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.

 

Is Oil Being Phased Out?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 08:39 PM
link   
For years scientists and environmentalists have been warning us about global warming. Government, for the most part, has taken decidedly "global warning is not real" stance, at least on their suface, for the last 30 or 40 years.
Electric car technology was superior to internal cumbustion even in its infancy.
What happend to the electric car? The oil conglomerates own the rights to all this technonlogy.
Oil prices sky rocket every year. Prices at the pump are getting more and more ludacris every summer.
Many reliable scientific scources tell us that over 1/2 of the world oil has been used up, and at the current, exponentialy increasing, rate of consumtion, all the oil will be gone within 25 to 50 years.
Al Gore, in An Inconvenient Truth, now tells us that all the global warming stuff is not only true, but far worse than anyone imagined. Bush announces USA's addiction to oil and dumps millions of dollars into environmental research.
Massive environmental protection plans are underway in the US, spearheaded by a company founded by Gorbachev.
Are we getting ready to phase out oil? Governments already have the monopoly on alternative energy. Why are world leaders suddenly changing their minds about gobal warming?


[edit on 23-11-2006 by testingatheory]




posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
If it's not being phased out,it most certainly should be.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I dont necessarily think this is a good thing. It kinda puts us in a precarious position dosent it?

[edit on 23-11-2006 by testingatheory]



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
whether global warming is real or not...there is alot of available alternative energies. But why use that when you can make money of black gold! God forbid people get clean free endless energy.



posted on Nov, 23 2006 @ 11:57 PM
link   
A lot of these alternative energy sources have been fine-tuned behind the scenes for upwards of 40 years. A lot of people are going to be pertty impressed with the governments "new" clean energy tech. The government is gonna have a lot of support because of this, and as long as alternative energy is cheaper by comparison to oil, they are gonna make a few bucks too.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
For years scientists and environmentalists have been warning us about global warming.


Actually the few that did got all the press attention while the majority who do not got very much ignored as if facts are not relevant.


Government, for the most part, has taken decidedly "global warning is not real" stance, at least on their suface, for the last 30 or 40 years.


A few governments have and many have not so what does that tell us?


Electric car technology was superior to internal cumbustion even in its infancy
What happend to the electric car? The oil conglomerates own the rights to all this technonlogy.


Actually the oil guys did not even have to get involved as far as i know; these technologies were firmly suppressed ( beside the brief Ev-1 episode) by car manufacturers themselves as these cars are just too cheap to operate with far too little wear and tear....


Oil prices sky rocket every year. Prices at the pump are getting more and more ludacris every summer.
Many reliable scientific scources tell us that over 1/2 of the world oil has been used up,


The sources that tells us that are neither reliable or honest and i think some reading of your own would quickly show you as much. The world is still practically floating on oil and it's not going to run out any century soon.


and at the current, exponentialy increasing, rate of consumtion, all the oil will be gone within 25 to 50 years.


Just a pure unadulterated lie and please don't help them spread it.


Al Gore, in An Inconvenient Truth, now tells us that all the global warming stuff is not only true, but far worse than anyone imagined.


Al Gore gave a election away when he clearly won and the man either has no spine at all or is just another sell out that will say anything for a bit of cash and air time.


Bush announces USA's addiction to oil and dumps millions of dollars into environmental research.


And dumps billions into using radioactive weapons materials against two countries in the last few years...


Massive environmental protection plans are underway in the US, spearheaded by a company founded by Gorbachev.


As' massive' as the fund being funnelled into private corporate hands? One can protect the environment without inhibiting growth and prosperity and it's strange that all the measures you will hear about on TV is asking the average person to drastically change their lives.


Are we getting ready to phase out oil? Governments already have the monopoly on alternative energy. Why are world leaders suddenly changing their minds about gobal warming?


Because they have always behind the scenes backed the global warming scam as they most certainly do not want their average citizen to enjoy the luxuries they have already gained for themselves. Oil will not be phased out any time soon as it's one of their primary control mechanisms.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
A lot of these alternative energy sources have been fine-tuned behind the scenes for upwards of 40 years.


