Good news - peak oil theory seems to be untrue(191 Posts)
'The so-called peak oil theory, which suggests that within the foreseeable future the world will run out of fossil fuels coal, oil and gas has never looked more absurd.'
'The green lobby, of course, is terrified that, despite the promotion of expensive and heavily subsidised wind power at the heart of the Energy Bill a subsidy paid to a considerable extent by poor householders through their bills to wealthy landowners with wind turbines the emergence of large supplies of cheap gas will make this policy unsustainable.
Hence the scare stories, lapped up by the BBC in particular, about shale oil and gas extraction causing earthquakes and pollution of the water supply.
Needless to say, there is no substance whatever in these scares.'
What will the think tanks and elite lobbies do now in order to stop the growth and progress of ordinary people?
'Mr Lawson has attended twice, so does his agenda meet with their approval?'
I don't think it does, which is why the BBC don't invite him on their publicly funded TV shows often to discuss his views, whereas they fund lots of programmes (out of the public purse) on polar bears.
The rich elite are pursuing a policy of neo-feudalism
But who are they claig? are they different to bankers? Are they Rockefellas or are they just plain old McHappy D's, or are they Beatrice or even green creatures? or even shock horror related to the queen?
I love polar bears. Hmm.......the ice is melting, will you adopt a polar bear claig?
The current IEA forecasts upon which the article in the DM was based expect OECD oil demand to go down from its peak in 2005-8 until the forecast date of 2035.
Benefits for large families are being cut, extra charges for an extra room in council accomodation will be introduced. The poor are suffering cuts, while the big multinational corporations pay a few million in tax, and have to be persuaded to chip in a bit by "people pressure".
The growth of the public is being curbed by financial constraints and their standard of living is declining. It is not an accident, it is ideological.
' will you adopt a polar bear claig? '
You've got to be kidding! So I can fund 6 figure salaries for the charity-type bosses who run these appeals?
'OECD oil demand to go down from its peak in 2005-8 until the forecast date of 2035.'
is that due to their decades of austerity and low growth?
Do you know that if they wanted so desperately to turn the light out or to cull us they already have many tried and tested ways to do this. Wars cost money.........ubers get wealthy when governments borrow. Just one example.
Or is that these ubers like the game and actually no one will ultimately win because they haven't decided amongst themselves what their game strategy is. If that is the case, we are left with plain old boring old capitalism.
Mini, it's not a clockwork world. The think tanks predict what will happen, but they can't be sure. They evaluate scenarios, but there is always risk involved.
The Soviets and the Ceaucescu's probably planned well ahead into the future, but things didn't turn out as they planned.
The future is a blank page, we don't know what it will hold, and nor do the rich elites.
Some think tanks told us we had passed the "tipping point" and that we only had "50 days to save the planet" and they predicted that teh public would believe them. But they didn't count on Nigel Lawson, Paul Dacre and the Daily Mail!
Lawson says that his think tank is unbiased, that climate change science has not proven anything beyond doubt. That is the key.......doubt. Plus on that website it says that they prefer to rely on observation and not on the predictions of the scientists using data.
He has an agenda, it is short term. (silly old fool is due to croak soon)
There is plenty of evidence that fracking causes environmental damage. If oil is a finite resource as we know it is, then finding other sources doesn't make it less finite it just puts off the inevitable.
'Lawson says that his think tank is unbiased'
That just goes to prove that there are some good think tanks out there.
'If oil is a finite resource as we know it is, then finding other sources doesn't make it less finite it just puts off the inevitable.'
Life is finite and the life of the planet is finite, but that doesn't mean that we have passed the "tipping point" and have to live in a low-growth climate of doom.
Lawson's article shows that new sources of gas have been found that will power the planet for the next century at least.
Future generations of the billions of people on this planet will make new discoveries and find and create brand new sources of energy. We only discovered electricity just over 100 years ago. Who knows what teh people of teh world will discover in the next 100 years.
The question will be, will the rich elite try to prevent the ingenuity and growth of the world population of the next 100 years in order to maintain their control of the planet.
In a free democractic world, the people will prosper and the rich elite will have to go with the public.
Peak oil has always been a deeply flawed theory.
The reason it is flawed is because in the entire history of mankind there has never been any instance of humankind running out of a fuel.
As a fuel becomes scare it becomes more expensive and thus more economic to exploit another fuel. First it was wood, then it was coal, then oil and now it is natural gas. In the future it might be renewables, it might be nuclear fusion.
The bonkers rush to install hugely expensive 'renewables' now when there is a vast vast untapped resource of cheap natural gas in every country in the World is just plain mad.
The age of oil is coming to an end for sure but not because we are running out of it but because peak demand for will soon be reached.
