Oil Companies clean up: big profits.

[mears]

But I would also say Bernie that some type of commercial farming will always exist because it must. There is simply not enough arable land in Asia, stretching into India and the Middle East.

China has had to take some land out of agricultural production because the tress cut down exacerbated flooding. China will need to export grains to feed their people along with Japan, North and South Korea. Also there are growing populations in places like Indonesia and Malaysia. India of course has a a billion people.

The places ready to service the areas in corn and soybean exports are the two grain producing superpowers, the US and Brazil. The US, Australia and Canada will compete for the wheat market. There is also beef exports to places like Japan and South Korea.

Agricultute is a truly globalised business.

 

[pbman]

What the hell is "chap oil"?

YOu are supid if you can' fuigure out that typo.

Why do you advertise that fact tehn?

 

[pbman]

Anyways oil companies are not the only ones cleaning up.

The feds get a huge percentage right off the top, without any overhead or production costs.

Usually one eight the value on federal lands, this includes all offshore, were they own it all, and were most of the future potential is.

So if the congress is whining about oil company profits, i assume they have all ready given back their huge "windfall" then?

Of course not.

They are massive hypocrits.

And they get away with it, as most people don't know the get the get the lions share.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Thanks for the reply. You know a lot more than I do about sustainable agriculture. If countries have the arable land I think its good to promote individulal or family plots to grow vegtables, fruit, nuts or whatever you can in the environment you live in. This does happen in the states but I don't know any of the numbers. I am sure they are pretty small.

I know some things on the business end of agriculture. I worked in the corn futures pit at the Chicago Board of Trade. I also have part ownership in a family farm in Ohio.

High oil prices are hurting western famers. American farmers have a huge lobbying outift in Washington and American farmers are subsidised for each acre in production. Subsidising each acre brings more supply to the market, further depressing prices which means more money from Washington. Its an evil circle. Emergency releif to drought stricken areas of North and South Dakota means the US government encourages planting crops not sustainable to the environment.

The same goodies are of course doled out by the EU.

If US and Europe wants to work on something constructive they should bring down their agricultural subsidies together.

I dislike the US & EU subsidy systems too, but possibly for different reasons. A small scale organic type of operation is more efficient per acre in actually producing food, but a large scale industrial operation is more efficient in producing food per worker, which at current oil prices and subsidy levels means a lower economic cost.

The economics supporting the latter type of operation are heavily subsidised in both the US and the EU, leading to the practices you descibe and also leading to the dumping of food produced in the developed world, which in turn creates enormous problems for farmers in the developing world and for small scale farmers within the developed world. Frequently it simply puts small scale, low-environmental impact farmers out of business. Such farms also do far less well in terms of subsidies in the places I'm aware of, because large agribusiness concerns are better at lobbying and working the subsidy system.

These subsidies mostly support the petrochemical-agribusiness-supermarket system, to the detriment of other potential systems which, for the reasons I describe above, are considerably more sustainable.

 

[ViolentPanda]

In the future you should:

1. tell when you are using another's words and

2. Understand what you are copying.

1) I'm not using another's words, I used my own. If someone else has spoken/written them then I'm not aware of it, but I take it to show that the contention I made is quite an obvious and apparent one.

2) I'm not aware that I'm copying anything, please expand. If you can't then please shut your yap.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

They are far different here, they are very old fields.

Pre-war most of them.

The over produced them, during WW2.....

The wells here aren't exactly new either.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/calgary/turnervalley.html

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/bm/W058738.R9tq_DOG.html

 

[Bernie Gunther]

But I would also say Bernie that some type of commercial farming will always exist because it must. There is simply not enough arable land in Asia, stretching into India and the Middle East.

China has had to take some land out of agricultural production because the tress cut down exacerbated flooding. China will need to export grains to feed their people along with Japan, North and South Korea. Also there are growing populations in places like Indonesia and Malaysia. India of course has a a billion people.

The places ready to service the areas in corn and soybean exports are the two grain producing superpowers, the US and Brazil. The US, Australia and Canada will compete for the wheat market. There is also beef exports to places like Japan and South Korea.

Agricultute is a truly globalised business.

I'm not convinced by this.

Firstly, most of the exporting countries you mention, I think all of them but would have to check, have heavy subsidies for agribusiness which encourage export dumping on developing countries. Secondly, I know from research that I've done in this area that food aid to several of the Asian countries you mention was done for political purposes by both the US and USSR post WW2, and has seriously messed up their local food security because the aid was used to introduce unsustainable forms of industrial agriculture, replacing indigenous methods which had been working pretty well for 1000's of years, with ones that are now failing due to the ecological damage they've caused and which have displaced 100's of millions of people into urban squalor.

 

[pbman]

The wells here aren't exactly new either.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/calgary/turnervalley.html

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/bm/W058738.R9tq_DOG.html

I bet they didn't over produce them durring ww2 then.

