Petrol has always required subsidies but it has such low economic efficiency it has been causing successively worse crashes which in turn require bailouts which in turn hollow out societies with austerity. But worse than petrol poisoning air, water and food and driving climate instability and war, worse than this is the property model of fuel/energy petrol which seems to be aimed at undermining powersharing systems and converting people into property. It also seems that given the stranded asset issue due to economic inefficiency in the face of radically superior alternatives petrol fuel/energy will never be profitable again but petrol interests are holding pensions hostage to cushion its fall. Petrol has become public enemy #1 Profit from petrol/fuel enrgy should be a felony.
That's a pretty radical conclusion to come to (the felony part). That's fine, I'm just not completely following how you got here. Perhaps if you explained a bit more how it is "undermining powersharing systems and converting people into property," and how pensions are being held hostage. Open to your take, but don't completely see how you're getting there.
Its self evident dogma for me at this point and so much so that it would be a real challenge to provide a rational explanation. Rifken's "Zero Marginal Cost Society" makes a lot of the same points I'd make but also consider for instance the 07 crisis- it wasn't loans to the poor it was derivatives that then as now were insuring petrol because its fails on a hollowing out schedule. And think of all the wars and instances like Enron that were insuficient to bail it out prior to that. Consequence of very low economic efficiency such that the kind of science needed to fix it would obviate the need for it. A better way to shine light on this is General Kelly's recent strange remarks on slavery. What he is saying is very clear if you see petrol clearly. What the South wanted was a right to exploit and its the same thing Petrarchy wants and needs to survive. Petrol fuel/energy is slavery part 2. But the one thing you don't do is compromise with slavery or compromise with the projecting sit-on-their-*** elitests royalists that want it. Kelly goes all revisionist because he knows the world just overroad any US veto on Paris and knows the pent up bounty is coming due and by whom it will be paid. Are these literally some of the same old South families behind petrol? Its an identical mind set. Fuel/energy petrol has no right to continue to exist just as slavery didn't.
You jumped the shark dude! We need to get off oil and gas, but making profitable production a felony would cripple the economy and would hault progress towards EVs. And who do you decide to punish? Drillers? Gas station owners? Electric companies that have natural gas power plants? Taxi drivers and truck drivers who charge for miles driven? Where does it end? A time table to phase out fossil fuels is the correct and responsible method. There are many ways to approach it such as: Incentivize EVs with rebates, tax vehicle emissions, and put quotas on EV production.
On the pensions they try to get the fund managers to buy their profitless future petrol trash stocks like a shield or cushion for their fall against total petrol collapse suggesting no petrol cancer then no retirement. Just like their suggestion to fund social security with a carbon tax. They are rightly scared petrol will be outright banned because its obsolete with a ready supeior replacement and people don't like the exploiters and the terror they use to profit from petrol and public sentiment wants them to fall. Unnecessary Iraqi deaths play into for instance Model 3 preorders.
No, announce intent to make it a felony post ban and accelerate ban. Think felony is implied in a ban. But at this point petrol fuel/energy profit is just terrorism and while I don't believe in it, its a great case for the death penalty- as mass slavery probably greater offense than genocide in many ways. But simply nationalize and redirect profit to green with end of all subsidy plus immediate decom. Russia's treatment of Yukos was a start.
I think you huffed a few too many petro chemicals. Petrol companies are energy supply companies. Life requires energy. But as capitalism does, these companies would gladly switch product to supply another energy if a different one proved to be more valuable. They're profit takers for sure but that breeds a desire to get the best net deal available. The companies don't really care what they supply if it makes them the most money. They're street pushers in a sense. Shell Bio or Shell Solar would exist if it were economically attractive. And some oil firms are investing in other than oil. Now OPEC, that's another issue altogether. They really are the true suppliers of dead dinosaurs. Oil companies are in this case but the middle man. This is akin to proclaiming the middle drug man is the problem. Not the user, not the cartel... The middle guy looking to score some money on some marques. But again like the drug peddler if another drug became the fancy of the user they'd happily switch what they peddle, it just needs to make them more money. Your gripe is with capitalism and OPEC, not oil companies.
Nope they have a sunk cost problem in addition to facing a profitless future over their obsolence and broken balance sheets over uncompetitive stranded assets. They will never be profitable again. And they never really were that profitable always requiring huge subsidies and triggering collapses and bailouts disguised as wars. Can hardly manage dividends taking out loans to cover it. Ultimate corporate welfare.
Reality check: The EROI (Energy Return On Investment) for petroleum distillates is far higher than on any other common fuel. In other words, the superior economic efficiency of getting energy from petroleum distillates has driven most other fuels off the market. That's why the world runs on petroleum distillates such as gasoline, diesel, and kerosene. There is certainly a lot to indict Big Oil for: World-endangering levels of pollution, bribing governments (not only the U.S. Congress) to support Big Oil's economic interests, and an unremitting propaganda campaign to discredit climate change. But claiming economic slavery by Big Oil is stepping into the realm of the tinfoil-hatter brigade. What Big Oil is actually doing is bad enough; evil enough. We don't need to invent conspiracy theories to make them appear worse.
