Food Price Riots Popping Up Around The World

  • Thread starter Thread starter ribozyme
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ridgerunner said:
No wonder you’re depressed, if you spend your time reading stuff like this. But take heart! Any writer who writes things so grotesque, so excessive, mean-spirited and human-hating is not wisely to be believed in anything else he says.
Click to expand...
But I like Kurt Vonnegut :(. Misanthropic humanists are so hilarious…
 
Ridgerunner, this interview is not a fly-by nighter. Fatih Birol (not a misspelling) is head of the OECD’s International Energy Agency. The IEA was formed by Western Governments due to the oil embargo. The US is a member nation. This IS the international version of the DOE’s EIA (Energy Informatin Agency). As head of this agency Birol is the top dog on what’s happening internationally in energy

The “40%” I beleive is a misprint but 1.4 billion number is correct figure I’ve read. IOW abut 1/4 of the world population is without electricity
 
The “bubble” that preceded this “burst” was nowhere near as wild as the one 30 years ago, and I don’t see that the “bust” will be as bad as that one either.
Click to expand...
globalism and greed are worse than thirty years ago. if anything, we’ve become more debased as a society.

energy prices will not go down.
 
Ridgerunner said:
This is a tough time. No doubt about it, and it isn’t over. But having lived through a lot worse, and believing this time hasn’t quite “bottomed out”, but isn’t far from it, it’s awfully hard for me to get too engaged in doomsday scenarios. The “bubble” that preceded this “burst” was nowhere near as wild as the one 30 years ago, and I don’t see that the “bust” will be as bad as that one either.
Click to expand...
I remember all those things too. (Dallas by the way had over built its office space supply by at least a decade as per a real estate professor at UNT but anyway). Here’s an interview you might find interesting (just to warn you the intro bells are too loud): netcastdaily.com/broadcast/fsn2008-0412-2.ram

Walter J. “John” Williams was born in 1949. He received an A.B. in Economics, cum laude, from Dartmouth College in 1971, and was awarded a M.B.A. from Dartmouth’s Amos Tuck School of Business Administration in 1972, where he was named an Edward Tuck Scholar. During his career as a consulting economist, John has worked with individuals as well as Fortune 500 companies
 
Doug50 said:
It is accurate. Congress wants oil companies like Exxon to invent renewable energy magic bullets that’ll keep the economy doing what has been for the past 60 years and at the same inexpensive costs to the consumer. Here’s where Exxon stands on renewables: exxonmobil.com/Corporate/Files/Corporate/tomorrows_energy.pdf
Click to expand...
Doug, I think $10.00/gallon gasoline might be a good thing. It would get people out of their cars and into trains or onto bicycles. It would spur the end of the SUV era; It would free up oil for heating, and it might finally get the high-speed rail plans off the ground.

Petrus
 
Doug50 said:
You believe that across the board, Al? Does that apply to America’s military, too? Does that apply to NASA? Does that apply to the interstate highway system? Does that apply to nuclear technology? The Manhattan project didn’t just give us the A-bomb it also gave us the knowledge of how to do nulcear generation.

It seems to me that when there is a national focus directed to solving a problem/crises the government can do quit well at getting things done. It’s when the Houses and Administration kiss up to constituent interests that are less than altruistic such as the ones I listed above is where the government screws up. The midwest corn growers love ethanol no matter how irrational it is as a gasoiline replacement is what I’d consider an example.
Click to expand...
I know that your post is slightly older and I already addressed it abundantly.

However … this came in today and couldn’t let it pass.

A really neat summary of how the U.S. military bureaucracy sabotaged the M-16 rifle at the cost of many U.S. soldiers’ lives.

military.com/news/article/colts-grip-on-army-rifle-under-fire.html?col=1186032310810&ESRC=airforce.nl#

Skip down to the last paragraph and then read backwards to the beginning.

It’s not really about Colt; not about the M-4.

The article is about how Stoner devised the AR-15 and the Army bureaucracy sabotaged it … in a Christian sense … out of envy. Not Invented Here syndrome. They didn’t want the Army to have it, so the bureaucracy made it inferior … and the Army bought it anyway.

After all these decades, the M-16 still jams in firefights.

Newer, better rifles have come along, but the Army bureaucracy is still screwing the infantry. Literally.
 
