X-Message-Number: 27098 From: "Mark Plus" <> Subject: Re: Under the Premise that Knowledge Is Power: Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:41:59 -0700 In message # 27089, David Stodolsky writes, >Proven Reserves have never been higher. There are hundreds of billions of >barrels in Venezuela, in Saudi Arabia, in Iraq, and in Iran, Energy investment banker Matthew Simmons has studied the Saudi oil situation in depth, and he thinks that Saudi fields have seriously depleted no matter what their official spokesmen claim. Arab culture has a taboo against acknowledging weakness and vulnerability, as we saw from "Baghdad Bob's" absurd press conferences over two years ago. Simmons has published his findings in his new book, "Twilight in the Desert." The mainstream business media have given him considerable access, demonstrating that they find his viewpoint legitimate and credible. Simmons proposes that if a few dozen outside experts had access to Aramco's records, they could accurately audit the state of Saudi reserves to see whether they really have all much that oil left. In the world overall, the proportions and absolute quantities of the different weights of oil have also changed recently. The supply of light crude has declined by over 2 million barrels a day since 2000, meaning that light crude has already peaked. Link to OPEC's August 2005 report, scroll down to page 4 and do the math: http://www.opec.org/home/Monthly%20Oil%20Market%20Reports/2005/pdf/MR082005.pdf Light crude yields more gasoline and jet fuel per barrel than the medium and heavy crudes. Most refineries can't process the heavier grades without retooling and dumping more toxic byproducts into the environment. The Saudis have so much heavy crude these days they almost have to give it away. This largely unreported fact helps to explain how we can have a growing supply of (nonfungible) "oil" while the fuel situation continues to deteriorate. >not to mention the tar sands in Canada, which contain an equal amount. In the real world business of extracting oil from Alberta's muskeg, costs have started to spiral out of control because the process just about breaks even thermodynamically: Shell Canada Oil-Sands Cost Target Jumps to C$7.3 Bln (Update3) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000082&sid=ahBH9vf06yT0 Tar sand extraction uses natural gas, the supply for which in North American has already started to slide despite increasingly frenetic drilling, as Exxon's retiring CEO Lee Raymond admitted recently. The two hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico have made the supply situation dramatically worse. I'd put the odds at 60% that the U.S. will experience some kind of natural gas emergency this winter. What do these facts have to do with cryonics? One, and I can't this emphasize this enough, you can no longer depend on having mobility when you need it, especially if you live overseas and have to get to the U.S. for your cryosuspension. And two, liquid nitrogen requires an energy intensive industrial base to produce. The chemical industry threatens to quit North America because it can't afford the local natural gas as a feedstock (many nitrogen fertliizer plants have already closed for that reason), and other nonessential, energy expensive commodities will follow suit. Eventually this trend will threaten the supply of liquid nitrogen. Manage your risk, not your terror. Mark Plus Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=27098