text:
A look at forecasts for peak oil – and the end of civilization
Summary: A common concern in the comments expresses fear of resource exhaustion, perhaps even leading to collapse of civilization. Here we examine the theory, evaluate the risks, and point to sources of more information.
Such one to a Question Time: "how do you think the US will cope with the return to a preindustrial lifestyle?"
A more sophisticated version is this excerpt from a a July 4th article by Damien Perrotin at his website posted in the comments to last week's Question Time:
It is a popular idea among degrowth people and some sections of the Green movement and of the far left. My last girlfriend was very much into it, and it definitely is a bad idea … The main reason for it should be obvious to anybody vaguely aware of the coming energy descent. Even its proponents acknowledge that the feasibility of a basic income system is highly dependent upon the continued existence of the industrial civilization.
… The problem, of course, is that this future of robots automated factories shall never come to pass. It is not automation per se that fueled the industrial revolution and gave our society, but access to fossil energy. Without coal, oil or gas to fuel them and the highly complex social apparatus they need for their manufacture and maintenance, our machines are useless.
Perrotin graciously posted a comment to the discussion with more details. Excerpt:
(b) We won't run out of oil any time soon. Discoveries, however, have peaked in 1964 and are declining since. Production is plateauing since 2006 and will begin to decrease in the relatively near future. It certainly won't be a cliff but a long and progressive descent. Alternatives won't be developed, because there is none. The last breakthrough in energy (nuclear energy) happened during the fifties and was an economic failure. The other alternatives are low quality.
(c) Industrial civilization needs a constant inflow of high grade energy ; Without it they will collapse, but that will take some time. We won't have any instant Dark Age.
What will happen is that we will be forced to replace high grade fossil fuels by lower grade « alternatives », which will result in cycles of steadily worsening economic crisis with periods of temporary recovery. According to the Meadows report, it should begin during the first decades of the XXIst century.
(d) Don't expect the Middle Age 2.0 before 2100, at the very earliest, and while we may lose a lot of technology, we won't get back to medieval level.
These things we discussed in several posts, even the extreme version (in Peak Oil Doomsters debunked, end of civilization called off). This post gives a brief reply to Perrotin's concerns. In brief, we should worry about the consequences of peak fossil fuels. Bad luck (an early peak and fast decline) might mean a long recession or even depression. But we can prepare, and we can cope with the consequences. Preparation now minimizes the pain of the inevitable transition to new energy sources, and reduces the risk of a long and severe transition.
Now for a look at the specifics Perrotin raises, focusing only on oil.
UPDATE: Perrotin generously replied in the comments! Als0, consider subscribing to the FM website feed and Twitter feed (see the upper right corner).
(1) "Production is plateauing since 2006″
Yes, but the reason why is important. Using EIA data, liquid fuels consumption (which include non-oil sources) peaked at the start of the great recession, at 87.8 million barrels/day in February 2008 (as prices spiked).
The combination of slower growth offset by OPEC production quotas AND the slow/sure response to 5 years of rising prices resulted in demand dropping. The trough in May 2009 was 87.9 mbd (-6%). A slow acceleration in GDP offset by continued efficiency gains brought demand back up to 2008 in July 2010, and to 89.7 mbd (up 2%) in February.
Summary: consumption is flattish because of demand, not supply. Otherwise prices would be rising to destroy the excess of demand over supply (as it did in Spring 2008).
(2) "and will begin to decrease in the relatively near future."
Perhaps, but such confident predictions are not a good idea. First, there is insufficient publicly available information to forecast peaking with reasonable reliability. Data about the oil fields of many nations with large reserves is either sketchy & old (ie, Iraq) or secret (eg, Russia and most in the Middle East).
And there are too many variables: economic growth, expenditures on projects to increase both supply and efficiency, and technology (eg, as fracking disproved the many confident forecasts of an imminent "cliff-like" crash in North American natural gas production.
Which is why forecasts for peaking range from now through 2020 — and beyond.
But there are people who know the answer: When will global oil production peak? Here is the answer!, 1 November 2007.
(3) "certainly won't be a cliff but a long and progressive descent."
Agreed! Data from fields and regions that peaked suggest a possible long plateau, followed by annual declines of 3 – 12% (depending on a wide range of factors). The worst-case: peaking in the next decade, a brief plateau, and double-digit decline rates — would be horrific (although not civilization-ending).
For more about this see:
- "Giant oil field decline rates and their influence on world oil production", Mikael Höök, Robert Hirsch & Kjell Aleklett, Energy Policy, June 2009
- The three forms of Peak Oil (let's hope for the benign form) , 23 April 2008.
(4) "we won't run out of oil any time soon …"
Agreed! Most forecasts (eg, the large collection used by the IPCC to estimate CO2 emissions) estimate that we'll reach the point at which we've used 90% of reserves (ie, recoverable using current technology) sometime in the late 21st century.
That estimate is speculative for two reasons. First, what's economically recoverable will certainly expand due to new extraction & refining technology. Second, see the next point.
For an explanation of why peaking does not mean "running out" see this important post: Recovering lost knowledge about exhaustion of Earth's resources (such as Peak Oil), 27 January 2011.
(5) "Alternatives won't be developed, because there is none."
Perhaps, but IMO that's stating as a certainty something about which we can only guess. Also, that's a astonishingly confident statement to make about technology over the next 50+ years. As you know, the history of such assertions is not pretty (although providing much laughter to later generations).
It's especially odd given the range of technologies under development. First, nuclear has great potential — despite its incompetent application so far. For details see the reports listed in the nuclear section on the Energy Studies page.
Second, there are other sources — such as Coal-to-liquids — that have severe limitations (eg, dirty, expensive) but can help carry us from oil to better sources.