Michaeljc4 said:
I saw a $6 loaf of bread today in a store. $6! That’s scary stuff. Gas is $3.45 a gallon, eggs and milk are up 25% from a year ago, and I won’t even tell you what I’m paying for a gallon of oil to heat my house. My family and I live in Massachusetts, where it’s expensive enough already. Now? I don’t know how people are getting by. We have more and more kids showing up to our school breakfast program; more and more kids “forgetting” to bring lunch. Things are getting tough, friends. Pray that God will show mercy to the poor, and that we’ll be His hands in these tight times.
Click to expand...
When I shop I take a look at different prices for different things … did you know you can buy rice for 45 cents a pound or for $4 per pound. They have meat on sale from time to time. There is gourmet bread and then there is regular bread. You can pay $6 or $1. Or you can bake the bread yourself.

You can buy microwave popcorn, or buy bags of loose corn and pop it on the stove. Big difference in price.

And … keep in mind that a lot of people move to places that are cheaper than Massachusetts. It’s called voting with their feet.
 
Al_Masetti said:
I know that your post is slightly older and I already addressed it abundantly.

However … this came in today and couldn’t let it pass.

A really neat summary of how the U.S. military bureaucracy sabotaged the M-16 rifle at the cost of many U.S. soldiers’ lives.

military.com/news/article/colts-grip-on-army-rifle-under-fire.html?col=1186032310810&ESRC=airforce.nl#

Skip down to the last paragraph and then read backwards to the beginning.

It’s not really about Colt; not about the M-4.

The article is about how Stoner devised the AR-15 and the Army bureaucracy sabotaged it … in a Christian sense … out of envy. Not Invented Here syndrome. They didn’t want the Army to have it, so the bureaucracy made it inferior … and the Army bought it anyway.

After all these decades, the M-16 still jams in firefights.

Newer, better rifles have come along, but the Army bureaucracy is still screwing the infantry. Literally.
Click to expand...
I’m all aware of buracracy in government. The larger the instutution the more that comes about;even in large companies. But who would you rather have owning and having the final say on how military operations get implimente, the US government/Pentagon or a Wall Street Corporation? Roadways: should we do away with all government run highways so that all of the operations are sold to corporations who charge a toll to maintain and build them?
 
drpmjhess said:
Doug, I think $10.00/gallon gasoline might be a good thing. It would get people out of their cars and into trains or onto bicycles. It would spur the end of the SUV era; It would free up oil for heating, and it might finally get the high-speed rail plans off the ground.

Petrus
Click to expand...
Get this, Prius sales are up 38%. That Congress expects the big oil companies to solve the high gas prices but won’t give them access to potential fields is on the surface hypocritical. But even if they had that access what Vern, Al, and etal don’t understand and don’t want to understand is that access will not only NOT bring down oil prices simply because of the (name removed by moderator)ut costs due to development for geological work, drilling, completing and bringing to market such fields. And those fields will not raise global oil production supplies by an apprecialbe amount.
 
Doug50 said:
Get this, Prius sales are up 38%. That Congress expects the big oil companies to solve the high gas prices but won’t give them access to potential fields is on the surface hypocritical. But even if they had that access what Vern, Al, and etal don’t understand and don’t want to understand is that access will not only NOT bring down oil prices simply because of the (name removed by moderator)ut costs due to development for geological work, drilling, completing and bringing to market such fields. And those fields will not raise global oil production supplies by an apprecialbe amount.
Click to expand...
You’ve already told us no one knows how much oil is in these untapped areas.
 
When I shop I take a look at different prices for different things … did you know you can buy rice for 45 cents a pound or for $4 per pound. They have meat on sale from time to time. There is gourmet bread and then there is regular bread. You can pay $6 or $1. Or you can bake the bread yourself.
Click to expand...
You can buy microwave popcorn, or buy bags of loose corn and pop it on the stove. Big difference in price.
Click to expand...
And … keep in mind that a lot of people move to places that are cheaper than Massachusetts. It’s called voting with their feet.
Click to expand...
Which does nothing to change the fact that, in the past year, food prices have risen 25% overall. Can you find bargins? Sure. Can you cut back on “luxury items” (like microwave popcorn)? Of course. Does that change the fact that food is much more expensive now than it was a year ago, and is projected to get even more expensive? Nope. Is the reality that, as always, it is the poorest among us who suffer the most, changed by baking your own bread?

