What's with the constant attacks on testing, achievement and merit? It seems like every other week there is something attacking the SAT, scores, testing, achievement, etc.
The developing world are and will benefit from cheap oil. This is a fact. Not a matter for debate or discussion.
> Several countries in Africa are suffering from wars worsened by climate change driven migrations.
Now only if these african countries used more oil to develop and get rich so that they wouldn't have to fight over scraps. Are you seriously saying that a continent where a significant portion of the population lacks reliable electricity won't benefit from cheap oil and development?
> Countries like India have a mix of cities running out of water, cities flooded by water and cities drowning in pollution which is almost certainly gonna erase years of people's lives eliminating any improvements caused by better medicine.
A country with a per capita income of only $2K? Where hundreds of millions of its citizens live in poverty. You are claiming these people won't benefit from cheap oil and development?
The only people who are against cheap oil for africa, india, etc are privileged white liberal parasites who are already rich from a century of cheap oil. It's pretty pathetic to try and deny these people are chance at a better life because you want to help bankers enact a carbon tax on the world.
You are spouting nonsense. Use of oil and gas isn't a matter of "belief". It's a function of demographic, developmental and economic variables. Pretty much the energy use for the next decade or two is nearly set in stone barring fusion energy.
Also, if you think going from gas cars to EV is a greater jump than horse buggy to automobiles, then you simply don't have a clue. As for china and india, EVs account for 0.0001% of cars.
If you think we are going to be using "all electric aircraft" at the end of this decade and that it will dent the need for oil for air travel, once again, you haven't a clue what you are talking about.
If you think natural gas growth is going to slow anytime soon, once again you haven't a clue what you are talking about. The bigger growth in energy has been in natural gas. It has solely been responsible for the collapse of the coal industry in the US. And there are tremendous room for growth in natural gas production in the US, Russia, etc.
> Your peak oil will be in the past once you see entire areas of housing in BRIC countries running on Solar/batteries. Goodbye. Oil.
Dumbest thing I've ever read. It much more likely that these countries are going to increase coal production to keep up with energy demand needs than going "solar/battery" route.
> War profiteers say the same thing. They never come out on the right side of the history book.
Nope. This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. War profiteers are some of the biggest winners we have.
> Oil and Gas will NOT have growth for a long time.
If you say so. But then again, people like you were claiming the end of oil a decade ago.
3rd party fact checkers themselves are highly biased. If you think reuters is neutral, then you really don't understand the "news" business. The "news" business isn't in the business of news. It's in the influence business. The founder of reuters started off peddling radical revolutionary propaganda.
Paul Julius Reuter worked at a book-publishing firm in Berlin and was involved in distributing radical pamphlets at the beginning of the Revolutions in 1848.
Besides, the problematic part with "news" involve "non-factual" news but rather political "news". Whether globalism is good or bad. What, if anything, to do about climate change. Nonsense like veganism, etc. There, by nature, can't be fact-checked because it is a value/contextual judgment rather than a factual one. Capitalism vs communism, nationalism vs globalism, immigration vs nativism, alt-right vs alt-left, traditional media vs social media, etc.