<Wilma Category 5: Lowest Pressure EverThe Oil DrumA gentle reminder>

54 comments on Midweek Open Thread...

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

PhilRelig on October 19, 2005 - 10:39pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
Here's a question for you all:  What do you think of Matt Simmons?  What makes him tick?  Is he being fully truthful in everything he says?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
egl9sun on October 20, 2005 - 12:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think he is being truthful about what he really believes to be true about our situation.  

He is also being a little over the top to wake people up because I think he knows after all these years what our attitudes are regarding energy, ie. we take it for granted.  

He is a scholarly type, from Harvard, and I think regardless of the money he may have made, is really concerned about our future.  

Otherwise, I can not imagine why someone would take such risk, with little to really gain, because he just steped down from CEO so he can speak more.

He is not running for office. Not asking for a job from the Bush crowd, and he really is not helping big oil much with his message.  He is an investment banker, and my take is because new reserve projects have been decreasing, his business is done in the long run.  Instead of just cashing in and retiring, he has decided to speak out, educate us, research, stick his neck out, be interviewed, and so far it has got a lot of attention.  That is a huge risk, and I suspect he would not take it unless he really, really saw something that made him very concerned.    

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Rick on October 20, 2005 - 5:01am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think Simmons' big motivator is a search for the truth. Twilight in the Desert reads like a geeky detective story. It took a lot of work to find the raw material for the book, and a lot more to piece it together.

I think it's the same for many of us on TOD: the pieces of the oil puzzle simply don't fit together, and there is a need to make sense of it all. We're working to reduce cognitive dissonance every day. Some days are better than others.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 20, 2005 - 7:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
It took a lot of work to find the raw material for the book, and a lot more to piece it together.

A crucial part of the picture people are missing (IMHO) is that it does take a bold man, one who is willing to step away from the herd, and to step away from the "me and my private-profits" mentality.

Simmons is such a man.
Hubbert was such a man.

Think about it.
It is 1956.
For the last 100 years (since Drake in 1959) everybody in the oil business has been making money hand over foot by sticking to the basic script:
 

 (1)Worry only about yourself,
(2)Find a geologically promising site;
(3)KEEP IT SECRET;
(4) Drill,
(5) Hit a big pot of luck underground and start pumping; and
(6) Repeat steps 1-6.

This is Adam Smith capitalism at its best.
What kind of maroon would step outside this box and start collecting data?
My gosh man, there are thousands of drill sites and everybody is happy in shit, making money. Why start messing things up, upsetting the apple cart, and asking questions? Have you no sense of decency? Have you no shame?

Such was the man named Hubbert.
Such is the man named Matt Simmons.

God bless him.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
louGrinzo on October 20, 2005 - 9:50am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
For the usual reasons quoted by everyone else, I generally consider Simmons to be one of the more trustworthy experts.

I would, however, like to see him stop with the headline-grabbing predictions.  In this article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9753233/) he talks about the possibility of $40 natural gas and $190 oil this winter.

Someone needs to sit Matt down and explain to him that it helps no one for him to make these kinds of lottery ticket predictions.  If he happens to be right, he looks like a genius, but otherwise he looks like just another clueless chicken little.

If he's convinced Bad Things are coming, then he should say so, but without hanging a number on the prediction.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 20, 2005 - 10:45am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
... but otherwise he looks like just another clueless chicken little.

Wait a minute.
This sounds like a huge double standard.
How come you are not out here taking Steve Forbes (Captain Capitalism) on for guranteeing a year ago in his front page editorial of Forbes Magazine that oil would be down below $35 by now and arguing all who are crying "beware" are chicken littles who do not understand the fundamentals of commodities ... that their prices always goes down?

Oil: $35 or $105? Part 1
The other day I posted a link to an article that was sent to me in which the financial publisher and previous presidential candidate Steve Forbes called the energy markets a bubble and said that oil would be going to $35 a barrel inside of a year. That figure is in sharp contrast to the Goldman Sachs $105 super spike scenario.

Who's right? ...
In the Forbes case, it's very likely that the call was politically motivated. If prices fall he's a hero. If prices don't fall, well then at least he tried to help the people. I don't have such a problem with that because if he were able to influence prices to the downside that would be good for the majority of people except likely Goldman Sachs and numerous hedge funds and their investors.

Overzealous opportunists and office seekers aside what then is the truth of oil prices?

from:
http://www.blogginwallstreet.com/2005_09_01_blogginwallstreet_archive.html

See also:
http://greens.org.au/mediacentre/mediareleases/senatornettle/010905a/view?searchterm=kerry%20forbes

P.S. ... and yes, oil is "down" to $60 today, but get real, 60=/=35 !!!!

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on October 20, 2005 - 10:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In Summary:

How come Steve Forbes gets the Smirking Happy Chimp award for being the messenger of Happy Days Acoming?

And Matt Simmons gets the boot for being a realistic pessimist?

Is it because of our irrational human nature?

Is that the whole basis of our "rational" thunking?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Murray on October 20, 2005 - 11:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The one problem that I see with Simmons is that he consistently underestimates the role that efficiency and conservation can play. This last year he has come to recognize the train/truck potential, but he downplays the potential for more efficient cars, citing the length of time needed to replace the fleet. While his numbers are right they overlook the Pareto principle. On NG he has not really thought through the potential for either efficiency or demand destruction. Having said that a NG spike to $40.00 is not so outlandish. In Feb. 2003 NG went to $18.00/MBtu interday, and to $28.00 briefly intraday. The NY gate has gone above $30.00 more than once in recent years, even if that is only a local effect.
Simmons himself has said that he has advised Bush and Cheney, but noted that he is not close to either one. He strikes me as an honest man, seriously concerned for the country, and hoping that he can contribute to averting, or at least ameliorating, a major economic crisis. More power to him.  Murray
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
PhilRelig on October 20, 2005 - 11:57am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Ah, you have hit upon the crux of my reservations about Simmons:  What knowledge does he have of possibly sinister goings on behind closed doors at the Cheney Energy Task Force and related meetings of top policy makers that he is not publicly revealing?  I admire Simmons too; but to be truly heroic, I would urge him to turn fully against his socio-economic class interests and tell all.  My argument for why he should do this is that his great caring and concern for the world as a whole (which I also believe is genuine - like everyone else who has been posting about this) directly contradicts his continued partial allegiance to his own socio-economic class.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
BeaconBoy on October 20, 2005 - 10:47pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Let's not attack Matt for his motivations. He is sticking his neck out personally and professionally. He does not have to do it as he looks to be a man of considerable means. He could easily retire and invest his fortune and watch the world pull itself apart.

He is one who understands the implications from a business point of view. The problem of peak oil is just not geologic, it is also an economic, social and political problem.

Peak Oilers come in all shapes, flavours and occupations.
We do not have to have the same voting records or affliations.  What motivates us all is the problem at hand. We need to spend less time amongst ourselves questioning each others motives and more time debating what actions we can take to solve this enormous facing the whole world. There is no silver bullet.

It will need both high tech and low tech solutions. What wee need more is to understand is when and what to use at the right time.

 

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.