Jump to content
BennyJackdaw

Why I'm misanthropic and why I hate hunters.

Recommended Posts

I keep forgetting to respond to this and it's halfheartedly sincere.

 

I'm an ecologist. I'm also a hunter. These are not mutually exclusive stances to take. I go pig hunting to help reduce the number of invasive feral pigs, which also happen to be delicious. Of course trophy hunters exist. I always found it strange honestly how trophy bucks (older, healthy animals) are targeted in hunting efforts rather than sick, old, or headstrong young bucks. It doesn't align with natural selection. That being said, humans have already messed up natural selection to the point there's no way to recuperate it through natural means again. But....here's the thing. That all was hecked up way before your time.

That's my preamble. My point is: why would you let that make you be misanthropic? You weren't born in a time before the Migratory Bird Act. You weren't alive when passenger pigeons were hunted to extinction, or when the last thylacine was pacing around a concrete pen, or when bear and bull baiting were considered fun family activities. You should absolutely be grateful to live in a society that is at least attempting to mitigate and right the wrongs of previous generations. 

Hell, even canned hunt money from safaris and "trophy hunts" now typically go to conservation. The meat? Typically eaten by natives there because trophy hunters obviously don't want to eat gamy stuff like lion. Poached meat in the US, when confiscated quickly, typically goes to processing for homeless shelters or to be turned to jerky and shipped to active military. It's been like that for like....30-40 years depending on what state you're in. And yeah it's all wrapped up in BS regulation but lmao at anyone who thinks that somehow now, trophy hunters are The Worst Things Ever. Hundred years ago women were encouraged to light fires at the base of trees to murder passenger pigeons. 

 

I do not know why I attempt to respond earnestly to this considering all measured responses are met with defensiveness by the OP but I wanted to share a little bit of modern conservation tidbits since it's really cool, imo. 

Also dang I really want some wild boar ribs rn 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 3:48 PM, Victor-933 said:

you're such a 9K111

I'm gonna eject my white hot load all over your face.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Zaraphayx said:

I'm gonna eject my white hot load all over your face.

No threats of arson please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2017 at 1:07 PM, Vallium said:

Okay yeaah but why are you guys hating on environmentalists? Sure, the world would be better off without humanity and nothing we can do is going to 100% reverse damage unless humanity stops being so populous, but that doesnt change the fact that humanity still exists RIGHT NOW, 

 

Why are you shitting on environmentalists and humanitarians trying to maintain a sense of balance when if there weren't any humans that made any attempts at all more species would go extinct, more land would be destroyed, and more damage would be done?

 

I'm pretty annoyed by the anti-humanitarian rhetoric on the basis of evolutionary timeline of the planet making it irrelevant

 

Would you rather all the environmentalists, ecologists, and researchers stop doing their jobs because it doesnt matter? Jeez...

I am an environmentalist, and it fucking drives me to watch legislation just slip by the general public pretty well unnoticed as bill riders. There's a lot of shit going on now, and it's waaaaay worse with Trump.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2017 at 0:37 PM, Wrecker said:

I am an environmentalist, and it fucking drives me to watch legislation just slip by the general public pretty well unnoticed as bill riders. There's a lot of shit going on now, and it's waaaaay worse with Trump.

You want civilization to continue don't you?

Imagine how expensive almost everything would be if shipping companies pretended to care about the environment and used more refined and expensive fuel rather than the cheap sulfur-heavy stuff for cargo ships for example.

Human civilization has always been harmful for the majority of organisms. It's only going to get worse as the economy continues to slow down, decline then collapse. On the bright side the world will have a chance to recover afterward (and after the radiation from the fuel ponds and reactors settles down).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I hate people for killing animals to eat or to control" 

oh gee whiz, I wonder how many animals were "relocated peacefully" to install your internet, power lines, generate your power, and mine the material for your electronics, and build your home. The more you have, the more damage is there.

Sorry to be an asshole, its usually not the way I am, but seriously. if you are worried about hunting causing damage, I'd think about the probability of how many companies you use, and buy from daily that probably are now standing over a drained wetland. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Data said:

"I hate people for killing animals to eat or to control" 

oh gee whiz, I wonder how many animals were "relocated peacefully" to install your internet, power lines, generate your power, and mine the material for your electronics, and build your home. The more you have, the more damage is there.

