World Without Oil

Yes...we will FINALLY get some of those decent European turbo-diesels built for efficiency...and its about time. The sooner $6/gal hits, the better. The sooner dumbass Americans get with the conservation of crude oil based fuels, the better.

 

The ongoing problem the US and it's citizens have is both are financially broke. The government and people are deep in debt, living from pay check to pay check, or no check to no check, etc. and can't even afford their status-quo lives. Rising gas prices in the $5-$6/gallon range IMO will cripple the US economy. The idea of the 'masses' buying new diesels or any other cars when the country might be in a recession is not going to happen. Someone in a coffee shop the other day said they are spending $1000 per month on fuel to commute to work and they can't afford it and certainly cannot afford $4.50 and higher gas prices without cutting back on other stuff.

When a nation and most of it's people are bankrupt...this greatly reduces our options when we need to solve problems...

 

the auto industry is already ignoring dumbass americans all the american euro and asian auto manufactureres are going full speed into electric, hybrid, fuel cell, diesel development and in the meantime vastly improving traditional fuel mileage...development has improved to the point where my next vehicle will be a hybrid for mrs wyly, her commute distance to work for a week can now be done completely on a single charge of a battery...CC change deniers can scream and whine all they want but the entire world is going ahead with green energy technology development because in the big picture green energy is cheaper...

 

Being proactive is very rare in the USA...being reactive is the status quo...

 

conservatives fear change, they fear what they don't understand...were it not for progressives dragging their whiny conservative dumbass butts into reality we'd all still be living in tents and caves...

 

The problems that exist in the USA, starting with $16 trillion in debt, and ALL other issues, are not caused by conservatives or democrats or any political label...they are caused by Americans who are either too stupid or are just political and religious sheep...both of which are incapable of open-minded thinking in order to find consensus and effective solutions! It is ALL of these people I refer who are scared (*)(*)(*)(*)less of change...

 

"...we will FINALLY get some of those decent European turbo-diesels built for efficiency..."

Taxcutter says:
Only after we rein in the extremists at the EPA.

 

There is a good book by Thom Hartman giving new data that in the preindustrial age human life was not all that "short, nasty and brutish". The title is something like "The Last Days of Ancient Sunshine." Granted high tech medicine and big screen TVs wern't around, but there was much more quality time with the family and less stress to keep up with the Jones. A nice compromise might be the lifestyle of the old Laura Ingels Wilder books, at least no one was concerned about another Fukashima in one of the 105 odd US nuclear plants.

 

Life expectancy in colonial (pre-industrial) America was about thirty-five years.

Hobbes comment was penned prior to the industrial age.

 

First, welcome to PF and if you have any questions please ask any of the greeters or moderators.

I don't know the percentages but if I assume 80%, this is how many Americans live in urban and suburban areas of the USA. These areas are expensive, crowded, growing, polluted, higher crime rates, more division of classes, etc. and are simply not suited to a simpler lifestyle. It is unlikely this will change. So...my question is how can the US distribute more people to the rural areas? One idea is to reactivate the old Homestead Act. Another idea is to create more potable water supplies and distribute this to these rural areas which will encourage development. Once more people are located in rural areas more business will follow because the residents are both consumers and potential manpower. And...with continued population growth, most of it in already over-crowded areas, and with climate change potential, we will be forced to disperse people and provide water and energy...

 

LOTS of Speculation, very few facts, the nature of discussion boards, anyone can say anything, proof and facts are not a requirement.

- - - Updated - - -

LOTS of Speculation, very few facts, the nature of discussion boards, anyone can say anything, proof and facts are not a requirement.

 

So what part is speculation?

 

Looks like the EPA didn't win this one. Gots to get me one for road trips. Coming to a dealership near you this summer.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1303_2014_mazda6_diesel_european_spec_first_drive/

 

The American gov't may be $16 Trillion in debt, but plenty of American corporations still have positive cash flow, Apple Inc. , Walmart, Google etc....
Strange, that while GM still had operations in China, that company received hundreds Billions $ bailout.

 

GM has a lot more going on than just China? Check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_General_Motors_factories Personally, I was not in favor of the GM bailout and would have preferred other healthier companies buying some or all of GM.

American corporations have nothing to do with US debt?

Back to this thread...a world without oil, or even less oil, or more expensive oil, is going to hurt all things no matter cash on hand or debt...

 

World Without Oil = Middle East Without Usa

LoL : )))

 

A few weeks ago I read that China contracted to buy most of the oil from Iraq. I suspect China and other developing nations will be competing for ME oil supplies, and willing to pay more, which means the US might be squeezed out...

 

China will buy a oil field from whom ? from Iraqis ? NO , from Usa . Interesting !!!

 

How many places in the article below do you see the term 'USA'?

A little more than a year after President Barack Obama declared the end of the war in Iraq, Chinese companies are top players in the country’s oil sector. China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC) is jointly operating three fields in the south producing 1.4 million barrels a day—more than half Iraq’s output. China and Malaysia have the largest share of international contracts, says Abdul Mahdy al-Ameedi, an official in the Iraqi Oil Ministry. “We are very much satisfied with the work of Chinese companies,” says al-Ameedi, who is in charge of petroleum contracts and licensing.

