Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Owner59 -> Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/15/2008 9:33:39 PM)

The Saudis, while attempting to maintain close relations with the U.S. – indeed the Bush administration is pressing for a new, $20-billion arms sale to the Saudi government – insist that the bigger picture of stability in the world oil market is their greatest concern.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/saudis_not_boosting_oil_produc.html



MzMia -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/15/2008 9:41:37 PM)

Owner, we need to kiss more ass.
[;)]



MissMagnolia -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/15/2008 9:42:40 PM)

*presenting arse, for the kissing of* [sm=moon.gif][:D]



MzMia -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/15/2008 9:47:10 PM)

lol, Miss Magnolia



samboct -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/16/2008 7:35:16 AM)

If only the choice were so easy-between Miss Magnolia's no doubt lovely derriere versus Saudi camel stinky bottom, then life would be easy. 

But let's throw out an alternative scenario- what if the Saudi's can't pump more oil?  Bush has not shown himself to be very smart at anything- why should we assume he's a smart oil man?  Nobody, with the possible exception of the Saudis, knows what their reserves actually are, and that's pretty debatable.  There are a number of folks who think that the era of global peak oil has passed including the heads of Chevron, Shell, and possibly a few other majors, who've gone on record as saying the era of cheap oil is over.  I was at a conference when I heard this from Shell's CEO less than a year ago.

Oil in the ground isn't sitting in a giant lake where all you have to do to get more of it is add more straws.  It's actually in a giant sponge- one which tears easily.  To get the maximum amount of oil out of the sponge, you have to use a slow even pressure, put too much pressure in one spot and it tears, and the oil inside the piece of sponge is trapped.  Hence, if you try to take oil out too fast, you get less of the stuff over time.  It's quite possible the Saudi's have hit this point- that they think that if they increase their production rates, they may decrease the overall yield of their oil fields.

Also from the Saudi's point of view- the US may be their current largest customer, but China is coming up quickly, and will happily buy their oil.  Thus, even if the US economy goes into a tailspin, the Saudis will still be able to sell their oil at the prices they want- or at least they think they can.  If the Saudi's think that its risky to try and increase production, they would do exactly what they've done, and said that we're happy with the situation.  Would the Saudi's admit that they've hit peak production?  Why?  These guys are Arabs and tend to view information as an important bargaining chip- trust is not in their vocabulary.  What do they gain by being honest and telling the world that their production has peaked?  The world may be in better shape by being able to prepare, but the Saudi's might lose money- hence, very bad idea from their viewpoint.  Just another nail in the coffin of fossil fuels.....


Sam



Real0ne -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/16/2008 7:36:57 AM)


yep the power of the euro combined with ignorant gambling assholes controlling the purse strings.






Stephann -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/16/2008 8:00:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

There are a number of folks who think that the era of global peak oil has passed including the heads of Chevron, Shell, and possibly a few other majors, who've gone on record as saying the era of cheap oil is over.  I was at a conference when I heard this from Shell's CEO less than a year ago.


Hi Sam,

You don't suppose this has anything to do with the Saudis (or any other oil producing country and/or company) being unwilling to sell for $40 a barrell what now sells for $100 a barrel? 

Prices didn't soar in Latin America, Saudi Arabia, or Iran when Iraq was invaded simply because production costs went up (or their own supplies grew scarce.)  They went up because the global oil supply was disrupted by the war.  When Iraq resumes full oil production, they'll resume at the new, 'adjusted' rate.

Though we are in agreement; the age of cheap fossil fuels is over.

Stephan



samboct -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/16/2008 9:15:25 AM)

Hi Stephan

For the oil producing countries, it's a balancing act.  If they charge too much for oil, their customers economy tanks, and the demand drops.  That demand and supply are so tightly balanced means that a disruption in one supply increases demand from other producers- which they can't meet.  It costs them more money to increase production so the price goes up.  There are several oil fields which are very unattractive at $40/barrel, which become much more attractive at $70/barrel and up.  Hell, there are now micro wells in Pennsylvania again- very small pocket installations producing oil for what I think are local uses- you can see them in the towns dotted along I-80 in western PA in this country.  These installations aren't economical at $40/barrel, but they are at $70/barrel.

I don't see that much cooperation amongst oil producers.  If the Saudis could gather more market share by selling oil at $40/barrel- they would- they'd be perfectly happy to cut out the North Slope oil producers.  That the Saudis haven't undermined their competition most likely means that they can't.

