[ennui2]

I said et. al. China is a rhetorical device for demand destruction. But we have been through that one hundred time above. Do you really want to another round? It's tiring ennui.

Not really. I was cool agreeing to disagree, and I've already explained that this is going to go around in endless circles. Neither of you have any additional arguments to strengthen your case.

[MonteQuest]

Your dismissal of the 2008 demand destruction, is like saying the oil embargo wasn't the reason behind the oil shortage & gas rationing.

Whether I dismiss or accept it, it doesn't change where we are today in 2016, which is a GLUT. It's like whether or not someone believes in an earth-centric or helio-centric solar system, it doesn't change the fact we have 24-hour day/night cycles. So it's ultimately an academic dispute.

See? An empty word salad that says nothing.

[ralfy]

When it comes to a global economy that involves capitalism and competition, a glut is the excess of production that is no longer needed by a world population that has a growing global middle class:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22956470

which will require at least an additional earth.

That means such production should be able to provide an increase of at least 2 Mb/d per annum easily at very low costs, with no need for shale, gas, biofuels, etc.

[ennui2]

A glut represents the situation in the present tense. Nothing more, nothing less. It makes no claims for how long that glut can last.

It's like measuring the earth's carrying capacity vs. population. The math is constantly changing in an ominous way, but for now, we're not dying off.

[MonteQuest]

It's like measuring the earth's carrying capacity vs. population. The math is constantly changing in an ominous way, but for now, we're not dying off.

Except the biodiversity of the entire planet that supports us.

[Revi]

I think we may be reaching the top of the population peak. The projections for 10 billion people may not happen. We are going to have a very hard time feeding everyone on the planet now. How is it going to be possible to keep that many people fed, clothed and housed?

[tlowellb]

It will take a different conciusness than that which is prevalent if it is possible.

[ennui2]

It's gonna get increasingly soylent-green-ish. Factory farming is already very soylent-greenish when you think about it. Pink slime and all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slime

We'll probably have a push to culturally accept eating insects next.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ure-report

Of course, the idea that we might, ya know, have less kids, will be left out of the discussion. It will all about just adapting our attitudes for the sake of the planet, that we're not entitled to be repulsed by the slippery slope.

[AdamB]

A few Sundays ago, "60 Minutes'" Steve Kroft asked President-elect Barack Obama if the astonishing drop in gas and oil prices made dealing with energy issues "less important." Obama responded forcefully: "It makes it more important."

Like a passing hurricane, this “eye of the storm” in gas and oil prices is setting us up for an even more painful energy crisis in the very near future.

So...that never happened obviously...and as we stand here with gasoline prices possibly going under $1/gal in certain places in the MidWest soon...was this the crisis you were referring to as you revised your world view?

We must consider that, should oil prices and demand remain low for an extended period, new investment in oil production — not to mention renewables — will fall to such an extent that, with worldwide depletion of existing fields at 6.7 percent a year, there simply will not be enough new oil, or oil replacement energy, to power an economic recovery.

And instead, as it turns out, there is too MUCH oil! Surprising twist, I agree.

The true costs of cheap oil and the consequences of its’ use, have historically always been externalized — our military presence in the Middle East to ensure the flow of oil; environmental damage such as global climate change; the declining health of all living things – and have never been paid by consumers at the pump.

They soon will be…

Yup.

$0.99/gal in the MidWest coming soon to you..if..you are in the MidWest.

http://woodtv.com/2016/02/08/mi-gas-pri ... ince-2013/

So when you said "they soon will be", referencing "never been paid by consumers at the pump", you meant everyone who buys gasoline is young, and doesn't remember paying less than $1.00/gal back in the summer of 86, right? Because certainly you couldn't have meant HIGH prices...so you must have meant then that everyone will be out road tripping this summer, enjoying this new to them (the youngsters anyway) prices?

Time to dust off that V10 Excursion in the garage and get crackin!

Vintage road trip plans for those who are going to do this, this summer.

http://www.nationalparks.org/connect/bl ... nfographic

[Revi]

It's going to be the time for a road trip, because next summer might not be so great. I think we are seeing a monster recession coming at us, and a lot of us will be riding shank's mare next year...

[Lore]

Forget the old mare, I'm thinking of building Daryl's bike from the Walking Dead.

[AdamB]

It's going to be the time for a road trip, because next summer might not be so great.

Same thing was said back when PO was supposed to be happening a decade ago. The EIA says that the glut might continue for awhile, and based on how well they withstood the pressure to make PO-centric estimates over the past decade, they get some street cred.



So 2017 looks good for some road tripping as well. And affordable even in an SUV no less!

I think we are seeing a monster recession coming at us, and a lot of us will be riding shank's mare next year...

Did you see anyone riding shank's mare because they had to during the last big one? I didn't either, and that wasn't supposed to be just a recession, but peak oil and the Great Depression II all rolled into one.

What did it end up being? One helluva fine buying opportunity in the stock market. Probably the best in a generation.

[EdwinSm]

So 2017 looks good for some road tripping as well. And affordable even in an SUV no less!

At this stage, I think that price will be less of factor compared with any loss of jobs from a possible recession and therefore the ability to pay for a road trip. So for those with jobs it will look fine, but for others who need to conserve what little money they have.

Since I lost my job I have had to curtail the number of trips to our nearest town/city, as the cost of petrol for one round trip is almost equal to a day's unemployment pay (at minimum rate).

So the dynamic is mostly the ability to pay rather than the price. [Although the price is a factor in 'ability to pay'.]

[ennui2]

In a time of limited employment AND cheap commodities, the best adaptation is communal living arrangements. In other words, a family or other unit where only one person brings home the bacon and others work in the informal economy of doing all the chores around the house (to avoid looking like freeloaders).

The reason this works is that the amount of take-home pay required to pay for basic necessities isn't that high, and so it's possible for one person to feed a bunch. Self-esteem becomes the main reason why everyone of working age would want to work, not survival.

The main sting of cost of living isn't from food or energy. Besides rent/mortgage, it's things like health-care and higher-education. That's why these have become political issues. These two also don't fit very well into the narrative of peak-oil doom. If anything, they are anathema, as doomers go off to the boonies to live on herbal remedies and home-school and don't see the value of college. But in the real world, these things ARE important.

[AdamB]

So 2017 looks good for some road tripping as well. And affordable even in an SUV no less!

At this stage, I think that price will be less of factor compared with any loss of jobs from a possible recession and therefore the ability to pay for a road trip.

Certainly the recession of 2008 hit tourism in general and whatnot. But even then, folks were out traveling, and that was only the Great Recession, with hopes of being the Great Depression II. But even with 10% unemployment in the US, that leaves the other 90% to enjoy glut gasoline prices, and get some National Park visiting in.

Since I lost my job I have had to curtail the number of trips to our nearest town/city, as the cost of petrol for one round trip is almost equal to a day's unemployment pay (at minimum rate).

So the dynamic is mostly the ability to pay rather than the price. [Although the price is a factor in 'ability to pay'.]

Being gainfully employed certainly does come in handy if one wants to enjoy a modern consumerist lifestyle, which is what we are really talking about. Gasoline has gotten so cheap in the States that it isn't much of a consideration.