[satjeet]

I've been reading the NY Review of Books for over 30 years. The current issue finally has a discussion of peak oil. It is by George Soros under the title "The Perilous Price of Oil"

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21792

I think we can call his view "Peak Oil Lite". One of his concluding remarks:

"So, is this a bubble? The answer is that there is a bubble superimposed on an upward trend in oil prices, a trend that has a strong foundation in reality."

The reality being "peak oil" - which he describes as a misleading term. But he seems to grasp the issue clearly.

Still, from my "provincial" point of view, this is a big movement in the intellectual firmament.

[Cashmere]

First, the cost of discovering and developing new reserves is increasing, and the depletion rate of aging oil fields is accelerating. This goes under the rather misleading name of "peak oil" —namely that we have approached or reached the maximum rate of world output. It is a misleading concept because higher prices make it economically feasible to develop more expensive sources of energy.

An Idiot.

1st, Peak Oil is not a misleading concept at all. It's clear as day. A day must arrive when we reach peak production.

2nd, with this one quote, Soros makes it clear he has no concept of extraction rates or EROEI.

He's a smart guy who made a boatload of money but who doesn't understand or hasn't taken the time to understand basic oil extraction facts.

[vtsnowedin]

George Soros wrote

[quote]"In conclusion, it should be emphasized that curbing speculation in oil futures would be at best a temporary remedy. It could serve a useful purpose at a time when the parabolic rise in oil prices reinforces the prospects of a recession but it would not address the fundamental problems of peak oil, global warming, and dependence on politically unstable or hostile countries for our energy supplies. Those problems can be solved only by developing carbon-free sources of energy. The imminent onset of a recession, by reducing the demand for oil in the developed countries, is likely to bring some relief from higher oil prices, but that relief will be temporary. It should not divert our attention from the pressing need for developing alternative energy sources, and that will entail higher prices, at least in the early stages.

In the absence of alternative sources, the price of oil is liable to rise indefinitely. Only if we are willing to live with higher prices in order to develop alternative fuels can we hope to see an eventual reversal in the long-term uptrend in oil prices. In contrast to oil and other fossil fuels whose costs of production are bound to rise, the alternative fuels will become cheaper as we discover cheaper and more efficient technologies to exploit them, and will eventually bring down the price of fossil fuels as well."[quote]

—
For an idiot his conclusions seam about right .
Perhaps he is trying to gently lead the PO unaware world one step at a time in the right direction. A compelling argument that people dont listen through to the end convinces no one.

[eastbay]

How can so many otherwise perfectly intelligent people miss, deny, ignore, or completely fail to comprehend something so obvious as peak oil? Here we have the literati; those recognized by many as the cream of the crop among intellectuals completely failing to grasp something as clear as this. It's dumfounding.

If THEY don't 'get it', how can civilization stand a chance!

[blukatzen]

Here we have the literati; those recognized by many as the cream of the crop among intellectuals completely failing to grasp something as clear as this. It's dumfounding.

Simple. They're paid "not to get it". They need more time to keep their game going.

Blu

[satjeet]

I agree with all the vituperative reactions to Soros' comments - which were originally presented to a Congressional hearing in June. (The NY Review article is a revision of these comments.) Of course he's an idiot. And he doesn't explore any of the ramifications of peak oil - that's why I say his view is "peak oil lite" - God help us if we actually face reality !!

Still, the world is in uncharted territory. When the US faced its own peak oil, we could, and did, just import more oil. Now with world wide peak oil, we have to fall back on our own inventiveness. And the standard economic response is that with higher prices, technology will come of with surprising new developments. For example, as North America recently reached peak natural gas, new ways of accessing un-conventional natural gas in the form of tight shale deposits have been developed. This has kept us from the predicted cliff of natural gas fall-off.

My own reaction to this - as I said in my original posting - is "provincial". I've been 'addicted' to the 'cream' of US publications: The New Yorker, The NY Review, Harpers, etc. A failure of my warped intellectuality. Still as Emily Dickinson said a long time ago ...

The Robin's my Criterion for Tune—
Because I grow—where Robins do—
But, were I Cuckoo born—
I'd swear by him—
The ode familiar—rules the Noon—
The Buttercup's, my Whim for Bloom—
Because, we're Orchard sprung—
But, were I Britain born,
I'd Daisies spurn—
None but the Nut—October fit—
Because, through dropping it,
The Seasons flit—I'm taught—
Without the Snow's Tableau
Winter, were lie—to me—
Because I see—New Englandly—
The Queen, discerns like me—
Provincially—