More than a hundred but i doubt it's been taking place in the general government backed science establishment as they still deny the reality that we can get energy almost for free...


A lot of people are going to be pertty impressed with the governments "new" clean energy tech.


People will not be impressed as few if any governments are going to be allowed to allow such to function in their various states. No government on Earth benefits by decentralized power 'generation' as that is a great deal of control they lose right there. Once electricity is basically for free with almost no infrastructure requirements people will discover what freedom looks like and why the true rulers of the world kept it from them for so long.


The government is gonna have a lot of support because of this, and as long as alternative energy is cheaper by comparison to oil, they are gonna make a few bucks too.


Alternative energies are not cheaper at all and you must be pretty well off to even consider making the financial investment that might after five or ten years give you your money back. If you want to life exactly as you did before the investment you have to make becomes very large indeed and not something many can afford to even consider.

Stellar


[edit on 25-11-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   
So you obviously think my idea is wrong, but what if your wrong?



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 01:57 AM
link   
One of two things:

Pressure must be put on the Ruskies and A-rabs in order to export cheaper barrels of oil

or

The price of oil must be high enough to process shale, sand and tar oil.

The Ruskies ablity to export low price crude hinges on the technology developed in the search and drilling of oil in Prudhoe Bay and other harsh, cold environments where US/British companies have high stakes, as well as other European (Statoil/norwegee).

The aRABS need to lighten up and stop acting as though the control the world. If Iraq hasnot taught them a lesson, it is about time we nuke Iran

Canada has lots of oil, but it is hard to process because there is so much # mixed with the oil.

Brazil is a testing ground for biofuels. Essential what you want to do is drive the Brazilian economy into the groun, dump on it and then see if the biofuels can do their job and reclaimate the economy.

Africa is war torn so that no african nation can establish a government (peaceful) on its own with European or US investment any longer than they can stratch their butts without having a new one torn open in their left side by those of whom decided that European or US investment was the best choice.

Indonesians are crazy.

China is hiding something.

There you have it, these places are easily accesible by the US NAVY and other US armed forces.

Peace be with you.



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:31 AM
link   
bush is a good president because the whole war in iraq was there before this is actually the second one and it was planned by th u.s. government.
bush made the economy go up

they usually dont put stupid people in government places such as president they put smart and intelligent people and are surrounded by highly smart indivuals.

theres a reason why there is a war with iraq because of oil crisis in the future and everyone even america would have to pay a whole lot for oil it would be like paying 900 times more.so the economy would go down and oil will cost money and people will loose it.
and other fuels dont work as good or real actually hydro will cause smog and toxic and lethal unhealthy vapors.
my conclusion is kill all the terrorists as lethal as possible and get out of there then live in and peace.

[edit on 26-11-2006 by muhlis]

[edit on 26-11-2006 by muhlis]

[edit on 26-11-2006 by muhlis]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aramco
One of two things:

Pressure must be put on the Ruskies and A-rabs in order to export cheaper barrels of oil

or

The price of oil must be high enough to process shale, sand and tar oil.

The Ruskies ablity to export low price crude hinges on the technology developed in the search and drilling of oil in Prudhoe Bay and other harsh, cold environments where US/British companies have high stakes, as well as other European (Statoil/norwegee).

The aRABS need to lighten up and stop acting as though the control the world. If Iraq hasnot taught them a lesson, it is about time we nuke Iran

Canada has lots of oil, but it is hard to process because there is so much # mixed with the oil.

Brazil is a testing ground for biofuels. Essential what you want to do is drive the Brazilian economy into the groun, dump on it and then see if the biofuels can do their job and reclaimate the economy.

Africa is war torn so that no african nation can establish a government (peaceful) on its own with European or US investment any longer than they can stratch their butts without having a new one torn open in their left side by those of whom decided that European or US investment was the best choice.

Indonesians are crazy.

