Independence (Day) from fossil fuels

[JiggsCasey]

The environuts also love to trot out the tired old "peak oil" mantra.

Well, maybe the really dumb ones. I think once a human being gains functionality in more than 5 brain cells, even they aren't stupid enough to trot that pony out anymore. They can still be an environut of course, they just aren't stupid enough to fall for the cult of peak oil at that point.

The worst part about you, Texas oil nerd, is that you're not only tragically wrong in every aspect of the energy:economy symbiosis, and that you're SUCH a complete dick about it all, but you're also attempting to misinform the unwitting at every turn.

You:

STFU and GTFO

 

[JiggsCasey]

Are you really so stupid as to miss the point, or is my reliance on historical fact so far outside your religions teachings that they have nothing for you to cut and paste?

Discoveries declining was EXACTLY why there were claims of running out, pre WWI. As for your 40 year claim, that is incorrect as well. Global peak oil discoveries (flowing oil now, not that mining operation in Alberta) peaked in 1935. This is using the standard Colin Campbell backdating technique to hide the size of reserve growth of course. So discoveries of oil have been declining since that year, which puts declining discoveries at 76 years. Perhaps I can recommend a math course for you as well?

LOL... show a link backing up your laughable claim for once in your sorry posting existence, or admit that the only thing you're good at is defrauding those here who don't know any better (Ace & Gary, i.e. Samson and Westfall).

In the meantime, I'll show you a few more sources than merely Campbell's, mmm-kay, douchie?

As represented in the following figure, global oil discovery peaked in the late 1960s. Since the mid-1980s, oil companies have been finding less oil than we have been consuming.​

Perhaps Exxon is lying, even though they lead your cult of denial.

http://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:169774

Surely, Uppsala Univ. is in on the "conspiracy" to "pretend" world discoveries peaked in the late 1960s also. Unsure who is funding their "fraudulent" research, however.

One more thing, tough guy: You can trumpet victory all you like simply because I'm not a message board nerd like you are. I'm sorry I don't spend every waking day putting your daily fraud in proper persective, but I have far better things to do with my time than debate on a random message board like you do. When I have time to kill and nothing better to do, it's a catharsis to deal with RW nonsense. You being a perfect example. It takes me about 5 minutes to dissect your latest horse shit. ... If that means I visit twice a month, so be it. But you don't ever "win" the discussion based on attendance. The fact that every time I make an appearance, you send yourself text alerts and hammer out the word "parrot" 50 more times. Could you BE more of an insecure loser?

Every time the rock is lifted off your bloated claims, the bugs scurry for shade. At this point, everyone here but Ace & Gary knows you're completely full of shit.

 

[RGR]

Perhaps Exxon is lying, even though they lead your cult of denial.

This is the classic, "lets only count the red shoes, womens, size 9, and claim that we are running out of them" graph.

It is smarter than you are. Notice it does say "conventional" in the title. Is there any reason why your church only counts oils of a certain density? Or is that too difficult of a question for a parrot?

Surely, Uppsala Univ. is in on the "conspiracy" to "pretend" world discoveries peaked in the late 1960s also. Unsure who is funding their "fraudulent" research, however.

Name a single oil field that Uppsala University has ever discovered. Drilled. Completed. Produced. Been asked by Ryder Scott to evaluate. Just one will do.

Tell us Jiggsy, of what value are studies done by people who have zero experience in the field in question?

The fact that every time I make an appearance, you send yourself text alerts and hammer out the word "parrot" 50 more times. Could you BE more of an insecure loser?

Certainly with the censorship policies at your church forums this is a wonderful place to hang out. Haven't been censored once here, unlike your churches where censorship and random editing are the norm, lest the congregation starts thinking for itself.

 

[JiggsCasey]

Perhaps Exxon is lying, even though they lead your cult of denial.

This is the classic, "lets only count the red shoes, womens, size 9, and claim that we are running out of them" graph.

It is smarter than you are. Notice it does say "conventional" in the title. Is there any reason why your church only counts oils of a certain density? Or is that too difficult of a question for a parrot?

Surely, Uppsala Univ. is in on the "conspiracy" to "pretend" world discoveries peaked in the late 1960s also. Unsure who is funding their "fraudulent" research, however.

