the frack thread

[another_exlurker]

I was just trying to see if we had a "Ralph from accounts" and apparently we do.

[RenewableCandy]

I don't recall saying anything at all about the free market.

Those curves presuppose a free market.

[Ralph]

I don't recall saying anything at all about the free market.

Those curves presuppose a free market.

More learning. Less ridiculous backup of Steve just because his story fits groupthink.

Functioning cost and supply curves presuppose work a COMPETITIVE market.

A competitive market is one in which a large numbers of producers compete with each other to satisfy the wants and needs of a large number of consumers. In a competitive market no single producer, or group of producers, and no single consumer, or group of consumers, can dictate how the market operates. Nor can they individually determine the price of goods and services, and how much will be exchanged. Competitive markets will form under certain conditions.

There is no such thing on this planet, at the scale of a country that I am aware of, of a FREE market. Steve has been defending a straw man, and now you are encouraging him. More learning, less straw men.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

A free market is a market economy in which the forces of supply and demand are free of intervention by a government, price-setting monopolies, or other authority.

How many years of training has it taken you to imitate someone some thoroughly unknowledgeable of such things?

[emordnilap]

What on earth?

the province wants to inundate a valley in British Columbia to generate hydroelectricity so it can process fracked natural gas to send overseas to help keep the lights on in Tokyo and Seoul.

Worthy of the yanks:

So eager is BC’s government to construct the $8 billion, taxpayer-funded dam that it has exempted the project from oversight by the British Columbia Utilities Commission, a regulatory agency that shot down previous attempts to construct the dam.

[RenewableCandy]

more condescending twaddle

which completely misses the point that Steve (or anyone else) was trying to make. Let's try and look at this from a human perspective shall we little machine, because you might learn something (see, 2 can play etc):
1. in a free, or indeed competitive, market, i.e. one in which "the law of supply and demand" is allowed to run (note the word "allowed"), stuff tends to become more costly as is becomes more scarce.
2. this leads to (among other things) demand destruction.
3. at this point, conventional economics has described all it has to.
4. however, for the various necessary products/services which are discussed here on ps, those who, for whatever reason, can neither buy, nor find an alternative, do not simply vanish, or go and do something else. They have a problem, do they not?

It is this problem, and its various possible solutions, which ps seeks to address. Part of the solution may in fact involve rationing, or otherwise deliberately changing, those curves, for humanitarian reasons_oh dear, I've lost you, haven't I? I said human...

[vtsnowedin]

more condescending twaddle

which completely misses the point that Steve (or anyone else) was trying to make. Let's try and look at this from a human perspective shall we little machine, because you might learn something (see, 2 can play etc):
1. in a free, or indeed competitive, market, i.e. one in which "the law of supply and demand" is allowed to run (note the word "allowed"), stuff tends to become more costly as is becomes more scarce.
2. this leads to (among other things) demand destruction.
3. at this point, conventional economics has described all it has to.
4. however, for the various necessary products/services which are discussed here on ps, those who, for whatever reason, can neither buy, nor find an alternative, do not simply vanish, or go and do something else. They have a problem, do they not?

It is this problem, and its various possible solutions, which ps seeks to address. Part of the solution may in fact involve rationing, or otherwise deliberately changing, those curves, for humanitarian reasons_oh dear, I've lost you, haven't I? I said human...

Well said RC.

[PS_RalphW]

Well balanced piece from the BBC (for a change).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26735000

[Ralph]

4. however, for the various necessary products/services which are discussed here on ps, those who, for whatever reason, can neither buy, nor find an alternative, do not simply vanish, or go and do something else. They have a problem, do they not?

Of course. Fortunately, peak oil is not about running out, nor the alternatives running out. The price response to a lessening of supply (post peak) is certainly within the realm of economic theory, and has arguably been going on since the early70's when the US could no longer be the swing producer. Turns out this reality is a much more critical item related to price than the "running out" of easy oil, which goes back 70+ years earlier than that.

It is this problem, and its various possible solutions, which ps seeks to address.

Oh…so ps itself is addressing scarcity issues? It would seem to me that the forum members themselves are, or are not, addressing such issues. Some by using wind fired electricity to post, others by using "built from fossil fuel" computers on which to post, and undoubtedly no one here owns a car, or uses public transport run by these scarce liquid fuels, and so on and so forth?

Or do you mean more that ps folks talk about all the ways OTHER people, if they would just think and act like ps folks, could make the world a different place? An idea just as rooted in the fascism of the past as it is in the eco-movements of the present?

