Which party will support this effort?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

It's ironic, isn't it? They spent 70 years spreading Communism. Now in some ways they're better capitalists than we are.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Josh Cryer
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:19 am

Post by Josh Cryer »

dupe
Last edited by Josh Cryer on Tue Sep 09, 2008 4:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Josh Cryer
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 7:19 am

Post by Josh Cryer »

TallDave, it's called "profit maximization." It's interesting that you didn't answer the question about what would happen to oil prices if the Green River started pumping out a lot of oil at competitive pricing models using proven in situ technology. You and I both know that the spectulaor war would end and prices would plummet. (Oh, and while we're at it the dollar would strengthen making those bank accounts a hell of a lot stronger.)

They'll go after the reserves eventually and when they do you can think back to the time that idiot Josh Cryer pointed out how they were sitting on reserves to maximize their profit. But no new magic technology will be invented, and the price of oil won't be that much higher.

It has nothing to do with price fixing, it has everything to do with opportunity cost. Right now, from their portfolios, the opportunity cost is not worth it. That is not a conspiracy, it's smart business practice.

I'm done with this nonsense, feel free to flame away, call me a conspiracy theorist, and so on. I personally wouldn't sell 200 barrels of anything at $50 if I could sell 100 at $100 and still have that other 100 left over for future profit, especially when my dollar is undervalued and my commodity is the life-blood of civilization.

There's nothing "communist" about expecting a leasor to grant a lease to people who want to follow the lease rather than ignore the contract completely. The BLM doesn't need new law (of this I am certain) to kick these squatters off of the land.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

It's interesting that you didn't answer the question about what would happen to oil prices if the Green River started pumping out a lot of oil at competitive pricing models using proven in situ technology.
I did answer that. I said the company that did it would make a lot of money (that's called profit maximization), and in fact efforts are underway to do so. You seem to think all the oil majors are simultaneously and deliberately refraining from doing so as part of a conspiracy to raise oil prices, despite the obvious fact they don't control enough of the world oil market to do so.
You and I both know that the spectulaor war would end and prices would plummet.
It's unlikely U.S. production from oil shale will affect world oil prices anytime soon. It will take years to set up and clear legal hurdles, and years more to become cheap enough and plentiful enough to matter much. A drilling project can take a decade. That's why we're in this mess now: a lot of oil projects looked unprofitable at 1998's all-time-low oil prices. It's possible a lot of projects started now will be unprofitable at 2018 prices.
I personally wouldn't sell 200 barrels of anything at $50 if I could sell 100 at $100 and still have that other 100 left over for future profit, especially when my dollar is undervalued and my commodity is the life-blood of civilization.
I've already explained why this makes no sense: "you" in that scenario are a price-fixing monopoly, which the oil majors are not, legally cannot be, and do not have the leverage on world markets to be. That's also besides the fact oil is actually going down in price right now, and may never see summer 2008 highs again given the proliferation of renewable substitutes that are viable around $70/bbl.
I'm done with this nonsense
Well, good. I've explained how this works several times now, and you persist in asserting demonstrably absurd conspiracy theories while claiming they aren't conspiracy theories.
There's nothing "communist" about expecting a leasor to grant a lease to people who want to follow the lease rather than ignore the contract completely.


Great, then let them go to court and try to prove oil companies are breaking their leases. But don't expect this is going to magically create profitable oilfields where none existed before.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

WillKell
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: Dallas,TX
Contact:

Post by WillKell »

This is about "change".

"Hope" that man creates his own history.

History has been very clear, there will be change and man always seems to come out on top. If this should not happen in the future then we simply go extinct like everything else. See the law. oooops were going anyway!

Remember, there was a time before 1854 when all the machines on the earth (almost all) were lubricated with whale oil (not very sustainable) not to mention lamps.

Remember, there was a time when England's new found industrial revolution was ending because the coal fields had played out, see Devons book.

Does anyone remember how important bat shit use to be?

Remember there was a time when Greece had been de-treed until a breakthrough in ship building occured (see planking).

