[static66]

Jbeck, sorry to hammer a point but I have some extra time this morning... this formula you have come up with for the "average" family living off of $300 a month for food/household necessities. Umm.. where does this "family" shop? How many people are in this family? What are they eating???? Holy shit, I spend $100 a week on food/nescessities and I am not living high on the hog... I don't have children, just two dogs.... and the dog food is getting to be pretty freakin expensive!! I want to move to where this family lives so I can get on the gravy train where food costs are in 1970's dollars. You just don't know what is coming down the pike for the most important aspect of your life.... your food.

[Revi]

IRA's and 401K's are all losing in comparison to the dollar. We are losing 10% a year and an IRA pays 5%. There are tax advantages, but say we lose 2 and 1/2% every year. In ten years we've lost at least 25% off of our savings. I think we should call them losings.

I like what Survivalblog says. Invest in tangibles. I am thinking of getting an in-town lot as a garden space, instead of investing the money in an IRA or a 401K this year.

[jbeckton]

Jbeck, sorry to hammer a point but I have some extra time this morning... this formula you have come up with for the "average" family living off of $300 a month for food/household necessities. Umm.. where does this "family" shop?

No formula, just an estimation. Buy generic food, I spend about $200/mo. on food. Leave the $5 bag of Doritos on the shelf, buy bulk meat and eat lots of veggies. Grow as much as you can on your own. I also didn't include household necessities in that figure, how about we raise it to $500/mo. and you are still left with $1860.

I did look around and found a number though.

Last year U.S. households spent $3,240 on average for groceries, according to the American Express Everyday Spending index. The study also found consumers' consumption of fast food increased by 43% over the past year, bringing the average amount spent up to $720 per household. http://www.cccsatl.org/save-money-grocery.asp

So that comes out to $270/mo. and they are wasting $720 on fast food. People that buy ingredients at the grocery store spend a lot less than people who buy already made meals in a box. And with 25% of the US population classified as obese, I think the average household could spend less than it does.http://www.cccsatl.org/save-money-grocery.asp

I want to move to where this family lives

Welcome to Pittsburgh, hope you like the Steelers!

[static66]

I love the steelers...my mother's favorite football player was Franco Harris. I am a Patriots fan.... In other news~

Oil reserves over-inflated by 300bn barrels – al-Huseini
by David Strahan

The world’s proved reserves have been have been falsely puffed up by the inclusion of 300 billion barrels of speculative resources, according to the former head of exploration and production at Saudi Aramco, and this explains the industry’s inability to raise output despite soaring prices.

Sadad al-Huseini’s presentation to the Oil and Money conference in London went substantially as previewed by lastoilshock.com, but the analysis he delivered may also throw light on the infamous OPEC reserve additions of the 1980s.

Mr al-Huseini began by noting the obvious inconvenient truth of the oil market of recent years: that production has barely increased despite a soaring crude price and massive investment by the industry. “It’s telling us something. We should be listening to what the numbers are telling us, not what the politicians say… It’s not about economics alone, you can increase prices, but you will not necessarily drive production up”

He also noted that 400 billion barrels of reserve replacement has been reported over the last decade, and asked why this had not been translated into new capacity. The answer, he suggested, was that a quarter of the world’s claimed proved reserves are no such thing: not production-ready oil, but speculative sources. “Reserves are confused and in fact inflated. Many of the so called reserves are in fact resources. They’re not delineated, they’re not acessible, they’re not available for production”. By his estimate 300 billion of the world’s 1200 barrels of proved reserves should be recategorized as speculative resources.

Mr al-Huseini did not specify which countries had inflated their reserves in this fashion, but the number is strikingly similar to the size of reserve additions recorded by OPEC members in the mid-1980s when countries were vying for quota share, although no new discoveries had been made.

However he did go on to question the production potential of some Gulf states, pointing out that 75% of Iranian production comes from mature fields that are more than 50% depleted. “That is not sustainable. When you hear officials saying production is going back up to up to over 5 million barrels [per day], that is not do-able”. He also noted that the 38 giant fields in the Arabian Gulf with reserves of over billion barrels each are on average 41% depleted. “These are the fields that in many forecasts are supposed to crank up and double production from the Gulf – again, very questionable”.

