It's not just how many people there are, but how stupid they are. On the bright side, it kicks evolution into action. And guess what, "They will rebuild", the mind boggles.
You're making the assumption that you don't have to use huge amounts of energy to suck the stuff out the ground. That's true for the stuff being produced now. They literally just pump it out. It's not true for tar sands or oil shale and it's why the break even point is $30/barrel rather than $3/barrel.
We've already organised much of our society round high gas prices. As you said, the effect of the increasing demand and reducing supply can be mitigated somewhat by reducing taxes as oil gets really expensive.
In America, the shit is just about to hit the fan and there's bugger all the government can do about it.
Look. If it costs $30 to extract a barrel of oil from the ground they're not going to bother to produce it and sell it on an international market at $10/barrel. That would be what's called... Making a loss and not a profit. And if it's not being produced and sold that would mean less supply wouldn't it and lower supply means higher prices. So... The only reason they are even considering these technologies for tar sands and oil shales is the high price of gas. High gas prices are here to stay and apart from a short dip when the damaged refineries are recomissioned and additional capacity added they are only going to get higher.
I RTFA and was aware anyway that Shell and the rest have been investigating many extraction technologies in the full knowledge that the price of oil is only going to increase in the coming years.
You should now slap your forehead and shout DOH, just like the 9mpg SUV drivers out there.
The reason they're talking about getting oil from shale at all is because the gas price is $3/gallon. If it was less, they wouldn't bother, so you aren't going to see the price go down when they start on the sand and shale deposits.
"My guess is that this guy didn't get his job because he's an idiot."
You've never heard of the Dilbert or Peter principles?
Anyone who says they're going to migrate their entireanything from one platform to another is a moron. Nothing to do with Linux, Itanium. Exactly the same would apply to Windows, AIX, OS X.
" I would whole heartedly welcome a shield that just naturally didn't fog up. "
I got a new Caberg helmet that just doesn't fog at all. I think the visor comes precoated with something, I'm guessing it'll wear off eventually. This stuff sounds a bit more permanent.
Fogging of glasses is a problem. The visor problem's been largely solved what with Foggy Masks, Fog City films but it's still a problem for those who wear glasses.
"I'd like to say that the currency float you mentioned was a good thing, but there isn't a single economist who sees it as anything other than an empty political gesture. All they did was let it "float" within very narrow bounds, defined by them, with essentially no impact whatsoever on the real underlying exchange mechanics."
It's allowed to appreciate, or depreciate in value significantly over time. The limitations imposed act as a low pass filter, preventing large short term swings. At the current rate of appreciation, it looks like it's moving about 3%->5%/year. The boundary conditions limit maximum theoretical move to about 35%/year. When we are talking about economies and 1.3 billion people, 35%/year is not an empty political gesture.
What we're seeing is a gradual liberalisation of the Chinese economy, political liberalisation will follow as the wealthy middle class develops. The chinese are not stupid or rash, they know it takes time to change. In a decade or two, China is going to be by far the largest economy in the world, the USA and EU will be in comparison, satellite economies.
China's going to "win" BTW. They're the next superpower, already competeing for resources.
Look at your clothes, computer, TV, video, car labels. You can bet most or all of it's from China. That's going to continue till the exchange rate sorts itself out. It's a good thing that they recently "floated" their currency and that it's rising in value.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends completely on where the energy you use to manufacture it comes from.
Indulged, entitled.
Hmm, sound like a good idea?
It's not just how many people there are, but how stupid they are. On the bright side, it kicks evolution into action. And guess what, "They will rebuild", the mind boggles.
Ignorance is bliss. Have faith. etc.
In the west at the moment, stupidity, ignorance are integral to our culture, even those who are irreligious and are worn like badges of honour.
I hope so. China is going to be bigger than the USA and EU combined. Own them before they own you.
Having problems reading or interpreting the quote you included?
"apart from a short dip when the damaged refineries are recomissioned and additional capacity added"
You're making the assumption that you don't have to use huge amounts of energy to suck the stuff out the ground. That's true for the stuff being produced now. They literally just pump it out. It's not true for tar sands or oil shale and it's why the break even point is $30/barrel rather than $3/barrel.
In Europe.
We've already organised much of our society round high gas prices. As you said, the effect of the increasing demand and reducing supply can be mitigated somewhat by reducing taxes as oil gets really expensive.
In America, the shit is just about to hit the fan and there's bugger all the government can do about it.
Oh... my... god!
... Making a loss and not a profit. And if it's not being produced and sold that would mean less supply wouldn't it and lower supply means higher prices. So... The only reason they are even considering these technologies for tar sands and oil shales is the high price of gas. High gas prices are here to stay and apart from a short dip when the damaged refineries are recomissioned and additional capacity added they are only going to get higher.
= 4338b04c7c29073ba6638d8f6deb7604
Look. If it costs $30 to extract a barrel of oil from the ground they're not going to bother to produce it and sell it on an international market at $10/barrel. That would be what's called
I RTFA and was aware anyway that Shell and the rest have been investigating many extraction technologies in the full knowledge that the price of oil is only going to increase in the coming years.
You should now slap your forehead and shout DOH, just like the 9mpg SUV drivers out there.
http://content.todayscartoons.uclick.com/?feature
In 2003 the price of a barrel of oil was below $30. The only reason they're considering it now is that it's $70/barrel.
The reason they're talking about getting oil from shale at all is because the gas price is $3/gallon. If it was less, they wouldn't bother, so you aren't going to see the price go down when they start on the sand and shale deposits.
It's quite common for parasites to change a host's behaviour. There are parasites which change the behaviour of their human hosts.
2 977,1048642,00.html
e.g.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/thisweek/story/0,1
There are others.
You're clearly one of those Peter principle morons I was talking about.
"My guess is that this guy didn't get his job because he's an idiot."
You've never heard of the Dilbert or Peter principles?
Anyone who says they're going to migrate their entire anything from one platform to another is a moron. Nothing to do with Linux, Itanium. Exactly the same would apply to Windows, AIX, OS X.
Can we get the attributions right people?
FreeBSD is a registered trademark of The FreeBSD Foundation.
"NETBSD" is a registered trademark of The NetBSD Foundation.
Linux® is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.
" I would whole heartedly welcome a shield that just naturally didn't fog up. "
I got a new Caberg helmet that just doesn't fog at all. I think the visor comes precoated with something, I'm guessing it'll wear off eventually. This stuff sounds a bit more permanent.
Fogging of glasses is a problem. The visor problem's been largely solved what with Foggy Masks, Fog City films but it's still a problem for those who wear glasses.
So buy "cultured" diamonds rather than mined ones.
http://gemesis.com/home.htm
Market economics at work. Someone keeps prices artificially high, someone else comes along and bursts their bubble.
I personally think opals are far more beautiful than diamonds.
http://www.australianopals.com/
They forgot the attribution as well:
Linux® is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.
http://www.linuxmark.org/attribution.html
"I'd like to say that the currency float you mentioned was a good thing, but there isn't a single economist who sees it as anything other than an empty political gesture. All they did was let it "float" within very narrow bounds, defined by them, with essentially no impact whatsoever on the real underlying exchange mechanics."
It's allowed to appreciate, or depreciate in value significantly over time. The limitations imposed act as a low pass filter, preventing large short term swings. At the current rate of appreciation, it looks like it's moving about 3%->5%/year. The boundary conditions limit maximum theoretical move to about 35%/year. When we are talking about economies and 1.3 billion people, 35%/year is not an empty political gesture.
What we're seeing is a gradual liberalisation of the Chinese economy, political liberalisation will follow as the wealthy middle class develops. The chinese are not stupid or rash, they know it takes time to change. In a decade or two, China is going to be by far the largest economy in the world, the USA and EU will be in comparison, satellite economies.
Hanlon's razor.
China's going to "win" BTW. They're the next superpower, already competeing for resources.
D &to=CNY&amt=1&t=5d
Look at your clothes, computer, TV, video, car labels. You can bet most or all of it's from China. That's going to continue till the exchange rate sorts itself out. It's a good thing that they recently "floated" their currency and that it's rising in value.
http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=US
It would have to be GNU/Linux® in order to comply with the trademark requirements.
It says so quite clearly here:
http://www.linuxmark.org/attribution.html
And page or post mentioning it should have the following attribution somewhere:
"Linux® is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries."
Obviously anyone using the word Linux without the ® as specified by the web page is using it incorrectly.
You've misunderstood the word "free" in the term "free trade". Ironic coming from someone into Linux®.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=free
HTH.
Linux® is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.
100 million Africans died in abject poverty instead.
HTH.