Talk about being shafted lots of the oil got left in the ground, and we got .15 a barrel for it,..... we wasted it all freeing ungratefull europeans.

I take it the same didn't happen to your fields if their still in good shape.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I bet they didn't over produce them durring ww2 then.

Talk about being shafted lots of the oil got left in the ground, and we got .15 a barrel for it,..... we wasted it all freeing ungratefull europeans.

I take it the same didn't happen to your fields if their still in good shape.

Maybe, or maybe the reserves were larger to begin with.

 

[pbman]

Maybe, or maybe the reserves were larger to begin with.

I doubt it, these were huge fields.

But who knows.

But when you over produce a well to free europeans, you can never get that oil out of the ground, as it has no pressure.

Next time we will know better i guess.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I doubt it, these were huge fields.

But who knows.
:

Of interest is the fact that Turner Valley has the greatest known productive closure of any oilfield or gasfield on the American continent. The productive closure, the oil and gas bearing trap formed by the upthrust of the Madison limestone, extends from 796 ft above Sea Level (the elevation at which the shallowest Naphtha gas well contacted the lime) to nearly 4,200 ft below Sea Level (the level at which salt water under lying the crude oil was encountered in South Turner Valley). This gives Turner Valley a productive closure of nearly 5,000 ft

Estimates of Turner Valley Reserve, that is the amount of oil that mately be recovered from the field, vary widely. Six expert Petroleum engineers presented their estimates before the McGillivry Royal Commission in 1939. The average of their estimates would be an ultimate recovery of about 200 million bbls with an average recovery per acre of about 15,000 bbls. Important to note, however, is that the same engineers' estimates on individual wells range from 600,000 to 900,000 bbls on wells that might be described as average, and from 900,000 to as much as 2,000,000 bbls on a considerable number of wells rated better than average. On the basis of 40 acres per well these individual well estimates would give recoveries of from 15,000 to 50,000 >bbls per acre an average or better wells. Estimates of recovery for the large probable oil area, not yet proven' by the drill, are generally set well below the estimates for the producing area, and the estimate of total field recovery may be subject to considerable revision when the possibilities of the 'probable' oil area can be more accurately determined by a study of conditions at a sufficient number of producing wells

http://www.nickles.com/history/article.asp?article=history\history_0068.html


-lots of oil in Alberta.

 

[pbman]

Thats huge, the williston basin has a productive zone of about 10 ft. IIRC

And thats not that far away from alberta.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Thats huge, the williston basin has a productive zone of about 10 ft. IIRC

And thats not that far away from alberta.

Apparently it's near Sweetgrass Montana. That's where my relatives used to drive to on a Sunday night to drink, back when Alberta was dry on sundays.

Ever been there?

Fucking flat, fucking hot.

 

[pbman]

Apparently it's near Sweetgrass Montana. That's where my relatives used to drive to on a Sunday night to drink, back when Alberta was dry on sundays.

Ever been there?

Fucking flat, fucking hot.

I worked in that field back in the mid 80's.

We started a sismic line right on the candaian border.

I entered illegaly and took a piss, and left btw.

I miss driving that old thumper, it was a lot of fun.

But i don't miss the 100 hour weeks.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I worked in that field back in the mid 80's.

We started a sismic line right on the candaian border.

I entered illegaly and took a piss, and left btw.

I miss driving that old thumper, it was a lot of fun.

But i don't miss the 100 hour weeks.

I guess that's why they don't call it 'sweetgrass' on our side of the border...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

On a trip east, we went down 15, and then were going to go by the backroads, across the state on highway 2. We cut off at Shelby. I think we made it as far as Havre; then I had to beeline south to I90. I'm from Alberta, but the unending flatness plus two lane blacktop, was starting to get to me.

 

[mears]

I'm not convinced by this.

Firstly, most of the exporting countries you mention, I think all of them but would have to check, have heavy subsidies for agribusiness which encourage export dumping on developing countries. Secondly, I know from research that I've done in this area that food aid to several of the Asian countries you mention was done for political purposes by both the US and USSR post WW2, and has seriously messed up their local food security because the aid was used to introduce unsustainable forms of industrial agriculture, replacing indigenous methods which had been working pretty well for 1000's of years, with ones that are now failing due to the ecological damage they've caused and which have displaced 100's of millions of people into urban squalor.

Remeber, real world. People can have plots to grow vegetables. But for chicken, beef, oranges (unless you live in a place like Florida) or fish someone is gowing to have to grow and transport the stuff. That is if you want some variety in your diet.

 

[pbman]

On a trip east, we went down 15, and then were going to go by the backroads, across the state on highway 2. We cut off at Shelby. I think we made it as far as Havre; then I had to beeline south to I90. I'm from Alberta, but the unending flatness plus two lane blacktop, was starting to get to me.

