Long term OIL

[Zeke2345]

Was reading last weeks Bloomburg and came across a article about people that speculated on oil rebounding and lost their shirts.
It referenced something about China buying up oil and holding it for the future because of the cheap price.
Reason this caught my eye is,China is slowing down economically and is in a downward trend yet they should be saving off the cheap oil.
If they are not able to do that now when prices are low,whats going to happen when it goes up?

This could really hamper China and because its China the world growth.

[goinmerry]

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

[bryant.coleman]

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

Technology is not that much advanced. The alternatives for gasoline are very expensive, and many of those options can't be implemented on a bigger scale. For example, a normal gasoline run car costs at the most $10,000, while the Tesla electric car can cost anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000. A large part of the world population doesn't have the economic power to afford gasoline alternatives.

[goinmerry]

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

Technology is not that much advanced. The alternatives for gasoline are very expensive, and many of those options can't be implemented on a bigger scale. For example, a normal gasoline run car costs at the most $10,000, while the Tesla electric car can cost anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000. A large part of the world population doesn't have the economic power to afford gasoline alternatives.

Sure but if it is the future we are talking there are many possibilities that something might come up for alternative power. We dont know what can happen in those years that have been told.

[arbitrage]

Clean electric energy must come from somewhere?
 Answer is from coal and from oil again.
And the winner is nuclear power with all their pollution and possible horror accidents..
Don't count on power of sun and wind , this is small percentage even now.

[NUFCrichard]

Oil will rise over the short to medium term, almost no one doubts that.

The price now is low enough that investors are pulling the plug, fracking companies aren't drilling any more, so when the current rigs stop pumping, they won't be replaced.
OPEC and non-OPEC producers are all playing a similar game to the central banks, i.e. a race to the bottom.  They pump to make more money, then the price falls, so they pump some more!  Why would anyone invest in long term clean energy schemes when oil is so cheap?

[romero121]

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

Technology is not that much advanced. The alternatives for gasoline are very expensive, and many of those options can't be implemented on a bigger scale. For example, a normal gasoline run car costs at the most $10,000, while the Tesla electric car can cost anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000. A large part of the world population doesn't have the economic power to afford gasoline alternatives.

Well said in terms of affordability itself alternative has got backlog, when we consider the pollution electric cars are much more than gasoline cars. While running the pollution is less, During the manufacture of high power batteries the pollution caused is very high than the pollution caused by normal gasoline cars

[goinmerry]

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

Technology is not that much advanced. The alternatives for gasoline are very expensive, and many of those options can't be implemented on a bigger scale. For example, a normal gasoline run car costs at the most $10,000, while the Tesla electric car can cost anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000. A large part of the world population doesn't have the economic power to afford gasoline alternatives.

Well said in terms of affordability itself alternative has got backlog, when we consider the pollution electric cars are much more than gasoline cars. While running the pollution is less, During the manufacture of high power batteries the pollution caused is very high than the pollution caused by normal gasoline cars

But options will be the one who will take down oil. If more options will be presented in the future the long term investment in oil will go down too. High quality stone would be much better. Well everything in this world is getting depleted.

[bryant.coleman]

Clean electric energy must come from somewhere?
 Answer is from coal and from oil again.
And the winner is nuclear power with all their pollution and possible horror accidents..
Don't count on power of sun and wind , this is small percentage even now.

Coal power is the most polluting form of energy ever invented in the history of the human race. You can travel to the tier-II cities of Russia and Ukraine, and experience the pollution yourself. In cities such as Konakovo, Kirishi, Nazarovo, and Sharypovo, the pollution is so intense that sometimes it is impossible to see the sun, even during daytime.

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the cleanest form of energy.

[arbitrage]

Using nuclear power take greater responsibility for environment and human health.
Who can guarantee you won't see another Focushima or even worse Chernobyl?
Planet will clean herself from co2 and dust particles, but you need thousands of years to pass if something terrible happened near nuclear facilities.

[bitbunnny]

Clean electric energy must come from somewhere?
 Answer is from coal and from oil again.
And the winner is nuclear power with all their pollution and possible horror accidents..
Don't count on power of sun and wind , this is small percentage even now.

Coal power is the most polluting form of energy ever invented in the history of the human race. You can travel to the tier-II cities of Russia and Ukraine, and experience the pollution yourself. In cities such as Konakovo, Kirishi, Nazarovo, and Sharypovo, the pollution is so intense that sometimes it is impossible to see the sun, even during daytime.

