Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Latest peak oil news
- This topic has 240 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 9 months ago by
davelj.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 24, 2010 at 6:19 PM #518387February 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM #517469
KSMountain
ParticipantWow that looks like a great speech. I’ll read the rest from hotel room tonight or tomorrow.
Ah the joy of business trips…
February 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM #517610ParticipantWow that looks like a great speech. I’ll read the rest from hotel room tonight or tomorrow.
Ah the joy of business trips…
February 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM #518045ParticipantWow that looks like a great speech. I’ll read the rest from hotel room tonight or tomorrow.
Ah the joy of business trips…
February 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM #518138ParticipantWow that looks like a great speech. I’ll read the rest from hotel room tonight or tomorrow.
Ah the joy of business trips…
February 24, 2010 at 6:22 PM #518392ParticipantWow that looks like a great speech. I’ll read the rest from hotel room tonight or tomorrow.
Ah the joy of business trips…
February 24, 2010 at 6:38 PM #517474Participant[quote=Arraya]Nuclear is not long term thinking.[/quote]
Yeah I guess I agree. Anything based on extracting finite material from the planet is not sustainable “long term”. On the other hand, you can do a lot, for a long time, with suboptimal solutions. Look at the internal combustion engine. Or HTTP for that matter. Really kind of a hack, but though it is suboptimal, it is good enough, and pervasive. Nuclear could be that way for what 100 years? 200? Still, I agree not forever.[quote=Arraya]With wind, solar and tidal we could power the world today.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? I’m not. I support doing as much of all of those things as we can. I’m not sure that it would be enough, but sheesh, even if their sum covered say 40% of our needs… great!Might hundreds of square miles solid of highly efficient solar panels in unrelentingly sunny areas get the job done? Maybe. I’m all for trying.
Where do I vote for that?
I’d rather pay for that than health care for people who don’t take care of themselves.
February 24, 2010 at 6:38 PM #517615Participant[quote=Arraya]Nuclear is not long term thinking.[/quote]
Yeah I guess I agree. Anything based on extracting finite material from the planet is not sustainable “long term”. On the other hand, you can do a lot, for a long time, with suboptimal solutions. Look at the internal combustion engine. Or HTTP for that matter. Really kind of a hack, but though it is suboptimal, it is good enough, and pervasive. Nuclear could be that way for what 100 years? 200? Still, I agree not forever.[quote=Arraya]With wind, solar and tidal we could power the world today.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? I’m not. I support doing as much of all of those things as we can. I’m not sure that it would be enough, but sheesh, even if their sum covered say 40% of our needs… great!Might hundreds of square miles solid of highly efficient solar panels in unrelentingly sunny areas get the job done? Maybe. I’m all for trying.
Where do I vote for that?
I’d rather pay for that than health care for people who don’t take care of themselves.
February 24, 2010 at 6:38 PM #518050Participant[quote=Arraya]Nuclear is not long term thinking.[/quote]
Yeah I guess I agree. Anything based on extracting finite material from the planet is not sustainable “long term”. On the other hand, you can do a lot, for a long time, with suboptimal solutions. Look at the internal combustion engine. Or HTTP for that matter. Really kind of a hack, but though it is suboptimal, it is good enough, and pervasive. Nuclear could be that way for what 100 years? 200? Still, I agree not forever.[quote=Arraya]With wind, solar and tidal we could power the world today.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? I’m not. I support doing as much of all of those things as we can. I’m not sure that it would be enough, but sheesh, even if their sum covered say 40% of our needs… great!Might hundreds of square miles solid of highly efficient solar panels in unrelentingly sunny areas get the job done? Maybe. I’m all for trying.
Where do I vote for that?
I’d rather pay for that than health care for people who don’t take care of themselves.
February 24, 2010 at 6:38 PM #518143Participant[quote=Arraya]Nuclear is not long term thinking.[/quote]
Yeah I guess I agree. Anything based on extracting finite material from the planet is not sustainable “long term”. On the other hand, you can do a lot, for a long time, with suboptimal solutions. Look at the internal combustion engine. Or HTTP for that matter. Really kind of a hack, but though it is suboptimal, it is good enough, and pervasive. Nuclear could be that way for what 100 years? 200? Still, I agree not forever.[quote=Arraya]With wind, solar and tidal we could power the world today.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? I’m not. I support doing as much of all of those things as we can. I’m not sure that it would be enough, but sheesh, even if their sum covered say 40% of our needs… great!Might hundreds of square miles solid of highly efficient solar panels in unrelentingly sunny areas get the job done? Maybe. I’m all for trying.
Where do I vote for that?
I’d rather pay for that than health care for people who don’t take care of themselves.
