There was a refreshing moment of truthful clarity last week from Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal during an interview on “CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS.” Prince Talal admitted that the Saudis want to lower oil prices to avoid moves toward other energy sources and away from oil. It is the same principle upon which drug dealers offer cut-rate narcotics to keep the addiction going for their customers.
Talal, the grandson of the founder of Saudi Arabia, wants oil down to $70 and $80 a barrel. Why? “We don’t want the West to go and find alternatives, because, clearly, the higher the price of oil goes, the more they have incentives to go and find alternatives.”
Once again, Congress appears to be helping out by reducing support for renewable energy sources and continuing the mantra of “drill baby drill.” President Obama has joined the chorus and opened up pristine areas for oil development– a move that not only brings great environmental risks but guarantees to keep our addiction to oil going strong.
Source: CNN
Elaine, if we followed the logic of the libertarians on developing clean energy, the town would wait for city hall to catch fire before buying a fire truck.
I cannot believe someone who claims to know more than Ned in the First Reader would be talking about a theory of oil percolating up from the center of the earth as a viable source of oil. I already knew about this theory. It is called abiogenisis. Then where is the new oil that should be appearing in Oklahoma and Texas? If the abiogenic theory of a source of oil is really true, even the most ardent supporters of the theory admit the process of oil replacement is on the order of hundreds of thousands of years. I don’t think it would be a good idea to wait and see if the theory is true.
Finding new and practical sources of energy ought to be a high priority for both private enterprise and government. There is not much incentive for the coal, oil and gas companies to sink money into cheap alternate energy sources.
China Ousts U.S. as Most Attractive Renewable Energy Market
9/13/2010
http://seekingalpha.com/article/224802-china-ousts-u-s-as-most-attractive-renewable-energy-market
Excerpts:
In the second half of 2009, China almost doubled consumer subsidies for generating renewable power to $545 million. Meanwhile, the U.S. government let a program expire that provided grants for clean energy projects, leaving few incentives for companies to invest in renewable energy.
“What we’re seeing in the U.S. is a continued resistance to committing to long-term visible and transparent support for the sector,” said Warren. “The U.S. market has always suffered from this boom and bust tax-based incentive regime.”
*****
China’s IPO Market Goes Green
The profit potential of renewable energy is too rich for investors to turn down as the industry becomes more competitive. The cost per unit of electricity generated by solar panels is falling 20% a year and could reach levels charged by coal-fired electric providers in about five years.
“Grid parity should be reached even sooner if a price on carbon is introduced by the Chinese government,” said Tim Buckley, portfolio manager at Arkx Investment Management.
Interested investors are targeting China, where the opportunities are growing at the fastest pace, and future investment in China’s renewable energy sector will be poured into a number of initial public offerings (IPOs) slated to debut in Hong Kong and U.S. markets in coming months.
Chinese wind-turbine maker Xinjiang Goldwind Science & Technology Co. will make a $1 billion Hong Kong offer in the next few weeks. China Suntien Co., a renewable energy unit of the Hebei province government, will offer $500 million in Hong Kong. Also expected to hit Hong Kong is wind power group Huaneng New Energy Industrial Co. with a $1.5 billion IPO in October.
Mingyang Electric Group Co. plans to raise $300 million to $500 million in a U.S. IPO this year, bringing the total of China renewable energy IPOs to a record level in 2010.
In 2009, China overtook the United States in total renewable energy investments for the first time ever. China pushed $34.6 billion into renewable energy projects – mostly wind farms – while the United States spent just $18.6 billion.
China also pulled in $11.5 billion in asset financing for clean technologies in the second quarter of 2010 – more than the United States and Europe combined.
“[W]ith the needs for energy security and energy demand from countries like China, the move to renewables is unstoppable, and you’re increasingly seeing renewable energy companies that are a good value,” Geoff Evison, managing director of Arkx Investment Management, told The Journal.
While IPOs will offer investors more opportunities to break into the clean energy race in the coming months, some analysts suggest looking into companies just starting out.
“[W]e like so-called expansion-stage companies that are one to two years away from IPOs,” Chris Rynning, from Beijing-based private equity firm Origo Partners, told The Journal. “Expansion-stage companies typically have commercially scaled their technologies but need capital to grow and often are at a tipping point in terms of sales and profits.”
Unfortunately, the US may fall behind other countries in developing cleaner and newer methods for producing energy when hydrocarbons become too expensive.
China and Europe Steaming Ahead on Clean Energy, not the U.S.
by Zachary Shahan on March 7, 2011
http://ecopolitology.org/2011/03/07/china-and-europe-steaming-ahead-on-clean-energy-not-the-u-s/
That is what Malthus was saying about the population. Same old same old since the beginning of time.
When hydro-carbons become too expensive we will have a market driven response based on sound economic principles. Not pie in the sky based on government mandate.
Based on historical occurrences we should be able to make a transformation in 10 years or less with a huge increase to the economy.
Is this what we want to hand down to our children? This is so much damage, that thinking about what the mountains would look like in fifty years if beyond comprehension.
You can find an in-depth explanation of good and bad speculation, oil futures, and the cause of the big spike in oil prices in 2008 in Matt Taibbi’s book “Griftopia: Bubble Machines, Vampire Squids, and the Long Con That Is Breaking America.” Check out Chapter 4–Blowout: The Commodities Bubble.
Taibbi notes that the bubble that hit us in the summer of 2008 was a long time in coming. He writes that a bunch of Wall Street financial companies started buying up stakes in trading firms that held seats on the various commodities exchanges in the early eighties and that the companies then began asking “the government to lighten the hell up about this whole position limits business.”
