Seeking Alpha

Americans are in "peak denial about peak oil," seeing no looming crisis as they fill up their...

Americans are in "peak denial about peak oil," seeing no looming crisis as they fill up their gas-guzzlers at $2.60/gallon. But Jim Quinn sees oil at $200/barrel within five years, as the consumption curve continues upwards and the production curve stays flat. And like the housing collapse or the financial system collapse, "Americans won’t see it coming."
Comments (17)
  • davidingeorgia
    , contributor
    Comments (2713) | Send Message
     
    The only people who seem to be in denial are the peak oil enthusiasts.
    3 Sep 2010, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • coloneldebugger
    , contributor
    Comments (890) | Send Message
     
    Then let's see Mr Quinn buy a few thousand shares of UCO.
    3 Sep 2010, 02:56 PM Reply Like
  • SaBiN
    , contributor
    Comments (37) | Send Message
     
    I think by "Americans won't see it coming" is really in regards to the value of the dollar and how Asia will easily and quickly use oil American's don't use.

     

    The basic understanding is that there needs to be more energy for more people and there are only a limited resources. America is behind the curve, we've been spending on wars to take over oil rich nations when we should've used that money to make more efficient cars or rail systems.

     

    Oil will go higher, but the biggest impact will be in America because we're so used to burning it willy-nilly. That will be a huge slap in the face to all the monster truck drivers racing around town. Get gas to $3 or 4$ and notice how those folks drive. Meanwhile the folks in other countries who focused on conservation vs. imperialism will thrive as they're more prepared.
    3 Sep 2010, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • dw57
    , contributor
    Comments (507) | Send Message
     
    while peak oil will happen (oil is finite, and it takes 400 millions to make more in conditions we don't have). problem will be is the current collapse in demand going to keep going and will it stay ahead of the decreasing production?
    3 Sep 2010, 03:03 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12751) | Send Message
     
    When shale-oil reserves are included, the U.S. has the world's largest oil reserves and the second-largest natural gas reserves, plus the world's largest coal reserves.

     

    So, if the U.S. finds itself priced out of and in short supply of energy, it will have only its own suicidal worship of leftist ecological utopia to blame and will deservedly suffer.
    3 Sep 2010, 03:11 PM Reply Like
  • SaBiN
    , contributor
    Comments (37) | Send Message
     
    Think EROEI....

     

    If it takes 40 barrels of oil to extract 100 barrels vs 1 barrel to extract 100 in Saudi fields, do you think the price might have an impact on American "Monster Truck" or "McMansion" behavior?

     

    Ohhh... and with all these miracle sciences the uninformed below keep pumping, why aren't we doing them now?

     

    We're even turning our food into energy, at some point the scale will tip and the gas guzzlers go bye-bye...
    4 Sep 2010, 04:57 PM Reply Like
  • Jasper M
    , contributor
    Comments (1652) | Send Message
     
    Ever-upward consumption curve = myth of inelastic demand.
    Silly, silly.

     

    I wish someone would publish stats on US oil consumption before and during the last Depression. Would probably help Mr. Quinn et al with some perspective.
    Or then again, maybe not. Beliefs founded in religious faith can be hard to shake.
    3 Sep 2010, 03:27 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3314) | Send Message
     
    I guess nobody taking into consideration the fact oil inventories are at an all time high.

     

    Cheap and plentiful Nat Gas will keep prices in check.

     

    If oil was not traded as an asset class it would likely be going for $25 a barrel.
    3 Sep 2010, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • gatekeeper
    , contributor
    Comments (72) | Send Message
     
    Didn't someone project $200 oil for today, around 5 years ago?
    3 Sep 2010, 04:44 PM Reply Like
  • davidingeorgia
    , contributor
    Comments (2713) | Send Message
     
    IIRC, the first sighting of the "we're running out of oil" alarmist was in the 1920's or thereabouts...seriously.
    4 Sep 2010, 09:01 AM Reply Like
  • Duude
    , contributor
    Comments (3358) | Send Message
     
    I'm more of the belief that production was temporarily out of line with demand back in 2008. This recession has reduced world demand enough to allow more critical supply to catch up with a likely slow recovery in demand to match the slow world recovery. New supply is discovered all the time. If not a greater supply coming from the oil sands in Canada, we have Iraq and Brazil production accelerating over the next few years. Add to that new sour crude refining capacity that is now online that wasn't available in 2008. This is actually a very big deal due to the greater supplies of sour crude but previously not enough capacity to refine it. When oil demand was at its peak, Saudi Arabia had more available for the market but no buyers due to a lack of refining capacity.
    3 Sep 2010, 05:41 PM Reply Like
  • dw57
    , contributor
    Comments (507) | Send Message
     
    and nobody needed it as their was lack luster demand for oil based products. gas consumption is way down,.
    3 Sep 2010, 05:45 PM Reply Like
  • Angel Martin
    , contributor
    Comments (1291) | Send Message
     
    This article is silly, coal to gasoline conversion is feasible at less than $200 per barrel, and the US has the world's largest reserves of coal...
    3 Sep 2010, 06:21 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12751) | Send Message
     
    Angel:

     

    But.......

     

    But, if nobody is permitted to drill for oil, drill for gas or mine coal, all while we kneel, chanting ecological prayers, then, it matters not what the rational economics of anything might be.
    3 Sep 2010, 06:41 PM Reply Like
  • zorrba
    , contributor
    Comments (397) | Send Message
     
    Scientific American had an article a few years ago about how caverns in the south west west could hold compressed air pumped in by solar power. One hundred square miles of desert solar could meet all U.S. energy needs. Then we have wind and geothermal and wave energy to boot. Energy could be sent efficiently over long distances to cities by direct current. The technology exists to move every vehicle to batteries in a system supported by local renewable energy based electric recharging stations.Unfortunately the oil based political/industrial/m... financial structures would be obsolete, so they fight against sunlight in order to destroy the arctic and open up more oil exploration. This will kill millions in the future as the ocean conveyor stops and the food cycle to plankton ends, killing ALL life in the oceans. "A new system is a hard thing to put into place, it is opposed by those that would be disadvantaged by the new system and it receives no support from those that would benefit."
    -- Niccolo Machiavelli
    4 Sep 2010, 03:25 PM Reply Like
  • fibo777
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Nobody can really prove whether oil is not a renewable energy resource or not. So there is no need to scream about the peak. There actually might be oil for another 200 or even thousand of years. Why should we listen just to one opinion.

     

    www.youtube.com/watch?...
    6 Sep 2010, 08:11 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (12751) | Send Message
     
    From all the leftist ranting in the media one would be led to believe that oil resources are rapidly dwindling. In fact, proven oil reserves are, at this moment, at their highest level in recorded history.
    6 Sep 2010, 08:24 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|