The World will Never run out of OIL!!!!

reply to post by skribal


No, it has not been proven. The other theory is abiotic oil.
Even with abiotic generation, oil creation is dependant on a finite carbon cycle which involves humans burning it and venting it into the atmosphere where it takes time to get back inside the Earth's crust.

reply to post by Denied


Sorry it took me a while to reply, but I agree that oil will become a redundent fuel as time goes by. The major problem with ousting Oil from the top of the global fuel market is very simple: what other fuel can earn the government as much money. At this point in time there is no substitute to take Oil's place in that regard, therefor the government won't change it's position on the matter till they can tax some other sort of fuel that is easier to mass produce. From the research I've done I haven't found any energy source that is so abundent or as easily harvestable as oil; except for the shiniest object in the sky. Oil will still be the leading source of fuel for at least the next 20 years; sad fact I know but with how money hungry every corporate CEO is we may never see a new major source of fuel in our lifetime. I'll be looking for more information on any type of fuel advancements, keep posted.


[edit on 18-3-2008 by Lokey13]

Originally posted by finnegan
We will run out of oil because oil comes from dead plant material.

At best, according the classical theory and modern knowledge, we can say that that vast majority comes from such a source. Clearly some proportion is and always have been formed abioticly.

Regardless of how quickly you believe the plant material is transformed to oil, there is still a significantly long time between the sprouting and the death of the plant, I would estimate at least 40 years on average.

www.gi.alaska.edu...

Forty years? Why not go back to the books for a while?

The rate at which oil is being discovered is decreasing at a regular rate which would be very minimal at 2050.

It is in fact increasing as it has been for decades on end.

At 2003 consumption levels [2], the remaining reserves represent 44.6 years of oil and 66.2 years of natural gas. Does this mean that the world will be out of fossil fuels in 50 years or so? That theory has been around since the 1970s. In fact, the figures for years of remaining reserves have remained relative constant over the past few decades as the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.

No one can know for certain how much oil and gas remains to be discovered. But geologists sometimes make educated guesses. For example, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducts periodic assessments of U.S. mineral resources. In its most recent assessment (1995), the USGS estimated that the onshore U.S., including Alaska, has undiscovered, technically recoverable resources of 112.3 billion barrels of oil and 1,074 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. In a separate assessment of offshore resources completed in 2000, the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) estimated that 75 billion barrels of oil and 362 trillion cubic feet of natural gas underlie the areas off the coasts of the U.S. The USGS and MMS resource assessments make clear that, despite being a very mature producing area, substantial resources still exist in the U.S.

World oil resources to 2025 may be more than two times current reserves, based on an estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) using USGS data. Reserve growth of 730 billion barrels accounts for new discoveries and the expansion of what can be recovered from known reservoirs due to advances in technology and improvements in economics. But EIA estimates that in 2025, countries around the globe will still have more than 900 billion barrels of oil remaining to be discovered. EIA estimates total world oil resources at more than 2.9 trillion barrels of oil.

How much oil and natural gas i left?

We may not literally run out, but the amount left will be negligible.

We will never run out of oil but in fifty or a hundred years time the current 100 USD a barrel pricing may actually be justified.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by finnegan
Regardless of how quickly you believe the plant material is transformed to oil, there is still a significantly long time between the sprouting and the death of the plant, I would estimate at least 40 years on average.

www.gi.alaska.edu...

Forty years? Why not go back to the books for a while?

It was just an estimate. If you have an exact figure on how long an average plant lives, please enlighten me.

The rate at which oil is being discovered is decreasing at a regular rate which would be very minimal at 2050.

It is in fact increasing as it has been for decades on end. ]

The graph shows a decrease in oil discoveries since 1967. Do you have a graph that shows otherwise?

We may not literally run out, but the amount left will be negligible.

We will never run out of oil but in fifty or a hundred years time the current 100 USD a barrel pricing may actually be justified.

I can't tell the future, but I would guess that it will cost quite a bit more in 50 years.

Originally posted by finnegan
It was just an estimate. If you have an exact figure on how long an average plant lives, please enlighten me.

The average lifespan of a plan has absolutely nothing to do with how long it takes for the geophysical processes to turn organic material into oil.

The graph shows a decrease in oil discoveries since 1967. Do you have a graph that shows otherwise?

