I guess I'm not really getting jiggs rationale here. The price of oil is just gonna stay at this magic number that is too high for consumers but too low to extract profitably? And the price of oil is low now due to demand side being low and not supply side being high?

I've elaborated on his rationale before. The world economy depends on ever increasing growth in oil production. Supply and demand are irrelevant.

The jiggsconomics of cheap oil seem to be something like:

1- peak oil!
2- supply goes down
3- prices go up
4- demand is CRUSHED
5- prices go down

So, in short, it's a unique "lower supply -> lower prices" mechanism.

There is also this thing where the world cannot afford expensive oil so the world throws money at expensive oil to turn it into cheap oil that it can afford.

I'm not sure I understood correctly, it's all very technical.

He believes the federal reserves rasy money policies have created risk taking in the markets that will destroy the shale oil boom. Completely ignoring what happens when companies default on bonds.

i think he's a truther though, so peak oil may be the least of his problems.

Re: "the world," ... You seem to have trouble differentiating between the average buyer (can't afford) and the average investor (throwing money at...)

In any event, it took them a while, but the average investor likely now understands the law of diminishing returns... The average 2+2 political forum contributor? Still really struggling with the concept.

A barrel of oil today simply does not contain nearly the value that it did 50 years go, certainly in terms of BTU as well as cost to bring it to market. This is part of why we say the industry is doomed with oil at any price.

It already is destroying the shale oil boom. And it's you who doesn't understand what happens when a drilling site is padlocked and mothballed.

Not surprised that you would be this ignorant, and attempt to lump me in with Loose Changers. My argument in that realm is unassailable, and has nothing to do with controlled demolition or missiles.

You are, without a doubt, the reigning champion of thread trolling uselessness on this topic. I will reserve my energy for those who prefer to at least be honest about what's being debated. You are not that.

Unassailable arguments are not scientific or even reasonable.

"Can't be disproven" does not imply "correctness" at all.

You can "disprove" obstruction of justice if you like. Just explain how the direct testimony of the commission co-chairs were lying.

"But how do you explain that!!!" is the stuff of having a jumping to conclusion bias.

JTC is a technical term.

I am guessing the shake site will stop producing oil.

I really do not mind if you think I am useless. I am not trying to debate you. I don't need to prove anything to myself or anyone on this board. You are in another world, and it is incredibly entertaining to the rest of us. I truly feel badly for you.

Enjoy life in your gated community samson

I just wish jiggs would give me a way to capitalize financially on his theory. But he can't. Because his theory isn't based in reality or economics.

LOL.... This sounds a lot like "will you show if I fold?"

Oh, he could. But much like at the table, lessons aren't free.

Nonetheless, it is amusing watching one Jr. Friedmanist after another come into the thread and try and subtly glean investment advice. Maybe if you weren't such a routine c***, I'd let you in on a secret or two. There are a lot of small energy companies who didn't overextend, own leases for isolated sweets spots that still remain, and have considerable room for short-, medium-term growth.

But, well, f*** you.

No, that would be yours. Perhaps you missed the lesson on diminishing returns when you faked your way through school.

The economy is a subset of the environment. Not vice versa. Further, financial instruments are just markers for real capital. Perhaps some day people like you will get that through your thick head.

WOW,

If my memory doesn't fail me I recall you stating in several posts that capitalizing off of this peak oil thing would be selfish and that is not your goal. Has that changed? Also, I am intrigued in which companies you have invested or timed your investment in and not lost money. I am not intelligent enough to have done that in the energy sector and would love your guidance.

Jiggs, thoughts?

Hey buddy, I hear what you are saying .......peak oil **** yea! Gonna run out of oil and stuff any day.

So how about sharing some secrets eh pal?

Trying to capitalize on Jigg's version of peak oil seems silly. Even if you make a few millions on it, what is it going to buy you when doomsday hits? A potato?

At this point in the debate, I don't really understand how you're not clear on this. As I've stated, the "peak is no problem/peak is not happening" contingent - in order for their argument to be viable out of the gate - needs every last drop brought to market, every day. And then a little bit more next month. Onward it goes. You guys can't just hope to ignore the more expensive version while pretending you can still meet global demand. The less expensive oil just can't grow anymore. Those fields are mature, and declining. There's no easy oil to be found any more. That's the entire reason we've had to turn to more expensive forms to meet growth demands. It's the expensive, tight oil production that is the only thing maintaining tepid total liquids growth, but it's doing so at enormous (unsustainable) cost and dwindling net energy return. It is a debt-based bubble set to pop, very likely beginning this year.

It's pretty clear that we've always "cared about" the inexpensive, efficient oil first and foremost. We've cared so much, we've burned through over half of it with no successful development towards what comes afterward ... About the best our oligarchical society has come up with for life after conventional oil's growth is to dig up far-dirtier forms of the same energy source. They don't care what that means because they 1) believe they can afford it, while the masses can "eat cake," 2) they have no concept of depletion or EROEI, and 3) they generally deny climate change is even happening, so we should just "drill baby drill."

Now, I asked you in the other thread what your diagnosis is for a world of growing instability. I see you guys mock as if it all somehow has "nothing to do with" peak oil. So please do let us know what is causing the systematic meltdown of modern industrial society and the simultaneous cold/hot conficts all over the world?

Let me guess: Socialism/liberal spending/regulation.

Jiggs, you wrote a lot and didn't answer my question.

Jiggs,

What do you think of stuff like this?

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/pro...ct-fusion.html

Straight from the dragon's mouth. It's a fusion reactor the size of a jet airplane engine that they say will be ready in ~10 years.

Total horse**** IYO? My question is - if this technology is real, what the heck will that do to the petrodollar paradigm?

True and that demonstrates one of the built-in flaws of the profit model of organizing society, which is that it severely limits democratic medium and long range planning. The oligarchs use their power to gain access to short term profits and toward disseminating ignorance on systemic risks, inherent in those efforts (of the desired maximum efficiency), to their own industries and to the world.

The tendency for sociopaths to rise in our society aside, I think it is a mistake to accuse the business leaders of not caring and not knowing. Many of them know and care but they are straight jacketed in their institutional roles. It is going to take a radical restructuring of institutions in order to save us.

Actually, I did.

Did you?

Jiggs, you didn't. You avoided my actual question (which was quite simple and basic) in order to try and make a bigger point you wanted to make.