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the cleanest form of energy.

It is the cleanest but is it the safest? What to do and how to deal with it if some incident happens, how can that be avoided? I'm a bit scared of nuclear energy but that doesn't mean that I'm against it.

[JosNekoKopa]

Who is not scared after all those events. I only can assume what can happen if we totally switch to nuclear power. Where will be dumped nuclear waste ? In ocean like before?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUYJFlObhtA

What about terrorist actions in future? This gives me a creeps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlEtQ2qlxEU

We better stick for oil for now..

[bryant.coleman]

It is the cleanest but is it the safest? What to do and how to deal with it if some incident happens, how can that be avoided? I'm a bit scared of nuclear energy but that doesn't mean that I'm against it.

Nuclear energy is safer than other forms of energy. You might be wondering how I reached that judgement, but I'll explain.

Every year, more than a million people die as a result of respiratory illnesses, as a result of ash and toxic gases which are released from the thermal power plants around the world. Since these deaths mostly occur in the developing nations, such as Russia, Ukraine, China, and India, not many of the researchers give any importance to them. On the other-hand, very few people die from diseases such as leukemia, which can be attributed to the presence of nearby nuclear power plants (even that claim is debatable).

Check these sources:

http://fortune.com/2014/11/05/the-cost-of-chinas-dependence-on-coal-670000-deaths-a-year/ (670,000 deaths per year in China, 2012)

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/Global/india/report/Coal_Kills.pdf (Total premature mortality of up to 115,000 including child mortality of 10,000 per year in 2012, India)

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-12-09/news/56879425_1_dioxide-india-urban-emissions (300,000 deaths per year in India by 2030, as a result of pollution from coal-powered plants)

[tyz]

The oil production in the United States is completely decentralized in contrary to Russia, Saudi Arabia and other states. So, there could be no coordinated production stop or production decreasing.
The government can only stop export but then the USA would consume its own oil and would stop importing. There would be no effect since the oil amount will still be the same.

I guess when that war stops and United States controls it again then oil will rise again. But technology is becoming better and better. There are many ways to do anything without the use of oil. If it takes long then oil might go down in the long run.

[bryant.coleman]

The oil production in the United States is completely decentralized in contrary to Russia, Saudi Arabia and other states. So, there could be no coordinated production stop or production decreasing.

This makes the American producers even more vulnerable to the decrease in prices. In Russia, the oil production is monopolized by a few major companies, such as Rosneft, Lukoil, Bashneft, Tatneft, Gazpromneft.etc. In Saudi Arabia, almost 100% of the production is done by the state-owned Aramco. These mega-corporations are capable of withstanding the low prices for many years. The same can't be said about the medium-sized and small sized crude oil producers in the United States.

[jaysabi]

Clean electric energy must come from somewhere?
 Answer is from coal and from oil again.
And the winner is nuclear power with all their pollution and possible horror accidents..
Don't count on power of sun and wind , this is small percentage even now.

Coal power is the most polluting form of energy ever invented in the history of the human race. You can travel to the tier-II cities of Russia and Ukraine, and experience the pollution yourself. In cities such as Konakovo, Kirishi, Nazarovo, and Sharypovo, the pollution is so intense that sometimes it is impossible to see the sun, even during daytime.

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the cleanest form of energy.

It is the cleanest but is it the safest? What to do and how to deal with it if some incident happens, how can that be avoided? I'm a bit scared of nuclear energy but that doesn't mean that I'm against it.

Would you really say that it is cleaner and safer than solar? I don't see any energy source cleaner or safer than solar, though wind might be close.

[criptix]

Clean electric energy must come from somewhere?
 Answer is from coal and from oil again.
And the winner is nuclear power with all their pollution and possible horror accidents..
Don't count on power of sun and wind , this is small percentage even now.

Coal power is the most polluting form of energy ever invented in the history of the human race. You can travel to the tier-II cities of Russia and Ukraine, and experience the pollution yourself. In cities such as Konakovo, Kirishi, Nazarovo, and Sharypovo, the pollution is so intense that sometimes it is impossible to see the sun, even during daytime.

In my opinion, nuclear energy is the cleanest form of energy.

