Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on August 29, 2017

Bookmark and Share

The next oil super cycle will hit hard

Production

Ministers of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) need to change their mindset — and they need to do it soon, as the next energy super cycle will hit these countries harder than the previous one.
Commodities markets are very volatile. Prices can go up and down greatly over a short period. Super cycles, on the other hand, can extend for many years.

The oil market today is shaped by two super cycles: The first appeared between 1986 and 2000, and the second lasted until 2014.
In the first super cycle, oil prices remained low, averaging around or below $20 a year — with the exception of 1990, when prices averaged $23.73 due to the Gulf War — according to data from British Petroleum Statistical Review.

There was an interim period of three years between the first and second super cycle. Oil prices edged a little higher between 2000 and 2003 but they were capped at below $30. From 2004, oil prices took the opposite direction from the previous super cycle and kept on rising.
A main feature of the first super cycle was OPEC’s mismanagement of the oil market. Oil prices were subdued for 14 years because demand weakened and supply from outside OPEC grew strongly. This was because OPEC allowed oil prices to rise to a very high level in the period up to 1986. That drove production from difficult offshore areas and incentivized consumers to look for alternatives.

Due to a lack of proper investments in oil projects between 1986 and 2000, OPEC and others were not prepared for the second super cycle, which was mainly shaped by the rise in demand from emerging markets led by China and India. Suddenly, China and India needed millions of barrels of oil to fuel their economic growth and the world did not have enough capacity inside or outside OPEC. Back then, the world relied on conventional oil that takes years to be explored and developed; therefore, supply lagged behind demand and prices kept rising.
This is no longer the case. Since 2011, high oil prices allowed technology to unlock oil that was once thought very difficult to recover. Unconventional oil resources boosted world oil production between 2011 and 2014.
In 2014, the market took a different direction. China’s economy was no longer growing in double digits. The cost of renewable energy went down. The market became awash with oil thanks to the shale oil revolution and deep-water drilling. The result was a sharp fall in oil prices and a glut that reminded everyone of the 1980s.

The super cycle of 2004-2014 may be coming to an end and a new one emerging. Oil prices might stay low for a decade as there are still more undeveloped shale areas in the world and alternative energy is gaining more ground.
Some major oil companies are already preparing for a scenario of “lower for longer” for oil prices. Royal Dutch Shell sees the peak of oil demand in the 2030s while Saudi Arabia and other OPEC members still see demand peaking in the 2040s or 2050s.
It is better to prepare for the worse than hope for the best. OPEC needs to realize that the next super cycle will hit everyone harder than the 1986-2000 low-oil-price cycle.
Why would it be harder? First, the population of OPEC states has boomed since the 1980s and 1990s. Second, there have been more aggressive technological breakthroughs this time. New techniques are unlocking more crude everywhere; electric cars will in a decade’s time replace tens of millions of combustion-engine vehicles. Third, there is no big consumer of energy on the horizon that can surprise everyone like China did in the early 2000s.
So how can OPEC prepare for the future? First, member states need to change their economic models. They need to diversify their incomes. Local industries must be developed to limit the need to import manufactured goods from abroad and to create more jobs. So far the Saudis are starting to do this but others need to follow. Second, they need to put aside their differences and discussions of short-term oil trends and prepare for a “lower for longer” scenario. Given the current situation, OPEC cannot target high oil prices — but it can defend a reasonable floor. Many OPEC countries like Venezuela are still hopeful of seeing oil prices of $70 or more. Hope is good but too much makes a country unable to see the future clearly — and makes it captive to high oil prices. That is what Ahmad Zaki Yamani warned OPEC about in the late 1970s, but no one bothered to listen.

arab news



47 Comments on "The next oil super cycle will hit hard"

  1. Jan on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 3:47 am 

    Electric vehicles will replace tens of millions of combustion engine vehicles. True, but this statement is also meaningless.

    http://www.oica.net/category/sales-statistics/

    The number of vehicles on the roads is now in the region of 1,400,000,000.

