Peak Expensive Oil

[Chris Coles]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

The only way to learn something new is to be taught that something one once thought, is in fact incorrect. I embrace being proven wrong, as must anyone who would value learning over ego. Only those who wish to preserve their ignorance want to be proven right all the time.

Consequently, if and when I do need to apologize, it will not be with profound regret, but rather with great joy over the opportunity to do so, and also my thanks to you, for giving me the opportunity to learn something new.

I have no problem with a debate about technicalities; the apology will be for getting personal in a manner that I found very disturbing indeed. I have no idea who you are, how old you are or your circumstances. For that reason I have made allowances and have thus given you the opportunity, when, and not before the book is published, to learn from those around you the full implications for you, not me, regarding what you wrote to me in public.

I will never again respond to any further comment you make here on iTulip.

[santafe2]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

Before I respond, let’s refocus on my original response. Denigrating new technologies during their infancy, isn’t a great long term strategy. Coal is dead. Not tomorrow but 50 years from now it will be less acceptable than cooking with firewood is to my wife today.

Displacing coal in stationary power generation and other (steel furnaces, mine kilns, etc.) applications in North America is comparatively easy today. There are numerous well established lower carbon and no-carbon alternatives. The main impediments are the incredibly cheap cost of coal today (even natural gas can't compete) and who bears the cost of writing off the existing capital and replacing it. Both of these can be (& slowly are being) addressed through public policy decisions and hardly insurmountable.

As you note later, policy is changing. Politically, coal is dead. Once something is dead politically in NA, it’s dead. See the cigarette industry as an example. As for the question of who bears the cost of worthless assets, see 2008 for an example of how this works. Government entities pick winners and losers. The smaller utilities who didn’t change their focus from energy to energy distribution will be forced into bankruptcy. The larger utilities will move out of the energy business and into distribution. It is completely surmountable. The government will pick winners and losers as a few large utilities take over the energy delivery business and the government gets more deeply involved in which energy sources receive subsidies. It won’t be coal.

Displacing hydrocarbon fuels in mobile applications is infinitely more challenging.

More challenging but definitely not infinitely more challenging. I know EJ thinks the future is diesel but EJ is likely incorrect on this one. The future is near zero to zero tailpipe emissions. Cities need their population to be mobile and they don’t like pollution so pollution as required will be geographically shifted. It’s a similar idea to time shifting energy use. These energy consumers vote and they’ll demand cleaner energy sources.

Private passenger vehicles are quite another matter. I don't think many of them are going to be replaced. In the absence of extraordinarily cheap and abundant credit the cost of purchasing a new passenger vehicle has already become prohibitive for a great many people. The cost of a clean tailpipe vehicle, such as a Tesla, even more so...and therefore restricted to the wealthy few. The expectation is that advances in technology and volume production will bring down this cost and make them available to more consumers. I have my doubts. Raising the cost of current vehicles (whether that be carbon or other taxes) makes the alternatives more attractive, but also puts a floor under the price of those alternatives.

The relatively poor first world inhabitants, the bottom four quartiles, will not drive any of this change. For now, only the top 20% have to be interested and only 10% of these consumers have to switch to very high mileage vehicles. The growth in lithium ion battery deployment in mobile energy environments will grow a compound 32% a year over the next 5 years according to Navigant. That’s roughly 300% growth in 5 years.

Layer on the demographics of Millenials displacing Boomers as income earners, rapidly increasing urbanization, Uber, driverless cars, shifting attitudes towards ownership of assets such as cars and it is not much of leap to imagine that we are close to or at a peak in total private passenger vehicle registrations and annual sales in North America. Maybe the way to own a Tesla Model S is to share it with 3 or 4 of your friends.

While all of these arguments are valid, none of them point to a requirement for cheap polluting energy. In fact, most of these younger consumers will demand their shared resource economy be based on clean energy. After all, they’ll be using less of it so if it costs a bit more, no problem. The Millennial generation will demand Starbucks, “you’re too special to just buy coffee”, service and a zero energy version of a taxi and among others, AirBnB offers will have to meet Passivhaus standards. Green elitism is just beginning. As it grows, it will drive change and the high priests will pronounce coal as the devil.

