New Energy and Those $10 Oil Predictions

While much of the focus I’ve had here lately has been on New Media due to its current state of rapid development and its coming role as the Super-Industry that drives the success or failure of most other Industries, my interest in and work on New Energy hasn’t waned. I mentioned the building of new auto assembly plants throughout many largely depressed areas in my recent Factory of the Future article, including electric, hybrid, solar and solar-assisted.

Developments in New Energy have already had a big role in pulling Europe out of the annual extortion hangman’s noose it was perennially stuck in with freezing winters and oil & gas reduction threats. Europe can now feel confident they’ll never again face that brand of “diplomacy”.

Now we have a serious debate taking place over the potential for $10 a barrel oil. The reason is these vehicles and the expected growth.

When I made a push for solar I knew its then state of limitation that’s only been marginally mitigated. Though the vehicles are cheap and cost virtually nothing to operate, they still have issues with power and speed. Most generally don’t drive much over 80 kph. That leaves many needs they can’t fulfill. But for hundreds of millions in poor regions, those limitations are easily set aside as the needs they do meet are more than sufficient. This has all been part of a long-term strategy to prevent energy from being the stumbling block to growth.

Not necessarily as an Oil & Gas Industry crippler.

Without transportation and energy constraints, combined with information and communication that New Media will handle, global growth is set to be enormous. Bigger than all previous growth combined. More than big enough to support both Old and New Energy Industries for at least another 20 years.

Or maybe not.

Seeking Alpha is saying expect $10 a barrel oil by 2025. Obviously that’s the end of the Oil Industry as we know it when that happens. This “Energy ‘tsunami'” as SA’s Editors call it, has sparked a response by BP that oil prices will hold strong for the foreseeable future and a growing debate among Industry Analysts. That’s understandable for many reasons.

People’s jobs and Investment income is at stake. There is no such thing as completely honest unbiased analysis. Here again we get to my issue with today’s lame excuse for “Scientists” which are mostly kids born with SmartPhones in their hands who think “Tech” and “Science” are the same thing and who believe there’s such a thing as public Socratic discourse. Their version of discourse always leads to nothing but discord and discourteousness. Whatever Social Engineer disguised as Educator who decided to teach kids that crap in school should be flogged.

We never know enough to have debates. That’s why they always backslide into meaningless arguments and self-declared winners on both sides. If the Truth exists, it sure as hell doesn’t need our help. And if it’s smart it’ll turn it the hell down.Name something we haven’t screwed up lately.

So we have all of that in this Energy Debate as well. The simple fact that we don’t know and probably won’t notice it when it happens. How often has this been the case?

We didn’t know Henry Ford was starting the Industrial Revolution. To most he was a kook. To those in the slowly building Auto Industry he was a total whackjob. yeah, our “Expert Class” and anyone who listened to them completely wrote Ford off.

NOTHING has changed since. Not one damn thing.

Because we don’t know and our debates are never honest anyway. And nothing gives any indication that even when we do know that the debates change. They never do. They just morph into arguments about something else. A reasonable alien would come to the conclusion we’re nothing but idiots who like to argue.

Try debating them on that.

I’m not sure I see $10 oil. I see $20. I can easily see $20. But I’m not looking at that so much as I’m on the energy demand side. And ways to not artificially dampen that demand and in the process hamper growth simply because Energy Suppliers like limited supply.

We’ve fought wars over that stuff. So my position is simple. Those who think arguing over trends is sport are nothing more than traitors to the memories of those who’ve died when the real debate takes over.

The one over whether people have their basic needs met. Those are the ones that lead to wars.