Personal Finance

s_knight8 · Guest

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47276

In 1865, Englishman William Stanley Jevons, one of the greatest social
scientists of his day, wrote an exhaustive study titled "The Coal Question:
An Inquiry Concerning the Progress of the Nation, and the Probable
Exhaustion of our Coal Mines." Jevons' argument was that England was about
to exhaust all available coal resources, which inevitably would mean the
collapse of the industrial enterprise upon which Great Britain's mighty
empire depended. He wrote:

It will appear that there is no reasonable prospect of any relief from a
future want of the main agent of industry (namely, coal).

And:

We cannot long continue our present rate of progress. The first check for
our growing prosperity, however, must render our population excessive.

In contemplating his form of the Malthusian nightmare, W. Stanley Jevons was
the M. King Hubbard "Peak-Oil Production" theorist of his day. Like the
"Peak-Oil Production" theorists of today, Jevons' work is filled with
detailed analyses of coal mines showing - mine by mine - the estimated
amount of coal, the annual consumption of that coal (depletion ratio), and
the duration of the supply, anticipating with uncanny precision the
"bell-shaped curve" typical of M. King Hubbert's "peak-oil" graphs.

In his classic 1996 book, "The Ultimate Resource 2," debunking many
different "doom-and-gloom" resource scares that abound in popular and
scientific thinking, University of Maryland's professor of business
administration Julian L. Simons, explained why Jevons was flat wrong:

What happened? Because of the perceived future need for coal and because of
the potential profit in meeting that need, prospectors searched out new
deposits of coal, inventors discovered better ways to get coal out of the
earth, and transportation engineers developed cheaper ways to move the coal.

Insightfully, Julian Simons documented a series of authoritative predictions
dating back to 1885, all warning that the United States would soon run out
of oil.

1885, U.S. Geological Survey: "Little or no chance for oil in California."

1991, U.S. Geological Survey: Same prophecy by USGS for Kansas and Texas as
in 1895 for California.

1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines: Total future production limit of 5.7 billion
barrels of oil, at most a 10-year supply remaining.

1939, Department of the Interior: Oil reserves in the United States to be
exhausted in 13 years.

1951, Department of the Interior, Oil and Gas Division: Oil reserves in the
United States to be exhausted in 13 years.

When did Julian Simons think we would run out of oil? "Never!" was his
answer. With 1.28 trillion barrels of oil in proven reserves today - more
than ever in recorded human history, despite oil consumption in the world
nearly doubling in the last three decades - we should seriously consider
that Julian Simons might well be right.

"Peak-Oil Production" believers regard Shell Oil geologist M. King Hubbert
as their theoretical deity. In 1956, Hubbert drew a bell-shaped curve that
he said showed U.S. oil production would peak in the 1970s and decline from
there until U.S. oil would in 2050 be nearly depleted. Subsequently,
Hubbert's adherents have expanded his analysis into a worldwide prediction
that we are running out of oil. Again, "Hubbert's Peak" theorists have
serious critics, including prominent oil and gas analyst Michael C. Lynch.
In a paper titled, "The New Pessimism about Petroleum Resources: Debunking
the Hubbert Model (and Hubbert Modelers)," Lynch argues that Hubbart's
initial analysis was anything but rigorous or scientifically formal:

The initial theory behind what is now known as the Hubbert curve was very
simplistic. Hubbert was simply trying to estimate approximate resource
levels, and for the lower-48 U.S. he though a bell-curve would be the most
appropriate form. It was only later that the Hubbert curve came to be seen
as explanatory in and of itself, that is, geology requires that production
should follow such a curve.

Indeed, for many years, Hubbert himself published no equations for deriving
the curve, and it appears that he only used a rough estimation initially. In
his 1956 paper, in fact, he noted that production often did not follow a
bell curve. In later years, however, he seems to have accepted the curve as
explanatory.

