Dr. Doom Roubini is scared – economy worse than predicted

[Arraya]

The main issue I have with your post is ridiculing improvements to US energy policy as hippie-green-liberal nonsense. It’s this decade-old ‘Anti-Gore’ GOP talking point bullshit.

Actually, I think it goes back to when Reagan took off the white house solar panels that Carter put on.

[gandalf]

BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[gandalf]

BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[gandalf]

BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[gandalf]

BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[gandalf]

BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[Arraya]

[quote=gandalf]BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[/quote]

How much did Iraq cost? Big oil got some tasty contracts from that. That was a huge subsidy. However:

ENERGY IS the capacity to do work (no energy = no work). Thus, the global economy is 100 percent dependent on energy — it always has been, and it always will be.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that neither capital nor labor nor technology can “create” energy. Instead, available energy must be spent to transform existing matter (e.g., oil), or to divert an existing energy flow (e.g., wind) into more available energy. There are no exceptions to the thermodynamic laws!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that energy is wasted at every step in the economic process. The engines that actually do the work in our economy (so-called “heat engines”; e.g., diesel engines) waste more than 50 percent of the energy contained in their fuel.

ENERGY “RESOURCES” MUST produce more energy than they consume, otherwise they are called “sinks” (this is known as the “net energy” principle). About 735 joules of energy is required to lift 15 kg of oil 5 meters out of the ground just to overcome gravity — and the higher the lift, the greater the energy requirements. The most concentrated and most accessible oil is produced first; thereafter, more and more energy is required to find and produce oil. At some point, more energy is spent finding and producing oil than the energy recovered — and the “resource” has become a “sink”.

There is an enormous difference between the net energy of the “highly-concentrated” fossil fuel that power modern industrial society, and the “dilute” alternative energy we will be forced to depend upon as fossil fuel resources become sinks.

No so-called “renewable” energy system has the potential to generate more than a tiny fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels!

So no, there is nothing that compares. Conversely, we don’t price it appropriately as I stated in my above post. Because markets on think short term when developing and energy strategy for the future requires long term thinking. Thus, the market can’t save us or the mythical invisible hand.

[Arraya]

[quote=gandalf]BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[/quote]

How much did Iraq cost? Big oil got some tasty contracts from that. That was a huge subsidy. However:

ENERGY IS the capacity to do work (no energy = no work). Thus, the global economy is 100 percent dependent on energy — it always has been, and it always will be.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that neither capital nor labor nor technology can “create” energy. Instead, available energy must be spent to transform existing matter (e.g., oil), or to divert an existing energy flow (e.g., wind) into more available energy. There are no exceptions to the thermodynamic laws!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that energy is wasted at every step in the economic process. The engines that actually do the work in our economy (so-called “heat engines”; e.g., diesel engines) waste more than 50 percent of the energy contained in their fuel.

ENERGY “RESOURCES” MUST produce more energy than they consume, otherwise they are called “sinks” (this is known as the “net energy” principle). About 735 joules of energy is required to lift 15 kg of oil 5 meters out of the ground just to overcome gravity — and the higher the lift, the greater the energy requirements. The most concentrated and most accessible oil is produced first; thereafter, more and more energy is required to find and produce oil. At some point, more energy is spent finding and producing oil than the energy recovered — and the “resource” has become a “sink”.

There is an enormous difference between the net energy of the “highly-concentrated” fossil fuel that power modern industrial society, and the “dilute” alternative energy we will be forced to depend upon as fossil fuel resources become sinks.

No so-called “renewable” energy system has the potential to generate more than a tiny fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels!

So no, there is nothing that compares. Conversely, we don’t price it appropriately as I stated in my above post. Because markets on think short term when developing and energy strategy for the future requires long term thinking. Thus, the market can’t save us or the mythical invisible hand.

[Arraya]

[quote=gandalf]BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[/quote]

How much did Iraq cost? Big oil got some tasty contracts from that. That was a huge subsidy. However:

ENERGY IS the capacity to do work (no energy = no work). Thus, the global economy is 100 percent dependent on energy — it always has been, and it always will be.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that neither capital nor labor nor technology can “create” energy. Instead, available energy must be spent to transform existing matter (e.g., oil), or to divert an existing energy flow (e.g., wind) into more available energy. There are no exceptions to the thermodynamic laws!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that energy is wasted at every step in the economic process. The engines that actually do the work in our economy (so-called “heat engines”; e.g., diesel engines) waste more than 50 percent of the energy contained in their fuel.

ENERGY “RESOURCES” MUST produce more energy than they consume, otherwise they are called “sinks” (this is known as the “net energy” principle). About 735 joules of energy is required to lift 15 kg of oil 5 meters out of the ground just to overcome gravity — and the higher the lift, the greater the energy requirements. The most concentrated and most accessible oil is produced first; thereafter, more and more energy is required to find and produce oil. At some point, more energy is spent finding and producing oil than the energy recovered — and the “resource” has become a “sink”.

