F1technical.net

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2020, 23:50

Renewables aren't even keeping up with the growth in energy demand never mind 'taking over'. perhaps by 2050 fossil fuel use will start to drop
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/wp-cont ... 181011.png

Do you think a graph about renewables and petroleum future wich comes from British Petroleum is any reliable?

Sadly petroleum companies are probably the main responsible of current situation. I´m not talking about their product wich we all use, I´m talking about patents wich never saw the light, biased reports stating climate change does not exist to delay society reaction as much as possible, influence in governments to not take some decisions wich are obvious decades ago, etc.

Business is legit, manipulating governments and the entire society for their own benefit is not, and that´s what these companies are doing for around 4 decades or even more

Edit: when I say petroleum companies I mean energy companies, as depending on the country they may be petroleum companies, or electrical companies. Here in Spain for example it´s electrical companies who manipulate the most as there´s no significant amounts of petroleum here. Coincidentally most former presidents of Spain are all advisors of different electrical companies with huge salaries while legislation has been the biggest problem for renewables to take off for decades. A casual coincidence? Spain is just an example, it is the same all around the world.

Yes actually I do. Big companies in first world countries have a responsibility to present accurate forecasts for their shareholders. if they are found to have deliberately manipulated the data then they face VERY BIG FINES. This may not be the case in the developing world.

It is of course a sign of a weak position to attack the source of the data rather than the data itself. So, please present your better data, with sources. You'll actually find many reputable sources use BP.

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2020, 22:49

Yes actually I do. Big companies in first world countries have a responsibility to present accurate forecasts for their shareholders. if they are found to have deliberately manipulated the data then they face VERY BIG FINES. This may not be the case in the developing world.

It is of course a sign of a weak position to attack the source of the data rather than the data itself. So, please present your better data, with sources. You'll actually find many reputable sources use BP.

And yet they have been caught red handed using the same tactics as the tobacco industry! In fact it now is known that the petroleum industry created the playbook back in the 50’s!

https://www.ciel.org/news/oil-tobacco-denial-playbook/

I’ve worked in (as an IT consultant) some Very large companies, including banks and insurance companies, and the corporate culture in most of them was frightening.

Normal folk who were quite nice with socially responsible attitudes outside of work, Will do whatever it takes at work to put profits above all else.

I’ll never work in those type of large companies again, I value my soul too much! (And no I’m not religious)

I bet most of the guys here would have been alive when the steam engines were around and were saying diesel and electric will never take off as there isn't enough oil and electricity to run the trains.

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2020, 22:49

Yes actually I do. Big companies in first world countries have a responsibility to present accurate forecasts for their shareholders.

Is this graph for the shareholders?

Anycase you´re implying there´re only correct and wrong things, when that´s far from accurate. Data and specially future forecast are extremelly subjective and interpretable, and I guess you know what end of that extremelly big margin they will show to their shareholders, right?

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2020, 22:49

It is of course a sign of a weak position to attack the source of the data rather than the data itself. So, please present your better data, with sources. You'll actually find many reputable sources use BP.

Weak position? No, it´s just experience. I´m sick of biased reports by interested companies, specially with the environment, electricity and petroleum problem, so I don´t waste any time with reports from companies whose business depend on the result of the report. Sources with such big interest in a specific result for the report can´t be reliable sources

Don't blather, post data.

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020, 10:15

Don't blather, post data.

I'm not saying this supports your data or not as I have not compared but when looking at energy forecasts I prefer to use one of two public sources, either;
US Energy Information Administration (EIA) https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/ (2020 Annual Energy Outlook)
or
International Energy Agency (IAE) https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2019 (2019 World Energy Outlook)

There will always be bias, but these two seem to be the most impartial to me. There are also numerous subscription services that will provide market intel but cannot be shared here.

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020, 10:15

Don't blather, post data.

Andres125sx wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020, 08:08

so I don´t waste any time with reports from companies whose business depend on the result of the report

I´m not going to waste my time proving the bias of a petrol company. It should be obvious for anyone IMHO, but you´re free to disagree obviously

Now Bhall signature came to my mind, it was a quote from Bender (futurama), can´t remind the exact words but it was in the line of "I´m free to believe what I want, and I choose to believe what I´ve been programmed to belive"





PS: I miss bhall, I learnt so much from him

So using iea stated policies by 2040 oil increases by 10%, gas by 30% and coal by 0%

Poor Andres, even the iea doesn't agree with him.

Will do whatever it takes at work to put profits above all else.

In the U.S. and elsewhere I believe, they are legally required to get the most profit possible for the shareholders.

Greg Locock wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020, 22:46

So using iea stated policies by 2040 oil increases by 10%, gas by 30% and coal by 0%

Poor Andres, even the iea doesn't agree with him.

With what?

You seem confused, I´ve not said a word about my opinion, I´ve only said I don´t care and don´t believe a word of any petrol company

Thanks for the downvote. The IEA says that FF use will increase up until 2040 just like BP does.

I have wondered in the past why if I up vote without what the powers that be feel is a good reason or because I strongly agree I get a lecture, but people can down vote w/o good reason or simply because they disagree..

strad wrote: ↑

06 Oct 2020, 23:41

Will do whatever it takes at work to put profits above all else.

In the U.S. and elsewhere I believe, they are legally required to get the most profit possible for the shareholders.

Ah, "legally required"? or 'legally permitted'?

Nowadays large investment interests often have 'riders' to ensure 'best practice' operating
provisions of ethical, & possibly 'eco-friendly' activities, are adhered to, by companies.

This is why - even in energy resources rich Australia, the fossil fuel keen Fed-Government
is having to stump up to fund new gas-fired (let alone coal!) thermo-electric generation
plant - as eco-protocols of potential large investors mean they can't/won't, profit or no..

strad wrote: ↑

07 Oct 2020, 22:09

I have wondered in the past why if I up vote without what the powers that be feel is a good reason or because I strongly agree I get a lecture, but people can down vote w/o good reason or simply because they disagree..

If you feel you've been downvoted wrongly you can just let the Mod Team know. For me personally i don't gt the fuzz about the Number going down or up. Some People seemingly get satisfaction out of it. ^^

But anyways. This is a Discussion for another Topic.