Third, there are many promising research programs in fusion (see this article for an overview). Such as the Polywell invented by the great late physicist Robert Bussard (for more information see here and here). We can only guess which — if any — of these will prove feasible; none will have significant production during the next two decades. But during the mid-21st century during which fossil fuel shortages become serious they have great promise.
What are the alternative sources under development? How long might it take until they're in large-scale use? For a summary answer see Eventually we'll have unlimited cheap clean energy. But that will not help us or our kids. For details about specific energy sources look here.
Note that all of these require electrification of surface transportation. A National Academy of Sciences study ("Transitions to Alternative Transportation Technologies: Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles", December 2009) shows that this is feasible, although (like all large-scale capital projects) requires one or two decades to do economically (ie, not on a wasteful, panicked crash basis).
When should we begin to prepare for peak oil?
President Kennedy gave us the answer in his speech at U California at Berkeley on 23 March 1962:
"Knowledge is the great sun of the firmament," said Senator Daniel Webster. "Life and power are scattered with all its beams."
In its light, we must think and act not only for the moment but for our time. I am reminded of the story of the great French Marshal Lyautey, who once asked his gardener to plant a tree. The gardener objected that the tree was slow-growing and would not reach maturity for a hundred years. The Marshal replied, "In that case, there is no time to lose, plant it this afternoon."
Today a world of knowledge — a world of cooperation – a just and lasting peace — may be years away. But we have no time to lose. Let us plant our trees this afternoon.
For more information
(a) The FM Reference Pages about energy on the right-side menu bar:
- Peak Oil and Energy – posts on the FM site – Articles discussing all these issues in detail
- Peak oil and energy – Studies and reports, with links to authoritative outside sources
Especially see the "studies and reports" page. On that is a link to the US Department of Energy's Mitigations report by Robert Hirsch et al (2005), that discusses these things at length. Hirsch is IMO our (America's) greatest living energy export. He saw this crisis coming in 2002 (before prices started their fast rise), but we didn't listen. We're still not listening.
(b) Some posts about Peak Oil
- More answers about Peak Oil! (or just better phrased questions), 5 November 2007
- Peak Oil, part 3: discussing the solutions, 10 November 2007
- The world changed last week, with no headlines to mark the news, 25 April 2008 — The King spoke.
- When the King of Saudi Arabia talks about oil, we should listen , 2 July 2008 — More news
- Red Alert: the Saudi Princes have announced the arrival of Peak Oil , 11 July 2008
- An urban legend to comfort America: our massive reserves of unconventional oil, 29 August 2008
- An urban legend to comfort America: oil is oil, even if it is not oil, 10 September 2008
- One of the top questions for our time: how will Peak Oil affect the economy?, 6 September 2011
13 July 2012 9:59 am
This is a thoughtful and interesting post and I agree with most of it. A few remarks, however, :
a) all liquid includes a lot of things which are not oil (biofuels for instance) and requires significant quantities of oil or natural gas to be produced. Many of those things have a rather low net energy content, which explain why they are so costly. They can replace oil, but not at the same level of prosperity or social complexity. If you want to measure oil production, you have to look at crude + condensate stats, and those peaked in 2006.
b) production is flattish because of both demand and supply. As we move from cheap, easy oil to more expensive alternatives, the amount of net energy available for the global economy shrinks, which causes economic difficulties, which in turn lowers the consumption (and oil price, which discourages investment). The kind of complex feed-back the Meadows report described in 1972.
c) nuclear worked in countries where it was propped up by covert stat subsidies (the USSR, France and Japan). Two of those states have had major problems. Breeders are an old technology, developed during the fifties, and a significant number of them have been built. They have produced electricity but not enough plutonium to make the effort worth it. Thorium looks promising, but there are reasons why it was not developed : the whole process requires plutonium to be started and plutonium is not exactly abundant, besides, it is not the kind of thing I'd like to see traded on an open market. And of course, our supply of uranium is rather limited.
d) geothermal is great if you happen to live in Iceland. In geologically stable areas, however, its potential is fairly limited. Coal to liquid is an old technology, which was used by a number of regimes with little oil and a lot of coal. It proved quite inferior to oil and is highly dependent upon the availability of high quality coal (fortunately I'd say, given the nature of the regimes which usedit). While there is still a lot of coal, the average quality in declining. In Europe we are down to lignite.
e) fusion is probably our only hope, which is depressing considering how long a shot it is. Achieving hydrogen fusion is easy, but getting an energy surplus is quite another problem, and it is what matters. The first tokamak were built during the fifties and commercially viable fusion energy has been "just around the corner" for my whole life, yet after more than six decades of research, we still have got nothing. Fusion energy looks therefore a bit too much like vaporware to me.
f) in fact, most "new energies" touted today are either old (wind, photovoltaic) or untested concepts, which will take decades to develop, in the best case. Frankly, I won't bet on them.
Now I agree that we won't fall off a cliff. We'll lose a lot and the bottom will be pretty low, but getting there will take a long time. The descent can be managed, whether it will be managed is quite another matter, of course.
Ron Patterson permalink13 July 2012 2:11 pm
You wrote: "Summary: consumption is flattish because of demand, not supply. Otherwise prices would be rising to destroy the excess of demand over supply (as it did in Spring 2008)."
In other words the oil supply is flattish because of low oil prices.
We hit that plateau began in 2005, three years before prices destroyed demand in 2008. In other words we have been on a seven year plateau because of low oil prices. Here are average yearly Brent prices since 2001. Look at the average price before we hit the plateau in 2005, then the average price after we hit the plateau. Now someone tell me, with a straight face, that production has been flat because of low oil prices.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
24.46 24.99 28.84 38.26 54.57 65.16 72.44 96.94 61.74 79.61 111.26 112.68
Every nation was producing flat out from 2005 thru 2008. Then after the crash OPEC cut back until late last year. Since then every country has been producing flat out again.
