In Saturday's Telegraph Money was a very interesting article on the furture of oil prices. It seems that OPEC will not allow oil to fall below $50/barrel, but 80% of all oil is now being supplied by national oil companies and are not as motivated to adjusting supply to meet demand.
The demand growth is 1.2m barrels a day, yet demand has increased by 1.4m barrels a day mainly from asian demand increasing.
Another startling fact is that
"We have consumed 1 trillion barrels of oil since the dawn of civilisation but mostly in the past 60 years. There are another 1 trillion barrels in proven conventional reserves, possibly another trillion barrels in resource and let us say, for example, another trillion barrels that we have yet to find at all. If this picture is right, we have consumed a quarter of the 4 trillion barrels of accessible oil and we are only 25 years away from reaching the point we will have consumed half of it."
Demand growth from Asia is going to remain strong for 10 to 15 years and supply growth is going to be difficult. The most likely scenario seems to me to be one in which the oil price settles down for a period in a new $50-$70 trading range. If by 2009 it becomes apparent that the worst fears about the difficulty in growing non-Opec supply turn out correct, then a further significant upward move in the oil price to more than $100 in the early part of the next decade seems, to me, inevitable.
tinyurl.com/335xrz
It seems likely that we shall have only increasing oil prices in the future and we should all consider using less.
--
Roger
A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
|
............. we should all consider using less.
Tell that to the people who change their engine oil more frequently than what the car manufacturer recommends! ;-)
--
L\'escargot.
|
>>Tell that to the people who change their engine oil more frequently than what the car manufacturer >>recommends! ;-)
You are a troublemaker!!!!!
|
You are a troublemaker!!!!!
I was merely agreeing with artful dodger.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Surely in 25 years we will all have flying cars that run on air.
|
Surely in 25 years we will all have flying cars that run on air.
There'll be no air left in 25 years. We'll all be breathing chip fat.
|
S
chip fat is good for you. It's full of vitamin D. If you don't get enough vitamin D you develop rickets. Hence, chips are health food.
May I also point out that beer is a vegetable, so geting your daily 5 really isn't so hard.
JH
|
>>Tell that to the people who change their engine oil more frequently than what the car manufacturer recommends! ;-)<<
This is minimal (4.5l every 6 months) compared to say people who drive big thirsty Scoobies.
Pot and kettle spring to mind here.
|
This is minimal (4.5l every 6 months) compared to say people who drive big thirsty Scoobies. Pot and kettle spring to mind here.
Just out of curiosity, who is/are "the people who drive big thirsty Scoobies" to whom you refer?
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
>>Tell that to the people who change their engine oil more frequently than what the car manufacturer recommends! ;-)<< This is minimal (4.5l every 6 months) ............
The idea is that if everyone made a small saving then collectively the total amount saved would be significant. I've no doubt that everyone could come up with some sort of excuse as to why their particular extravagance would make little or no difference and was therefore acceptable.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys this was meant to be a serious thread.
Perhaps you are not worried about how much your fuel will cost in the future and how long it will be before demand greatly exceeds supply. I certainly am as I think too much of the Earth's resources are being squandered on producing low quality cheap throwaway items made from petroleum products (plus other materials as well) e.g packaging, free toys with fast food, clothing, furniture, etc. If we decided that following fashion was a bad idea and decided to concentrate on long life products, our resources would last far longer. I do not believe that global warming has been proved, but I think the misuse of our planet's resources is a far greater worry.
In the past century there has been no other fuel discovered or developed that can match petroleum products for their suitability for all forms of transport. Combining batteries in cars like the Pruis is not solving the problem. We need to find a completely new fuel that is highly efficient to power an engine for forward motion and yet remains cost effective to produce and use. Until this day oil will remain our fuel and it's cost will certainly have a greater effect on our lives and economies than in the past.
--
Roger
A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
|
Sorry but packaging etc is a very small amount of of oil consumed. By far the greatest amount is refined into vehicle fuels, with heating fuels coming up behind.
If there is problems with oil, then the car technology will adapt and people will move away from oil fired heating.
There are no new fuels, just better ways of using what is already on the table, e.g. electric cars could be big news in the future and hybrids are an excellent stepping stone to that day.
|
|
|
.........I think too much of the Earth's resources are being squandered on producing low quality cheap throwaway items made from petroleum products (plus other materials as well) e.g packaging, free toys with fast food, clothing, furniture, etc.
All of the things you mentioned (in fact most things) are made by people trying to earn an honest crust. What would you say if they suggested your source of income was taken away?
--
L\'escargot.
|
>>All of the things you mentioned (in fact most things) are made by people trying to earn an honest crust. What would you say if they suggested your source of income was taken away?
Should we be looking at all self interested parties on this basis or the global good? On your basis then everything is sacrosanct, hence we used to support white elephants like Rover, coal mining, steel making, etc. Workers in these industries were finally forced to accept change.
--
Roger
A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.
|
Perhaps the 'global good' might be better served if all the hundreds of millions of pounds spent on dodgy research grants, for self serving 'researchers' was directed elsewhere.
Technology will naturally adapt to what's available....it's just we won't be able to afford it because we've been taxed to death, in order to 'encourage' us to stop using our cars.
|
|
|
|
|
