Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on June 3, 2016

Bookmark and Share

Peak Oil: Big Oil Faces ‘Slow And Steady Decline’

Peak Oil: Big Oil Faces ‘Slow And Steady Decline’ thumbnail

“Peak oil demand” is the new “peak oil supply” because of climate change and plummeting costs for electric car batteries.

It’s increasingly clear that we’re not going to move off of oil because we run out of supply. Rather, we’re going to move off of oil because it is both the economic and moral thing to do.

The research firm Bernstein notes that two “existential threats to the oil industry” exist — “climate change” and “advances in battery technology and computing power, which have resulted in a surge in interest in electric vehicles and autonomous driving.” They project the peak in oil demand could come as soon as 2030-2035:

BernsteinPeakOil2016

CREDIT: Bernstein Research

This projection is quite similar to one from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) that I wrote about earlier this year.

You know the oil industry is in long-term trouble when even the staid Financial Times editorializes, “Fossil fuel producers face a future of slow and steady decline” in a piece headlined, “The long twilight of the big oil companies.”

Significantly, the FT piece focuses exclusively on the implications of the “international objective of holding the increase in global temperatures to ‘well below’; 2C, agreed at the Paris climate talks.” This objective “implies the obsolescence of all fossil fuel production within the next few decades. The oil companies have not yet reconciled themselves to quite what this means.”

The Financial Times ends by bluntly laying out just what this means:

Instead of railing against climate policies, or paying them lip-service while quietly defying them with investment decisions, the oil companies will serve their investors and society better if they accept the limits they face, and embrace a future of long-term decline.

Existential threat #1 to oil, the ever-worsening reality of climate change, makes peak demand inevitable in the next few decades. Existential threat #2, the ever-improving reality of electric car batteries, will be one of the primary instruments of demand destruction.

Bernstein Research explains:

While their share of the overall transport market is small, EVs [electric vehicles] and PHEVs [plug-in hybrid electric vehicles] will gain market share over time and eventually have a material impact on demand growth. While we do not foresee this being material in the next five years, EVs will start to have an impact toward the middle of the next decade.

Similarly, BNEF has projected “electric vehicles could displace oil demand of 2 million barrels a day as early as 2023. That would create a glut of oil equivalent to what triggered the 2014 oil crisis.”

But that would require maintaining EV growth at the current very high rate of 60 percent a year, which BNEF considers “a very aggressive forecast.” BNEF models the costs of EV components and comes up with about half the current growth rate. In their scenario “we’ll cross the oil-crash benchmark of 2 million barrels a few years later — in 2028.”

Electric cars have always had a significantly lower per-mile fueling cost than gasoline-powered cars. This is true even with today’s oil low prices and even if you run the car on renewable electricity.

The key point is that sometime between now and 2025, batteries — which make about one-third the cost of an EV today — will come down in price enough that EVs will achieve cost-parity with internal combustion (IC) engine cars on the initial cost of the vehicle itself!

BNEFbatteries2016full

And this will be happening at exactly the same time that solar and wind power will be achieving penetration levels that allow electric utilities to offer very low rates for zero-carbon power — especially if the utility can be given some control over when most of the charging is done.

By the mid-2020s, then, EVs and new renewables in tandem will provide an alternative to IC vehicles that is superior in many respects — the same or lower first cost, a much lower annual fueling (and maintenance) bill, zero tail-pipe emissions of urban air pollutants, and zero total emissions of carbon dioxide. And this will all be happening during the decade when the increasingly painful reality of climate change makes governments even more desperate to slash CO2 emissions than they are today.

China Will Drive The Timing Of The Peak In Oil Demand

Oil demand already peaked over the last decade for the industrialized (OECD) countries:

OECDoilpeak

CREDIT: BP Statistical Review, peakoil.com

Peaking in oil globally around 2030 would require the developing world’s recent rapid growth in oil use to slow over the next 15 years — and then ultimately reverse itself as the OECD has.