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

Before I respond, let’s refocus on my original response. Denigrating new technologies during their infancy, isn’t a great long term strategy. Coal is dead. Not tomorrow but 50 years from now it will be less acceptable than cooking with firewood is to my wife today.

50 years time there maybe no oil and no ng. The Saudis will be back in the desert riding camels, fighting among themselves as they did 1400 years ago, while the rest of the world's 9 billion people use coal or nuclear.

[GRG55]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

Before I respond, let’s refocus on my original response. Denigrating new technologies during their infancy, isn’t a great long term strategy. Coal is dead. Not tomorrow but 50 years from now it will be less acceptable than cooking with firewood is to my wife today.



As you note later, policy is changing. Politically, coal is dead. Once something is dead politically in NA, it’s dead. See the cigarette industry as an example. As for the question of who bears the cost of worthless assets, see 2008 for an example of how this works. Government entities pick winners and losers. The smaller utilities who didn’t change their focus from energy to energy distribution will be forced into bankruptcy. The larger utilities will move out of the energy business and into distribution. It is completely surmountable. The government will pick winners and losers as a few large utilities take over the energy delivery business and the government gets more deeply involved in which energy sources receive subsidies. It won’t be coal...

The analogy with tobacco has merit.

Over time more governments in the developed world have decided they need to protect us from the ravages of coal. But they also know that it cannot be removed from existence instantly, and years will be required to eliminate most of it from their jurisdictions. So they will likely tax away most or all of the remaining economic value and redistribute it in whatever manner they see necessary - perhaps some income replacement for displaced coal workers, incentives for replacement energy sources, whatever. True investment capital is already heeding the policy and regulatory messages and flowing elsewhere, suggesting the future valuations of coal businesses are a purely speculative pursuit.

Since coal companies do not have the exceptional margins that tobacco has, it will not prove as lucrative (and maybe also not as durable) a source of revenue. My guess is coal will merely be a warm up act for governments already training their gunsights on the petroleum companies.

More challenging but definitely not infinitely more challenging. I know EJ thinks the future is diesel but EJ is likely incorrect on this one. The future is near zero to zero tailpipe emissions. Cities need their population to be mobile and they don’t like pollution so pollution as required will be geographically shifted. It’s a similar idea to time shifting energy use. These energy consumers vote and they’ll demand cleaner energy sources.

Yes they will demand cleaner energy sources. They will also demand (or at a minimum believe their politicians statements) that the costs be borne by someone else. Geographically shifted pollution is like cities dumping their garbage into rural landfills. Inevitable, but controversial nevertheless.

The relatively poor first world inhabitants, the bottom four quartiles, will not drive any of this change. For now, only the top 20% have to be interested and only 10% of these consumers have to switch to very high mileage vehicles. The growth in lithium ion battery deployment in mobile energy environments will grow a compound 32% a year over the next 5 years according to Navigant. That’s roughly 300% growth in 5 years.



While all of these arguments are valid, none of them point to a requirement for cheap polluting energy. In fact, most of these younger consumers will demand their shared resource economy be based on clean energy. After all, they’ll be using less of it so if it costs a bit more, no problem. The Millennial generation will demand Starbucks, “you’re too special to just buy coffee”, service and a zero energy version of a taxi and among others, AirBnB offers will have to meet Passivhaus standards. Green elitism is just beginning. As it grows, it will drive change and the high priests will pronounce coal as the devil.

The relatively poor still need to get to work. I recall EJ (correctly, imo) identified the bus as their future green alternative. As for the Millennials, here in Canada there is an interesting bifurcation developing...those with an education making them eligible for public sector employment now enjoy a distinct advantage over their private sector counterparts. They have the most stable incomes and benefits, the most secure and generous (indexed, defined benefit) pensions and, most of all, the ability to transfer much of the current and future cost of their "green elitism" to their employer who after all must be seen to be leading. Once the housing market rolls over I'm not sure what will employ all the others.

