![]() | CFTC - Futures Position Limits on Energy? | The Oil Drum | The Chicken Coop Refuge: Or How I Became a Bug Farmer | ![]() |
51 comments on Peak Oil Day - July 11
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
51 comments on Peak Oil Day - July 11
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race.”
—H. G. Wells, 1904
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Hi All, as a "believer" of PO, I had trouble reading this article
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3952
Hmmmmmmm !!!
P.S July 11th 2011 works for me!! That will be when the price is $247 a barrel !!
More abiotic oil!
Only problem with $247 oil is that the economy collapses first. We spend more and more of our income on fossil fuels and electricity. Also, the price of food goes up with the price of oil. This leaves too little of our salaries for everything else, demand for things like houses and cars drops greatly, and oil prices drop.
IMO the first part of the article isn't that far off, but the author fails to explain how inaccessible oil of non-biologic origin will be cheaply obtained. There will always be LOTS of expensive oil for processes and uses that can exist with EXPENSIVE oil-peak CHEAP oil is far in the past and the decline of CHEAP oil is the real issue. The entire global economy was built up with CHEAP FF as an energy source.
Nicely put. I think even when EROEI is below one there will be a market for oil, just as there is for other materials that don't supply net energy. It will just stop being a net energy source.
If you're using oil as a feedstock for polymer production, say, rather than as an energy source, then it has no ER and EROEI analysis doesn't apply.
Good point. But even if you are using it to power your hummer or war jet, it won't be extracted because it gets you net energy, but because it provides energy in a dense, liquid, easily transported form that suits certain functions, wasteful or not. Essentially it will be a handy carrier, rather than a source, of energy, like electricity.
Yeah, I agree. The military will undoubtedly want liquid petroleum based fuels regardless of how expensive they are.
Apparently the guys behind NaftoGaz Ukrainy need to be educated about the Russian-Ukrainian theory of deep, abiotic petroleum.
The author of that article needs to carefully wrapped in a white jacket with strong leather straps and placed in a well padded room for his own protection.
Making petroleum by dissolving steel in strong acid?! The acid must be strong indeed but he really should stop ingesting it...
I'm not saying the guy is just a bit off his rocker I'm saying he is batshit insane!
First, an explanation: My login was chosen because it was my 50th birthday and a bump in the peaking process. What great timing to be born, unless you have any concern about the future. 50 years of unbridled consumption with little or nothing to show for it in terms of sustainability. Energy is concentrated capital.
I am from Canada and have some familiarity with the "journal" you linked. Canada Free Press is a highly suspect, intentionally provocative right wing e-tabloid associated with a gaggle of rather pathetic scientific heretics, most of which have some religious cross they want society to bear on their behalf. They specialize in ad hominem attacks and claims of persecution.
Meaningful terrestrial reserves of abiotic oil have not only been thoroughly refuted, but biological and geological origins have been positively traced for many, many types of crude and gas. Now, it is probably true there is some abiotic methane - it's an organic chemical after all - but it just too scarce until you get to deep space - or should we call it Heaven?
The "Free Press" response would be to recommend star wars style technology, bigger prisons and a few global wars to ensure we can all drive clean fusion cars to one of Saturn's moons to fill up. In other words, science fiction dressed up with impressive words. Note the guy's credentials. There are better spokesmen for this marginal POV, but few less polemic. They are all, however, angry and share the cornucopian's lament: How did our oil get under their sand?
At the end of the day, these folks use their own biggest weakness to malign everybody else: All knowledge is faith-based and scientific method is always biased - in their case against the Biblical and BAU POV. I think it's fair to lump this marginal pseudo-scientific diatribe in with Creationists and other religious fundamentalists.
Interesting that these guys have quite a hold on government policy here in Canada via the National Post and other mouthy mouthpieces. They are loud, quick to condemn and blind to their own failings, just a step or two away from the Brown Shirts and street bullies of the 1930's. They are closely aligned with anti-abortion crusaders.
Nothing wrong with being mouthy, but to do things like claim that RW Christians never hurt anyone (in contrast with you-know-who's) as one of their senior spokesmen once did in print is to do a great disservice to freedom and legal dissent. To call all AGW and Kyoto skeptics and critics "deniers" is another more subtle form of misinformation, designed to monkey-wrench any and all carbon controls.
The article should really be flagged as inappropriate, but it's a good example of pseudo-science being used to baffle the uninformed. We are all keen to show off a casual sort of certainty. Persecution, personal politics, and old time religious science seem to the formula for the future of the Far Right. Whaddya know? The same themes we hear in good ol' Sarah Palin's speeches. You betcha!
The National Post is a rag, but to label it as a mouthpiece for right wing Christians is ridiculous.