01330035

 

 

 

 

 

Tiresome….

Some day (soon, I hope) audiences for whom peak oil denial nonsense is intended will ask themselves: what are the reasons—and supporting evidence—for these kinds of assertions?

Good to have dreams, I say.

(While they’re at it, audiences can also ask the same re: NRA-paranoid crazy statements and the idiotic pronouncements on a wide range of topics routinely offered by a growing number of painfully clueless right-wing pols—all of whom are diligently competing with one another for the title of Congressional Moron of the Year. Issa and Gohmert are running neck and neck. But I digress.)

Browsing through some recent articles by those for whom facts and context continue to remain elusive concepts, I came across some creative variations on the theme of denying we have any problems with our fossil fuel supplies. It’s nice to have something different to dismantle.

But fact-and context-free nonsense is still nonsense. This first post in the series offers up a sampling. There’s so much more, sad to say.

Shock Wave

It was of course comforting to see some old friends like the unquantifiable but really cool-sounding “awash in hydrocarbons” and the ever-optimistic-let-no-facts-get-in-the-way “potentially vast” (which some spoil-sports will surely contradict with their opposing assessment: “probably not very much” and then add evidence in support—damn them), but this was my favorite: “a shock wave of new oil supply.”

I have no idea what that means or how one quantifies a shock wave of oil, but I’m guessing it’s gotta be at least a few hundred barrels. Minimum!

As often seems the case, we apparently still have the possibility of potential new possibilities which may possibly happen at some point in the future. This is so even if nothing within a country mile of a fact is part of the prediction. The good news is brought to us by deniers who have added clairvoyance to their arsenal (my comments within the bold/italic [[ ]] ):

Oil Supply Nostradamus

[T]he next phase of technology will almost certainly focus on how to better store, transport, and distribute the abundant supplies of natural gas now becoming available [1]

[[ Almost certainly! Let’s not trouble ourselves with any understanding about accessing “abundant supplies,” either—the kind where fact is used to dispute or support. ]]

The reality is that, in just a few years, we may live in a world where fresh water is no longer widely used in hydraulic fracturing operations. [2]

[[ How about even a hint of a fact suggesting this is even a remote possibility? “We may live….” Seriously? And just how are we measuring/defining “widely used?” ]]

Squeezing oil out of shale is expensive business. If the global price drops below the high cost of producing shale oil, then drillers stop squeezing and go out of business. Overall, though, happy days will be here again for the oil industry. [3]

[[ Sure hope he didn’t tear his ACL on that pivot from a brief visit to Factville back to “Happy-Days-Are-Here-Again Land” ]]

I’m just getting warmed up, but I’ll leave you with this:

Oil Industry Cheerleading

Defending to the high heavens the goodness of the fracking industry’s heart and how deeply committed all participants are to disclosing the chemical contents used in fracking, the same author offered these comments:

In addition, the ‘shale-gas industry’ funded and worked with the Groundwater Protection Council to establish FracFocus.org, the voluntary disclosure website where, as of this writing, the chemical content of 42,709 hydraulic frac jobs has been disclosed. Third, the author talks about hydraulic fracturing as if it is something new, when in fact it has been in use by the oil and natural gas industry since 1949, encompassing well over 1.2 million frac jobs in the intervening 64 years.  (I’ll address FracFocus.org in an upcoming post, along with the 60-plus years claim.)

Cheerleading Meets Math

I suck at math, but my handy-dandy calculator tells me that disclosing the chemical content of 42,709 frac jobs from a pool of 1.2 million means the industry has demonstrated its deep, deep concerns three-hundredths of one per cent of the time. No need to worry, citizens of the world, so let’s party! [Let’s not forget that the industry’s version/definition tends to differ from the one used by rest of us.]

If the commentary described in this series is any indication (discussed in many other posts of mine—see the “Denial” category in the Sidebar—and those offered by others), three-hundredths of one per cent appears to be the going rate for truthful, fact-filled, context-supplied statements by the fossil fuel industry’s media shills.

Good thing energy supply doesn’t matter all that much.

~ My Photo: Crystal Cove State Park, CA – Sept 2008

Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
– Look for my new website coming soon

Sources:

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/pikeresearch/2013/05/12/old-technology-fuels-new-energy-boom/; Old Technology Fuels New Energy Boom by Richard Martin – 05.12.13
[2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/05/13/the-illogic-and-folly-of-peak-oil-or-is-it-peak-gas-alarmism/; The Illogic And Folly Of Peak Oil (Or Is It Peak Gas?) Alarmism by David Blackmon – 05.13.13
[3] http://www.green-energy-news.com/arch/nrgs2013/20130047.html; THE COMING DELUGE OF OIL by Bruce Mulliken – 05.20.13