Now a Chinese oil major may purchase ExxonMobil’s (XOM) position in the West Qurna 1 field, which has reserves worth $50 billion. Derek Scissors, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who specializes in China’s state-owned enterprises, spoke in December with a Chinese oil executive whose company was negotiating with the Iraqis over Exxon’s stake. The Chinese executive warned it was not a done deal, says Scissors. The Iraqi Oil Ministry and Exxon wouldn’t comment on a possible agreement.

The Iraqi oil industry is abuzz with rumors that CNPC’s Hong Kong-listed subsidiary, PetroChina, is the leading bidder. PetroChina’s spokesman did not return phone calls and e-mails. A stake in West Qurna 2, a nearby field, could go to the Chinese as well. Russia’s Lukoil operates that field, but its partner in that project, Statoil of Norway, has pulled out. “An attractive partner for us would be China, where there is stable demand growth,” Lukoil head Vagit Alekperov told reporters in Russia on Jan. 15.

Iraq, which pumps 3 million barrels of crude a day, is expected to reach 8 million barrels by 2035, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. By then, 80 percent of Iraqi production will go to China. “Baghdad to Beijing is the new Silk Road of the global oil trade—oil from Baghdad and capital investment from Beijing,” says Fatih Birol, chief economist at the IEA. Chinese construction of power plants has cemented the relationship.

It helps that the Chinese develop fields at lower costs than their rivals, says Wenran Jiang, a political scientist at the University of Alberta who studies China’s energy industry. Chinese managers and engineers usually earn a quarter the wages paid by Western companies, estimates Jiang. With Iraq offering foreign operators as little as a couple of dollars per barrel produced, it’s hard to earn money, says Trevor Houser, an energy and natural resources expert at China-focused consultancy Rhodium Group. Some companies, Exxon included, are turning to the Kurds, whose terms are more generous.

China may have little choice but to accept the terms offered by the Iraqi Oil Ministry. Foreign oil meets almost 60 percent of China’s needs today. That will likely rise to 80 percent by 2035, says Lin Boqiang, director of the China Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University. “It’s not that China likes going to Iraq,” says Lin. But “not that many places are left.”

The bottom line: Chinese oil companies are bulking up fast in Iraq, which may eventually sell 80 percent of its crude output to China.

 

Are you joking me ? How old are you ? Really this is a serious question ?

Who is the owner of Exxon Mobil ?

 

There has been less oil before, and certainly has been more expensive oil before, and sure it hurts. Smart folks who know this is coming DO something about it, and fortunately we now have transport which doesn't require us to be extorted by OPEC!! Fav pic!

View attachment 20880

- - - Updated - - -

fortunately as the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world, and without closest trading partner having more than both of us combined during the next century, we ain't gettin squeezed out of nuttin!

 

There is no such thing as 'an owner of Exxon Mobil'. There are billions of shares of stock of EOM owned by people and institutions all over the world. Exxon Mobil is a multi-national company. BTW; The US government owns zero shares of EOM.

In the grand scheme of things, considering the government and private sectors, Exxon Mobil is no different than Ace Hardware or Perez's Taco Truck...all are businesses which operate in the private sector having nothing to do with government.

Actually, my age has nothing to do with the discussion on this thread...

 

The past has little to do with the present or future? Everything today is different than yesterday so why compare?

It's not a matter of being smart; it's a matter of understanding the options and affordability.

For the umpteenth time, the future issue won't be as much about supply as it will be about cost. When the price of fuel increases there is a direct impact to the economy and it's not a positive one. Unless the US government wishes to nationalize all oil in the USA, all of those companies producing oil in the USA are going to sell it to the highest bidder. IMO in the USA we will not win the bidding war...

 

We have arent going to run out of oil any time soon and then theres coal oil synthesisation or synthetic oil which can be made from coal after that . Current known coal reserves will last for centuries. The Nazis were using this process to run thier war machine for most of WW2 and this is old technology. The SASOL company of South Africa have been profitably producing this for decades now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer–Tropsch_process

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...frica-has-a-way-to-make-oil-from-coal-446384/

The oil companies must be laughing all the way to the bank every time some green pundit claims we are going to run out. That false scarcity story has doubtless done wonders for thier bottom line over recent decades. I often wonder if the companies themselves actively promote these stories behind the scenes in order to further those profits even more

 

We learn from history how to not react hysterically when a situation repeats itself. You want to claim some pretty bad consequences from an event that has happened before, but did not lead to the consequences you want to claim for the situation now? Then you need to understand the history better than I do, in order to show how THIS time it will be different.

Fine. According to the IEA there are about 7 trillion barrels of oil to be had in the future, ranging in cost from what we pay today to around $120/bbl. So until you can come up with a better cost/supply curve, it is reasonable to assume that is about the cost of what our future looks like.

Fortunately for America, we are changing our behavior faster than others can drive the price up to the maximum required by the IEA.