Sorry to be an asshole, its usually not the way I am, but seriously. if you are worried about hunting causing damage, I'd think about the probability of how many companies you use, and buy from daily that probably are now standing over a drained wetland. 

Exactly. Hunting is necessary because we've killed off all the natural predators that normally keep deer populations in check.

 

Want to ban hunting? Get ready for this to happen in your neighborhood to your pets.

(warning: extremely violent, dog probably dies)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Victor-933 said:

Exactly. Hunting is necessary because we've killed off all the natural predators that normally keep deer populations in check.

 

Want to ban hunting? Get ready for this to happen in your neighborhood to your pets.

(warning: extremely violent, dog probably dies)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

Perhaps we should keep hunting, but restrict the weapons to melee ones like clubs and axes. That would be good for a larf ;3

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Victor-933 said:

Exactly. Hunting is necessary because we've killed off all the natural predators that normally keep deer populations in check.

 

Want to ban hunting? Get ready for this to happen in your neighborhood to your pets.

(warning: extremely violent, dog probably dies)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

From what I remember, the dog didn't die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2017 at 7:09 PM, WileyWarWeasel said:

You want civilization to continue don't you?

Imagine how expensive almost everything would be if shipping companies pretended to care about the environment and used more refined and expensive fuel rather than the cheap sulfur-heavy stuff for cargo ships for example.

Human civilization has always been harmful for the majority of organisms. It's only going to get worse as the economy continues to slow down, decline then collapse. On the bright side the world will have a chance to recover afterward (and after the radiation from the fuel ponds and reactors settles down).

Bad media makes a world of a difference. When an outfit in Alberta shipped a heavy hauler down to a museum in Washington as a token of the equipment utilized in the oilsands industry, several activists caught wind of it, scrutinized the industry and provided as much bad publicity as they possibly could. It was enough attention to encourage a world of a difference in methods of oil exploration and values that were adopted by big names across the board. All of the sudden there were plans introduced by everybody to hand back tapped out stakes to nature, create muchly improved strategies and policies to handle spill response, introduce an entirely new method of oil extraction (SAGD), implement deadlines to return seismic cutlines, and forking out a fucking boatload of money in experimental technologies designed to make their processes more efficient and less wasteful. Everybody is gunning to be the next supposed green industry leader in pushing bitumen through a pipeline because there's serious market value in it now. They took a big hit when the world saw them tearing shit apart and firing up junk old boilers to push fairly shit oil downstream.

That's not at all saying that any of them are perfect; there's still a lot of work to be done, but the fucking junk attitude that it just needs to be done and that's the way it is, is fucking stupid. Nobody in any oil, gas, or mining industry is turning a deficit short of the organizations servicing them alongside their expendable employees, they are still and will continue to create substantial revenue for the foreseeable future. They're the most ruthless motherfuckers you'll ever meet, and as soon as they have to do something, they'll fuck anybody right over without question to make sure they still stay on payroll. Public pressure can sway a lot of things, put somebodies job on the line and they'll answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wrecker said:

Bad media makes a world of a difference. When an outfit in Alberta shipped a heavy hauler down to a museum in Washington as a token of the equipment utilized in the oilsands industry, several activists caught wind of it, scrutinized the industry and provided as much bad publicity as they possibly could. It was enough attention to encourage a world of a difference in methods of oil exploration and values that were adopted by big names across the board. All of the sudden there were plans introduced by everybody to hand back tapped out stakes to nature, create muchly improved strategies and policies to handle spill response, introduce an entirely new method of oil extraction (SAGD), implement deadlines to return seismic cutlines, and forking out a fucking boatload of money in experimental technologies designed to make their processes more efficient and less wasteful. Everybody is gunning to be the next supposed green industry leader in pushing bitumen through a pipeline because there's serious market value in it now. They took a big hit when the world saw them tearing shit apart and firing up junk old boilers to push fairly shit oil downstream.

