Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise • Hacker News Board

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#181

Post by majewsky » Sun, May 03, 2020, 2:49 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #174

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only without larger grids and smaller capacities. In general, generating electricity as close to where you need it is a better idea (because of loss from transmission). They are not completely reliable for backup, which I think is an under-appreciated point, but nuclear can provide any backup necessary (which i suspect wouldn't be as large as you might think).

point is that they need backup from either nuclear, coal, oil or gas to be reliable, but the very people who want more renewable is normally against nuclear. Wind and solar is less than 1% of the worlds energy consumption and not expected to be more than 3-4% in 2030 exactly because its not reliable and the more renewable you build the more expensive it becomes as it need one of those or multiple backup sources menti…

> they need backup from either nuclear, coal, oil, gas or storage to be reliable

FTFY. That's a very significant omission.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#182

Post by majewsky » Sun, May 03, 2020, 2:51 PM UTC

boomboomsubban wrote: post #170

divbzero wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among the good things, George W. Bush contributed more to the fight against HIV/AIDS than any other president. [1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_f...

I can't find the full funding breakdown, but I'd guess Obama contributed more. Purely as he had 8 years to Bush's 5 though.

George W. Bush held office for 8 years. You may be thinking of his father, George H. W. Bush.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#183

Post by cycomanic » Sun, May 03, 2020, 3:05 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #174

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only without larger grids and smaller capacities. In general, generating electricity as close to where you need it is a better idea (because of loss from transmission). They are not completely reliable for backup, which I think is an under-appreciated point, but nuclear can provide any backup necessary (which i suspect wouldn't be as large as you might think).

point is that they need backup from either nuclear, coal, oil or gas to be reliable, but the very people who want more renewable is normally against nuclear. Wind and solar is less than 1% of the worlds energy consumption and not expected to be more than 3-4% in 2030 exactly because its not reliable and the more renewable you build the more expensive it becomes as it need one of those or multiple backup sources menti…

It's funny how this is brought up again and again. Actually the one energy form that needs the most "backup" (a very imprecise word) is nuclear. Because nuclear is very slow to adjust you need either massive overproduction and somehow "dump" this when you don't need it (the reason why Belgium had all their highways brightly lit, I remember being amazed by this when we travelled during the night between countries) or what you call "backup" from e.g. gas. If you have a large enough modern grid (and that is not the case right now due to massive underinvestments) renewable good power 100% with very little overproduction (you obviously need capability i.e. overcapacity). There have been several studies on this (some are mentioned here https://www.vox.com/2015/6/9/8748081/us-100-percent-renewabl...)

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#184

Post by smnrchrds » Sun, May 03, 2020, 3:08 PM UTC

cturner wrote: post #157

smnrchrds wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Iran seems to be able to sell nearly as much as it wants, presumably at near-market prices. Not really. I am no expert, but my understanding is that US sanctions bar Iran from accessing any financial services by US institutions or in US dollars. Apparently, they have jurisdiction to enforce that if a transaction uses US dollars. Unfortunately for any country who provokes the ire US, currently USD is the only real o…

"currently USD is the only real option for international trade" I think you have conflated currency matters with sanction matters. I will attack that here, but much of your point stands. My points here: international business tends to be done in USD only because it is convenient, and no business ever failed to happen due to that convention. International trade tends to happen in terms of the USD because USD is conven…

I think the issue with USD is more entrenched than the role of English language. As I said, I'm no expert. I've just read some articles like this:

> The power of U.S. sanctions lies in the use of the U.S. dollar in most international transactions. A foreign company that sends its proceeds from trade with Iran through an international bank would likely face sanctions because part of it would be conducted in dollars.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/iran-...

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#185

Post by pinkfoot » Sun, May 03, 2020, 3:19 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #60

redis_mlc wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All oil and gas exporters become dependant on that revenue. It's human nature to spend it all.

Norway stands as an obvious counter example; they’ve invested a huge amount of their oil money into a sovereign fund, and have a fairly robust economy too.

And only 5,367,580 people to share it amongst.

The city I live in has nearly twice the people and making more at an astonishing rate.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#186

Post by twomoretime » Sun, May 03, 2020, 3:57 PM UTC

jariel wrote: post #173

twomoretime wrote: post #116

People are really optimistic in the industry. I am active in petroleum circles and many are convinced that this is another temporary downturn and we'll always need oil. All I see is public sentiment turning against fossil fuels and an inevitable death for 90% of the industry as we move away from petroleum. We only use something like >20% of raw petroleum for plastic and medicine and such. And the price curve is not l…

5 billion people on planet earth living in poor countries do not care about the negative effects of oil. They are making quite a lot more money and want to buy cars. If the last 30 years was about the rise of China, the rest of the century is going to be about the rise of 'the rest of the world'. Pre 2000 it was as if these places didn't exist - they had no money. Just people in huts. But now they want Hondas and iPh…

The entire global economy is grinding to a halt and we may be sitting on top of a global depression for years to come.

Those 5 billion are going to have to wait. Also, it may be harsh but if history is any indication, these people are unlikely to gain access to oil themselves - which means they're dependent on probably their neighbors (developing countries probably are sensitive to shipping/deliver charges) which means that their demand is subject to international sanctions if, say, G20 decides to wean the globe from petroleum. So if the west decides no more fossil fuels, these people will likely stay in huts until they stumble upon reserves in their country (unlikely) or find another civilization-sustaining energy source.

You think oil dependence will last forever? Also with the rise of the internet, you don't think people in developing countries are likely to give preference to renewables if the price is within reach? Everything's getting cheaper.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#187

Post by bladegash » Sun, May 03, 2020, 4:06 PM UTC

Scoundreller wrote: post #84

texasbigdata wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many basins or producers in the US don't "work" below $32 either.

But what happens when your opex and capex crater? How much cheaper is a drilling rig now vs. 12 months ago? How about an electrician?

I don’t know this for certain, but I have a feeling much of the price of extraction comes from accrued debt. Most of these companies - especially the smaller ones with less liquidity - probably financed significant portions of their operating expenses.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#188

Post by jariel » Sun, May 03, 2020, 4:11 PM UTC

twomoretime wrote: post #186

jariel wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 billion people on planet earth living in poor countries do not care about the negative effects of oil. They are making quite a lot more money and want to buy cars. If the last 30 years was about the rise of China, the rest of the century is going to be about the rise of 'the rest of the world'. Pre 2000 it was as if these places didn't exist - they had no money. Just people in huts. But now they want Hondas and iPh…

The entire global economy is grinding to a halt and we may be sitting on top of a global depression for years to come. Those 5 billion are going to have to wait. Also, it may be harsh but if history is any indication, these people are unlikely to gain access to oil themselves - which means they're dependent on probably their neighbors (developing countries probably are sensitive to shipping/deliver charges) which mea…

No, they will get the oil, and low prices will only expedite that.

Nobody, not the entire EU/West and certainly not anyone else is going to say to poor Africa and Asia: 'you can't use Oil', moreover, nobody is going to send troops to Nigeria to stop exports, or embargo Indonesia and Pakistan or wherever from receiving oil.

It's like telling 5 billion people they can't use tapped water or water wells that they have to 'figure something out'.

It's a non-starter.

The only shift will be economic - either Oil is too expensive - or - in some situations, solar might be cheaper. Which it will be, but for the most part, there is no end in sight to oil.

If there is a magic leap in solar and battery tech, and China pumps out super cheap electric cars that can be re-fueled cheaper than gas and there's enough sunlight, that would work. But that's not in the cards.

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#189

Post by Iv » Sun, May 03, 2020, 4:19 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #145

stevenjohns wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Around that time, Bremer decided to bar former ba'ath officer from either serving the new military or getting pension. That decision almost single-handedly created the backbone of the terrorist networks that would become ISIS. This isn't true. The Ba'ath party had already largely lost its Arab nationalist identity and become progressively more and more Islamist after the first Gulf War. Saddam announced the "return…

> The Ba'ath party had already largely lost its Arab nationalist identity and become progressively more and more Islamist after the first Gulf War. That's not so much the point the parent comment was making, I believe. Mostly that by making sure the previous military and political leaders would not be allowed to play any role in the future and not get pensions, they'd obviously have zero incentive to work with the ne…

Exactly. Actually, it created an incentive to join the insurgent.

Picture that: your skill is to organize soldiers and military operations but the only local and legal employer refuses you and denies you any pension. Did they really think they would go beg in the streets rather than join the militias in dire need or organizational advices?

Re: Oil's Collapse Is a Geopolitical Reset in Disguise

#190

Post by Iv » Sun, May 03, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

jeffdavis wrote: post #97

Iv wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the most relevant part was this: > She was an assistant to Paul Bremer in the Coalition Provisional Authority. She was Senior Director for Iraq at the United States National Security Council. Around that time, Bremer decided to bar former ba'ath officer from either serving the new military or getting pension. That decision almost single-handedly created the backbone of the terrorist networks that would become I…

"People from that admin should be shunned from any published analysis" Interestingly, it was GWB that also put a lot of effort into pandemic preparedness. See: https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemi... History is kind of a weird place.

Pandemic preparedness is one of the simplest thing in the world: have trained personnel, listen to a few epidemiologist expert when it comes to quarantine, make sure a few of the incredibly cheap and easy to manufacture protective equipments are available.

The GWB admin still had the level of competence to organize something like the last Iraq war so it made sense it could have pandemic preparedness which is orders of magnitudes easier.

I don't think the US public really realize how incompetent and dumb the current administration looks from abroad.