We are witnesses to the end of the petroleum age

[Wolfgang Horn + 7]

We are witnesses to the end of the petroleum age. After more than 125 years, oil is now beginning to radically descend into the underworld. Plan A, the decarbonization due to climate change had hardly started since 2015, but Plan B, the corona crash, was all the more efficient. If you combine both events, then in our lifetime - in 2050 I'll be 70 years old - a strong decoarbonization can be expected. Oil will then be around 10 mbpd in 2050, i.e. 10% rest ... - but maybe the price will be over $ 100 pb again -
I support the redirection of all free investments in renewable energy. All subsidies for the fossil industries must be shut down. Step by step. The European Green Deal set the course in this direction even before the corona crisis.

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

But isn't the world ending in less than 12 years due to global warming?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Let’s see....the world is set up to run on oil. The world is now swimming in CHEAP oil.

Yep, guess you’re right, it sure looks like the end of the oil era!

You can apply your EUROPEAN Green Deal to Europe if you like, but please leave the rest of us out of it while you freeze in the dark.

[Marcin2 + 724]

This thread is a bait, I am the third one who got lured.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

Trump made a statement weeks ago: What have we got to lose. Quite a fatalist comment from him..ask yourself if you believe Trump is a fatalist..This virus and its implications are being slowly rolled out..meaning small steps..yelling fire in a theatre is frowned upon until there is smoke where ever one looks.Yes i do believe the industry will change dramatically, No matter how you formulate your analytics cheap plentiful energy will be needed..Low investment high return..known as ROI..LNG will surpass oil personally i see no other path forward.

The above is merely a opinion your mileage will vary greatly

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Oil will be around for many decades but natural gas should be preferred for price, being cleaner, and abundance. So far wind and solar have more deficiencies than benefits IMHO, especially price and aesthetics. Coal is the real enemy and only Asia can stop that. China burns more coal than all the rest of the world together.

[surrept33 + 609]

Wind and solar still need a lot advancement in energy storage. Current battery technology still needs a lot of advancement in the energy efficiency when the battery is initially formed.  

I think natural gas will cannibalize oil (in petrochemicals), coal (for primary energy), and nuclear (for primary energy), over the medium term until storage economics work better.

[El Nikko + 2,145]

Damn

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

17 minutes ago, El Nikko said:

Damn

They need to get used to the life of energy, IMHO.  "You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em."

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

We agree but on a different scale, green energy has seen its demise....https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Lockdown-Strikes-Utilities-As-Electricity-Demand-Plunges.html

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

10 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

But isn't the world ending in less than 12 years due to global warming?

I anticipate that I will beat the deadline. 

In any event, by 2050 I will be seriously dead.  Oh, well. 

[Prometheus1354 + 178]

In the mid 70's right after the Arab oil embargo; we started hearing how the planet was running out of oil. (Ohhhh the Horrors'!)  No it wasn't! The Arab's were pissed at us for siding with Israel; so they turned off the tap. Thus the die was cast; the 'eco's' fresh off the anti war protests of Vietnam, had their new 'thing' to be irate over.

Flash forward too the early 90's and the Clintons.  Now the Hippies had one of their own in power...  Now we have renewed vigor on the eco fronts. Not that they went anywhere in the time from the oil embargo too the 90's. But now they had the WH and they were in nirvana. Alas, this netted them a lil but not the sweeping reforms they sought.  Next up, Obama.  Now he was truly gonna see too it that the US fall in line with the Euro's or else.  Well he mandated all manner of 'Green energy' Farce that got him approval points.  He threw monies at 'green' companies like it was goin outta style.  Solyndra anyone???  He was complicit in everything the UN wanted done, so long as it made the US weak and him look like the 2nd coming in the eyes of the eco sheep.

Funny thing though, the renewables ignored or forgot about a lil place called the Permian.  It was fast on its way too driving the resurgence of American energy dominance!  The renewables have quickly fell by the roadside with the abundance of Cheap Oil & NG...

[Hiten Shah + 22]

13 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

But isn't the world ending in less than 12 years due to global warming?

We ar already seeing large decrease in pollution across the world due to less use of oil

Edited April 2, 2020 by Hiten Shah

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

9 hours ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Trump made a statement weeks ago: What have we got to lose. Quite a fatalist comment from him..ask yourself if you believe Trump is a fatalist..This virus and its implications are being slowly rolled out..meaning small steps..yelling fire in a theatre is frowned upon until there is smoke where ever one looks.Yes i do believe the industry will change dramatically, No matter how you formulate your analytics cheap plentiful energy will be needed..Low investment high return..known as ROI..LNG will surpass oil personally i see no other path forward.

The above is merely a opinion your mileage will vary greatly

You need to provide context for Trump’s remark. What he was referring to was the pushback to trying treatments which had not been fully tested (against covid19, they had been tested in relation to other applications) and had not been blessed by the FDA.

His comment reflected his, and others belief, that we know if we do nothing, people would certainly die. So what do you have to lose by trying ‘experimental’ treatments.

So, no, I do not believe Trump is an fatalist. In fact, as far as the situation allows, he is a optimist.

By taking that comment out of context you diminish the credibility of the rest of your post.

 

Edited April 2, 2020 by Douglas Buckland
Typo

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

20 minutes ago, Hiten Shah said:

We ar already seeing large decrease in pollution across the world due to less use of oil

No shit Sherlock! We are also seeing a global recession, millions of small businesses set to fail, economies crashing and possibly famines starting!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

3 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

I anticipate that I will beat the deadline. 

In any event, by 2050 I will be seriously dead.  Oh, well. 

As opposed to ‘unseriously’ dead or hilariously demised?😂

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

I anticipate that I will beat the deadline. 

In any event, by 2050 I will be seriously dead.  Oh, well. 

But isn't that the crux of "the world is ending, climate change" sales pitch?  As a rule, do not believe any cxnt guaranteeing events that are definitely, unquestionably, for sure, no kidding, absolutely going to happen after you die.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

50 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

You need to provide context for Trump’s remark. What he was referring to was the pushback to trying treatments which had not been fully tested (against covid19, they had been tested in relation to other applications) and had not been blessed by the FDA.

His comment reflected his, and others belief, that we know if we do nothing, people would certainly die. So what do you have to lose by trying ‘experimental’ treatments.

So, no, I do not believe Trump is an optimist, as far as the situation allows.

By taking that comment out of context you diminish the credibility of the rest of your post.

 

And it stems from the bill, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Trump, of:

The Right to Try Act

The Right to Try Act, or the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act, was signed into law May 30, 2018. This law is another way for patients who have been diagnosed with life-threatening diseases or conditions who have tried all approved treatment options and who are unable to participate in a clinical trial to access certain unapproved treatments.

Edited April 2, 2020 by Dan Warnick

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

17 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

You need to provide context for Trump’s remark. What he was referring to was the pushback to trying treatments which had not been fully tested (against covid19, they had been tested in relation to other applications) and had not been blessed by the FDA.

His comment reflected his, and others belief, that we know if we do nothing, people would certainly die. So what do you have to lose by trying ‘experimental’ treatments.

So, no, I do not believe Trump is an optimist, as far as the situation allows.

By taking that comment out of context you diminish the credibility of the rest of your post.

 

Actually i used the word fatalist...and Donald Trump is no fatalist. When he makes statements of that nature he is merely taunting someone or some body of power...he just cannot help himself. I could go into depth..it's easier just to watch him work and the final results. That guy has a knack of pulling a rabbit out of his hat like no other...Pulling out of Syria and then watching the Turks and the Russians settle the issues was beyond brilliant. A shell game played out on the world stage..so where is the peanut now?