In June, according to the EIA's Short Term Energy Outlook non-OPEC liquids were over one million barrels per day lower than they were in December of 2011. And that is with world oil prices over $100 per day as they are today. The reason is because prices, since December of last year, have been so low. Unbelievable!
13 July 2012 1:42 pm
as is typical for this kind of rambling article, the concentration is focussed on a single problem : peak oil. as if that was all we had to worry about, when overpopulation, climate change and food shortage present a greater danger. they are upon us now, whereas peak oil might be a few years off. we won't get to peak oil, the other problems will see to that
Burning oil needs a sophisticated infrastructure, that will break down before the oil goes
13 July 2012 1:53 pm
I think that we need to differentiate between long term and short term factors that affect crude oil prices. In my opinion, average annual oil prices give us the best indication of fundamental long term supply and demand factors. And of course, Brent is a far better indicator of global prices than WTI. We have seen two annual Brent crude oil price doublings since 2002, from $25 in 2002 to $55 in 2005, and then from $55 in 2005 to $111 in 2011 (with a year over year decline in 2009).
In response to the first price doubling, we did of course see a substantial increase across the board in total liquids production (inclusive of biofuels), in total petroleum liquids, in crude + condensate (C+C), and in Global Net Exports (GNE) and in Available Net Exports (ANE). GNE and ANE numbers are calculated in terms of total petroleum liquids. ANE are defined as GNE less China and India's combined net oil imports.
In response to the second Brent crude oil price doubling (2005 to 2011), we have so far seen a slow rate of increase in total petroleum liquids production and in total liquids production (up 0.4%/year and 0.5%/year from 2005 to 2011 respectively), virtually flat C+C production (through 2011), and a 0.7%/year and 2.2%/year respective decline rate in GNE & ANE (through 2011). GNE fell from 46 mbpd (million barrels per day) in 2005 to 44 mbpd in 2011, while ANE fell from 40 mbpd in 2005 to 35 mbpd in 2011. (Top 33 net oil exporters in 2005, BP + Minor EIA data, Total Petroleum Liquids.)
Five annual "Gap" charts follow, showing the gaps between where we would have been at the 2002 to 2005 rates of increase, versus the actual data in 2010 (common vertical scale, not yet updated with 2011 data):
- EIA Total Liquids (including biofuels)
- BP Total Petroleum Liquids
- EIA Crude + Condensate
- Global Net Oil Exports (GNE, BP & Minor EIA data, Total Petroleum Liquids)
- Available Net Exports (GNE less Chindia's net imports)
I would particularly note the divergence between the first chart, Total Liquids, and the last chart, Available Net Exports (ANE). I estimate that there are about 157 net oil importing countries in the world. If we extrapolate the Chindia region's rate of increase in their combined net oil imports, as a percentage of GNE, in 18 years from now, around 2030, just two of these oil importing countries–China & India–would consume 100% of GNE.
US annual crude oil production rose from the pre-hurricane level of 5.4 mbpd in 2004 to 5.7 mbpd in 2011, versus the 1970 peak rate of 9.6 mbpd. This is helpful, but the former CEO of Shell Oil described it as a "trickle" of higher production, and we remain dependent on imports for about 2 out of every 3 barrels of crude oil that are processed in US refineries. We do have of course have production from thermally mature shale formations, like the Bakken and Eagle Ford, but there has been no commercial production from the "shale" deposits in Colorado (the Green River Formation), which are really a kerogen rich marl deposits that have to be "cooked" in order to produce a liquid that can be refined. In any case, I suspect that the net energy to be derived from these kerogen deposits is, at best, minimal.
And of course, Canada has shown increasing net oil exports, which are calculated in terms of total petroleum liquids, but the combined net oil exports from the seven major net oil exporters* in the Americas and the Caribbean fell from 6.1 mbpd in 2004 to 5.0 mbpd in 2011, an 18% decline in six years.
The dominant trend we are seeing is that the US, and most other developed oil importing OECD countries, are so far at least gradually being priced out of the global market for exported oil, as annual global (Brent) crude oil prices doubled from 2005 to 2011. For more info, you can search for: Peak Oil Versus Peak Exports.
*Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Argentina, Ecuador, Trinidad & Tobago
13 July 2012 2:31 pm
First, the supply side: Annual Brent prices doubled from 2002 to 2005. So, we had a strong price signal. And we saw a strong positive supply response.
Annual Brent priced doubled from 2005 to 2011 (with one year over year decline in 2009). In response, crude oil production was flat. We saw small increases in total petroleum liquids and total liquids (inclusive of low net energy biofuels), and we saw a material decline in Global Net Exports of oil and in Available Net Exports, with the volume of oil that is available to importers other than China and India falling from 40 mbpd in 2005 to 35 mbpd in 2011.
And on the demand side: Here is a chart showing normalized oil consumption from 2002 to 2010 (BP data) for China, India, top 33 net oil exporters and for the US.
The chart is not yet updated for 2011, but the trend on the chart continued in 2011, to-wit, China, India and the oil exporting countries showed increasing oil consumption as Brent priced doubled from $55 in 2005 to $111 in 2011, while consumption in the US (and in most other oil importing OECD countries) fell.
13 July 2012 2:50 pm
My principal point is that I'm guessing that perhaps 0.1% of the people in the world have some grasp of what is going on regarding global net exports of oil.
ANE (Available Net Exports) are defined as GNE (Global Net Exports) less Chindia's combined net oil imports. The following graph shows the ratio of GNE to Chindia's Net Imports (CNI). At a 1.0 GNE/CNI ratio, the Chindia region would consume 100% of Global Net Exports of oil. The 2008 to 2011 decline in the GNE/CNI ratio (8.7%/year) was faster than what the 2005 to 2008 rate of decline (7.7%/year) predicted we would see.
