OK, this is not coming from a Peak Oil nutter.  This prediction from the CEO of Occidental Petroleum.

The question is, who will take it in the shorts?  How will the oil be divied up by country?  What will happen to the price?  Will there be a bidding war?

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/05/oil-market-will-face-supply-shortage-by-end-of-2025-occidental-ceo-says.html

Oil market will face supply shortage by end of 2025, Occidental CEO says

RE

I say we harken back to the good ol' days of peak oil. Far more names in this video than just one source, making far more interesting claims, why don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 05:15 PMwhy don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Because that's the kind of falsification Faux Newz does.  This is current newz, not old newz.

RE

I will go on record and say I disagree with the CEO of Occidental Petroleum and say I do NOT think that we  will be a Short on Oil in 2025.  This because I think we will be in a deep Global Recession by 2025 and Demand will drop faster than Supply.  This will hit the economies of China and India hardest and may even lead to cheaper gas here in the FSoA.

You heard it here first. 

RE

Quote from: RE on Feb 05, 2024, 05:30 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 05:15 PMwhy don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Because that's the kind of falsification Faux Newz does.  This is current newz, not old newz.

RE

Well, yes it would be falsification, pretending it was just made, but no it isn't old news. It is the same news your reference makes, only instead of some small time CEO from a company with a billion or two barrels of oil equivalent on the books, the video I provided has like the Iranian oil minister selling the same idea, with credibility of 100X 1000X more oil to back up his credibility.

So yes, it is the same news, with a far more credible source, but yes it is irrelevant that the news is the same and close to 20 years old, the readers will never notice. They never noticed all the other times, (let alone one of the first in 1886 from J.P. Lesley, a man of far more credibility at that time in terms of oil globally than about anyone else) resembling nothing so much as a proverbial anterograde amnesia patient, and each of these pronouncements can invigorate them anew. Think of it as a public service, getting the word out 6 years after the last global peak oil in 2018 so when the worm finally starts to turn (i.e. people notice peak oil in some way and begin looking around for someone to blame), the world will be just that much more ready.

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 06:11 PM

Quote from: RE on Feb 05, 2024, 05:30 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 05:15 PMwhy don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Because that's the kind of falsification Faux Newz does.  This is current newz, not old newz.

RE

Well, yes it would be falsification, pretending it was just made, but no it isn't old news. It is the same news your reference makes, only instead of some small time CEO from a company with a billion or two barrels of oil equivalent on the books, the video I provided has like the Iranian oil minister selling the same idea, with credibility of 100X 1000X more oil to back up his credibility.

So yes, it is the same news, with a far more credible source, but yes it is irrelevant that the news is the same and close to 20 years old, the readers will never notice. They never noticed all the other times, (let alone one of the first in 1886 from J.P. Lesley, a man of far more credibility at that time in terms of oil globally than about anyone else) resembling nothing so much as a proverbial anterograde amnesia patient, and each of these pronouncements can invigorate them anew. Think of it as a public service, getting the word out 6 years after the last global peak oil in 2018 so when the worm finally starts to turn (i.e. people notice peak oil in some way and begin looking around for someone to blame), the world will be just that much more ready.

No, it's not the same news, because it's a conclusion drawn from the current conditions, not the conditions as they were 20 years ago.  Those conclusions were drawn before the fracking and tight oil plays were added to the supply.  They are no longer present to add to the supply again, at least not in that kind of quantity.  Different starting conditions change the situation, so you are comparing apples to oranges.  Or better, an apple tree with some apples left to an apple tree that has been picked for 20 years.

RE

Quote from: RE on Feb 05, 2024, 06:26 PMNo, it's not the same news, because it's a conclusion drawn from the current conditions, not the conditions as they were 20 years ago.

