PowerSwitch

See my blog entry - it links to Hansard etc.

http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2008/10 ... k-oil.html

Rather a depressing response from the Prime Minister.

johnhemming wrote:See my blog entry - it links to Hansard etc.

http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2008/10 ... k-oil.html

Rather a depressing response from the Prime Minister.

Out of interest, what would you have had him say John? I can't imagine what my response would have been had I been in his position and been asked the same question! Perhaps something along the lines of;

"Oh. Difficult question. Yes, there isn't enought oil in the world, which means we get to look forward to a long and protracted contraction of the world global economy. This realisation may indeed be the reason why credit markets the world over have dried up. This is why we are nationalising the banks as quickly as we can, because we can then manage the deflation of the monetary economy with as little pain as possible. Banks could not do it, as there will be no profit in lending in the future. Interest rates may well have to drop to zero, and be given not on the basis of potential profit, but on the basis of social good. Only a goverment run bank can manage this deflation. We can borrow from future tax payers, and prop the banks up while they recall loans and deflate our money supply. We will all be made poorer by the goverment debt of the future, and this way we can devalue our currency and stimulate UK supply of UK goods, which is exactly what we need to do to protect ourselves from the implosion of the global transport network. We hope nuclear will be a stop gap, and we will have to build as many renewables as we can, but really the watchword of the next century will be less. Vote for me, I can manage this mess. "

I'd vote for that

'A constantly rising supply of oil'. This is what the prime minister of a fairly important nation believes is possible, let alone necessary, for millions of peoples' futures.

Who the hell advises this guy? Is blind stupidity really a qualification, an asset?

Just because he says it, doesn't mean he belives it will happen.

All politicians are terrified of saying "less". Look what happened to Carter.

SunnyJim wrote:Just because he says it, doesn't mean he belives it will happen.

All politicians are terrified of saying "less". Look what happened to Carter.

Quite. People choose to believe that politicians are knaves or fools depending on whether they want to vaunt their own integrity or wisdom.

It's the "anti-conspiracy theory" theory again: the idea that everything is chaos, no one in charge knows anything, and the only people with a clue are those who sit on their arses watching TV.

Brown knows the truth, just as Bush and Cheney know the truth.

Reminds me of a Lyn Jenkins rant, despite anything one says, he'l retort, "Demand must be met".

emordnilap wrote:Who the hell advises this guy?

DBERR advise him and they actually believe what Grasping Gordon said. They think there is oil for many years to come. They also believe that houses are currently being built are well insulated.

But then they are economists. And what do they know?

Is blind stupidity really a qualification, an asset?

If it's in the form of an Economics degree from Cambridge, then yes.

LOL Ken.

*ankers and economicks have sunk right to the bottom of my list of respected professions....... I mean at least estate agents actually sell something......

back on topic, I note GB said,

"we must ensure that the demand for oil is met by supply, otherwise the price will go up again."

well he is right about the second part of the sentence, but as for the first part, all I can say in response is that, I demand that I can breathe under water. Nope, I 've tried it and you just can't do it!

Radio 4 Today Programme today, Nick Clegg saying the vital thing was growth.

Somebody tell him about finite planets and growth ultimately only possible as a function of technological efficiency gains.

Perhaps John Hemming can get his ear!!! In fact John perhaps we should get a bunch of us powerswitchers together with you, Nick Clegg and one or two other MP's from the LibDem's, how about it?

Neil

Neily at the peak wrote:Perhaps John Hemming can get his ear!!! In fact John perhaps we should get a bunch of us powerswitchers together with you, Nick Clegg and one or two other MP's from the LibDem's, how about it?

Neil

It's called APPGOPO, Neil, the All Party Parliamentary Group On Peak Oil and meets about once a month in a committee room in Westminster, although you can't rely on Nick Clegg, or any other MP arriving. You can get an invitation from, John Hemming's researcher, Neil Endicott at endicottn@parliament.uk.

Not surprised at all. We know that government cannot directly say we are facing declining global oil supplies because:
(a) It would shock the markets, bringing on long recession
(b) They would be labelled doom-mongers and criticised for not having faith in technology and innovation (see Jimmy Carter)
(c) Governments tend to be reactive to situations - can't assume global oil supplies are declining, or will decline, until they actually are. And even if supplies decline, it isn't a problem if demand declines. Which recessions are very good at doing.

Not defending government, it is just how it probably is. I imagine once public and, more importantly, business opinion demands that 'something must be done', then government policy will shift.

Interesting, this report suggests the general global public do this we have a long term oil crisis on our hands...

World Public Opinion[/list]

johnhemming wrote:See my blog entry - it links to Hansard etc.

http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2008/10 ... k-oil.html

Rather a depressing response from the Prime Minister.

John, I note that your question opened with the statement

The recent high prices and volatility in the price of oil is symptomatic of geological constraints on supply—also known as peak oil and gas.

May we know to what you attribute the recent falls in the price of oil?

Also, if I might say so you are being a bit harsh in not also drawing Powerswitchers' attention to the rather better stab at the same subject made by the PM earlier in the same debate:

We need an energy strategy that deals with the price volatility and high price of oil. That means that we need to diversify out of oil and not be wholly dependent on it. That means, for those people who will not face up to this, that they must confront the issue of nuclear power—16 European Union countries have done that—and the issue of how we can get affordable renewables. We must also look at how the car is powered, so that we can have savings in the oil that is used by cars as well. We will need to have an arrangement between consumers and producers so that we can deal with the continuing volatility of the oil price, and I would have thought that this is now the time for all-party agreement on that as well.

kenneal wrote:

emordnilap wrote:Who the hell advises this guy?

DBERR advise him and they actually believe what Grasping Gordon said. They think there is oil for many years to come.

Not clear whom Gordon meant by "we" when he said we need a rising supply of oil; the UK's oil demand is actually pretty flat and expected to remain so. Global oil demand is however expected (by the International Energy Agency) to rise over the next couple of decades; they also state that proven reserves are already larger than the cumulative production needed to meet that demand until at least 2030. Nobody's saying it's going to be cheap or easy to get at, but it's definitely there.