Based on the six year (2005 to 2011) rate of decline in the GNE/CNI ratio, estimated post-2005 Available CNE (Cumulative Net Exports) are about 168 Gb (billion barrels). Cumulative ANE for 2006 to 2011 inclusive were about 81 Gb, putting estimated post-2005 Available CNE about 48% depleted at the end of 2011.
The 2005 to 2011 rate of decline in the GNE/CNI ratio, if extrapolated, suggests that China and India would be consuming 100% of Global Net Exports of oil in the year 2030, which is 18 years from now. Of course, I don't think that will actually happen, but that is the trend line, and the rate of decline in the GNE/CNI ratio accelerated from 2008 to 2011, versus 2005 to 2008.
13 July 2012 4:01 pm
Here is my full quote:
"The 2005 to 2011 rate of decline in the GNE/CNI ratio, if extrapolated, suggests that China and India would be consuming 100% of Global Net Exports of oil in the year 2030, which is 18 years from now. Of course, I don't think that will actually happen, but that is the trend line, and the rate of decline in the GNE/CNI ratio accelerated from 2008 to 2011, versus 2005 to 2008."
We are clearly seeing evidence of some weakness in global demand, with Brent currently around $100, versus $111 in 2005. But that's the point. Demand has had to accommodate a declining supply of GNE, with the Global Net Exports being rationed by price, with the developing countries, led by China, so far outbidding the developed countries for access to a declining supply of Global Net Exports of oil.
But the $64 trillion dollar question is what happens going forward.
It seems to me that most analysts are looking at a slowing in the rate of increase in Chinese demand for energy. However, one point to keep in mind is that the EIA is showing Chinese oil production as being flat year over year.
When US crude oil production peaked in 1970, our rate of increase in net imports increased from 11%/year from 1949 to 1970 to 14%/year from 1970 to 1977. In 1978, Alaskan crude briefly increased production, and then demand fell, for a while. But in any case, US net oil imports doubled in about five years, after US crude oil production peaked in 1970, at 9.6 mbpd (versus 5.7 mbpd in 2011)
I guess I remain uncertain as to why all of this is not clear to you.
13 July 2012 11:02 pm
@Jeffrey J. Brown – The US now imports less than half of it's oil consumption. You would think a person like you who spends 24/7 studying the data would know this. The next time you throw out numbers, make sure and include natural gas liquids and biofuel, because yes, they do count.
simon permalink13 July 2012 3:12 pm
I've read your blog on/off for a while. While some posts elucidate, most are Rationalizing rather than Rationality. I've wondered what could make someone so rational sometimes but something other most other times. I've come think it has to do with the subtitle of your blog: "A discussion about geopolitics…from an American's perspective…" This, along with your esteem of Fabius Maximus who lived on the sweet spot of the Roman Republic, makes your perspective very narrow and specialized.
Specialization was good in the sweet spot of American "exceptionalism," a time when energy was so abundant everyone forgot the central role it plays in all human endeavours and started believing their egos alone powered all accomplishments. That is no longer the case and specialization's become a hobby of constant diminishing returns.
To get even-keeled again, and get a proper perspective on our future, you should read Dr Charles A S Hall, author of "Energy and the Wealth of Nations: Understanding the Biophysical Economy." It is an expensive textbook so a quick intro to his research would be to listen to From Alpha to Omega podcast 1st episode where Dr Hall is interviewed on his research. You'll really get a grounding on the vital role energy plays in all we've created and all that's happening.
You'll then understand how all human endeavours are a subset of available enery in the system; and all the implications that understanding portends as we accelerate into an energy-scarce future.
You'll understand the vital role of EROEI in modern society and why a lower EROEI means a simplification of modern society rather than a "reigniting of spirit."
You'll be a realist, a stoic, and may even find Seneca, Marcus Aurelius and Cato the Younger much more relevant figures Americans should look to emulate. Good luck.
Unna permalink13 July 2012 5:55 pm
I'm skeptical of mono-causal explanations for very complex historical occurrences like the Fall of Rome, attributing Rome's decline to some sort of energy use imbalance nonsense instead of to a miasma of cultural, political, and economic factors. How could Rome's fall be because of "energy" problems when we see a very advanced energy civilization existing today in the very same geographic space? The real question is: what combination of factors led to Rome's failure to improve its technology. Why wasn't Hero's invention of the steam engine exploited by that culture? That's a political-cultural question, not an energy question?
As to FM's use of Fabius, I've always understood the historical FM to be a great example of personal and non ego driven, non self promoting service to the Republic. He pursued a correct and patient strategy during the Punic War in the face of popular criticism, sometimes intervening to save the more flamboyant younger generals from their own mistakes without humiliating them in the eyes of their countrymen. One of the great examples of moral public service in all of history.
simon permalink13 July 2012 7:35 pm
(1) Maximus, excuse me for coming off as patronizing, it couldn't be helped when pointing out your Rationalizing vs Rationality.
One of the best things I like of your posts is the wealth of references you post (not the constant self-referencing to previous own posts though), of course it takes a while to go through them and even more to find differing views in order to apply some critical thinking (reason why personally I don't do it frequently unless real interest in subject discussed). Case in point, you mention nuclear as a given in its potential and self-referencing as you mention its "incompetent application so far." While any in-depth reading into nuclear makes it obvious the energy sink that it is when taking into account just the vast amount of concrete each reactor requires, concrete made not with nuclear or fusion but with petroleum derived diesel. Take into account any additional factor and is clear if it weren't for its secondary use as fissional material cauldrons, govts would've given it up same way they've given up Moon Landings. Fusion? Outside of the fusion reactor about 150mK away from us (ie THE SUN), any investment into fusion is nice for basic knowledge, don't ever think this offshoot of hominids will ever downsize it to nuclear plant proportions.