Part of the solution may in fact involve rationing, or otherwise deliberately changing, those curves, for humanitarian reasons_oh dear, I've lost you, haven't I? I said human...

Some here have arguing that rationing is taking place, through the mechanism of price. Seems like as good a method as any, particularly when solutions are, in some places, already happening. Certainly taking advantage of fossil fuel abundance and the disparity in value of BTUs is not going to go away anytime soon, and businesses are usually the first to notice price differentials, and act.

Like my local delivery man, for instance.

[PS_RalphW]

http://peakoilbarrel.com/wp-content/upl ... 3/ngs3.gif

[Ralph]

http://peakoilbarrel.com/wp-content/upl ... 3/ngs3.gif

Right! And isn't it wonderful that in the US, where we allow development of natural resources, storage levels can be replenished? Hell, we managed to completely disprove Hubbert's life work (to those who don't understand his accomplishments anyway) with nothing but the application of a little, DRILL BABY DRILL!!

Oh goodness!! I recommend everyone live in such a proactive place!! Then it might not be so necessary to sit around lamenting what might have been, or the compromises forced onto a people for lack of choosing to even TRY.

[PS_RalphW]

Let's see where that storage level is nine months from now. We appear to be entering an el nino year, which often drives up US air conditioning demand, and hence ng demand, just as you plan to export it as lng , and use more for fertilizer for corn ethanol, and more for transport as cng, even as the demand for drilling rigs for oil shale wells knows no bounds, and ng exports from Canada are falling as they struggle to meet their own demand, both for domestic heating/cooling in the extreme weather, and to power tar sand extraction, which requires ever more energy to melt out of the ground.

That makes at least six more uses for each mcm of methane. Most of them simply to keep up the extraction of of other fossil fuels.

[Ralph]

Let's see where that storage level is nine months from now.

Absolutely. But better yet, lets see what that future storage level generates in terms of PRICE. Price being the driver for development obviously. Those crazy economists have that one clocked.

That makes at least six more uses for each mcm of methane. Most of them simply to keep up the extraction of of other fossil fuels.

Good thing that methane is about as plentiful a fossil fuel as exists. To think it is so plentiful that it is just flared at the well site in North Dakota is near criminal. And ironic that some countries don't even want the stuff developed.

It would be reasonable to project, however, that just as the US built the TransAlaskan pipeline under the peak oil pressures of the 70's to develop last resources, that sooner or later the pressure of the citizens for some energy price relief, or less dependency on Russia, will generate development back in the EU.

If there is one surety in the world, it is that things change. Tell enough citizens that "no, you can't have less expensive energy right under your very feet because we, your Lords and Masters say you can't have it" and I'm guessing the citizens will find themselves some new lords and masters.

[PS_RalphW]

Crow, your logic is truely desperate. Six uses for every molecule of gas drilled. At least two of them for oil substitutes, yet fracking for gas needs large quantities of oil, and increasing production will need a dramatic increase in rigs, but they are all tied up drilling for oil... So far more physical resources and manpower will need to diverted to building more rigs, imports are falling, decline rates are rising as ever higher percentage us ng production comes from shale, so you have to drill more gas each year just to stand still, but the sweet spots are becoming harder to find, and in two years you have gone from glut to record low storage as a percentage of demand. Prices have risen sharply already, but production has almost levelled off.

Declining energy return on investment is the primary requirement for collapse.

[RenewableCandy]

And it's forgotten about poor people again

The price response to a lessening of supply (post peak) is certainly within the realm of economic theory

but would create a problem for those unable to afford it, or an alternative.

To take a (rather extreme) analogy, supposing I were from the USA. I'd get out my gun and shoot Ralph. While the effect on the wiring would not contravene the laws of Physics (sooo...no problem!) it might prevent the present level of functioning. Which might be percieved, by Ralph, as a problem.

(this post brought to you by 10% wind-fired electricity and we're working on the other 90% )

[Ralph]

Crow, your logic is truely desperate.

Well, characterize it how you'd like, but when it lines up with reality, hey…whatever works?

Declining energy return on investment is the primary requirement for collapse.

Oh. Gee. I'm amazed I didn't think of recycling Duncan's Olduvai Gorge argument with such certainty. Particularly seeing as how it didn't work in 2008 as claimed. Who would have thunk it. Didn't you mention that you have a top notch education? How about a novel idea…USE some of it.