You can make a graph say almost anything you like and if you have a problem with actual reading the material the graph should be based on i can just post more and more sources until you start reading them; i may even be able to find you some pictures and graphs if reading is too much work for you.

I can't tell the future, but I would guess that it will cost quite a bit more in 50 years.

Sure it will but it wont be based on fundamental costs as is widely admitted by economist, petroleum engineers and geologist who know just how much oil we are stuck with. The accepted knowledge is oil at below current prices for at least another fifty years and if it becomes more expensive or oil does not reach the market it simply has nothing to do with oil availability or the cost of extraction and transportation.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by finnegan
It was just an estimate. If you have an exact figure on how long an average plant lives, please enlighten me.

The average lifespan of a plan has absolutely nothing to do with how long it takes for the geophysical processes to turn organic material into oil.

I never said it did, but where does the organic material come from?

The graph shows a decrease in oil discoveries since 1967. Do you have a graph that shows otherwise?

You can make a graph say almost anything you like and if you have a problem with actual reading the material the graph should be based on i can just post more and more sources until you start reading them; i may even be able to find you some pictures and graphs if reading is too much work for you.

I do not appreciate your condescending posting manners, let me just tell you that first, although I don't report people for bad manners so continue on with that if you wish. You may think you are Stellar, your personality is far less.

The source you provided does not show any information on increased oil discoveries. I will pick out what I think you are trying to say show an increase in discoveries and try to explain why they are not.

the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.

This does not state that discoveries are growing but that current discoveries can account for current increse in consumption.

In its most recent assessment (1995), the USGS estimated that the onshore U.S., including Alaska, has undiscovered, technically recoverable resources of 112.3 billion barrels of oil and 1,074 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. In a separate assessment of offshore resources completed in 2000, the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) estimated that 75 billion barrels of oil and 362 trillion cubic feet of natural gas underlie the areas off the coasts of the U.S.

This also does not indicate increased discoveries, it is only an estimate of how much oil can be discovered in the future.

World oil resources to 2025 may be more than two times current reserves, based on an estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) using USGS data.

This indicates that EIA estimates reserves will increase, not discoveries.

Originally posted by finnegan

I never said it did, but where does the organic material come from?

According to the conventional view it comes from life.

I do not appreciate your condescending posting manners, let me just tell you that first, although I don't report people for bad manners so continue on with that if you wish. You may think you are Stellar, your personality is far less

I don't have to be 'nice' to propagate the truth ( if it is, that is ) and you being 'nice' does not mean that your any closer than i am. I can understand if you think my tone is condescending but that's what your going to be stuck with while you give me graphs and dismiss all of conventional wisdom so easily....

The source you provided does not show any information on increased oil discoveries. I will pick out what I think you are trying to say show an increase in discoveries and try to explain why they are not.

It was one source but since you apparently did not check my record here that must be what you think i have to offer. Too bad really as that's pretty condescending in my opinion.

the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.

This does not state that discoveries are growing but that current discoveries can account for current increse in consumption

It is interesting that you forget to include the first sentence where it's made abundantly clear that the world has more than forty years worth of oil reserves at current estimates. Do you think i do not even read my own sources? Do you realise the scale of the new discoveries that needs to be made every year just to keep reserves constant?

Eni’s review shows 1.9 percent growth in world oil reserves last year, while natural gas reserves hold steady; Russia leads in gas reserves; Qatar world’ s leading LNG exporter

www.petroleumnews.com...

The new data estimate total world oil reserves at 1.15 t barrel, about 10 % higher than previously reported for 2002. Additionally, global oil reserves have increased almost continuously over the past 30 years, BP officials said. World reserves now represent 41 years of production at current rates.
By comparison, in 1980 reserves equivalent to only 29 years of production were known. The world has now produced some 80 % of the oil reserves that were known in 1980; yet exploration success and application of technology has led to current reserves that are 70 % higher, BP said. The company has published its statistical review of world energy for 53 years.

Looking at natural gas, BP reported global reserves of 176 tcm, 13 % higher than those previously reported for 2002. The company said that gas reserves have more than doubled since 1980 as a result of exploration, new technology, and the "unstranding" of gas reserves through LNG and other technologies.
BP Group CEO John Browne emphasized that oil and gas are not being depleted at an accelerated rate.
"The data [illustrate] the continued growth in reserve volumes across the world," Browne wrote in the review's introduction. "At current levels of consumption, there are sufficient reserves to meet oil demand for some 40 years and to meet natural gas demand for well over 60 years."

