1 1
ryoder

PBS Frontline: The Power of Big Oil

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Series about the FUD campaign on climate change that pretty much followed the playbook for the tobacco industry. Biggest surprise for me was that Exxon first learned about AGW from it's own internal research team!

Part 1: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#-video-1

Part 2: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#video-2

Part 3: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#video-3

 

 

Edited by ryoder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Its internal memos is an important part of the legal claims against it for GW. Brent obviously hasn't read them.

I can't wait for him to read them, read up to "Exxon's climate change research . . ." then stop reading and post a link saying "See?  Exxon is doing climate change research!  They are the good guys, right libs?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let's not be sanctimonious about this. Short of helium balloons; everyone here who skydives depends on fossil fuels to do it. Next time you buy that completely necessary jump ticket, give a nod to the oil producers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, metalslug said:

Well let's not be sanctimonious about this. Short of helium balloons; everyone here who skydives depends on fossil fuels to do it. Next time you buy that completely necessary jump ticket, give a nod to the oil producers.

Yes, we all understand that. It is the “inconvenient” part of The Inconvenient Truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Its internal memos is an important part of the legal claims against it for GW. Brent obviously hasn't read them.

He doesn't bother to read the stuff he himself links.

What makes you think he reads anything anyone else links?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

He doesn't bother to read the stuff he himself links.

What makes you think he reads anything anyone else links?

On one side of the equation is Wendy who does volunteer work. On the other side there are people that only care about personal convenience. So screw the environment and everyone else. Oh, and Shell reports a record $9.1 billion profit. Now don't forget thats for one quarter and is three times the earnings of the same quarter a year ago.

Now there is nothing wrong with oil companies making a profit. But for some its all perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ryoder said:

Series about the FUD campaign on climate change that pretty much followed the playbook for the tobacco industry. Biggest surprise for me was that Exxon first learned about AGW from it's own internal research team!

Part 1: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#-video-1

Part 2: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#video-2

Part 3: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-power-of-big-oil/#video-3

 

 

Hi Robert,

Having watched #3 the other nite, I found it interesting how Big Oil likes to do the old Bait & Switch on the issues; 'Hey, look over here.'

One I quite liked was where they said something about, 'Methane is not the problem is used to be.'  When, before they were denying that it was any problem at all.

FRONTLINE is always interesting to watch.

Jerry Baumchen

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

On one side of the equation is Wendy who does volunteer work. On the other side there are people that only care about personal convenience. So screw the environment and everyone else. Oh, and Shell reports a record $9.1 billion profit. Now don't forget thats for one quarter and is three times the earnings of the same quarter a year ago.

Now there is nothing wrong with oil companies making a profit. But for some its all perspective.

Not only Shell:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/may/03/bp-profits-energy-windfall-tax-rosneft

I expect it's Hunter Biden's doing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2022 at 12:47 AM, metalslug said:

Well let's not be sanctimonious about this. Short of helium balloons; everyone here who skydives depends on fossil fuels to do it. Next time you buy that completely necessary jump ticket, give a nod to the oil producers.

Not to worry. In a few more years, oil - and jump tickets - will become so prohibitively expensive that only the rich will be able to afford to skydive.

Everyone else will turn to BASE jumping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

Not to worry. In a few more years, oil - and jump tickets - will become so prohibitively expensive that only the rich will be able to afford to skydive.

Everyone else will turn to BASE jumping.

As electric everything catches on, I'll be looking for an oil price decrease. It's not just EV's. Recently I bought an electric weed whacker and an electric leaf blower and both completely kick ass on my top of the line Stihl units. The future is already here for anyone willing to look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve had an electric weed whacker for over 10 years; I always hated trying to start the gas ones. I’d have gotten an electric lawn mower if we’d lived somewhere with tenderer grass than St Augustine  

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

I’ve had an electric weed whacker for over 10 years; I always hated trying to start the gas ones. I’d have gotten an electric lawn mower if we’d lived somewhere with tenderer grass than St Augustine  

Wendy P. 

I should have stated Lithium Battery powered as opposed to electric. My error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

I should have stated Lithium Battery powered as opposed to electric. My error.

Ummmm...

Aren't batteries storage devices for...

Electricity?

My dad was a proponent of electric mowers for a long time (like back in the 70s).

The ones he had when I was a kid were the plug in kind. You had to be careful when using them because running over the cord was a problem.

He got a fairly expensive (at the time) Ryobi that used a pair of lead acid batteries (think lawn tractor or motorcycle sized). It was pretty heavy, but it could cut a decent sized lawn on one charge. 
The weight (75lbs) became an issue for him as he got older, so when I bought my house, I got him a light weight plug in one and 'inherited' the Ryobi. It was pretty cool. 
When it finally crapped out, I got a different battery powered one. It's nice. No oil changes, no hassles starting it, no problems.

I've used plug in weed whackers for a long time. The convenience of not having a cord doesn't outweigh the cost of getting a new one (especially when the old ones are working just fine). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

I should have stated Lithium Battery powered as opposed to electric. My error.

And I should have stated battery, too, though not lithium. But it’s been holding up to the much lighter wear we give it up north.

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Ummmm...

Aren't batteries storage devices for...

Electricity?

My dad was a proponent of electric mowers for a long time (like back in the 70s).

The ones he had when I was a kid were the plug in kind. You had to be careful when using them because running over the cord was a problem.

