No shit - I know, the Marcellus and Bakken. Many say it's a game-changer, others not so much. If you really have the time, I suggest this article: http://www.aspousa.org/index.php/2009/09/mission-critical-can-shale-gas-save-the-world/ quote from article: "Indeed, to displace half the coal we now use with gas, weâd need to complete 30,000 to 50,000 new wells a year for decades to come. If thatâs our strategy for averting climate disaster, then weâll need to put somebody like Sarah Palin in charge of drilling."
Agreed, but I think it's you that's using the corazon and not the cabeza. 5 years time? I said it would be slow after all.
Depends on the statistics and how you interpret them. Look at the price of natural gas and you might come to the conclusion its plentiful enough to use on a large scale One statistic says we can recover today what would amount to 118 years of current usage it aint hard to run an electric plant on nat gas hell - it aint hard to run piston engines on nat gas - if you choose to (or are forced to) do it
It's plentiful, and many vehicles today run on it. It's the extraction that's the issue. Especially the deep, difficult stuff. It's very intensive work, as I said before. Hydrofraking and horizontal drilling are quite destructive and use A LOT of water. I have heard that people living near such wells have complained about earthquakes. Now, if that's the only choice, then we move those people. But we will be using a lot of water, which itself is a resource that may not be as plentiful down the road. And another thing - these wells deplete amazingly fast - up to 60% in a year or two. That's why the writer above said we would need tens of thousands of wells. Natty Gas would have to get much more expensive to justify that kind of magnitude of extraction. I see it as something we will eventually be forced to do.
move 'em hell! we buy em out - they go to florida to live happily ever after condos are cheap down there right now
You also said: "Just the same, if the world had a viable option for an alternative reserve currency it would have already been implemented after the events of the past year." These things don't happen overnight. First you hear of "leaked" grumblings by lower level Chinese officals about the current reserve currency. (check) Then you hear it from influential bankers in China that used to be gov't officials saying it openly. (check) Then BRIC meets in Yekaterinaburg and dismisses Turbo Timmays request to be there, and they all openly agree to a new currency (check.) Then you have a soveriegn default (the US's) or such massive devaluation of the dollar that the effects are similar to a default (3-5 years hence) - US municipalities, States, especially California, and the US interest payments approaching 750 billion a year... it's not that hard to imagine. Then BRIC, the EU, and OPEC get together and hire a graphics designer to make a few designs so they can vote on what the new currency will look like. They decide on having green as the dominant color so the US doesn't feel left out.
I agree. Save for details, most fantasies/fictions come rather easily. It doesn't take much to ratchet up the the rhetoric, but it takes a hell of a lot of trust to implement it. BRIC, EU & OPEC? Like I said, 5 years? Heh...
The real fantasy/fiction is assuming that things will be business as usual. We are witnessing a significant amount of historical watershed events. A new world is being born right in front of our eyes. The global transfer of wealth that is occuring right now is unprecedented. It's a complete reversal occuring in an historical blink of an eye. Remove the hubris and you'll see things clearer. I will also add this: Money is an abstraction. A meager attempt at measuring concepts such as stored surplus, worth, labor etc... Don't tell me that a nation of 300 million people has a bigger economy than a nation of 1.3 billion people. That accepted belief is a facade that's coming down. 1.3 billion people get up every morning, some work in banks, many in rice fields, others in factories or construction. Compare that to a nation of 300 million people. Remove the assigned monetary values of labor and just look at what's accomplished in those two countries. Which country produces more things? Which country cooks more food? Which country sweeps more floors? Washes dishes? Paves roads? Mines rare metals? Think along those lines - forget money for a moment - and you realize that obviously a growingly modern nation of 1.3 BILLION people accomplish more than a nation of 300 million people. It's a concept that a 5 year old would understand before an adult that has bills to pay could comprehend. And another thing, China can fight a war, lose 100 million people, and may even be better off as a country. Reality always catches up.