I live in this area. Otteray is the Cherokee name for it. If all the coal mines were to shut down tomorrow, it would not be soon enough for me. Use of fossil fuel is growing exponentially. Where does that 600 year figure come from? No number can be extrapolated six centuries. We need sustainable sources of energy that does not depend on energy sources that come out of the ground. Delay is not an option if civilization as we know it is to be sustained.
http://www.google.com/search?q=mountain+top+removal&hl=en&safe=off&biw=1227&bih=524&prmd=ivnsu&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=1qbmTYFi5-DRAd-4kOgK&sqi=2&ved=0CG4QsAQ
Otteray Scribe:
“we have no more than fifty to a hundred years to find an alternative source of energy before the fossil fuel supply runs out.”
That assumes a static analysis based on todays proven reserves and todays technology in finding new oil and gas deposits. It also assumes a traditional view of hydro-carbons as deposited organic material. Some scientists believe the entire earths core is comprised of hydro-carbons which percolate up through the mantle and are trapped in formations in the crust. In effect it becomes oil as it rises through temperature and pressures.
We have over 600 years of coal reserves currently.
Gyges:
“But more than that, there is concern that the “speculators” are not merely holed up in duck blinds, but that they are actively manipulating the market. That argument is more complex, and necessarily speculative. I’ll let others who understand the issues better try to explain some of what may be going on.”
So someone who admits they dont know what they are talking about can criticize someone who asked a legitimate question, i.e.:
“Maybe we could say speculators are the feedback mechanism which keeps the system stable?”
So I am a troll for asking a legitimate question and you take a criticism from someone who admits they dont know anything about oil speculation?
Man your name is appropriate. That other Gyges screwed the kings wife, killed him and took over the country. A virtual cornucopia of subterfuge.
Gyges, I move in a different circle than most. I have several friends who are physicists. One I went to high school with. Looking back, it is a wonder we did not either electrocute ourselves or blow the side out of the house. The past several years, I have been watching the Nobel awards in October because I fully expect his name to pop up one of these years. Another friend is one of the few people on the planet who can fire up the Tevatron and get useful data from it–and she could do it before her 30th birthday.
My point is, I talk to knowledgeable physicists about energy issues. Obviously, we have no more than fifty to a hundred years to find an alternative source of energy before the fossil fuel supply runs out. There will be solutions out there, but people like my friends need to be funded, not sabotaged. This is some sick stuff we read about, but hardly surprising.
I find it amusing, in a sad sort of way, to see the hue and cry about Medicare and Social Security running out of money in the next fifty years, but a ghostly silence on fossil fuels running out in the same time frame–maybe less.
OS,
Honestly, I suspect the guy’s just the latest avatar of someone who’s been trolling the site for well at least 2 or 3 years now. And I’ve now reached the upper limit on how much consideration I’m willing to give him in one day.
So, I’m changing the subject. To me, this is the perfect example of the Tragedy of the Commons. Oil use might benefit everyone as individuals, but as a society not working to find another energy source will be pretty damning.
Gyges, I agree with you. In fact, on this and that other thread he has had his simplistic talking points dissected with clinical accuracy by a number of users. His comeback is typically something irrelevant or name-calling. That gets old after a while. It is like trying to use logic on a four year old with acute ADHD.
OS and Buddha,
Er, hate to break this too you but, somebody DID respond to what he wrote, rather well actually.
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/05/31/pushing-petroleum-saudi-arabian-prince-admits-the-kingdom-wants-to-lower-oil-prices-to-discourage-pursuit-of-alternative-fuels/#comment-235686
If the basis of Roco’s argument was that gravity made things fall, I’d drop a pencil just to double check.
Personally I don’t respond because I like to have conversations, and while he may or may not pass a Turring Test (guess what book I just finished), I’ve never seen him actually involved in a dialogue more deeply than a predictable Stimulus/Response level.
What the Green One said. It gets tiresome reading the same six libertarian talking points over and over. And when all else fails, the libertarian troll resorts to lame ad hominem attacks when called out on his non-responses.
Roco and his like-minded cohorts would apparently bring this back:
“A group of anti-Roosevelt and anti-New Deal politicians and business leaders formed an organization in 1933 called the American Liberty League (ALL), ostensibly dedicated to “fostering the right to work, earn, save and acquire property.” The members of the organization demonized all forms of social welfare and pledged that it would do anything necessary to secure their wealth. Apparently, this included staging a military coup to force Roosevelt out of office and replace him with a pro-corporate dictator.”
Among the conspirators to overthrow the government of the USA and install a Fascist dictatorship was Prescott Bush, father of G.H.W. Bush and grandfather of G.W. Bush and Jeb Bush.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/31/980973/-It-Almost-Happened-Here?via=sidebyuserrec
And now a musical interlude to clear the palate.
Buddha,
In retrospect, he probably meant a negative feedback, and for whatever reason I just misinterpreted him. Of course, this could just be him getting lucky and accidentally using a word correctly. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt though.
“Roco”,
That might be because we get tired of playing with the special interests children such as yourself.
“Like Wal-Mart or any other successful large enterprise, it’s we who make Big Oil big. Profits come as a result of providing a service most Americans are happy and willing to pay for. Indeed, even gas at current prices hasn’t markedly affected domestic consumption. Indeed, many of those who complain about $4 gasoline from Exxon Mobil don’t hesitate to buy a $4 latte at Starbucks.”
Johnathan Hoenig
I see no one has any criticism of what I wrote, just the same old same old. Greed bad, markets bad, big oil bad.
http://slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=solar+power