He got a fairly expensive (at the time) Ryobi that used a pair of lead acid batteries (think lawn tractor or motorcycle sized). It was pretty heavy, but it could cut a decent sized lawn on one charge. 
The weight (75lbs) became an issue for him as he got older, so when I bought my house, I got him a light weight plug in one and 'inherited' the Ryobi. It was pretty cool. 
When it finally crapped out, I got a different battery powered one. It's nice. No oil changes, no hassles starting it, no problems.

I've used plug in weed whackers for a long time. The convenience of not having a cord doesn't outweigh the cost of getting a new one (especially when the old ones are working just fine). 

Sure, absolutely. But I use mine on a boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was back in 1998 that I bought an electric mower, (cord not battery). I'm still using it. In all this time I've had to replace a circuit breaker in the handle (once), and the brushes in the motor (once). And typically sharpen the blade once/year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, riggerrob said:

Not to worry. In a few more years, oil - and jump tickets - will become so prohibitively expensive that only the rich will be able to afford to skydive.

That is - unless EV's are so successful that the demand for gas (and thus the price of oil products) plummets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, billvon said:

That is - unless EV's are so successful that the demand for gas (and thus the price of oil products) plummets.

Hi Bill,

Not to sound all Doom & Gloom, but don't get your hopes up too high.

As with any commodity, the price to harvest it will determine the retail pricing.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Bill,

Not to sound all Doom & Gloom, but don't get your hopes up too high.

As with any commodity, the price to harvest it will determine the retail pricing.

Jerry Baumchen

Hi Jerry,

Very, very true.
Supply and demand is still the primary driver for commodities.

If supply stays tight and demand stays high, prices will too. Those high prices will mean that more expensive extraction will become more viable. Which will expand supply.
Which will lower prices. Which will make those expensive extraction processes less viable.

The shale oil boom in the late "zeroes" is as classic an example as it gets.

When oil spiked well above $100/barrel, lots of people made lots and lots of money extracting oil from the Dakotas.
I remember during those times that there were 'more than a few' news stories talking about the 'boom and bust' nature of the oil business.

One that I remember the most was a 'crusty old guy' oil fella who said something to the effect of 'all this new technology is great. It really is. But if you are depending on a method that costs more than $75/barrel to get it out of the ground, you won't be around for very long. This industry goes up and down. It always has and it always will.'

His point was proved rather convincingly because when the price of oil dropped back down, all the 'boom towns' in the Dakotas went away. The high paying jobs went away. All the oil money went away.
I know a couple guys who made a lot of money working those oil fields. They were smart enough to limit expenses, bank the cash and when the jobs disappeared, they were good. 
But they were far more the exception than the rule in that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Hi Jerry,

Very, very true.
Supply and demand is still the primary driver for commodities.

If supply stays tight and demand stays high, prices will too. Those high prices will mean that more expensive extraction will become more viable. Which will expand supply.
Which will lower prices. Which will make those expensive extraction processes less viable.

The shale oil boom in the late "zeroes" is as classic an example as it gets.

When oil spiked well above $100/barrel, lots of people made lots and lots of money extracting oil from the Dakotas.
I remember during those times that there were 'more than a few' news stories talking about the 'boom and bust' nature of the oil business.

One that I remember the most was a 'crusty old guy' oil fella who said something to the effect of 'all this new technology is great. It really is. But if you are depending on a method that costs more than $75/barrel to get it out of the ground, you won't be around for very long. This industry goes up and down. It always has and it always will.'

His point was proved rather convincingly because when the price of oil dropped back down, all the 'boom towns' in the Dakotas went away. The high paying jobs went away. All the oil money went away.
I know a couple guys who made a lot of money working those oil fields. They were smart enough to limit expenses, bank the cash and when the jobs disappeared, they were good. 
But they were far more the exception than the rule in that.

Hi Joe,

Re:  Which will make those expensive extraction processes less viable.

When the anticipated costs are more than can be recouped, you will not find any investors.  It is simple economics.

Re:  I know a couple guys who made a lot of money working those oil fields. They were smart enough to limit expenses, bank the cash and when the jobs disappeared, they were good. 

And, one who invested & went broke was John Connally of Texas.  The last that I heard was that he was having a 'garage sale' on his front lawn.

John Connally - Wikipedia

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

Re:  Which will make those expensive extraction processes less viable.

When the anticipated costs are more than can be recouped, you will not find any investors.  It is simple economics.

Re:  I know a couple guys who made a lot of money working those oil fields. They were smart enough to limit expenses, bank the cash and when the jobs disappeared, they were good. 

And, one who invested & went broke was John Connally of Texas.  The last that I heard was that he was having a 'garage sale' on his front lawn.

John Connally - Wikipedia

Jerry Baumchen

Hi Jerry,

There will almost always be some oil available for extraction at reasonably cheap prices.

These days, it's not a whole lot. 

If, as suggested above, the demand for oil drops significantly, that limited amount of oil will be enough to meet demand. So prices shouldn't be terribly high.

Considering I have a classic car that I hope to keep for the foreseeable future, I hope this comes to pass.

While I have no doubt that some investors/owners made a fair amount out of the shale oil fields, many (most?) didn't make back their start up cost investment. 
The guys I mentioned were working the oil fields. They were making pretty impressive salaries out in the 'oil patch'. The living costs in the boom towns were insanely high (typical), but they did a pretty good job containing costs. They both walked away with a decent pile of cash when the jobs disappeared. Not 'investor class' money, but enough for what they did.

I remember Connally. He was a lot of things, including president of Continental Airlines.
I don't remember the whole 'yard sale' thing. I know he lost just about everything. Of course, the idea of the yard sale was to pay back investors who got screwed. But, as usual, he was still fairly wealthy and nobody who invested saw a dime of their money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1