<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Could We See $300 Oil by 2020?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/</link>
	<description>A personal finance blog dedicated to discussing such topics as budgeting, asset allocation, 401K, IRA, cash flow, insurance, financial planning, portfolio management, and other areas in personal finance.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:32:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frugal</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-35001</link>
		<dc:creator>Frugal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2006 05:45:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-35001</guid>
		<description>Oops, sorry, the number should be $177.5 (=$60 * (1.075)^15) instead of $300.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oops, sorry, the number should be $177.5 (=$60 * (1.075)^15) instead of $300.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frugal</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-35000</link>
		<dc:creator>Frugal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2006 05:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-35000</guid>
		<description>$300 oil is really not that bad.  With an annual inflation rate of 3.5%, oil needs to be at $100 to be on par with inflation (starting $60 in 2005 for 15 years).  But since US Fed is printing money by some 7.5% more every year, on par with US money supply increase, oil should be at $296.

Seriously, we are stealing from Saudi Arabia, and not the other way around, if we pay less than $300 for a barrel of oil in 2020.  They just get some pieces of IOU, while we get actual oil!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>$300 oil is really not that bad.  With an annual inflation rate of 3.5%, oil needs to be at $100 to be on par with inflation (starting $60 in 2005 for 15 years).  But since US Fed is printing money by some 7.5% more every year, on par with US money supply increase, oil should be at $296.</p>
<p>Seriously, we are stealing from Saudi Arabia, and not the other way around, if we pay less than $300 for a barrel of oil in 2020.  They just get some pieces of IOU, while we get actual oil!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PeakEngineer</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33915</link>
		<dc:creator>PeakEngineer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2006 02:31:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33915</guid>
		<description>When looking at energy alternatives, you have to consider factors like energy density, infrastructure, and rate of production.  The energy-returned-on-energy-invested (EROEI) is critical to all forms of energy.  Modern oil recovery is in the 30:1 range -- the oil sands are no more than 4:1.  The reality is there is no viable alternative to completely replace the demand for energy when oil starts to decline: biofuels, solar, wind, nuclear, coal, and natural gas all suffer from fundamental problems that will not be resolved cheaply or soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When looking at energy alternatives, you have to consider factors like energy density, infrastructure, and rate of production.  The energy-returned-on-energy-invested (EROEI) is critical to all forms of energy.  Modern oil recovery is in the 30:1 range &#8212; the oil sands are no more than 4:1.  The reality is there is no viable alternative to completely replace the demand for energy when oil starts to decline: biofuels, solar, wind, nuclear, coal, and natural gas all suffer from fundamental problems that will not be resolved cheaply or soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33888</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33888</guid>
		<description>$300 oil sounds expensive but you must take into the 5/25 principle into account. America has 5% of the world’s population but uses 25% of the world’s annual oil output. With stagnating output and soaring demand by China and India competing market forces are bound to increase the cost. It is easy to say there is a magic pill that will let us all run our cars on moldy banana peels but the real fact is that Americans are energy-ignorant and no easy solutions currently present themselves.

1.	The price of energy (oil) is set by the fair market value of the commodities market. The oil companies cannot manipulate it. If this were not the case significant arbitrage opportunities would present themselves

2.	Viable alternate energy sources must take into account EROEI (ENERGY Returned on Energy Invested). This value has to be greater than 1.0 or you are putting more energy in than you get out. Hence hydrogen, ethanol and oil shale are energy losers since you put more energy in than you get out. Right now the only sources that achieve this are Oil, Coal, Nuclear, Solar and Wind. Would you invest in a bank if it had a negative yield?

3.	Hydrogen is an energy battery, not an original energy source. To get hydrogen you must crack the H molecules out of water using (you guessed it) energy (EROEI less than 1). Hence hydrogen is a net energy loser. Because of energy losses in transformation, the hydrogen will always contain less energy than was invested in it. (Using nuclear to make H could be a viable solution)

4.	America becomes more energy-dependant on OPEC every year. You must ask yourself if you believe the concept of “PEAK OIL”. Read Richard Heinbergs book titled “The Party’s Over” if you want to understand of the energy challenge America and the world face as we move into the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>$300 oil sounds expensive but you must take into the 5/25 principle into account. America has 5% of the world’s population but uses 25% of the world’s annual oil output. With stagnating output and soaring demand by China and India competing market forces are bound to increase the cost. It is easy to say there is a magic pill that will let us all run our cars on moldy banana peels but the real fact is that Americans are energy-ignorant and no easy solutions currently present themselves.</p>
<p>1.	The price of energy (oil) is set by the fair market value of the commodities market. The oil companies cannot manipulate it. If this were not the case significant arbitrage opportunities would present themselves</p>
<p>2.	Viable alternate energy sources must take into account EROEI (ENERGY Returned on Energy Invested). This value has to be greater than 1.0 or you are putting more energy in than you get out. Hence hydrogen, ethanol and oil shale are energy losers since you put more energy in than you get out. Right now the only sources that achieve this are Oil, Coal, Nuclear, Solar and Wind. Would you invest in a bank if it had a negative yield?</p>
<p>3.	Hydrogen is an energy battery, not an original energy source. To get hydrogen you must crack the H molecules out of water using (you guessed it) energy (EROEI less than 1). Hence hydrogen is a net energy loser. Because of energy losses in transformation, the hydrogen will always contain less energy than was invested in it. (Using nuclear to make H could be a viable solution)</p>
<p>4.	America becomes more energy-dependant on OPEC every year. You must ask yourself if you believe the concept of “PEAK OIL”. Read Richard Heinbergs book titled “The Party’s Over” if you want to understand of the energy challenge America and the world face as we move into the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sam</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33814</link>
		<dc:creator>sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33814</guid>
		<description>The price might spike at $300 for a while, but I doubt it would stay there for long periods.  Elasticity in demand, alternate fuels, improved technology, fuel switching, etc. will all serve to keep the prices reasonable.