China is hiding something.

There you have it, these places are easily accesible by the US NAVY and other US armed forces.

Peace be with you.
Yes they have a lot of oil.It is putins fault for not selling or exporting it to america.

and oil doesnt cause global warming it was there for thousands of years.only 1 percent.and do not waste any money to africa.let them help themselves.leave them alone.

[edit on 26-11-2006 by muhlis]

[edit on 26-11-2006 by muhlis]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by muhlis
Yes they have a lot of oil.It is putins fault for not selling or exporting it to america.


Actually they can do with their oil whatever they want and it's been US policy for a century to affect political changes by economic means.


and oil doesnt cause global warming it was there for thousands of years.only 1 percent.


?????


and do not waste any money to africa.let them help themselves.leave them alone.


If only people would leave Africa alone things would get so much better within mere years. The odds of Africans being left alone so that they may prove how well they did before Europeans showed up is obviously ridiculously low under the current control paradigm.


Originally posted by muhlis
bush is a good president because the whole war in iraq was there before this is actually the second one and it was planned by th u.s. government.


Well i guess one can blame the father for what the son finished?


bush made the economy go up


The economy is going down and down and then some more so i am unsure how he could logically have contributed to it doing better?


they usually dont put stupid people in government places such as president they put smart and intelligent people and are surrounded by highly smart indivuals.


It's not about 'stupid' ( i don't think Bush is stupid - i consider it far more likely that he is in fact a 'robot' of some sort with programming errors ) as there seems to be reason behind every apparent madness they indulge in. These people are in fact highly intelligent if mostly evil and absolutely corrupt.


theres a reason why there is a war with iraq because of oil crisis in the future


The oil ' crisis' barely exist and what parts does is very much artificial and designed to make us easier to control by taking cheap energy out of our reach.


and everyone even america would have to pay a whole lot for oil it would be like paying 900 times more.


Actually America has plenty of oil of it's own and could easily produce it's needs for centuries to come from just the known ( but not admitted) oil reserves. The war in Iraq is all about social control.


so the economy would go down and oil will cost money and people will loose it.


Oil and the economy is not connected in any big way to start with considering the fiat currency systems we currently use. The only that would happen in reality is that more human labour would have to spent on the oil extraction but those salaries have absolutely nothing to do with the use of the oil itself. If one resource becomes more 'expensive' ( in terms of labour )for everyone the economy simply adapts with no net resultant change under fiat currency systems.


and other fuels dont work as good or real actually hydro will cause smog and toxic and lethal unhealthy vapors.


There are plenty of alternative energy sources that could give us almost free energy with no resulting pollution.


my conclusion is kill all the terrorists as lethal as possible and get out of there then live in and peace.


Then you really have not even the beginning of a idea as to what is happening and why.

Stellar

[edit on 26-11-2006 by StellarX]



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
So you obviously think my idea is wrong, but what if your wrong?


Obviously i could somehow be wrong about everything i have said so far ( i used to be wrong about almost everything i believed ) but if your interested in discovering why i believe what i currently do your going to have to do more than just point out the completely obvious.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aramco
One of two things:

Pressure must be put on the Ruskies and A-rabs in order to export cheaper barrels of oil


Why should they sell their natural resources for the price YOU want? Who invested in developing the infrastructure?


or

The price of oil must be high enough to process shale, sand and tar oil.


It has nothing to do with price as it assumes exploitation for profit? Nationalize American oil reserves and take half the military budget to develop it; they will have the cheapest oil in the world.


The Ruskies ablity to export low price crude hinges on the technology developed in the search and drilling of oil in Prudhoe Bay and other harsh, cold environments where US/British companies have high stakes, as well as other European (Statoil/norwegee).


RIIIIGHT! It's always the other guys stealing from the inventive American corporations! According to many sources the USSR's oil 'peaked' in the early 80's and they were by far less crazy sources to be pretty close to the end of their cheap oil yet here they are managing to extract their oil for a average of 6 USD per barrel in 2006 being the largest producer of the stuff in the world? Do you really think such a program is based on their theft of some critical American corporate 'technology' that America could not see sense in exploiting themselves? Explain the logic employed for me could not find it...