Name a single oil field that Uppsala University has ever discovered. Drilled. Completed. Produced. Been asked by Ryder Scott to evaluate. Just one will do.

Tell us Jiggsy, of what value are studies done by people who have zero experience in the field in question?

The fact that every time I make an appearance, you send yourself text alerts and hammer out the word "parrot" 50 more times. Could you BE more of an insecure loser?

Certainly with the censorship policies at your church forums this is a wonderful place to hang out. Haven't been censored once here, unlike your churches where censorship and random editing are the norm, lest the congregation starts thinking for itself.

I think you've played every failed card in your arsenal in one piss-poor post.

- but, but, you're not counting the extra expensive oil discoveries!!!! why not??? (because nothing is more efficient nor abundant as oil has been)
- the source doesn't count, because it doesn't actually do the legwork of extraction, refinement, delivery, etc. (lol... wow, ok)
- you're just a zealot!!! (irony, little wildcatter ... irony)

By your logic, Bill Parcels never kicked a field goal, nor completed a pass against zone coverage, so he can't know a thing about football.

Tell me, is Warren Buffet a part of my alleged church? He admitted global oil production shortfall just this year. No doubt you know more than he does.

 

[Dot Com]

Addiction to oil was even recognized by the last Repub Pres. We keep putting all out eggs in one basket and subsidize the very companies who recorded record profits will mean disaster. Status quo isn't a good strategy here.

 

[Bullhornman]

Addiction to oil was even recognized by the last Repub Pres. We keep putting all out eggs in one basket and subsidize the very companies who recorded record profits will mean disaster. Status quo isn't a good strategy here.

Tell that to the conTards.

 

[westwall]

Addiction to oil was even recognized by the last Repub Pres. We keep putting all out eggs in one basket and subsidize the very companies who recorded record profits will mean disaster. Status quo isn't a good strategy here.

Simple, stop driving. Take your house off the grid and if enough people do that the use of oil will plummet. The US has allready reached peak gas usage, we have been using less gas every year for the last 5 years. Keep it up.

 

[daveman]

Addiction to oil was even recognized by the last Repub Pres. We keep putting all out eggs in one basket and subsidize the very companies who recorded record profits will mean disaster. Status quo isn't a good strategy here.

Addiction to oil was even recognized by the last Repub Pres. We keep putting all out eggs in one basket and subsidize the very companies who recorded record profits will mean disaster. Status quo isn't a good strategy here.

Tell that to the conTards.

You guys might have a little credibility of you'd let us exploit our own resources.

 

[RGR]

- but, but, you're not counting the extra expensive oil discoveries!!!! why not???

I am counting them parrot. The cheap oil is the oil already found. And that is where most new discoveries of oil are coming from nowadays, your inability to understand the EIA website aside.

The companies have known about this oil for years, and after they skim off the light and sweet, they then produce the heavy and ugly.

Both are oil. Both were discovered before that incident between you and mommy and her 'puter. Read a book already, learn to google, pay attention to something other than the propaganda of the day. How many trillions of barrels does this game have to cover before even the half wits notice?

US: BP commences Ugnu formation heavy oil test on Alaska's North Slope

 

[rdean]

Wonder if the conservatives realize that the U.S. only has @ 4% of the worlds oil resrves? You can only "drill baby drill" for so long. Why do they "cling" to oil at the expense of seeking out alternative sources?

They like the idea of dependency. For all their boasting about being "independent", they are the most dependent group of people in America. A lack of education does that. Oh, I'm sorry, I forget. They have Bible degrees.

 

[Mr. H.]

The neat thing about the oil business is that Bucktard Jr. from No-ville, U.S. has little issue in finding a 2 barrel/day oilwell out in the middle of a cornfield. It's a decent living especially at $80/barrel.

What's even neater is that there are nearly a half million such oilwells scattered across our lands.
Marginal wells constitute a considerable portion of U.S. oil production- and each one contributes so much to Mr. Bucktard Jr., his wife and kids, the farmer that collects the royalty, the local taxing district, the state's tax base, and the nation's treasury. Buck boy Jr. purchases his equipment and supplies from local vendors who themselves have wives and kids. You get the picture.

Don't discount marginal discoveries. Filling a bottomless bucket begins with a single drop. Ants are good at shit like that- building mounds with grains of sand. A journey begins with a single step. And so on. Folklore stuff.

 

[daveman]

They like the idea of dependency.

The reality is that the left prefers dependence. You won't let us exploit our own resources, you won't let us build new nuke and hydro power plants, you want to eliminate the use of coal.

Wind and solar are never going to replace the sources you want to eliminate. NEVER.

So you're keeping us dependent on foreign sources.

For all their boasting about being "independent", they are the most dependent group of people in America.

...says the guy who wants the government to make all his decisions for him, cradle to grave.

A lack of education does that. Oh, I'm sorry, I forget. They have Bible degrees.

Still claiming that 3% of all colleges give out more degrees than the other 97% put together, huh?

Derp, why do you keep lying when reality so clearly contradicts what you say? Are you really so simple-minded that you think your words define reality?

Yes. I think you are.

 

[JiggsCasey]

- but, but, you're not counting the extra expensive oil discoveries!!!! why not???

I am counting them parrot. The cheap oil is the oil already found. And that is where most new discoveries of oil are coming from nowadays, your inability to understand the EIA website aside.

The companies have known about this oil for years, and after they skim off the light and sweet, they then produce the heavy and ugly.

Both are oil. Both were discovered before that incident between you and mommy and her 'puter. Read a book already, learn to google, pay attention to something other than the propaganda of the day. How many trillions of barrels does this game have to cover before even the half wits notice?

US: BP commences Ugnu formation heavy oil test on Alaska's North Slope

LOL. This from the fucking retard who dismisses net energy as a factor in determining efficiency.

If you have 500 billion barrels of synthetic oil that returns a paltry 2.5:1 EROEI... And I have 100 million barrels of sweet crude that returns 35:1 EROEI, who's economy is going to have an easier time expanding?

For the 100th time, Capt. Nothing to See Here: You can't take an apple and call it an orange. Inflating U.S. reserves by suddenly (and conveniently) including extra heavy, enormously expensive "oil" from rock and clay formations doesn't change the equation that way you hope.

The global economy runs on cheap energy. Unfortunately, synthetic oils from bitumen, or kerogen are not "cheap," nor are their production rates nearly enough to make a dent in our overall consumption.

 

[Samson]

- but, but, you're not counting the extra expensive oil discoveries!!!! why not???

I am counting them parrot. The cheap oil is the oil already found. And that is where most new discoveries of oil are coming from nowadays, your inability to understand the EIA website aside.

The companies have known about this oil for years, and after they skim off the light and sweet, they then produce the heavy and ugly.

Both are oil. Both were discovered before that incident between you and mommy and her 'puter. Read a book already, learn to google, pay attention to something other than the propaganda of the day. How many trillions of barrels does this game have to cover before even the half wits notice?

US: BP commences Ugnu formation heavy oil test on Alaska's North Slope

LOL. This from the fucking retard who dismisses net energy as a factor in determining efficiency.

If you have 500 billion barrels of synthetic oil that returns a paltry 2.5:1 EROEI... And I have 100 million barrels of sweet crude that returns 35:1 EROEI, who's economy is going to have an easier time expanding?

For the 100th time, Capt. Nothing to See Here: You can't take an apple and call it an orange. Inflating U.S. reserves by suddenly (and conveniently) including extra heavy, enormously expensive "oil" from rock and clay formations doesn't change the equation that way you hope.

The global economy runs on cheap energy. Unfortunately, synthetic oils from bitumen, or kerogen are not "cheap," nor are their production rates nearly enough to make a dent in our overall consumption.

Fascinating.

Despite all you bluster, private industry will invest $7,000,000,000.00 to move syncrude from Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast

The proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast would not have "significant impacts" on the environment, the State Department has concluded, removing a major barrier to construction of the $7-billion project

Do we trust the Squakings of Jiggs, the likes of whom have been babbling about "Peak Oil" for the past century... Or do we trust an industry that has proven to be the most profitable in the world?

 

[Dot Com]

I am counting them parrot. The cheap oil is the oil already found. And that is where most new discoveries of oil are coming from nowadays, your inability to understand the EIA website aside.

The companies have known about this oil for years, and after they skim off the light and sweet, they then produce the heavy and ugly.

Both are oil. Both were discovered before that incident between you and mommy and her 'puter. Read a book already, learn to google, pay attention to something other than the propaganda of the day. How many trillions of barrels does this game have to cover before even the half wits notice?

US: BP commences Ugnu formation heavy oil test on Alaska's North Slope

LOL. This from the fucking retard who dismisses net energy as a factor in determining efficiency.

If you have 500 billion barrels of synthetic oil that returns a paltry 2.5:1 EROEI... And I have 100 million barrels of sweet crude that returns 35:1 EROEI, who's economy is going to have an easier time expanding?

For the 100th time, Capt. Nothing to See Here: You can't take an apple and call it an orange. Inflating U.S. reserves by suddenly (and conveniently) including extra heavy, enormously expensive "oil" from rock and clay formations doesn't change the equation that way you hope.

The global economy runs on cheap energy. Unfortunately, synthetic oils from bitumen, or kerogen are not "cheap," nor are their production rates nearly enough to make a dent in our overall consumption.

Fascinating.

Despite all you bluster, private industry will invest $7,000,000,000.00 to move syncrude from Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast

The proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast would not have "significant impacts" on the environment, the State Department has concluded, removing a major barrier to construction of the $7-billion project

Do we trust the Squakings of Jiggs, the likes of whom have been babbling about "Peak Oil" for the past century... Or do we trust an industry that has proven to be the most profitable in the world?

They do sooo well that they need subsidies Seriously, they do FABULOUSLY well, profit-wise, so why the subsidies?
Obama calls on Boehner to follow through on cutting oil subsidies - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

 

[RGR]

LOL. This from the fucking retard who dismisses net energy as a factor in determining efficiency.

Last I heard you were going to give me 5 barrels of oil, if I would just give you 2 in return. I am still waiting for my 5 barrels math genius and EROEI specialist.

Might I recommend parroting your answers from a calculator next time, rather than doing the sums in your head?

 

[Samson]

LOL. This from the fucking retard who dismisses net energy as a factor in determining efficiency.

If you have 500 billion barrels of synthetic oil that returns a paltry 2.5:1 EROEI... And I have 100 million barrels of sweet crude that returns 35:1 EROEI, who's economy is going to have an easier time expanding?

For the 100th time, Capt. Nothing to See Here: You can't take an apple and call it an orange. Inflating U.S. reserves by suddenly (and conveniently) including extra heavy, enormously expensive "oil" from rock and clay formations doesn't change the equation that way you hope.

The global economy runs on cheap energy. Unfortunately, synthetic oils from bitumen, or kerogen are not "cheap," nor are their production rates nearly enough to make a dent in our overall consumption.

Fascinating.

Despite all you bluster, private industry will invest $7,000,000,000.00 to move syncrude from Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast

The proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast would not have "significant impacts" on the environment, the State Department has concluded, removing a major barrier to construction of the $7-billion project

Do we trust the Squakings of Jiggs, the likes of whom have been babbling about "Peak Oil" for the past century... Or do we trust an industry that has proven to be the most profitable in the world?

They do sooo well that they need subsidies Seriously, they do FABULOUSLY well, profit-wise, so why the subsidies?
Obama calls on Boehner to follow through on cutting oil subsidies - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Agreed: Let's eliminate all gov't subsidies.

 

[Dragon]

Who cares. CO2 is not an enemy contrary to what the alarmists will tell you. It is an essential trace gas that the worlds plants need to grow.

Westwall to drowning man: "Hey, no worries! Water isn't dangerous. It's an essential nutrient! You need it to survive! Life on earth couldn't even exist without water!"

Drowning man: "That's [glub] reassuring."

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Who cares. CO2 is not an enemy contrary to what the alarmists will tell you. It is an essential trace gas that the worlds plants need to grow.

Westwall to drowning man: "Hey, no worries! Water isn't dangerous. It's an essential nutrient! You need it to survive! Life on earth couldn't even exist without water!"

Drowning man: "That's [glub] reassuring."

Global Warming "Scientists" view testing their theories in a lab like they were Dracula greeting the morning sun in a garlic field.

 

[Dragon]

Global Warming "Scientists" view testing their theories in a lab like they were Dracula greeting the morning sun in a garlic field.

How do we know CO2 is causing warming?

Heard Island global warming test - Environmental Science & Technology (ACS Publications)

Those were just two examples that came up in a Google search for Global Warming Lab Tests. AGW is tested in laboratories -- chemical, physical, mathematical -- all the time.