That's not at all saying that any of them are perfect; there's still a lot of work to be done, but the fucking junk attitude that it just needs to be done and that's the way it is, is fucking stupid. Nobody in any oil, gas, or mining industry is turning a deficit short of the organizations servicing them alongside their expendable employees, they are still and will continue to create substantial revenue for the foreseeable future. They're the most ruthless motherfuckers you'll ever meet, and as soon as they have to do something, they'll fuck anybody right over without question to make sure they still stay on payroll. Public pressure can sway a lot of things, put somebodies job on the line and they'll answer.

Interesting sentiment, behold the results of them forking out a boatload of money:

https://srsroccoreport.com/end-of-the-u-s-major-oil-industry-era-big-trouble-at-exxonmobil/

https://srsroccoreport.com/the-blood-bath-continues-in-the-u-s-major-oil-industry/

https://srsroccoreport.com/continental-resources-example-of-what-is-horribly-wrong-with-the-u-s-shale-oil-industry/

https://srsroccoreport.com/worlds-largest-oil-companies-deep-trouble-as-profits-vaporize-while-debts-skyrocket/ (more recent article from October)

Yes, the articles are from SRS but they use data from the oil companies themselves.

 

You're not a PR officer of an oil company by any chance? If not you would be a good fit I would imagine.

I did highlight one thing I agree with from your assessment, many companies (oil or otherwise) are trying to be supposed green leaders, but that doesn't actually mean they're green at all. It is almost all about image at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

Interesting sentiment, behold the results of them forking out a boatload of money:

https://srsroccoreport.com/end-of-the-u-s-major-oil-industry-era-big-trouble-at-exxonmobil/

https://srsroccoreport.com/the-blood-bath-continues-in-the-u-s-major-oil-industry/

https://srsroccoreport.com/continental-resources-example-of-what-is-horribly-wrong-with-the-u-s-shale-oil-industry/

https://srsroccoreport.com/worlds-largest-oil-companies-deep-trouble-as-profits-vaporize-while-debts-skyrocket/ (more recent article from October)

Yes, the articles are from SRS but they use data from the oil companies themselves.

 

You're not a PR officer of an oil company by any chance? If not you would be a good fit I would imagine.

I did highlight one thing I agree with from your assessment, many companies (oil or otherwise) are trying to be supposed green leaders, but that doesn't actually mean they're green at all. It is almost all about image at this point.

1

No, I do work in the oil and gas industry, but that doesn't mean I advocate their work by any means. There is such thing as progress, though.

You should move north of the border in your search, considering I wasn't referring at all to the junk shale industry, fracing or the like.

Look up outfits like CNRL, Suncor, MEG, Cenovus, Devon or Syncrude.

And yes, it is entirely about image, but that doesn't mean that nothing changes as a result. If it weren't for the Westray Disaster, Bill C-45 wouldn't be a thing where I live and work, and you better believe that they plug safety HARD in the industry now. You should see what happens on every site through the province on April 28th to commemorate the National Day of Mourning for fallen workers. All the cranes on site blast their horns for several seconds, all work stops, and everybody sitewide takes a moment of silence.  Same goes to show with environmental issues, the current place I work in and several others I've been at have big-time severe spill reporting and handling policies where if more than a liter of so much as water or propylene glycol (used for hydrostatic testing in the winter months) hits the ground, they want to know about it and file an incident report over it. They'll shut down an entire project if a protected bird happens to create a nest in an active work area as per legislation.

Things happen with pressure in the same shape and way that asbestos is no longer the most common ingredient in insulation or that nuclear sources aren't installed without shielding, appropriate measurement, and training.

Things happen when people get pissed off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Wrecker said:

You should move north of the border in your search, considering I wasn't referring at all to the junk shale industry, fracing or the like.

I wasn't just referring to shale oil, I was also referring to the world's biggest oil companies.

In particular check out this article about the biggest oil companies:

https://srsroccoreport.com/worlds-largest-oil-companies-deep-trouble-as-profits-vaporize-while-debts-skyrocket/

 

Out of curiosity I checked out the companies you quoted.