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

duplicate

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

The Saudis aren't winning.

Soon the mercenaries the Saudis engage will recognize the folly of taking part in a fight to death Jihadis war and flee like ants.

Who will fight in their place?

http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...ates/77289732/

152 Feared Dead in Yemen Ballistic Missle Strike

By Awad Mustafa6:29 p.m. EST December 14, 2015

(Photo: Saleh al-Obeidi/AFP)

CONNECT

TWEET 41LINKEDIN

COMMENTEMAILMORE

DUBAI — One hundred and fifty-two coalition soldiers are feared dead after a short range ballistic missile strike hit a coalition base at the strategic Bab al-Mandab region in the south, a coalition source told Defense News.
Among the dead in the attack, which took place Monday afternoon, was the commander of the Saudi Special Forces, Col. Abdullah Al Sahyan, the source confirmed.
"So far, nine Emirati soldiers, seven Moroccans and 23 Saudis have been identified," the source added.
The missile strike was conducted by OTR-21 Tochka mobile missile launch system for short range ballistic missiles, the source said.

[GRG55]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

The Saudis aren't winning.

Soon the mercenaries the Saudis engage will recognize the folly of taking part in a fight to death Jihadis war and flee like ants.

Who will fight in their place?

http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...ates/77289732/

There is no such thing as "winning" in this conflict.

This is just one of many battle fronts in the latest manifestation of a growing sectarian conflict that started with the events of 8th June, 632.

What is interesting is that, for the first time, it is drawing in active state participants (such as Russia, the Europeans and soon China) from outside the Muslim sphere.

What is amusing is no-nothing western journalists, with no evident understanding of any religion (including their own), trying to explain a religious conflict. The inability to put any of this in context is why it is easier to default to white-hat/black-hat and portray what is going on as a West (the wretched infidels) versus East (ISIS/ISIL/al-Queda) war instead (the "War Against Beheadings"). At the root of this conflict is Arab killing Arab and Muslim killing Muslim. As horrific as the killings in Paris and elsewhere may be, they are a mere sideshow to the main theatre.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

There is no such thing as "winning" in this conflict.

This is just one of many battle fronts in the latest manifestation of a growing sectarian conflict that started with the events of 8th June, 632.

What is interesting is that, for the first time, it is drawing in active state participants (such as Russia, the Europeans and soon China) from outside the Muslim sphere.

What is amusing is no-nothing western journalists, with no evident understanding of any religion (including their own), trying to explain a religious conflict. The inability to put any of this in context is why it is easier to default to white-hat/black-hat and portray what is going on as a West (the wretched infidels) versus East (ISIS/ISIL/al-Queda) war instead (the "War Against Beheadings"). At the root of this conflict is Arab killing Arab and Muslim killing Muslim. As horrific as the killings in Paris and elsewhere may be, they are a mere sideshow to the main theatre.

Which is why I will continue to argue that the best strategy for us here in the "West" is to bring the two sides together and engage with their mutual fear of the other side of their own conflict. That they are simply reacting to their imaginations; which is just another form of jealousy, an imagined slight against their own imagined beliefs. Yes, a very challenging debate, but someone has to bring the stupidity to an end.

We do ourselves no favours by emulating their internal hostility by "bombing" them from above.

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

There is no such thing as "winning" in this conflict.

This is just one of many battle fronts in the latest manifestation of a growing sectarian conflict that started with the events of 8th June, 632.

What is interesting is that, for the first time, it is drawing in active state participants (such as Russia, the Europeans and soon China) from outside the Muslim sphere.

What is amusing is no-nothing western journalists, with no evident understanding of any religion (including their own), trying to explain a religious conflict. The inability to put any of this in context is why it is easier to default to white-hat/black-hat and portray what is going on as a West (the wretched infidels) versus East (ISIS/ISIL/al-Queda) war instead (the "War Against Beheadings"). At the root of this conflict is Arab killing Arab and Muslim killing Muslim. As horrific as the killings in Paris and elsewhere may be, they are a mere sideshow to the main theatre.

