"Oil is NOT a fossil fuel"

Status
Not open for further replies.
See, this is the stuff that bothers me about international trade. Why would some countries import and export the same thing at the same time?

IMO the reason is that they aren't the same. Melamine tainted powdered milk is imported to make cheap stuff and good quality powdered milk is exported to make luxury items with "imported ingredient".

They are also used to get around duty, export subsidizes, tariff, quota, and tons of other stupid trade tactics. One could think of it as why would nations want military when you save a ton of money by every country eliminating its military at the same time.

The reality is: people and countries do stupid things because they cheat, and wants to prevent others from cheating, so we will never achieve the utopia of perfect efficiency, and can never guarantee to be free from mutual destruction.


My cousin in law works for Lite-On and he said that many components were build in China, shipped to Hong Kong, then shipped back to China to meet some quota or subsidize standards. He also said the main reason for many factories in China locating near concentrated and expensive cities is the ease to get through custom, rather than being the shortest transportation path.


We haven't seen nothing until we see all the back room deals and dirty little secrets in trade wars.
 
Trade is used to provide foreign aid that nations earn. It also balances books. All the westernized industrial nations share like mean standards of living and all pay for the umbrella defense of that the mechanisms that provide that lifestyle.

Trade is totally regulated. Even if it's not throttled, it's not throttled with a purpose and it isn't competition and has nothing to do with philosophy.
 
I remember being in Scotland-not a place facing a shortage of sheep, seeing New Zealand lamb and mutton for sale in the village grocery. Many of the customers didn't care too much for that....
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: crinkles
i'd say about double to triple what they are now, judgung by people and industry's reactions in 2008

What is your target goal to reduce oil use by and why?

What do you think is an acceptable energy utilisation rate and why ?

Use what can be found. The cheaper oil is, the more people's living standards will increase, and poverty will be reduced.
Those that wish to artificially limit oil actively want to increase poverty and reduce living standards on a global scale.

Market forces tend to drive the price of oil, within the market frame work setup by governments. To say oil is a free market is a complete fallacy as there are significant outside distortions at every level.


Umm, which people, where? Was poverty reduced when oil was under a dollar a gallon?

Using what can be found doesn't mean that if you can get what you find out of the ground, that it will be cheap.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest

Use what can be found. The cheaper oil is, the more people's living standards will increase, and poverty will be reduced.
Those that wish to artificially limit oil actively want to increase poverty and reduce living standards on a global scale.

Market forces tend to drive the price of oil, within the market frame work setup by governments. To say oil is a free market is a complete fallacy as there are significant outside distortions at every level.


1) Oil price is hardly driven only by market force, unless you consider oil producing nation's intention to provoke volatility part of the market force.

2) Oil cost per individual income percentage is a better indication of living standard and poverty level. When fuel price drop to $1 / gal, people buy SUV instead of save the money for something else. Actually, oil price follows economy more than economy follows oil price when you look at recent history.

3) None of these matter when your market is not static. Currently it matters more about whether China and India's economic activities than US consumption.

4) You won't see standard of living increase when oil price drop lower, because it will only means production cut from OPEC.
 
Demand is infinite based on price. Production capability/capacity is max'd and likely to remain max'd. New finds are not infinite to match that infinite demand.

It's a simple pie that is going to be divided among many MANY more users. That will even grant (as in "for the moment" and only for the sake of consideration) some "perpetual" ability to maintain current production levels. As wealth is redistributed to "others" ..they will have more economic clout to afford more energy ..we will have the ability to afford less.

That's not hard to figure out.
 
Originally Posted By: Augustus
Why then is no oil found among fossils? Why is it normally found near underground salt pillars?


Do you count coal reserves as fossils ?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
i have no opinion on that, herr tempest.

Then how are you to decide if your 2 to 3 times price increase is being "effective"? You simply want to raise prices with no goal or rational? Why not increase the price 10 times? 20 times?