(2) EROEI defines why our infrastructure keeps crumbling no matter how much taxes are increased on its users. Most of it was built when USofA was net producer, when -at times- petrol was cheaper than potable water. Read Joseph Tainter a bit to understand how a complex society as ours gets to the point where more energy is required simply to maintain the infrastructure it's come to depend on. Not grow, not replace, only maintain the infrastructure requires more energy than it took to build it. Seen EROEI define the utility of a finite resource, it is disingenuous to believe it doesn't apply "over any time frame." At particular moments of peak resource, such as we are in the midst of, is when it applies the most.
Unna, pay attention to that previous part, that's what pressured Rome to simplify; getting to the point that all their sorrounding vassal states were needed just for maintenance of the core. All the losses they had up to the onset of the Dark Ages was them trying to maintain the status quo at whatever cost, something we seem to bent to repeat.
(3) "reignite the spirit" is part of your blog's subtitled Maximus.
Annus, re the historical FM I give you all that and I don't ever want to take away from the person he was but the times he lived were very different to the times Seneca, Marcus Aurelius and Cato the Younger lived. Those three were very much the same as FM but even more so for the lived in the decline of Empire and still chose to face the future stoically, attempting to simplify while remaining civilized and humanized.
As regards tech, again, like much of human dreams, tech is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Available Energy In The System. Little energy = Even Less Tech, same as Little Energy = Even Less Human Dreams Becoming Real. Please research Biophysical Economics, or Land Economics, or just read the papers by Dr Charles A S Hall, a quick googling will give you a wealth of data to keep you busy for weeks.
As regards why Hero's invention wasn't exploited at the time, is the same reason King Henry's court knew about coal but it still took 350yrs for others to exploit it because during Henry's time it was considered to cause miasma (which essentially it does). Basically they were doing fine and doing what they needed to do with the ample forests they had. Once those forests dwindled to practically nothing, guess what, we had to use dirty coal. Do you think the Sheriff of Nothingham simply had it in against Robin Hood and his merry men? It was about limiting the depltion of the commons, with some cronyism as humans are wanton to do in such times (ie look at Barclays and JPM for instance.)
Basically we're scraping the bottom of the barrel fellows. As John Michael Greer says, "choose to collapse now and avoid the rush." Choose to adapt to living comfortably with the least you can now while the system still gives us things for free, than waiting for later when everyone is forced to forcibly live with less; it'd be a mad rush then.
James Catfish permalink13 July 2012 5:06 pm
I see our problem(s) largely being one of culture, politics, corporate media, and Wall Street. No instition run by man will ever be perfect, however as these things now stand it is hard to determine TRUTH.
Most of us have been quite content to burn through about 1/5 of world oil production with about 1/20 of the worlds population. Military power, and the US dollar as the worlds instrument of trade have helped make this possible. The fall of the US dollar and replacement with another currency (for comodities) would make our present problems tame by comparison.
We have become a "short term" culture, with little thought for future generations.
Big corporations usually act in their own best interest, and that of the stockholders. They have evolved to the point where they hold no aliegence or concern for any nation (other than what is in their own best interest). It is just their nature.
Shell, Exon, BP ect, the media, our government will tell us little about peak oil. Even if it is true, we just don't want to hear it. If peak oil is real, and their is no replacementent, we may head for a pre industrial world population of about 1 billion. So the outcome could be devastating, brutal. This issue (along with climate change) merit mature, careful thought, and debate, long absent in our culture.
James Catfish permalink14 July 2012 12:41 am
Fabius, as per military power and access to oil; if not then why the aircraft carrier battle groups in the North Arabian Sea, and/or Persian Gulf from at least 1980 to present? If the Middle East had no oil would we be there? One could strech the scope of that question much further. Nations throughout history have used there military to control access to resources. How about Libia, if they had no oil would we have used airpower to influence the outcome? What makes us so different, am I missing your point? Or did I fail to make my point?
I would agree that there are dangers in a reserve currency, and if the dollar does fall and is replaced, there will be plenty of pain to go around. I hope we have a good plan to manage that possibility. Our record on the economy inspires little confidence.
Peak oil! My feeling is we may have time, but you have more faith in the present political and corporate system than I do. What do you see as a substitute, and at what cost to an infrastructure build over the past hundred plus years. I would agree that peak oil may be in the distant future, but that assumption is based on present production increasing to meet future possible demand. What are worldwide oil reserves, for example what are Saudi reserves at present production rates? Unless you know something I don't, they hold that information close and allow no outside verification.
If one believes that China, and India combined have about 8 times our population, and want to consume as we do (if they don't self distruct), then could the world produce 180 million plus barrels of oil per day? If that comes to pass I think we will shortly have an answer on peak oil theory, and man made climate change, one way or the other.
13 July 2012 6:03 pm
I want to make two points: One is what peak oil people actually say and this is in response to "A key point in this post is that it's false to say "oil goes" away. It's a canard, one reason the peak oil community has so little influence". The second point is a response to your statement that prices reflect demand more than supply conditions: "consumption is flattish because of demand, not supply. Otherwise prices would be rising to destroy the excess of demand over supply (as it did in Spring 2008)".
Peak oil is not about oil going away, it is about production volumes – the tar sands in canada are enormous but production flows are highly constrained (and it is very expensive) – so peak oil is about rising production, then peak production followed by plateau/decline. For any finite resource, this is expected and has been seen for individual fields and regions (Texas, North Sea etc.). Yes, one reason for 'so little influence' is that the peak oil position is commonly mis-represented (oil isgoing away, we are running out…), like 'death panels'. Now the question, which is difficult to answer definitively, is with respect to global peak production – argument of peak oilists are that we are on a plateau despite strong price signals for more supply. Now it is true that production rises have indeed slowed and so the question is why – your statement tells the reader that it is demand side such that, I assume, if demand increases, production will come online in response. So let us examine that.
