Saudia Arabia: $200 Oil In 2 Years

2009-05-25 12:59:56

#1

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5886

Saudi Arabia warned oil prices could spike to beyond the near $150 record high of 2008 within two to three years, as energy leaders on Monday decried a blow to investment in expanding capacity due to the financial crisis.

Energy ministers and officials at the Group of Eight energy summit in Rome are meeting as oil prices hover at a six-month high of over $60 a barrel, but below the $75 a barrel level producers say is needed to spur investment in new production.

Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi said the world was heading for a fresh spike after the current phase of faltering demand and lower prices, which reflected the global economic downturn rather than an indicator of things to come.

"We are maintaining our long-term focus rather than being swayed by the volatility of short-term conditions," he said in prepared remarks at the summit.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/sil … 009_5.html
If only we could power the world on the tears of children. Anyway what should or could be done in order to prevent?

2009-05-25 13:13:26

#2

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6856

Agrarian smallholdings.

2009-05-25 13:14:26

#3

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7062

Macbeth wrote:
Anyway what should or could be done in order to prevent?

stop listening to green weenies

2009-05-25 13:19:28

#4

TSI: Cholera in the time of love; +247|6282|Toronto

Wow. That sucks. I say we invade, and get the oil by pretending they've got, um, nuclear chickens or some other WMD. That has worked before, hasn't it?

Oh wait....

I like pie.

2009-05-25 13:20:02

#5

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7062

we dont take their oil dumb dumb

2009-05-25 13:25:32

#6

=NHB=Shadow: hi; +322|6666|California

We should run away like one country did, it would solve the worlds problem.

2009-05-25 13:39:58

#7

TSI: Cholera in the time of love; +247|6282|Toronto

usmarine wrote:
we dont take their oil dumb dumb

That's exactly the point.

I like pie.

2009-05-25 14:49:43

#8

Diesel_dyk: Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears; +178|6295|Truthistan

The Saudi's want $200 a barrel for oil. I guess waging a secret jihadist war against the US and the west must be expensive.

We should mandate that all cars being sold are electric or plug in hybrid and build tons of nuclear plants. Then see if oil goes to $200 a barrel. Then without Saudi money bin laden will starve to death.

Two birds with one stone.

2009-05-25 16:03:07

#9

benefit: Member; +21|6017

Diesel_dyk wrote:
The Saudi's want $200 a barrel for oil. I guess waging a secret jihadist war against the US and the west must be expensive.

We should mandate that all cars being sold are electric or plug in hybrid and build tons of nuclear plants. Then see if oil goes to $200 a barrel. Then without Saudi money bin laden will starve to death.

Two birds with one stone.

good points

the sooner we have alternate fuel sources the better.....holding the world to ransom has gone on long enough

i would be happy to see them sitting on a lake of oil with no buyers

2009-05-25 17:04:59

#10

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7021|California

America spearheading the drive for alternative fuels is like giving a homeless guy the keys to a jewelry store.

2009-05-25 17:46:05

#11

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6706|North Carolina

stryyker wrote:
America spearheading the drive for alternative fuels is like giving a homeless guy the keys to a jewelry store.

More like trying to get an obese person to eat healthy and exercise more.

2009-05-26 13:10:08

#12

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6746|The Land of Scott Walker

Diesel_dyk wrote:
We should mandate that all cars being sold are electric or plug in hybrid and build tons of nuclear plants.

We should mandate no such thing, but we should improve the technology to make it more affordable. Let the market, not the government cause the change. The government will only screw it all up. All for more nuclear plants, but we'll have to talk down the envirowackos first.

2009-05-26 14:31:57

#13

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6706|North Carolina

Stingray24 wrote:
Diesel_dyk wrote:
We should mandate that all cars being sold are electric or plug in hybrid and build tons of nuclear plants.
We should mandate no such thing, but we should improve the technology to make it more affordable. Let the market, not the government cause the change. The government will only screw it all up. All for more nuclear plants, but we'll have to talk down the envirowackos first.

Mandates aren't necessarily a bad thing. Just raising fuel efficiency and emissions standards would be enough to improve things at a relatively low cost.

You can't depend on the market for everything.

2009-05-26 20:03:01

#14

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6746|The Land of Scott Walker

Raising those standards would seem to funnel R&D funds to improvement in gas powered engine tech, not alternative. Car companies aren't going to risk pouring money into new tech if the end product is not affordable enough to result in high sales. We have hybrids and now full electric cars in the market. So we've made a bit of a transition already in the market. Once full electric tech is refined and pricing lowered, I'm confident we'll see plenty of these cars on the road.

2009-05-26 21:13:02

#15

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6706|North Carolina

Stingray24 wrote:
Raising those standards would seem to funnel R&D funds to improvement in gas powered engine tech, not alternative. Car companies aren't going to risk pouring money into new tech if the end product is not affordable enough to result in high sales. We have hybrids and now full electric cars in the market. So we've made a bit of a transition already in the market. Once full electric tech is refined and pricing lowered, I'm confident we'll see plenty of these cars on the road.

I'm cool with that. Letting the market decide what is most cost-effective is fine by me, but the government has to motivate automakers by raising standards.

Basically, the idea is that if more efficiency and fewer emissions are required, that forces companies to be more innovative in how they do business. As long as the government isn't actually controlling their decisions, I don't see a problem.

2009-05-26 22:00:39

#16

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6982|Disaster Free Zone

Good.

2009-05-26 23:14:08

#17

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6975|Canberra, AUS

I had a chat with my chem teacher today on this very topic. I've always been a bit raised-eyebrow about full electric, but I see no reason why we can't have hybrid electric supplemented by a small diesel or LNG (if you somehow get past the energy density issue)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

BF2S Forums Saudia Arabia: $200 Oil In 2 Years

Macbeth wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

stryyker wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Board footer