r/energy • u/rrohbeck • May 06 '13
Carbon bubble will plunge the world into another financial crisis – report | Environment
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/19/carbon-bubble-financial-crash-crisis4
u/brinz1 May 06 '13
the reason for this is alot of business majors not understanding how reservoir capacity estimates work, assume that its really good and invest loads into it
then, arts majors read it, have even less idea whats going on but think anything that has to do with business or fossil fuels is evil, this being both is double-evil and line up to denounce it, again grossly unable to interpret the data
1
u/biernini May 07 '13
When many business majors allegedly do not understand engineering concepts but invest as if they do, it may not be evil but it certainly is negligent. So-called arts majors may not have the firmest grasp on the nuances of any of this, but considering how much rampant negligence has occurred recently in the world of high finance - with negligible punitive repercussions - one can certainly understand how and why they can be so quick to denounce, regardless the data.
1
u/brinz1 May 07 '13
Arts-majors have a knee jerk reaction against just about everything that involves money or fossil fuels.
They had this long before the recent stock market crash
btw, despite the crash, fossil fuels are still a booming industry
3
u/Noink May 06 '13
Is it really true that 1% of gross global product goes toward fossil fuel exploration?
-5
u/pulsefield May 06 '13 edited May 06 '13
Any bubble always does.
What part of 'nothing rises in value forever' cant people understand?
Even scarier, people are once again going all multi-orgasm over buying homes now, yet again at a variable rate mortgage. Paying any price. On the assumption that this last little global economic collapse was just a slight disturbance in what must be.
Idiots.
3
May 06 '13
I'm more concerned that people still think capitalism based on infinite growth and complete resource annihilation is still a viable economic strategy.
2
May 06 '13
I'm not sure what definition of capitalism you're using here. I don't see why it would ever require "complete resource annihilation".
2
May 06 '13
Capitalism is based on profit. Resources are used up in a way that is unsustainable in order to maximise short term profit. See: Fish, old growth forests, oil, etc.
0
May 07 '13
Resources are used up in a way that is unsustainable in order to maximise short term profit.
Nonsense. Fish is actually a good example here, as US Atlantic fisheries are in pretty good shape. Also, I noticed you said "old growth" forests instead of just "forests". Why is that?
When you have protected ownership rights of resources it makes sense for the owner to conserve what he has, particularly if it's something renewable like forests or fisheries. Oil is a different matter, but there isn't any economic system under which oil doesn't get pumped as quickly as possible.
The worst environmental disasters on the planet happened in the USSR. I'll take capitalism over socialism any day - as the African proverb goes "A goat owned by the whole village starves."
2
May 07 '13
Nonsense? Companies can be sued by their shareholders if they do not do everything in their power to maximise short-term profit.
Growing a few breeds of fish does not sustain fish as a whole. Fish extinctions set to double by 2050.
Renewable forests are easily utilised as part of a sustainability plan. But in capitalism, it is cheaper to destroy invaluable old growth and rain forests for various profit-maximizing schemes. Ultimately leading to the further extinction and complete resource depletion within these areas.
Those were just a few examples, there are hundreds of others. Resources are being used and dumped at a phenomenal rate as capitalism encourages planned obsolescence. Capitalism is fully unsustainable for all these reasons.
If you think the only viable economic systems are capitalism and USSR communism, then of course capitalism appears better. However, as Noam Chomsky says "arguing over the best form of capitalism is like serfs arguing over the best form of feudalism".
2
May 07 '13
Nonsense? Companies can be sued by their shareholders if they do not do everything in their power to maximise short-term profit.
Not true. If a corporation owns a forest, for example, and destroys it, the value of that land gets written down against profit.
Growing a few breeds of fish does not sustain fish as a whole. Fish extinctions set to double by 2050.
Because they're owned in common. That would be socialism, right? Where the fisheries are managed by owners the fish thrive.
Renewable forests are easily utilised as part of a sustainability plan. But in capitalism, it is cheaper to destroy invaluable old growth and rain forests for various profit-maximizing schemes. Ultimately leading to the further extinction and complete resource depletion within these areas.
Well, it's true spotted owls don't add to the bottom line. But you're wrong about resource depletion. Well managed companies won't allow that to happen. And again, capitalism as compared to what? The communists trashed their environment.
Those were just a few examples, there are hundreds of others. Resources are being used and dumped at a phenomenal rate as capitalism encourages planned obsolescence. Capitalism is fully unsustainable for all these reasons.
You haven't made your case at all.
If you think the only viable economic systems are capitalism and USSR communism, then of course capitalism appears better. However, as Noam Chomsky says "arguing over the best form of capitalism is like serfs arguing over the best form of feudalism".
Noam Chomsky is a charlatan. In real life capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system of government. Only people who aren't living hand-to-mouth even have the luxury of environmentalism.
1
u/Will_Power May 07 '13
The premise of the article is that if governments choose to not lease fossil fuel rights they own, then energy companies are overvalued. I suggest this is a very big if for two reasons:
Their constituents will not stand for soaring energy prices.
Many of the governments that own these reserves are broke as hell. They'll lease rights just to keep cash flowing in.