Robbo,   Everyone,

Thanks for your input. There's times when I read articles and gut instinct tells me this has to be wrong, but because of a particular mindset, and/or how busy I find myself at the time, I can find it difficult to explain to myself exactly why I feel something may be wrong.

I think you, and others, are right when you suggest that we are not going to run out of oil, as the price climbs we are simply going to get to the point when it is just not going to be worth getting it out of the ground, because no one can afford to buy the stuff.

I am probably with you too on the work ethic. There's always people who see every problem as a opportunity.   Discomfort and boredom are great motivators.

I have to agree with Bill D too.   I seem to remember doing endless equations in math, modelling populations
of strange animals; births, deaths, resources etc to find points of equilibrium.

I'm heartened by your post Larry K. However, you state "Our goal is to convert 5% of our total energy to renewables in 5 years".   We have goals like this in the UK, But to my mind the big question of the moment is whether we've got five years.    That we are going to have to find renewable resources, and develop alternative technologies, I do not think is in doubt.

I'd also agree the changeover period is looking distinctly uncomfortable, and I think its perhaps here that the doom merchants predict the end of the current economic system.   OK oil is the worlds most marketable commodity at the moment, who knows what it will be in thirty years time. I suspect gold or even wood may rapidly increase in value during the 'bridge' period.    There could well be some serious belt tightening all round.   Ultimately I believe most wars are fought over resources, and as everyone here points out, a serious political reality check all round is going to be required.

It's crystal ball time. How fast is the oil price, and hence commodity prices going to rise?   We have to start with what we know.   And what we appear to know is that no-one has a clue.

In March of this year the Royal Bank of Scotland published a consensus of the top world economists and analysts who confidently predicted that oil prices in 2004 would average $26 a barrel and in 2005, $22.8 a barrel. Today the Oil Price peaked at $47.03 a barrel, An increase of some 68% over two years, and a 44% rise since the start of the year.   

Similarly in the financial pages Platts, the energy market information provider, reports that forward prices for electricity are running at more than £29 per megawatt hour, from an average price of £15.50 in 2002/2003. Average gas prices over the period have nearly doubled from 16p a therm to almost 32p.   

On August 15 while the oil price was $44/bl the Independent quoting generator EDF reported that coal prices were 20% higher than in January. This was largely due to increased extraction and shipping costs.

Two years ago energy companies were fighting to ram 5 year contracts down customer's throats. Today many won't quote for more than two years.    Businesses can't sustain this sort of cost inflation for long.
The reasons for these increases appear multifarious, again the current consensus goes along the lines that current oil output is close to its limits and any even small disruption to supply has a significant impact on pricing. Many analysts point to burgeoning economic recovery as a reason for increased demand. Emerging economies are proving the most difficult to satisfy, with Chinese imports of crude oil jumping 40% in the first seven months of 2004 from a year earlier. Some analysts are predicting that oil prices will advance above $50, while governments and firms are already warning of the damage that higher raw material and fuel costs are likely to do to economies. Along with this, Oil companies are maintaining a smaller cushion of oil stocks, (in commercial terms this is seen as efficient). These combinations make energy prices hypersensitive to political uncertainty and terrorist action around the world.

Going back to the population model, and given that in any complex situation it may be advisable to 'get back to basics' to build a new scenario.   Can we all accept the view that developed economies can survive and prosper only according to the availability of suitably priced energy resources?   

Bill

Just read your post Petr. "Democratisation on energy" Now that's an interesting concept.....