    If vehicle sales globally were static, then electric vehicles would have a meaningful impact. The number of vehicles sold annually has increased by 30,000,000 in the last 12 years, to just under 100 million per year.

    The number of ICE vehicles on the roads will only fall when production is less than scrappage. Unfortunately scrappage of old cars is falling because it has become cheap to export old second hand vehicles to poorer countries.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29061377
    Cars which some years ago would have been sent to the scrap yard have years more polluting life in Africa and India.
    Fully electric vehicle sales will need to be over 60 million per years before in number of combustion engine vehicles starts to fall.
    That will take around 20 years and by then the global vehicle number will exceed 3 billion.

  2. deadlykillerbeaz on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 4:30 am 

    Volvo is going to build all electric cars.

    They won’t have to manufacture four cylinder engines.

    The savings in raw materials and energy used will be substantial.

    The market is there, it is more efficient to use electricity to power the drive than gasoline or diesel fuel for smaller vehicles.

    One million EVs driven 12,000 miles per year won’t be consuming any gas.

    At 20 mpg, the ice car will consume 600 gallons of gas, the EV zero.

    600,000,000 gallons of gas not used in a year’s time will be an environmental victory.

    At 10,000,000 EVs, it will be 6 billion gallons. You won’t be needing 142,857,142 barrels of fuel to drive 10,000,000 ICE cars 120,000,000,000 miles in one year.

    It will add up, you will save on oil usage.

    It is not rocket science. You will notice the difference.

    Besides, it is better to burn coal to generate electricity to charge batteries than it is to burn gasoline in an automobile.

    Of course, Fairbanks-Morse will still build powerful diesel engines.

    https://www.fairbanksmorse.com/engines/

    And, of course, Boeing will build a nice new airplane that uses jet fuel, so oil won’t be going away anytime soon.

    http://www.boeing.com

    And now for something completely different:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qmDYchDxBvw

  3. Cloggie on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:47 am 

    Why does the first post always vanish?

    #2ndpost

  4. Cloggie on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:48 am 

    #garbage text to obfuscate that I already posted this message before

    http://www.sociosite.org/pictures/internet_globaal.gif

    #garbage text

    In 1995 few had an internet connection. For thoughtful conservative minds this was enough proof that it would never take off.

    https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/08/29/global-electric-car-stock-surpassed-2-million/

    Again: e-vehicles are quiet and clean and require less maintenance than its petrol sister. The bottleneck is the battery, not the rest. E-motors are simpler and cheaper and robuster and have (far) larger longevity than the combustion motor. Innovation is a reality many like to ignore. The value of the replacement market is enormous, hence the innovation push to bring the price of the batteries down and energy content up.

    Events like Houston are wake-up calls that (correct or not) will function as catalysts towards implementation of “Paris”.

  5. Davy on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 6:20 am 

    The next oil super cycle will hit hard is an understatement. Peak oil dynamics is alive and well. Just look to Houston or the multiple conflicts in the ME. Check out all the economic problems globally. China can’t continue to grow as it is. There is adequate global growth now primarily because of China. Chinese growth is unhealthy but still energizes the global economy. The developed world is on a plateau. Demand destruction is there waiting especially when China falters as it will and it will be ugly. The rate of growth, of growth is declining. Renewable energy is coming on strong. I am yet unsold that we can go 100% renewable but I am admiring how northern Europe is making a bold effort to go renewable. If we can go 40% in the developed world this will greatly extend our status quo.

    I hate the status quo because of its destructiveness but let’s face it many of us will die quickly if it ends. If you want us to go back to something less then prepare yourself for widespread death and suffering. Yes, a continuation of the status quo will likely get us there too. You can’t combine techno development with growing populations on a finite planet and expect that to end well. Our world is a Ponzi arrangement of exploitation of a finite planet and a social exploitation of haves and have nots. How long this can go on is debatable. It is a big world and collapse may be in only part of it. The degree and duration may vary by location. It may all come crashing down. We may work things out where some of modern civilization continues on longer in Byzantium enclaves with savage collapsing peripheries.

