It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saudi Arabia Plans $2 Trillion Megafund for Post-Oil Era

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 08:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DJW001


All of these forms of extraction have become economical because conventional supplies are running out.

Big difference between '"economical" and necessary. In order to keep the oil flowing they are causing pollution on an unheard of scale. See Gulf oil spill from deep drilling. See endless wars in the middle east, endless debt, failing (Petro) dollar, hill top removal for coal, Fracking, melted down nuclear reactors, disease and death from all these toxic technologies, (including war).
How stupid humans gotta be to dig up the most toxic stuff safely sequestered in the earth and burn it to the atmosphere in the form of carbon, spread it around on the ground in the form of roads and build cities to the sky, to snare everyone in?
Damn we dumb.


Here's the dilemma: In order to end our dependence on oil, we'd have to totally uproot modern civilization and start over. Just about EVERYTHING uses oil in some way, shape, form, or another.




posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: network dude

I am not really getting the point of the OP . Oil is a finite resource . Makes sense to me that they would plan for the future . I know from close family that Oman has been planning for the end of the oil dollar for quite a long time .


in order for there to be an end, there must be an alternative. As of now, I don't see one. I do know this:
1. the AGW crowd wants to move away from oil
2. there is a finite amount of oil on the planet.
3. those who make the rules, seem to be the ones who make the most from oil.

Knowing all that, seeing Saudi Arabia making a move of this proportion seems to indicate a shift in the future of oil. I am all for getting off the stuff, but as I said, until there is another alternative, this doesn't make sense.


Spot on, except - while there is a finite amount of oil on the planet, that's a relative concept. There's currently a**loads upon a**loads of reserves, and really no end in sight to the availability of oil.

As for Saudi Arabia's planning, I think it has more to do with wise planning in the face of both increased supply vs. demand, and against a future where oil for transportation fuels is going to be in far less demand. They're not doing this because in 5-10 years there will be no demand for oil. If they truly wish to continue their wealth in the long run, they need to diversify, and they need to do it before they have to start tapping their wealth reserves just to get by. The End of Large-Scale, Profitable Oil (enough to sustain a wealthy kingdom) may be decades off - the ideal time to start planning trillion dollar seeds.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Those countries rich in coal can turn their coal into oil, the Germans did it, its a proven way of producing oil, gasoline engines can be converted to run on Methane, there is no shortage of that, also hydrogen, but its more volatile than methane, and there is no shortage of hydrogen either.
Early in the 20th century there were steam driven cars!



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 09:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Misterlondon




Oil does a he'll of a lot more than those couple of things listed.. Currently without it the world is screwed. Until something else replaces it's uses.. which of course they won't allow whilst the dollars are still rolling in.. Ker-ching..


Yes, oil can be used for a variety of chemical transformations..
Like water, dirt, if you have fire and air.

If an industry more ruthless decides to capitalism, then oil will go, but is it worth it?



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: pikestaff
Those countries rich in coal can turn their coal into oil, the Germans did it, its a proven way of producing oil, gasoline engines can be converted to run on Methane, there is no shortage of that, also hydrogen, but its more volatile than methane, and there is no shortage of hydrogen either.
Early in the 20th century there were steam driven cars!


Coal is also a limited resource. At current levels of consumption it will only last another 200 years. If it becomes a substitute for petroleum, it will only last a decade or two.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
GCC leaders have known about the eventual decline of their oil & natural gas wealth for a long time. There's a famous saying from one of their powerbrokers that I'll paraphrase (because I can't remember who said it & the exact vehicles):

"My grandfather rode a camel. My father drove a Mercedes. I drive a Bentley. My son will drive a Bentley. His son will ride a camel."
edit on 1-4-2016 by enlightenedservant because: don't judge me



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
GCC leaders have known about the eventual decline of their oil & natural gas wealth for a long time. There's a famous saying from one of their powerbrokers that I'll paraphrase (because I can't remember who said it & the exact vehicles):

"My grandfather rode a camel. My father drove a Mercedes. I drive a Bentley. My son will drive a Bentley. His son will ride a camel."


It won't be that bad, but places like Dubai and Doha are trying to convert themselves into financial centres. Dubai is going for pure finance companies and Doha in Qatar for insurance and reinsurance.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I don't think it'll be that bad either. They've got highly educated people & they've been trying to diversify for a long time. That's one reason they invest so much in Western markets. But I always found that quote to be both hilarious and a bit depressing. Makes me think of the gambler that wins big but doesn't know when to quit.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I don't think it'll be that bad either. They've got highly educated people & they've been trying to diversify for a long time. That's one reason they invest so much in Western markets. But I always found that quote to be both hilarious and a bit depressing. Makes me think of the gambler that wins big but doesn't know when to quit.