I'm not so sure if China will be interested in participating. Chinese culture today is essentially matriarchal. Women in China are extremely powerful, much more than women in the US, UK or Germany.

[jk]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

There is no such thing as "winning" in this conflict.

This is just one of many battle fronts in the latest manifestation of a growing sectarian conflict that started with the events of 8th June, 632.

What is interesting is that, for the first time, it is drawing in active state participants (such as Russia, the Europeans and soon China) from outside the Muslim sphere.

What is amusing is no-nothing western journalists, with no evident understanding of any religion (including their own), trying to explain a religious conflict. The inability to put any of this in context is why it is easier to default to white-hat/black-hat and portray what is going on as a West (the wretched infidels) versus East (ISIS/ISIL/al-Queda) war instead (the "War Against Beheadings"). At the root of this conflict is Arab killing Arab and Muslim killing Muslim. As horrific as the killings in Paris and elsewhere may be, they are a mere sideshow to the main theatre.

if they knew more history they could refer to the 30 years war - a better analogy.

[GRG55]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

I'm not so sure if China will be interested in participating. Chinese culture today is essentially matriarchal. Women in China are extremely powerful, much more than women in the US, UK or Germany.

Please don't tell Hillary, Angela or Margaret (Thatcher).



China is already in up to its neck.

China's weapons and weapons technology sales into the region (look how often China pops up in even a cursory review of the last 25 years of Iranian missile activity), its firm alignment with one side in this secular conflict, and its own growing and highly visible military backed international engagement (see link below) trump China's powerful women. Not even a close contest given the make up of the Politburo


"...all those opposed please report to the Ministry of Public Security after the meeting..."



China isn't building aircraft carriers to run tourists up and down the Malacca Strait.

China to build 18 naval bases in Indian Ocean

POSTED BY CHANKAIYEE2 ⋅ NOVEMBER 22, 2014


At the onset of the "Arab Spring" in 2010 who would have guessed that the Russians would emulate the Americans in the region and escalate to their current level of military activity? There's a long history of foreign powers being drawn in to the quick sand that is the Middle East. But in the past they have warred among each other as colonial powers, and later to protect their resource supply lines and economic investments (e.g. the British and French reaction to Nasser's nationalization of the Suez Canal).

The simple minded analysis has this as yet another conflict between the great powers, Russia & China vs the USA, that sort of thing. However, what is different this time is the Arabs and Turks are not being drawn in to a great powers conflict on their soil; instead the great powers are being drawn in to what may become the greatest Islamic conflict since The Prophet's armies were ranging across the region.

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

Please don't tell Hillary, Angela or Margaret (Thatcher).

Angela and Margaret are not 100% women in the usual sense. As for Hillary, she's definitely not a woman at all. A real woman won't tolerate her husband's public sex scandals.

Anyway, having a woman as a head of state doesn't prove anything. A female head of state can be a puppet controlled by men. Korea is an extremely male dominated society, yet they have a female president. The same with Pakistan where women can be almost legally killed by their husbands and fathers if they misbehave. They had female presidents if I'm not wrong.

China is already in up to its neck.

China's weapons and weapons technology sales into the region (look how often China pops up in even a cursory review of the last 25 years of Iranian missile activity), its firm alignment with one side in this secular conflict, and its own growing and highly visible military backed international engagement (see link below) trump China's powerful women. Not even a close contest given the make up of the Politburo

Selling weapons yes.

The Chinese Politburo is not stupid. They don't spend hundreds of billions to build up a high speed rail network and metro system in 38 cities for nothing. By now, it's quite obvious that they want to build a nation wide transportation system that does not depend on oil or gas.

You can see maps of Chinese metro systems on my Chinese Real estate bubble thread - http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...ble-in-history

In comparison, the US has no high speed rail system and only 12 metro system, many of which are in the CBD only.