He added that there appears to be considerable scope for proved reserves and production to keep rising in Russia and elsewhere.
"Reserves, globally, have grown over time, and it is clear that the issue of energy security, which has been so prominent over the last year, is driven not by a physical shortage of supply but by the challenges of ensuring, in a world where demand and supply are not collocated, that there will be sufficient traded oil and gas to meet rising demand."

www.gasandoil.com...

"2003 was a turbulent year in the world's energy markets, with supply disruptions, strong growth in both demand and production of oil and coal, and the highest prices in the oil and gas markets for 20 years," said BP Chief Economist Peter Davies.

www.energybulletin.net...

The US still hastonto.eia.doe.gov... around 22 million barrels in proven reserves ( always a very conservative estimate) and while it's proven reserves stood at around 40 million barrels in 1970 it's produced about 90 million barrels from them. So basically you have 40- 90 = - 50 million barrels but since the US now still officially has 22 million barrels 70 million barrels appeared from 'somewhere'? Can you explain why this is true for all countries and why i should thus believe this blatant peak oil nonsense?

As to the claim that new finds are not being made...

16 May 2007 ,Agence France Presse

"The one-billion-tonne (7.35-billion-barrel) reserve announced earlier is not the final figure. As our explorations deepen, we expect to discover more reserves."
Corroborating Jiang, Zhai Guangming, Jidong Oil field's first general manager, said that even half of Bohai Bay's resource has not been tapped.
Zhang Anping, spokesman of PetroChina, confirmed with AFP that more reserves are likely with further explorations and technological improvements.

www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca...

three years of exploration has enabled Pemex to map oilfields that the state-owned oil monopoly believes will more than double the nation's known crude oil reserves.
Luis Ramírez Corzo, Pemex's director for exploration, told EL UNIVERSAL that on a "conservative" estimate, almost 54 billion barrels lie underneath the oilfields. That would take Mexico's reserves to 102 billion barrels, more than the United Arab Emirates (which has reserves of 97.8 billion barrels), Kuwait (94 billion) and Iran (89.7 billion), and almost as much as Iraq (112.5 billion).
The official also said the discovery could enable Pemex to increase Mexico's oil production from the current level of 4 million barrels per day (bpd) to 7 million bpd.

www2.eluniversal.com.mx...

In its most recent assessment (1995), the USGS estimated that the onshore U.S., including Alaska, has undiscovered, technically recoverable resources of 112.3 billion barrels of oil and 1,074 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. In a separate assessment of offshore resources completed in 2000, the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) estimated that 75 billion barrels of oil and 362 trillion cubic feet of natural gas underlie the areas off the coasts of the U.S.

This also does not indicate increased discoveries, it is only an estimate of how much oil can be discovered in the future.

Sure it indicates increase RECOVERABLE oil. If you do not understand the difference between the different classes and what the fast increasing oil prices ( which has nothing to do with oil in the ground as the massive increases in oil company profits shows) have done to increase recoverable oil stocks i will simply have to add explanations in my next response.

World oil resources to 2025 may be more than two times current reserves, based on an estimate from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) using USGS data.

This indicates that EIA estimates reserves will increase, not discoveries.

And for some reason you have decided that there is some kind of magical difference... If you can explain why you have been led to believe that recoverable reserves increasing also means no new dsicoveries will be made you will be much closer to understanding why oil will not run out any century soon.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX
And for some reason you have decided that there is some kind of magical difference... If you can explain why you have been led to believe that recoverable reserves increasing also means no new dsicoveries will be made you will be much closer to understanding why oil will not run out any century soon.?

This is where our problem lies, this is what we will have to clear up in order to continue.

I have never stated there are no new discoveries, I said discoveries are decreasing. Please do not put words in my mouth. Perhaps you would like to peruse a document from the DOE, which clearly states that discoveries are decreasing.
peakoil

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “Worldwide, the rate of [oil] reserve additions from discoveries has fallen sharply since the 1960s. In the last decade, discoveries have replaced only half the oil produced.

reply to post by StellarX


If you want to talk about reserves, which I remind you are different from discoveries because we have already discovered them, I have some information for you here.