 

CNRL:

If by CNRL you mean Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) I haven't been able to find reliable GAAP figures.

Their non-GAAP figures still show losses in 2015 and 2016:

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/CNQ/financials?p=CNQ

Hopefully you also know how easy it is to show profits when using non-GAAP figures and also how one or two good quarters does not necessarily a good year make (especially if they're achieved by deferring costs).

 

Suncor:

Free Cash Flow has been heading downhill after 2013, in the negative for 2016:

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/su/financials/cash-flow

 

MEG:

Free Cash Flow in the negatives for at least the last 5 years, though it at least improved in the last 2 years but still negative:

http://quotes.wsj.com/CA/MEG/financials

 

Cenovus:

Free Cash Flow in the negative for last 2 years:

http://quotes.wsj.com/CVE/financials

 

Devon:

Harder to find figures for them, 2016 showed major Free Cash Flow loss but at least 2017 is a few million in the positive for now:

http://markets.businessinsider.com/stock/DVN/financials

 

Syncrude:

Appears to be part of Suncor.

 

The occasional bright spot here and there does little to diminish the free cash flow problems that the oil industry faces as a whole. Even the Arabs are drawing down their foreign currency reserves to make up the deficit (Saudi Arabia as an example):

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/saudi-arabia-foreign-reserves-resume-falling-july-170825085047359.html

2 hours ago, Wrecker said:

And yes, it is entirely about image, but that doesn't mean that nothing changes as a result. If it weren't for the Westray Disaster, Bill C-45 wouldn't be a thing where I live and work, and you better believe that they plug safety HARD in the industry now. You should see what happens on every site through the province on April 28th to commemorate the National Day of Mourning for fallen workers. All the cranes on site blast their horns for several seconds, all work stops, and everybody sitewide takes a moment of silence.  Same goes to show with environmental issues, the current place I work in and several others I've been at have big-time severe spill reporting and handling policies where if more than a liter of so much as water or propylene glycol (used for hydrostatic testing in the winter months) hits the ground, they want to know about it and file an incident report over it. They'll shut down an entire project if a protected bird happens to create a nest in an active work area as per legislation.

Things happen with pressure in the same shape and way that asbestos is no longer the most common ingredient in insulation or that nuclear sources aren't installed without shielding, appropriate measurement, and training.

Things happen when people get pissed off.

So people get pissed off and a few practices change here and there. Behold the differences these kinds of changes in the oil industry and other industries make to figures such as these (source USGS):

4cf3455ccecb17447b018daad51d2d05--specie

2 hours ago, Wrecker said:

No, I do work in the oil and gas industry, but that doesn't mean I advocate their work by any means. There is such thing as progress, though.

Yes there is some progress, though the (positive) impacts such progress makes seems rather insignificant compared to the damage incurred to biodiversity and habitat.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

I wasn't just referring to shale oil, I was also referring to the world's biggest oil companies.

In particular check out this article about the biggest oil companies:

https://srsroccoreport.com/worlds-largest-oil-companies-deep-trouble-as-profits-vaporize-while-debts-skyrocket/

 

Out of curiosity I checked out the companies you quoted.

 

CNRL:

If by CNRL you mean Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) I haven't been able to find reliable GAAP figures.

Their non-GAAP figures still show losses in 2015 and 2016:

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/CNQ/financials?p=CNQ

Hopefully you also know how easy it is to show profits when using non-GAAP figures and also how one or two good quarters does not necessarily a good year make (especially if they're achieved by deferring costs).

 

Suncor:

Free Cash Flow has been heading downhill after 2013, in the negative for 2016:

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/su/financials/cash-flow

 

MEG:

Free Cash Flow in the negatives for at least the last 5 years, though it at least improved in the last 2 years but still negative:

http://quotes.wsj.com/CA/MEG/financials

 

Cenovus:

Free Cash Flow in the negative for last 2 years:

http://quotes.wsj.com/CVE/financials

 

Devon:

Harder to find figures for them, 2016 showed major Free Cash Flow loss but at least 2017 is a few million in the positive for now:

http://markets.businessinsider.com/stock/DVN/financials

 

Syncrude:

Appears to be part of Suncor.

