Peak Oil

[postie]

........ and when driving use a very fuel efficient car.

I'm guessing that if an average American was to drive a fuel efficient car that's exactly the same as a European model, the fuel consumption would still be more. Simply as they have to haul around not only their own fat arse, but also their family of fat arses.. which I'm guessing wouldn't even fit in a normal sized car. However, on the plus side, if they turned off their air-con, then they might sweat some of that lard off.

[Vortex]

True love in America.

A couple with his-and-hers scooters as used by many of the obese in the USA.

[JohnB]

True love in America.

A couple with his-and-hers scooters as used by many of the obese in the USA.

They wouldn't fit in the aisles in some British supermarkets!

[lilsmiley]

Is the answer to 'peak oil' really to inflate prices?
Will we really stop using oil, which many of us cannot live without as it seems like a necessity, even if there is an extortionate price of oil?

I'm not sure whether that inflating the prices of oil is really the answer but they seem to be doing it in hope that everyone will stop buying oil and that it will last longer but realistically that isn't going to happen.
Everyone seems to need oil in some shape or form whether it is to heat their home or to make the products that we need.
If the running out of oil is inevitable then why postpone it?

[Tawney]

If the running out of oil is inevitable then why postpone it?

Turkeys don't usually opt for an early Christmas.

[postie]

I'm not sure whether that inflating the prices of oil is really the answer but they seem to be doing it in hope that everyone will stop buying oil and that it will last longer but realistically that isn't going to happen.
Everyone seems to need oil in some shape or form whether it is to heat their home or to make the products that we need.
If the running out of oil is inevitable then why postpone it?

Firstly, they're not upping the price of oil in the hope people will stop buying so much of it. In a capitalist society, they're upping the price of oil because of scarcity value.

Imagine if diamonds were 20p a bag... and suddenly there were less diamonds to buy generally... the price for those who wanted diamonds.. would rise. It's apparently.. the market.
Same for wheat.. or sugar.. or mops.

Scarcity increases the cost. Especially with oil. Diamonds last a long time, once oil is burned, it's pretty much gone as a useful thing.

Why postpone it? We can't. We will use oil until it rises above our price range. Perhaps even below our price range.. cos you've got to consider that those making the wheat,sugar and mops might not be able to make those things, economically for them, if oil goes above a certain price. Then we wont see the wheat, sugar or mops being made for us to buy.

But that's just my POV.

[frank_begbie]

I'm not sure whether that inflating the prices of oil is really the answer but they seem to be doing it in hope that everyone will stop buying oil and that it will last longer but realistically that isn't going to happen.
Everyone seems to need oil in some shape or form whether it is to heat their home or to make the products that we need.
If the running out of oil is inevitable then why postpone it?

Firstly, they're not upping the price of oil in the hope people will stop buying so much of it. In a capitalist society, they're upping the price of oil because of scarcity value.

Imagine if diamonds were 20p a bag... and suddenly there were less diamonds to buy generally... the price for those who wanted diamonds.. would rise. It's apparently.. the market.
Same for wheat.. or sugar.. or mops.

Scarcity increases the cost. Especially with oil. Diamonds last a long time, once oil is burned, it's pretty much gone as a useful thing.

Why postpone it? We can't. We will use oil until it rises above our price range. Perhaps even below our price range.. cos you've got to consider that those making the wheat,sugar and mops might not be able to make those things, economically for them, if oil goes above a certain price. Then we wont see the wheat, sugar or mops being made for us to buy.

But that's just my POV.

But doesn't the price of oil have to rise, otherwise the oil tar and oil shale are not economic to extract?

Its a kind of vicious circle.

[postie]

I'm not sure whether that inflating the prices of oil is really the answer but they seem to be doing it in hope that everyone will stop buying oil and that it will last longer but realistically that isn't going to happen.
Everyone seems to need oil in some shape or form whether it is to heat their home or to make the products that we need.
If the running out of oil is inevitable then why postpone it?

Firstly, they're not upping the price of oil in the hope people will stop buying so much of it. In a capitalist society, they're upping the price of oil because of scarcity value.

