Could it be true? Hard to say.
The higher prices give impetus to developing alternatives, which is a good thing. We are seeing increased investment in wind farms, a refocus on nuclear energy, and motivations to develop alternative automobile power plants. (i.e hybrids, and hydrogen)
The consequences may be too much of a shock to the system in the near term. Is it possible that the increased drain on capital, and the shift of capital to the oil producing nations, is causing a delay in bringing these technologies to market?
This may be the case. Energy policies in the consuming nations should have been focusing on the development of alternatives ever since the oil scare of the 70s. Incentives and research dollars should have been in place for the last 25 yrs, especially when the consuming nations were able to import oil at a low price. But, as they say, hindsight is 20/20.
The capital drain on the consuming nations is a serious consequence, which by last measure $64+ per barrel, is becoming alarming. This is draining needed capital across the board and straining our resources.
It is not in the best interest of the nations receiving the capital shift to develop alternatives. The capital shift is moving more and more of the world’s capital to the oil rich nations. What are they going to do with the capital? Well, lets looks at the nations; Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, Algeria, Libya, Qatar, UAE, Indonesia, Iraq, and Nigeria. Do you honestly expect any of them to take the increased capital flow and invest it in petrol alternatives? I don’t think so.
There in lies the problem.
Got Balls???
Report on availability of crude oil info in public libraries.
If a motor is low on oil, it overheats and breaks down.
When all the oil is sucked from under the tectonic plates the
surface of the earth will turn liquid like the Magma core.
Crude is a heat medium and insulator.
Posted by: Dave | October 27, 2005 at 04:14 AM