    At this point we just don’t know because there is too much data to process. There is too much human nature in self-organization that is not predictable. You can’t predict human emotions in mass. Human nature is responsible for lifestyles and attitudes. These need to change to a new wisdom based way of life of less with the ability to say no to techno development. The unfortunate reality of this is we have a growth based global economy tightly interconnected. You can’t change it now because it is a climax human ecosystem fully dependent on systematic rigidities that are now brittle to change. The sad fact is if we can’t get off the conveyor of competitive cooperation that does not allow needed draconian change. We must compete less and cooperate more. This cooperation must be draconian. It won’t work if it tries to be fair because fair means more sacrifice for some than others. This will never work in a world where people don’t know or trust each other. The alternative is a bumbling into crisis after crisis. We must go to a multipolar world of more cooperation. Yes, this means a quick end to the last vestiges of the American hegemony.

    Oil is caught up in all this with a certainly difficult future faced with depletion, lack of investment, and destructive alternative techno change. Oil is our foundational commodity. It is responsible for transportation. Transportation is the circulatory system of a just in time economies of scale world that digitally interconnects. I doubt EV’s and alternatives can ever manage what oil is doing. They can help extend but not replace. This oily modernism is too complex to end without complete collapse and large loss of life. Oil is a part of this and it is how we manage the end of oil that that will determine how much time we have left. I used to be more extreme about doom. I am less so now but longer term I don’t see a happy ending.

  6. Revi on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:37 am 

    It’s pretty much over, but most people don’t realize it. There are thousands of people in my town without cars, or access to one. They walk and get rides, but they won’t be owning cars any time soon. They feel like they live in the same place, but they aren’t participating in the “American Dream”, and they won’t be. They are living their lives and doing okay. It’s the new normal.

  7. Dredd on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 8:28 am 

    “The next oil super cycle will hit hard”

    Gives new meaning to “Houston, we have a problem” (Iraq: World’s Number One Oil Producer?).

  8. Sissyfuss on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 8:47 am 

    Revi, with unlivable wages as the new normal cars all be as unattainable as McMansions.

  9. Dredd on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 9:34 am 

    rockman (“Dr. Hindsight”) wrote about not being able to foresee events we now see before our eyes.

    He could not be more WRONG.

    This video (https://youtu.be/BmQs9ItjvNs) features Professor / Dr. Peter Hoeppe of Munich RE, one of the world’s leading reinsurers (insurer of insurance companies).

    He points out that they made climate change induced floods, etc., a part of their core business plan in 1973.

  10. bobinget on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 9:35 am 

    EIA Report out 10:30
    Here’s all you all need to know;

    Total products supplied over the last four-week period averaged over 21.2 million barrels
    per day, up by 3.4% from the same period last year. Over the last four weeks, motor
    gasoline product supplied averaged 9.7 million barrels per day, up by 0.2% from the
    same period last year. Distillate fuel product supplied averaged 4.2 million barrels per
    day over the last four weeks, up by 11.1% from the same period last year. Jet fuel product
    supplied is up 3.3% compared to the same four-week period last year.

  11. bobinget on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 9:36 am 

    Before the Storm

    U.S. crude oil refinery inputs averaged over 17.7 million barrels per day during the week
    ending August 25, 2017, 264,000 barrels per day more than the previous week’s average.
    Refineries operated at 96.6% of their operable capacity last week. Gasoline production
    increased last week, averaging 10.6 million barrels per day. Distillate fuel production
    decreased last week, averaging about 5.1 million barrels per day.