It is the cleanest but is it the safest? What to do and how to deal with it if some incident happens, how can that be avoided? I'm a bit scared of nuclear energy but that doesn't mean that I'm against it.

Would you really say that it is cleaner and safer than solar? I don't see any energy source cleaner or safer than solar, though wind might be close.

Fusion!
Longterm it is cleaner and more efficient. But right now we need better methods of creating ultra strong magnetic fields.

[criptix]

Combustion engine is actually 19th century technology. It's weird why an engine which is only 30% energy efficient is still being used. It's ancient. Electric cars are the future. Say bye to big oil in next decades. Lithium is the key.

Yes you are may be right. but what is price for electric car- purchasing price?
Producing price per car ? Maintenance, battery ?

Combustion engine may be an "ancient" technology, but it is so pervasive because for the amount of energy you get for the cost, combustion engines are cheap and easy. I also believe electric cars are the future. I currently own a hybrid car. Comparatively, a hybrid car costs a few thousand dollars more than the exact same non-hybrid version, about $2-3k. I've more than made up that cost in the years of driving it, so it's been a sound investment.

As for electric-only, there are plenty of viable models that are not overly expensive. The Nissan Leaf starts at $29k and the Chevy Volt starts at $33k. Tesla is working on a version now as well that will start in the mid-$30k range. The biggest limitation for electric-only vehicles for me is the range. I think the Leaf is around 100 miles, and the Volt offers 50 electric-only miles, though it does run on gas as well.

Well, the killer is not only the range.  It's also the recharge time.  The average gas vehicle goes about 300 miles before needing to stop for 2 minutes to fill up.  Even if you got a car that can do that 300 mile range, it will still take you hours (if quick charging) or most of a day (if not interested in killing battery) to recharge.  Hybrids make a lot more sense, especially for heavier use in urban centers.  Idling in a regular car is basically burning gas to power your radio.

no, you would exchange your discharged battery for a recharged one at the "gas" station.
but thats all future, we need better energy sources and then we can think about switching to the infrastructure needed.

Well, yes, that would be ideal, but it's not the case right now or in the near future.  Also, car manufacturers would need to agree to a battery standard to allow the same battery to fit in any vehicle.  Otherwise, it's gonna be fun driving around on a dying battery pack finding someone who's got your pack in stock.  And I think you mean energy storage rather than energy source.  And yes that does require lots of developing.  Some would say hydrogen is the answer, and it might be, assuming they figure out a way to store it without the threat of blowing up.

no i really mean energy source, not storage.
if we would have 100% clean energy (i.e. renewables, fusion) there would be not much of a problem to switching to electric cars.
but we are on world average around 20% maybe?
* im off, its 11% EIA: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=527&t=1

I have to disagree with you on that one.  It's not the source of the energy that's impeding the electric car.  It's the ability to carry and load that energy that's the issue.  It's not like we have a global energy crisis or anything.  To the end user, the power is coming out of the outlet, regardless of whether it was generated by renewables or not.

It is not. Range of batteries are already going 300 miles. You dont need to recharge like i explained.
The problem of batteries right now is monetary and pollution cost.

But if we would have clean energy sources then the battery cost would be a good trade off.
Right now our energy comes mainly from gas and oil.

[arbitrage]

This makes the American producers even more vulnerable to the decrease in prices. In Russia, the oil production is monopolized by a few major companies, such as Rosneft, Lukoil, Bashneft, Tatneft, Gazpromneft.etc. In Saudi Arabia, almost 100% of the production is done by the state-owned Aramco. These mega-corporations are capable of withstanding the low prices for many years. The same can't be said about the medium-sized and small sized crude oil producers in the United States.

I Believe this kind of pollution do influence on people like were you said here.
But how will Fukushima influence on whole world you will never see real research results, because this kind of pollution is long term and can influence on generations to come.


Radioactive Wolves Of Chernoby
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLJuQQDPY8Y

[bryant.coleman]

I Believe this kind of pollution do influence on people like were you said here.
But how will Fukushima influence on whole world you will never see real research results, because this kind of pollution is long term and can influence on generations to come.

The negative health effects of nuclear power plants are over-exaggerated and converted in to anti-nuclear propaganda by activists who are on the payroll of the OPEC and the Western corporations such as Shell and Exxon Mobil. How many people died as a result of the nuclear pollution from Fukushima? Can you compare that number to the 1 million plus deaths, which results from pollution by thermal power plants every year?