We need oil for too many products and services, like crop fertilizer, harvesting machines, plastics, medicines, etc. Diesel fuel and bunker oil can do heavy (mobile) work that electric motors with batteries simply can't. Locomotives with diesel electric drives are critical for bulk transportation, as are container ships. Precious oil should be saved for those large necessities.
How would production actually fall in a meaningful way due to cap & trade or whatever? I could see it plateauing, as it must when global Peak Oil hits, but that's nature, not "tree-huggers" causing it.
The human population is growing by nearly 80 million per year, so demand for oil is highly unlikely to fall until it hits a production peak, even if each person uses it more efficiently.
How can anyone actually worry that carbon legislation will hurt the oil business, given all those factors? Is denial merely another means for Flat-Earthers to express discontent with modern science? Denial seems to be driven by a blind rage that makes no sense when you analyze real-world oil-dependencies.
What's the big deal about using fossil fuels as EFFICIENTLY as possible? Most people don't need a V8 engine and they know it. High displacement engines could be relegated to trucks that actually haul loads, not just people trying to look like big shots on the boulevard.
Conservatives are always crowing about the need for efficiency in guv'mint spending, so why not apply that to physical resources that underly the money supply? In other words, deniers should look at the sum of their arguments and ask themselves if concern for the fate of Big Oil has any merit. Why do they even care what happens to Big Oil unless they're wedded to the industry?
KMcG, are you a Creationist? I am sick and tired of half-wits throwing around words like "fraud" and "hoax" with only talk show hosts, rogue shill scientists, and circular arguments as a reference. You come off as low-I.Q. troglodytes who want to derail progress and a survivable future. Let's hope you can all be sued for wasting time at some point.
How would production actually fall in a meaningful way due to cap & trade or whatever? I could see it plateauing, as it must when global Peak Oil hits, but that's nature, not "tree-huggers" causing it.
The human population is growing by nearly 80 million per year, so demand for oil is highly unlikely to fall until it hits a production peak, even if each person uses it more efficiently.
How can anyone actually worry that carbon legislation will hurt the oil business, given all those factors? Is denial merely another means for Flat-Earthers to express discontent with modern science? Denial seems to be driven by a blind rage that makes no sense when you analyze real-world oil-dependencies.
What's the big deal about using fossil fuels as EFFICIENTLY as possible? Most people don't need a V8 engine and they know it. High displacement engines could be relegated to trucks that actually haul loads, not just people trying to look like big shots on the boulevard.
Conservatives are always crowing about the need for efficiency in guv'mint spending, so why not apply that to physical resources that underly the money supply? In other words, deniers should look at the sum of their arguments and ask themselves if concern for the fate of Big Oil has any merit. Why do they even care what happens to Big Oil unless they're wedded to the industry?
KMcG, are you a Creationist? I am sick and tired of half-wits throwing around words like "fraud" and "hoax" with only talk show hosts, rogue shill scientists, and circular arguments as a reference. You come off as low-I.Q. troglodytes who want to derail progress and a survivable future. Let's hope you can all be sued for wasting time at some point.