  12. paultard on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 9:43 am 

    the idea that global warming induces more lethal storms assumes somehow the system is more energetic on higher temperature scale.

    it is my observation that winds is more intense in the winter, lower temp scale. i’m still looking for that graph of winds energy v tempeature

  13. bobinget on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 10:33 am 

    Higher water temps increase evaporation.
    U can try this at home, paultard.
    GOM is hotter today then ever in recorded hist.

    Hurricanes are like walking dead. Instead of human brains they feed off warm water.

    Watch ocean, GOM temps steer Irma. Not saying Irma will fall into GOM. She could Mexico instead.

  14. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 12:41 pm 

    Dredd on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 8:28 am

    “The next oil super cycle will hit hard”
    Gives new meaning to “Houston, we have a problem” (Iraq: World’s Number One Oil Producer?).

    Do you know how much oil Iraq produces?

  15. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 12:47 pm 

    Did you not read the article Boat? You do understand what a question mark (?) means? No?

  16. rockman on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 12:57 pm 

    And back to the thread my dear highjackers. LOL.

    “In the first super cycle, oil prices remained low, averaging around or below $20 a year — with the exception of 1990, when prices averaged $23.73 due to the Gulf War…”. More bullsh*t. The inflation adjusted price of oil is well documented. In the 80’s prices ran between $25 to $35 per bbl. In 1990 prices spiked to $63/ bbl but that was short lived.

    In the early 2000’s prices ran similar to the 80’s and 90’s with the exception of the late 90’s when prices fell as low as $12/bbl. But in genera on the mega scale they refer to there were clear cycles: 1946 – 1973 (low end); 1974- 1985 (high end); 1986 – 2004 (low end); 2004 – 2014 (high end); 2015 – current (low end).

    So what does that predict about the future? Who knows? No one has been consistently correct predicting future oil prices. But having said consider that the world is consuming huge quanties of oil while depletion continues and additional new reserves are being developed slowly. At the same time development of renewable energy is growing very slowing as are the sales of non-fossil fuel vehicles.

    So how difficult is it to not expect another high end price period sometime in the future?

  17. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 1:16 pm 

    “So how difficult is it to not expect another high end price period sometime in the future?”

    Gasoline prices are already high, at least in Canada.

    Price at the pump today $1.36/ litre. 13 cents shy of the all time high of $1.49 reached in 2009.

    History of Vancouver gas prices since 1999, in pictures:

    http://www.theprovince.com/Historical+prices/4760052/story.html

  18. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 2:31 pm 

    greggiet,

    In the middle of a hurricane you can get gas for $2.09 per gal. Your high cost of fuel has a lot to do with taxes. Socialized gasoline. Just another form of wealth distribution.

    GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 12:47 pm

    Did you not read the article Boat? You do understand what a question mark (?) means? No?

    I followed the Dredd link where it suggested Iraq oil might reach 12 mbpd. Currently Iraq produces closer to 4.5. Like you and mak, our bud Dredd is another conspiracy wingnut.

  19. onlooker on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 2:52 pm 

    I suppose the idea that maybe the extra cost of gas, incurred by Europeans and Canadians due to taxes, tariffs is a bad thing in your book Boat. In fact it is a good thing as they have not become such a crazed car culture as the US

  20. Davy on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 3:00 pm 

    Define “such” onlooker. They are crazed in my book just a little less. They are both still deep into unsustainability especially Canada. Europeans don’t have the luxury of being as wasteful. They would be more wasteful if they could. It is human nature.

  21. onlooker on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 3:07 pm 

    Yes, Canada in some ways is a mirror image of the US but somewhat less perhaps. But the point is that cars will become obsolete despite our fellow posters who swear by EV. So, I do think that when James Howard Kunstler said something to the effect that the American Suburbs is the greatest misallocation of resources is the history of mankind, he was not engaging in hyperbole. It is just that the unsustainable practices are just more and were evident earlier in the US. But since then everyone and their grandmother joined in. Look at China and India doing their darnest to be like the US

  22. Apneaman on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:27 pm 

    boat, I hear you on those subsidies. They should end them all.