If you get into your time travel device and go forward years you'll be right. Today the cutover globally to non fossil energy sources will be very very slow. An EV driver or a solar panel customer sees a local energy pattern that's way into the future. Jetson style, at least as the world is concerned. The 3rd world is decades, maybe centuries behind on this depending on locale. It'll happen but it's not going to be in our lifetime globally. Locally perhaps but still depends where you are. I saw probably 25 Tesla today and thought nothing of it. Just how it goes here. Any LEAF or Prius or whatever is just background noise here but are a thing of curiosity in some places. Energy is needed. Global energy companies supply global energy. Fossil fuel is a global energy. Not difficult to see the near and mid future with petrol firms still being leaders raking it in.
No the only thing that would delay it is trying to protect entrenched power but this is a revolution so you're missing the point utterly. There is literally a war against the power and money behind petrol. They have been convicted in the court of public opinion OJ style, but also literally blamed for everything that appears to be wrong in the world or has gone wrong. Taking their power and money and bringing them to justice as fast as humanly possible is the actual goal, petrol turns out to be an efficient means. But see the bigger picture. Since about 1970 labor has been dead over automation (capital warned globally at that point by about 2000 economists) and capital knew if labor was dead it as the flip side of that coin would be dead too- so its solution was to take use back to the plantation with an interim phoney as a forceable means to retain power and control instead of allowing access to the fruits of automation that others (labor not capital) put in place. So their solution is data based reinforced rule by inherited wealth as if they had won some sort of contest of history. But the actual contribution of this group was minimal or strongly negative and this is consistent with their essentially waging war on domestic populations since the death of capital was self evident 50 years ago. Their only viable move at this point to stop the global road rage may be some sort of deep cradle to grave VR distraction backed up by a high indexed GAI also cradle to grave including drones delivering the organic food and interior led lights that change color with the sun's azimuth so that 99 percent of people are lulled into a deeper sleep and stay indoors and don't come out in a Brave New World. You don't need business or the state after that but you don't guarantee WWIII over trying to strip people's rights and take them back to feudalism. Its hardly utopian and likely the path of least resistance. It seems as dirty as messing with food and water has the same ethics as that long term practice. A.I. is an enabler and wild card here.
No its radically inferior even to battery backed solar with out going into exotic stuff or even the 5500 plus patents the USG suppresses for "economic" reasons. Short of finding something like an efficient conversion of energy into matter petrol has a floor of about current US 13 cents a kwh and that is at scale, built out with mature technology. Solar is already lower than 6 cents a kwh and can go to 1/1000 a cent a kwh. All petrol has is lies and censorship to protect it. Take the hydrogen fuel cell bs. That is an attempt to protect petroleum by protecting its liquid transport network and sunk cost or allow it to use petrol as a feed stock but that will never ever be acceptable because the point is to bankrupt the power and money behind petrol and bring them to justice not continue to allow them to destroy democracy and take us back to monarchy which seems to be their goal. The core is with petrol is tha 50 years ago it became petrarchy a simple means to power for people who should have no enhanced power and its accrued a retributive debt that has come due. When the Pope says capitalism is the source of terrorism we can take that at face value but more specifically its petrol and the power behind it. What light do we think world history will hold Bush, Cheny, Rumsfeld, Kochs... pretty good chance they will be seen as terrorists because that seems to be the current consensus and same for the Republican Party and much of the Democratic party intent on unjust undemocratic rule through the manufacture and spreading of fear generally centered on an narrative based around obsolete unnecessary petrol fuel/energy. When the world is saying that petrol fuel/energy has no right to exist it is saying their power has no right to exist that they are being evicted for past injustice, present ill intent and bad models, and total incompetence.
My mistake in wasting time arguing with a tinfoil-hatter who actually thinks the U.S. Government is actively suppressing thousands of patents which otherwise would give us nearly free energy.
There's a case to be made for it actually, when you consider direct exhaust injection isn't patented yet.
The law on the suppressing patents states it exists to prevent economic disruption. Very clear primary intent behind that law.
Based on the drawing provided, that looks a lot like the same concept as Honda's CVCC automotive engine, which recirculated some of the exhaust to improve MPG. My first car was a 1975 Honda Civic CVCC. So if I'm right about what the concept is, then you're gonna have a rather difficult time convincing me the technology was suppressed.
I call bullsh!t. Quote the actual text of the law in question, with a link to an actual government source.
The patent suppression law is intended to prevent economic disruption as a matter of security. Shocking if during its history it was ever used to do anything but protect petrol. Its enactment going back to the 50s probably was already a recognition of how useless fuel/energy petrol was for anything except spreading slavery in its various slippery slope forms.
