On 15 Apr, 15:51, Eric Chomko wrote:

I have only one comment, that on oil companies. The truth about oil
companies is an interesting one. They recognize themselves that oil
has a finite life and are diversifying themselves at quite a rapid
rate. BP is putting solar panels on the roofs of its garages. Gimmick
you might say. Not entirely, oil companies are positioning themselves
for technological change and want to ensure a foothold in any new
technology.

Yes, but some have to fail, that is the nature of business. Right now
they are in a prevent failure mode my making sure that oil still gets
used more than it should. And they own enough politicians to prevent
the government to really push for new forms of energy.

Sure the oil companies know the future means change, but they are NOT
about to lead the way.

Every company is out to maximize its profits. However I was listening
on an article on oil company finances. A high price of oil benefits
them, but only up to a point. If you look in more detail at the
balance sheet you will find that considerable provision is made for
the writing down of assets. High oil prices benefit producer
countries. Oil companies to some extent but the added value you get
from such activities as refining and transport can get squeezed.
Exploration costs are going up relative to finds. This is basically
what is meant by "peak oil". There is more oil - true, but it is is
smaler and smaller quantities and is less and less accessable. There
comes a point where investment in alternative energy is more cost
effective than further exploration.


It is important to realize this. If the green movement plays its cards
right it could have the oil companies on board!

Nope. Oil works off profit not benevolence.

Yes but we can make it worth their while to invest in alternative
energy.

It should be accepted
though that in the short and medium term furure there will be a need
for petroleum products. This is where BP is coming from.

Oil companies have their own armies and fight their own wars. The main
reason why the UK went into the Iraq war with Bush and the US was to
assist BP interests. Don't kid yourself.

Are you aware of the 1953 coup in Iran and who was there to reinstall
the shah?

This I know is talked about a lot by the left. The fact is that oil
producers need to sell their oil as much as consumers need to buy it.
The Shah BTW was NOT a fan of cheap oil. Oil is a sticky black
substance. The only thing you can do with it is sell it. I do not
approve of Western (particularly US) foreign in the Middle East.
However to say that it is motivated by oil is erroneous. As I say oil
is bought and sold in Rotterdam. Who owns the oil, in the sense of who
is in power, has very little effect on the price.

In fact the interesting question is what would happen if (or should I
say when) solar power arrives. It is already growing at 50% compound
each year. William Mook will destroy Saudi Arabia. You cannot face
Mook without Wahhabism and with all your population (I am referring
here to the women) working. You don't need women when a sticky black
substance bubbles out of the ground. In fact Wahhabism is only
possible in a country that does not have to run a normal economy.

The post oil Middle East is the really interesting thing.


- Ian Parker