What the English MSM don't mention is that city and intercity rail systems run on electricity. They don't because America is not building them.

The Chinese mega construction for rail infrastructure isn't finished, they are still building more HSR, cities with metro systems are adding more lines, and high speed rail is being extended to neighboring countries. This is all work in progress.

I believe the next step will be adding freight carriages to HSR trains for e-commerce freight delivery.

China's present HSR network:



The HSR network map looks just like a major city metro system.

[DSpencer]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

I have no problem with a debate about technicalities; the apology will be for getting personal in a manner that I found very disturbing indeed. I have no idea who you are, how old you are or your circumstances. For that reason I have made allowances and have thus given you the opportunity, when, and not before the book is published, to learn from those around you the full implications for you, not me, regarding what you wrote to me in public.

I will never again respond to any further comment you make here on iTulip.

You entered the thread proposing your own theories of science and specifically asked for recommendations. Astonas provided an amazingly insightful, respectful and sincere reply. He (or she) even indulged the possibility that your theory has merit. Now you respond with this absurd rudeness?

You are an intelligent person. I am sure you have much to offer the world. However, the simple and honest truth is that your theories of physics are delusions of grandeur. I am sure you strongly reject this possibility. If you are convinced I am wrong, I urge you to find a psychiatrist and explain the situation. Show them your book and your Capital Spillway PDF. Ask them if it's possible that you are indeed the greatest physicist in all of human history.

[santafe2]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

There is no such thing as "winning" in this conflict.

This is just one of many battle fronts in the latest manifestation of a growing sectarian conflict that started with the events of 8th June, 632.

What is interesting is that, for the first time, it is drawing in active state participants (such as Russia, the Europeans and soon China) from outside the Muslim sphere.

What is amusing is no-nothing western journalists, with no evident understanding of any religion (including their own), trying to explain a religious conflict. The inability to put any of this in context is why it is easier to default to white-hat/black-hat and portray what is going on as a West (the wretched infidels) versus East (ISIS/ISIL/al-Queda) war instead (the "War Against Beheadings"). At the root of this conflict is Arab killing Arab and Muslim killing Muslim. As horrific as the killings in Paris and elsewhere may be, they are a mere sideshow to the main theatre.

Oh boy, I really have got to stop reading any post here that mentions one of the horrible belief systems that emerged from ancient Mesopotamia. If one goes back several hundred years in Christian history it's not difficult to find massive "sectarian" conflict in Europe. Not that much later our Pilgrims found joy and religious reason to behead Native Americans. There are 1,000 more disgusting data points with regard to Christians and I'm sure there are about as many with Muslims but as you pointed out, Christians have had a 632 year head start.

To me this is the ultimate modern world false dichotomy. Christians and Muslims are just one big dysfunctional family. Please just send all of these goofballs to therapy and possibly we can focus on real 21st Century issues and stop obsessing on these idiots focusing on how the world will end.

[touchring]

Re: Peak Expensive Oil

Oh boy, I really have got to stop reading any post here that mentions one of the horrible belief systems that emerged from ancient Mesopotamia. If one goes back several hundred years in Christian history it's not difficult to find massive "sectarian" conflict in Europe. Not that much later our Pilgrims found joy and religious reason to behead Native Americans. There are 1,000 more disgusting data points with regard to Christians and I'm sure there are about as many with Muslims but as you pointed out, Christians have had a 632 year head start.

To me this is the ultimate modern world false dichotomy. Christians and Muslims are just one big dysfunctional family. Please just send all of these goofballs to therapy and possibly we can focus on real 21st Century issues and stop obsessing on these idiots focusing on how the world will end.

Everyone knows this but corrupt politicians need to create war to terrify their citizens and maintain onto power.

Think Turkey's Erdogan, Putin's involvement in East Ukraine and the US involvement in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Ukraine's Maidan. The US a little different because their goal is to maintain power over the people Middle East and Europe, in addition to their own citizens.