Many years ago I started looking at oil supply and prices and by 2004 came to the conclusion that geological factors could see a run up in price. In 2004 CERA/EIA spoke of oil prices falling to $30/barrel or less. Well Southwest must have known something – they hedged at $50/barrel. Now, I pointed out at my business school that I saw a possibility of $80 oil and temporary 'superspikes' of prices in the range of $100-110 per barrel. I was ridiculed at the time. Well this happened and if I told the MBA class in 2004 that in 2012 Brent crude would be approximately and persistently around $100-110/barrel (the 'superspike price') during WEAK global economic conditions, I would have been laughed out the door. Price signals are an important indicator of supply and demand conditions and running averages are a better than spot prices at given times – average prices today are significantly higher then historical world prices even adjusted for inflation and in weak economic conditions.
While I do understand the points you make about economic conditions suppressing demand, it is precisely that – weak economic conditions and record average oil prices – that suggests something is happening on the supply side – otherwise, there should be a price collapse closer to historical world prices ($25-35/barrel in 2012 dollars).
I do appreciate you getting in on the debate and much welcomed and hope my thoughts help in this debate.
13 July 2012 6:58 pm
"While I do understand the points you make about economic conditions suppressing demand, it is precisely that – weak economic conditions and record average oil prices – that suggests something is happening on the supply side – otherwise, there should be a price collapse closer to historical world prices ($25-35/barrel in 2012 dollars)."
Nice. Pretty clear, eh?
13 July 2012 8:58 pm
Yes, the peak oil community has had lively debate on the rate of decline in oil production on the downside of the slope and some call for very steep and some for a more moderate decline – the debates have been for the most part and in my view excellent – new tech such as multilateral will have steeper declines and tight oil and deep water have evidence of sharper declines then conventional – so this debate (usually with extensive evidence and data) is important and is about production volume – oil will flow for centuries, but expected to be at declining rates and it is the rate that is indeed debated (in addition to timing of peak) – so no, the oil is not 'running out' or 'going away' – this is what many people I know happen to think what peak oil is about; now if originally you meant production volumes regarding specifically doomster predicitions of crash in production rates, then I mis-interpreted you andf yes, this can perhaps undermine credibility. But in all debates, there are extreme positions and it is to be expected. But rapid decline rates is different from framing peak oil debates as oil 'going away', implying it runs out and suddenly there is no oil. I have been following ASPO and TheOilDrum and the destinction between the two framings has been made numerous times in the debates I have read.
On the point of doomsters, while Hirsch is not a doomster, his reports are still quite sobering regarding the realities of transition and mitigation.
You are correct that we cannot return to historical world prices – I realised this just after posting but it actually emphasises my point that something is happening on the supply side. Marginal cost of supply is rising due to inability of conventional sources to meet demand and so must be met with more expensive unconventional – this is actually part of the peak oil story – peaking conventional oil. But this seems then a supply side story… yes? So it is a classic story – the current equilibrium price is based on the market demand under weak economic conditions and the marginal cost of additional production – that the average price is $100 and up is evidence to me of peak oil scenarios – cheaper (conventional) sources are fully exploited – conventional supply has been fairly flat for some time and if it were expected to grow in future significantly, then expensive new sources would not be developed – so demand is increasingly being met by more expensive and difficult to exploit plays – cheap oil is over. Note that these new sources will come on-line but they have to make up for decline rates of the existing production base and this will be more and more difficult over time. Oil will not be getting cheaper.
So I reiterate, yes, something is certainly happening on the supply side, otherwise, prices would be back to historical prices – but they are not, and as you point out correctly, they cannot. So from a broader interpretation of what the peak oil debate is about, in my opinion, we are experiencing the effects of peak oil today.
13 July 2012 6:05 pm
But why is demand falling? Because people realize that we are running out so they conserve or because an increasing amount of people are becoming/remaining impoverished? The latter is not good and will need to be dealt with some how. This may be the biggest reason for the occupy movement.
Plus what happens when the time comes when oil fields around the world begin hitting their peak and those countries inevitably make the decision to nationalize all oil fields to be utilized for their own people? This too is a bit frightening and could very well lead to a cliff of a decent, among some very nasty wars!
13 July 2012 8:06 pm
I wonder if resource depletion will lead to a negative correlation between EROEI and the ratio of energy expenditure to GDP?
I think it might be possible that future reliance on ever-lower returns might significantly increase the portion of our society devoted to extracting and distributing energy. The increased necessary investment might preclude a profitable business venture, and so this might only happen if government subsidies to energy infrstructure were to increase as a portion of GDP, which is entirely possible.
Also, I think Fabius places too much hope for the prosperous future of humanity on the shoulders of Bussard's polywell. It is indeed the most promising alternative energy prospect I've seen, but may never actually become the panacea we need. Technological developments in general are sporadic, especially in the modern age, and I don't think it's wise to count our chickens before they hatch.
13 July 2012 9:20 pm
(1) I'm not making an unsubstantiated claim about EROI (and hence didn't feel the need to cite something), just proposing a hypothesis about how it might affect our economy. If you would deign to consider it, I would love to hear your comments.
(2) You've never said as much directly, but I've inferred it by reading your various articles on the topic (especially this one: Eventually we'll have unlimited cheap clean energy. But that will not help us or our kids). However, please forgive me if I've misread between your lines.
13 July 2012 9:32 pm
Hi Fabius
Have now been reading more of your responses to various readers and now prefer that I never participated in the debate around your article. I am new to this forum and came across it during some research and thought worth the read and even making some comments. But the tone of your responses is appalling. Regardless of what you think of the merits of reader comments, it is uncalled for.