 

The occasional bright spot here and there does little to diminish the free cash flow problems that the oil industry faces as a whole. Even the Arabs are drawing down their foreign currency reserves to make up the deficit (Saudi Arabia as an example):

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/saudi-arabia-foreign-reserves-resume-falling-july-170825085047359.html

So people get pissed off and a few practices change here and there. Behold the differences these kinds of changes in the oil industry and other industries make to figures such as these (source USGS):

4cf3455ccecb17447b018daad51d2d05--specie

Yes there is some progress, though the (positive) impacts such progress makes seems rather insignificant compared to the damage incurred to biodiversity and habitat.

It should be painfully obvious that any and all losses are from the direct causation of the standoff between OPEC and western counterparts circa 2014. Those losses cannot sensibly be regarded as something pertinent to the question at hand which is in regard to the improvement of environmental standards from major oil producers in Canada that have shown considerable improvement over time.

Also, if you're arguing against oil in general, why is that graph showing population through time? Correlation and causation.

The exchange rate of the several oil commodities has nothing to do with this, and even OPEC members have suffered losses over the time elapsed, which you've stated that is already a known fact that is monitored during every trading session every day. It might be a better idea for you to look into why oil is trading at the rate it is before assuming... uhh... Actually, what are you assuming here? What point are you trying to make with those statistics?

I hope you're doing more than just writing stuff on here and calling everything insignificant because every voice matters in changing something, and I'm trying to say that it really does force changes to happen. Keeping your mouth shut and just bitching about things to people that already feel the same sentiment does nothing, but maybe signing the odd petition or encouraging other people that you know to become just a little bit more vocal, and bitching to a broader audience yourself are all steps forward. 

I'm not happy with watching any of these motherfuckers just keep plugging on like nobody's ever going to stop them, but bit by bit, they're forced to change over public interest. We've made a significant amount of progress since the industrial revolution, and we are polymorphic in terms of our interests; nothing's fucking impossible.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Wrecker said:

It should be painfully obvious that any and all losses are from the direct causation of the standoff between OPEC and western counterparts circa 2014. Those losses cannot sensibly be regarded as something pertinent to the question at hand which is in regard to the improvement of environmental standards from major oil producers in Canada that have shown considerable improvement over time.

That's funny, because the BP Statistical Review of World Energy shows no sudden spike in oil production that would cause oil prices to slip down (and cause losses for oil companies). In fact in 2014 oil production in the middle east was lower than it was in 2012. No sudden spike in oil production growth rate occurred on a worldwide basis:

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html

10 hours ago, Wrecker said:

Also, if you're arguing against oil in general, why is that graph showing population through time? Correlation and causation.

I'm not arguing against oil, I'm pointing out the differences between their hype and the actual numbers for them (showing mostly losses). As for the graph it just happens to show both human pop and animal extinctions, I just wanted to emphasize the animal extinctions part. Here's a quick overview of what humans are doing (unfortunately only part of it is publicly available but it will give you a good idea) to cause these mass extinctions:

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mass-extinction-human-cause-by-paul-r--ehrlich-and-anne-h--ehrlich-2015-08?barrier=accessreg

There's obviously more detailed info on the processes involved but I can't be bothered putting that down here now.

10 hours ago, Wrecker said:

The exchange rate of the several oil commodities has nothing to do with this, and even OPEC members have suffered losses over the time elapsed, which you've stated that is already a known fact that is monitored during every trading session every day. It might be a better idea for you to look into why oil is trading at the rate it is before assuming... uhh... Actually, what are you assuming here? What point are you trying to make with those statistics?

Oil (and some other commodities) is trading at loss-making levels because the world economy can no longer afford highly-priced oil with diminishing EROI on top of its own escalating costs (namely pollution, debt, aging infrastructure and complexity).

If you want I can provide additional information from various sources referencing oil and other economic data.

It was you that told me to "Look up outfits like CNRL, Suncor, MEG, Cenovus, Devon or Syncrude." Well I actually did and decided to provide the statistics on how well they were doing since your post implied they were positive examples to follow.

