Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
If business TV catch phrases are correct and reflect the US, welcome and about time, although the phrase is decades old and it applied to Canada, Europe and Japan.

As for overdue US decisions, I agree with your 1, 2 and 3.  Your fourth and "ingenuity" are NOT reasonable solutions.  More like sticking one´s head in the sand, or wishful thinking.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Mon Dec 18th, 2006 at 02:03:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well you prove yourself to be the Paul Ehrlich in the referenced Wikipedia article.  I think new technologies will have dramatic impact on future energy costs, and investments such as the new VC money into energy R&D will be a major reason for the new innovations.  But you're certainly welcome to your opinion.

And if you don't think providing more oil as one source of energy, when there is a supply problem, will help the situation, you might want to go back to Economics A01 and look at some of those supply/demand charts.

by wchurchill on Mon Dec 18th, 2006 at 02:46:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There is a demand problem, not a supply problem.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 18th, 2006 at 02:56:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That is just such an odd comment.  When an economist looks at a demand and supply chart, and it shows, for example, climbing prices,,,,he would not look at one part of the chart, and say that is the problem.  That is of course what you are doing  when you say that.  

Note my five suggestions have three on the demand side, and two on the supply side.  It's just not rationale to eliminate half the options.  Certainly increasing the supply of oil helps the situation--I'm not saying that it solves the situation, only that it helps.  And the new technologies that are being developed will have the effect of shifting the supply curve.

Historically cheap oil has made it impractical, in a capitalist society, for the investments in new technologies to be made that will shift the supply curves.  This is an area where visionary public policy could have seen the situation, and made policy decisions that would have smoothed the transition.  Obviously that didn't happen, and the road to change is going to be bumpier than it might have been.  But what's new with politicians that either lack vision, or lack courage because often vision requires short term pain--anathema to politicians--(see social security and healthcare for the aging).

by wchurchill on Mon Dec 18th, 2006 at 03:22:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't really follow...

It's peak oil supply. Peak oil demand is nothing to worry about. If prices stay reasonable, demand is almost infinite.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 07:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The point is CLIMATE CHANGE and(due to) FOSSILS´ OVERUSE.  Two things that do not appear in econ. books, nor theoretical stunts.  For all I forgot after getting top grade in Econ 430?, I didn´t forget the mental discipline of finding real-life answers outside a textbook, from current information.

Regretting the past and fantasizing about the future does not change the urgency to stop wasteful use.  

If you count on "finding more oil", with all its environmental-climate-changing damage, ask yourself what future value does that have.  If you count on the "magic of science" coming to the rescue, you are gambling many lives to the limit.  Science still does not have the support necessary to make renewables an accessible choice.

Even if I could count on both, I wouldn´t trust the current USgov and energy multinationals, even if they were in another planet.

PEAK OIL calls for individual ACTION NOW and we know what to cut.  Write to your monsters; I´m working on mine.  And if you know of good investments in renewables, let me know and I´ll see if they pass my tests.


Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.

by metavision on Mon Dec 18th, 2006 at 05:03:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, I think we'll see all three factors play a role:--lower rate of growth in demand due to escalating prices in the short and midterm, "finding more oil", and new technologies.

We will see 1) in the longer term, some of the emerging technologies will eventually be successful, 2) in the short/medium term,existing energy sources being exploited more aggressively--note plans for new nuclear plants, continuing efforts with hybrid, electric and "cleaner diesel" just as  examples, 3) in the short term, more drilling for oil, note new drilling in the gulf, I believe between US and Cuba, financed by Russia, 4)also in the short term, previously unprofitable oil sites opened and producing, plus previous sources such as oil shale seem to be opening now, and 5) rising prices will both lower demand and move demand gradually away from oil,,,,and it would be nice if public policy supported that.  And probably a number of other factors i don't have a clue about.

There is no single "silver bullet" here, imho, but we'll get something from each of the above factors.

I don't know energy well enough to really invest in it, but Uranium mining stocks have done very well, such as Cameco and Pinetree Capitol, the former up eight fold in less than five years, and the latter up four fold this year.  I made some small investments in these and did well.  I'm letting those investments ride for a while, but watching somewhat carefully.  But I don't know the energy field well enough to to make any serious investments in it, so I can't really answer you.

by wchurchill on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 01:44:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"rising prices will both lower demand..." should have read "lower the rate of increase in demand for energy".
by wchurchill on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 01:47:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My favourite is Exelon.

Not due to peak oil actually, but due to North American peak gas.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 07:51:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And the core of Exelon's business is this:

Exelon Nuclear is headquartered in Warrenville, Ill., and is a business unit of Exelon Corporation.  It operates the largest nuclear fleet in the nation and the third largest fleet in the world.  Exelon's ten stations - with 17 reactors - represent approximately 20 percent of the U.S. nuclear industry's power capacity.  Chris Crane is president and chief nuclear officer Exelon Nuclear and senior vice president, Exelon Corporation.

Exelon Nuclear's 17 generating units produced a total of 130.2 million net megawatt-hours of electricity in 2005.  The fleet also achieved an average capacity factor of 93.5 percent, the fifth year in a row the capacity factor was more than 92 percent.



Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 07:58:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
RE-NEW-ABLE.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 11:38:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I take your point that uranium is not renewable, but it seems to be available in abundance, and as technology goes forward, I would expect productivity increases in the use of uranium, so the same amount produces more energy.  So it seems to me the renewable aspect of uranium is not really an issue, do you agree?  I realize there are other issues with uranium, however.
by wchurchill on Tue Dec 19th, 2006 at 02:57:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series