concept of time is missing in all the
PEN-l discussions of oil, except in Tom's postings.
At 6:47 PM -0400 6/1/04, Doug Henwood wrote:
Someday we may run out of oil, but I suspect we'll choke ourselves or
ruin the climate completely before we do.
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
At 4:41 PM -0400 6/2/04, Doug Henwood wrote:
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic, not
physical sense - before we choke on the smoke and CO2?
Before is a time-related concept, no?
Doug
Yeah, but saying before we choke on the smoke and CO2 and saying
before
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
At 4:41 PM -0400 6/2/04, Doug Henwood wrote:
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic, not
physical sense - before we choke on the smoke and CO2?
Before is a time-related concept, no?
Doug
Yeah, but saying before we choke on the smoke and CO2 and saying
before
The stone age didn't end because people ran out of rocks (Sheik Yamani)
to
the discussion of Hubbert's peak. His basic point -- or rather, that of
his followers -- is the same as that of David Ricardo Thomas Malthus:
long-term diminishing returns in the supplies of natural resources leads
to increasing misery and/or conflict.
Of course, as with Ricardo Malths
Devine, James wrote:
I don't think that the validity of the bell curve is that important to
the discussion of Hubbert's peak. His basic point -- or rather, that of
his followers -- is the same as that of David Ricardo Thomas Malthus:
long-term diminishing returns in the supplies of natural
to point out that the bell curve
is
not a theory, a fact or a physical law. It is an observed regularity
that
occurs often when looking at large numbers of cases
I don't think that the validity of the bell curve is that important to
the discussion of Hubbert's peak. His basic point
: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 1:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
Authorities have been
increasing their estimates of proven reserves, at least,
until Shell had to reduce
theirs.
On Wed, Jun 02
://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 1:07 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
Authorities have been
Michael Perelman wrote:
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic, not
physical sense - before we choke on the smoke and CO2?
Doug
I don't know. Water might be a bigger bottleneck.
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 04:41:44PM -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
Michael Perelman wrote:
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic, not
physical sense - before we choke
: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 1:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
Jim is obviously correct. When the energy crisis hit in 73,
Dow Chemical realized
that it had not been shutting down its electric sidewalk in
the Summertime. Frozen
food containers were open
On Wednesday, June 2, 2004 at 14:07:19 (-0700) Devine, James writes:
it's interesting that (according to MS SLATE on-line magazine) a
whole bunch of conservatives, including Gary Becker, are endorsing
steep taxes on gasoline in the US, to encourage conservation and
gas-saving technical change,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Bill Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 2:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
On Wednesday, June 2, 2004 at 14:07:19 (-0700) Devine, James writes
Michael Perelman wrote:
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic, not
physical sense - before we choke on the smoke and CO2?
Doug
Higher prices can cause stagflation, before the oil industry invents
new technology to make
Message -
From: Yoshie Furuhashi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
Michael Perelman wrote:
Hasn't been a decade since a major oil discovery has occured?
So do you think we'll run out of oil - in the economic
I am not well versed in Hubbert, but I think that David's characterization might be
inconsistent with H's association with technocracy.
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 07:55:50PM -0700, sartesian wrote:
regarding Hubbert:
It is quite clearly a message of
approaching apocalypse, an absolute,
sartesian wrote:
It is possible to twist and turn and refer to statistical relativism and do
all sorts of things to make Hubbert appear less Hubbertist than he was and
his predictions appear more accurate than they are, but doing that obscures
the kernel of the Hubbertist message-- and that
sartesian wrote:
Which gets us to another point, and the one where industry, ideology, and
cash flow meet: The Hubbertists have created a veritable industry out of
predicting catastrophe.
Which brings me to a question about the politics of this. Mark Jones,
may he rest in peace, was a big fan of
around. The actual work needed to
keep a stable society running is a very small fraction of available
manpower.
Jim Devine wrote,
I don't think that the validity of the bell curve is that important to
the discussion of Hubbert's peak. His basic point -- or rather, that of
his followers
Carrol Cox wrote,
What needs to be debated is the views of those involved in the debate,
not an antiquarian issue about some particular person not involved in
the debate.
Hear! Hear! Thank you for saying it, Carrol.
