oil will trade with demand fundamentals until supply declines measurably.
Anyone who looks at the production decline from Cantarell has to be very scared to short oil. That field alone lost 2mbpd in the last 5 years.
There is a good field-by-field production analysis by IEA here:
www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2008/chapter10.pdf
Time-to-peak and decline rate are measurably worse the more recent the discovery.
Here's an analysis of decline rates too:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5979
This analysis suggests a 2.2mbpd decline rate in production annually. If that is the case, we will be in supply deficit by next year. I would not short oil with somebody else's money. Demand will have to collapse materially to adjust.
We need to find fields equivalent to 80+% of currently producing fields in order to meet demand growth necessary for continued economic growth plus the depletion of the existing fields...and all by 2030.
The dollar will be forced to decouple from oil, period.
won't help...law school helps teach you to believe in everything simultaneously
murders by demographic that consitutes maybe 3% of the population: 54%
BAN THEM
you people should really start studying demographics.
There is no single statement that holds for all groups in the USA. break the obesity rates down by demographics such as ethnicity or race and see what jumps out.
Your biases show through pretty clearly on what you think a "fat southerner" looks like.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5827a2.htm this is nationally...in some of these high obesity areas, a large majority of black women are at least overweight, even having redefined that term to be more flattering than the same metric 50 years ago.
All depends upon the steepness of the decline curve.
Every bit of production data I'm seeing at TOD is suggesting a material C&C peak in 2005 with an all-liquids peak in 2008.
If we fall sharply, this will get incredibly ugly in a real hurry.
The fiat bulls may not have understood that these ghost tanker fleets they claim are storing oil are doing so in anticipation of something. Nothing I have seen anywhere suggests other than that production has fallen off the peak plateau. Oil may go into backwardation as a result.
Here's an analysis from TOD: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5979
2010:
Bad news: nothing but horse shit for dinner
Good news: there's lots of it
eh...China was a placeholder in between Rome and Europe post-Renaissance. Sure, they kept it together but Rome was light years beyond them. May as well call the muslims a superpower while we're at it.
As for "superpower," that's global dominance. Rome had it. China did not. Ever.
China will always be a regionally significant nation. As it has been. But, there's no room for superpowers in a future that holds contraction. Empires grow one upon another to zeniths and then things collapse.
I don't see how China's emulation of a western model of growth will make them to a superpower. I'm not persuaded by their ascent during an era where everybody did.
I mean, China? Puhleaze...look at what WE did. In the span of the time it took China to drag itself out from basically the opium wars to having some cities on par with the west if you hold your breath and have a gas mask, look what we did.
We went from the onset of the computer age to Folding@home and shit. A supercomputer costing zillions in the 1980s has less power than my son's PSP. We networked the world. I mean, sure, China went from a backwaters to some semblance of modernity, but the US was not standing still and neither was anyone else.
All boats were lifted by the tide.
The ERROR here is projecting China's past into its future. We don't do that with our own, nor Europe's, nor Japan's. People did do it with Japan and we saw where that ended - in the supply-side wall.
does this mean that Happyjoyfun "growth" is intractable? Plz say it ain't so...
fuck, here's just the first hit on world gold production
http://www.dani2989.com/gold/goldproduction2011gb.html
look at the chart; it's cribbed from USGS. A relatively significant increase in production over the past few years has led to relative price stagnation. 2011 exceeded 2001's peak according to data I saw.
unless you ppl want to kvetch about the fucking daily movement instead of the larger trends, in which case have at it.
frankly, all this means is that you are a dumb@ss.
IQ is analyzed by a lot of people, crunching tons of data and actually what you say is totally false. IQ is one of the BEST PREDICTORS in existence for socioeconomic success.
That you don't understand that what I just said IS NOT equivalent to "higher iq = higher success" only means that YOU don't have a high IQ.
Wealthy parents tend to be smarter than average. They are evidence in FAVOR of the trend WRT IQ, not opposition of it. Smarter guys tend to make more money and get hotter chicks to bear their offspring.
What this ends up meaning is that the upper class gets taller, prettier, smarter, and wealthier as a matter of basic biological breeding. The under class goes the opposite direction.
You see this if you are willing to look. It's not a comfortable realization for marxists, which is why most of ZH struggles to accept human biodiversity.
sorry, don't let the FACTS get in the way of your daily chicken little hysteria
no; actually it is YOU that are the idiot.
ANY fast-spectrum gen 4 reactor can consume actinides and transuranics; the engineering problems with this fuel cycle are nontrivial. LFR is supposed to be online in 2015. SCWR are under development. Other Gen 4 technologies do not exist yet.
The problem is processing the spent fuel, jack@ss. You can't just dump this stuff in and close the lid like this is a Mr. Fusion.