Remember the rubber cartels. Remeber the rubber blithe? Remember Japan cut us off from rubber!

Remember Paul Earlich?

Remember Malthus?

Remember that India was not going to be able to feed itself by 1970 (today it exports food)

The problem with oil is that no matter how much you take out, it is not going to be enough for what we need in the future. At some point, even if you had it you will not be able to get it out and use it to maintain growth. We need a lot more energy to fuel our dreams than oil will be able to delivery by burning it (period, do the math).

The beauty is that we get to watch Mans next big shift, watch in awe!

See "the ultimate resource II" by Julian Simon
http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/


So there will be a change and fusion, I believe, is it.

It will not matter in the end what any oil company does or does not do.

Saludos

Will

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

A well drilled on land can be done in 10 - 30 days once the rig is in place.

Off shore about 1 to 2 years including placing a platform.

Right now there are about 2,000 platforms in the Americas and they are all in operation and more are being built.

So here is what I would expect: shallow water - 2 years from the day of ordering the steel. Deep water 3 - years.

And don't forget - you can't ramp up too fast because the trained operators are not there. So you have that constraint as well. You can't hire that many people with 10 yrs experience.

Roger probably knows this way better than I do.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Josh,

When was a company ever interested in profits more than 2 or 3 years out?

In fact I thought the big deal was they were only looking at the next quarter.

BTW what about the opportunity cost of not locking in delivery contracts at $130 a bbl?

BTW if you can predict oil prices 2 years down the road you are wasting your time posting here. That has got to be a huge opportunity cost for you.

OTOH I get it. You are holding your services off the market until their value rises. Smart. Very smart. If you hold them off for 100 years just think of what they will be worth.

Are we sufficiently confused yet? I hope so.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Post by Roger »

MSimon wrote:A well drilled on land can be done in 10 - 30 days once the rig is in place.

Off shore about 1 to 2 years including placing a platform.

Right now there are about 2,000 platforms in the Americas and they are all in operation and more are being built.

So here is what I would expect: shallow water - 2 years from the day of ordering the steel. Deep water 3 - years.

And don't forget - you can't ramp up too fast because the trained operators are not there. So you have that constraint as well. You can't hire that many people with 10 yrs experience.

Roger probably knows this way better than I do.
Basically correct. Real Deep Water is emerging technology 5-7 miles deep is a major accomplishment. Setting the well head has bever been done..... yet.

Clinton ordered over 4 million acres of NPRA lease sales in 1999, Alpine was producing in 2 yrs IIRc, 2001. More leases were sold in 2003 in NPRA but nothing major has come online yet.

In the Beaufort Sea, it can be shallow, dump some rocks and gravel for a causeway and a 400ft x 400 ft pad, and you have enough room for 30 wells. Oil companies hold many offshore tracts in this area, that may or may not need offshore rigs.

Over the next 18 months, many new rigs should be flowing out of the yards, to go to work. I dont why these rigs weren't started until late 2007.
IIRC gas hit $3.25 here in NJ in 2005. If those rigs had been started in 2005, they'd be working now.

I'm sure some bottlenecks are legit, I'm not sure they all are. I'm too used to being lied to.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

Technology keeps moving ahead. Just wait till algae farms and biomass ethanol hit their stride. Just today there was news of a bioengineered thermotropic ethanol-excreting bacterium -- and we're only scratching the surface of what's possible.

Heck, Brazil already manages not to import any oil, thanks to sugar ethanol mandates that were widely mocked for years. And if it weren't for our ridiculous corn-subsidy-protecting ethanol tariff, they might be supplying a big chunk of our needs too.

Our grandkids will roll their eyes at our "oil crisis" the way we do about the end of whale oil.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

TallDave wrote:Technology keeps moving ahead. Just wait till algae farms and biomass ethanol hit their stride. Just today there was news of a bioengineered thermotropic ethanol-excreting bacterium -- and we're only scratching the surface of what's possible.

