|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#871
March 4th 05, 08:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Christopher M. Jones" writes:
Rand Simberg wrote: Or do you really believe that OJ didn't murder his wife and her friend? This thread is certainly hitting all the bases. Let's see, we've already run through the war on terror, Bush, Clinton, now we're on to OJ. Might as well just go for the whole shebang: (cue the family guy) Microsoft sucks Apple sucks Jesus sucks Krypton sucks The Yankees suck The Red Sox suck C++ sucks Java sucks Marvel sucks DC comics sucks Have I left anything out? Vacuum cleaners. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, | chances are he is doing just the same" 
|
|
#873
March 4th 05, 11:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#874
March 5th 05, 01:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In sci.space.policy Christopher M. Jones wrote:
(cue the family guy) Microsoft sucks Apple sucks Jesus sucks Krypton sucks The Yankees suck The Red Sox suck C++ sucks Java sucks Marvel sucks DC comics sucks Have I left anything out? The Chinese as a Yellow Menance(tm) -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++
|
|
#875
March 6th 05, 05:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#876
March 7th 05, 01:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
[reply trimmed to exclude the obvious flamebait groups. I'm not sure
where the original poster is replying from. I'm in sci.geo.geology.] In article , Ian St. John wrote: I hadn't realised that Canada was going that far 'afield'. Check out what Talisman are up to in Sudan. Not that they've been talking very much about it since the news people found out about the genocide. (I'm not alleging that Talisman are involved with or deliberately instigating the genocide, but human rights abuses do have a tendency to follow investment opportunities like sunset follows the terminator.) Apache are Canadians too? They've recently brought a billion barrel North Sea field from BP - Forties. That's just the ones I've had personal involvement with. I was trying to get work in the Malvinas (North Falklands Basin) a few years ago, but it doesn't look likely to be a goer in terms of major oilfields. Another "un-explored basin" that's effectively dry, which is another pain in the eye for the economists who think oil supply is a matter of economics, not geology. -- Aidan Karley, Aberdeen, Scotland, Location: 57°10'11" N, 02°08'43" W (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
|
|
#877
March 7th 05, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Aidan Karley wrote:
[reply trimmed to exclude the obvious flamebait groups. I'm not sure where the original poster is replying from. I'm in sci.geo.geology.] In article , Ian St. John wrote: I hadn't realised that Canada was going that far 'afield'. Check out what Talisman are up to in Sudan. Not that they've been talking very much about it since the news people found out about the genocide. (I'm not alleging that Talisman are involved with or deliberately instigating the genocide, but human rights abuses do have a tendency to follow investment opportunities like sunset follows the terminator.) Apache are Canadians too? They've recently brought a billion barrel North Sea field from BP - Forties. That's just the ones I've had personal involvement with. I was trying to get work in the Malvinas (North Falklands Basin) a few years ago, but it doesn't look likely to be a goer in terms of major oilfields. Another "un-explored basin" that's effectively dry, which is another pain in the eye for the economists who think oil supply is a matter of economics, not geology. Well, in a way, it is. Titan is now known to be a major find... It could probably supply our needs for many generations.. but good luck finding 'economically recoverable' hydrocarbon reserves. Petroleum isn't really about finding crude oil, but the economics of recovery. The current system runs on CHEAP and PLENTIFUL oil. i.e. Quantity matters too. The Tar Sands of Alberta are cheap enough but they provide a trickle in return for huge investments. And the pace that we are consuming it is just too high to sustain for more than a couple more decades. We need to start moving away from cheap oil as the major fuel both to limit price spikes from shortfalls and to eventually have an alternative with the investment in infrastructure that it needs. This may be coal gassification/conversion ( most likley in my opinion ) I can only hope that it includes proper treatment to remove waste products and improvements in mine safety.
