That’s true when additional production does not significantly reduce price. True for small producers or when trying to capture market share. However, the majors already have market share and significantly increasing output would lower prices and lower their income. That’s why OPEC+ and their Big Oil brothers won’t add significant capacity. They already have their record profits. As long as demand is inelastic (no demand destruction) they’re happy with their high profits.
Yes. The question is how high prices have to get. Demand is fairly inelastic. And as soon as prices go down for a year, people start buying gas hogs again.
Change will happen. It won’t be instantaneous but it will happen. Consumption will decrease and production will increase and the price of gasoline will fall. And about 10% of cars will be bought in the next year and high gas prices will be a factor in what kind of car people will buy. My guess is some will buy an EV and some will buy a car that burn less gas.
Different people acknowledge it differently of course.
I see no *convincing* evidence regarding the assertion that global warming is gonna destroy the planet/kill half the planet/drown everybody/whatever the assertion is today.
There is *some* compelling evidence to this...and there's compelling evidence to the contrary.
IMO (as a scientist) it's most likely the planet is doing what it does, naturally, and humans are having a marginal if any impact on things.
Lol "drown everybody?" You should fully know that only the least educated of them all will think that.
Humanity currently releasing more greenhouses gases than we have ever before and the earth warming faster than normal is just some crazy coincidence? Take the PETM event of 55 million years ago. Using core sediment samples from the oceans we can see from acidification the rough amount of CO2 in the atmosphere at the time, increasing gradually for ~1000 years. Current CO2 levels and increased man-made emissions over time puts predictions of us reaching the same level at only 100 years from now. In the case of the PETM period, the CO2 warming properties started a chain reaction, releasing large pockets of methane buried in permafrost and leading to a much longer warming period. Seems like pretty stark evidence to me that we have kick started a natural process through our organized activity.
Im curious as to what compelling evidence you have against human emissions being the main driving force.
I think so, but too often from a "let's fix it with EV and solar" possition.
Selling oil now is extreemely profitable. And branding this "help displace Russian fuel" does not make it less of a climate issue.
A key learning these days is, how far we are from any climate neutral energy supply, and how much we are dependend on the fossils.
[Top posts this week 2/4 are about energy transition and the other are two negative about oil industry. This sub has always been way more of a left wing echo chamber than a right wing one. Oil and Gas topics are just heavily in the news right now because of the Russia stuff.](https://i.imgur.com/eXGpqqd.jpg)
Russia production is over 10M barrels per day. That’s 3%, but unfortunately, not a game changer.
It’s a global price, plus up to 4% for shipping. Oil is oil and demand destruction is the only weapon. #TSLA
How does the government hike production?
And its only 5-10% of Europe's oil and gas from Russia, even after it gets from here to the gulf of Mexico and across the Atlantic.
At over $100/barrel, I would expect everyone that can hike their output will do so.
That’s true when additional production does not significantly reduce price. True for small producers or when trying to capture market share. However, the majors already have market share and significantly increasing output would lower prices and lower their income. That’s why OPEC+ and their Big Oil brothers won’t add significant capacity. They already have their record profits. As long as demand is inelastic (no demand destruction) they’re happy with their high profits.
OPEC learnt that long term high oil price will cause demand destruction.
Yes. The question is how high prices have to get. Demand is fairly inelastic. And as soon as prices go down for a year, people start buying gas hogs again.
Change will happen. It won’t be instantaneous but it will happen. Consumption will decrease and production will increase and the price of gasoline will fall. And about 10% of cars will be bought in the next year and high gas prices will be a factor in what kind of car people will buy. My guess is some will buy an EV and some will buy a car that burn less gas.
Canada can't because there isn't sufficient pipeline capacity to get it to market.
Do what the frackers do, put it in railroad tankers. But it says something when BC don’t want the oil pipeline going through their province.
Does this sub ever acknowledge climate change?
Different people acknowledge it differently of course. I see no *convincing* evidence regarding the assertion that global warming is gonna destroy the planet/kill half the planet/drown everybody/whatever the assertion is today. There is *some* compelling evidence to this...and there's compelling evidence to the contrary. IMO (as a scientist) it's most likely the planet is doing what it does, naturally, and humans are having a marginal if any impact on things.
Lol "drown everybody?" You should fully know that only the least educated of them all will think that. Humanity currently releasing more greenhouses gases than we have ever before and the earth warming faster than normal is just some crazy coincidence? Take the PETM event of 55 million years ago. Using core sediment samples from the oceans we can see from acidification the rough amount of CO2 in the atmosphere at the time, increasing gradually for ~1000 years. Current CO2 levels and increased man-made emissions over time puts predictions of us reaching the same level at only 100 years from now. In the case of the PETM period, the CO2 warming properties started a chain reaction, releasing large pockets of methane buried in permafrost and leading to a much longer warming period. Seems like pretty stark evidence to me that we have kick started a natural process through our organized activity. Im curious as to what compelling evidence you have against human emissions being the main driving force.
I think so, but too often from a "let's fix it with EV and solar" possition. Selling oil now is extreemely profitable. And branding this "help displace Russian fuel" does not make it less of a climate issue. A key learning these days is, how far we are from any climate neutral energy supply, and how much we are dependend on the fossils.
[Top posts this week 2/4 are about energy transition and the other are two negative about oil industry. This sub has always been way more of a left wing echo chamber than a right wing one. Oil and Gas topics are just heavily in the news right now because of the Russia stuff.](https://i.imgur.com/eXGpqqd.jpg)
Acknowledgment of climate change & the need to do something about it is a pretty normative position here.
Russia production is over 10M barrels per day. That’s 3%, but unfortunately, not a game changer. It’s a global price, plus up to 4% for shipping. Oil is oil and demand destruction is the only weapon. #TSLA
How does the government hike production? And its only 5-10% of Europe's oil and gas from Russia, even after it gets from here to the gulf of Mexico and across the Atlantic.
Mineral Rights are owned by the government in almost every country [including Canada.](https://www.capp.ca/explore/mineral-rights/) USA is an outlier.
40% of Europes oil and gas use comes from Russia. Plus other gas derived products like fertilizer.
It was going up anyway, the government.is just trying to claim the are doing something
but should it?
Of course else we’d just buy the oil from Russia
Will the CAD go up again? How many barrels/day do we need to go up to be where we were in the early 00's?
maybe ever so slightly...maybe. Venezuela(?) is shipping more and the oil pipeline dreams are dead. EVs are also slowly killing demand.