Since China has been the key driver of non-OECD oil demand growth, China will be the key driver in reversing global oil trends (just as it has been in reversing global coal trends). And just as China’s recent coal policy has been driven more by the urgent need to slash its intolerable urban air pollution than by its longer-term desire to preserve a livable climate, so too is China’s oil and transportation policy. After all, the dangerous air pollution in cities like Beijing is caused by both coal burning and dirty vehicles.

Unsurprisingly, then, China has made a huge bet on batteries and EVs. Also, China understands the future is low-carbon and then zero-carbon — so it intends to become the world leader in both the production and use of battery EVs, just as it already has in both wind and solar power.

The Chinese EV market tripled last year. China’s BYD Auto Company now appears to be both the biggest EV maker in China and the whole world.

Here are China’s monthly EV sales for the past three years:

ChinaEVsales

CREDIT: EV Volumes

BYD projects China’s EV market will double in size this year, and again next year, and once again in 2018. That would mean China’s EV sales would blow past one million vehicles a year within three years.

“If China gets moving on electric cars then that would automatically lower prices and have a favorable ripple effect across the whole world,” as one auto expert has said. That is exactly what drove the exponential explosion in solar power worldwide this decade.

The bright dawn of renewables and electric cars means the long twilight of the big oil companies is in sight.

thinkprogress.org



50 Comments on "Peak Oil: Big Oil Faces ‘Slow And Steady Decline’"

  1. Stuifzand on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 12:11 pm 

    Royal Dutch Shell, one of the Seven Sisters oil majors, is currently embroiled in a battle between a large group of activist shareholders who insist that Shell should invest every euro profit in renewable energy and the leadership, that doesn’t want to be that drastic.

    http://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/051916/shell-invest-17b-new-energies-division.asp

    “Chatham House, a London-based international affairs think tank, released a report stating that international oil companies such as Shell must completely transform their business models or face a “nasty, brutish and short” end over the next decade.”

  2. rockman on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 1:32 pm 

    First, those activist shareholders have a completely insignificant vote in how RDS conducts business. Last time I saw the story 90%+ of the voting shareholders want the board to stay the course.

    And $200 million? Wow…that’s almost 0.6% of their 2016 budget…which is 30% less then the 2015 budget. And the $1.7 billion? That’s about 6%. More but that’s stretched over multiple years.

    And Big Oil isn’t going to shrink…just the opposite. The number of companies will decrease…as has been happening for more than 30 years. The surviving members of Big Oil will grow thru acquisitions…made even more profitable by the recent price decrease.

    Folks need to set their emotions aside and view the situation as strictly business and not personal. LOL

  3. Boat on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 1:40 pm 

    Stuifzand,

    I think rockman said it best. Why would you expect a company good at extracting oil to be good at manufacturing or deploying renewables.
    If investors want renewables to grow faster companies like Siemens and GE would make more sense.

  4. PracticalMaina on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 1:45 pm 

    GE gets government kickbacks while eliminating jobs, its like they’re a fossil fuel co.

  5. Apneaman on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 1:55 pm 

    This looks like a fast and steady decline to me. Cancer’s externalizing more “folks” everyday/disaster. Lovely pictures from last months once in 500 years (or is it 1000? who can keep up?) texass floods. You can rest assured this months once in 500/1000 year floods have made a similar or worse mess.

    Flooding sweeps oil, chemicals into rivers.

    “Scores of photographs taken by state emergency-management officials show that when floodwaters rise in Texas, they inundate oil wells and fracking sites, sweeping crude and noxious chemicals into rivers throughout the Lone Star State.

    Most recently, rainbow sheens and caramel plumes can be seen radiating from tipped tanks and flooded production pads during the March flood of the Sabine River, which forms much of the state’s boundary with Louisiana. Similar scenes are visible in photos from last year’s floods of the Trinity, Red, and Colorado rivers.”

    http://www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/2016/04/30/flooding-sweeps-oil-chemicals-into-rivers/83671348/

  6. GregT on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 2:02 pm 

    Continuing to call alternate electric power generation ‘renewable’, is not only misleading, it is downright dishonest. Alternates are a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, and by extension, modern industrialism. As are all of the gadgets that we use that electricity for. The ignorance and denial is mind-boggling.

