Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: liberallarry
Pickens certainly has looked into the possibility of expanding supply by drilling offshore and in ANWAR and rejected it as unrealistic.

That's not what Pickens is saying. He's remarking that, long-term, demand is growing greater than supply. Thus, we'll have to develop alternative energy sources.

His reasoning is impeccable. And inarguable.

But he is NOT saying that, in the meantime, we should give up the pursuit of additional petroleum reserves.

Because, until those alternative energy sources are available, the world's economy is going to run on oil. T. Boone is not unfamiliar to me and he would agree with this statement, just as I am agreeing with his.

The solution posed by the New York Times editorial board would apparently be to simply shut down the economy and wait.

What would be your solution?

49 posted on 06/21/2008 9:14:34 AM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: okie01
This is tentative since I've not yet had time to sit down and compare the two articles line by line, or do any additional research I think warranted.

I think Pickens is saying something other than demand is increasing faster than supply (of oil). That would imply that the problem could be solved by more investment in supply.

He's saying that he believes in peak oil, that we may not be able to achieve substantial increases in supply. That's why supply has stagnated at 85mbpd for the last several years, why the IEA has adjusted its target downward from 116mbpd to 100mbpd.

So, what to do?

First, the problem must be recognized and acknowledged. Hubbert's theory, and the evidence behind it, must be better and more widely understood.

Second, as you say, the world will be dependent upon oil as its primary energy source for many years, and will rely upon it indefinitely for lubrication and non-transportation or heating uses.

Third. There's going to be great pain in making the adjustment (if its possible). My feeling is that should be accepted and dealt with now rather than fobbing it off on future generations when the population is greater and the amount of reserves less. If we provide more oil people will immediately backslide, just as they did when the crisis of the '70s passed. This crisis won't pass. People are going to have to adjust to a much lower standard of living (until and if we find new energy sources)...and probably to some form of mandatory birth control. Probably there will be some vicious wars of population reduction.

50 posted on 06/21/2008 10:18:04 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

To: okie01
On a hunch I googled "T. Boone Pickens+peak oil". Here's the first article which appeared, dated March, 2007

AP INTERVIEW: T. Boone Pickens says global oil production has reached its peak

51 posted on 06/21/2008 10:30:37 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

To: okie01
On a hunch I googled "T. Boone Pickens+peak oil". Here's the first article which appeared, dated March, 2007

AP INTERVIEW: T. Boone Pickens says global oil production has reached its peak

52 posted on 06/21/2008 10:31:05 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson