Six questions for gas price conspiracy theorists: (Al Gore, middle east, global warming)

[ca_north]

Without Googling anything beforehand:

1) Do you understand the concept of EROEI, aka Net Energy in terms of how oil field flow-rates decline over time as costs rise?

2) Do you think environmental regulations were somehow responsible for the 1970 U.S. oil production peak, when the EPA had barely begun to regulate the industry? This goes with claims that oil is merely "locked up by eco-freaks" and if we could ravage half the wilderness in America we'd be "energy independent."

3) How long do you think Alaska's ANWR oil would last the United States if that was our hypothetical sole source? We burn about 19-20 million barrels per day at the moment and ANWR could yield 10 billion barrels in a median optimistic scenario. Have you done the math?

4) Do you think all U.S. shale can be drilled and fracked (meaning it comes up in a semi-liquid form) like North Dakota's Bakken formation? The vast bulk of U.S. shale is solid kerogen that must be heated to release a synthetic form of oil. Can that shale be "unlocked" to freely flow via a miracle EROEI-boosting technology that's "just around the corner?"

5) Do you think global warming is simply a hoax created to impede oil drilling and coal mining?

6) Was the Earth, with all its life and resources, created by a supernatural deity solely for humans to use?


I pose these questions because I see many opinions on oil that make me wonder if 2/3rds of America has bothered to learn basic geology, including Presidential candidates.

[modeerf]

Originally Posted by ca_north

Without Googling anything beforehand:

1) Do you understand the concept of EROEI, aka Net Energy in terms of how oil field flow-rates decline over time as costs rise?

No

2) Do you think environmental regulations were somehow responsible for the 1970 U.S. oil production peak, when the EPA had barely begun to regulate the industry? This goes with claims that oil is merely "locked up by eco-freaks" and if we could ravage half the wilderness in America we'd be "energy independent."

No, it was about increasing the value of oil, in order to increase treasury bill purchases. 10% of $5, or 10%
$50? which is better?

3) How long do you think Alaska's ANWR oil would last the United States if that was our hypothetical sole source? We burn about 19-20 million barrels per day at the moment and ANWR could yield 10 billion barrels in a median optimistic scenario. Have you done the math?

5 yrs.?

4) Do you think all U.S. shale can be drilled and fracked (meaning it comes up in a semi-liquid form) like North Dakota's Bakken formation?

Yes, it just does a lot of damage.

5) Following up on #4, do you think solid kerogen shale (the vast majority of U.S. shale) can flow just like the Bakken formation, or even liquid crude oil, via some miracle EROEI-boosting technology that's "just around the corner?"

Possibly, the micro chip has doubled and doubled... where there is a will, there is a greedy banker ready to profit.

6) Do you think global warming is simply a hoax created to impede oil drilling and coal mining, along with raising taxes?

Yes, As far as a man made phenom? Yes Al Gore is a opportunist, and a snake oil salesman.

7) Do you think the Earth, with all its life and resources, was created by a supernatural deity solely for humans to use?

Yes, but not solely, it was created for man. And man for it.

I pose these questions because I see many opinions on oil that make me wonder if 2/3rds of America has bothered to learn basic geology, including Presidential candidates.[/quote]

No, and Presidents are appointed, not elected.

[whogo]

125 years ago it was postulated that if something was not done the cities of Boston, Philadelphia and New York would be knee deep in horse manure within a century.

Less than 40 years ago major magazines were printing articles speculating about the coming ice age.

Another Ice Age? - TIME

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...4C5E16&first=0

Great song.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by modeerf

No

No, it was about increasing the value of oil, in order to increase treasury bill purchases. 10% of $5, or 10%
$50? which is better?

5 yrs.?

Yes, it just does a lot of damage.

Possibly, the micro chip has doubled and doubled... where there is a will, there is a greedy banker ready to profit.

Yes, As far as a man made phenom? Yes Al Gore is a opportunist, and a snake oil salesman.

Yes, but not solely, it was created for man. And man for it.

I pose these questions because I see many opinions on oil that make me wonder if 2/3rds of America has bothered to learn basic geology, including Presidential candidates.

No, and Presidents are appointed, not elected.

You replied before I re-edited the post down to six questions, but I get the drift. Thanks for answering. The Creationism angle is quite common among Peak Oil deniers. The belief that global warming is solely the brainchild of Al Gore (and not thousands of scientists, going back to John Tyndall in the 1850s) is also quite common. I'm glad we have such sharp minds in America.

P.S. ANWR would last less than 2 years. Math is a useful thing.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by whogo

125 years ago it was postulated that if something was not done the cities of Boston, Philadelphia and New York would be knee deep in horse manure within a century.

Less than 40 years ago major magazines were printing articles speculating about the coming ice age.

Another Ice Age? - TIME

won't get fooled again who - Bing Videos

I see you have chosen to answer none of those questions and just posted right-wing echo chamber stuff. Thanks for the insight. I guess the questions weren't fair, or too detailed. Choosing not to think can make life seem simple. I understand that a lot of people are afflicted that way.

