Mark Jones wrote:
>What is it with you guys and the Wall Street Journal?
It's a daily newspaper for the U.S. business class, which, despite
its prejudices (which the WSJ indulges for them on its edit page),
wants to be well informed. I've always found it to be intelligent,
well-written, and f
Regarding Ken's assumption that higher prices will bring new energy forms on line,
the first effect will be to open up fragile ecosystems to oil drilling, causing more
problems elsewhere.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> Why, what do you have against it? [the Wall St Jnl]
190bn bbls of non-existent Caspian crude, for one thing.
Encouraging credulousness for another.
Why would not both happen simultaneously? And why do you assume that the drilling would
be on fragile ecosystems? It would make extraction from large but low grade deposits
such as the Alberta Tar Sands more economical and injection etc. that recovers more oil
from wells that are running out.
Ch
At 06:28 PM 07/04/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>Regarding Ken's assumption that higher prices will bring new energy forms
>on line,
>the first effect will be to open up fragile ecosystems to oil drilling,
>causing more
>problems elsewhere.
if prices are high due to taxes, it shouldn't have this effec
In the U.S., the oil industry is hungering after the California coast and Alaska.
Ken Hanly wrote:
> Why would not both happen simultaneously? And why do you assume that the drilling
>would
> be on fragile ecosystems? It would make extraction from large but low grade deposits
> such as the Albe