There is an enormous difference between the net energy of the “highly-concentrated” fossil fuel that power modern industrial society, and the “dilute” alternative energy we will be forced to depend upon as fossil fuel resources become sinks.

No so-called “renewable” energy system has the potential to generate more than a tiny fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels!

So no, there is nothing that compares. Conversely, we don’t price it appropriately as I stated in my above post. Because markets on think short term when developing and energy strategy for the future requires long term thinking. Thus, the market can’t save us or the mythical invisible hand.

[Arraya]

[quote=gandalf]BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[/quote]

How much did Iraq cost? Big oil got some tasty contracts from that. That was a huge subsidy. However:

ENERGY IS the capacity to do work (no energy = no work). Thus, the global economy is 100 percent dependent on energy — it always has been, and it always will be.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that neither capital nor labor nor technology can “create” energy. Instead, available energy must be spent to transform existing matter (e.g., oil), or to divert an existing energy flow (e.g., wind) into more available energy. There are no exceptions to the thermodynamic laws!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that energy is wasted at every step in the economic process. The engines that actually do the work in our economy (so-called “heat engines”; e.g., diesel engines) waste more than 50 percent of the energy contained in their fuel.

ENERGY “RESOURCES” MUST produce more energy than they consume, otherwise they are called “sinks” (this is known as the “net energy” principle). About 735 joules of energy is required to lift 15 kg of oil 5 meters out of the ground just to overcome gravity — and the higher the lift, the greater the energy requirements. The most concentrated and most accessible oil is produced first; thereafter, more and more energy is required to find and produce oil. At some point, more energy is spent finding and producing oil than the energy recovered — and the “resource” has become a “sink”.

There is an enormous difference between the net energy of the “highly-concentrated” fossil fuel that power modern industrial society, and the “dilute” alternative energy we will be forced to depend upon as fossil fuel resources become sinks.

No so-called “renewable” energy system has the potential to generate more than a tiny fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels!

So no, there is nothing that compares. Conversely, we don’t price it appropriately as I stated in my above post. Because markets on think short term when developing and energy strategy for the future requires long term thinking. Thus, the market can’t save us or the mythical invisible hand.

[Arraya]

[quote=gandalf]BTW, our EXISTING petrol-based energy industry has been the recipient of enormous investments, subsidies and foreign policy support from the United States Government over the last century.

Just don’t go yanking my chain about free markets and socialism and how renewable energy will never work because ‘Oil and Gas’ is as close as you can get to a state-sponsored, state-supported industry.

[/quote]

How much did Iraq cost? Big oil got some tasty contracts from that. That was a huge subsidy. However:

ENERGY IS the capacity to do work (no energy = no work). Thus, the global economy is 100 percent dependent on energy — it always has been, and it always will be.

THE FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that neither capital nor labor nor technology can “create” energy. Instead, available energy must be spent to transform existing matter (e.g., oil), or to divert an existing energy flow (e.g., wind) into more available energy. There are no exceptions to the thermodynamic laws!

THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS tells us that energy is wasted at every step in the economic process. The engines that actually do the work in our economy (so-called “heat engines”; e.g., diesel engines) waste more than 50 percent of the energy contained in their fuel.

ENERGY “RESOURCES” MUST produce more energy than they consume, otherwise they are called “sinks” (this is known as the “net energy” principle). About 735 joules of energy is required to lift 15 kg of oil 5 meters out of the ground just to overcome gravity — and the higher the lift, the greater the energy requirements. The most concentrated and most accessible oil is produced first; thereafter, more and more energy is required to find and produce oil. At some point, more energy is spent finding and producing oil than the energy recovered — and the “resource” has become a “sink”.

There is an enormous difference between the net energy of the “highly-concentrated” fossil fuel that power modern industrial society, and the “dilute” alternative energy we will be forced to depend upon as fossil fuel resources become sinks.

No so-called “renewable” energy system has the potential to generate more than a tiny fraction of the power now being generated by fossil fuels!

So no, there is nothing that compares. Conversely, we don’t price it appropriately as I stated in my above post. Because markets on think short term when developing and energy strategy for the future requires long term thinking. Thus, the market can’t save us or the mythical invisible hand.

[gandalf]

Good point, Arraya.

I wonder how much of the GOP’s current anti-environment, anti-conservation policies trace back to Carter’s ineptitude in dealing with oil shocks and Middle East matters in the 1970s?

[gandalf]

Good point, Arraya.

I wonder how much of the GOP’s current anti-environment, anti-conservation policies trace back to Carter’s ineptitude in dealing with oil shocks and Middle East matters in the 1970s?

[gandalf]

Good point, Arraya.

I wonder how much of the GOP’s current anti-environment, anti-conservation policies trace back to Carter’s ineptitude in dealing with oil shocks and Middle East matters in the 1970s?

[gandalf]

Good point, Arraya.

I wonder how much of the GOP’s current anti-environment, anti-conservation policies trace back to Carter’s ineptitude in dealing with oil shocks and Middle East matters in the 1970s?

[Author]

Posts