Correct. Same conclusions. 20 years apart. Different starting conditions. How many times can the same conclusion be drawn (end of oil, peak, etc etc) each with varying current conditions of the time going back through time to 1886 before anyone is allowed to ask the current claimant...."ah...excuse me please...but we've heard that one XX times before, how have you corrected for why all those claims went wrong in order to be sure that you aren't just another discredited toad 5 years from now?"

It is logical that the answer to that question is "Well I couldn't see into the future then, but NOW I've got it figured out!"?

It is a logical and fair question, considering how the Groundhog Day effect has infiltrated this particular topic. Anyone capable of critical thinking can see the logic of the ask, it is clear as a bell. Did the CEO of Occidental answer it? Or is this just another Ground Hog day exercise?

Quote from: REThose conclusions were drawn before the fracking and tight oil plays were added to the supply.

In 1886, sure. When Hubbert in 1936 predicted US peak by 1950? Ok. When he declared US peak in 1970 in 1956? Nope. Fracking had been rolling for a decade, and tight oil, that had been known in Pennsylvania since between 1880-1900, and according to the USGS some of those wells were still producing in the 1990's.

Quote from: REThey are no longer present to add to the supply again, at least not in that kind of quantity.

Two things. Both easy to miss in the post 2018 turmoil I suppose. The first are estimates, or estimate, from at least one organization cutting something loose very hard to find in the wild. Hard to find because it is valuable, and answers questions in an additional dimension that few bother to ask, but is critical.

The first is here. Details just how much more there is in a single small area. But more importantly, how much it costs to get it, and how much you get it for each dollar, all this always a component missing within the peak oil argument with such rigor.

The second is all the other countries besides the US (some already at work on theirs, China and Russia spring to mind) are sitting on their hands. With more LTO than the US.

Quote from: REDifferent starting conditions change the situation, so you are comparing apples to oranges.

And all the changing starting conditions lead to the same, and wrong, conclusion, then what? Just give up and allow the "Groundhog Day Analysis" to continue ad infinitum rather than trying out that critical thinking thing? Is the world really that short of folks willing or capable of this rare act?  

Quote from: REOr better, an apple tree with some apples left to an apple tree that has been picked for 20 years.
RE

Or now standing at 138 years. Or 68 if we want to allow Hubbert's knowledge of all technologies and rock types in 1956 to be the starting point. How about we just guess at how many more Groundhog Day routines might we expect? I can name 6 this century, including the one not predicted but occurred in 2018. So do i hear a 2025? Thank you Mr Small company CEO. Anyone want a 2027? a 2031? Here here, do I have a 2035!

I think if Groundhog Day is the operative idea, then recycling The End of Suburbia makes perfect sense. Without folks asking those critical questions, peak oilers will never know, they'll be happy at being told what they want to hear, again, and again and so on and so forth. It is fitting in a way, that peak oil and this proposed Groundhog Day idea fit together so well.

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 08:18 PMSo do i hear a 2025? Thank you Mr Small company CEO. Anyone want a 2027? a 2031? Here here, do I have a 2035!

Small company CEO?  Occidental Petroleum has a market cap of $50B.  It's not Exxon, but it's hardly a small company.

Maybe she's not gonna hit it perfect, but at least she's got the stones to make a prediction.  We don't have long to wait anyhow.

She might have to eat crow predicting an oil shortage. I might have to eat crow on my prediction for a global recession.  You might have to eat crow if one of us gets it right and BAU goes south.  Only one will be right on.

Diners can place bets now.

RE

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 05:15 PM

I say we harken back to the good ol' days of peak oil. Far more names in this video than just one source, making far more interesting claims, why don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Because it has James Howard Kunstler in it and Kunstler kicks dogs.  Specifically me.  That video started a chain of events that highlighted (from my point of view) with me being gang stalked by the FBI and other homeland security agents because  I compromised the operational security of a troll farm run on Kunstlers website with his permission. 

I was able to track visitors on Kunstler website and in commemoration of my discovery this website has a tracking ball in the upper right corner.  True fucking story, and that is half the reason why I have my own website and the Diner is where it now is.