Reserves have been decreaseing since 1970, not too quickly though.
US reserves

Here are some more facts.
oil facts

Originally posted by rizla
We might never use up all the oil in the planet, but we will use up all the cheaply accessible oil, and possibly all the accessible oil. So as a cost-effective and viable energy source, it will run out.

Having researched this extensively, at current prices unlimited oil is essentially available, at least we will run out of atmosphere to burn it first.

That's not to say that oil won't exceed the current prices because we do have a shortage of rigs capable of drilling deep enough and through basement rock to reach abiotic oil, and we have a shortage of refineries capable of handling heavy sour crude that is widely available near the surface. But these are short-term issues. In the long term, atmosphere is the issue not oil.

Even if we do have vast expansive sources of undiscovered oil deep with in the crust, it will be very expensive to get to. Not only will alternative energy be cleaner, it will also be cheaper. We should start developing alternative technology now so we don't have to spend the money looking for deep oil.

Originally posted by finnegan
This is where our problem lies, this is what we will have to clear up in order to continue.
I have never stated there are no new discoveries, I said discoveries are decreasing.

As compared to what , the year 1920?

Please do not put words in my mouth. Perhaps you would like to peruse a document from the DOE, which clearly states that discoveries are decreasing.
peakoil

And what do you expect from something that says 'peakingoil'? Why have they chosen to misrepresent the DOE?

www.ifp.com/content/download/56068/1266053/version/4/file/IFP-Panorama05_05-DecouvertesVA.pdf

For that matter did you know that oil prices had slumped to 8 USD a barrel in 1998 despite the fact that they seemed to have replaced only half of used oil with new discoveries? Why has new discoveries been on the increase since then? Would you look, and heaven forbid, find, more oil when no one wants to pay you for what you already have?

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), “Worldwide, the rate of [oil] reserve additions from discoveries has fallen sharply since the 1960s. In the last decade, discoveries have replaced only half the oil produced.

Well discoveries have sort of decreased since the 60's but why use the 60's as a benchmark? For instance...

America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

In the next 30 days the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) will release a new report giving an accurate resource assessment of the Bakken Oil Formation that covers North Dakota and portions of South Dakota and Montana. With new horizontal drilling technology it is believed that from 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil are held in this 200,000 square mile reserve that was initially discovered in 1951. The USGS did an initial study back in 1999 that estimated 400 billion recoverable barrels were present but with prices bottoming out at $10 a barrel back then the report was dismissed because of the higher cost of horizontal drilling techniques that would be needed, estimated at $20-$40 a barrel.

It was not until 2007, when EOG Resources of Texas started a frenzy when they drilled a single well in Parshal N.D. that is expected to yield 700,000 barrels of oil that real excitement and money started to flow in North Dakota. Marathon Oil is investing $1.5 billion and drilling 300 new wells in what is expected to be one of the greatest booms in Oil discovery since Oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938.

www.nextenergynews.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

So ,yes, technically oil discoveries may be down since the 60's because technically we have not started to use even a fraction of what was discovered then. The fact of the matter seem to be that at a price range of 50 USD ( current USD) we are going to be swimming in oil for centuries to come even if the world population growth does not follow it's long term slowing.

Stellar

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by finneganI have never stated there are no new discoveries, I said discoveries are decreasing.

As compared to what , the year 1920?

As compared to the last 40 years.

And what do you expect from something that says 'peakingoil'? Why have they chosen to misrepresent the DOE?

It is not a misrepresentation, it is on the DOE website. link

For that matter did you know that oil prices had slumped to 8 USD a barrel in 1998 despite the fact that they seemed to have replaced only half of used oil with new discoveries? Why has new discoveries been on the increase since then?

Could you provide a source on increased discoveries?

Would you look, and heaven forbid, find, more oil when no one wants to pay you for what you already have?

If you believe oil companies are screwing you, that's all the more reason to seek alternative energy replacements.

Well discoveries have sort of decreased since the 60's but why use the 60's as a benchmark? For instance...

America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed.

The Bakken Formation is yet to be proven to be recoverable. If we could use all the oil in it, it could run the country for about 20 years, but still, 20 years is finite. We would have to build pipelines to transport it all and we would have to continue to pay higher prices for the recovery of it. Alternatives are cheaper.