  7. Stuifzand on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 2:30 pm 

    Shareholders have a natural commitment to the long term well being of the company, where CEO’s are more committed to this years profit and bonus.

    And ‘poof’ says Enron or Shell, as per Chatham House:

    https://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/international-oil-companies-death-old-business-model
    International Oil Companies: The Death of the Old Business Model

    Ignore at your own risk.

  8. GregT on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 2:53 pm 

    Nature has no commitment to the longterm wellbeing of companies, their shareholders, or their CEOs. Mankind is doing a very good job of ignoring the risks, and the consequences.

  9. shortonoil on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 2:55 pm 

    “The bright dawn of renewables and electric cars means the long twilight of the big oil companies is in sight.”

    A repost from A Renewable Energy Economy will Create More Jobs today:


    “About 147 gigawatts (GW) of capacity was added in 2015”

    http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36420750

    By our calculations what will be lost from the reduction in petroleum production alone (not counting NG declines) by 2030 will amount to 24.52 trillion Kwhrs (83.70 quad BTU). Using the above 2015 growth rate for re-newables it will require 166.9 years to make up for the loss.

    To maintain the present civilization (without growth) will require a growth rate for renewable energy which will be 12.4 times greater than the present rate. The chances are, that the world of 2030 will be unrecognizable to most present day inhabitants.

    http://www.thehillsgroup.org/

    Very few people have any idea of just how fast the oil age is ending. Even fewer will be ready for it when that day arrives.

  10. Plantagenet on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 3:15 pm 

    Short is right. The world of 2030 will be unrecognizable. Global Warming will bring us a blue Arctic Ocean, rapid warming of the Arctic and release of CO and CH4 from thawing permafrost, and rapid melt of the Greenland Ice Sheet.

    The coast is toast–rising sea levels will swamp coastal cities by 2100.

  11. Apneaman on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 3:22 pm 

    Fuck, Chatham House. Just one more “think tank” eating (nicely) off corporate funding. It will all come to an end due to depletion or possibly nuke war, but not on purpose. There is no MIC without oil, so everything and one will be sacrificed before they give up. Fuck the shareholders too. Scum puppies the lot of em. I hope depletion hits even sooner than short suggests. I had a dream where they was serving “shareholder stew” for dinner. Mmmmmm sounds rich.

  12. Anonymous on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 6:32 pm 

    “It’s increasingly clear that we’re not going to move off of oil because we run out of supply. Rather, we’re going to move off of oil because it is both the economic and moral thing to do.”

    No goal post-shifting to see here, move along.

    Its not ‘peak oil(which is bad)’, its been re-branded to ‘peak demand'(which isn’t exactly good either, but looks a lot better on paper.

  13. shortonoil on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 6:44 pm 

    Petroleum is an essential components for 38% of the world’s GDP. No oil, no GDP. If 10% of the world’s petroleum producers go bankrupt that would reduce GDP by 3.8%. That is a permanent depression. We expect to have reached that state by the end of 2017.

    http://www.thehillsgroup.org/

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-03/us-commercial-bankruptcies-soar-despite-rosy-scenario

  14. makati1 on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 7:50 pm 

    whew! And I thought I sounded negative. The above comments reinforce my thoughts perfectly. We are in for a rough ride. Buckle Up!

  15. GregT on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 7:55 pm 

    Short,

    I would like to see your data in support of 62% of the world’s GDP not being completely reliant on oil.

  16. observerbrb on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 8:02 pm 

    Shortonoil,

    That seems to be a pretty bold statement (I think it’s not an unrealistic possibility, tough). Do you think that emerging markets are going to suffer the hit before the western economies?

  17. Dustin Hoffman on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 8:31 pm 

    Numerology states that on the Date of 02/22/2022 will cause the contraction of the cosmic order at precisely the time of the same order with a 95% confidence level.

