news.bbc.co.uk— The field is in the Gulf of Mexico, and Mexico says it could be bigger than its largest oil field, Cantarell. Maybe this will stave off peak oil for another year or so...
Mar 15, 2006View in Crawl 4
Your first and second points don't contribute at all to the detriment argument. There's no reason to think that a small continuance of current production instead of no continuance of current production would be detrimental.Your third argument is based on false assumptions. Oil is controlled by price fixing cartel economics, not supply and demand economics. Although Mexico is not part of the cartel, they are able to benefit from it by keeping their prices at the price determined by the cartel without fear of being undercut.Thus, your fourth argument is wrong because it was based on an invalid assumption.Thus, this is not in any way detrimental. It may not be positive, but not positive doesn't mean negative.
100 days at curren usage. Oil usage goes up significantly every year. So, after the 5-10 years it usually takes to bring a field up to capacity, you're talking about far fewer than 100 days.
So now the oilaphobes are associating the cost of oil with obesity? Geez, you all really must be out of ammo. Kids get fat in front of their computers and video games. Not driving in a car.The thing that pisses me off is people like this saying we need to raise oil prices. Like they are the only ones in the world that use it. Hey, I use gas everyday. I do not want people like you to be responsible for me paying more for gas. I mean, who do you all think you are?
I deal with it just fine. Obviously you are the one ashamed of yourself and the rest of the west. You are the one that needs to deal with things and wake up and realize that our success is not to blame for the 3rd worlds problems.And watch you language. There could be a child reading this. You worthless jerk. If you ask me, it is people like you that make the west look bad.
President José López Portillo told mexicans that they should learn how to manage wealth when he announced to the world the extent of mexican oil reserves. I found this when he died three years ago."Aged 83, López Portillo ruled from 1976 to 1982 and presided over an oil boom that fed some of the worst corruption excesses ever seen in Mexico in an administration characterized by nepotism and graft."It is nice that President Vicente Fox can keep announcing more oil discoveries.It is better for Mexico to keep finding oil, than to declare bankruptcy, as when Presidenrt Clinton came to the rescue.Mexico and the US are joined by geography, let us learn to live together.
The plant is running at full capacity and is producing 500bpd !!! Yeah I can see this solving the worlds energy problems... (the US uses 21,000,000 bpd alone).. any other bright ideas ?
Even if the abiotic oil theory were true, the earth can't just "churn out" 80+ million barrels, which is our current demand. No natural process works that fast. We are still faced with the fact that oil is a finite source, wherever you believe it comes from.
How have we been duped? You mean you fail to understand the influence and lobbying power of the oil industry that has allowed it to enjoy SUBSIDIES from the government, a far cry from the "gov regulation of the free market" that you speak of. SUBSIDIES, not only in the form of direct subsidies to the oil industry, but also to the industrial agriculture industry that relies on oil, the vast network of taxpayer-subsidized highways, and the auto bailouts. If anything, the government gives a major advantage to the fossil fuel economy. Tell me, what interests have the power to restrict the oil industry? There really aren't any. ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell are the 5th and 6th biggest companies in the world and have more lobbying power in government than any environmental organization or alternative energy company could dream of.
Thermal depolymerization is not a complete solution to our problems. but it is true, when the declines set in, everybody will be forced to develop an economy less reliant on newly pumped oil.It does not disprove peak oil. Oil wells will eventually decline in production regardless of thermal depolymerization. It does however mean that we can salvage the past to continue our current lifestyle.
It's very unlikely that we can run on corn. The agricultural system relies on energy inputs such as oil and natural gas. The energy return from Ethanol from corn is much poorer. You get about 2 units of energy from corn ethanol for every 1 input. By contrast, conventional oil wells give 15:1 EROI (energy return on investment). We do not have nearly enough tillable land to not only support growing world populations, but to also divert to corn.Even if it isn't a fossil fuel, and if the earth does in fact produce oil abiotically, we are still depleting it faster than it replenishes. Even if oil is abiotic, we would still have "peak oil".
That is why, with our lower gas prices today, we should not take it as an excuse to drive more, but to save money on gas to put toward savings, like matrixxx1 said above.The people that get through this situation are the ones who are using the gas savings to put towards savings, where, if oil gets more expensive again, they would be able to then invest in say, square foot gardens to grow your own food, a more efficient vehicle, a house closer to work, or enough savings to tide you over to finding a job closer to home.
godelMar 16, 2006
Your first and second points don't contribute at all to the detriment argument. There's no reason to think that a small continuance of current production instead of no continuance of current production would be detrimental.Your third argument is based on false assumptions. Oil is controlled by price fixing cartel economics, not supply and demand economics. Although Mexico is not part of the cartel, they are able to benefit from it by keeping their prices at the price determined by the cartel without fear of being undercut.Thus, your fourth argument is wrong because it was based on an invalid assumption.Thus, this is not in any way detrimental. It may not be positive, but not positive doesn't mean negative.
Closed AccountMar 16, 2006
Er.What have you been smoking today?
qkslvrwolfMar 16, 2006
100 days at curren usage. Oil usage goes up significantly every year. So, after the 5-10 years it usually takes to bring a field up to capacity, you're talking about far fewer than 100 days.
anagamiMar 16, 2006
yey! some more months before Peak Oil!
nw2190Feb 22, 2011
haha ya seriously
Nick Winovich
jeezmosMar 17, 2006
hah! it made me laugh hearing this from a person with the self-named nick "tastypastry".
tonageMar 17, 2006
So now the oilaphobes are associating the cost of oil with obesity? Geez, you all really must be out of ammo. Kids get fat in front of their computers and video games. Not driving in a car.The thing that pisses me off is people like this saying we need to raise oil prices. Like they are the only ones in the world that use it. Hey, I use gas everyday. I do not want people like you to be responsible for me paying more for gas. I mean, who do you all think you are?
hockeygoonMar 18, 2006
jealous of the west? I am a canuck you stupid f**k. And ya, the majority of us are fat and lazy. Deal with it.
tonageMar 19, 2006
I deal with it just fine. Obviously you are the one ashamed of yourself and the rest of the west. You are the one that needs to deal with things and wake up and realize that our success is not to blame for the 3rd worlds problems.And watch you language. There could be a child reading this. You worthless jerk. If you ask me, it is people like you that make the west look bad.
tonageMar 19, 2006
How original. Do you all read past comments before you post? I have read that same lame joke about 10 other times.
cantoralMar 29, 2006
President José López Portillo told mexicans that they should learn how to manage wealth when he announced to the world the extent of mexican oil reserves. I found this when he died three years ago."Aged 83, López Portillo ruled from 1976 to 1982 and presided over an oil boom that fed some of the worst corruption excesses ever seen in Mexico in an administration characterized by nepotism and graft."It is nice that President Vicente Fox can keep announcing more oil discoveries.It is better for Mexico to keep finding oil, than to declare bankruptcy, as when Presidenrt Clinton came to the rescue.Mexico and the US are joined by geography, let us learn to live together.
aklblueApr 20, 2006
The plant is running at full capacity and is producing 500bpd !!! Yeah I can see this solving the worlds energy problems... (the US uses 21,000,000 bpd alone).. any other bright ideas ?
Closed AccountMay 17, 2006
Even if the abiotic oil theory were true, the earth can't just "churn out" 80+ million barrels, which is our current demand. No natural process works that fast. We are still faced with the fact that oil is a finite source, wherever you believe it comes from.
yesec9Jan 20, 2009
How have we been duped? You mean you fail to understand the influence and lobbying power of the oil industry that has allowed it to enjoy SUBSIDIES from the government, a far cry from the "gov regulation of the free market" that you speak of. SUBSIDIES, not only in the form of direct subsidies to the oil industry, but also to the industrial agriculture industry that relies on oil, the vast network of taxpayer-subsidized highways, and the auto bailouts. If anything, the government gives a major advantage to the fossil fuel economy. Tell me, what interests have the power to restrict the oil industry? There really aren't any. ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell are the 5th and 6th biggest companies in the world and have more lobbying power in government than any environmental organization or alternative energy company could dream of.
yesec9Jan 20, 2009
So the new oil field is a 10 trillion barrels? Impossible. The TOTAL discovered reserves up to today are more like 4 trillion.
yesec9Jan 20, 2009
Thermal depolymerization is not a complete solution to our problems. but it is true, when the declines set in, everybody will be forced to develop an economy less reliant on newly pumped oil.It does not disprove peak oil. Oil wells will eventually decline in production regardless of thermal depolymerization. It does however mean that we can salvage the past to continue our current lifestyle.
yesec9Jan 20, 2009
It's very unlikely that we can run on corn. The agricultural system relies on energy inputs such as oil and natural gas. The energy return from Ethanol from corn is much poorer. You get about 2 units of energy from corn ethanol for every 1 input. By contrast, conventional oil wells give 15:1 EROI (energy return on investment). We do not have nearly enough tillable land to not only support growing world populations, but to also divert to corn.Even if it isn't a fossil fuel, and if the earth does in fact produce oil abiotically, we are still depleting it faster than it replenishes. Even if oil is abiotic, we would still have "peak oil".
yesec9Jan 20, 2009
That is why, with our lower gas prices today, we should not take it as an excuse to drive more, but to save money on gas to put toward savings, like matrixxx1 said above.The people that get through this situation are the ones who are using the gas savings to put towards savings, where, if oil gets more expensive again, they would be able to then invest in say, square foot gardens to grow your own food, a more efficient vehicle, a house closer to work, or enough savings to tide you over to finding a job closer to home.