So ,yes, technically oil discoveries may be down since the 60's because technically we have not started to use even a fraction of what was discovered then. The fact of the matter seem to be that at a price range of 50 USD ( current USD) we are going to be swimming in oil for centuries to come even if the world population growth does not follow it's long term slowing.

Swim in oil for 50$? Are there gonna be any playboy models there?

Here is the link for Lindsey Williams' free online book

www.reformation.org...

Originally posted by finnegan
As compared to the last 40 years

Well discoveries are not declining and especially not as compared to the volumes being used or the scale of capitol non-investment. Why would the oil companies admit to any more oil than they have to when the price of a barrel dropped to 8 USD on the spot markets?

Amid rising costs and the plunging value of oil - which slumped to below $10 a barrel at the time - firms including Shell pulled out and the promise of oil wealth in the Falklands remained just that.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Do you REALLY want me to believe that we can be swimming in oil one minute and out of it the next? Why should the massive slump in world oil prices not be employed as evidence towards the fact that the world wont run out of practically affordable oil for many many decades or centuries to come? Why is Coal still so very cheap when it essentially supposedly comes from the same base resource stock?

It is not a misrepresentation, it is on the DOE website. link[quot e]

www.usgs.gov...
www.searchanddiscovery.net...

And from the DOE www.eia.doe.gov...

Showing that despite the world consuming roughly 0.08 billion barrels a day ( 29.2 billion barrels for the year) the world 'proven reserves' have increased since the end of 2005 ( 1100 billion- 1200 billion) to the end of 2006 ( 1300 billion) with anywhere between four to eight years of current world consumption. How that can be presumed to 'prove' that the world is running out of oil i have no idea and if new discoveries are not being made fast enough , at least according to you, it's not because there isn't plenty of spcae left to look but because they are finding the damn stuff in such volumes that looking any faster ensures that you just have to do more manipulation to make a profit at all.

could you provide a source on increased discoveries?

The new data estimate total world oil reserves at 1.15 t barrel, about 10 % higher than previously reported for 2002. Additionally, global oil reserves have increased almost continuously over the past 30 years, BP officials said. World reserves now represent 41 years of production at current rates.
By comparison, in 1980 reserves equivalent to only 29 years of production were known. The world has now produced some 80 % of the oil reserves that were known in 1980; yet exploration success and application of technology has led to current reserves that are 70 % higher, BP said. The company has published its statistical review of world energy for 53 years.

Looking at natural gas, BP reported global reserves of 176 tcm, 13 % higher than those previously reported for 2002. The company said that gas reserves have more than doubled since 1980 as a result of exploration, new technology, and the "unstranding" of gas reserves through LNG and other technologies.
BP Group CEO John Browne emphasized that oil and gas are not being depleted at an accelerated rate.
"The data [illustrate] the continued growth in reserve volumes across the world," Browne wrote in the review's introduction. "At current levels of consumption, there are sufficient reserves to meet oil demand for some 40 years and to meet natural gas demand for well over 60 years."

He added that there appears to be considerable scope for proved reserves and production to keep rising in Russia and elsewhere.
"Reserves, globally, have grown over time, and it is clear that the issue of energy security, which has been so prominent over the last year, is driven not by a physical shortage of supply but by the challenges of ensuring, in a world where demand and supply are not collocated, that there will be sufficient traded oil and gas to meet rising demand."

www.gasandoil.com...

Eni’s review shows 1.9 percent growth in world oil reserves last year, while natural gas reserves hold steady; Russia leads in gas reserves; Qatar world’ s leading LNG exporter

www.petroleumnews.com...

And considering the price ranges in 2002 how much have the 'reserves' grown given that proved reserves are normally taken to mean oil that can be produced for profit? If the price went up by nearly 500% ( even if it's quite a bit less given the depreciation of the dollar) is it not logical that proved reserves have massively expanded? The problem with reserves figures are that they are almost entirely useless for a lay person given just how easily they can and have been manipulated thus going from eight USD in 1998 to 30 odd USD pre Iraq invasion and then steadily rising as the occupation goes horrible wrong and aids in the meltdown of the USD value.

If you believe oil companies are screwing you, that's all the more reason to seek alternative energy replacements.

