Oil prices peaked
02-01-2008, 08:15 AM
#91
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: CFI, MEI
Posts: 105
Bus Dawg,
I don't know what the freak you are talking about.
Duke,
Yes, at this point, supply does seem to be tight, but I don't think it will remain so forever. If history has taught us anything about the oil and gas industry is that it is usually boom or bust and hardly ever a middle. Numbers are interesting sure and I believe you that you have friends that work in the industry. I, however, work in a technical applications/marketing roll and I am seeing the new technology coming down the pipe to extract heavy oil (oil sands, tar sands, shale) and I'm telling you that supply will once again exceed demand.
On the aviation note. Since I was a child I've wanted to be a pilot and I love airplanes. I don't want to get into that industry to "be rich" if I wanted to be rich I'd stay in the oil field. I've passed up a specific opportunity to make well over 100K/year but I would work all the time doing something I hated. If worse came to worse I would do it. I opted to stay where I'm at to have flexibility with my schedule outside of work...work would have owned me the other way. I'm working on my ratings one at a time now trying to pay for them. I know the realities of aviation and it seems to be less stable than the oil and gas industry. My natural tendency is to look at all negatives first; I have only over the past few years trained myself to be optimistic. I am young, 24 almost 25, but I have worked in the oilfield for 5 years now(2.5 in college). I can't wait to get to aviation but don't worry I do have a Bachelor's Degree and a fall back. I am a realist and a capitalist who understands you have to have a skill to survive in this world and feed your family. Thanks for your advice.
I believe oil is a finite resource but I also believe the market will find a way to continue growing itself even if we've peaked. I don't believe we have peaked because of all the new discoveries of types of oil we make. We are making many heavy oil discoveries and the US does have refineries that can handle heavy oil. We are going to be fine.
I don't know what the freak you are talking about.
Duke,
Yes, at this point, supply does seem to be tight, but I don't think it will remain so forever. If history has taught us anything about the oil and gas industry is that it is usually boom or bust and hardly ever a middle. Numbers are interesting sure and I believe you that you have friends that work in the industry. I, however, work in a technical applications/marketing roll and I am seeing the new technology coming down the pipe to extract heavy oil (oil sands, tar sands, shale) and I'm telling you that supply will once again exceed demand.
On the aviation note. Since I was a child I've wanted to be a pilot and I love airplanes. I don't want to get into that industry to "be rich" if I wanted to be rich I'd stay in the oil field. I've passed up a specific opportunity to make well over 100K/year but I would work all the time doing something I hated. If worse came to worse I would do it. I opted to stay where I'm at to have flexibility with my schedule outside of work...work would have owned me the other way. I'm working on my ratings one at a time now trying to pay for them. I know the realities of aviation and it seems to be less stable than the oil and gas industry. My natural tendency is to look at all negatives first; I have only over the past few years trained myself to be optimistic. I am young, 24 almost 25, but I have worked in the oilfield for 5 years now(2.5 in college). I can't wait to get to aviation but don't worry I do have a Bachelor's Degree and a fall back. I am a realist and a capitalist who understands you have to have a skill to survive in this world and feed your family. Thanks for your advice.
I believe oil is a finite resource but I also believe the market will find a way to continue growing itself even if we've peaked. I don't believe we have peaked because of all the new discoveries of types of oil we make. We are making many heavy oil discoveries and the US does have refineries that can handle heavy oil. We are going to be fine.
02-01-2008, 09:10 AM
#92
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 955
The Hubbert method has been applied to discoveries, and the resulting scenario is similar to that for production. Whether you buy into this or not, it should be clear that new discoveries alone do not tell us where production is relative to "peak."
02-01-2008, 09:48 AM
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: CFI, MEI
Posts: 105
You just made my point for me. We don't know if we are at peak oil and it is difficult to tell.
02-01-2008, 01:52 PM
#94
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 955
Originally Posted by mattisawesome
We are going to be fine.
I recognize that of the two camps who care about the issue, agreement may never be possible. I respect your view, and am open to consider its merits. After all, it's the investigation of new and different ideas that makes advancement possible.
02-27-2008, 09:23 PM
#95
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Hi!
rickair7777: You're right, the masses in China can't afford $100 barrel of oil. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), the "masses" in China don't even OWN a car yet. They one's that do are the rich Chinese, and they can afford WELL OVER $100/barrel of oil. When the masses get more money, then they WILL buy cars, and they WILL be able to afford whatever it is that oil costs then, or, more hopefully, they'll drive some type of hybrid/hydrogen car and won't need much oil.
Gasoline WILL go down to $2/gallon, and even lower, but only AFTER gasoline is no longer the major transportation fuel again. Oil will go down below $30/barrel I'd say also, but only under the above conditions.
Prices will be going up, up, up for a while, until we quit using oil as our main transportation fuel.
cliff
YIP
rickair7777: You're right, the masses in China can't afford $100 barrel of oil. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), the "masses" in China don't even OWN a car yet. They one's that do are the rich Chinese, and they can afford WELL OVER $100/barrel of oil. When the masses get more money, then they WILL buy cars, and they WILL be able to afford whatever it is that oil costs then, or, more hopefully, they'll drive some type of hybrid/hydrogen car and won't need much oil.
Gasoline WILL go down to $2/gallon, and even lower, but only AFTER gasoline is no longer the major transportation fuel again. Oil will go down below $30/barrel I'd say also, but only under the above conditions.