    Fossil fuel subsidies are a staggering $5 tn per year

    A new study finds 6.5% of global GDP goes to subsidizing dirty fossil fuels

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/aug/07/fossil-fuel-subsidies-are-a-staggering-5-tn-per-year

    What better example of the taxpayer subsidizing the already uber wealthy than y’alls ongoing horror show I have correctly renamed-

    HURRICANE EXXON

    Harvey to be costliest natural disaster in U.S. history, estimated cost of $160 billion

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2017/08/30/harvey-costliest-natural-disaster-u-s-history-estimated-cost-160-billion/615708001/

    Now get the fuck to work boat and pick up the tab. 160 billion is low. These estimates never end up anywhere near the first estimates. They like to break you in gently and every couple of weeks to months give the public a new and higher one.

    The first estimate for the record breaking AGW Jacked Calgary flood of 2013 was about 1 billion and was at 6 billion and counting last I heard.

    Remember when I told you and everyone 957 times already that AGW will break the bank sooner than most realize? Is my claim starting to make sense now?

    In truth what is more likely to happen is the fossil fuel industry will get more subsidies and tax breaks and they will call it a matter of national security. And they will be right, because their denial helped make it so by leaving everything unprotected. That wasn’t their intent, but rather a by product of denial for power and profit. Can’t exactly publicly state that climate adaption/protection is a national priority when you deny it exists and spend a billion a year on denial propaganda to create an army of true believer useful idiot deniers.

  23. Apneaman on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:44 pm 

    onlooker, the Canadian cancer started the minute the boys came back from the war, but the population was only about 12 million.

    Birth of the Suburbs
    Canadians embrace the comforts of home in post-war times

    “The Camisso family was given the keys to the home, and neighbours brought roses, served coffee and welcomed the new family under the glare of the press. The Camissos had bought the millionth house built in Canada since the end of the Second World War.”

    http://www.cbc.ca/history/EPISCONTENTSE1EP15CH3PA3LE.html

    By the time that 1 millionth post war building boom home was built in 1956 the population was 16 million. They also built indoor hockey rinks all over the place in little towns as small as 1000 folks. No KKK.

  24. onlooker on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:53 pm 

    AP, your fellow Canadians never had a chance. Think about being right next to the US, about all the space to build out luxury, about being white etc and especially once you became a “rich” country. So we in rich countries are Cancer extradonaire monkeys haha.

  25. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 5:58 pm 

    ape,

    “Remember when I told you and everyone 957 times already that AGW will break the bank sooner than most realize? Is my claim starting to make sense now”?

    I have never argued AGW will not break the bank. I just don’t think it will come any time soon. Harvey is another data point. When we start getting a couple of storms like that a year is when real trouble starts.
    Remember a few years back when Florida had 4 hurricanes in a year? Florida survived. Remember 4 years ago the US was going to crash? The US is growing at 3 percent which is massive considering the scale. Like 27 percent of the worlds economy If I remember correctly.
    This climate change fight will be long and agonizing and we’ll be here in a couple decades adding to those data points.

  26. onlooker on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 6:07 pm 

    Yes, the climate change fight will be fairly long. Meaning we will hang on with lessser and lesser places to live and less of our kind. Then, we will probably disappear. Peak population 0

  27. Ghung on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 6:09 pm 

    Boat,, still whistling past the graveyard.

  28. DerHundistLos on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 6:34 pm 

    Vote no in emergency relief funds for the Texas deniers since the congressonal reps. from Texas voted ‘no” for emergency funds to New York after Sandy.

  29. onlooker on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:00 pm 

    Is that so Derhund Sons of bitc*es
    But still do not penalize others

  30. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:00 pm 

    “The US is growing at 3 percent which is massive considering the scale.”

    You do understand the exponential function right Boat?

