Magnus Itland ([info]itlandm) wrote,
@ 2008-07-28 16:08:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Share this!  Next Entry
Current location:Kristiansand
Entry tags:economy, energy, politics

Should oil be cheap?
The Real Question: Should Oil Be Cheap? (BusinessWeek)
An interesting article. I have to say I was put off by the first page, which mainly consisted of anecdotes of companies and people who had benefited from high oil prices. I am sure you could easily raise two counter-examples for each of them. After all, energy is what drives life. It has been that way for over 4 billion years, so live with it. The question is rather whether oil is a good energy source. It was certainly convenient, but it may no longer be so. It is a limited resource after all, so it cannot possibly stay cheap forever. And like all fossil fuels, it has a side effect on the climate. We should not just look surprised when that happens, since we have known it for a couple centuries. Rather, we should consciously manipulate CO2 levels (and methane levels) to achieve the climate we want: Raising levels when an ice age threatens, but otherwise keep them low. This is well within the technically possilbe, just not the politically possivle, because People Are Stupid. And that's why the proposal of the article is wasted: It is not politically possible in the Land of the Free to introduce that kind of tax. You need people with some experience in serfdom to grumpily adjust to such things. Either that, or nations of enlightened beings. Take your pick of which I live in, we've had carbon taxes for a long time already.



(2 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]broccoman
2008-07-28 04:09 pm UTC (link)
The whole concept of a price floor for a nonreplaceable resource is a stupid idea, as the market corrects itself. The real issue is the lack of information we have over how much oil is left. It's hard to budget things out not knowing what the future holds.

Also, places like ANWAR/offshore/oil shale/coal as replacements will happen sooner or later, if oil rises high enough. I'm going to predict if Obama wins in 08, and gas prices remain at $4, Republicans get the House in 2010. Holding out longer increases the value of those reserves though. I'd rather have oil at the end then oil right now.

We're already seeing the market correct itself, it just takes time, and then it also is taking the form of a cobweb model, so we're going to see a series of overadjustments until we get it close to right. That said, the Dems in Congress aren't really helping matters much.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]itlandm
2008-07-28 05:23 pm UTC (link)
I agree about the "better to have oil later". I was opposed to emptying the North Sea back when it barely turned a profit, but the others who opposed it were mostly daydreaming socialists or environmentalists. The construction lobby won out, of course - even if it didn't turn much profit for a long time, it created jobs in building platforms and such - the old smokestack industry where the European labor parties have their strongest support. So there was no match really. They can regret now - but then again, economists that are not in the hire of big capitalists always have this cassandra complex. We always go "Told you so! Told you so!" but by then something new is coming up and everyone is following that instead.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(2 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Log in with OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…