Prices will be going up, up, up for a while, until we quit using oil as our main transportation fuel.
cliff
YIP
04-21-2008, 01:19 PM
#97
Line Holder
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 26
waflyboy,
Couple of things....global climate change has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years. And I will preface by saying this...if man is responsible for changing the climate as much as Al Gore predicts then we absolutely should do something about it. I'm pretty open minded on this subject, but I think there are other reasons for us to get off of oil besides global warming: National security, our own economic health and our ability to continue to be a major economic power.
Let me briefly go into another point with out making this extremely political:
1. In reality I do not see enough evidence for making the case that man is reaking such havoc on the environment and the globe that we will destroy ourselves in the way many people think. I also think there is enough evidence to the contrary to say that we are not having much of an effect at all. There are ice core samples from the middle ages saying it was warmer then than it is now...how do you account for that? That implies that the earth cools and warms without our help.
2. I naturally tend to be skeptical about doomsday claims. The very fact that media, scientists and other influential environmentalists are now calling it "Global Climate Change" instead of global warming should throw up some red flags. I've read that weather balloon data has indicated only slightly warmer surface temperatures but that if global warming were as bad as climate models predict that the upper atmostphere would be warming as well. However, there is no indication that this warming is going on anywhere above the surface. Also it takes hundreds of years for oceans to cool and warm and the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide on Earth is oceans. When oceans warm they give off carbon dioxide and one thing that Al Gore doesn't show you is that carbon dioxide levels follow temperature and not the other way around. On many graphs there is as much as a 400 year lag between temperature and carbon dioxide levels.
3. My main point here is that we just don't know about climate change and many climatologists say that we don't have enough information to start making drastic economic decisions. There are also scientists saying that some of the antarctic ice melting could be due to underwater volcanoes. I've also heard that we've been on a cooling trend since 98 and that we need to get read for a global cooling. Scientists said 30 years ago(all though I realize they didn't have quite the technology we do now) that we were entering the next ice age.
4. I do think that we certainly have a responsibility to preserve the environment and asking me such a question is a bit silly. You don't know how tight regulations are in the oil and gas industry on surface pipe, and conductor pipe and what happens if you make a stupid mistake and you let oil or gas leak into the water table. This used to be a big problem but I can guarantee you that these things are not as bad as they once were. You and I, however, agree that we should do what we can as quickly as we can to get as much off of oil as we can. Unfortunately right now and for a very long time it will be part of how we power our world. I know this is redundant but I'm mainly saying that there is not enough data to support the drastic changes that would supposedly be required to "curb" global warming.
Couple of things....global climate change has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years. And I will preface by saying this...if man is responsible for changing the climate as much as Al Gore predicts then we absolutely should do something about it. I'm pretty open minded on this subject, but I think there are other reasons for us to get off of oil besides global warming: National security, our own economic health and our ability to continue to be a major economic power.
Let me briefly go into another point with out making this extremely political:
1. In reality I do not see enough evidence for making the case that man is reaking such havoc on the environment and the globe that we will destroy ourselves in the way many people think. I also think there is enough evidence to the contrary to say that we are not having much of an effect at all. There are ice core samples from the middle ages saying it was warmer then than it is now...how do you account for that? That implies that the earth cools and warms without our help.
2. I naturally tend to be skeptical about doomsday claims. The very fact that media, scientists and other influential environmentalists are now calling it "Global Climate Change" instead of global warming should throw up some red flags. I've read that weather balloon data has indicated only slightly warmer surface temperatures but that if global warming were as bad as climate models predict that the upper atmostphere would be warming as well. However, there is no indication that this warming is going on anywhere above the surface. Also it takes hundreds of years for oceans to cool and warm and the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide on Earth is oceans. When oceans warm they give off carbon dioxide and one thing that Al Gore doesn't show you is that carbon dioxide levels follow temperature and not the other way around. On many graphs there is as much as a 400 year lag between temperature and carbon dioxide levels.
3. My main point here is that we just don't know about climate change and many climatologists say that we don't have enough information to start making drastic economic decisions. There are also scientists saying that some of the antarctic ice melting could be due to underwater volcanoes. I've also heard that we've been on a cooling trend since 98 and that we need to get read for a global cooling. Scientists said 30 years ago(all though I realize they didn't have quite the technology we do now) that we were entering the next ice age.
4. I do think that we certainly have a responsibility to preserve the environment and asking me such a question is a bit silly. You don't know how tight regulations are in the oil and gas industry on surface pipe, and conductor pipe and what happens if you make a stupid mistake and you let oil or gas leak into the water table. This used to be a big problem but I can guarantee you that these things are not as bad as they once were. You and I, however, agree that we should do what we can as quickly as we can to get as much off of oil as we can. Unfortunately right now and for a very long time it will be part of how we power our world. I know this is redundant but I'm mainly saying that there is not enough data to support the drastic changes that would supposedly be required to "curb" global warming.
04-21-2008, 02:31 PM
#98
Kept down by the man
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 767 CA
Posts: 657
While heading to get some lunch today I saw what I believe to be a ford prototype for hydrogen and fuel hybrid car. Looked pretty nice, and was a factory model (had the ford Hydrogen hybrid tag)... Looks like we may be seeing SOME form of hydrogen in the near future (fingers crossed)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