    A sustained growth rate of 3% per annum means that the entire throughput of the economy must double in around 22 years. Around the same time that the world will have added another 2 billion mouths to feed.

    You can’t understand the problem with this?

  31. Tom on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:07 pm 

    Apneaman;

    Why do US Oil & Gas Companies receive such lucrative subsidies (that are mostly hidden in tax credits so they are not classified as subsidies)?

    Because the US Government is that desperate to increase production & deliver more oil to market.

    This is one of many tools that the US government exploits in their never-ending struggle to hold oil prices down…

    Increasing Crude Supply & Manipulating oil prices down is the US’s only means of retaining their position of global domination in the coming years as Global crude oil consumption increases…

  32. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:18 pm 

    “In the middle of a hurricane you can get gas for $2.09 per gal. Your high cost of fuel has a lot to do with taxes. Socialized gasoline. Just another form of wealth distribution.”

    Did you bother to look at the link that I provided Boat?
    Gasoline in Vancouver was 30.7 cents a litre in January of 1999, and never exceeded $1.00 per litre until some time in 2007. Gasoline at the pump today is over 500% higher than it was 18 years ago.

  33. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:25 pm 

    Sorry,

    Gasoline at the pump today is over 400% higher than it was 18 years ago. And Boat, high gasoline prices are the norm around the world. Your gasoline is being subsidized. That would be socialism.

  34. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:31 pm 

    tom,

    Imports are expensive. Even with expensive local FF governments get revenue and jobs from every part of the FF chain.
    Oil is not the only btu in town. 37 percent of btu production is oil with about 25 percent of that imported for consumption.

  35. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:38 pm 

    Boat,

    “Imports are expensive.”

    Then how do you explain the TV manufactured in China, or Mexico, being so much cheaper than the same TV manufactured in the U.S.?

  36. Makati1 on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 7:47 pm 

    Boat is a socialist. Simple as that. His gasoline/NG consumption is subsidized by the taxpayer and the US military, which is also subsidized by the taxpayer. He pays well over 50% of his income to pay those bills. THAT is what socialism is. The few supporting the many. Keep paying your taxes Boat. You are funding some of my retirement here. lol

  37. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 8:09 pm 

    greggiet,

    US employees demand healthcare, 401k and other benefits. Our cars have pollution and safety added costs. Hell we recycle at an added expense. You need to watch tv and catch up. Mexico and China have little regard for their workers and few regulations by choice. So yea, for now they can make a cheaper tv.
    What your missing is S Korea. Highly educated work force using cutting edge tech. Little country that has to import materials and energy but still drives products.

  38. GregT on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 8:29 pm 

    Boat,

    The longer that U.S. Multinationals are allowed to offshore labor for bigger profits, the further underfunded social programs will become. There is no free lunch.

    You really should stop watching the corporate propaganda on television, and try reading some books instead.

  39. Boat on Wed, 30th Aug 2017 9:00 pm 

    greggiet,

    Why don’t we just cut the population of poor N America families by giving huge incentives for not having kids. You really want to go down the rabbit hole of solutions that will never happen? Your books promote racism and hate. My daddy taught me better.

  40. jan on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 5:45 am 

    deadlykillerbeaz says

    “At 10,000,000 EVs, it will be 6 billion gallons.”

    Deadly, perhaps you can tell us when you think global sales of 100% electric vehicles will be reached?

  41. jan on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 6:16 am 

    Hurricane Harvey is not proof of Global Warming.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_most_intense_tropical_cyclones#North_Atlantic_Ocean

    Other than 2005 which was an el nino year, major hurricans have been spreed evenly since 1924.

    The El Nino effect has caused severe climatic effects since records began, including a famine in China killing 13 million people.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Ni%C3%B1o#Cultural_history_and_prehistoric_information

    What do you think the global warming brigade would say if a storm surge killed 50,000 in the Netherlands? or if the yellow river flooded killing 900,000 people?