Tom Walker
604 255 4812
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
sartesian wrote:
It is possible to twist and turn and refer to statistical relativism and
do
all sorts of things to make Hubbert appear less Hubbertist than he was
and
his predictions appear more
Hear hear, my ass. I provided factual counterpoints and specific questions,
try taking your head out of your ass and answering them.
- Original Message -
From: Tom Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hubbert's peak
Carrol Cox wrote,
What needs to be debated is the views of those involved in the debate,
not an antiquarian issue about some particular person not involved in
the debate.
Hear! Hear! Thank you for saying
Doug Henwood wrote:
Which brings me to a question about the politics of this. Mark Jones,
may he rest in peace, was a big fan of Petroconsultants, who are
major catastrophists, right? But aren't the catastrophists in the oil
industry eagerly lobbying for tax breaks and reduced environmental
Ted Winslow wrote:
Like the sadism to which they are closely linked, envy and
insatiable greed are protean. Marx points to them as the
psychological basis of crude communism.
General envy constituting itself as a power is the disguise in
which greed re-establishes itself and satisfies itself,
.)
The View from Hubbert's Peak
Column by Mike Davis, June 2004
Diminishing oil supplies have epochal implications for the world economy.
Angry truckers celebrated this May Day by blocking freeways in Los
Angeles and container terminals in Oakland and Stockton. With diesel
fuel prices in California
Anybody interested in knowing just how flexible and elastic the
speculations about peaks really are would do well to read the original
peakist himself, the petroleum Malthus, M. King Hubbert. Take a look at
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/nehring.pdf and you will read the King
predicting a
sartesian wrote:
Anybody interested in knowing just how flexible and elastic the
speculations about peaks really are would do well to read the original
peakist himself, the petroleum Malthus, M. King Hubbert. Take a look at
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/nehring.pdf and you will read the
sartesian wrote:
Anybody interested in knowing just how flexible and elastic the
speculations about peaks really are would do well to read the original
peakist himself, the petroleum Malthus, M. King Hubbert. Take a look at
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/nehring.pdf and you will read
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, sartesian wrote:
Anybody interested in knowing just how flexible and elastic the
speculations about peaks really are would do well to read the original
peakist himself, the petroleum Malthus, M. King Hubbert. Take a look at
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/nehring.pdf
From the website: http://www.hubbertpeak.com/hubbert/
With Richard Nehring, Hubbert wrote a book World petroleum availability
1980-2000 [pdf, 419k], also available at
http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/byteserv.prl/~ota/disk3/1980/8023/8023.PDF.
[1980]
So it seems the disclaimer does not apply
sartesian wrote:
I believe it is important, essential really, that we not be stampeded
into
supporting, reproducing, endorsing scarcity theorizing for several reasons,
first of which is that there is little data to support the grand theories
of
peak and depletion. Second of which is that scarcity
For Mark:-
positive review of book in New Scientist by Kenneth Deffeyes
http://www.newscientist.com/opinion/opbooks.jsp?id=ns23137
Chris Burford
London
Sam Pawlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
How are they [poor countries as they develop] to pay for it [limiting
environmental damage]? World Bank loans? I try not to assume anything,
but it's safe to say that LDC countries will follow the path of least
resistance (i.e. the cheapest) towards
Rich countries reduce pollution, in part, by exporting it to poor
countries.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 10:44:00AM -0400, Julio Huato wrote:
Sam Pawlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
How are they [poor countries as they develop] to pay for it [limiting
environmental damage]? World Bank loans? I try not
Julio Huato wrote:
IMO, the main obstacle to the development of capitalism in the Third
World is not imperialism.
What is?
Doug
Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Rich countries reduce pollution, in part, by exporting it to poor
countries.
If Third World countries get to grow, they are likely to be in a position to
limit or negotiate this in better terms.
Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Julio Huato wrote:
IMO, the main obstacle to the development of capitalism in the Third
World is not imperialism.
What is?
Doug
To state it in general may not be particularly helpful. But here it goes.
In my opinion, the main obstacle to the development of
This sounds like the articulation of modes of production
approach reviewed back in the late 70's in NLR by Aidan-Foster-Carter.