  18. makati1 on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 10:31 pm 

    GregT, I would like to see that also. I think most GDP is reliant either directly or indirectly on oil. Even NG, coal and nuclear is reliant on oil.

  19. GregT on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 11:03 pm 

    “Numerology states that on the Date of 02/22/2022 will cause the contraction of the cosmic order at precisely the time of the same order with a 95% confidence level.”

    Sounds intelligent enough. How’s about getting back to us all in about 5 years, and letting us all know how that’s working out for you? Thanks Dustie. 🙂

  20. Dustin Hoffman on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 7:29 am 

    Greg, does that include all the others that make “predictions” here on this blog?
    If so, you will likely be talking to your lonesome!

  21. Kenz300 on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 7:47 am 

    Big Oil Could Have Cut CO2 Emissions In 1970s — But Did Nothing
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/big-oil-emissions_us_573c9d81e4b0aee7b8e8a046

    New Documents Show Oil Industry Even More Evil Than We Thought
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-cover-up-climate_us_570e98bbe4b0ffa5937df6ce

    Climate Change is real….. we will all be impacted by it.

    Oil Giants Spend $115 Million A Year To Oppose Climate Policy
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-companies-climate-policy_us_570bb841e4b0142232496d97

    The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/koch-electric-vehicles_us_56c4d63ce4b0b40245c8cbf6

    Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire | Rolling Stone
    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924?page=2

  22. makati1 on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 8:12 am 

    Dustin, Greg will have more people to talk to than you will. You and the Missouri hillbilly should get together for a few beers and brag to each other about your intelligence and the lack of ours and talk about us while we continue to prepare for, and talk about, a free life you cannot even imagine.

    TPTB are using every trick in the book to keep it all from imploding, but they are running our of tricks. Does it matter if something we say should happen this year actually happens next? Nope! Just gives us more time to prepare and enjoy life. More than can be said by your side of the fence.

  23. Boat on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 8:18 am 

    GregT on Fri, 3rd Jun 2016 2:02 pm
    Continuing to call alternate electric power generation ‘renewable’, is not only misleading, it is downright dishonest. Alternates are a byproduct of burning fossil fuels, and by extension, modern industrialism. As are all of the gadgets that we use that electricity for. The ignorance and denial is mind-boggling.

    The world is not going to change the name for a group of products because some idiot in Canada thinks it’s misleading. The world will not change GDP calculations because some idiot in Canada thinks they should. Catch the theme there greggiet?

  24. makati1 on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 8:29 am 

    Boat, do you understand the use of punctuation? You know: .”,’! etc.? I had to read your comment then go up to Greg’s to see why it didn’t make sense. You omitted the “” dividing his comment from yours. If you want to be understood and considered intelligent, you have to try harder.

  25. Sissyfuss on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 8:30 am 

    Dust off, the correct date was 2/22/2222. And people who think that the human tool of mathematics holds sway over the ineffable essence of the universe are as hubristic as they are delusional.

  26. Boat on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 8:41 am 

    mak,

    Since were all dead soon I am practicing
    post death writing. I wish my i’s had no dots. I deemed them irrelevant. There is a solution, don’t read my shyt. Just assume I disagree with about every thought you have ever thunk.

  27. Davy on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 9:29 am 

    Oh, Makati Billy, thanks for the compliment. Better to be a Missouri Hillbilly than a dumbshit old man living in a high rise in the middle of 20MIL people in a overpopulated 3rd world country. A country that is ranked #3 in exposure to natural disasters. LMFAO

  28. rockman on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 9:31 am 

    Sissy – And let’s not forget that 2/22/2222 is just an arbitrary construct that exists only on one of many calendars. But folks should still enjoy their fantasies.LOL.

  29. makati1 on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 9:47 am 

    Boat, when you have a thought, it will be front page news. But, I put you on the ignore as not worth my time list with a few others here. No matter the excuse, you do not come over as very intelligent.

  30. GregT on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 11:18 am 

    The Boat non-sensical quote of the day:

    “Since were all dead soon I am practicing post death writing. I wish my i’s had no dots. I deemed them irrelevant.”