You figure it out.
 
vern_humphrey said:
You’ve already told us no one knows how much oil is in these untapped areas.
Click to expand...
that’s irrelevant to how much you need to produce to breakeven on (name removed by moderator)ut and operational costs. For example: I might have a well producing 3 barrels per day making a net postive return while a deep water operation might need a minimum of 6000 barrels per day. Hypothetically, suppose Chevron drills a deep water well off the Gulf (call it Jack II) and this well will IP, initial production, barrels per day. What if Chevron’s managment takes the postion that that isn’t enough to justify completion to sales. As an incentive to produce it, since any new well could be viewed as a national security issue, would you be willing to give Chevron government funded support? Or would you be in favor of plugging the well? They could, I suppose, cap the well and save it till prices per barrel becomes high enough to justify completion costs. Like Dee Dee, who works in oil for the government out of Houston, said oil price will not come down. Everyone agrees that the era of cheap oil is over so get use to paying for expensive oil and gasoline.
 
Michaeljc4 said:
Which does nothing to change the fact that, in the past year, food prices have risen 25% overall. Can you find bargins? Sure. Can you cut back on “luxury items” (like microwave popcorn)? Of course. Does that change the fact that food is much more expensive now than it was a year ago, and is projected to get even more expensive? Nope. Is the reality that, as always, it is the poorest among us who suffer the most, changed by baking your own bread?

You figure it out.
Click to expand...
You are dealing with someone who, I believe, just likes to be confrontational. If I say the government is better at things like running NASA or a military Al has to find some strawman angle to attack it…as if military action should truned over to private industry??? I doubt he actually believes that but he can’t let such a statement, at least from me, in some way go unchallenged.
 
Doug50 said:
that’s irrelevant to how much you need to produce to breakeven on (name removed by moderator)ut and operational costs. For example: I might have a well producing 3 barrels per day making a net postive return while a deep water operation might need a minimum of 6000 barrels per day. Hypothetically, suppose Chevron drills a deep water well off the Gulf (call it Jack II) and this well will IP, initial production, barrels per day. What if Chevron’s managment takes the postion that that isn’t enough to justify completion to sales. As an incentive to produce it, since any new well could be viewed as a national security issue, would you be willing to give Chevron government funded support? Or would you be in favor of plugging the well? They could, I suppose, cap the well and save it till prices per barrel becomes high enough to justify completion costs. Like Dee Dee, who works in oil for the government out of Houston, said oil price will not come down. Everyone agrees that the era of cheap oil is over so get use to paying for expensive oil and gasoline.
Click to expand...
And all that is irrelevant until we know how much oil is there. Your 6000 barrel a day well might not break even. But a 12,000 barrel a day well would.

The point is, “do nothing” is not a viable option. There are things we can do – we would be better off if we had started doing them 30 or 40 years ago, but perhaps it’s not too late.
 
vern_humphrey said:
You’ve already told us no one knows how much oil is in these untapped areas.
Click to expand...
IOW, Vern, producable flow rates matter more than reserves. So what if there is trillions of barrels of oil shale in Colorado if you produce it or if it took more energy (name removed by moderator)ut to get it out of the ground then you get from production.

Here’s the Bakken reality rant again that puts the point into perspective: bakkenshale.blogspot.com/2007/10/time-for-reality-rant.html
 
Doug50 said:
IOW, Vern, producable flow rates matter more than reserves. So what if there is trillions of barrels of oil shale in Colorado if you produce it or if it took more energy (name removed by moderator)ut to get it out of the ground then you get from production.

Here’s the Bakken reality rant again that puts the point into perspective: bakkenshale.blogspot.com/2007/10/time-for-reality-rant.html
Click to expand...
And we don’t know what the flow rate would be in these areas.

Is it your advice we should just sit here, stalled on the tracks, until a train comes along?
 
vern_humphrey said:
And all that is irrelevant until we know how much oil is there. Your 6000 barrel a day well might not break even. But a 12,000 barrel a day well would.

The point is, “do nothing” is not a viable option. There are things we can do – we would be better off if we had started doing them 30 or 40 years ago, but perhaps it’s not too late.
Click to expand...
IIRC Jack II IPed 6000 but the Wilcox formation is a tight formation that required a big frac job to get it to make that IP. These wells have steeper declines than wells with better porosity and permiability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top