So, why is a report “revolutionary”?

Keeping a pool of unemployed high round a globe -and in “civilized developed countries” at a steady level, is a poor attempt to get inflation that is a direct indicator of a national currency's worth stable both in absolute value at local market and a relative relation (foreign exchange).

Dependence on both oil and goods imported as worldwide growing population is to put a strong increasing demand on energy supply, eventuates the meeting of nation’s consuming expectations by the most powerful only,of having own currency accepted and paying more (again, either directly or indirectly) than others could afford for.

Admiral, if there's so much oil can you please tell the Federal peak oil inquiry where it is? I'm sure they'd like to know, because they concluded...

3.132 The concept that oil production will peak and decline, and there will be a post-oil age, is well accepted. The argument turns on when the peak will come, and how serious its economic effects will be.

3.133 'Early peak' commentators have criticised what they regard as overoptimistic official estimates of future oil supply with detailed and plausible arguments. The committee is not aware of any official agency publications which attempt to rebut peak oil arguments in similar detail.

"3.134 Affordable oil is fundamental to modern economies. The risks involved are high if peak oil comes earlier than expected, or if economies cannot adapt quickly enough to the post-peak decline. The 2005 ‘Hirsch report’ for the US Department of Energy argues that peak oil has the potential to cause dramatically higher oil prices and protracted economic hardship, and that this is a problem ‘unlike any yet faced by modern industrial society.’ It argues that timely, aggressive mitigation initiatives will be needed:

Prudent risk management requires the planning and implementation of mitigation well before peaking. Early mitigation will almost certainly be less expensive that delayed mitigation.[113]"
http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/rrat_ctte/oil_supply/report/c03.htm

As for easy coal liquefaction, the Hirsch report concluded that Coal to liquids programs was one of the mitigating "solutions" for peak oil except that it would take 20 years of a major program to scale it up to the volumes we are using. We are talking about hundreds of billions, possibly trillions of dollars of infrastructure that takes TIME TO BUILD!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report

Besides the time to build coal to liquids programs comes another surprise. Much coal reporting is out of date. Exponential growth in the consumption of coal has undermined the normal cozy assumptions people have about coal lasting centuries. Google "peak coal" to see what I mean. Remember, peaking does not mean "running out" it means having used the best and cheapest concentrated stuff. We could be 20 years away from peak COAL!

As one commentator pointed out "light" or "fuel" oil and "heavy" oils are a post-refining process, typically a distillate. See the wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_oil

However, what I believe Aime was asking was about the differences in light and heavy crude. "Light" crude is generally less viscous than it's heavy counterpart, and has a lower wax content. "Light" oil is typically easier and hence cheaper to refine, but are typically more expensive to extract because they are found at deeper depths.

"Heavy" oils also generally contain larger amounts of sulfur and other impurities. This makes them more expensive to process than "light" crude, but, due to the wonder of economics, are often sold at a discounted price due to the presence of impurities. These impurities cause "heavy" crude to have a larger environmental impact than "light" crude, both when processed and burned.

As the supply of "light" crude dries up (oil companies generally favour extracting this oil first as it fetches a higher price on the market), it is likely that we will begin producing more products from "heavy" crude. What the exact implications are, I don't know. But it is likely that producers will no longer discount the heavy stuff, which will put upward pressure on fuel prices.

Just a little whimsy.

Only four or five years ago, a discussion of this sort would not have been had amongst polite company. The MSM for their part would not hear a word of it - taboo - heresy! How appropriate then that they are being dragged into the present by websites such as this. The ripples will spread.

I was only ever able to produce yarns of an anecdotal nature, so it is a great pleasure to see younger people bring their brains, yardstick and compass to the problem. I look forward to learning from you as you go.

- and I somehow rather fancy that my grandkids will be in good hands.

Hi Chris,
I also am glad the online discussion is happening here in earnest. It does show a sea-change in attitude to the subject.

However, when are the government going to implement rezoning our cities around Transit Orientated Developments (TODS)?

this should be an election issue!

On 26 July 2007 the ABC "Difference of Opinion" screened, "What will we do when the oil runs out?"
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/differenceofopinion/

In late June 2007 Dr Roger Bezdek spoke at the "Smart Conference" think tank for Aussie CEO's as the co-author of the Hirsch report into peak oil. Federal Labor Candidate Maxine McKew introduced him, and this was just 3 days after I gave a very short brief to Maxine on our Monday night Labor meeting. 51 minute video available in Quicktime http://fundraisingconcepts.info/spo/bezdek_keynote.mov

On 24th May 2007 the ABC science unit released a fantastic DVD you can now buy from ABC bookstores called Crude — announcing both peak oil and a new theory of "Super-Greenhouse" effect that could poison our oceans and plunge us into a new kind of food challenge.
http://abc.net.au/science/crude/

On on 24 April 2007 SBS screened the EXCELLENT "Crude Impact".
http://www.sydneypeakoil.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4828

All of this occurred in the last few months — yet where is the debate this Federal election? It simply cannot happen. They cannot discuss what to do about peak oil, because that would mean announcing it. This would trigger a market crisis of confidence and bring on some of the effects earlier than they had to — and so we are in the perfect catch 22.
http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1088&Itemid=33

Our group http://www.sydneypeakoil.com has met with a number of politicians. Most of them now KNOW the data. Yet... where is the debate?

This is surreal.

The pollies won't discuss it out loud although they are taking some
actions that point the right way. They might disguise them as global
warming reasons. Peter Costello is the only one that has said it out loud.
The Queenslad senator (I forget his name) has also spoken on it.
The State NSW government is mothballing their replaced busses instead of selling them.
There are little hints like that but if they say it out loud they will
have to start talking petrol rationing and you can see what an election
no no that would be.