I bought the video after I saw it at a Capital Hill Showing in Seattle.  A small theatre on 11th avenue.  The group discussion after the video was disrupted by an agent provocateur who wanted to sell leather kilts.  'Because the real reason for the worlds problem is the boys don't swing and get enough air'.

That video changed my life.  It still does.

Here is the CEO of Occidental Petroleum from RE's link, I snagged the video.


Two minutes in, she says everything but PAST PEAK.

Quote from: RE on Feb 05, 2024, 10:33 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 08:18 PMSo do i hear a 2025? Thank you Mr Small company CEO. Anyone want a 2027? a 2031? Here here, do I have a 2035!

Small company CEO?  Occidental Petroleum has a market cap of $50B.  It's not Exxon, but it's hardly a small company.

You have decided to forget about who I compared this small time CEO to? Which then defines her...yes...small time CEO. Mouselike when compared to an OPEC NOC. Repeat after me....order of magnitude larger is....BIGGER. TWO orders of magnitude bigger is...REALLY...bigger.

Quote from: REShe might have to eat crow predicting an oil shortage.

She certainly wouldn't be the first. Or 100th.

Quote from: REI might have to eat crow on my prediction for a global recession.  You might have to eat crow if one of us gets it right and BAU goes south.  Only one will be right on.

I never said BAU isn't going south. I've been waiting for the consequences of govenment spending during covid, inflation, out of control federal spending and borrowing to hit like a hammer. For at least a year now. I am probably as surprised it hasn't happened as those discredited peak oilers bleating how they REALLY meant global peak in 2018 instead of all those other years they brain farted on..

Thank you for validating the near impregnable quality of the Groundhog day idea. I thought it would be difficult to refute as well, based on the facts of peak oil history, it seemed a good analogy.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 05, 2024, 11:40 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 05, 2024, 05:15 PMI say we harken back to the good ol' days of peak oil. Far more names in this video than just one source, making far more interesting claims, why don't we just edit all the dates on this video and start puttig it out there again?

Because it has James Howard Kunstler in it and Kunstler kicks dogs.  Specifically me. 

Well, sounds unfortunate. Sounds like a good reason to not like the little weasel. I always thought Kuntsler (sic) was just a gadfly tool type, run of the mill Y2K doomer who went fishing for more notoriety after his technical ignorance in computer land was revealed, and went for something more...opaque.

Quote from: K-DogThat video started a chain of events that highlighted (from my point of view) with me being gang stalked by the FBI and other homeland security agents because  I compromised the operational security of a troll farm run on Kunstlers website with his permission. 

So Kuntsler was fronting a troll farm with all his idiot nonsense on Y2K and peak oil? Would you have any reason why the FBI would front someone generally foolish and easily dismissed, rather than someone useful to clicks and popularity and whatnot, like whomever the Taylor Swift of the day might have been? Michael "Jesus Juice" Jackson?

Quote from: K-DogI bought the video after I saw it at a Capital Hill Showing in Seattle.  A small theatre on 11th avenue.  The group discussion after the video was disrupted by an agent provocateur who wanted to sell leather kilts.  'Because the real reason for the worlds problem is the boys don't swing and get enough air'.

Agent provacateur? Or a peak oiler trying to make some coin on the side, selling prepping gear for those who fell for the theme it was trying to sell?

Quote from: K-DogThat video changed my life.  It still does.

I caught it only after Matt Savinar began hawking it, either on peakoil.com or his original website. Certainly in the moment it had to be taken seriously.

Quote from: K-DogTwo minutes in, she says everything but PAST PEAK.

Well, she is exactly right. Today. Global peak oil was 6 years ago now. Don't know about you but gasoline is $2.30/gal locally, you can buy it by the tanker truck load if you've got vehicles to use it all, and cosidering peak oil consequences were supposed to arrive within weeks/months.