Juston above asks why the price of oil has gone up and &quot;why we have been stuck paying higher gas and oil prices over the past year due to reasons beyond our control, yet the big oil companies posted record profits? Is the rate hikes due to demand, or due to greed?&quot;  

Juston, it is because you, me, and millions of others are willing to pay that price.  Sure, we get on Internet blogs and piss and moan about it, but we still buy.  We don&#039;t park our cars and take the bus instead, at least in large enough numbers to influence the market.

If your house appreciated half a million dollars over a decade or so and you went to sell it, would you sell it for the same price as you bought it for, or sell it for the appreciated price?  Let me guess.  You would sell it at a price someone is willing to pay, the appreciated price.  But isn&#039;t that greedy, making all that obscene profit at the expense of some homebuyer that is just looking for a place to house their family?  Well many people think so when it applies to Exxon, but not when it means money in their own pocket.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The price might spike at $300 for a while, but I doubt it would stay there for long periods.  Elasticity in demand, alternate fuels, improved technology, fuel switching, etc. will all serve to keep the prices reasonable.</p>
<p>Juston above asks why the price of oil has gone up and &#8220;why we have been stuck paying higher gas and oil prices over the past year due to reasons beyond our control, yet the big oil companies posted record profits? Is the rate hikes due to demand, or due to greed?&#8221;  </p>
<p>Juston, it is because you, me, and millions of others are willing to pay that price.  Sure, we get on Internet blogs and piss and moan about it, but we still buy.  We don&#8217;t park our cars and take the bus instead, at least in large enough numbers to influence the market.</p>
<p>If your house appreciated half a million dollars over a decade or so and you went to sell it, would you sell it for the same price as you bought it for, or sell it for the appreciated price?  Let me guess.  You would sell it at a price someone is willing to pay, the appreciated price.  But isn&#8217;t that greedy, making all that obscene profit at the expense of some homebuyer that is just looking for a place to house their family?  Well many people think so when it applies to Exxon, but not when it means money in their own pocket.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curtis</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33754</link>
		<dc:creator>Curtis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:37:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33754</guid>
		<description>Are the numbers on the amount of oil found including Canada&#039;s oil sands (1.7-2.5 trillion barrels of oil) or all the oil shale we have in the US (3.3 million tons) ???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are the numbers on the amount of oil found including Canada&#8217;s oil sands (1.7-2.5 trillion barrels of oil) or all the oil shale we have in the US (3.3 million tons) ???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foobarista</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33668</link>
		<dc:creator>Foobarista</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33668</guid>
		<description>My standard line on bigthink gloom &amp; doom: it has an awful historical track record, dating all the way back to Malthus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My standard line on bigthink gloom &amp; doom: it has an awful historical track record, dating all the way back to Malthus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Juston Garland</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33655</link>
		<dc:creator>Juston Garland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 07:05:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33655</guid>
		<description>This would have been better to ask about a month ago. The big oil companies are sad that they can&#039;t find any reasons to raise the price of oil and pad their pockets at this time. Does anyone else out there wander why we have been stuck paying higher gas and oil prices over the past year due to reasons beyond our control, yet the big oil companies posted record profits? Is the rate hikes due to demand, or due to greed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This would have been better to ask about a month ago. The big oil companies are sad that they can&#8217;t find any reasons to raise the price of oil and pad their pockets at this time. Does anyone else out there wander why we have been stuck paying higher gas and oil prices over the past year due to reasons beyond our control, yet the big oil companies posted record profits? Is the rate hikes due to demand, or due to greed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jersey jen</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33622</link>
		<dc:creator>jersey jen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 04:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33622</guid>
		<description>amazing, hope we have next-generation technology by then already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>amazing, hope we have next-generation technology by then already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fivecentnickel.com</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2006/10/17/could-we-see-300-oil-by-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-33605</link>
		<dc:creator>fivecentnickel.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2006 02:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allthingsfinancialblog.com/?p=1260#comment-33605</guid>
		<description>$300/barrel would probably be good news, as that would mean that we&#039;d still have oil left at that point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>$300/barrel would probably be good news, as that would mean that we&#8217;d still have oil left at that point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