Al-Huseini’s world production forecast showed output on a plateau that will last no more than 15 years before starting to decline. In a world where spare capacity has evaporated, he concluded, the technical floor for oil prices would continue to rise at about $12 per year. “Prices can only go up”.

Yikes. Do you think the Patriots will beat the steelers?

[jbeckton]

Yikes. Do you think the Patriots will beat the steelers?

I hope so, I am a transplant form Detroit so I don't really like the Steelers, I actually kinda hate them because the whole town is obsessed with the Steelers.

On a side note, I am a big Michigan fan........ you’re welcome for Tom Brady.

[static66]

Wow, a Michigan fan... I of course am a BC fan, thanks for Tom, he seems to be working out for us here.... we will know this Sunday when we play the Colts...
Did you read Heinbergs latest.... Peak everything?

[roccman]

Well - let's see...if workers are laid off because there is no electricity...that would reduce production...that in turn would make gold more valuable... Is that about right? Got Gold?

JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) - South Africa's Gold Fields (GFIJ.J: Quote, Profile, Research), the world's fourth-largest gold miner, said on Monday it would scale back at some mines and trim production, putting 6,900 jobs at risk, in response to a power crisis which has reduced electricity for industry by 10 percent.

[Iaato]

If you want a clear picture of what happens to mines in general when there's no electricity, here's the recent chart for platinum. South Africa supplies about 70% of the new mine supply of platinum, so the effect of electricity is clearer here than it is for gold.

[spear]

Yeah, everyone around here was blabbing on about gold and silver and missed the REAL money.
And we think we are smart and one jump ahead of the game.lol
I hate when I get caught sleeping like that.

[paimei01]

This is capitalism and stealing resources from the third world
The owners of the gold and platinum and diamonds: South Africa nation, should be very rich, instead they have no electricity

[mattduke]

Don't forget palladium. It was a steal a few weeks ago. Still the most undervalued precious metal in my opinion.

[seahorse]

Yes, paladium is a substitute for platinum, so, it should go up as manufacturers look for a cheaper product than platinum

[spear]

I am re evaluating everything this week.
We saw that thing on the SA electrical probs a month ago here on the news.Even the five year time frame was mentioned back then.
I was just too busy and didnt connect the dots.
You snooze ,you lose as the saying goes.
Everything is going too fast now.Market dive,metals climbing,SA probs,Balkans in the spotlight again.

[sittinguy]

Diamonds to me are not in the same league as gold and silver, There is no way to prove authenticity. As a trade diamonds will drop so far they will be worthless. I will take minted, marked , coins all day. stick the diamonds were the sun don't shine. Gold has beeen out of my reach since it past $750, and now silver is out at almost $20. I hope it will come back down soon and I would pick up some more.

[emersonbiggins]

Before finding out about peak oil, I was like about the state of the world's future, not a care besides and maybe some . After about it, though, I began to question the validity some of the claims, initially writing off the more apocalyptic scenarios as and . As the price of oil trudged well past $30, 40, 50/bbl, however, I began to get about the situation, not knowing whether tomorrow would bring at my door for finally taking the red pill, or whether my countrymen would once and for all welcome a "charismatic leader" , who promised to bring oil back down to a "reasonable" price.

Upon further study and discussion about the rapidly rising price of crude, it became apparent that my next or was perhaps going to be , if it was anything at all.

As for preps, I wish I had more time to get things in order, namely raising my own and gardening, but it looks as if I and the rest of society will have to resort to in the lean days ahead. I have no doubt that some of the more sinister dregs of society, dispensed to violent outbursts, will make themselves known, going out in a of glory. So, retreat to the trees I will, to sit and wait - p a t i e n t l y ...

If nothing else, remember these are 'interesting' times, so getcha ready!

[RonMN]

Emmerson...I think you're spamming for the hormel company with that spam emoticon

[emersonbiggins]

Emmerson...I think you're spamming for the hormel company with that spam emoticon

If I don't have a pallet of that shiat sitting on my doorstep when I get back to the house tonight...

[CarlinsDarlin]

Bravo!
Well done!
What a creative bunch we have here

[eXpat]

Time to reinvigorate this thread!
IEA’s dire warning on green stimulus and renewables

The IEA’s report for G8 energy ministers, to be presented this Sunday in Rome, has generated a few stories. Some picked up on the oil supply squeeze that awaits the world due to massive cuts in production investment. I wrote yesterday that the IEA forecasts that, for the first time since World War II, world electricity consumption will decline in 2009.