  31. shortonoil on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 2:49 pm 

    “I would like to see your data in support of 62% of the world’s GDP not being completely reliant on oil.”

    If you look at the EIA data, they said that last year 35.7% of world energy production came from petroleum. That number has gone up and down, over the last 15 years. The Etp Model indicates that it is closer to the long term average of about 38%. So using 38%, if that 38% were to be removed one would be removing 38% of the economy. That is, there is no economic activity without energy because there is no movement without energy.

    If one uses the commonly accepted economic multiplier effect of 6 to 1, that 3.8% would increase to 22.8%. The problem here is that the multiplier effect may not be a constant. It may increase or decrease as the economy contracts. It may also vary widely from place to place. In essence we just don’t know what its impact will be.

    We can state with confidence that if all the oil were removed that at least 38% of the economy would disappear. 38% would undoubted end most of what we know as modern civilization. There would be some kind of economy remaining, in some places, but it is impossible to predict what that will be. Even after it happens no one will know! There won’t be any government payed bean counter remaining to add up the numbers, even if they had them, which they probably won’t.

    Looking past the end of the oil age is more in the realm of science fiction, and fantasy writers than analysts. To really know what will happen you will have to wait a few years; few as in not many. At that point the future will get ever closer to the present.

  32. Davy on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 2:59 pm 

    Even removing a small amount of oil from the economy can stop the economy. There is a multiplier effect of the reduction of activity reducing activity. A 10% reduction in the availability of liquid fuels might reduce 50% of the discretionary use of liquid fuels since emergency services and vital support industries a must be maintained. The key is how fast the liquid fuels are removed. We can adapt to drops over time but immediate drops cause life threatening economic damage.

  33. shortonoil on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 3:06 pm 

    Dust off, the correct date was 2/22/2222.”

    That can’t be right – it’s not a Leap Year? Dame Monks screwed up the translation again! Last time they turned YHVH into Jehovah. Getting good help has always been a problem. And one would ask why the world is so screwed up? Now you know!

  34. sidzepp on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 3:29 pm 

    If 2/2/2222 is to be a shocker, I can hardly wait for 6/6/6666! What would the date be in the Chinese calendar?

  35. Dustin Hoffman on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 4:39 pm 

    Hey, if the circle jerk here can disprove my numbers based on my basic program, I will be the first to admit error. But judging from the trend analysis, it holds and within an margin or error of +/- acceptable range. Please pay close attention….the date is 02/22/2022…please do not have a dyslexia episode.

  36. shortonoil on Sat, 4th Jun 2016 4:58 pm 

    “A 10% reduction in the availability of liquid fuels might reduce 50% of the discretionary use of liquid fuels since emergency services and vital support industries a must be maintained. The key is how fast the liquid fuels are removed.”

    That is a hard one to call. First, the reduction will not hit all nations the same way. The richer Western countries will be able to afford fuels for longer than smaller poorer counties. But, how that will feed back into their general economies is yet an unknown. It will definitely have a negative impact, and perhaps a gigantic one. Like the S&P collapsing, an explosion of corporate bankruptcies, and supply chains breaking. But all and all we will just have to wait and see. It has been four years since petroleum hit its energy half way point. We should not have to wait much longer. We are likely to see the first major impacts this year!

  37. Westexasfanclub on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 5:25 am 

    So it will be 02/22/2022? Hmm … I’m rather looking back to 11/2015, the recent peak. The longest peak on our actual C&C plateau was from 2005 to 2008 and took slightly over three years.

    When the actual peak surpasses those three years in a significant way, I’ll call the final and absolute peak. So what does significant mean? I would rather consider five years as sufficient, which will be in 01/11/2020 –

    but I could agree with 02/22/2022 😉

  38. Westexasfanclub on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 5:27 am 

    Arr, that american way to write the date! Of course I meant 11/01/2020!