Natural gas will take over from oil as a transportation fuel just as it has already taken over from oil and coal in much of the electricty generation. Combined Cycle Gas Turbines burn gas very efficiently in power stations across the World and internal combustion engines (with a very small amount of low tech modification) already burn natural gas in road vehicles.
'According to the U.S. government, oil shale deposits in an area called the Green River Formation in the western United States are estimated to contain up to 3 trillion barrels of oil three times more than the whole world has consumed in the past 100 years.
The shale revolution means the earth can now provide us with about 250 years' worth of gas supplies
The economic and political repercussions of such discoveries cannot be understated. The cheap energy brought about by the shale gas revolution, for example, is already boosting the U.S. economy.
Indeed, sections of U.S. manufacturing are even repatriating their activities from China.'
This is incredibly good news and yet we hardly hear about the momentous consequences on the BBC news channels, who still show us reports on "ethical man" riding a bicycle to "save the planet" and the plight of the polar bear.
None of the think tanks who told us all about the "tipping point" ever predicted this huge new energy revolution beneath our feet, and they are still pretty silent about it now. I wonder why.
This cheap gas and oil are real assets, not funny money digits on bankers' deriavtives' books.
This cheap energy could lead to a boom in production as we harness power and energy to create new goods and upgrade crumbling infrastructure. This could spell the end of the imposed financial austerity and lead to productivity on a scale we haven't witnessed in decades.
That's probably why the elites and their media haven't spread the word yet.
But the truth is out, they can't put the lid back on it - the gas beneath our feet will gush up for humanity's service.
and all of this is good for the environment?
Yes it's good for the environemnt and also it is not nuclear so doesn't pose those risks.
'As a result, instead of benefiting from cheap shale gas, new industries and hundreds of thousands of new jobs, Europe is constraining itself with self-imposed green limits to growth.
This is despite the fact that gas-fired power stations emit roughly half the carbon dioxide that coal-fired power stations do, which is why the U.S. is the only country to have significantly reduced its CO2 emissions in recent years.
But don't expect most of the media to tell you anything about it. They will still be pushing taxpayer subsidies to rich landowners for windfarms that push up fuel prices for the poorest people in the land by about £100 per year, which prolongs the austerity and cuts growth.
'self-imposed green limits to growth'
green limits to growth is the key phrase. Remember that the Club of Rome document in the 70s, I think it was, was actually called 'Limits to Growth', and the green mantra is the same after all these years.
The elites and their think tanks want 'limits to growth', I think they want austerity too, so that ordinary people will be limited in their growth.
But this energy revolution might turn the tide on the tidal wave of 'climate change' and 'global warming' and deliver the end of austerity for the people of the world and lead to an age of growth the like we haven't seen since the industrial revolution.
There are a few people and some think tanks who criticise our Chancellor, George Osborne. But they may well soon be singing his praises because he may the person who delivers this hope and bright future to teh people of this land.
'In his Autumn Statement on Wednesday, Chancellor George Osborne announced a new gas strategy designed to promote the fastest practicable exploitation of the UKs shale gas deposits.
He explained: I dont want British families to be left behind as gas prices tumble on the other side of the Atlantic.
In years to come, this may well be seen as a major turning point for the UK economy, when everything else in this years Autumn Statement has long been forgotten.
super wealth in the hands of a very few
Windsors - Huis van Oranje (NL)......
The two that most come to mind.
Keep the people dumb with their permanent soap operas too.....
Here is a wikipedia article on the original elite-commissioned 1972 Club of Rome book called 'The Limits of Growth'.
That same thread runs through to today.
suburbophobe, you are right.
Kepp the people in the dark about Savile et al. for decades, and even knight him, and feed the people false information, and divide and rule the people, and tell them to get on their bikes to "save the planet", while the super rich own fleets of Ferraris and Maseratis and Bentleys and private jets.
I am unconvinced by the Peak Oil claims.
I used to know some petro-geologists who worked in E&P, they told me that there is only ever about 20 years of proven expolitable reserves, because if you've got less than 20 years-worth, you go and look for more; and if you've got more than 20 years-worth, you don't go looking for more. Therefore you probably won't find any.
That said, the "Global warming is not agreed" claim is a load lof bllcks. It is agreed by all climatoligists and weather experts throughout the world. The data is uncontrovertible. There are still a few nutters and non-scientists or people who work in other fields that still argue with it. A bit like saying "the germ theory is not universally accepted" or "evolution is just a theory, and no more valid than the view that the world is flat and stands on the back of a giant tortoise"
I am always unconvinced by the idea that some politician will deliver hope and a bright future to the people of this (or any other) land
'I am always unconvinced by the idea that some politician will deliver hope and a bright future to the people of this (or any other) land'
Piglet, I think you are being a bit harsh on politicians there. But I would not disagree with you if you qualified that statement with 'New Labour politician'!
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.