Another part of what Julio says sounds like to me like the Peruvian
economist touted by Mario Vargas Llosa, and the late Richard
Milhous Nixon, whose name I'm
The New York Times Magazine had a lengthy article about Hernando de Soto on
July 1:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/01/magazine/01DESOTO.html?pagewanted=all
What is especially interesting is that he is apparently catching on in
various places: Aristide in Haiti and Mubarak in Egypt, among
michael pugliese [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This sounds like the articulation of modes of production
approach reviewed back in the late 70's in NLR by Aidan-Foster-Carter.
Another part of what Julio says sounds like to me like the Peruvian
economist touted by Mario Vargas Llosa, and the late Richard
Michael Pugliese [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I knew I should have phrased that differently!
No. It's fair, Michael. And thank you for all the URLs. I have heard of
de Soto before. Louis Proyect already honored me by associating me with
him. But I haven't read him directly. Now I should.
Why should we assume that Third World countries, as they industrialize,
will
not act to limit environmental damage?
How are they to pay for it? World Bank loans? I try not to assume anything,
but it's safe to say that LDC countries will follow the path of least
resistance (i.e. the cheapest)
Jim Devine wrote:
In any event,
people can and do figure out ways to use oil more efficiently each year.
=
In last December's Monthly Review (vol 52, no 7) John Bellamy Foster wrote a
good article resurrecting the Jevons Paradox: Chapter Seven of The Coal
Question was entitled 'Of the
Jim Devine wrote:
In any event,
people can and do figure out ways to use oil more efficiently each year.
=
In last December's Monthly Review (vol 52, no 7) John Bellamy Foster wrote a
good article resurrecting the Jevons Paradox: Chapter Seven of The Coal
Question was entitled 'Of the
Yoshie writes:
In contrast, Mark's framework -- the second law of thermodynamics,
the law of diminishing returns, etc. -- suggests that he thinks that
the problem is not so much capitalism as industrialization that the
solution is deindustrialization under socialism, substituting
Yoshie writes:
You might clarify your political program, then. If not
deindustrialization labor-intensive production under socialism,
what do you think would allow human beings to live with the
constraints that you have us posit? Do you agree with Sweezy
Foster that an energy revolution
Sam Pawlett said:
Ok. I think I've nailed the problem: the energy base of
capitalism is only
sustainable as long as technological change and efficiency improvements
offset the increasing marginal costs associated with exploiting the
declining quality of the resource base,
((
Yoshie
It's not clear to me that we disagree on anything substantive. The
implication that I'm somehow having a go at Lenin is misplaced, because the
point is not how mistaken Lenin was, but how constrained by his
circumstances he was. Those circumstances included civil war and the
unwarranted
Michael Keaney says:
It's not clear to me that we disagree on anything substantive. The
implication that I'm somehow having a go at Lenin is misplaced, because the
point is not how mistaken Lenin was, but how constrained by his
circumstances he was. Those circumstances included civil war and the
I wrote:
in addition, Louis P. has argued (pretty convincingly) that the early
Bolshevik regime was pretty ecologically-minded (especially by the
standards of the day), until the rot set in
says Yoshie:
Many Greens understand the rot in question to be the ideology of
productivism, but I
And
there is much capitalist industry that can, without great disagreement among
socialists, be decommissioned. That pertaining to the military sector would
be a good place to start.
Michael K.
Military spending is 2% of OECD GDP, of which only 1/4 is the
procurement of products that are
The last sentence is unnecessary.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 02:01:30PM -0700, Brad DeLong wrote:
And
there is much capitalist industry that can, without great disagreement among
socialists, be decommissioned. That pertaining to the military sector would
be a good place to start.
Michael K.