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

    Most of these people are ignorant of the scale of floods that have occurred in the past, most have never heard of them.

  42. Davy on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 6:39 am 

    “Hurricane Harvey is not proof of Global Warming.”
    Uuu, well would the warming up of the ocean be a clue? Would a warmer ocean maybe have enhanced Harvey? Could a disrupted jet because of a warmed arctic maybe have change the normal dynamics of a hurricane exiting an area quicker? Please don’t give me historic context and try to argue away global warming and its effects.

    We know we are warming the world, period. If you disagree with that you are a science denier. Now, maybe a cooling sun will save us. Maybe a NUK winter will bring us salvation. Maybe even super caldera volcanism will come to the rescue. It won’t be modern man with his Paris parties saving the world. It won’t be the fake green Paris party hypocrisy later saying a Cheeto clown rejection of that party is going to destroy the world nonsense. One thing is certain for science denier and people who believe in science until the solutions are discussed alike is this will not end well because there are no solutions for this other than draconian measures of population and consumption decline.

    I get so tired of hearing the whine, moan, and complain stupid AGW priestesses saying Houston deserves what they got blame and complain shit. I also get tired of the science denying skydaddy worshipping dumbasses who say all is well. All is not well and blame and complain is for immature people. What we need is to see reality. This reality is humans are doing what humans do and nature is doing what nature does through humans. This is a keystone species planetary extinction event playing out as a process and yes global warming is proof of this. Man your lifeboats and prepare grand hospices for a die down.

  43. onlooker on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 8:19 am 

    Jan, what sort of proof are you looking for, some Neon sign blowing with Harvey saying I was caused by GW. Cmon surely you know Science does not work like that. Direct perfect proof rarely exists what you have is studied processes, precise measurements and empirical experiments that demonstrate certain aspects of our Universal reality. AGW has been studied extensively both in the present and in the past. We also know greenhouse gases accumulate both in the atmosphere and in the oceans and that they cause the greenhouse effect. We know from measurements that the oceans have warmed and that the atmosphere is holding more moisture. From all this we can safely and firmly say that weather will be affected and that the climate will gradually and then probably quite suddenly change. That is all that is needed to say that Harvey almost certainly was enhanced by AGW

  44. Kenz300 on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 11:30 am 

    Go electric.

    Clean energy production with solar panels / tiles and battery storage.
    Clean energy consumption with electric vehicles. No emissions.
    A new solar roof, battery storage, an electric car charger and an electric vehicle.
    Solar panels are now being projected to have a much longer life than just a few years ago.

  45. GregT on Thu, 31st Aug 2017 11:49 am 

    The manufacturing of solar panels, batteries, electric car chargers, and electric vehicles, all require industrial processes, and the burning of fossil fuels, as do economies of scale needed to pay for all of the above not clean industrial processes.

    The cart does not pull the horse Kenz.

  46. Jan on Fri, 1st Sep 2017 6:17 am 

    onlooker

    The world may well be warming up a little but the fact remains, huge and long lasting changes have happened in the past.
    The Sahara desert was once lush with trees and grass supporting herds of animals.

    https://www.livescience.com/4180-sahara-desert-lush-populated.html

    The Gobi desert has formed from gradual and increasingly dry conditions over the last few thousand years.

    http://scienceinpoland.pap.pl/en/news/news,410066,archaeologist-many-thousands-of-years-ago-life-flourished-in-the-gobi-desert.html

    You will agree these changes are vast and calamitous and also nothing to do with men burning oil or coal.

    Can you tell me why you are so convinced the greater humidity will not bring rains to these vast deserts?

  47. Davy on Fri, 1st Sep 2017 6:40 am 

    jan, can you tell me this, is it a good idea to force a climate system when it is that stable climate period being forced that is responsible for human civilization? IMA, a human civilization way off into overshoot territory already because that civilization was allowed to explode because of a stable climate period.

Leave a Reply

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