World Population vs. World Oil Production (long version)

[symmetry08]

Oil is expected to finish between 2055-260. But by 2040, already world will be in a mess. To eat or to miss dinner choose between two.

[dibaterman]

This is so skewed. Most people being born can't afford the things that use oil even by the time they die. It's sad but true.

[gagaplex]

Many say that green energies are job killers, but frankly, if we moved the ridiculous subsidies from fossil fuels into renewables, a whole new industry creating a whole new field and lots of new jobs would become viable.

[symmetry08]

@gagaplex now everything should be directed towards soften of impact of oil scarcity, not about job creation mantra. USA so stupid about "job creation" which only leads to more people to be born. What all those people gonna do around 2040?

[ClarksonsinUSA]

The tar sands in North America will carry us for a 100 years easily...

[hollywoodt00]

But we will still have Mountain Top Removal, Tar Sand Extraction, Nuclear Energy and my personal favorite, Fracking. It's not a pretty picture but so long as there's black gold somewhere on earth, there will always be someone who is more than willing to destroy the natural beauty of the earth and all the life that's on it.

[GermanConquistador08]

My question is...so what? So what if we run out of oil (which isnt happening soon because anyone who says it is doesnt factor in prices and efficency) But if we were running out, than like ever other time in human history, people who recognize that we're running out of resources and then ration those resources accordingly (they'll use cars less, bike more, etc.) and then people will find new resources, or understood how to better use old ones. This is history people, and we should remember it.

[HostileNegotiator]

Very good. It would be cool if you could also explain to people how oil in cars is so wasteful of the resource and all the other uses of oil that we will no longer have in 2080 because our cars used it all up. Plastic bags for one thing. People are already getting irate over plastic bag bans with no clue that there is no oil left to make the damn bags. Just an educational thought. Oil will go down in history as the most stupid use of resource ever. We've had electric cars from car invent.

[UtwoBed]

Hell that's nothing. This video deals only with oil and population, but there is a bigger problem. Check out this video on YouTube:

"The Most IMPORTANT Video You'll Ever See (part 1 of 8)"

(Bastards at YouTube won't even let you post a url to one of their own videos.)

[hitssquad]

@Ralphdraw3 "economic markets are [...] myopic"

Then what's a futures market -- something that rewards myopia and punished hyperopia?

.

"attitude among mortgages traders [...] helped create the 2004-8 housing boom."

Mortgage traders didn't create the racially-biased lending policies that created the housing bubble. Barack Obama's ACORN did -- along with George W. Bush, Clinton, and a broad bipartisan spectrum of congressmen: isteve. blogspot. com/2011/05/mortgage-lending-i­ndustry-strategic. html

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad The futures market did little to stop the housing boom 2004-2008, the bubble in housing prices or the stock market run-up in the same period. Regarding the housing boom - mortgage originators were under no obligation from the government to make loans to people who could not pay them back. The originators made the loans for short term profits and then they dumped the crappy loans onto the open market (IBGYGB). The credit rating agencies went along with the fiction (4 shortterm prof

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad I now se your problem. You seem to think that economics is an abstract mathematical subject governed solely by the proposition that 1+1=2. Its not. Economics is a practical mathematical subject much like engineering. There are no infinities allowed in practical mathematics, it is the sole reserve of pure maths. You keep saying how supply and demand influence price without realizing that the limits of the real world impose limits on all three. No infinities allowed.

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad Better video-- Chapter 17a - Peak Oil: --Energy is the lifeblood of any economy and a steady supply of energy is necessary to maintain the status quo, while an ever-increasing supply is needed to grow an economy. In this chapter, Dr. Chris Martenson explains that Peak Oil is not a theory, rather it is a description of how oil production increases over time, reaches a peak, then declines. Evidence points to a global production peak in the near future, watch?v=cwNgNyiXPLk

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad If the phrase I used was meaningless why have you sent two messages and about 5 comments arguing against it? Obviously you knew what it meant so don't be so pretentious as to claim the phrase is meaninglesss just because it wasn't framed in technical jargon.

Critique of your rationalle? Ok. Economics 101: Any commodity is only worth what the highest bidder can and will pay for it. No one has infinite wealth therefore nothing can have an infinite price. You were wrong.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "Critique of your rationalle? Ok. [...] nothing can have an infinite price. You were wrong."