13 July 2012 11:10 pm
@Fabius Maximus – Let's take Ethanol as an example. Sure it requires a lot of energy input from natural gas to produce. But as long as natural gas is cheap, and liquid fuels that can power existing vehicles are expensive, it makes sense. Same goes for tar sand production. Energy inputs and outputs are completely irrelevant.
EROEI is nothing more than a doomer strawman.
13 July 2012 11:32 pm
@Fabius Maximus
The EROEI strawman goes something like this – once it takes a barrel of oil to produce a barrel of oil, game over. The entire 10+ trillion barrels of unconvnetional oil will make no difference.
It's a strawman simply because you do not use oil to produce ethanol, tar sands, heavy oil, etc. In fact, some of the ethanol in Brazil is being distilled with energy from biomass.
How about we add in the solar energy it took to grow the plants for biofuel AND fossil fuels. Then the energy balance is ALL negative. So what?
Also, the Republican Congress removed tax credits for ethanol blending last year, yet the market is still growing.
14 July 2012 7:31 am
I would suggest that the current growth in the US ethanol industry is being driven by the high price of Brent, and exports to Europe.
This situation illustrates one of the major arguments against peak oil collapse theories. If oil supply/demand becomes tight, the price rises. Higher oil prices open the door to alternatives.
14 July 2012 12:02 am
One important theory that should be mentioned (and refuted) is M. King Hubbert's prediction that oil production would peak in 1995, based on a total URR of 2 trillion barrels. "Oil, the Dwindling Treasure", Noel Grove, National Geographic, June, 1974
Of course we know oil production didn't peak 17 years ago, but more importantly, Hubbert's estimate of 2 trillion URR is way too low. Hubbert did not include unconventional oil, shale, tar sands, heavy oil, deep water, etc, in his estimates, because there was no technology to produce these resources in 1974. We have the technology now, and new technology is constantly being developed. This is why recovery rates are always increasing.
Some experts estimate as much as 16 trillion barrels URR. It is more likely that future emissions regulations will curtail oil production long before we "run out".
14 July 2012 2:26 am
Hubbert's peak oil theory is a theory: Wikipedia. It has been proven wrong because we did not peak in 1995, and 2 trillion URR is not accepted by most petroleum geologists at this time.
BP's current estimate of "proven reserves" is 1.6 trillion barrels, or approximately 50 years of oil production. This figure DOES NOT include the 1 trillion barrels that we have already used up so far. Based on this estimate, Hubbert was off by 600 billion barrels so far.
However, "proven reserves" are not URR. This is where peak oil doomers can trick people. Proven reserves have historically "grown" over time with increases in price and technology. Also, some organizations require that the resource is actually producing before it can be considered as proven reserves. E.g. Venezuela's reserves were upgraded by some 500 billion barrels by the USGS after production began. Even though the oil resource was known for some time.
It's also interesting to note that proven reserves in 1948 were 20 years, 35 years in 1972, 40 years in 2003, and 50 years in 2011. This shows how reserve numbers grow. If proven reserves were "all that there is", we should have run out of oil back in 1968.
14 July 2012 3:22 am
Hubbert stated that world oil production would peak in 1995. EIA data shows a new peak for crude + condensate in 2011. Their data is in .xls format, but I found a nice graph on one of the doomer blogs: Energy Bulliten.
Pluto permalink14 July 2012 7:51 am
An excellent article, FM, and I applaude your patience in answering some of the comments here. The article covers a vital topic that has been buried in propaganda and overly self-confident prophetic statements. I am sure that there is a silent majority of your readers who are glad for your sources and the clarity of your writing.
Fred Magyar permalink14 July 2012 12:53 pm
"As I've said many times, if we get a harsh peak oil arrival (soon, short plateau, rapid decline), their "crying wolf" will bear a large part of the responsibility."
Hmm, isn't that a bit like saying that the boy who cried wolf is responsible for an actual wolf showing up?! Even if the boy was just trying to get attention by making up a story about wolves, I still fail to see how that would be the proximate cause of a pack of real wolves suddenly appearing and attacking the flock… I just can't quite seem to wrap my mind around that kind of logic!
Thomas More permalink14 July 2012 9:13 pm
Catfish's statement is factually accurate and provably true: ""Most of us have been quite content to burn through about 1/5 of world oil production with about 1/20 of the worlds population. Military power … have helped make this possible." References:
- How we use energy
- Wikipedia: world energy usage
- Energy usage by the United States
- World Population Balance
Americans constitute 5% of the world's population but consume 24% of the world's energy. On average, one American consumes as much energy as 2 Japanese, 6 Mexicans, 13 Chinese, 31 Indians, 128 Bangladeshis, 307 Tanzanians, 370 Ethiopians.
Catfish is stating well-documented facts as thoroughly demonstrated and as well proven as the heliocentric theory or Darwinian macroevolution. Denying that America uses 24% of the world's energy and that America's population is 5% of the world's population is either delusional, hallucinatory, or so disconnected from reality that it can't be taken seriously.
FM will now claim that "these are just random citations from the internet and therefore can't be taken seriously." Wrong. These facts are so well documented that they appear everywhere on the web, so FM's claim that "it's just random citations from the internet" means that any well-known fact that appears on many different places on the web must be discounted and ridiculed, because it appears on so many places in the web that any internet citation is likely to include so many diverse sources that it can be dismissed as "just random citation from the internet." That's tantamount to dismissing as "absurd" facts like "2+2=4″ because 2+2=4 is so widely cited on the net that any citation is likely to be "just random links from the internet" — i.e., sufficiently well-known facts have no single definitive source.