The aRABS need to lighten up and stop acting as though the control the world. If Iraq hasnot taught them a lesson, it is about time we nuke Iran


They do not control the world and that's well known in oil circle's. Nuke Iran? Just make sure all that foam dripping from your mouth doesn't fall on your keyboard.


Canada has lots of oil, but it is hard to process because there is so much # mixed with the oil.


It's not hard as much as it's private with little or no government backing.


Brazil is a testing ground for biofuels. Essential what you want to do is drive the Brazilian economy into the groun, dump on it and then see if the biofuels can do their job and reclaimate the economy.


The Brazilian government have been investing in bio fuels since the early 70's and there is no chance that the industry will collapse even if the oil price slumps back to 8 dollars. Independence is worth almost any price for some nations.


Africa is war torn so that no african nation can establish a government (peaceful) on its own with European or US investment any longer than they can stratch their butts without having a new one torn open in their left side by those of whom decided that European or US investment was the best choice.


If Europeans stopped trying to manipulate the entire continent things might improve but their still attempting coup's and generally inspiring genocide like it's 1754.


Indonesians are crazy.


Completely over exploited ( by the west ) is what they are....


China is hiding something.


Very descriptive description! Do you have anything of value to add or is that it?


There you have it, these places are easily accesible by the US NAVY and other US armed forces.


Apparently 21 million Iraqi's is too much to handle so one wonders what 1.4 billion Chinese or 250 million Indonesians might have to say about the matter.


Peace be with you.


Hopefully you will suffer as much discomfort and pain as you wish onto others.

Stellar



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 10:55 PM
link   


Obviously i could somehow be wrong about everything i have said so far ( i used to be wrong about almost everything i believed ) but if your interested in discovering why i believe what i currently do your going to have to do more than just point out the completely obvious.

My question was "what if your wrong?", not "could you be wrong?", But I guess that wasn't completely obvious enough. But I have new question now: Does knowing everything make you condecending, or were you that way before, y'know, back when you were wrong about almost everything?

[edit on 26-11-2006 by testingatheory]



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Some facts about the worlds oil reserves.
The total oil reserve is 3345 bil/brl (3345.000.000.000)
We have used 717 bil/brl of those (2005).
The current rate is 80 mil brl/day.
There are still about 1150 bil/brl of “easy to pump” oil and 1450 bil/brl of oil that is tough to pump up because it´s tar-oil or “vertical fields” or located 4000-5000 thousand meters (13000-16000 ft) below the sea.
If we continues to use oil at the current rate (80 mil brl/day) we have aprox. 114 years left.
But everyone knows that’s not the deal as the oil usage has increase by 2% every year and allso that the growth rate in Asia in the coming years will increase the percentage to 3, 4 maybe 5%/year.
So calculations based on these numbers say that we will have fairly cheap oil until around 2050 and the oil will be used up in around 2070.
The oil is probaly going to be fairly cheap cause the increasing number of biofuel cars running on ethanol…. the problem in the future will instead be to aviod all the alcoholics in the streets when 99.9% alcohol will be avaliable at every gas station for like $2-3 per/gallon



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
I dont necessarily think this is a good thing. It kinda puts us in a precarious position dosent it?

[edit on 23-11-2006 by testingatheory]


How so? I think continuing the use of fossil fuels will not only put us in a pretty precarious situation, it has put us into a pretty precarious situation.



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by testingatheory
My question was "what if your wrong?", not "could you be wrong?", But I guess that wasn't completely obvious enough.


I can not say that i understand the distinction so feel free to point it out me.


But I have new question now: Does knowing everything make you condecending,


When i attempt to consider what i know nothing about i feel strikingly ignorant so i presume i do not have to consider myself condescending then? Not sure why you think the issue are related but i will play along for now....


or were you that way before, y'know, back when you were wrong about almost everything?