And that's why i have spent so much time correcting the ignorance pertaining to both alternative energy technologies as well as introducing information concerning 'free' and vacuum energy extraction technologies. It's not that i don't think oil companies are lying but that i understand how it makes absolutely no economic sense for them to officially admit that there are massive volumes of oil or no very little left. That is why i have aimed to find my own date and why i understand how they are using former oil people as well as politicians to spread the peak oil rumours to allow them to raise prises while still being able to tell in the truth in stating that there are sufficient reserves to ward of investment in alternatives.

Swim in oil for 50$? Are there gonna be any playboy models there?

And here i thought you were serious about this issue.... I don't know about playboy models but for the right kind of money i suppose they will swim in anything.

Stellar

[edit on 18-6-2008 by StellarX]

Will we every run out of oil? Of course not. The answer is that what really matters is the spot price of crude. Eventually it will be too expensive to get out of the ground for economical purposes. Oil companies can only sell the stuff for the price people are willing to pay for it. Sadly alternative energy sources are even more expensive and less productive. By 2030, no one will drive a car unless they absolutely have to.

Originally posted by dbates
Will we every run out of oil? Of course not. The answer is that what really matters is the spot price of crude.

Sure it matters but the question is how it's determined when we know that there is enough oil on the market to supply the nominal demand?

Eventually it will be too expensive to get out of the ground for economical purposes.

'Economical' in terms of what and when is this supposed to happen when world reserves keep growing far faster than consumption? Why are oil companies still making massive profits despite investment in production and the like? How can so much profit be made if oil is so expensive to extract?

Oil companies can only sell the stuff for the price people are willing to pay for it.

Oil companies can sell it for more than people can afford at which point people will start to eat less, buy less, move to smaller homes and do whatever it takes to afford being able to drive to work due to at least keep themselves fed. IF we could afford electric transportation or had sufficient public transportation that was not dependent on fossil fuels people could decide not to go on vacation or whatever but due to the fact that people are cornered with few obvious or easy options it is not true that people are 'willing' to pay ever high prices. I don't know how many people would pay as much in taxes if they were not compelled to do so with threats of persecution so it's just in my opinion strange to argue that people would give away so much of their hard earned money because they are in fact 'willing'.

Sadly alternative energy sources are even more expensive and less productive.

I don't understand the reasoning that drives people such as yourself to claim that we can't afford oil and that there are not alternatives. Are you simply here to tell us that the sky is falling and that we best flatten ourselves in anticipation? You probably believe 'global warming' too, right? Lets all stop using energy and refuse to release the carbon dioxide that is the basis of ALL life?

By 2030, no one will drive a car unless they absolutely have to.

That is very clearly the aim of those who are currently manipulation the markets and if they have their way , with your avid support, they will slowly strip us of the tools and rights that makes us as independent as we are today.

Stellar

Originally posted by Lokey13
reply to post by BRITWARRIOR

 

I don't think I have to comment on you gramatical errors you should be able to see them, you made enough. But if you realistically think a different energy source is going to be readily available in the next 20 years your crazy.

Hey let's keep it civil!

If you check over YOUR post, I believe you'll find several mistakes as well.

HINT: Missing semicolon, missing apostrophe, missing comma and you misspelled 'grammatical'.

I just think it's silly to correct people's typos online, especially when you make several errors yourself in the correction!!


Back on topic, only time will tell if it's all one big scam and oil is made deep within the earth. I'm sure someone out there knows for a fact.

reply to post by Lokey13


We will run out of any resource, including oil, eventually, if consumption is greater than natural production. That is the law. How long this process will take is in the air. It does not help matters, when our own government officials try to hide the numbers.

My genius father gave the advice: What ever you see on the media, look the other way to find out what really is going on. Do you really think it is a coincidence that George Bush, Jr. became president (with the family interest in oil) and the war in the middle east just happened to start during his term? The big plan almost failed when the other guy was elected, you mean Al Gore? Thank goodness for brother, Jeb, in Florida to turn the tables. What a windfall it must have been for 9/11, oh boy, all those oil fields in Irag! Ooops! You mean the terroists were not from Irag? Geez! Those are just technicalities....

Call me crazy but per my calculations, if current rates of consumption hold we should use up all current known reserves in about 50 years.
Believe what you will.