If $2.30 gallon is what peak oil looks like 6 years in...well....I've got bigger things to worry about. Federal deficit, government borrowing, homelessness showing up locally and spreading, including on the local rail service, etc etc.

Global peak oil circa 1979 went 15 years, everyone who claimed it was in the past for those 15 years was completely correct. And then...one day...as RE said...the original conditions changed and presto! Another peak oil dispatched by more oil.

QuoteSo Kuntsler was fronting a troll farm with all his idiot nonsense on Y2K and peak oil? Would you have any reason why the FBI would front someone generally foolish and easily dismissed, rather than someone useful to clicks and popularity and whatnot, like whomever the Taylor Swift of the day might have been? Michael "Jesus Juice" Jackson?

You seriously ask why, as if 'The War On Terror' is logical?

Actually it is: The mission remains (you think it is over , take a peek, but you can look up the web address on your own) to identify people who could be potential terrorists, and put them on a list.  That is all there needs to be to it.  Cross referencing people is the way dissidents are controlled.  Basic Stazi methods used paper records.  Now A.I. is doing much of the work.  It is all about identifying the connections between people.

Come on, Kunstler has that many commenters, really?  If you think he does, grow a brain.  I don't have to think about it.  I touched the sky.

A pop figure site is not a good place to put a troll farm.  Dissidents in general do not follow pop figures.  There are exceptions:

  Yes      No

QuoteAgent provacateur? Or a peak oiler trying to make some coin on the side, selling prepping gear for those who fell for the theme it was trying to sell?

No, the delivery did not match your guess.  The personality expressed was similar to Jed Clampet from the Beverly Hillbillies.  The intent to break up the discussion was clear.  After the fact that is.  Some of the blue haired liberal ladies left speechless.  Like I told you, the boys needed air, and needed to swing free.  He made it very clear.  He was wearing one of his kilts and used hand signals.  He was not trying to sell anything, but he was pretending he was. 

Talking about your balls is not a good way to sell stuff.

Do you disagree?

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 06, 2024, 02:55 PMThank you for validating the near impregnable quality of the Groundhog day idea. I thought it would be difficult to refute as well, based on the facts of peak oil history, it seemed a good analogy.

It's an analogy, yes, but that is not what you said.  You said it was the same.  An analogy is when 2 things have similarities, but they are not the same thing.  You wanted to use the same news story over again.  Not correct. If you learn the proper use of the English language, we won't have a problem.  Some writing lessons might be helpful for you to be more precise in the use of language when writing to avoid confusion.

RE

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 06, 2024, 03:51 PM

QuoteSo Kuntsler was fronting a troll farm with all his idiot nonsense on Y2K and peak oil? Would you have any reason why the FBI would front someone generally foolish and easily dismissed, rather than someone useful to clicks and popularity and whatnot, like whomever the Taylor Swift of the day might have been? Michael "Jesus Juice" Jackson?

You seriously ask why, as if 'The War On Terror' is logical?

No. I didn't seriously ask anything about the war on terror. Was Kuntsler a war cheerleader or something?

Quote from: K-DogTalking about your balls is not a good way to sell stuff.
Do you disagree?

To be honest I have no idea. Porn stars might do it, in order to sell jock straps or something?

Quote from: RE on Feb 06, 2024, 05:49 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Feb 06, 2024, 02:55 PMThank you for validating the near impregnable quality of the Groundhog day idea. I thought it would be difficult to refute as well, based on the facts of peak oil history, it seemed a good analogy.

It's an analogy, yes, but that is not what you said.  You said it was the same.  An analogy is when 2 things have similarities, but they are not the same thing.  You wanted to use the same news story over again.  Not correct. If you learn the proper use of the English language, we won't have a problem. 
RE

So you are saying that you will happily argue the semantics because you can't refute the analogy I used? Ummm...ok. You win.