Straw man - again. I never claimed anything could have an infinite price. However, you did imply that demand (of a given commodity) could "outstrip" supply, which I did claim was fallacious since it reduced to the absurdity of an infinite price.

.

You never addressed that claim of mine other than to baldly state the opposite: "Demand outstriping supply doesn't mean an infinite price".

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad The comment you replied to: "I have seen various experts conclude that population increase/demand will outstrip oil supply."

Your reply:"That would imply an infinite price. That wouldn't seem to jibe very well with historical price trends, don't you think?"

Can you not admit that you were wrong to even mention the word infinite?

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "The comment you replied to: "I have seen various experts conclude that population increase/demand will outstrip oil supply.""

Could you tell us what you think "outstrip oil supply" does imply? So far, you haven't given any indication that that phrase actually has any economic meaning to you. You rejected my explanation, yet you still have offered neither any logical critique of my explanation nor an alternative explanation.

.

That phrase you used is actually meaningless, isn't it?

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad Are you advocating famine?  and crop failure?

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "how oil is not subject to cartel economice"

Not all of the oil is controlled by cartels. Why are you dodging the question?: "What. Cartel. Does. Southwestern. Energy. Belong. To?"

.

"how oil prices would be infinite if demand is higher than supply"

Ceteris paribus, any marginal increase in price decreases marginal demand. If price is not already infinite, price therefore can marginally increase, and further therefore if price isn't marginally increasing then demand is satisfied.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 Since marginal increases in price automatically reduce demand, and since marginal increases in demand automatically trigger marginal increases in price, if demand were permanently exceeding supply, the price must therefore be continuously triggered by that demand to marginally increase -- without end.

.

1 + 1 + 1, to infinity, is infinity. Since marginal price-increases automatically satisfy some demand, a state of unsatisfied demand implies a state of infinite price.

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad You're reasoning is entirely circular. Think about it - how can the price of anything be infinite when there aren't infinite resources to pay for it? Anything priced at infinity would remain unsold and hence the price would have to fall to a saleable level. OPEC et al fix prices so that the most people pay the highest price they can afford. The price of oil is not a good indicator of how much of it there is in the world for that very reason.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "Anything priced at infinity would remain unsold and hence the price would have to fall"

...And does lowering a price stoke demand?: investopedia. com/university/economics/econo­mics3. asp#axzz1RBJDwFiM "The quantity demanded is the amount of a product people are willing to buy at a certain price"

So, if we lower a commodity's price, we increase its demand. Yes? No?

.

"OPEC et al fix prices"

So? Does OPEC control the 56% of the world oil market that OPEC doesn't control?

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad Demand outstriping supply doesn't mean an infinite price, especially when talking about cartel economics. Consider the Mona Lisa - there's only one and millions of people would love to own it, but its price is not infinite. It is capped by what the richest collectors can afford. Same with oil. Its price is capped by what the richest companies and in turn countries can afford. No point trying to sell gas at the pump for $1000 a gallon, no one could afford it.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "talking about cartel economics"

Oil is latently not subject to cartel economics, because every nation has natural oil resources.

.

"the Mona Lisa"

Off topic.

.

"its price is not infinite."

...And demand for the Mona Lisa doesn't outstrip its supply.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "[Oil's] price is capped by what the richest [...] can afford."

...And what is that cap?

.

"gas at the pump for $1000 a gallon, no one could afford"

Are you sure? At 100 mpg, that's $10/mile. For someone who drives:

100 miles/year, that's only $1,000/year;

1,000 miles/year, that's only $10,000/year;

10,000 miles/year, that's only $100,000/year. You don't think any of the millions of Americans with six-figure incomes could afford to spend $10,000/year on fuel?

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad Erm, can you do maths? Mona Lisa = 1, people who want Mona Lisa = millions (thousands who could afford it). Demand CLEARLY outstrips supply of any singular coveted object.

Oil IS controlled by cartels of producers and wholesalers. Oil reserves in most countries are built up from buying in from the mid east or elsewhere, they do not have access to oil fields of their own. Reserves are very, very finite. Please, check your facts before arguing.

