Seeking Alpha

Old Rick » Comments » CHK

  • The Truth About Fossil Fuels and Renewable Energy [View article]
    Regarding peak oil, I first heard the "peak oil" thesis in college in he late 60s, then again during the first oil crisis (74-75). If oil prices could get long term stabilized at $75-90 a barrel, we would have oil out our ears. Oil from the Alberta tar sands and the Bakken can be profitably extracted at around $60. Drilling in the (phony and deceptively created) ANWR would do a lot. Coastal drilling off of Florida and California would add a bunch of supply. We don't have a lack of oil, we have a (intentional) lack of will. With these moves, we could cut 10% or more of our foreign dependence.
    Aug 09 15:56 pm |Rating: +1 -1 |Link to Comment
  • The Truth About Fossil Fuels and Renewable Energy (Part II) [View article]
    By the way jerrydd, I've been following solar, wind, biomass, etc alternative stuff since (probably) before you were born. In 1972, the solar cell industry was estimating that solar panels would be less than a buck a watt by 1978. Seems it didn't quite happen that way. I am a believer in T. Boone's and Aubrey's CNG ideas, but since the storage tanks required are so large to get a gallon of gas equivalent, it will only work in a smallish area around a CNG refuel station. A home NG refuel station is a good but costly alternative. Note too that the new Honda and VW diesels both get better real-world mileage than the Prius. Hmmmmmmm.
    Aug 09 14:54 pm |Rating: +5 -3 |Link to Comment
  • The Truth About Fossil Fuels and Renewable Energy (Part II) [View article]
    Good article with the exception that the author gives to much credence to the requirement to "sequester carbon". When the AGW concept is proven to be a Statist/Big government hoax in the next 10-15 years, we will look back and wonder how in the world we allowed the religion of AGW to happen.

    For jerrydd, you make a few excellent points, especially about conservation, but you lose a LOT of credibility when you engage in personal attacks (" Judging from how uninformed on basic physics, econo101 you are, you may not be smart enough.") with a few loose opinions tossed in. Note that this is the favored tactic of the AGW/enviro crowd right out of Rules for Radicals.
    Aug 09 14:39 pm |Rating: +6 -3 |Link to Comment
More on CHK by Old Rick
Comments by Ticker
AAPL, AAUKY.PK, ABT, ACAS, ADM, AFL, AIG, AIV, AKP, AKS, AMAT, AMGN, AMZN, AOB, APAC, APL, APOL, ARVCF.PK, AUY, AXP, AYN, AZN, BAC, BAX, BBT, BCS, BEN, BF.B, BFZ, BLJ, BMY, BP, BPL, BRK.A, BRK.B, BWP, BYDDF.PK, C, CAT, CB, CBG, CCJ, CDE, CDUTF.PK, CEDC, CEP, CHK, CIT, CLX, CMC,
Old Rick's
Comments Stats
212 comments
Rating: 270 (400 - 130 )