IEA chief economist Fatih Birol said he personally thought the electricity forecast was the most striking finding of the report.

However he was also keen to highlight concern about green spending in the G20 stimulus packages:

The agency will also tell ministers that its calculation of the stimulus spending required from G20 nations on renewable energy was inadequate and should rise by a factor of six if greenhouse gas emissions targets set by the United Nations were to be met.

Some more comments from Birol that didn’t make it into the story:

“We have looked at all G20 stimulus packages - and all the money they are putting into renewable energy. The money they have put aside for renewables is definitely important, but it is still much lower than what it should be, if we want it to be come to a sustainable level of energy treds - to bring CO2 emissions down. In order to come to that trend, [spending on] renewable energy needs to increase by a factor of six.”
...
Birol also warned about renewable energy, saying investments would fall 38 per cent in 2009 - again, the first fall recorded.

This was particularly serious, he said, because renewable energy industries are in their infancy and more vulnerable to a fall in investment:

“… oil is much more consolidated, whereas renewable energy is still in childhood - if they get a big hit, it will be very difficult for them to get on their feet. From that point of view it is very difficult that renewable indutries are hard hit, as we need them for fighting climate change and for energy security.”

http://blogs.ft.com/energy-source/2009/05/22/ieas-dire-forecasts-on-green-stimulus-and-renewables/

[eXpat]

Dark days ahead

SOUTH AFRICAN burglars pay close attention to electricity. A moratorium in the early 1990s stopped new power stations from being built, and by 2007 demand was overwhelming the country’s electricity grid. So Eskom, the national power company, began cutting supplies to specific suburbs for hours at a time. One side-effect of the rolling blackouts that afflicted Cape Town and Johannesburg was that they disabled the electric fences, spotlights and alarms that adorn richer people’s houses, making them easy pickings for thieves. At first the blackouts were announced in advance; later, aware of the risks, Eskom imposed them without notice. Fortunately for South Africans, the economic slump has trimmed demand (and a huge, rushed building programme boosted supply), but it will be 2013 before order is properly restored.

Britain is running short of power too—so quickly that some economists claim, only just tongue-in-cheek, that the economic slowdown is useful. “A recession is the best demand-reduction policy ever invented,” says Dieter Helm, an energy economist at Oxford University. Many power stations are due to close over the coming decade (see chart 1), and supplies are getting tight. The government reckons that, of a total of around 75GW in generating capacity, 20GW will disappear by 2015.
Indeed, Britain’s energy grids are already showing signs of stress. A cold snap in the winter of 2005-06 led to a spike in demand for natural gas, which is used both as a heating fuel and to generate electricity. Prices shot up but, despite several pipelines linking Britain to Europe, no extra gas was forthcoming from the continent. Big factories were instructed to stop work, and National Grid, the firm that runs the electricity network, came close to cutting supplies to homes as well.

Last year two power stations—one nuclear, one coal-fired—failed within minutes of each other, causing blackouts across the country. Officially, this was a one-off stroke of bad luck, but privately some think that a system with more spare capacity could have kept the lights on. Less obvious but just as worrying, says John Constable of the Renewable Energy Foundation, a think-tank, is that electricity prices are becoming more unstable. “Volatility is a sign of a system under stress,” he notes.
Acid rain and old age explain the shortage of capacity. Britain’s coal and nuclear plants together account for just under 45% of all power generation (see chart 2). But most of the nuclear plants, and around half of the coal plants, are due to close in the near future.
The nuclear stations are simply too ancient to carry on: most are over a quarter of a century old. Around half have already shut down and are being decommissioned. Those that remain are increasingly doddery. British Energy, which runs most of the remaining reactors, had to shut two of its eight power stations last year after engineers discovered cracks in components. By 2023 only one nuclear plant will be left, a modern reactor at Sizewell in Suffolk. Some of the power plants may be patched up a bit and granted life extensions (one on Anglesey was recently given a nine-month reprieve), but not for long.

http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14177328&source=hptextfeature
New nuclear plants in the middle of a depression?, I don´t think so...