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by ca_north

I see you have chosen to answer none of those questions and just posted right-wing echo chamber stuff. Thanks for the insight. I guess the questions weren't fair, or too detailed. Choosing not to think can make life seem simple. I understand that a lot of people are afflicted that way.

I also decided to answer none of your questions because you're a troll.

[GuyNTexas]

Originally Posted by ca_north

Without Googling anything beforehand:

1) Do you understand the concept of EROEI, aka Net Energy in terms of how oil field flow-rates decline over time as costs rise?

It's a simple concept, so it's not difficult at all to grasp. But applying the concept as a predictive and negative outcome certainty is an act of simple mindedness.

I cite liberals as a perfect example of extreme ERoEI, in that the energy resources they consume far exceed the output value they provide in return ... including such simple minded nonsense like ERoEI.

A little factoid that may be of interest ..... food production in general consumes 20 to 50 times the amount of energy that the food ultimately produces in calories for which it is produced. Applying ERoEI as a viability measure for that production would require us all to purposely starve ourselves to death. Not a good idea.

If you're worried about a situation that has us using two barrels of oil to extract one barrel ... just keep liberals out of the oil fields. Conservatives would never agree to do such a stupid thing.

Originally Posted by ca_north

2) Do you think environmental regulations were somehow responsible for the 1970 U.S. oil production peak, when the EPA had barely begun to regulate the industry? This goes with claims that oil is merely "locked up by eco-freaks" and if we could ravage half the wilderness in America we'd be "energy independent."

The oil cartel use all sorts of ridiculous and nonsensical excuses for doing what they do. One of the more ridiculously lame ones is this oft repeated claim that "those sandal wearing tree huggers won't let us drill, which is why costs are so high" baloney. Just ask those Arab sandal wearers what happens when you impede the goals of Exxon/Mobile/BP/RDS .... and that laughable nonsense will be easier to recognize.

Originally Posted by ca_north

3) How long do you think Alaska's ANWR oil would last the United States if that was our hypothetical sole source? We burn about 19-20 million barrels per day at the moment and ANWR could yield 10 billion barrels in a median optimistic scenario. Have you done the math?

Math has nothing to do with it. The first equation is truthfulness ... and to be truthful, you're clueless, which makes the arrogance that much more annoying.

There are known and proven oil reserves in the United States that dwarf the combined reserves of the middle east. There's enough here to not only provide for all our needs for the next 200 years, but also enough to make us one of the major oil exporters on the planet. These reserves have been kept secret since the 1970's, when they were discovered, capped off, and classified. To reveal these reserves would have then and would still send oil prices plummeting to levels that are totally unacceptable by the powers that be, which, contrary to the child-like public's misconceptions, is not wanted by the "government".

Since the US Dollar was taken off the gold standard, Oil has been the defacto backing power of the dollar, and you would destroy the dollar by destroying oil prices. That's the relevant math in this equation.

Originally Posted by ca_north

4) Do you think all U.S. shale can be drilled and fracked (meaning it comes up in a semi-liquid form) like North Dakota's Bakken formation? The vast bulk of U.S. shale is solid kerogen that must be heated to release a synthetic form of oil. Can that shale be "unlocked" to freely flow via a miracle EROEI-boosting technology that's "just around the corner?"

Total non-issue. Totally not needed. All that is needed is to declassify and put to use the massive reserves of lite sweet crude that's already been found.

Originally Posted by ca_north

5) Do you think global warming is simply a hoax created to impede oil drilling and coal mining?

No ... it's a scam to control every activity that uses energy by imposing carbon output restrictions on every conceivable activity which will undoubtedly be selectively enforced, with certain exemptions available to those politically connected. And that pretty much covers every activity I can think of that someone might want to control, since all manners of commerce and production and distribution and manufacturing and energy production and transportation and entertainment uses energy and has an associated carbon footprint .... including sitting under an old oak tree and simply breathing the chem trail contaminated air.

As a side note .... us older folks remember the days before the great CO2 Molecule that ate New York movie was produced by Al the Goracle .... and we used to joke about how the government would tax the very air we breathe if they could figure out a way to do it! 30 years later .... ding, ding, ding ... by George, they've done it!

Originally Posted by ca_north

6) Was the Earth, with all its life and resources, created by a supernatural deity solely for humans to use?

Godlessness and cluelessness is a terribly self defeating situation.

Originally Posted by ca_north

I pose these questions because I see many opinions on oil that make me wonder if 2/3rds of America has bothered to learn basic geology, including Presidential candidates.

Your opinions are quite common, so my negative remarks are not directed particularly at you personally .. just at the opinions themselves.

And I think you have fallen victim like so many others ... too quick to accept others opinions, and to slow to think things through on your own. I don't have the slightest idea why so many people are like this, but it is a huge problem.

And one can set their watch to these people ... almost without fail, when you find a person that believes in anthropogenic global warming ... you've found a person that is GUARANTEED to buy every cockamamie story out there, hook line and sinker ... from Peak Oil ... to jet fuel melting sky scrapers.

It's always the same ones. Over and over.

[pknopp]

So you start one thread which is basically the same thing as this one and when it doesn't go as planned, you start another?