Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Improbable bell curve

Login or register to post comments Last Post 24664 reads   54 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 54 total)
  • Sat, Jul 02, 2011 - 11:22am

    #21
    Marius Mollersen

    Marius Mollersen

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 16 2011

    Posts: 25

    count placeholder

    I have completed the crash

I have completed the crash course, and I have read other supports for “global peak oil”, including this thread, but I find it totally unconvincing.

 

  • Sat, Jul 02, 2011 - 12:12pm

    #22

    Aaron M

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 22 2008

    Posts: 790

    count placeholder

    Cool

Then there isn’t much more for you here.

Cheers,

Aaron

  • Sat, Jul 02, 2011 - 12:43pm

    #23

    Dogs_In_A_Pile

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 04 2009

    Posts: 810

    count placeholder

    Just Curious

[quote=mariusm98]

I have completed the crash course, and I have read other supports for “global peak oil”, including this thread, but I find it totally unconvincing.

[/quote]

What specifically do you contest and on what evidence or data are you forming the counter opinion?

Looking back over the thread, you never really answered the questions about EROEI, but instead denominated oil extraction/production in terms of money.  You do realize that the EROEI curves strip out the dollar cost of extraction?  Or are you saying that we are counting on as yet undeveloped or unproven technologies to restore the previous EREOI margins?

We’d much rather see the evidence of this technological improvement rather than your hope and assurance that some new technology will save us.

Look what happened the last time a bunch of chowderheads signed up for “Hope and Change”….

  • Sat, Jul 02, 2011 - 01:24pm

    #24

    SagerXX

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 11 2009

    Posts: 394

    count placeholder

    mariusm98 wrote:I have

[quote=mariusm98]

I have completed the crash course, and I have read other supports for “global peak oil”, including this thread, but I find it totally unconvincing.

[/quote]

Then I guess you, your McMansion, and your Lincoln Navigator will live happily ever after.  

Good luck — Sager

  • Sat, Jul 02, 2011 - 07:19pm

    #25
    ewilkerson

    ewilkerson

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 18 2010

    Posts: 213

    count placeholder

    Then I guess you need to

Then I guess you need to reasearch some of the people on YouTube such as Matt Simmons, Colin Campbell, etc.  There is a great lecture by Tim Hudson which is about 45 minutes, but he does it in a style I think might be suitable for you.  It was interesting for me to watch.

  • Sun, Jul 03, 2011 - 06:50pm

    #26
    ewilkerson

    ewilkerson

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 18 2010

    Posts: 213

    count placeholder

    This ASPO aricle is a few

This ASPO aricle is a few years old, but does an excellent job of explaining the situation we’re in.  It is a former engineer from Saudi ARAMCO.

  • Sun, Jul 03, 2011 - 09:20pm

    #27
    Marius Mollersen

    Marius Mollersen

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 16 2011

    Posts: 25

    count placeholder

    Dogs_In_A_Pile wrote:What

[quote=Dogs_In_A_Pile]

What specifically do you contest and on what evidence or data are you forming the counter opinion?

Looking back over the thread, you never really answered the questions about EROEI, but instead denominated oil extraction/production in terms of money.  You do realize that the EROEI curves strip out the dollar cost of extraction?  Or are you saying that we are counting on as yet undeveloped or unproven technologies to restore the previous EREOI margins?

[/quote]

I am forming my counter opinion on lack of evidence. The bell curve and our being near its top is possible, but so is another peak later on, or virtually any other variation of the supply curve. The bell curve makes all possible sense with little or no technological progress. Oherwise not.

As for the “EROEI” I find it rather on the side of the bell curve. It is indeed an interesting phenomenon that some oil (or other energy supply) takes a lot of energy to render it usable for the modern society, but we might as well coin this in currency. If a barrell of oil sells at 100 dollars, there is no (commercial) point in extracting it if the cost is higher than that. On the other hand distribution of oil must have become increasingly cheaper (or more energy efficient) over the last century, which should counter for at least some of the rise in extraction cost.

We are indeed counting on undeveloped or unproven technologies for numerous future challenges, so why not oil extraction? It is a fact that wells are being drilled at ever greater depths. It is totally unlikely that this trend does not continue, and that the technology does not get cheaper once it proliferates.

 

  • Sun, Jul 03, 2011 - 09:51pm

    #28

    Dogs_In_A_Pile

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 04 2009

    Posts: 810

    count placeholder

    The old known unknowns slant…..

[quote=mariusm98]

[quote=Dogs_In_A_Pile]

What specifically do you contest and on what evidence or data are you forming the counter opinion?

Looking back over the thread, you never really answered the questions about EROEI, but instead denominated oil extraction/production in terms of money.  You do realize that the EROEI curves strip out the dollar cost of extraction?  Or are you saying that we are counting on as yet undeveloped or unproven technologies to restore the previous EREOI margins?

[/quote]

I am forming my counter opinion on lack of evidence. The bell curve and our being near its top is possible, but so is another peak later on, or virtually any other variation of the supply curve. The bell curve makes all possible sense with little or no technological progress. Oherwise not.

As for the “EROEI” I find it rather on the side of the bell curve. It is indeed an interesting phenomenon that some oil (or other energy supply) takes a lot of energy to render it usable for the modern society, but we might as well coin this in currency. If a barrell of oil sells at 100 dollars, there is no (commercial) point in extracting it if the cost is higher than that. On the other hand distribution of oil must have become increasingly cheaper (or more energy efficient) over the last century, which should counter for at least some of the rise in extraction cost.

We are indeed counting on undeveloped or unproven technologies for numerous future challenges, so why not oil extraction? It is a fact that wells are being drilled at ever greater depths. It is totally unlikely that this trend does not continue, and that the technology does not get cheaper once it proliferates.

 

[/quote]

So to paraphrase your answer concisely – you are hoping that as yet undiscovered technology will ride up on a white stallion and save us?  To much time in a Hopium den in Bombay I think.

I just don’t know what to say about the “absence of proof is proof of absence” argument. 

It only works until it doesn’t.

  • Sun, Jul 03, 2011 - 09:56pm

    #29

    Aaron M

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 22 2008

    Posts: 790

    count placeholder

    Lack of Evidence

Dude – you realize that “Lack of Evidence” denotes that you hold some special authority to dismiss issues based on your infallible knowledge, right?

What exactly is this special knowledge?
That you “find it rather” uncompelling? If that’s the case, and you can present no evidence to counter the literal mounds of evidence being presented here – go troll elsewhere! Simple!

If you *do not* possess some special knowledge – which you should promptly impart, if you do – you need to rebut Dr. Martensons Positions with evidence. Imagine that! You can do this (as was done in the Crash Course) with reputable, credible sources and information. Not your hunches, not your inclination, not because “meh, you’re just not convinced”.

If that’s the case – please, please, please – spend your valuable time elsewhere so we can continue to discuss important issues.
I, for one, would *love* to see a strong case against peak oil. If you have one, bring it on and we’ll discuss.

If not, stop trolling for attention here.

Cheers,

Aaron 

  • Mon, Jul 04, 2011 - 12:37am

    #30
    ewilkerson

    ewilkerson

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 18 2010

    Posts: 213

    count placeholder

    mariusm98,  Please go argue

mariusm98,  Please go argue with yourself in the mirror or fill your Mercedes.  I was told by a wise man once, “Who is more ignorant?  The person who will never understand, or the person who continues to try to educate them?”  I had to find a polite way to put that.

Ernest

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 54 total)

Login or Register to post comments