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad w w w.indexmundi. com/g/g.aspx?v=88&c=am&l=en Here you'll find a list of what oil reserves countries have - many have none. Most oil fields outside of the mid east are exploited by private companies, not state authorities. Have you never heard of oil cartels? Basically, they charge whatever they think they can get, and this is why the price is not infinite even though demand IS outstripping supply. Any price rise is indicative of an unbalanced supply/demand ratio. Basic economics

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad They get bigger because of more accurate measuring techniques and improved and more efficient extraction techniques.  The actual quantities do not increase, just our understanding and technological ability. Are you suggesting that oil reserves are infinite? Surely you're not that silly.

We started talking because I disagreed with your statement that oil prices would be "infinite" if demand outstripped supply. You were wrong then, you continue to be wrong now.

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad A cartel is an agrement between producers and/or suppliers of any commodity to control prices artificially. OPEC is a cartel. Soutwestern Energy are N. American only at the moment, and are primarily involved with natural gas, thus totally irrelevent to our discussion.

Answer my first question - how does demand higher than supply = infinite price? Don't bother, the answer is it doesn't. If you can accept that maybe I'll carry this on. Otherwise I give up on you.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "Don't bother, the answer is it doesn't."

Which of my premises did you reject?

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "OPEC"

en. wikipedia. org/wiki/OPEC "As of November 2010, OPEC members collectively hold [...] 44% of the world’s crude oil production"

That leaves 56% of oil production not being held by OPEC -- which seems to contradict your claim that we're "talking about cartel economics". Does that 56%-not-OPEC fact contradict this claim of mine?: "not all of the oil is controlled by cartels."

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad Why can you not admit that demand being greater than supply does not equal infinite price? Have you ever heard of anything having an infinite price? You keep picking up on minor irrelevancies as if they somehow connect to this point, but they don't. All I wanted to say to you was that you cannot argue that oil supply is greater than demand by noting that the price of oil is not infinite. If you cannot admit you were wrong about that then I will not reply again.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "All I wanted to say to you was that you cannot argue that oil supply is greater than demand"

...And I didn't claim that. It would have been inconsistent for me to claim that, given that what I did claim was that a claim of supply and demand not being in generally-continuous equilibrium reduces to and absurdity: en. wikipedia. org/wiki/ Reductio_ad_absurdum

...since prices automatically equalize supply and demand.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "Have you ever heard of anything having an infinite price?"

No. As I pointed out, an infinite price (i.e. a price that cannot be raised and therefore cannot be changed so as to reduce demand and increase supply) is the absurdity that the notion of demand being greater than supply reduces to: en. wikipedia. org/wiki/ Reductio_ad_absurdum

.

"you cannot argue that oil supply is greater than demand"

...And I wouldn't, since that would imply the absurdity of an infinitely-negative price.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 I asked you before which of my premises you reject. You didn't answer, so I'll ask more specifically: do you reject the premise that a marginal increase in price increases supply and decreases demand. Do you reject the corollary premise that a marginal reduction in price reduce supply and increases demand? Do you reject the premise that prices automatically move to equalize supply and demand?

[labrat1807]

@hitssquad What is wrong with you? You said that demand outstripping supply would "imply an infinite price" - your exact words. As you say, infinite price is an absurdity, and I say is an impossibility. So you must be claiming that there is never more demand of a commodity than actually exists, or there would be infinite prices. Of course demand can outstrip supplywithout causing infinite prices! FFS admit you were wrong you lunatic.

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 "So you must be claiming that there is never more demand of a commodity than actually exists"

That's right -- or at least I claimed such a state is never sustained -- because demand is not independent of price. As I explained before, demand is partly governed by price: "Ceteris paribus, any marginal increase in price decreases marginal demand"; and price is partly governed by demand: "marginal increases in demand automatically trigger marginal increases in price".

[hitssquad]

@labrat1807 This is essentially a negative-feedback system, preventing any lasting imbalance in the levels of demand and supply, the same way negative-feedback prevents any lasting imbalance in the heights of water on either side of a bathtub.

.

"Of course demand can outstrip supplywithout causing infinite prices"

Maybe you don't understand price systems. Have you read Julian Simon's explanations of why free price movements prevent lasting-imbalances between supply and demand?

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad Why are there market crashes (falling prices)?? Like the 1929 crash; or the stock market crash of 1987 black Monday? And animal populations are frequently subject to run-ups (booms) followed by crashes (busts). Furthermore, economic markets are notoriously myopic; see the " I'll Be Gone, You'll Be Gone" (I.B.G.Y.B.G.) attitude among mortgages traders which helped create the 2004-8 housing boom.