Heck, Brazil already manages not to import any oil, thanks to sugar ethanol mandates that were widely mocked for years. And if it weren't for our ridiculous corn-subsidy-protecting ethanol tariff, they might be supplying a big chunk of our needs too.

Our grandkids will roll their eyes at our "oil crisis" the way we do about the end of whale oil.
Actually Brazil got oil independence by drilling for oil.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

I have been thinking about what Tall Dave said.
Four years of Accounting, a CPA license, seven years of paying taxes on my businesses and investments.


It has occured to me that the opinions of people change based on their interaction with reality. TallDave has to work in the real world, as opposed to the Theoretical world, and therefore has an understanding of how things work in the real world.


I am reminded of the case of my brother in law. He was a Union Electrician, and decided he wanted to be a contractor. He took the test for his contractor's license and passed it. He then approached another Union Electrician to become his partner.

Prior to becoming a contractor he was gung-ho Union Electricians Only! Afterwards, he and his partner seldom hired any Union Electricians. (He did so for jobs on Ft. Sill, only because the US Government demanded it and was willing to pay for it. ) He realized that Union Electricians cost a lot more money, and in order to win bid's, he had to bid lower than other contractors.

What I was struck by was his willingness to give up his belief when faced with a real world test of his beliefs.



David

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

Another example.


Several years ago there was a FireFighter here who was president of the local Union. For years he was gung-ho FireFighters union till the existing Fire Chief retired. Well, guess what ? The Union President became the new Fire Chief and appointed several of his fellow firefighters to be deputies.

When he and his deputies became the "Managment", they suddenly became disliked by his former comrades. The new chief and his deputies started complaining about the whiney troublemakers they now had to manage.

I think in many cases, one's perspective is heavily influenced by one's position in the system. This is the very thesis of non-objectivity, and is a serious problem humanity wide.

Likewise, dealing with real world problems tend to educate people in ways they didn't expect.

David

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

ravingdave wrote:I have been thinking about what Tall Dave said.

What I was struck by was his willingness to give up his belief when faced with a real world test of his beliefs.

David
We see the same with the CO2 craziness. If it doesn't cost anything people are all for CO2 reduction.

If it costs $1,000 a year there are very few interested.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

djolds1
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:03 am

Post by djolds1 »

MSimon wrote:We see the same with the CO2 craziness. If it doesn't cost anything people are all for CO2 reduction.

If it costs $1,000 a year there are very few interested.
Similar thought follows. The source is partisan, but the insight valid:

http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2008/09/ ... e-oxy.html

Sucking the Oxygen Out of the Environmental Movement

I have written on a number of occasions that, years from now, folks who would like to see meaningful reductions in man's negative impacts on the environment are going to look back on the global warming charade as a disaster for their movement -- not just in terms of credibility, but in terms of lost focus on real, meaningful improvements.

China is a great example. Like London in the 19th century or Pittsburgh in the early 20th, China's air quality is a mess. Real steps need to be taken to clean up the air, for the health and safety of its residents. The Olympics might have been a venue for people around the world to apply pressure to China to clean up its act.

But, in fact, there is little real pressure from outside for China to clean up the soot, unburned hydrocarbons, NO2, SO2 and other such pollutants from its vehicles and coal plants. That is because all the pressure, all the attention, is on China's CO2 production. But there is nothing China can do to slow down CO2 growth without killing its economy and probably destabilizing its government in the process. So, it gives the world a big FU to such admonitions.

Which is a shame. Unlike for CO2 abatement, there are real technologies that are proven to be economic that can abate the worst of China's pollution problems. Had we instead been spending our moral capital pressuring China to take such steps, there might be real progress.

...

This is consistent with other recent work that hypothesizes that increase of melting rates of Arctic sea ice may be as much due to Chinese black carbon falling on the ice (and thereby decreasing its albedo and increasing solar heating) than from rising global temperatures. This makes sense to me, and may help explain why melting in the Arctic sea ice was nearly as great as last year's record, despite much lower Arctic temperatures (see below) over the last year.
Vae Victis

Post Reply