Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
Yes of course. The question is if it will come when the developed world is still as dependent on oil as it is now. My guess would be yes. Want to see how rapidly society changes when gas doubles or triples in price? I don't, but sadly it will probably come. This is the 'right wing' justification for alternative energy.
Eh. Usually they just rely on the idea that we're sending money to "our enemies" and that it's therefore a national security issue.
I'm not sure there are too many right-wingers with a passing interest in scientific theories, even ones which relate to economics.
Probably be in about 10 years or so.
The problem lies with the LEFT wingers . . . as you can plainly see from the comments above :p
Here is a scientific fact for your discussion on this subject;
Liquid fuels are carbon based (they are NOT fossilized fuel from the dinosaurs that died off 50 million years ago, and I don't care what the political correctness folks tell you) and as I have repeatedly said on this site and other sites – Carbon is one of the most abundant and renewable and useful elements in the universe, and especially this planet. Therefore, and it has been done before and rather recently at that, we can make liquid crude oil from anything that has carbon in it. Therefore I do not think we need to worry about running out of carbon based liquid fuels anytime soon.
FYI – Man-made crude oil is much easier and more economically feasible than producing any other synthetic fuel that we have made to date.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. B)
Not sure what is so plain about the comments above that they lean "left-wing". Peak oil either is or isn't. That factor by itself has very little to do with politics and more to do with the interpretation of scientific data or theory.
As many times as you throw the labels around, "left-wing" or liberal or whatever, you might want to start looking at what it means or the kind of political assessments it provides. It does not mean "a person who disagrees with me", just as "a Nazi" does not mean "a person who disagrees with me." I'm not entirely sure what Jared is politically (and I'm of the opinion that neither is he), but I'm pretty sure Mr Clunn has some variety of political leanings that also don't fit neatly into the liberal-conservative schema.
Why don't you apply the same rhetoricle comments about the "right wing" statements?
If you ask me – and you haven't – I would say that your comments are just a little politically biased.
FYI – My comments about synthetic(man-made) crude oil is what is the important thing here, not whatever political bias I, you, or anyone else may have.
I attack Jared for making idiotic or partisan sounding statements all the time, usually on economics. The fact that you're getting hit is mostly because I find your statements just as uninformative and just as heavily biased. So you would say that your comments are not "just a little politically biased then?"
I agree the issue was supposed to be about peak oil, an apolitical topic of scientific interest or discussion. Andrew brought up what to do about the issue, which does involve political rhetoric, and which I commented on. You should also note I haven't commented at all on the topic of peak oil itself. You do this a lot when I try to point out a flaw in your arguments and leap to the presumption about what my own opinions must be as a result. Jared does the same thing.
Given your own political persuasions, I think it would be enough to say that you proved my point and move on. (that right-wingers don't care about this issue and claim "national-security" as their principle concern when discussing oil or "energy independence").
By staying on the political and ignoring the main thread – oil – you have proved my point better than I could ever have.
Enjoy your erroneous left wing life.
Did you have a point? I hadn't noticed.