Imagine if diamonds were 20p a bag... and suddenly there were less diamonds to buy generally... the price for those who wanted diamonds.. would rise. It's apparently.. the market.
Same for wheat.. or sugar.. or mops.

Scarcity increases the cost. Especially with oil. Diamonds last a long time, once oil is burned, it's pretty much gone as a useful thing.

Why postpone it? We can't. We will use oil until it rises above our price range. Perhaps even below our price range.. cos you've got to consider that those making the wheat,sugar and mops might not be able to make those things, economically for them, if oil goes above a certain price. Then we wont see the wheat, sugar or mops being made for us to buy.

But that's just my POV.

But doesn't the price of oil have to rise, otherwise the oil tar and oil shale are not economic to extract?

Its a kind of vicious circle.

I was saying oil prices will rise as it becomes scarcer.. as with any product.

I dunno about shale... but yeah... if you have a product that can only be economically viable at a certain price range, then if the price for that goes up.. it's closer to being economically viable. (but can the workers at the shale plant still drive to work on cheap petrol.. or have food delivered to a hyper market which they can afford...?)

EDIT - economically viable at that inflated price range....it wouldn't drop the cost of oil.

[woodburner]

True love in America.

A couple with his-and-hers scooters as used by many of the obese in the USA.

There's the solution to PO, render them down for lard

[Eternal Sunshine]

True love in America.

A couple with his-and-hers scooters as used by many of the obese in the USA.

Vortex, you're restoring my faith in humanity....

[frank_begbie]

Firstly, they're not upping the price of oil in the hope people will stop buying so much of it. In a capitalist society, they're upping the price of oil because of scarcity value.

Imagine if diamonds were 20p a bag... and suddenly there were less diamonds to buy generally... the price for those who wanted diamonds.. would rise. It's apparently.. the market.
Same for wheat.. or sugar.. or mops.

Scarcity increases the cost. Especially with oil. Diamonds last a long time, once oil is burned, it's pretty much gone as a useful thing.

Why postpone it? We can't. We will use oil until it rises above our price range. Perhaps even below our price range.. cos you've got to consider that those making the wheat,sugar and mops might not be able to make those things, economically for them, if oil goes above a certain price. Then we wont see the wheat, sugar or mops being made for us to buy.

But that's just my POV.

But doesn't the price of oil have to rise, otherwise the oil tar and oil shale are not economic to extract?

Its a kind of vicious circle.

I was saying oil prices will rise as it becomes scarcer.. as with any product.

I dunno about shale... but yeah... if you have a product that can only be economically viable at a certain price range, then if the price for that goes up.. it's closer to being economically viable. (but can the workers at the shale plant still drive to work on cheap petrol.. or have food delivered to a hyper market which they can afford...?)

EDIT - economically viable at that inflated price range....it wouldn't drop the cost of oil.

Yeah, that's what I meant by a vicious circle.

I just don't see how it can work if oil has to be $300 per barrel.
We'd all have to be on massive wages to be able to afford it, and that's the opposite of what we want.
Its a mad situation.

[6ft2britishmale]

A low consumption of oil paired with alternative energy resources could work, but for an outright replacement of oil, alternative energy resources will simply not be enough.
Considering the fact that the remaining oil is harder to reach and in turn will require more oil to obtain, things are looking grim.

[emordnilap]

A low consumption of oil paired with alternative energy resources could work, but for an outright replacement of oil, alternative energy resources will simply not be enough.

This seems to be a common view on here, one I share.

One of the ideas posted is for the world to consume no more than half available oil in any one year; then there'll always be some!

My own view is that fossil fuels should be 'invested' in resilient systems to capture the solar energy falling on the earth each day and tailor our usage to that 'current' energy alone.

[Vortex]

But doesn't the price of oil have to rise, otherwise the oil tar and oil shale are not economic to extract?

Its a kind of vicious circle.

Viscous circle?

[Catweazle]

But doesn't the price of oil have to rise, otherwise the oil tar and oil shale are not economic to extract?

Its a kind of vicious circle.

Viscous circle?