[extropy-chat] Re: peak oil debate framed from a game theory standpoint ?

[Robert Lindauer]

Hal Finney wrote:

>Sure, in fact that is one of the strongest arguments against Peak Oil.
>Who are the insiders who would know if we were about to peak in oil
>production?  Well, how about the oil companies?  They should have plenty
>of inside information.
>  
>

Speaking of which, wouldn't that be a good reason to start a more 
aggressive set of policies in the middle east and Venezuela?

Wouldn't that simultaneously be a good impetus for building ethanol 
plants domestically?

Both of which are happening in abundance.

>What would you do if you owned an oil well and knew that the world was
>about to hit a supply/demand crunch in oil?  Wouldn't that imply that
>oil prices are likely to shoot up incredibly high?
>

Aren't they?

>If insiders knew that these prices were unrealistic, they could take
>positions in the futures market and make enormous profits in a few years.
>But by their actions they would drive up the prices of the futures
>contracts, and we don't see that.
>  
>

Gamblers take both sides, they're smarter than you think.

>
>The fact that we don't see this behavior means that insiders don't believe
>in Peak Oil.  To me, that is the strongest argument against that scenario.
>  
>

It is -just common sense-.  Oil is not renewing itself, there are no new 
supplies.  The supply -will- dwindle.  When is an open question.  It 
shouldn't be regarded as suprising that our "easily accessible" wells 
are finite in size, should it?

Robbie Lindauer