Tell me about it, i get claustraphobic, when i go back to michigan.

And i was born and raised their.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Tell me about it, i get claustraphobic, when i go back to michigan.

And i was born and raised their.

There's no doubt that there's room for a man to think, in the open spaces of the prairies.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Remeber, real world. People can have plots to grow vegetables. But for chicken, beef, oranges (unless you live in a place like Florida) or fish someone is gowing to have to grow and transport the stuff. That is if you want some variety in your diet.

Remember also, humans lived just fine in all of those places you were talking about for thousands of years (although they now also live in places that weren't designed for humans, at least in those quantities, e.g. various parts of the US that were very sparsely inhabited prior to the last 100 years or so.)

There are plenty of ways someone living in a temperate climate could get all the vitamin C they needed without flying oranges in from Florida. You yourself were making the point earlier that financial subsidies allow the persistence of farming types that are not naturally viable the area they are in. The same applies to oil subsidies. The difference is that we generally subsidise farming methods that are completely unviable anywhere by using oil. On average in the US, the soil erosion rate is (if memory serves) x13 the replacement rate. In India, due in substantial degree to various effects of globalisation (industrial agriculture, cutting down forests for timber exports) the average rate of erosion is 40-50 x the sustainable rate of replacement. India managed to support vast populations for thousands of years before say WW2 (to pick a slightly arbitary date) without incurring those erosion rates.

Now, I'm drinking some very nice coffee as I'm typing this and I would very much dislike not being able to drink such nice coffee, so please don't get the idea that I think we should all revert to the medieval period. I hope it's clear though from my longer post above that's not at all what I'm suggesting. What I am suggesting is something more like this. It makes absolutely no sense for people in the UK, where some of the tastiest apples in the world are native, to be eating apples from New Zealand at this time of year. It makes absolutely no sense in sustainability terms for global trade to occur simply because it's economically viable due to market price differentials or because it's convenient for supermarkets to organise their supply-chains that way.

 

[nino_savatte]

YOu are supid if you can' fuigure out that typo.

Why do you advertise that fact tehn?

"Typo"? It's difficult to tell in your case, since misspellings (deliberate and otherwise) are your forte.

 

[ViolentPanda]

1) I'm not using another's words, I used my own. If someone else has spoken/written them then I'm not aware of it, but I take it to show that the contention I made is quite an obvious and apparent one.

2) I'm not aware that I'm copying anything, please expand. If you can't then please shut your yap.

Well, mears?

I'm still waiting for you to enlighten me as to whose work I've supposedly copied.

Come on, speak up.

 

[mears]

Well, mears?

I'm still waiting for you to enlighten me as to whose work I've supposedly copied.

Come on, speak up.

I can't enlighten you. I don't understand what you are saying about capital.

 

[Rob Ray]

That it's amoral (ie. it does not take moral actions), I believe.

Everything is relative, when big oil was 'on the ropes', it was more than able to survive on its own, and if it had collapsed, the slack would have been taken up by other/new companies when needed, as it is a utility service. The one and only saving grace of the market is that if something like that collapses, some bright spark will always fill the power void.

Hell, if it had collapsed, there would have been an outside chance that the state would have had to nationalise them, and could have benefitted from the massive revenues now to do stuff like rebuild New Orleans (or pay for more soldiers in Iraq, presumably). Sadly, all the money is still going into the pockets of people who regard mears as little more than a smear of shit on the road and waste it on an extra wing for the mansion.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I can't enlighten you. I don't understand what you are saying about capital.

In post #50 you said:

"In the future you should:

1. tell when you are using another's words and

2. Understand what you are copying."

That's an accusation of plagiarism.

Retract and apologise, or post the source from which you claim I plagiarised.

The clock is ticking...

 

[ViolentPanda]

In post #50 you said:

"In the future you should:

1. tell when you are using another's words and

2. Understand what you are copying."

That's an accusation of plagiarism.

Retract and apologise, or post the source from which you claim I plagiarised.

The clock is ticking...

What, no reply?

Why am I not surprised?

 

[nino_savatte]

I can't enlighten you. I don't understand what you are saying about capital.

You couldn't enlighten a corpse, pal. Your posts, if they aren't a form of praise song for your leaders, are devoid of insight. And when someone debunks your arguments you simply hurl abuse at them.

 

[pbman]

You couldn't enlighten a corpse, pal. Your posts, if they aren't a form of praise song for your leaders, are devoid of insight. And when someone debunks your arguments you simply hurl abuse at them.

ROFLMAO

Can you spell hypocrite?

 

[nino_savatte]

ROFLMAO

Can you spell hypocrite?

You are asking me to spell when you clearly have trouble spelling words yourself? My you have some fucking cheek, pal.

When was the last time you (or mears) debunked one of my arguments? Never. You, because you lack the brain power; and mears, because he has difficulty coming to terms with the art of discussion.