[Eco] Recycling and P&T's Bullshit

[John W. Cooper]

On Jan 31, 2007, at 13:24, Jonathan Grabert wrote:

> If you assume that there are no new discoveries of oil deposits, if 
> you assume there are no advances in technology to extract more from 
> current deposits, if you assume there are no advances in technology to 
> mine other sources of oil (like shale), if you assume that processes 
> that use oil aren't made more efficient, then MAYBE those estimates 
> would be correct. But that's an awful lot of assumptions, and they go 
> against the entire history of oil production.

 From what I've read, peak oil theories predict the production peak, and 
include those assumptions. There are a lot of assumptions, and that is 
why there is a lot of disagreement, but I *think* the predictions are 
in the hundreds, not thousands, of years. I'll look for data.
>
> Keep in mind that, when adjusted for inflation, the price of oil has 
> gone DOWN, not up.  That's hardly indicitive of a lack of supply.

This graph seems to contradict your claim:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Oil_Prices_1861_2006.jpg>

:-j

>
> J/
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John W. Cooper" 
> <jwcooper at pop600.gsfc.nasa.gov>
> To: "Eco Foundation Discussion List" <eco at lists.looneylabs.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [Eco] Recycling and P&T's Bullshit
>
>
>> On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:37, Jonathan Grabert wrote:
>>
>>> Again, we are in absolutely no danger of running out of oil for 
>>> thousands of years.
>>
>> Thousands? I thought current conservative estimates were between 50 
>> and 200 years. I'll have to look again. This will no doubt start 
>> another thread...
>>
>> :-j
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eco mailing list
> Eco at lists.looneylabs.com
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/eco
>