I used to tell people that every time I flew into Dubai the construction cranes had moved on to another area. People thought that was joking. I wasn't. The first time I went there, there was a road full of skyscrapers with nothing but scrubby land and the odd camel behind it (or at least that was the view from the UK-run pub that was there). Now there's an astonishing amount of buildings where those camels used to be, along with an astonishing amount of infrastructure. They were completing the monorail the last time I was there.
The only problem - and others I've talked to about this have agreed with me - is that it's sucked all the soul out of the place. There seemed to be no real local character. And according to one person I talked to recently who lives in Dubai, the locals are making a bit of a mess of things. For one thing they are farming the upbringing of their kids out to nannies etc - so the children of Dubai are largely growing up speaking English and not Arabic. Ironic.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Reading this make me think the Iranians were not so dumb after all.

They opted way back in the 1970's to build a nuclear reactor for generating their domestic electricity. Yea, this was under the Shaw, but those who followed were smart enough to continue the program.

Actually, this is were Valarie Plame was assigned by the CIA when she was outed by our own government. This took away our "eyes" on their nuclear development program and made it easier to claim they were working toward weapons.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

There is no big conspiracy it is just common sense. The Saudi economy is massively reliant on oil and at some point in the future that will no longer be a practical economic policy, They are just taking steps to assure that economic life goes on when the oil becomes less profitable.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

BP was the largest investor in alternative energy before the Deepwater Horizon gulf oil spill. They went around buying up solar and hydrogen fuel cell companies. Even if they didn't keep the companies operational, they still bought the patents and intellectual property and filed it away.

Oil companies operate 50, 60, 70+ years out. Big companies like Exxon and BP make massive investments that take 20+ years to pay themselves off, and project future business plans at least twice that into the future.

We're not moving away from oil anytime soon, but big oil is positioning itself to be at the right place at the right time when we do move away from oil as an energy source.

It's not just energy/fuel. Look around you right now. Everything dyed, made of plastic or painted is made from oil. Really think about everything you see, and try to imagine it being made without using a drop of oil.

Do you see the problem with this? Oil is here to stay in a big way for a very long time in some form or another.
edit on 1-4-2016 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42


Interesting, I recall a recent post around here about some new source of energy that was cost effective. However, I typically ignore them as they are dime a dozen.

I look them over, too. So far, hoaxes.
The real energy equivalent is localized farming, walking or riding bikes, being willing to do with less.

I do that all the time, I'm broke.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DJW001


All of these forms of extraction have become economical because conventional supplies are running out.

Big difference between '"economical" and necessary. In order to keep the oil flowing they are causing pollution on an unheard of scale. See Gulf oil spill from deep drilling. See endless wars in the middle east, endless debt, failing (Petro) dollar, hill top removal for coal, Fracking, melted down nuclear reactors, disease and death from all these toxic technologies, (including war).
How stupid humans gotta be to dig up the most toxic stuff safely sequestered in the earth and burn it to the atmosphere in the form of carbon, spread it around on the ground in the form of roads and build cities to the sky, to snare everyone in?
Damn we dumb.


Here's the dilemma: In order to end our dependence on oil, we'd have to totally uproot modern civilization and start over. Just about EVERYTHING uses oil in some way, shape, form, or another.

You are absolutely correct. Plastics, Petro chemical, fertilizer, pesticides, makeup, all oozing from the ground.

It would be easier in my mind if we voluntarily give it up now , rather than trying to pick up the pieces after a collapse r world war or biologic disaster.

For millennia people went to bed and rose with the sun, walked or rode horses, grew their own food. We are going to have to go back there eventually, whether painfully or not.

Off the grid independence is a lot of peoples dream.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 01:19 PM
link   
The writing is on the wall. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, various university's and a few other countries are announcing breakthroughs in fusion technology.

arstechnica.com...

oilprice.com...

www.cbc.ca...

mobile.eweek.com...

The times they are a changing.

I remember a long time ago a scientist, dr Eugene Mallove gave a three hour broadcast interview on coast to coast about alternative energy, infinite energy, and the intricacies of the energy sector.

He was shot the next day execution style. The police said it was a robbery.

www.coasttocoastam.com...

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The tech has been here. The powers in play want to tax you for energy, and have waited until they can make more money off of you to give it to you. What do you think the Saudis are stupid? No they are trying to keep up



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Hey Network Dude, have you ever seen the documentary "Gashole"? Anyone who doesn't think they've actively shut down technology is deluding themselves.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   
The Norwegians were planning for the future too. They set up a trust fund to keep the country going after the oil runs out. But they were transferring their technical knowledge from oil-rig design into offshore wind and tidal farms. They only have a population of 5 million, but one city accounts for 75% of GDP.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

If elon musk does well they better start charging more for gas or they will be screwed...good time to get into the scrap metal business



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: chrismarco
If elon musk does well they better start charging more for gas or they will be screwed...good time to get into the scrap metal business

Why would that be? Every Tesla vehicle costs more oil to produce (relative to an comparable ICE vehicle) than the ICE equivalent would have ever burnt as fuel.

IF anything, the more Musk succeeds, the more oil required.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
did anyone bother to see how much oil is left?
fortunately there is alot left.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join