February 24, 2010 at 6:38 PM #518397Participant[quote=Arraya]Nuclear is not long term thinking.[/quote]
Yeah I guess I agree. Anything based on extracting finite material from the planet is not sustainable “long term”. On the other hand, you can do a lot, for a long time, with suboptimal solutions. Look at the internal combustion engine. Or HTTP for that matter. Really kind of a hack, but though it is suboptimal, it is good enough, and pervasive. Nuclear could be that way for what 100 years? 200? Still, I agree not forever.[quote=Arraya]With wind, solar and tidal we could power the world today.
[/quote]
Are you sure about that? I’m not. I support doing as much of all of those things as we can. I’m not sure that it would be enough, but sheesh, even if their sum covered say 40% of our needs… great!Might hundreds of square miles solid of highly efficient solar panels in unrelentingly sunny areas get the job done? Maybe. I’m all for trying.
Where do I vote for that?
I’d rather pay for that than health care for people who don’t take care of themselves.
February 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM #517524davelj
Participant[quote=Arraya]
[From an a different thread]
Economics in general is a complete and utter pseudo-science… It’s guess work with a wishing aspect.
[/quote]OK, but…
[quote=Arraya]
Oil price spiked with no increased production and then demand fell and price subsided. There is no reason elevated prices should maintain elevated if demand falls, obviously.
[/quote]Hold on a sec… this sounds suspiciously like you’re applying the Theory of Supply and Demand… which is “economics”…
[quote=Arraya]
Market theory and economics is not rooted in any science. It’s just a man made theory that has little relevance on the natural state of the world. It’s a belief system with math. A belief system with endless contradictions and tragic assumptions, at that.
[/quote]Ah, but then another criticism of economics.
It appears that you like to use economics to support your positions when it’s convenient, but then you demonize it when it doesn’t support your position. Much like everyone who doesn’t ascribe to your views is guilty of “magical thinking,” but YOUR views are pure truth and wisdom.
You can’t have it both ways… with economics or magical thinking.
February 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM #517665Participant[quote=Arraya]
[From an a different thread]
Economics in general is a complete and utter pseudo-science… It’s guess work with a wishing aspect.
[/quote]OK, but…
[quote=Arraya]
Oil price spiked with no increased production and then demand fell and price subsided. There is no reason elevated prices should maintain elevated if demand falls, obviously.
[/quote]Hold on a sec… this sounds suspiciously like you’re applying the Theory of Supply and Demand… which is “economics”…
[quote=Arraya]
Market theory and economics is not rooted in any science. It’s just a man made theory that has little relevance on the natural state of the world. It’s a belief system with math. A belief system with endless contradictions and tragic assumptions, at that.
[/quote]Ah, but then another criticism of economics.
It appears that you like to use economics to support your positions when it’s convenient, but then you demonize it when it doesn’t support your position. Much like everyone who doesn’t ascribe to your views is guilty of “magical thinking,” but YOUR views are pure truth and wisdom.
You can’t have it both ways… with economics or magical thinking.
February 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM #518101Participant[quote=Arraya]
[From an a different thread]
Economics in general is a complete and utter pseudo-science… It’s guess work with a wishing aspect.
[/quote]OK, but…
[quote=Arraya]
Oil price spiked with no increased production and then demand fell and price subsided. There is no reason elevated prices should maintain elevated if demand falls, obviously.
[/quote]Hold on a sec… this sounds suspiciously like you’re applying the Theory of Supply and Demand… which is “economics”…
[quote=Arraya]
Market theory and economics is not rooted in any science. It’s just a man made theory that has little relevance on the natural state of the world. It’s a belief system with math. A belief system with endless contradictions and tragic assumptions, at that.
[/quote]Ah, but then another criticism of economics.
It appears that you like to use economics to support your positions when it’s convenient, but then you demonize it when it doesn’t support your position. Much like everyone who doesn’t ascribe to your views is guilty of “magical thinking,” but YOUR views are pure truth and wisdom.
You can’t have it both ways… with economics or magical thinking.
February 24, 2010 at 9:31 PM #518193Participant[quote=Arraya]
[From an a different thread]
Economics in general is a complete and utter pseudo-science… It’s guess work with a wishing aspect.
[/quote]OK, but…
[quote=Arraya]
Oil price spiked with no increased production and then demand fell and price subsided. There is no reason elevated prices should maintain elevated if demand falls, obviously.
[/quote]Hold on a sec… this sounds suspiciously like you’re applying the Theory of Supply and Demand… which is “economics”…
[quote=Arraya]
Market theory and economics is not rooted in any science. It’s just a man made theory that has little relevance on the natural state of the world. It’s a belief system with math. A belief system with endless contradictions and tragic assumptions, at that.
[/quote]Ah, but then another criticism of economics.
It appears that you like to use economics to support your positions when it’s convenient, but then you demonize it when it doesn’t support your position. Much like everyone who doesn’t ascribe to your views is guilty of “magical thinking,” but YOUR views are pure truth and wisdom.
You can’t have it both ways… with economics or magical thinking.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.