Skip to main content

High oil prices "here to stay"

High Oil Prices are "here to stay" according to a Lib Dem MP. John Hemming, Member of Parliament for Birmingham (Yardley) is calling together a summit of geologists and campaigners to review when oil production globally will peak.

"The issue", he said, "is not 'when we run out of oil', but when the global production of oil peaks. After that point oil will no longer be priced as something cheaper than mineral water, but as an essential resource that has taken millions of years to produce, but only decades to burn. As soon as the production peaks then there will be tight constraints on what can be consumed that will get tighter every year."

"Oil is a key part of our economic structure and energy supplies. It is essential not just as an energy supply, but also as a raw material for the production of plastics and other chemicals."

Wrking with the campaign group Powerwatch and the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, he will be calling a summit of geologists and other interested parties to meet in the House of Commons to look at the question "when will oil supplies peak globally".

"I asked the government the question, ' when will oil supplies peak globally'", he said, "and they said they really did not know, but someone else thinks 2030. Even oil companies such as Chevron don't think we have that much time. There are some people who thinik the peak of supply will be next year. This issue underpins the whole of our economic structure. I am calling together this meeting so that a proper and well researched examination of the issues can occur."

"There may be temporary blips when oil prices go down, but the situation is changing to one where prices are normally high and high prices are here to stay."

Comments

Apollo Project said…
A sound initiative. We're joining in the debate on the Apollo Project blog
http://liberalism2010.blogspot.com/

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…