<Spitzer Promotes Clean Energy, Minus EthanolThe Oil DrumSaudi Arabia's Reserve "Depletion Rates" provide Strong Evidence to Support Total Reserves of 175 Gb with only 65 Gb Remaining>
<DrumBeat: April 18, 2007DrumBeatDrumBeat: April 21, 2007>

150 comments on DrumBeat: April 20, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

DrChaos on April 20, 2007 - 9:36am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I have access to that article and will give you the gist:

Worst case scenario - peak in 2020
Best case scenario - peak after 2040

This is based on canvassing opinions of 75 experts at a meeting of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.

Key Quote: "The peak in world oil production is not imminent," oil information analyst Richard Nehring of Nehring Associates in Colorado Springs, Colorado, said at the meeting, but it is "nevertheless foreseeable."

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
b3NDZ3La on April 20, 2007 - 9:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hubbert doesn't count. Deffeyes doesn't count. Jeffrey Brown doesn't count. Bakhtiari doesn't count. Albert Bartlett doesn't count. Khebab doesn't count. Craig Hatfield doesn't count. Matt Simmons doesn't count.

None of the pseudo"experts" who have been following this situation from as early as 1956 counts. [to be considered an "expert" you must have been at the AAPG metting]

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
pvilleblue on April 20, 2007 - 9:50am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Nothing to see here, move along...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Noizette on April 20, 2007 - 10:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

‘Mainstream’ scientists are in bed with the pols. They consider themselves an ‘elite’ who can keep their positions, all of them dependent, they like to think, and certainly say (offstage) on ‘votes’ and thus presenting a sugary, lulling, cornucopia. Ostensibly, they state, it is because ‘voters’ or ‘the people’ can’t bear negative news, changes, the idea of a lowered of life style, higher taxes, regulations, etc. etc.

In fact, it is because they consider themselves part of the dominating group, and reckon they themselves will prosper, and survive. They show great contempt for ordinary ppl, and paint them as ‘sheeples’ -not with that word- a state of affairs they have themselves created, in their own interest.

That may sound harsh and wildly exaggerated, even somewhat loopy or conspiracist; of course it does not apply to all pols or scientists (specially not to those outside energy, health, and other socially important fields), even hyper mainstream ones. But the general ambiance is of that type. The lies and protectionism, rationalization and hype show clearly that the crunch is here and the competition is raging.

Recently, much has been made of climate change (rightly so), but it puts Peak Oil somewhat in the shade.

What about Peak Poverty in the Western World? That, of course, is the nightmare of our ‘leaders’.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Syntec on April 20, 2007 - 12:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Yes and many white lab coats are of the variety that 'tie at the back' if you know what I mean.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jjhman on April 20, 2007 - 6:54pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I think that more likely mainstream media finds mainstream "experts" a more confortable fit. We live in a world that has motored along in a very consistent manner for two generations. There have been apocalyptic predictions from the "fringe" for a long time and none of it has come to fruition. It is credible and professionally safe to believe those who reassure that more of the same is in the future.

It doesn't take a conspiracy, lies, or ego on the part of the media. Try to remember that all they learned in school was spelling and punctuation.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Noizette on April 21, 2007 - 8:36am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Yes, of course. There is a kind of symbiosis. But when the media ‘cherry pick’ their favorite pet scientists, these scientists gain credibility, and others are ignored, marginalized. General opinion then tends to sway towards what the media touted; and those who conform to that opinion get to publish ‘wider public’ books, stand a better chance not only to obtain funding in general (that isn’t always true actually) but certainly get a bigger look in for ‘new’ projects, ‘innovations’, ‘social action’, ‘public policy’, and so on. They advise Gvmts., particularly in the US. So who is running the show? The media or the scientists? Or unstated Gvmt. policy? Corporations? Some of all of the above? Well that’s impossible to answer. The present state of affairs seems to be considered ‘natural’ and no doubt to some degree it is; things have always been so, in part. But TODers can note that ‘we make our own reality’ is no joke (also called denial of reality), it is most definetly not a sort of vague, unexplicable, process that just ‘takes place’. It has a direction, a purpose, a momentum..One needn’t see this as a ‘conspiracy’ to be uncovered; it is a social process that should be understood. Public health is another area that has been much affected.

-Noisette

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on April 21, 2007 - 9:05am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

i wonder how that 2020 and 2040 peak date correlates with the 75 experts' expected retirement date ?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.