I think most people agree with you to the following: 1)there is an impending
global energy shortage that will cause a crisis within capitalism 2) the New
Economy doesn't alter the fact that capitalism is dependent upon
traditional energy sources
. You seem to suggest two somewhat contradictory
Ken Hanly wrote:
I think most people agree with you to the following: 1)there is an impending
global energy shortage that will cause a crisis within capitalism 2) the New
Economy doesn't alter the fact that capitalism is dependent upon
traditional energy sources
I'm not sure I agree with 1);
At 01:19 PM 7/9/01 -0400, you wrote:
But I guess a glass at 50% capacity is always half empty.
pessimist: the glass is half empty.
optimist: the glass is half full.
realist: it's half a glass of water.
surrealist: it's a cow.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 01:19 PM 7/9/01 -0400, you wrote:
But I guess a glass at 50% capacity is always half empty.
pessimist: the glass is half empty.
optimist: the glass is half full.
realist: it's half a glass of water.
surrealist: it's a cow.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/09/01 01:19PM
Ken Hanly wrote:
I think most people agree with you to the following: 1)there is an impending
global energy shortage that will cause a crisis within capitalism 2) the New
Economy doesn't alter the fact that capitalism is dependent upon
traditional energy
: Yet another take on Hubbert's
peak
At 01:19 PM 7/9/01 -0400, you wrote:
But I guess a glass at 50% capacity is always half empty.
pessimist: the glass is half empty.
optimist: the glass is half full.
realist: it's half a glass of water.
surrealist: it's a cow.
Jim Devine
Charles Brown wrote:
CB: Wouldn't it be moving toward more than half empty , hasn't the
half used up been in a little over 100 years, and aren't we using it
up at a much faster rate today than it was being used up 75 to 100
years ago ? So, _if_ it is half empty, wouldn't the other half be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/09/01 03:47PM
Charles Brown wrote:
CB: Wouldn't it be moving toward more than half empty , hasn't the
half used up been in a little over 100 years, and aren't we using it
up at a much faster rate today than it was being used up 75 to 100
years ago ? So, _if_ it is
Mark Jones wrote:
Doug Henwood wrote:
Yeah, except that the glass keeps filling - maybe not at the rate
it's being drained, but discoveries happen all the time, and old
fields give up more oil than was thought possible because of
technological trickery. And, there was that story in the
Charles Brown wrote:
Then when you add in global warming, that adds another jag.
Like I've said many times, that's the real worry. Mark's
petro-malthusianism isn't the main worry by far.
Doug
I'm no geologist (nor do I play one on TV), but it's possible (as Thomas
Gold suggests) that the supply is like the supply of magma under the
ground. It would go away _very_ slowly as the earth cools. In any event,
people can and do figure out ways to use oil more efficiently each year.
Wall
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/09/01 04:15PM
Charles Brown wrote:
Then when you add in global warming, that adds another jag.
Like I've said many times, that's the real worry. Mark's
petro-malthusianism isn't the main worry by far.
CB: Perhaps .
In a table turning way,
]
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 6:44 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:14869] : Yet another take on Hubbert's peak
Today, in terms of both entropy and accumulation, the indicators are all
set
the opposite way. The great hoped-for innovations like fusion energy,
the
Internet etc, haven't panned out. Meanwhile
Message -
From: Mark Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2001 3:20 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:14806] RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Yet another take on Hubbert's
peak
Ken Hanly:
Of course I forgot. References you supply demolish the idea that tar
sands
,or anything else I
Ken Hanly:
Have we any examples from the past of people making 100 year predictions
re
energy? Are any near the mark? Were they mostly too optimistic or
pessimistic?
Yeah, well I think Jevons predicted the end of coal. But more to the point,
it's time to move beyond 'the boy who cried wolf
Sam Pawlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
At best, costlier energy means that less developed countries will not be
able
to industrialize the way the North has: through cheap energy. The only way
will be for the North to decrease consumption. Because of acute capital
shortage, countries of the South will
http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7121.html
Hubbert's Peak:
The Impending World Oil Shortage
Kenneth S. Deffeyes
Cloth | October 2001 | $24.95 / £16.50
285 pp. | 6 x 9 | 25 halftones, 50 line illus.
Shopping Cart
Endorsements
Were the energy concerns of the past year a preview of everyone's
Tar sands as a source of oil will remain fantasy? Already just the mining of
the Alberta sands produces over 15 percent of Canadas oil. See the chart at
as well: As conventional production declines, tar sands production is
rapidly expanding. In situ extraction is being used NOW as well as
. How then is it that production is
increasing?
Cheers, Ken Hanly
- Original Message -
From: Mark Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 6:55 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:14799] RE: Re: RE: Yet another take on Hubbert's peak
Ken, only today I sent you offlist
76 matches
Mail list logo