I have spent the vast majority of my time online reading and learning from others and i only actively taken part in discussion the last two years ( only found ATS about 18 months ago ) when i realised i had far less reason to remain quite than those who had most to say.

It's not that i think i know a great deal but that i realise very many have far more to say than can be justified by what they know...

Stellar



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by MonkeyCitizen
Some facts about the worlds oil reserves.


Your first mistake is assuming these are facts at all.


The total oil reserve is 3345 bil/brl (3345.000.000.000)


That is PROVEN reserves ( a very very conservative estimate basically) and the US has thus used their proven reserve in 1977 four or five times over; it's a meaningless term.


We have used 717 bil/brl of those (2005).
The current rate is 80 mil brl/day.


Not 177.1 billion?
( and i never use these)


There are still about 1150 bil/brl of “easy to pump” oil and 1450 bil/brl of oil that is tough to pump up because it´s tar-oil or “vertical fields” or located 4000-5000 thousand meters (13000-16000 ft) below the sea.


1150 easy to pump? Who is sucking these figures from who's thumbs and who's extending their hands to be used in this way?


If we continues to use oil at the current rate (80 mil brl/day) we have aprox. 114 years left.


NO! It's 114.5 years!
( second one this year)


But everyone knows that’s not the deal as the oil usage has increase by 2% every year and allso that the growth rate in Asia in the coming years will increase the percentage to 3, 4 maybe 5%/year.


So now we are predicting what the future holds?


So calculations based on these numbers say that we will have fairly cheap oil until around 2050 and the oil will be used up in around 2070.


Define 'fairly cheap' and do attempt to take into considering that we use fiat currencies which are largely independent of energy expenditure.... These very same people have repeatedly claimed that oil with run out 'in the next decade' and being persistently and completely wrong has never slowed them down before...


The oil is probaly going to be fairly cheap cause the increasing number of biofuel cars running on ethanol….


Why bother with bio fuels if we can instead just burn the bodies of the twenty five thousand who starve to death each day? Recycling at it's very best! ( i am not serious BTW but Bio fuels is a terrible idea considering the current world order and i wish people would not fall for these schemes so readily.


the problem in the future will instead be to aviod all the alcoholics in the streets when 99.9% alcohol will be avaliable at every gas station for like $2-3 per/gallon


I can imagine a far worse reality and i reckon i speak for a large part of the, so called, western 'civilization'....

Stellar



posted on Nov, 28 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   
A question begining with "what if...?" usually implies that the answer might be a specific attempt to explain what would happen, in the sistuation in question, if say, as in this case, the counter point, was wrong. It might look someting like this:
I'd say "Hey StellarX, old buddy, old pal. Could it be that oil is being phased out?"
You'd say "Nope, don't think so testingatheory, and here is why...blah, blah,blah"
Then I'd say "Hmmm. But what if your wrong? What say you then?"
And you'd reply "Well, if I were wrong, as I used to be quite often, then here are some ideas about what ramifications might be instore for us. But I dont think Im wrong."
Then I'd say "Well well well, StellarX, you old dog you, looks like were gonna have to agree to dissagree, but I nevertheless thank you for your thoughtfull ideas"

But when you say:


Obviously i could somehow be wrong about everything i have said so far ( i used to be wrong about almost everything i believed ) but if your interested in discovering why i believe what i currently do your going to have to do more than just point out the completely obvious.
It kind of just sounds like your using lots of words to say "Yes, I could be wrong, but don't point out the obvious". Sounds like the answer to a question that I never asked (ie Could you be wrong?)
See? put 'em in order and it makes sense "Could you be wrong?" "Yes, I could be wrong, but don't point out the obvious"
So there ya go, thats the difference, understand?

As for being condecending, well, thats someting that is usually detected by the party that is being condedecend upon,(that'ed be me) not the one who is condecending(thats you). However, concerning this post specifically, I am satisfactorily aware that now I am being condecending also.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join