Begin with the end in mind. I realize that this is a black and white concept so it might be "below" the gray area thinkers here...


did you read what i wrote? read it again, it is in there. that's when people started hurting and market forces changed. who said i "simply want to raise prices with no goal..." ?? I only opined as to what i thought about where prices may hurt and get realised. talk about putting words in my mounth... your argumentation does not make for good debate. looks like a knee jerk to me... i'm done with you kind sir.
 
Quote:
I only opined as to what i thought about where prices may hurt and get realised.

Why would anyone want someone else to be intentionally "hurt" by high oil prices? To WHAT END do you want people to be hurt?

This "logic" is quite befuddling.
 
Tempest, if oil, a high utility fuel is used in stationary power applications (other than RAPS, which essentially count as mobile, due to the distances involved), then the market simply doesn't get it.

Is it too cheap ?

What will bring about rationality, other than depletion ?
 
Originally Posted By: MarkC
I remember being in Scotland-not a place facing a shortage of sheep, seeing New Zealand lamb and mutton for sale in the village grocery. Many of the customers didn't care too much for that....

If they didn't buy it, it wouldn't be there. So at least SOME of the people that don't like it, ARE buying it.

What was the deepest level organic matter has been found, again?

Quote:
Was poverty reduced when oil was under a dollar a gallon?

I'm guessing you had more money in your pocket when the price went down. Imaging how much that price reduction meant to truly poor people in other countries. And it wasn't that low long enough to make lasting impact.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Tempest, if oil, a high utility fuel is used in stationary power applications (other than RAPS, which essentially count as mobile, due to the distances involved), then the market simply doesn't get it.

Is it too cheap ?

What will bring about rationality, other than depletion ?

You are making a VALUE judgment based on your own biases. A very gray area...that you want policy made on.

I think I asked you before, if it is too cheap, how much more should it be? What is the END desired result? You are engineer, these should be simple concepts to you.
 
tempest, please find me a single post of mine where I have mentioned wanting policy made...

You keep demanding that people provide explicit figures on what number should be, while cloaking your own views in "the market does it, so it's the right thing to do"

How much waste do YOU see as tolerable ?

You're a market guy, so what's the NPV of a finite resource that's being tapped exponentially ?

My end desire ?

That our finite fossil fuels last as long as practicably possible, and that they be used rationally and efficiently.
 
Quote:
That our finite fossil fuels last as long as practicably possible, and that they be used rationally and efficiently.

Your gray area thinking is showing through here... All of those are qualifiers for a value judgment. Your shades of gray will be very different from others shades of gray.
Quote:
please find me a single post of mine where I have mentioned wanting policy made.

How else will you ensure that "our finite fossil fuels last as long as practicably possible, and that they be used rationally and efficiently"..from your point of view?

In terms of NPV, you should actually like the current way oil is dispersed. The exterior forces tend to make oil more expensive, rather than cheaper. A true free market would probably have found much more oil and delivered it at much lower prices, improving even more people's lives.
 
Quote:
A true free market would probably have found much more oil and delivered it at much lower prices, improving even more people's lives.


For how long?

How did Yankee Whaling do for finding more whales due to demand and market forces? They're even a resource that replenishes itself.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Augustus
Why then is no oil found among fossils? Why is it normally found near underground salt pillars?


Do you count coal reserves as fossils ?



I suggest Augustus and Tempest do some research on petroleum geology.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Augustus
Why then is no oil found among fossils? Why is it normally found near underground salt pillars?


Do you count coal reserves as fossils ?



Salt domes (the actual term) act as natural traps for oil that is migrating upward in strata. This salt was, by the way, deposited within marine basins.

Fossils and oil together, as shannow hinted, you need to clarify. But, if you're simple-mindedly talking about dinosuar and big animal fossils, you need to reset you thinking. That's not what "fossil fuel" means. Think algae and plankton, etc. The conditions that form oil are not the same conditions that preserve fossils.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
I only opined as to what i thought about where prices may hurt and get realised.

Why would anyone want someone else to be intentionally "hurt" by high oil prices? To WHAT END do you want people to be hurt?

This "logic" is quite befuddling.



words in my mouth! dammit talking to you is like dealing with a brick wall
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom