Guest smack-down by David Middleton
Hat tip to Clyde Spencer…
The Oil Age Is Coming to a Close
Noah Smith
Bloomberg October 29, 2019(Bloomberg Opinion) — The oil industry faces an uncertain future. The world is rapidly waking up to the severity and immediacy of the threat from climate change. At the same time, electric vehicles are getting cheap enough to compete with internal-combustion engines. BloombergNEF expects electrics to begin taking over in about a decade:
[…]
Yahoo! Finance
Noah Smith is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He was an assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, and he blogs at Noahpinion.
Bloomberg
Which is it?
Does “the oil industry face an uncertain future”? Or is “the Oil Age coming to an end”? “The Oil Age is coming to an end” doesn’t sound very uncertain to me. Or maybe Former Professor Smith listened to too many Doors albums in college (I know I did)…
The future’s uncertain and the end is always near…
Jim Morrison, The Doors, Roadhouse Blues, 1970
Before “electrics begin to take over,” they first need to top Ford F-Series pickup trucks.
EV’s may be taking over in the parking lots of the ivory halls of academia and LaLa Land of BNEF blogging, but the developing world likes SUV’s.
Oct 23, 2019
SUVs: A Reality Check On Oil Use And CO2 EmissionsJude Clemente Contributor
Energy
I cover oil, gas, power, LNG markets, linking to human development.The never-ending spirit of wanting a more enjoyable and easier life is a constant reality that far too many of us involved in our energy-environment discussion unwisely choose to ignore.
A perfect example of this is SUVs: gas-guzzling Sport Utility Vehicles that are increasing both oil demand and CO2 emissions.
Much bigger, much safer, and much more fun to drive, the harsh fact for some is that people love SUVs.
The Paris-based International Energy Agency gives us a much-needed reality check on SUVs, oil demand, and the corresponding CO2 emissions.
SUVs are becoming more popular in the emerging economies of the world, where urbanization and expanding middle classes are giving more people more access to buy.Many see SUVs as a symbol of wealth and status.
And why not?
Even environmentalists Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Mayor De Blasio love oil-swilling SUVs.
[…]
Forbes
Jude Clemente actually understands the energy industries… as opposed to the to the former professor of finance, who seems to be clueless about… everything…
Meanwhile, concerns over groundwater pollution are leading to growing calls for a ban on hydraulic fracturing, the main source of increased U.S. production during the past decade.
Former professor of finance
The former professor of finance is almost half right. Frac’ing is the leading “source of increased U.S. production during the past decade.” The second-leading source is the deepwater of the Gulf of Mexico, where “shale” scale frac’ing isn’t a factor (1)(2)(3).
However “concerns over groundwater pollution” are only “leading to growing calls for a ban on hydraulic fracturing” from left-wing (Marxist) politicians. There is no evidence whatsoever that frac’ing is any threat to groundwater.
Can anyone guess how many times I’ve heard this sort of thing the past 38 years?
Reduced demand for crude will send prices plunging, cutting into profits at oil extractors and refiners. Share prices of oil majors have drifted lower in recent years:
[…]
Workers in the energy industry need to be prepared for this shift. For knowledge workers, such as geologists, chemists and software engineers, this means cultivating technical skills that can be useful in other fields such as information technology, pharmaceuticals, health care or finance.
Former professor of finance
Clearly, this former professor of finance doesn’t know Jack Schist about the oil industry. The oil & gas business follows a “boom & bust” cycle. High oil prices reduce demand relative to supply. Low oil prices reduce supply relative to demand, ad nauseum. Shares of most oil companies have been beaten down since 2014-2015 because the price crash destroyed a lot of equity. If “reduced demand for crude” sends “prices plunging,” it will spur an increase in demand. That’s how business works. Maybe they don’t teach this in former professor of finance school.
While the oil industry certainly employs some chemists and software engineers (although, I’ve never worked for a company that did), the “knowledge workers” primarily consist of petroleum engineers, geologists, geophysicists, accountants, lawyers, petroleum land management professionals and compliance specialists. At least he mentioned geologists. Cyclical downturns have led to several episodes of layoffs since 1986 and the voluntary exodus of many “knowledge workers”. Most of the geoscientists (geologists and geophysicists) I started out with at Enserch Exploration in 1981 left the industry in the late 1980’s through 1990’s. Most went into hydrology/environmental/engineering geology, a few became schoolteachers, one became a NASA astronaut and is currently the Director of the USGS. I know of maybe 2 or 3 who went into finance… And none who went into pharmaceuticals or health care. Otherwise, no schist Sherlock… Back up plans are sort of de rigueur in this business.
This is where the former professor of finance went full Tropic Thunder.
Lower-skilled workers and fracking boom towns, however, will have a much harder time landing on their feet.
[…]
The problem will be compounded for those who live in the small towns and cities that grew up around oil-extraction sites. Americans have been less willing to move from place to place in search of work in recent decades, and big cities are no longer lands of opportunity for those without an advanced education. The decline of the oil industry may leave the country dotted with yet more decaying half-empty ghost towns, unable to pay for the upkeep on their infrastructure, afflicted with drugs and alcoholism and suicide.
Governments at the local, state and federal levels should work to prevent this unhappy future. People in decaying oil towns can be given vouchers to help them to move, perhaps to a nearby thriving college town.
Former professor of finance
Did I mention that this former professor of finance doesn’t know Jack Schist about the oil industry? What does he think Houston, Midland, Tyler and a whole lot of other oil towns looked like in the late 1980’s, early 1990’s and other bust cycles?
Did he seriously suggest giving hard-working blue collar workers “vouchers to help them move to… a nearby thriving college town”?
But… Then he sped right on past full Tropic Thunder.
The march of technology means oil’s days are numbered.
Former professor of finance
The oil industry is a helluva lot more high tech than wind and solar. Due to advances in seismic imaging technology over the past 40 years, we can literally “see” oil & gas accumulations more than 30,000′ below sea level in geological settings that couldn’t even be imagined, much less imaged, just 10 years ago. Due to advances in drilling technology, we can now drill highly precise directional wells in over 10,000′ water depths, through thick layers of salt, to hit pinpoint targets we didn’t even know were there just a few years ago.
The “march of technology” means that “oil’s days are numbered in decades, if not centuries.
I have read a lot of truly idiotic articles about the demise of the oil industry, often sponsored by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, but this one takes the cake. The former professor of finance earns a Distinguished Ron White Cross with a The Stupid it Burns Service Device and a Billy Madison Lifetime Achievement Award…
How about some Morrison Hotel?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Good grief, not that nonsense again. “Cold fusion” with new lipstick. Yay.
What’s the generator stock doing today?
Bloomberg Opinion aka BS put out in an attempt to manipulate the markets sentiments towards or away from whatever Bloomberg wishes to influence for its own profit.
Nothing, but nothing Bloomberg Opinion writes is worth a spit.
From the article: “The world is rapidly waking up to the severity and immediacy of the threat from climate change.”
Wishful thinking by an alarmist.
There’s no evidence of Human-caused Climate Change, and there is no evidence that “the world” is rapidly waking up to Human-caused Climate Change danger.
The only ones getting stressed about it are the Alarmist activists and the media, and they are getting stressed because they are starting to realize that their message is not convincing people they are in danger from CO2. I think “desperation” is a good characterization of this hysteria.
It’s now a race between VNZ and California to see who can keep the lights off the most.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oil-production-paralyzed-venezuela-apos-150000328.html
Meanwhile the Sierra Club is suing the SEC for denying too many shareholder resolutions on climate change.
Nothing but wishful thinking and propaganda. The real goal is to pack people into high density living where only the elite will be allowed private cars or homes in the suburbs. The US is just too spread out for that to happen while we still have relatively cheap oil.
If tax on gas did not exist I don’t think EVs would be very popular as they could not compete on price.
Indeed, they can’t in fact government support (such as tax credits) have more to do with EV sales than the gas tax. For Example, in Georgia, when the state’s legislature ended a $5,000 tax credit for electric cars in 2015, sales of EVs dropped from roughly 1,400 a month to fewer than 100 the month after the tax credit ended
David’s Meme checklist:
– Tommy Lee Jones Face Palm ✔︎
– Thunder Thunder Dumbest MF to Ever Live – Full Moron ✔︎
– Ron White Ya’ Can’t Fix Stupid ✔︎
– The Stupid It Burns ✔︎
– Billy Madison Insanely Idiotic-We’re All Dumber Now ✔︎
+ a 70’s music reference. ✔︎
Well that about covers them all except your:
– Caveman Next Time Do a Little Research meme.
You’re gonna need some new memes David.
Here’s a trending one with my addition text addition:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qZa1YYyRwnk-ar6fp2HvHp1UPj5HKC7B/view?usp=sharing
you left out Data laughing, Joel, which if I had it handy I’d include here.
Great article as always, David, thank you.
Very amusing, too. I love that classic Tropic Thunder clip! {:oD
Who’s the chap in the ‘can’t fix stupid’ photo, though..?
All the best. D.
Ron White
At the same time, electric vehicles are getting cheap enough to compete with internal-combustion engines
Only for as long as Governement is supporing them with tax credits and subsidies, once the Government support ends so does the “affordability”.
Well, that does it. With gas in my AO at $2.557, I’m inclined to believe – by way of empirical evidence called driving a car – that the engines designed to increase gas mileage and efficiency are prolonging the lifespan of the oil & gas industry, exponentially. (Did I use enough buzz words in that? Just askin’.)
When I put barely 3/4 of a 12 gallon tank of gas into a car and the price I pay covers 7.668 gallons and I still have change left over, who IS the loser there? Not me, the consumer! And with that kind of MPG mileage, I could likely go a month without needing to refill the tank very often unless I was using that car a lot. That extends the life of oil field production considerably, in my view. And 100 years from now, people may just be glad of it.
I’ll say what I’ve said before: Bloomberg is a control freak – an AGING control freak – who wants to tell everyone what to do with their lives, how to do it and how long they’re allowed to do it. But he’s an old man with an agenda that is backfiring on him, and in my view, is completely ridiculous. It’s worth it to pay attention to that whole group of control freaks, so that you know what they’re up to. The flip side of that control freak nonsense is that what they want to do (control everything and everybody) and what they can do (no control, period) are two entirely different things.
In the end, the rest of us will win and they’ll be seen as loons who thought they could tell everyone what to do and nobody did what they said.
David,
Thanks for yet another well written and accurate article.
I do that exception with one point (not sure if it is your’s or a quote):
“While the oil industry certainly employs some chemists and software engineers (although, I’ve never worked for a company that did), the “knowledge workers” primarily consist of petroleum engineers, geologists, geophysicists, accountants, lawyers, petroleum land management professionals and compliance specialists. ”
While I am a Mechanical engineer, not chemical engineer, I worked in the downstream (refining) and Petrochemical side for an oil company and this part of the business is dominated by chemical engineers and chemists.
Also most especially the MSM would be surprised to learn that there is a lot of technology behind the processing and upgrading of the basic crude extracted from the upstream where historically the profits are mostly made. The company I worked for had about 5 research centers in NJ, Louisiana, Texas, Canada, and England Generally employing Phd Chemists, Physics, etc. Not to mention that there are also outside companies like catalyst companies that constantly employ chemists that work to improve and develop new catalysts for better processes to manufacture fuels and all the plastics that are used in our homes and cars.
This is research and development is significant technology improvements never mentioned by the media in the news.
All of the companies I’ve worked for have been 100% upstream. As such, I often make the mistake of treating the entire industry as if it was 100% upstream.
Hey folks, I have an uncomfortable question to ask.
If the children are as bad as we think they are at basic science and recognising stupidity when it is on the street, as in XR demos. What does it say about us as parents? We allowed this ridiculous state of affairs to develop.
We can’t just blame the teachers, we have known since we were at school, teachers are too thick to teach anything. With that bitter truth already in place, it must be down to us that the next generation are so disconnected from reality so ignorant of fundamental physics.
We have failed to educate our own children!!
The Gretas’ are multiplying, it must be down to the parents…..
“Hey folks, I have an uncomfortable question to ask.
If the children are as bad as we think they are at basic science and recognising stupidity when it is on the street, as in XR demos. What does it say about us as parents? We allowed this ridiculous state of affairs to develop.”
Ultimately, the parents are to blame. I saw a report this morning on Fox that showed math proficiency had dropped several percentage points between 2017 and 2019 among fourth graders and among eight graders.
Our education system is going downhill people. It’s time to completely rethink the education system.
I see where some Lefty town in the Northeast US wants to allow 16-year-olds to vote. Why not just make it eight-year-olds. They have personal preferences, too. That makes about as much sense. “Easily manipulated”, that’s what the Left looks for.
Nobody is allowed to vote until the can correctly identify their biological gender.
( There, I fixed the world with one law (-;
Yeah but somewhere in the inevitable lawsuits, some judge will find some right to misidentify ones biological gender in the emanations of the penumbra of the constitution (in other words the judge will invent it out of his backside) to strike down your law, thus rebreaking the world.
I personally can’t control other people or what they teach their children. I *can* tell you that you won’t find *my* children out marching with XR or Antifa. They are much too level headed for that. As individuals that’s all we can really do; take care of our own business and try to be good examples/role-models to others.
Rod, if your children are out there being XR level stupid, it doesn’t say anything good about your parenting skills.
You can’t control the stupid stuff other people teach their kids, but you do have control over what you teach your own. And while you have little control over what nonsense teachers at any particular school teaches, you do have some control over whether you send your children to get taught at that particular school by those particular teachers or not (move to a better school district, send your kids to a private school of your choice, or homeschool are all possible alternatives). So yes, the parents of those children do shoulder much of the blame.
The hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) boom is not ready to end anytime soon, and actually has positive effects on the environment.
Prior to the fracking boom, the USA imported most of its oil from the Middle East, whose crude oil is very heavy and contains about 2.5 to 4.0 wt% sulfur. In order to convert such crude into useful fuel, refiners had to invest heavily in catalytic cracking and hydrotreating units, the former to break the large molecules in heavy crude to smaller molecules (boiling in the gasoline and diesel ranges), the latter to remove sulfur by reaction with hydrogen.
Fracked crude oil from West Texas and North Dakota is much lighter and sweeter, usually only containing about 0.3 to 0.5 wt% sulfur. which requires less cracking and hydrogen consumption to convert to useful fuels, less energy consumption in refineries, and less sulfur emissions.
Sulfur removed from crude oil or distillates is initially in the form of hydrogen sulfide (which is too toxic to be emitted to the atmosphere), so that refineries have “tail gas conversion units” that convert H2S to either solid elemental sulfur or sulfuric acid.
The use of crude oil produced in the USA eliminates the need to ship crude oil across the oceans, reducing the risk of oil spills. Despite the opposition of “environmental” groups to oil pipelines, they are much less prone to spillage than either oil tankers over the ocean or railcars over land.
SUV. s are popular because in the near Jungle that is normal driving today they are safer. Bit like a tank in that small arms fire is not a problem. Electric
vehicles have to be built light, so they crumble up even with a minor impact.
Only problem is that SUVs . are high, very hard to see what is ahead .
Re, the oil industry, lets not forget that oil is a lot more than petrol or diesel, oil produces so many other things jut as coal if processed rather than just burnt does too.
A bit like plastic, its not just plastic bags at the supermarket, its all of today’s
way of life. They come from oil too.
MJE VK5ELL
I think another reason SUV’s are getting more popular today is because they have comfortable back seats. Most sedans made today have very small, uncomfortable back seats. They are not really suitable for more than two people. I rode in the backseat of a Chrysler 300 not long ago, a supposed luxury sedan, for about 150 miles, and it was pure torture. Very uncomfortable. It would be almost impossible for a very large person.
I drive an SUV. 🙂
Math is useful to understand these problems and their scale. For example:
1. A barrel if oil is approx 1.7Mwh energy equivalent – ref
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrel_of_oil_equivalent
2. The world consumes 100 million x 365 barrels of oil a year. ref
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_consumption
3. Therefore the world consumes 100,000,000 x 365 x 1.7 Mwh of energy equivalent from oil.
4. The world currently generates 25,000 x 1,000,000 Mwh of electricity per year. ref
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/electricity-facts/20068
5. Therefore we can divide 3 by 4 to find how much additional energy we need relative to what we currently generate.
100,000,000 x 365 x 1.7 Mwh
———————————
25,000,000,000 Mwh
So.. lots of zeros cancel and we get the ratio.
620
——- = 2.48
250
So we need an increase of 2.48 times what we currently generate plus what we currently generate to get off oil assuming of course 100% battery effeciency. So 3.48 times current.
Is THAT All?? Only 2.48X…
Let’s see, that’s only…
150 new nuke plants +
560 new coal plants +
4500 new Nat Gas plants+
rewiring about 5,000,000 miles of lines with heaver conductors to carry the load+
thousands of new and rebuilt sub-stations to distribute the load.+
rewiring thousands of gas stations with 1k Amp service to charge all those EV’s
I’m not sure $20 trillion will be enough. But a 16 year old drop-out and a bartender told us we HAVE to, so we’d better jump right on it.
Still, if every one of the 3 million or so vehicles in Alberta was electric, and they were all plugged and charging from 120v outlets at the same time, the total load would be 4500 MW. There’s 5500 MW of unused capacity in the coal and gas generators at the moment. That’s 27,000,000 KM of range per hour of charge time, call it a million litres of gasoline equivalent, per hour, so maybe 20 million litres a day, because there isn’t always extra capacity all day. Total Canadian demand is 45 billion litres a year, so 123 million litres a day.
Yeah, lack of electricity is just not going to be the problem. Manufacturing the 60 to 100kwh battery packs for a billion full electric cars is.
We bought a plugin hybrid (9 kwh) and it works for us. A full charge takes 5 hours from a home plugin, is about 2 litres of gasoline equivalent, and costs 47 cents. And gives about double the power of the little sewing machine engine.
There’s a 40 litre tank for long trips or a zombie apocalypse. We buy less than 5 tankfulls a year, so we won’t worry if it’s five bucks a litre. But I bet you will.
The only reason card manufacturers are moving to EVs is the regulatory push to reduce allowable emission and boost fuel efficiency to unrealistic levels
It is rule by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats, especially in the EU
Help me out here. What the heck is a software engineer?
I can think of a few definitions but i would insult someone if that job description actually exists.
Rick
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineer
Rick, there’s this thing called a search engine (debeloped by software engineers, btw) you might want to try using one next time you want to know “what the heck” something or other is.
developed – darned typos.
a) won’t happen.
b) won’t save the planet even if it does happen.
Somehow I don’t think “taking over” means what you think it means.
Basic reading comprehension FAIL david
‘Does “the oil industry face an uncertain future”? Or is “the Oil Age coming to an end”?”
The OIL AGE is coming to an end
therefore,
the oil INDUSTRY faces an uncertain future.
The Industry will survive the end of the oil age, but how it will evolve is very uncertain.
David it is no great trick to WILLFULLY misread a text to make a point.
here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity
It’s a YUGE trick to miss the Jim Morrison punchline.
The future of the oil industry has always been as uncertain as oil prices and the former assistant professor of finance didn’t provide a single scintilla of evidence to support any of the nonsense he spouted on behalf of mental greentardation
Basic reading comprehension FAIL
That pretty much sums up the substance of all your drive-by post Steven. Time to start looking to that beam in your own eye rather than the mote in others.
The future is uncertain said Jim Morrison 1970.
Well he did not ave to worry long-he died 1971.
If he was in the climate business back then he would have to sell another story – Coming Ice age.
But back then we did not demand for action-it is much better today.
We take command over climate!
Lets make a change-eat nuts!
Good article, thank you David.
Fossil fuels comprise about 85% of global primary energy, unchanged in decades and unlikely to change for decades to some.
A few thoughts from the Dark Ages – 2009 and 2012.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/05/fear-and-loathing-for-california/#comment-82225
Here is a Video by warmers who DO believe in conspiracy theories (when in doubt, blame big oil).
THE CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL INDUSTRY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIGrkVoa78o&feature=related
Fossil fuels (oil, coal and natural gas) comprise over 85% of global primary energy – the remainder is mostly nuclear and hydro. Wind, geothermal and solar don’t amount to much, and neither do biofuels. It is ironic that so many people in the developed world loath energy companies, and yet fossil fuels are essential to keep them and their families from freezing and starving. Many Europeans and North Americans have bought into this irrational hatred – as they huddle in their homes during this cold winter, perhaps some of them will realize that rational energy policies and capable energy companies are essential for their survival.
Regards, Allan
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/31/earth-hour-2012-a-dissent-and-poll/#comment-802692
I have worked much of my career in the Canadian and international energy industry.
Occasionally, some imbecile will attack me and the energy industry, as evil doers who are destroying the planet. I respond that the energy industry keeps him and his family from freezing and starving to death.
It is true – shut down the energy industry and few people would remain alive in Canada, the Northern USA or Northern Europe. In our specialized modern society, everything from heating our homes to our food supply is dependent on the energy industry.
Allowing ignorant politicians to dictate energy strategy is like letting your four-year-old drive your car. Happy Motoring!
People who are young and idealistic — see a change they want in the world. Your moral outrage at them is misplaced and the kind of “beat down” that always impedes progress. You literally draw an impossible line and set imaginary boundaries. (hold on, don’t draw out the 10 Commandments of physics – we almost surely know more about that than you, we have physicists from the US Navy’s Energy Group on our team)
You are the luddites and you don’t even know it. You are letting yourself experience these emotions and justifying them with logic. You decry “them”bas innocent and you suggest they would do better to shut up, sit down and go home. There is a tinge of “spare the rod, spoil the child” logic that is sickening and hard to ignore. Are young people a tad entitled – yes, our generation made them that way by creating the materialistic culture. You created the culture, you created demand, you created what is good and God in the world. Take a look in the mirror my friend and say “it was me.”
In truth, though they have a redeeming quality. They have togetherness. They see something real — that human activity on the planet may lead to our destruction unless we veer a sharply different course- and you are not letting yourself see it – sure, hold onto a graph here or a datapoint there. They are right. Full stop. You may have seen too much to even fathom change is possible. And in your hidden misery, you take it out on them.
The truth is they are the moral force of change, and it’s working. We are in the room with large asset managers like Legal and General – they fully intend to transition society. They don’t even know it is possible… $10T in AUM have divested. We will amplify that, perhaps manifold. Divest and reinvest.
The moral force is not the technical force. You don’t expect Greta to be an experimental physicist. The experimental physicists like Dr. Johannes Conrads published 15 years ago that a new primary energy source exists in nature: https://twitter.com/EndOfPetrol/status/1185253155300347904 Where were all of you armchair scientists then? You would have decried with the same conviction “that is impossible, you don’t know what you are talking about, that goes against everything they teach.”
The technical force, a total fossil fuel replacement is coming online around the world. I’m not going to teach physics here. But mankind has always moved forward in quantum leaps, this one is the biggest since electricity was discovered.
It may be time to hedge your fossil fuel exposure.
What can you do to change the state of the world? Change yourself.
You could consider whether you’ve been wrong after all in your approach. Stop whining on a website in moral outrage at the naivety of the change makers. Transform your attitude from indignation to imagination. Support those authentic individuals who are trying to bring change to the world – whether in environment or energy. Gasp, become one?
Have you heard of the psychological concept of “projection.” We create an immediate resonance in the world from what we don’t want to see.
So I ask? What is your stake in avoiding change?
I just have a “stake” in avoiding scams.
Ha ha ha,
You wrote this fantasy:
“You are the luddites and you don’t even know it. You are letting yourself experience these emotions and justifying them with logic. You decry “them”bas innocent and you suggest they would do better to shut up, sit down and go home. There is a tinge of “spare the rod, spoil the child” logic that is sickening and hard to ignore. Are young people a tad entitled – yes, our generation made them that way by creating the materialistic culture. You created the culture, you created demand, you created what is good and God in the world. Take a look in the mirror my friend and say “it was me.”
You sound like a would be hippie……
Greta is a young girl being used for a singular purpose, a dishonest purpose, which you unsurprisingly missed. It is being financed by socialist money to con people with misleading claims, tinged with necessary lies.
Since it has become obvious the AGW “adults” propagandists have not been able to fool enough people into surrendering their individuality for the Fatherland (Authoritarian Socialism), they now turn to children such as ignorant Greta, and to Extinction Rebellion (A totally dumb organization) who are largely composed of the young with leaders who are mostly IGNORANT of the world around them.
It seems you have taken up the usual cause of wanting to force change upon the world, something the Human race never stops doing. Being a free thinking individualist is too much for you to handle, hence your idiotic screed you posted.
You want a conformity, communal herd for the “Fatherland” set up. I don’t want any part of it, because I want to live free, think freely and die freely.
First off, that piece was written at select individuals – and it was the result of tracking and interacting with many on this site for a while. Many of you aren’t in that bucket, and I apologize if you are.
>>Being a free thinking individualist is too much for you to handle
Gas lighting again?
>> You want a conformity, communal herd for the “Fatherland” set up. I
Inventing a scenario and causing a disturbance about it. Scarying us with the socialism meme. The only socialism we actually are living in is corporate. What are you doing about that?
>> I don’t want any part of it, because I want to live free, think freely and die freely.
You are fighting ghosts of an argument, about something you think I said, but which was in your own mind.
This is exactly what I was writing about.
Change for change sake is not a good thing. You want people to change, you have to make the case on how and why the change you want will be a good thing (rather than berate them for not doing as you demand) and listen when others explain how and why the change you want won’t be the good thing you think it is and then have an intelligent back and forth on the subject. You’ll have better luck persuading people that way. you’ve convince no one by demanding they change because you say so.
“Support those authentic individuals who are trying to bring change to the world”
No, we can’t do it. The change these Leftist/alarmist fanatics want to bring will destroy civilization. That’s not a good idea. You don’t want to get into the physics of it all, you said, so I guess that’s the only reply I need to make to you.
You threw up your hands pretty fast.
Start with the linked paper Tom.
It is all out there and available.
I don’t post all of that here since people have “beat down” such posts as “crazy” talk or self-serving – as per David’s reply above.
I don’t post all of that here since people have “beat down” such posts as “crazy” talk or self-serving – as per David’s reply above.
“You threw up your hands pretty fast.” as in you threw them up before you even started. You didn’t post all that stuff here because you know it’ll be torn to shreds for the nonsense that it is – revealing that even you don’t believe in it otherwise you’d have the courage of your convictions to not only post it but to attempt to intelligently defend it when the criticism starts flying. You did neither and you wonder by David replied to you as he did.
In truth,…
“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means” – Inigo Montoya
They see something real … They are right. Full stop
your saying it doesn’t make it so.
$10T in AUM have divested
You do realize the in order to divest $10T there were other institution out there that were willing to *invest* that $10T. Other than uselessly signaling your virtue, that divestment you tout accomplished ZERO POINT ZERO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkCa49I6_xw
Support those authentic individuals who are trying to bring change to the world
Being “authentic” does not make one right nor does it make the change one wants a good thing. Rather than touting change, try making a case for *how* and *why* the change you want will be a good thing and be willing to listen when others more knowledgeable than you show you *where* you are wrong and *how* and *why* the change you advocate would actually be a bad thing.
of course the biggest laugh line from your whole misguided post has to be this :
(hold on, don’t draw out the 10 Commandments of physics – we almost surely know more about that than you, we have physicists from the US Navy’s Energy Group on our team)
Not only don’t you want to discuss the physics (revealing you at least know how ignorant you are on the subject) you attempt to dodge it with an appeal to borrowed authority. You have “physicists from the US Navy’s Energy Group” on your team? great invite them to come on here and make the case you obviously are incapable of making. What’s that? they won’t be coming here? why am I not surprised.
Suggestion: many of the people on this site use logic mixed with gaslighting – taking the most simple minded position of the other person’s argument and then attacking them in the midst of their rebuttal. I can’t say why people here do that, usually it is someone who is insecure who does that.
>>You do realize the in order to divest $10T there were other institution out there that were willing to *invest* that $10T.
It is a sign of big capital moving. Markets are being bought by machines, corporate buy backs, and the Fed etc etc. The vast majority of markets are in passive investments that buy the markets. A huge amount of money just moves aimlessly (which is why the next crash will be worse) You FALSELY imply that it is meaningless. You don’t understand markets. You FALSELY implying buying is the same as INVESTING.
>> Other than uselessly signaling your virtue
This is ascerbic. You are fighting ghosts. You are proving my points.
>> that divestment you tout accomplished ZERO POINT ZERO
Stocks levitate until they don’t.
>> You have “physicists from the US Navy’s Energy Group” on your team? great invite them to come on here and make the case you obviously are incapable of making.
Nobody is going to come teach you physics beyond quantum theory on a chat forum. brilliantlightpower.com/theory
Dive in. Then go to the journal articles and experimental work.
(You have been off topic long enough, the replies are telling me you have nothing about the topic itself, just push your little off topic stuff for your dreamworld) SUNMOD
I see that YOU are listed as a Scientist, but doesn’t reveal the science degree on your Linkedin website.
https://ca.linkedin.com/in/navid-sadikali
Excerpt:
“I innovate and bring to life transformational opportunities that go unseen. I have the design, business and people skills to discover and imagine new directions and the perseverance to continue when the world pushes back.
Focus: Advocacy for a fossil fuel alternative – chemical energy source that can save the planet. Supporting transformative understanding in physics that can lead to great progress in energy, material science and chemistry. In short: involved in understanding, creating, and impact modeling of disruptive technologies that can have global scope.”
==================
No one here will try to stop you from pushing alternatives, but you will get get a push back if you continue your style of writing which is paternalistic, dismissive and even insulting. You are talking to people who are scientists, Engineers, Geologists and more.
Why don’t you just present a case for your position that is a part of the threads topic, while at the same time drop your smarmy, I am better than you overtones, which is a natural turn off.
There are a number of people here with science based degrees, people like David Middeltion who is a Petroleum Geologist, who wrote this post you have largely ignored in favor of your barely mentioned alternative energy source.
Your approach to people here needs to change if you want to get anywhere on the topic David started.
It’s clear he has no interest in “get(ting) anywhere on the topic David started”. He’s just shilling his product (or as David said “It’s an infomercial”). It’s highly doubtful he even is a scientist, based on the science-free nature of his posts so far.
You FALSELY imply that it is meaningless.
Nothing false about it. It *is* meaningless.
You don’t understand markets
your projection is showing.
Nobody is going to come
Yeah, I’d already guessed that (I’ll quote myself “What’s that? they won’t be coming here? why am I not surprised”), it wasn’t hard to guess. Based on your insipid fact-free posts, it’s pretty clear the authority you tried to borrow doesn’t even exist. You claim to be a scientist but you’ve not only posted nothing that would give anyone reason to believe that is true, you actively refuse to post anything that would give anyone reason to believe that is true. You might think you are clever, but you are fooling no one. No one’s buying the snake oil you are selling.
(Snipped the completely off topic comment, get on topic!) SUNMOD
Most of my post was about having a positive attitude and not issuing vitriol.
to borrow a phrase. Have you heard of the psychological concept of “projection.” calling people luddites, telling them to stop whining, claiming that they wouldn’t be able to understand the science (and that you somehow have a superior knowledge of the subject backed by non-existent experts – despite the fact that you’ve shown absolutely no scientific ability in any of your posts) etc.
This is in a nutshell is what I was writing about – moral outrage –
Do you even read what you write? You entire posting in this thread has been filled with your own moral outrage. Like I said, you aren’t being clever and you aren’t fooling anyone. everyone here sees right through you.
Somebody above say “we’ll rip it to shreds.” Rosy, exactly the type of environment where free and challenging ideas are cherished.
Don’t pretend you have any interest in “free and challenging ideas” because if you did, you would have posted such ideas in detail (instead of refusing to even talk about the science) and welcomed challenges instead of posting your moral outrage screed wrapped around an infomercial. That you say “I don’t write a pointed piece like that willy nilly – it is from watching hundreds of interactions and comments on this site” only confirms that you have ZERO interest in “free and challenging ideas”. As I said in one of my other replies “you threw up your hands before you even started”.
(Please no more replies to his off topic comments) SUNMOD
(Please no more replies to his off topic comments) SUNMOD
Fair enough. It’s pretty clear by now that he’s got nothing to say beyond being insulting and shilling for his snake oil project. Consider this my last response to his nonsense.
Navid – is your commentary a satire? If so, it is a really good one – thank you.
If you are serious, you are beyond help – you are writing delusional nonsense.
(He is being serious, but wearing out my patience in waiting for him to get on topic, so far he has no answer to what David wrote at all, which makes him look very weak for a guy who claims to be a Scientist) SUNMOD
It’s an infomercial.
Navid
This “breakthrough technology” was initially reported in early 2002
https://twitter.com/EndOfPetrol/status/1185253155300347904
Why would you be rolling it out in late 2019 (17 years later) as the solution with out a comprehensive list of commercialization projects and homes heated with this technology. Have they made any progress in 17+ years?
Did you note they talk about 750 C (1382 F) temperatures which I have designed equipment for but it requires more exotic/expensive materials and normally presents significant engineering challenges. Even Stainless steels have low strength properties at this temperature due to a well known characteristic as creep rupture.
Also did you know that hydrogen atoms are mentioned and that most of the hydrogen produced in the world comes from fossil fuels and all the CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere from the hydrogen manufacture.
My skepticism for you energy source comes from working in the energy business for over 50 years on a wide range of activities including working with PhD physicists, chemists on numerous research projects, which helps put a perspective on what I put my money on. I also worked on numerous bio-fuel projects none of which made it to successful commercialization despite huge expenditures of tax dollars. I even helped design some large demonstration equipment for CO 2 capture 10 years ago which works on small scale but yet to be commercialized for some reason.
There is a huge step from lab experiments and press releases intended to get funding and Commercialization which requires a lot of Engineering and cost benefit analysis.
Agree the Navy should be looking long term for energy to move their ships and planes but don’t expect anything for many decades.
Sadikali
You said, “The learning curve for new innovation is decades.” Is that why we are still waiting for the internet to take off?
Technical, facts, etc…
a) Society is outlawing fossil fuels
b) There are good reasons for that
c) A new energy source from atomic hydrogen exists and many companies are working on it. Many are secretive about it including 3 letter agencies. This energy source is already is in the field, cheaper, more energy dense, and clean unlike fossil fuels. Think 500kW/m3 at minimum in gen 1.
d) The large asset managers are transitioning away from fossil fuel investments – however strong the merits of that are not (and not so strong if we dont have c)
e) With higher energy density sources than fossil fuels we need to start to imagine a planetary cleanup and move to sustainability the would be unprecedentedly positive – thus the young engineers must be enlisted
A multi-trillion transition is already underway, with divestment leading investment.
Am I talking my book, of course!
If you have something to contribute professionally we can talk more. But everything you need to know has been explicated by (SNIP, no more advertising the website) SUNMOD
A) Environmentalists have been trying to outlaw so called “fossil fuels” for years, they fight Nuclear power as well. Most people still prefer “fossil fuels” and willing to support it.
B) Funny that you didn’t say what those reasons are…..
C) No mention of Atomic Hydrogen as an energy source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/atomic-hydrogen
Hydrogen GAS as a fuel for cars and homes, have not excited many due its numerous technical problems and inherent danger.
D) No evidence presented, but a lot of evidence that many new “fossil fuel” power generation are being built around the world.
Are 1,600 new coal-fired power plants being constructed today?
https://www.politifact.com/west-virginia/statements/2019/sep/20/cecil-roberts/are-1600-new-coal-fired-power-plants-being-constru/
At least 458 to as high as 903 new Coal Power plants are being built. Natural Gas for homes are on the increase too.
E) What Nuclear Power generation, Thorium, Fusion power….., snicker. Why are you ignoring them?
So far you have produced a lot of babble with ZERO evidence to support it.
You have never presented a case against Davids post at all, could it be because you have no argument to offer against what he wrote OR, could it because you are here to shill for your alternative power source you are so hilariously freaking excited over?
Pathetic effort from an alleged scientist.
B) Funny that you didn’t say what those reasons are…..
Heh, yeah. He’s strong on assertion but non-existent on details.
You just saw the moderator SNIP a website with experimental and theoretical papers. Back earlier in the thread was a link to a theoretical paper by German Johannes Conrads – as expected nobody mentioned it. If you want to study science go read the papers on hydrino energy in the Journal of Hydrogen Energy and elsewhere. I am bringing it to your attention and you are raging out because there is something you don’t know… go read the original message – don’t attack people who are authentic, transform your attitude from indignation to imagination
>> babble, hilariously freaking excited over, alleged scientist, shill
See what I’m saying? These jokes are attacks. Nobody is free to discuss anything when you can’t behave with civility.
(You have a big problem with getting on topic, you have been snipped and asked to get on topic, you ignored my warnings, now I will inform the owner of the blog about your several POLICY warnings you have ignored:
“Some off topic comments may get deleted, don’t take it personally, it happens. Commenters that routinely lead threads astray in areas that are not relevant or are of personal interest only to them may find these posts deleted.”
“Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, sockpuppetry, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion may get deleted…”) SUNMOD
I see that Navid, has decided to present a dishonest misleading claim, this is his complaint he made:
“>> babble, hilariously freaking excited over, alleged scientist, shill
See what I’m saying? These jokes are attacks. Nobody is free to discuss anything when you can’t behave with civility.”
Here is what I actually wrote that he responded to:
“So far you have produced a lot of babble with ZERO evidence to support it.
You have never presented a case against Davids post at all, could it be because you have no argument to offer against what he wrote OR, could it because you are here to shill for your alternative power source you are so hilariously freaking excited over?
Pathetic effort from an alleged scientist.”
They are attacks on what you WRITE about and how you BEHAVE over what you think and write about.
Meanwhile you completely ignored my A-E reply to YOUR rare on topic post………., LOL
Meanwhile you completely ignored my A-E reply to YOUR rare on topic post………., LOL
Indeed. if you read over his replies, he consistently skips over the most substantive parts of posts in order to focus on cherry picked bits to push his martyr narrative that people are somehow “gaslighting” him (another word for which the Montoya quote would be apt) and that nobody “wants to discuss anything”. The fact is he’s the one refusing to discuss anything of substance and instead tries to argue by assertion and borrowed authority.
There are people on this board who don’t engage in civil discourse. Form is as important as the function . Remember – I didn’t attack anyone personally, I said there is a general need to change attitudes.
To the substance of the topic – is the fossil fuel industry coming to a close – I introduced new forward looking ideas that make this possible and imminent. Two mega trends. They were rejected like a virus and led to the classic distortion and attacks:
– because you are here to SHILL for your alternative power source you are so hilariously freaking excited over?
– So far you have produced a lot of BABBLE with ZERO evidence
– HAWKING snake oil.
– hijacking for your infomercial
I’m not trying to teach physics or divert from the subject at hand so I gently introduced some new ideas. Two links and many facts were introduced. It is a valid line of reasoning, and almost any idea is rejected like a virus – with the ensuing personal attacks.
This is a chat board. A chat board! You get a chance to learn, just be nice like you would in the real world if your kids were on the other end.
If you don’t believe new energy tech is real, go ask Google why they are working on it (see MIT Tech review), go ask tens of companies why they are working on it. If you believe a new primary energy source may exist, then you are 50% of the way there.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/arm-waving