[Aaron]

the strong growth we have been projecting for many years is intact.

What a tool

[Starvid]

Their definition "liquids productive capacity" is not the same as the production of liquid fuels. Go figure.

[Mechler]

I'm stealing this from Graeme who stole it from Prof. Goose over at The Oil Drum, but I thought it should be discussed.

Here's Steve Andrews on CNBC

It's great that MSM is giving airtime to Steve Andrews, Boone Pickens, Matt Simmons, etc. Unfortunately, these guys are getting eaten alive by the suave analysts who, apparently, talk for a living.

I've talked with both Steve and Matt and seen them deliver presentations in person, and they're are both very intelligent and fairly well-spoken. However, it would be nice to have a real spokesperson go on TV and hand these pie-in-the-sky analysts their asses. From what I've seen, it has pretty much been the other way around. I know it's hard to break down PO into 10 second sound bites, but after watching an interview like this, who is Joe Public more apt to believe?

Personally, I'd like to see Randy Udall given some airtime. He really delivered one hell of a speech at the PO Conference last fall in Boston. Very impressive.

On another note, the analyst in this interview epitomizes the optimists view on energy. "Oh, we're in tight spot now, but the GOM and SA will save us." It's funny how people can see the same data and come to such completely different conclusions.

[turmoil]

On another note, the analyst in this interview epitomizes the optimists view on energy. "Oh, we're in tight spot now, but the GOM and SA will save us." It's funny how people can see the same data and come to such completely different conclusions.

Yep. Thats just the way news channels do interview segments though. They get people who disagree (usually an extreme optimist on one side of this issue, like you mention), because it makes better TV. The conversation doesn't really lead anywhere, and people end up thinking "there's still debate so I don't have to think or worry about it."

A lot of things have to go right for production to remain flat or higher to ~2012 because the supply of light sweet is in decline and the huge fields are in serious decline. Refineries will be blamed (as they are now) because there won't be enough processing bandwidth for the heavy crude. But the underlying cause will be clear.

Prices will have to move much higher to constrain demand. This first wave of price hikes to ~$70 is pricing countries like Zimbabwe out of the market. How high will the price have to go to reduce the demand of North America, Europe, and Asia? And we are no longer talking about slowing the growth rate. We are talking total demand reduction...as in negative growth...

[ozkrenske]

Wow,

The no problem points seem to be, Huge find in GOM, Canada, Big increase in Russian Oil, SA to go to 12mbd, report assumes no major slowdown in demand.

So we will be saved by really expensive oil in the GOM, Massive investment in Tar sands and the existing exporters refusing to supply their own domestic markets to shove more oil to the US. If these are all going to happen in the next 5 years (very very fast) we will still be no better than now and that will not take oil field decline into account either.

As to demand, well yes, the report has to assume something, they could assume demand will stand still or halve but how likely is that. Personally I'd like all reports out of government and intergovernment organisations to assume best case, worst case and middle of the road, but they don't.

I liked the size of tap quote as well, it sort of snuck in there and may pick away at some listeners minds and cause them to investigate.

Personally though the attention not being given to a report that effectively reverses the position of a major authority is quite humerous. It's like there are lots of people walking around with hands over their ears going 'nah nah nah nah' and only a few reports so they can cover their asses later on.

[ozkrenske]

By the way and this is probably off topic (it is, not probably), Zimbabwe made the news this morning with some marvelous quotes regarding the hyper inflation. Mugabe is blaming the store owners and demanding they halve their prices or be shot. Some of the quotes from people in the street are amazing.

'A banana costs more today than my house did four years ago'

'It cost me 4 times more than my weekly salary to buy 5 liters of petrol'

'The black market money traders are no longer swapping foreign currency for any amount of Zimbabwe currency.'

'I sold a bag of potato's today and paid off all my debts and bills but I couldn't afford a bag of corn meal this afternoon as it had doubled in price since this morning.'

Apparently Botswana and South Africa are preparing to step in and allow the use of their currency but only if the entire Zimbabwean finance ministry effectively ceases to exist and they get to run the economy for 5 years. Oh and also Mugabe has to go. That is so not likely to happen, in Africa that would only happen after the population has seen an involuntary reduction of 30% or more.

[IslandCrow]

That is so not likely to happen, in Africa that would only happen after the population has seen an involuntary reduction of 30% or more.

In 2006 Zimbabwe had a population of around 13.1 million people. I remember reading recently that over 3 million Zimbabweans had left the country because of the situation. Although as of 2006, despite all the emigration the population was still rising because of high birth rate.

3 out of 16.1 million gives under 19%. Still a long way to go before we test your theory of 30% population reduction triggering a political reaction.

This is noting that in the initial stages of a country collapsing the population reduction seems to be mainly by migration, and not by any 'die-off'.

[whereagles]

that guy mugabe is totally nuts. when is the US going to "liberate" zimbabwe??

[MattSavinar]

Just wondering. It's no fun, after all, untill somebody gets tazed.

[EndOfGrowth]

It's shocking, did you get tazed?

[UncoveringTruths]

I think everyone should go out and by a tazer so we can sit around the campfire tazing each other and have good ole time.

[dunewalker]

Colin Campbell: "Don't taze me, Bro!"

[Cyrus]

Is this some kind of inside joke that people who didn't attend will not understand?

[whereagles]

no. taser is some new kind of electromagnetic weapon used in riot control.

Being tased is like being shocked (literally)

DISCLAIMER: the above corresponds solely to a conjecture by the author, who rejects any responsibility in eventual misinformation to others. (Gotta be legalist on this stuff... lol)

[EndOfGrowth]

no. taser is some new kind of electromagnetic weapon used in riot control.

Being tased is like being shocked (literally)

The tazer is not much different to a cattle prod. Bzzzzzd-baaah-bzzzd

[MattSavinar]

Is this some kind of inside joke that people who didn't attend will not understand?

I didn't attend myself. Mostly out of fear of being tazed.

[drew]

If you're gonna try it just make sure you have one of those ressuccitation machines nearby. I'm sure the 'jack ass' crowd has already been there!

Drew

[bartholland]

Nothing to worry about, just don't be so foolish as to ask questions to politicians:

no critical questions please

[roccman]

Just wondering. It's no fun, after all, untill somebody gets tazed.

Wasn't too bad.

[julianj]

It certainly beats having to answer pernickety questioners. Perhaps this freedom-of-speech thing is overated, don't you think?


......AAAAAAAAAAAAGH! ZAAAPPPP!!!