10 hours ago, Wrecker said:

I hope you're doing more than just writing stuff on here and calling everything insignificant because every voice matters in changing something, and I'm trying to say that it really does force changes to happen. Keeping your mouth shut and just bitching about things to people that already feel the same sentiment does nothing, but maybe signing the odd petition or encouraging other people that you know to become just a little bit more vocal, and bitching to a broader audience yourself are all steps forward. 

That reminds me of the "every vote matters" argument. Making yourself heard is better than nothing but the overall course of the society and economy remains the same (a dissipative structure growing to counter its own effects of diminishing returns and increasing systemic costs becoming more and more complex before inevitably collapsing under its own weight).

10 hours ago, Wrecker said:

I'm not happy with watching any of these motherfuckers just keep plugging on like nobody's ever going to stop them, but bit by bit, they're forced to change over public interest. We've made a significant amount of progress since the industrial revolution, and we are polymorphic in terms of our interests; nothing's fucking impossible.

I'm afraid that sentiment such as "nothing's fucking impossible." does not coincide with the laws of physics and chemistry. Granted we obviously don't know everything about the universe but we have learned a great deal about physical constraints.

Humanity has marched straight into a progress trap and is in massive population overshoot.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

That's funny, because the BP Statistical Review of World Energy shows no sudden spike in oil production that would cause oil prices to slip down (and cause losses for oil companies). In fact in 2014 oil production in the middle east was lower than it was in 2012. No sudden spike in oil production growth rate occurred on a worldwide basis:

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html

I'm not arguing against oil, I'm pointing out the differences between their hype and the actual numbers for them (showing mostly losses). As for the graph it just happens to show both human pop and animal extinctions, I just wanted to emphasize the animal extinctions part. Here's a quick overview of what humans are doing (unfortunately only part of it is publicly available but it will give you a good idea) to cause these mass extinctions:

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/mass-extinction-human-cause-by-paul-r--ehrlich-and-anne-h--ehrlich-2015-08?barrier=accessreg

There's obviously more detailed info on the processes involved but I can't be bothered putting that down here now.

Oil (and some other commodities) is trading at loss-making levels because the world economy can no longer afford highly-priced oil with diminishing EROI on top of its own escalating costs (namely pollution, debt, aging infrastructure and complexity).

If you want I can provide additional information from various sources referencing oil and other economic data.

It was you that told me to "Look up outfits like CNRL, Suncor, MEG, Cenovus, Devon or Syncrude." Well I actually did and decided to provide the statistics on how well they were doing since your post implied they were positive examples to follow.

That reminds me of the "every vote matters" argument. Making yourself heard is better than nothing but the overall course of the society and economy remains the same (a dissipative structure growing to counter its own effects of diminishing returns and increasing systemic costs becoming more and more complex before inevitably collapsing under its own weight).

I'm afraid that sentiment such as "nothing's fucking impossible." does not coincide with the laws of physics and chemistry. Granted we obviously don't know everything about the universe but we have learned a great deal about physical constraints.

Humanity has marched straight into a progress trap and is in massive population overshoot.

Of course there wasn't an increase in production, that's not even how it works...

Forget it, what's with the melodramatic were-fucked junk rhetoric? You're just going to sit back and say everything is fucked without doing anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wrecker said:

Of course there wasn't an increase in production, that's not even how it works...

 

On 11/5/2017 at 3:35 PM, Wrecker said:

It should be painfully obvious that any and all losses are from the direct causation of the standoff between OPEC and western counterparts circa 2014.

Given that the mainstream rhetoric is that the middle east "flooded" the world market with oil in order to try to put western oil companies (in particular shale) out of business through low oil prices I thought you were referring to this.

Perhaps you should be more specific as they're not really sabotaging each other's operations or flooding the market either.

4 minutes ago, Wrecker said:

Forget it, what's with the melodramatic were-fucked junk rhetoric? You're just going to sit back and say everything is fucked without doing anything?