[hitssquad]

@Ralphdraw3 "Why [...] the 1929 crash"

Off topic, but part of the cause was loose margin-requirements (meaning that with only $1,000 in a margin trading account, one could buy $10,000 worth of stock -- the other $9,000 being lent by the stock broker), causing a bubble which automatically and rapidly collapsed in a cascade of "margin calls" touched off by an initial, and otherwise harmless, minor-fluctuation in prices.

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad 1929 - what happened to the futures markets?

[oldhacks]

thanks for this

[TheDrunkenHer0]

You are seeing all of Americas wealth being focused at the top, you are seeing oil companies getting more subsidies they don't need, you are seeing milionaires and bilionaires getting more tax cuts, you are seeing 1st world social programs being eliminated, you are seeing the beginning of the end.

America is not broke, it's just a master plan to make us slaves to a corporate dictatorship or as many of you like to call it. NWO.

The stars of the GOP elephant were turned upside in 2000 4 a reason

[TOPWATER187]

This is just more reason for me to bring Brutus to market sooner than later. I am looking forward to an opening date of august 1 for the shop and will be taking orders shortly after. Beat the oil companies by not using their product.

Thanks for sharing Ralphdraw3, keep up the good fight!

[woowooexpress]

A couple years ago when the price of oil started to fluctuate, I tried to explain the concept of "peak oil" and it's importance to some friends, whom I considered reasonably intelligent, and they just laughed at me like I was crazy...and that's why robots will soon inherit The Earth.

[wasy35]

Oil would be less important if other technologies were allowed to flourish, but they won't....

[copcorona]

yay! I live in Alberta!

[aldenbuzz]

oil is finite

[icompeltharts]

i'm some what optimistic.. as long as we have people like you that try to inform the mass, i know we all will eventually come up with solutions. i'm hoping pres. obama and the democrats dn't cave and continue with green energy....something that won't give us a nuclear scare or fire in my drinking faucet...

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad If demand outstrips supply - very nasty, bad things would happen.

[abntemplar82]

@Ralphdraw3 you hit it spot on with that statement ralph...oil is a finite resource, it is running out. this is the main reason we are having these unconstitutional wars in the mid east. very bad things happening and it will only get worse, much worse. we need alternitive supplies of energy, but i am not for subsidies for anyone. this problem could have been solved years ago but the technogy was stifled, covered up, or outright banned. we have only ourselves to blame.

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad great!! that must mean there is an endless supply of cheap, high quality oil - and oil prices won't go up into the future!!

[Ralphdraw3]

@hitssquad what is your source of information? The last graphs were estimates done in 2005. According to several sources world oil production has leveled off at around 84 mb/d. I have seen various experts conclude that population increase/demand will outstrip oil supply. And they say that what oil remains is 1) hard to get at and 2) is of lower quality (dirtier). Several sources say that Saudi Arabia is exaggerating its reserves of oil.

[tomitstube]

@Ralphdraw3 ~ i'm not sure about the numbers ralph but you're absolutely right because oil companies are going to much harder places to get that oil, that much is obvious, which definitely means supplies are waning.

[sidDkid87]

does not bode well . . . as in oil well . . . oh well . . . alls well that ends well

[hypnofan35]

Maybe someone will believe me some day, so i will say it again. Ever since the steam engine went away 100 years ago we have been using a "super heat chucking" paradigm. Who knows this? It's been 100 years of "heat chucking normal". It means they could produce more than enough fuel, but a centralized delivery system created an effective fuel /usage monopoly. Fukushima meltdown; Brought to you by super heat chucking fuel monopoly. Electric power delivery is super heat chucking too. Sorry.

[hitssquad]

@hypnofan35 "Ever since the steam engine went away 100 years ago"

Most power plants today are steam engines.

.

"we have been using a "super heat chucking" paradigm."

What does "super heat chucking" mean?

[hypnofan35]

@hitssquad Somethings cannot easily be noticed without a direct comparison. Internal combustion casts off heat twice as fast as it uses it for power. Wattage Power is delivered over a heat radiator so that isn't noticed because of the overall normalcy and general inability to know what's going on. What came to pass is the monopoly also wanted to control the usage or engine & fuel. It is more than a methodology for getting fuel it is about getting the user to pay for it then use is badly.

[Quotableduck]

@hitssquad he means the steam engine in cars...