Your assumption that everybody is out there trying to stick it to the consumer is slightly in error.  If everybody had the same cost structure to produce oil, I'd agree-  and say this is just an oligopoly trying to maintain prices (similar to the diamond market.)  But oil production costs vary dramatically around the world- the Saudis are probably among the lowest price producers.  Getting oil out of Canadian tar sands is amongst the most expensive, so the Saudis can make say $75/barrel profit, while the Canadians are making $20/barrel profit.  (numbers completely arbitrary, I'm making them up off the top of my head.)  Thus, there are a lot of producers that go under if oil drops to that $40/barrel price- which I don't think will happen- or it would have.

Remember that the majors account for something like 15% of global oil production, most is nationalized.  Do you think the UK is in cahoots with the Saudis to maintain the price of oil?  I kinda doubt it.

Sam



SugarMyChurro -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/16/2008 10:02:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Stephann
...the age of cheap fossil fuels is over.


The age of oil and coal is over, long over. Sadly, our government will not get behind alternative energy sources fast enough to prevent special interests (in oil and coal) from eating us alive in the meanwhile.

Of course, I figure that's exactly what they intend and why our politicians get the big money offshore where we can't trace it.



Feric -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 2:46:16 AM)

And meanwhile, India is taking the lead by planting millions of hectares with Jatropha plants, and leading the way in renewable fuels. http://www.ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=353




Sanity -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 5:17:29 AM)

Taking farm land out of food production is driving the price of food up at an alarming rate for the worlds' poor. Imagine if you had to subsist on thirty five cents per day, and the food prices go up a nickel. While I won't notice it on my trip through the market, there are those for whom it will cause severe panic.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Feric

And meanwhile, India is taking the lead by planting millions of hectares with Jatropha plants, and leading the way in renewable fuels. http://www.ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=353





Aneirin -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 6:03:05 AM)

The age of fossil fuels as we know it is over, that is true with our present technology, but it would seem the world is begrugingly investigating other sources.

To myself, I am a believer in nuclear technology as being the answer, things have moved on a long way since the old nuclear stations and their problems, thinking of Windscale, Chernobyl and long island here.Plus, there is other technologies based on nuclear that should be given a chance beyond laboratory experiments.

So, say the west was largely nuclear and other alternative power sourced,what would that mean for the middle east? Perhaps if their oil was not that important anymore, there would be less if no interest, maybe it might even lead to peace there.

But I suspect not, the next big resource problem will be water, that is quickly becoming a problem in the hotter parts of the world. Maybe then, the boot would be on the other foot, where the wetter west could play the saudis at their own game and raise prices on barrels of water, the most basic life necessity, oil being totally useless if one dies of thirst in about three days.

Edited to add an afterthought, maybe we will get bitten on the ass, all these high tech weapons we are selling to the oil rich nations might well be used on us should the demand for water become so great as to cause war.



charlotte12 -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 6:09:57 AM)

When we have discovered a very cheap source of power, the problem of water will also diminish.  It takes a fair amount of energy to turn salt water into fresh water; when energy becomes extremely cheap (through whatever alternative method will step in, within the next 30-50 years... keep in mind, it wasn't that long ago that we warmed our houses with firewood) so too will the methods for turning the ocean into a big drinking fountain.

No, the most precious resource of the future will simply be inhabitable land.

Stephan



Sanity -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 6:22:29 AM)

I agree with you about nuclear energy being a part of any possible solution, but peace in the middle east is not totally dependant on the worlds' need for oil.

Islamic extremists kill and die for Allah.

Why do so many people seem to forget that?



Aneirin -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 6:41:10 AM)

Yes, islamic extremists do kill and die for Allah, but if there was no requirement for the infidel to be in their countries, i.e. there was nothing there of use to us, we could just go back to defending our borders.

The middle east would possibly revert to the clan warfare that existed not so long ago.The ethnic cleansing and whatever.

Is it our interest in the middle east just about oil?

I know there is trade too, but that has always existed from the various ports, Dubai in the UAE, there even exists a protectorate order with the British, something that went back long before oil.

I see the west increasingly not required in the middle east, even shipping, for the past thirty years, the west has been engaged in training the nationals of middle eastern countries to do the sort of jobs the west has always excelled at, there cutting ourselves out of the loop.

Basically, when the major source of trade and reason for being there dries up, let them get on with it, it is their country, who are we to intervene in their politics, hey, we can't even sort out our own!



Sanity -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 7:08:54 AM)

No, we have to engage them and bring them more modern ways of thinking. Just like if we had crazy neighbors, closing our eyes won't make them go away, and neither will a better fence.

