Interesting article on oil reserves in the world

[Kärnfysikern]

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index....uID=1&subID=18

[Kärnfysikern]

and the respons from the peakniks
http://www.peakoil.net/Luttwak.html

KA: At the end of the article we get the reason why Dr Luttwak has written this article, he likes to say “Don’t worry, be happy”. He has not convinced me at all. Now it is up to you to make up your own mind, but before you do that you should take the time to read what Matt Simmons has to say here about the article.

On February 24, 2004 — Matthew Simmons, president of Simmons and Company International, and two Saudi Aramco executives, Mahmoud A**ul-Baqi, vice president, exploration, and Nansen Saleri, manager, reservoir management, analyzed the future of Saudi oil production at CSIS.

As Matt Simmons was invited by CSIS, the organization to which Dr Luttwak belongs, to discuss oil production in Saudi Arabia and also recently published a book about the “Twilight in the desert: the coming Saudi oil shock and the world economy”, I asked Mr Simmons if he could read the article and make some comments. This is his replyt:

Matt Simmons: The article is a well written piece that is supported by zero data as the author actually sort of admits. Like many others who love to write and opine on energy issues, he makes clear that Saudi oil reserves are essentially boundless and the only difficulty we will have is their leaders having the will and making the right investment decision to provide access to this oil. But even with his doubts about them ever adding so much oil, the writer can still not conceive that oil prices could ever stay at such ridiculously high prices of over $60 a barrel. Why he thinks $40 is a logical price is also not supported by any factual analysis. All he has in strongly opinionated hunches.

I am sticking to what a modest stack of 235 SPE papers laid out. The age of the Saudi Royal Family is far less important than the age of the five key producing fields. This aging issue will not change, regardless of how high oil prices go. I also think that $65 oil per barrel is extremely cheap with converted to terms humans understand. $.10 a cup for a non-renewable extremely valuable, very capital intensive raw material strikes me as unsustainably low.

Why so many "experts" assumed Middle East oil was so vast and so cheap is a riddle historians writing about the transition into the 21st Century will puzzle for decades. Why we also thought oil should sell for $.02 to $.04 a cup is an even great mystery. Was transparency so bad and knowledge of energy so poor in 2005 that society chopped down the last tree without realizing the tree was the last one around? Is this why society as it existed in the first few years of the 2ist century suddenly collapsed?

The sooner these vague but well written stories cease and people awake to the crisis that is at our door, the faster we put a fire wall between us and what "us" can easily become: a collapsed civilization.

[cj1capp]

i thought you were referring to grape seed oil or cotton , you know injectable grade stuff for gear.

[Kärnfysikern]

i thought you were referring to grape seed oil or cotton , you know injectable grade stuff for gear.

you read to much about juice

[Prada]

My father used to work for Aramco, in those days it was call only Aramco not Saudi Aramco. Aramco for ARabian AMercian oil COmpany. Lots of amercains worked for that company

Anyways I believe that consumers are very naive, ignorant, lazy, misinformed and many other adjectives I can add, because they have this false sense of finite resource of oil which will approach its limit soon. Yet this false creation justifies the price increases and billion dollar profit, a type of price gouging. Problems in Iran should have very very little effect on oil prices in N. America.
Yet exces take that to their advantage to raise the price