Supporters like to argue that U.S. production "peaked" in 1970. To counter
this claim, critics argue that U.S. production has only declined since 1970
because environmentalists and the political Left have aggressively blocked
oil production in Alaska and offshore, where oil exploration has generated
new finds.

In writing "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics
of Oil," Craig Smith and I have presented a 7-point plan we believe would
allow the United States to increase domestic oil production to the point
where once again the U.S. could approach oil independence.

In the first paragraph of his 2005 book, "Beyond Oil: The View from
Hubbert's Peak," Kenneth Deffeyes, professor emeritus at Princeton, boldly
predicts that world production of crude oil will peak in just a few days, on
Thanksgiving Day 2005. What happens when crude oil production statistics
show increases well into 2006? Will Kenneth Deffeyes eat crow for
Thanksgiving Day 2006 if he is wrong? Probably not.

Most likely Deffeyes will simply readjust his theory and pick a new day for
"peak-oil production," either that or he will assert he only meant the
prediction metaphorically, not empirically. At any rate, Craig Smith and I
are inclined to agree with Julian Simon. When will we run out of oil?
"Never!" we too argue. The world has never had proven oil reserves as large
as we have today and the trend shows no sign of reversing.

Gib Bogle · Guest

We'll never run out because as it becomes depleted the price will rise
and demand will reduce. Various other energy sources will substitute
for it.

Guest · Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:50 am Post subject: Re: We will never run out of oil

i do have a little proof of us never running out of oil. at first i did
not believe it, but now i have to because it is happening.many old dried
up oil wells have filled backup with oil and are being pumped again.
now, at first i thought maybe they just went back in because the prices
were so high, but then i read a few times that the people drilling were
suprised to find oil in them. scientists now believe that chemical
reactions reproduce oil in the earth, not hoardes of dinosaurs roaming
saidi arabia millions and billions and trillions of years ago ,like the
left wing professors were teaching us for years....yes, we were suckers
to believe the dinosaur -oil story.

Boycott Aruba !

Don S · Guest

Gib Bogle wrote:

Doug · Guest

Would be wonderful if it was true. I've heard this theory before. Not
sure anyone knows for sure.

Oil is frequently found in "domes". The dome is made of an inpervious
material like clay. The oil comes up from below (apparently it is sort
of in the rock, like water in a sponge), and collects below the dome.

The theory I heard like the one you expounded was that NATURAL GAS was
being made in the earth's core. The theoretical argument AGAINST this,
is there really is no reason why carbon would be in the core. Carbon is
light and would go to the earths surface as the earth spun and cooled.
So goes the argument against this (and other arguments as well).

Your theory has been around a while and has not gained credence,
although it hasn't been completely disprooved either.

They KNOW that swamps produce hydrocarbons. That is CERTAIN.

Carolyn · Guest

YOU'RE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don S wrote:

aubrey · Guest

Unless you fail to pay your bill.

Gib Bogle · Guest

comics@webtv.net wrote:

Don S · Guest

Carolyn wrote:

Adam Russell · Guest

"Carolyn" <momarch27959nospammywhammy@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:43758187.4030001@earthlink.net...

Carolyn · Guest

im rubber and YOU'RE (not your) glue...................
:P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
carolyn

Don S wrote:

Don S · Guest

Adam Russell wrote:

Carolyn · Guest

Say all you want about me but dammit spell my name right!!!!!
(stole that one from PT Barnum)

English was my worstest subject ;) Math was my forte. I just get tired
of seeing your and your're mixed up :D

Carolyn (who is shoeless right now and has been all day ;) We went to
the beach for the day)

billb · Guest

lots of things are ok, but taken to extreme produce less than
desirable results.

to wit:

http://www.ntxalliance.com/ntx-img/ShowLetter.jpg

--
billb
Do not squander time, that is the stuff life is made of.
The war is over, don't ask for credit.
"s_knight8" <s_knight8nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dktavt$a9p@dispatch.concentric.net...

Cyde Weys · Guest

comics@webtv.net wrote:

	Personal Finance Forum Index -> Stocks	All times are GMT Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2