|
|
#878
March 8th 05, 03:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ian St. John wrote:
Well, in a way, it is. Titan is now known to be a major find... It could probably supply our needs for many generations.. but good luck finding 'economically recoverable' hydrocarbon reserves. Petroleum isn't really about finding crude oil, but the economics of recovery. The current system runs on CHEAP and PLENTIFUL oil. i.e. Quantity matters too. The Tar Sands of Alberta are cheap enough but they provide a trickle in return for huge investments. And the pace that we are consuming it is just too high to sustain for more than a couple more decades. The current price of oil is unsustainable. It's unsustainably *high*. There are substitutes for oil that will be developed on a large scale if prices are perceived as staying permanently high. Fischer-Tropsch liquids (from natural gas or coal) become competitive when oil stays above $20-25/barrel. Alberta tar sands (which contain more extractable oil than Saudi Arabia) become competitive above $15-25/barrel (unless Kyoto causes the Canadian government to stop expansion). Biomass- derived liquids are also very competitive at around these levels. What's retarding (if not preventing) investment in these areas is the perception that the price of oil will soon decline again, reducing the rate of return and making the investments more risky. I understand that the price of oil company stocks is consistent with the expectation that oil will decline to about $30/barrel by 2007. If this expectation is wrong and prices stay high, the preceived risk in the alternatives will be reduced and they will go forward more aggressively. Paul
|
|
#879
March 8th 05, 03:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul F. Dietz wrote:
Ian St. John wrote: Well, in a way, it is. Titan is now known to be a major find... It could probably supply our needs for many generations.. but good luck finding 'economically recoverable' hydrocarbon reserves. Petroleum isn't really about finding crude oil, but the economics of recovery. The current system runs on CHEAP and PLENTIFUL oil. i.e. Quantity matters too. The Tar Sands of Alberta are cheap enough but they provide a trickle in return for huge investments. And the pace that we are consuming it is just too high to sustain for more than a couple more decades. The current price of oil is unsustainable. It's unsustainably *high*. There are substitutes for oil that will be developed on a large scale if prices are perceived as staying permanently high. Fischer-Tropsch liquids (from natural gas or coal) become competitive when oil stays above $20-25/barrel. Alberta tar sands (which contain more extractable oil than Saudi Arabia) become competitive above $15-25/barrel (unless Kyoto causes the Canadian government to stop expansion). Biomass- derived liquids are also very competitive at around these levels. While I don't disagree with you that the price is high, I am not nearly as sanguine about the high price leading to the development of substitutes. There are two reasons. The first is that the marginal cost of production is well below $50, so OPEC and Russia can cut the knees off anyone who tries to produce from other sources (invest your money, we drop the price for a few months and your investment goes up in smoke). The second is that a large part of the rise in the price of oil is really a fall in the value of the dollar. The cost in Euro and yen has not moved nearly as much, if at all. The dollar is, if anything, in worse shape today than a year ago. josh halpern What's retarding (if not preventing) investment in these areas is the perception that the price of oil will soon decline again, reducing the rate of return and making the investments more risky. I understand that the price of oil company stocks is consistent with the expectation that oil will decline to about $30/barrel by 2007. If this expectation is wrong and prices stay high, the preceived risk in the alternatives will be reduced and they will go forward more aggressively. Paul
|
|
#880
March 9th 05, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Joshua Halpern" wrote in message news:zo9Xd.68437$uc.12873@trnddc08... The second is that a large part of the rise in the price of oil is really a fall in the value of the dollar. The cost in Euro and yen has not moved nearly as much, if at all. The dollar is, if anything, in worse shape today than a year ago. While it is completely true that the U.S. dollar under Bush has lost about 1/3rd of it's value, it is also true that oil is priced by the U.S. dollar. Indeed it was the threat that Saddam would move to pricing Iraqi Oil by the Euro, that in part prompted Bush to illegally invade that nation and murder 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians. Which of the 10 commandments has Bush NOT broken?
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| CO2 and global warming | freddo411 | Astronomy Misc | 314 | October 20th 04 09:56 PM |
| CO2 and global warming | freddo411 | Policy | 319 | October 20th 04 09:56 PM |
| global warming could trigger an ice age at any time | Ian Beardsley | Astronomy Misc | 3 | February 24th 04 10:34 AM |
Linear Mode