Nope, I'll continue to slake my curiosity of the way the human world works within the natural world and otherwise entertain myself through games and anime and such while the electricity is on ;3333333333333

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, WileyWarWeasel said:

 

Given that the mainstream rhetoric is that the middle east "flooded" the world market with oil in order to try to put western oil companies (in particular shale) out of business through low oil prices I thought you were referring to this.

Perhaps you should be more specific as they're not really sabotaging each other's operations or flooding the market either.

Nope, I'll continue to slake my curiosity of the way the human world works within the natural world and otherwise entertain myself through games and anime and such while the electricity is on ;3333333333333

 

https://www.investing.com/news/commodities-news/oil-hits-highest-levels-since-2015-amid-tightening-markets-saudi-purge-764156

https://www.investing.com/news/commodities-news/oil-hits-highest-levels-since-2015-amid-tightening-markets-saudi-purge-764156

https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/asia-shares-slip-from-decade-highs-oil-at-twoyear-top-on-saudi-purge-764154

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/11/05/oil-hits-highest-levels-since-2015-amid-tightening-markets-saudi-purge.html

https://www.investing.com/news/commodities-news/crude-oil-gains-in-asia-as-saudi-crackdown-drives-risk-views-764152

http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/commodities/wti-crude-oil-trades-intraday-to-2017-high-as-opec-breeds-confidence?post=155174

It isn't that anybody limited production, you should see what happens when plants are directed to increase production above their designed capacity. It's hard enough for them to produce less than what they're designed for, it's next to impossible to just turn them up. It isn't on a dial. Things have a tendency to catastrophically ESD.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wrecker said:

I was originally talking about the prices crashing in 2014, the articles you reference are from 2017. I also never said that oil producers simply turned up their production on existing rigs either in 2014.

I love the line in the first article: "The decline in U.S. drilling activity comes as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and a non-OPEC group lead by Russia have pledged to hold back about 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) in oil production to tighten markets."

Companies get paid based on the oil they deliver. If you don't deliver the oil, you don't get the money. As such, if your rivals are cutting drilling which means lower production at a later point it makes much more sense to at least maintain your production to take advantage of the their diminished supply and slightly higher prices. Guess what happens if you cut production as well? You don't get the revenue for the barrels of oil you would've otherwise delivered.

The fact that their oil production is ostensibly going to go down while they're starved for revenue (remember the stats for the world's largest oil companies and even the oil companies you told me about) points to the fact that they're struggling to maintain current production given the low prices.

That being said it's also possible that the Russians and others are simply bluffing about production cuts so as to encourage prices slightly higher over the short term.

 

As for global oil and other liquid fuels production:

https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.cfm

Edit: I'll be a bit more specific about what I mean when it comes to production, consumption and price. Check out the historical prices for oil:

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=rwtc&f=m

When production lagged behind consumption between Q3 2012 and Q1 2014 the average price of oil rose about 11USD. However between Q2 2014 and the end of Q4 2014 the average price of oil dropped 50USD despite fact that the change in oil stocks in this period was roughly 1.5 m/b increase which came after the roughly 7 m/b decrease in stocks during the period where the price of oil rose only 11USD. This points to the world economy struggling to maintain prices in the face of production lagging consumption but very quick to massively decrease oil prices after a very short period of oversupply which didn't even come close to making up the deficit at the time of price increase. The issue here is affordability.

 

Since you seem to have some knowledge of the oil industry I hope you also know that the return on investment needs to be sufficiently high for oil and other commodities for that matter to be extracted in the first place. I hope that the statistics I've provided you with give you a clue as to what's happening with return on investment over time (it's going down due to diminishing returns).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<mod post>
This is quite beyond a derail at this point, and the OP's not even responding any more.

Take it out of the thread.
</mod post>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2017 at 1:23 AM, Victor-933 said:

Exactly. Hunting is necessary because we've killed off all the natural predators that normally keep deer populations in check.

 

Want to ban hunting? Get ready for this to happen in your neighborhood to your pets.

(warning: extremely violent, dog probably dies)

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

 

Would have probably shot that deer if it was my dog. Wouldn't have even waited for the cops, as they'd probably take 10 or 15 minutes for their slow asses to get their. "When seconds count the police are minutes away"?

Hence why I'm usually supportive of culls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...