Re: oil predictions

[ALI KADRI <akadri_00@xxxxxxxxx>]

In respect to oil there are some observations that
were made about the nineties, and these are:
World demand is increasing, with third world demand
increasing at 2 percent yearly.
Refineries are operating at 98 percent capacity, with
little new investments.
The ratio of new find to reserves was decreasing.
The OPEC supply jolt lifted and trebled prices such
that new prices would revert to a mean of 25$ per
barrel ( backwardation).
Fossil fuel substitutes are only foreseeable in the
medium term and costly, particularly, in the
developing world.
Some argue for a partial but sizeable contribution of
cheap nineties oil prices possibly contributing to
above-average economic performance.
Another relevant observation is that developing
countries experiencing a foreign exchange crunch (the
majority) tend to suffer tremendously from oil price
hikes.

 The depletedness cum limitness of the resource seem
to arise from the falling ratio of new finds to number
of digs when better exploration and digging technology
exists. When that is the case than predatory politics
kicks in "major time" and the politics of oil tend to
be humanely ugly.

With the above observation holding: there are probably
two interesting scenarios and these are:
1) The developed world splitting on the division of
energy resources in the third world ( sort of the US
and Europe differing on strategy in canaille manner)
2) The developed world closing ranks behind the US to
secure energy continuous energy resources with the US
calling the shots.
At first, the first outcome seems less probable given
Europe's vulnerability and security concerns.  The US
policy on oil follows very strict colonial patterns:
stable oil prices and stable flows at a high human and
economic cost to the producers.


--- Charles Brown <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>
> >>> seamus2001@xxxxxxxx 07/10/01 05:19PM >>>
>
> > ((((((((((
> >
> > CB: I didn't know about the chemically bonding
> contamination. How
> much is contaminated ? Sounds like a small
> percentage .
> >
> > How about taking a bunch of hydrogen and oxygen
> and combining it to
> make new water ?
> ===========
> That's where the Star Trek technology comes in.
> You'd need a quantum
> computer capable of synthesizing probability
> amplitudes from the
> Planck scale; it's not even decidable whether it's
> possible yet, let
> alone if it would ever be technically and
> economically feasible.
>
> Ian
>
> ((((((((
>
> CB: This undecidability IN PRINCIPLE stuff is weird.
> I mean does physics have to turn into the complete
> opposite of its "exacting" self , from hard to
> totally soft science ?  Social science need no
> longer have an inferiority complex. What gives ?
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/