We'd have to keep everyone out and stay shut in, for one thing - and we don't want to go that route. The world is getting so small... and the prize for dying while killing as many infidels as possible is at present  a hundred mansions with a hundred rooms each and in each room one hundred virgins ... a thing told to hormone-crazed teen boys who salivate at the sight of a womans' bare ankle, which is all they may get to see.

Not every Muslim country is like that, I know - I am talking about the more backward locations. The culture there is so different, so extremist... and that is exactly why we must engage them, not shut them off, because they will come West and they will get in. They're leaders can be ingenious in their methods, they have proven that.

And to pretend that if we don't buy the oil it won't be bought isn't realistic either. Someone will buy it, be it the Chinese or someone else.






Real0ne -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 7:24:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

I agree with you about nuclear energy being a part of any possible solution, but peace in the middle east is not totally dependant on the worlds' need for oil.

Islamic extremists kill and die for Allah.

Why do so many people seem to forget that?




american extremists kill and die for oil.


We dont need nuke energy at all as cold electricity has been produced.  I am sure it was all over the news.



quote:

No, we have to engage them and bring them more modern ways of thinking.



Shall we start with the most backward of them all?   The Saudis?





Amaros -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 7:42:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin

To myself, I am a believer in nuclear technology as being the answer, things have moved on a long way since the old nuclear stations and their problems, thinking of Windscale, Chernobyl and long island here.Plus, there is other technologies based on nuclear that should be given a chance beyond laboratory experiments.
It's good to keep investigating nuclear, but micropower is the only solution at the moment in the US, and most of the developing world, I don't know abotu the UK, but we're up agaisnt the limitations of our outdated grid - in many places, we simply can't put any more energy into it without overloading it, thus talk of new large scale generating facilites is absurd - the cost of building a new grid here are astronomical - eaiser perhaps inthe UK.

Then there is export, somehow I feel better exporting PV cells, high efficiency turbines and windmills than I do exporting fissionable materials na nuclear technology, and there are a lot of regions in the world that simply do not possess the natural resources, coal, oil, natural gas, to support a modern industrial or post industrial economy.

Much better to go with renewable micropower to supplement and replace domestic use, allowing current large production facilites to provide service during peak demand, and to industry which has higher levels of demand that micropower can't supply.

It's basically stretching what we have here, without overloading the grid. Globally, it's about developing emerging markets - if Arabs don't have electricity then there is also no demand for televisions and microwaves, etc.



samboct -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 9:20:54 AM)

There have been a number of threads on energy alternatives- I posted my notes on Steven Chu's lecture (A Nobel Laureate in Physics) a few weeks back.

A brief recap

Most important point- the major barriers are political, rather than technological.

1)  Nuclear only makes sense in areas of high population density.  However, given possible terrorists threats, real or imagined, most people are unhappy with this solution.  Nuclear is not mandatory- there's a highly successful whisper campaign to make everyone think that it is because it's an industry which has lost billions/yr for decades.
2)  The most pressing problem is really grid updating- we need to be able to move power longer distances more cheaply and easily as well as store it.
3)  Wind is already developed and efficient- it's mature technology and now is working quite well.
4)  Clean coal is a sick joke.
5)  PV is making strides quickly, but production in US and Europe leaves a lot to be desired.
6)  Biofuels should not come at the expense of food production- it's a political problem where we use corn for fuel, rather than food.  Very, very dumb idea.  Inadequate research dollars being spent here.  Biofuels are a wonderful way of converting sunlight to chemical energy- plants are some 79-80% efficient at it, compared to solar cells being ~ 20% efficient at converting to electricity.

A towelhead wanting to die for Allah with a fat bank account to afford scoping out a target in the West and plane fare is a problem.  A towelhead with an empty wallet is not.  The idea that China will buy their oil if we do not is an unfounded assumption- based on the idea that the replacement technology will not be as good as oil.  Note how it's referred to as "alternatives" rather than replacement, leaving you with the sense that nothing's quite as good as oil.  Nonsense- technological replacements have better performance in most cases, hence oil replacement technology is likely to be less expensive and reduce emissions, not cost more.  Its just going to mean that like centuries past, there will be a new group of industrial titans, and it won't be the bozos at the current top of the heap.  If China wants to keep buying oil from Arabs, they'll be in worse economic shape.

Sam



Justme696 -> RE: Bush asked for more oil,Saudis tell us to piss off,but wants to buy those weapons.... (1/17/2008 11:24:49 AM)

quote:

We dont need nuke energy at all as cold electricity has been produced. I am sure it was all over the news.


cold fusion you mean?

that is  still far away, they can do it in a laboratory, but not on big scale yet.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625