Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on March 28, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Supply or Demand? Peak Oil with Richard Heinberg and James Hamilton

This week Stanford said that it would divest all of its investments in coal-mining companies, becoming the wealthiest US university to pledge divestment from sectors of the.

Recorded February 25th, 2014 in Vancouver, BC Richard Heinberg speaks on his newest book, covering the short-term nature of the recent North American oil boom and the financial bubble that.

Richard Heinberg explaining everything that you need to know about Peak Oil and how to prepare for it, because we are already deep in Peak Oil time!



15 Comments on "Supply or Demand? Peak Oil with Richard Heinberg and James Hamilton"

  1. Davy on Sat, 28th Mar 2015 10:10 am 

    Why don’t these academic greenie weennies divest out of the car culture and show real backbone? Why don’t they admit that no matter how much they want to have their cake and eat it there are no free lunches? Why don’t they admit or try to understand that BAU is carbon and without carbon there is no BAU. Then while they are at it admit without BAU there is no Stanford.

    This is just another greenie joke of feel-goodism that will go nowhere. If you want to change things then lobby government to restrict liquid fuels enough to put the economy in a tailspin so we can begin the power down that will involve huge changes to bad attitudes, lifestyles, and economic activity.

    This power down will begin the rebalancing of overconsumption and over population. IOW people are going to die and suffer. There will be a situation of less with less meaning we will have less with the anticipation of even less. Get real folks and acknowledge what descent really is in an overshoot situation of gargantuan proportions. Talk about bottlenecks and mass deaths so people realize the gravity of the situation. Maybe then we will have less foreign wars because then there will not be the money.

  2. dave thompson on Sat, 28th Mar 2015 10:56 am 

    James Hamilton, ” not a question of running out of oil”. That’s right, it is a question of how long before the laws of nature and physics kick in, ending industrial civilization as we know it.

  3. Plantagenet on Sat, 28th Mar 2015 8:23 pm 

    This piece was recorded in Feb.2014—its way out-of-date. For instance, they talk about how high priced oil is at $100 bbl, but of course now oil is at ca. $50 bbl thanks to the oil glut.

  4. Nony on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 5:56 am 

    another over year old piece of news. Pathetic.

    And Heinberg has been wrong on everything for years.

    Hamilton is a joke. Oil has had all sorts of microeconomic insights and he has missed them. And he fucked up MASSIVELY with his hundred dollar to stay article last summer. And he has NOT manned up and discussed how he was WRONG. He’s a macro weenie. Would not want to hire him as an analyst. Don’t want him teaching kids. He’s not a smart economist. He writes bloated popular type academic articles with little insight

  5. Davy on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 7:32 am 

    NOo, you are wrong to put a time frame on this discussion. NOo you are in denial of POD issues that can be discounted not denied. Your denial of any effects of POD is so uneducated and sloppy as to make you look like a paid shill of the industry. It is nice to have you back so I can be reminded how idiotic shills can be.

  6. Nony on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 7:58 am 

    Rock’s “POD” was high oil prices. I’ve always said that was a powerful argument. I said that because I am honest and fair, though a cornie.

    Now, POD took a 50% haircut. Is Rock going to talk about POD being 50% less of a problem? No. He’ll be along soon to blather about 50 versus 30 even though it means a lot less than 100 versus 30. OR some other cherrypicked comparison [the one where he tried to talk about gas prices being high (at 2.75!) because he compared it to the 2012 glut was a hoot.]

    P.s. Please get Rockdoc out here. He has some smart background from academics and from shale production to share.

  7. Nony on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 7:58 am 

    Natural gas

  8. Davy on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 8:49 am 

    Cat Piss NOo, Rock has said high and low prices. Quit picking on Rock NOo. He may have coined POD but POD is not a Rock invention it is an invention called the law of nature. Rock just coined that phase for our use here on this forum. You might also mention Short’s ETP which is just another POD condition and that POD mentions lowering prices over time. You know NOo thermodynamics as opposed to the pseudo-science of Econ 101 you follow. NOo at this point one cannot deny POD & especially ETP. You can discount it and say it is further or sooner but you cannot deny it. You cannot deny nature NOo. I am not denying Econ 101. I admit the laws of supply and demand operate in an economy but within the laws of nature first and foremost.

  9. Nony on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 8:59 am 

    Are Americans beavers? Cuz…damn!

    http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/usoil2.jpg

  10. marmico on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 9:17 am 

    ETP is buffoonery. POD is meaningless.

    The condensate from Eagle Ford is not camel piss. 55.0° EFS Light sells for $3/barrel less than WTI.

    http://www.paalp.com/_filelib/FileCabinet/Crude%20Oil%20Price%20Bulletins/Daily/2015/2015-057_March_27_2015.pdf

  11. Davy on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 9:32 am 

    yada, yada, yada. Marmi, will you please answer the question why the Fed can’t raise rates. You are like the NOo dodging inconvenient truths.

  12. marmico on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 9:57 am 

    What does the Fed funds rate have to do with Hubbert’s “the date of the culmination”?

    The latest and greatest culminations that you subscribe to – the ETP is buffoonery and the POD is meaningless.

    Stay tuned for the end of next month when all the culminators who pivoted to oil affordability get slapped around by the data. The lowest or tied with the lowest (one decimal point) quarterly expenditure on gasoline relative to wages in the last 10 years happens on March 31.

  13. Davy on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 10:29 am 

    Marmi, you pussy, put it together Mr. Denseness. The ETP of POD means demand destruction in a vicious cycle of demand and supply destruction in a new paradigm of descent. If your buddy Mr. Freddy can’t raise rates that is a defacto admission of a sick economy. Got it? If you are unable to let your dense narrow minded Econ 101 mind a little word salad then just forget it. Narrow minded Econ 101 BAUtopians idiots are unable to understand something new and revolutionary. They spend their days mulling over Freddy Fluff charts that are all part of the lies, deceptions, manipulations, and corruptions of TPTB in an unholy wealth transfer on a global scale.

  14. marmico on Sun, 29th Mar 2015 11:17 am 

    You are the pathetic troll. Global oil demand/production has risen since Hubbert’s 1956 projection of the “date of the culmination” in 2000, when production was going to peak, at ~35 million barrels/day. I think the latest call out in 2015 is ~77 million barrels per day.

    ETP=buffoonery; POD=meaningless.

    I’ll put my ass on the line and make a projection. Oil will be more affordable for U.S. households (gasoline expenditures divided by wages and salaries) in 2015 than in any year since 2003.

    What are you going to do? Rush over to the zero dead heads and extract the latest doomer crap.

  15. palvis298 on Mon, 30th Mar 2015 11:11 pm 

    totally agree with you Davy!

    Why don’t they admit or try to understand that BAU is carbon and without carbon there is no BAU. Then while they are at it admit without BAU there is no Stanford.

    This is just another greenie joke of feel-goodism that will go nowhere. If you want to change things then lobby government to restrict liquid fuels enough to put the economy in a tailspin so we can begin the power down that will involve huge changes to bad attitudes, lifestyles, and economic activity.

    This power down will begin the rebalancing of overconsumption and over population. IOW people are going to die and suffer. There will be a situation of less with less meaning we will have less with the anticipation of even less. Get real folks and acknowledge what descent really is in an overshoot situation of gargantuan proportions. Talk about bottlenecks and mass deaths so people realize the gravity of the situation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *