I think the idea is to burn everyone else's oil, then start in ernest to extract all available reserves in our domain while we then begin to develope alternative energy sources and acheive world domination.

Why burn ours while we can still burn theirs?

And as I've said before, we currently pay about 16 cents per cup of oil...is there anything in this world that we pay so little for? How much was your last cup @ Starbucks? Oil will continue to get more expensive, barring a major worldwide depression, and most people will continue to pay for it...at least those who can afford it. Face it: you need that cup of gas more than the coffee, that's for sure.

I don't think the oil companies are to blame. They're involved in the most lucrative industry the world has seen, largely due to the world's addiction to oil. If you don't want them making big profits, stop buying their products...easier said than done, though, virtually everything we use today is a product of petroleum.

What I think is most interesting is what do oil companies know about oil production? If you were running Exxon/BP/Shell and knew that production had peaked, would you build more refineries? Of course not. Peak oil means that tomorrow you will not be able to produce as much oil as you did today. What I find most interesting in all of this is our involvement in Iraq and the involvement of Halliburton in Iraq. Dick Cheney back in 1999 was a proponent of Peak Oil theory. One of the greatest threats right now to our country and way of life is a full-scale war in the middle east. We are so incredibly dependent upon their oil right now...our involvement in Iraq, as bizarre as it may seem, may be a way of protecting valuable oil resources...in other words, it's probably a resource war.

Duke,
Since it seems like you know a bit about this topic, I wanted to ask you a question.

I agree with you about peak oil. My question to you is what should we do about it? We need to get energy from somewhere? Do we suck it up and pay $250/barrel for oil (or however high it gets), or do we use an alternative?

Bingo.

Large oil is also very much into other energy alternates. When you are buying an electric vehicle in the future, chances are that large oil companies will be involved in the production of electrical energy. The balance will shift away from carbon based fuels as technology and the economy permit. Not when we stamp our feet and proclaim it must be so.

How's this? The higher price of oil, the better off large aircraft operators will be. High fuel prices make RJs less efficient. High fuel prices make hedging less a competitive edge. (unless the hedge managers really bet well). Higher price fuel will get passed on to the consumer but there will be less seats in the air. It's a win win. Everybody makes money.

It could happen. :rolleyes:

That is a great idea when you can fill a 737. What happens when demand falls because of the coming, or maybe it is here, recession? After 9/11 it was more profitable to fly a full RJ than a half-full 737 and that is after the pilots took it in the shorts on concessions. There is more to picking the right airplane than just fuel costs per mile. Although I agree that the 50 seat RJ's time is limited.

737-700 pax 137 .79 cruise 4200 pph
c200 pax 50 .74 cruise 2900 pph

One of the world's largest producers of PhotoVoltaic (PV) cells is BP Solar... as in British Petroleum.

A lot of talk of supply and demand. I see the correlation to inflation and profit margin but WHAT ABOUT PRODUCTION COSTS? Cost is typically what drives pricing. So is it accepted that the oil rigs cost twice as much to pump money out of the ground as several years ago?

By those numbers, the 737-700 with 137 seats burns 30.66 pph/seat, while the CRJ-200 burns 58 pph/seat.

The "break-even" point between the CRJ and the 737 with 137 pax is 95 passengers.

If you can get ~70% load factor on the 737 with 137 seats, you are doing better in the "pounds per hour per passenger" ratio than the CRJ-200. Of course that discounts total revenue brought in, as well as acquisition, crew, and maintenance costs between the types, and actual fuel burn based on stage lengths.

My point? Numbers are easily manipulated to suit your agenda, and there is MUCH more to consider when deciding what fleet type to put into what market other than simply the hourly fuel burns. If a market will support narrowbodies and they are available for that route by all means use them, but lets not start thinking about flying RJs between cities where you'll only have 40-50 average passengers simply because of the per-seat fuel burns.

Aerospacepilot,

I obviously don't know the answers to this one. I didn't know anything about Peak Oil until after becoming an airline pilot. Then I started asking the hard questions about pay, quality of life, etc. and what the driving force behind these things were...then I happened across an article in Airways Magazine entitled Peak Oil: The Collapse of Commercial Aviation. The article was scary to read and difficult to swallow, however, almost everything the article predicted has occurred thus far...hence my fascination w/ Peal Oil.

I think alternative energy is great. I salute every single person who is involved it its development. With that said, virtually every single alternative energy that I've explored is just too energy intensive to serve as a meaningful replacement for the fossil fuels.

So, the way I see it, use your knowledge of Peak Oil as a means of adapting. You'll have a better perspective on the changes to come and will be better prepared for those changes. Heck, there may be opportunities out there to prosper financially from Peak Oil. It's not the end of the world, but it is the end of the world as we know it. I'm grateful for the opportunites I've received and I try to keep a keen eye on the future to come. In the mean time, hopefully someone a whole lot smarter than I am will come up w/ an energy resource that revolutionizes how the world is powered. It's possible, but a long-shot at best.

Production costs for old wells have remained fairly flat, bringing in new discoveries is far more expensive usually because they are deeper, under water, or under ice in isolated areas.
The demand is driving prices up and production has not kept pace.

If we were to switch to an all electric economy next week, it is quite safe to assume the price of electricity would climb rather steeply.

Yes, it is significantly more expensive. There is only one large scale producer of deep water oil rigs. National Oilwell Varco. Go look at their backlog. If you want a new deep water oilrig, you are going to have to wait at least two or three years. The ones already built are on contract. Transocean is the biggest player in offshore drilling. Go look at the websites and quarterly reports, it is not a pretty picture if you want costs to come down. Land rigs are a little more available depending on the location. Halliburton and Schlumberger are the biggest players in oil service.

Hi!

ANWAR has ONE YEAR's worth of US oil consumption, if we take all of it.

The Canadian Tar Sands would use ALL of the natural gas in North America to convert them to oil, with current production methods.

Another item on high production costs/difficulties of oil production: LABOR!
-The engineers that find the oil are retiring, and they can't find enough new ones.
-The workers that build the oil rigs are retiring, and they can't find enough new ones.
-The workers that operate/maintain the oil rigs are retiring, and they can't find enough new ones.
-The workers that operate/maintain the oil refineries are retiring, and they can't find enough new ones.

China, and India.

All of the above, combined with the peaking of oil in various countries, INCLUDING Saudi Arabia, means that deman, RIGHT NOW, TODAY, is outpacing supply.

Hang on, it's going to be a bumpy, wild ride!

cliff
YIP

No, just no.

If suddenly everybody has another significant energy consuming device attached to the power grid, it's not gonna be cheap anymore.

Plus where does the electricity come from? :p

Why not release some of the oil from our Strategic Reserve and flood the supply side of the market ?

Secondly, it was mentioned that the legacy carriers should just raise fares to compensate for rising oil prices. I agree 110%.

However, the other day, I saw an ad on TV:

Wanna Get Away ?
Los Angeles to any Bay Area airport $39 each way.

...and it wasn't Skybus or Virgin America.

I'd be curious after $100/bbl, what the next resistence level is in terms of price.

FF

Nice Democrat talking point.

Still don't see why that means we shouldn't drill there. When was the last time you hiked there?

For a good overall perspective on oil and shale reserves: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

There is plenty of oil out there, but that isn't going to make it cheaper.

For those of you who want to learn more about Peak Oil, go to www.financialsense.com and find the webcast portion of the website and listen to Jim Puplava discuss these issues along with others over the past couple of years as this issue has brewed. He's had the authors of several peak oil books on during the past several months, and those webcasts are in the archives.

Jim has a very good investment advice record, he advised to buy gold starting back in 2005, predicted last year's spike in oil, and warned of the sub prime debacle coming early last spring. He runs a private investment firm in San Diego for high net worth clients, PFS Group, and in 2006 his reccomended portfolio was up 20% in a very mediocre year for the markets.

His econimic warnings for late 2009-2010 are not good, and if you listen to the webcasts you better brace yourselves.

Duke is right, better prepare yourselves, because "there's a storm coming"...JP

I like wikipedia, but hell I can post information on that site. I agree there is a lot of oil out there, but at the pace we are using it you eventually out pace the production. I'm not saying it is today or tomorrow, but it will eventually happen.

My point exactly, whatever the source, the only question is how long this may take and how it will impact our interests. The process has already started.

[QUOTE=ewrbasedpilot;323295]:mad:Today oil shot up $4 a bbl and briefly crossed the $100 mark again. This is going to KILL aviation unless something is done to curtail this insanity. When oil companies are raking in $40 BILLION in profits for a quarter, something is definitely wrong with the picture. At CAL, every $1 increase is another $44 MILLION off the bottom line, or over $176 MILLION off the bottom line just today!!! I hope the oil companies/speculators, and Saudi's are happy with what they're doing to everyone. I just wish our government would grow some balls (even tiny ones would help) and say enough is enough and start going after the speculators who look for every little nuance to push the price ever higher. But, since we're beholden to the middle-east and special interest groups, that will never happen and the consumer will be blamed for using too much. My guess is that "recession" will be a mild word for what's going to really be the end result. The average american can't afford to fill up their gas tank much more if this keeps up. I guess those poor people getting an "economy stimulus rebate check" are salivating while waiting for a few more dollars to fill their tank. Meanwhile, the oil people are laughing their way to the bank.................:( Flame away..............:rolleyes:[/QUO



1. Why is this wrong? From 81-2001, no change in gas price. Water was more expensive. 2. Every time it falls by a $ we save 44 million!! 3. OPEC sets the price of oil. Nobody else. You're are correct though, they have us by the balls. 4. I haven't seen less cars on the road or people parking them. So obviously we're not hurting too bad. Just some thoughts. Not jabbing. Just believe the government should stay the hell out of business and let the markets work. Look what government meddling has done to the airlines, hospitals, etc. Don't ever look to a Sentator, etc. to fix your problems. They don't give a damn about you.

1 year of oil in ANWR? Read books, not political campaign ads. Peak Oil? Depends on who you listen too. Environmentalists said it happened in 1978, but they were wrong then as they probably are now. Try this website: www.insideautomotive.com Ed Wallace is a historian who covers the auto industry and pretty well keeps an even keel about things. He posts very relevant news stories each day. Also, he found a little nugget last week. Supply and demand you say? Our demand is increasing globally at about 1.45 times over the next few decades. Our supply (known reserves with increasing access) are growing at about 1.25 times. His take is if we use petroleum for fuel and stop making clothes and some useless plastics from it (i.e. that plastic baseball you got your nephew), then supplies increase slightly greater than projected demand. It's a competition for the resource. Plus, where exactly does aerospacepilot think electricity comes from? All the hydroelectric plants, solar cells, and windfarms contribute less than 10% to the electrical grid today. What's the price tag to increase that 12 times to supply us? Is he gonna get permisiion from CA to put ugly windmills up, considering a condor might fly into one and die? How about covering the whole state of AZ with solar farms? They won't mind a bit right? We need to find more energy resources. On this we can agree. What we don't need are the lies and distortions that lead us into fairy tale land.

Also, this from that right wing rag the San Francisco Chronicle.

Some counterbalance came from expectations of U.S. stock builds. JBC Energy predicted that the U.S. Energy Department's Energy Information Administration will announce gains of 2.41 million barrels of crude Thursday for the week ending Feb. 15, as well as increases in gasoline, diesel and heating oil stocks.

Quoted from boortzdotcom, Nealz news, 20 Feb 2008

In 2006 Exxon reported profits of $39.5 billion. Politicians went nuts. In 2007 those profits went to $40.6 billion. Politicians went nutsier.

The reason politicians can successfully demagogue these profits is that the vast majority .. and we're talking 95% and above .. of Americans couldn't tell you the difference between a profit and a profit margin if their flat screen TVs depended on it. Simply stated, profit is the total amount you make. Profit margin is how much you make on each dollar of sales. You would think that this would be taught in our government schools ... but if you did think that you would be wrong.

So ... what has been happening to Exxon's profit margin during these record profit years? Staying about the same, that's what; around 10%. The reason their profits have been increasing is because the price of crude oil has been going up ... bring gas prices up with them ... thus increasing the dollar amount of sales. Profit – up. Profit margins – 'bout the same.

By the way ... financial institutions and cosmetics companies have been enjoying higher margins ... along with many other sectors of our economy.

Now .. the numbers that I presented yesterday. Pretty eye-opening. The research was posted on the Seeking Alpha website.

Over the past three years Exxon Mobile has paid an average of $27 billion a year in taxes to the Imperial Federal Government. This has amounted to about 41% of Exxon's taxable income.

The last year for which complete numbers on who pays what taxes are available was 2004. In 2004 there were 130 million individual tax returns filed. If you take the bottom 50% of those tax returns – 65 million of them – and add up the total amount of taxes those households paid you come up with $27.4 billion. This means that one corporation, Exxon Mobile, pays as much in taxes to the federal government as do the bottom half of individual taxpayers. How's that for paying your fair share.

There's more. The Adjusted gross income for the bottom 50% of taxpayers comes out to about $922 billion. This means that these taxpayers are paying an effective tax rate of about 3% of their adjusted gross income. Exxon? Adjusted gross income of around $67.4 billion in 2006 ... for an effective tax rate of 41%.

There's the facts, my friends. If you're able to absorb them you'll see just how you're being manipulated by the likes of Hillary Clinton and other politicians. If the American voters were truly educated they couldn't get away with it for a minute.

And how many refineries have been closed in the last 15 to 20 years? Google it... :eek:

Someone might have put this out there... Taking too long to read the whole thread...

Supply and Demand... You can make refineries only so much more efficient.

[QUOTE=reCALcitrant;323862.......... Every time it falls by a $ we save 44 million!! .....[/QUOTE]

Hard to save any money when the price goes up $5 for every $1 it goes down. Our PBS givebacks for an entire year are completely wiped out for over 5000 pilots in a matter of MINUTES due to the spiraling costs of oil. Our price per bbl for crack crude was almost $120 for jetfuel! Something is definitely going on here. :(

Could it be that the man is keeping you down?

Wow! You don't sound like a typical Hole fan! What about your boy Johnny Edwards?? Don't think he'd agree with you.

Heres hoping the Wolfpack walk away with a win tonight!!:D

Ummm, what??

How's the view from up there in the bozoshpere?

Now that was funny!! Mind if I use it???:D

not at all!

Glad to see you two finish where you started. Lots of whining and mewling wrapped in self delusion. Did you contribute a single logical thought in eight pages? Let us know how that conspiracy theory works out for you.

Did you?

your posts were certainly longer and had more five dollar words. not much logical thought or substance, though....hey, wait a minute! are you sure you're not Barak Obama??

Wow.......pretty impressive post if i say so myself! You must read Readers Digest "Word Power" alot..............:eek::rolleyes: Let me guess.........C-150 Captain, right?

Okay guys, is this discussion going to continue to spiral downhill or do you want to discuss the impact of the price of oil on the industry? At the very least, please keep it civil. Thanks!

Damn it Dog Breath, that Avatar of yours gets me every time.

I sat in the back of an RJ and was very impressed with the crew's decelerated approach contrasting a later 30 mile flaps extended downwind on a subsequent flight by another RJer...the former crew gave me some hope for our oil situation...

W/O reading any other response.
1. US Govt makes more on taxes off oil than the oil companies.
2, Last new oil refinery was built in 1976. Laws, special interests have prevented any since then (like nuclear power plants)
3. US Govt does not control the world market. Talk to the Chinese and Indian govts. Their economies appetite for oil is growing exponentially, the US demand has remained relatively stable for the last 20 years. Now we are competing even more heavily for same commodity. Price goes up.