  39. Davy on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 6:01 am 

    “Beliefs about the Nature of Numbers”
    http://mental.psych.northwestern.edu/publications/Number_ontology_chap_v4.pdf

    “Nearly all psychologists think that cardinality is the basis of number knowledge. When they test infants’ sensitivity to number, they look for evidence that the infants grasp the cardinality of groups of physical objects. And when they test older children’s understanding of the meaning of number words, they look for evidence that the children can, for example, “Give [the experimenter] three pencils” or can “Point to the picture of four balloons.” But when people think about the positive integers, do they single them out by means of the numbers’ cardinality, by means of the ordinal relations that hold among them, or in some other way? This chapter reviews recent research in cognitive psychology that compares people’s judgments about the integers’ cardinal and ordinal properties. It also presents new experimental evidence suggesting that, at least for adults, the integers’ cardinality is less central than their numbertheoretic and arithmetic properties.”

    “However, we should consider other possible paths to knowledge of number. Many contemporary philosophers argue that the meaning of a number is given by the position of the number in an appropriate number system, and Michael Resnik puts the point this way:
    The underlying philosophical idea here is that in mathematics the primary subject-matter is not the individual mathematical objects but rather the structures in which they are arranged. The objects of mathematics, that is, the entities which our mathematical constants and quantifiers denote, are themselves atoms, structureless points, or positions in structures. And as such they have no identity or distinguishing features outside a structure.”

  40. Dustin Hoffman on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 9:06 am 

    You best decide which way you want it,
    Westexasfanclub, either this 01/11/2011 or that way, 11/01/2011….the cosmic refraction order has two sectors of fields depending on the numerological order placement. Thak you for your vote of confidence as far as the prediction. Refreshing in seeing one individual that has sense enough to realize the end is near…REPENT!

  41. ennui2 on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 9:18 am 

    Great, just when you thought PO.com couldn’t get any worse, it gets overrun by numerologists.

  42. Dustin Hoffman on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 9:42 am 

    Birds of a feather, flock together.
    I say unto you… The 1970’s had a load of this piled high as far as foretelling the end of BAU…..just having some chuckles on the reactions by over the hill egg head wannabees, that actually take it all too seriously.
    The fact is if one continues to make predictions, eventually one will turn out correct. Not to discredit true value of the work of the BW Hill group or contributions from types like Don Stewart.
    Keep up the reporting and dissing one another..great entertainment

  43. onlooker on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 10:03 am 

    Ennui, you reflexively seem to reject ideas. You seem to be very good at hunkering down into your thinking inside the box by automatically rejecting thinking outside the box.

  44. Northwest Resident on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 10:04 am 

    “…just when you thought PO.com couldn’t get any worse…”

    PO.com provides a forum for some of the world’s biggest idiots to spout their nonsense, hatred and obsessive points of view. PO.com is doing a valuable service to us all, allowing us to see how truly disturbed and how utterly devoid of logic so many people are. The good thing about PO.com is that there are a “few” individuals posting here who provide valuable information and insight into the dire situation we all find ourselves in. The ability to quickly scan through the manure pile and pull out those few valuable nuggets — without getting slimed in the process — is the key to enjoying PO.com.

  45. Davy on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 10:16 am 

    Words of wisdom NR!

  46. Boat on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 10:18 am 

    Will do brother hoff. Although how serious one is, is just subjective opinion. I remember when 30 was over the hill. I discovered over the hill is a moving target.

    “Not to discredit true value of the work of the BW Hill group.

    Explain the value. Simple supply and demand dynamics are at play. The latest word play went from the price of oil will continue to decline till collapse to the price of oil rose to go back to the curve on an outdated graph.

  47. Boat on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 10:25 am 

    Davy,

    Are you one of those people?

    there are a “few” individuals posting here who provide valuable information and insight into the dire situation we all find ourselves in.

  48. Davy on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 11:21 am 

    Boatie, are you trying to be cute with me.

  49. Dustin Hoffman on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 12:40 pm 

    Boat, that simple? Whatever…..

  50. GregT on Sun, 5th Jun 2016 12:43 pm 

    Boat,

    Are you one of those people?

    “a forum for some of the world’s biggest idiots to spout their nonsense”

Leave a Reply

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