If I were you, FM, I'd be careful about making these kinds of extreme statements like "IMO most of that is incorrect" and "that's absurd." Catfish appears to be making an accurate statement of facts when he mentions that America has 5% of the world's population and uses (roughly) 1/4 of the world's energy. That's not absurd, it's a thoroughly documented fact.
It's also clear that America's military power lets us artificially lower the cost of our oil. European consumers pay enormously less than American consumers for gasoline: roughly $8 per gallon, compared to America's current $3.50 per gallon. The only reason for this is America's huge military presence in the middle east and our ability to quietly threaten uncooperative oil-producing governments with regime change if they raise the price they charge the U.S. to too high a level.
When Catfish talks about the (probably unlikely in the near future) catastrophic fall of the U.S. dollar, the conclusions he draws seem reasonable. It's simply very improbable that the dollar will stop being the world's reserve currency and will collapse in value relative to other major currencies to a catastrophic degree anytime soon. There area variety of reasons for this. America has become a safe haven for global investment during the current global economic crisis because of America's relative economic transparency, our respect for the rule of law, our regulatory safeguards including thorough auditing of all firms and deposit insurance for commercial bank accounts. Compared with, say, China, which has almost none of these advantages, or countries in the southern hemisphere or asia, where the nephew of the prime minister might decide he likes your company and gets the prime minister to confiscate your firm and pay you a pittance, America is likely to remain a much more popular place for the rest of the world to invest for the foreseeable future. So while Catfish's conclusions given his premises are correct, the scenario he paints with respect to a collapse in the dollar seems unlikely.
Likewise, when Catfish remarks that "if oil production permanently drops and if there is no susbstitute, we will return to a pre-industrial level of civilization" is certainly correct if we grant his premises — but once again, these premises seem extremely improbable. It's wildly unlikley that there will be no substitutes for oil. Changing our transportation to light rail or electric cars powered by, say, solar-electric or nuclear power offers one obvious alternative. And there are many others, including geothermal, tidal power, wind power, and so on. America simply hasn't developed any other alternative to oil for transportation because our military power makes oil so inexpensive, and because our existing oil distribution infrastructure is so incredibly widespread and so thoroughly integrated into our society, that it would involve a major disruption to change it. For example, cities like Los Angeles simply couldn't exist in their current form if America were to shift from oil-based personal car transportation to (for example) light rail or electric trams or something of that sort.
So Catfish's statements appear fact-based and reasonable if we grant his premises, but some of his premises seem highly unlikely. They're low-probability doomsday scenarios akin to the kind of thing James Howard Kunstler churns out. That doesn't make them "absurd," just unlikely. But it's well to remember that $150-a-barrel oil was judged "absurd" until it happened just a few years ago. So we should also be careful about claiming that future events are likely or unlikely. Psychological experiments show that humans are extremely poor at predicting the probability of events, even events whose probability can readily be calculated. See "Are People Programmed to Commit Fallacies? Further Thoughts about the Interpretation of Experimental Data on Probability Judgment," L. Jonathan Cohen, Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, Volume 12, Issue 3, pages 251–274, October 1982.
One issue no on e has dealt with so far is the nonlinearity of oil prices and economic oil shocks. As oil prices increase, speculators drive oil prices up wildly. This sends the world into an economic recession, drastically reducing oil demand. When oil prices decline, demand picks up, and oil prices start to rise again. Eventually oil demand reaches the point where speculators drive up prices in wild spikes again, and the whole process repeats.
These kinds of increasingtly violent nonlinear price shocks are likely to grow more frequent and more extreme as the world's oil demand increasingly outstrips available supply. Most of the current growth in oil demand comes from China and the third world: at present, the developed nations show near-flat growth in oil consumption, with the major increases coming from China et al.
Also not mentioned is Saudi Arabia's remarkable recent increase in oil production. Apparently the Saudis increased oil production in 1997 to compensate for the Asian economic crisis, and they appear to be doing the same thing today. This suggests that Saudi production might not be anywhere near its peak. Since Saudi oil reserves and oil production are not publicly available information, this remains speculation, but given the recent global drop in oil prices, it seems likely that the Saudis have recently ramped up their oil production in response to the ongoing global recession. See "Saudis increase oil production by 13%" from 2011. Obviously the goal here is for the Saudis to keep the global economy sufficiently robust to avoid inducing developed nations to find permanent substitutes for oil in the near future.
For this reason, I'd have to agree that Peak Oil is probably not here yet, and won't be in the near future. As long as the Saudis can ramp up production enough to slash gasoline prices in America and boost the world economy, it's safe to say that we haven't yet reached Peak Oil. QuadRant makes an excellent point, however, when he notes the extremely long lead time required to transform our societies for a post-oil world. In fact, 50 years probably underestimates the required time. For one thing, America is going to have to knock down and rebuild most of its cities to eliminate the car-centric suburbs and exurbs. We're going to have to rebuild our cities to accommodate light rail transport. We need much more urban density in places like Washington D.C. and much less tract housing in places like Los Angeles. Significant parts of the United States are going to have to depopulate to prepare for Peak OIl: Phoenix AZ, Taos NM, Los Angeles CA, San Diego CA are not sustainable in their current form. These places all depend on the oil-guzzling personal car and the expenditure of vast amounts of energy in air conditioning, water transport, etc. Absurdities like the Oasis Water Park at the Arizona Grand Resort are completely unsustainable in a post-Peak-Oil world.
14 July 2012 11:04 pm
"Denying that America uses 24% of the world's energy and that America's population is 5% of the world's population is either delusional, hallucinatory, or so disconnected from reality that it can't be taken seriously."
If we're talking liquid fuels, the US used 21% of world production in Feb 2012. It's also interesting to note that the latest data shows the US produced 24% of the world's GDP. So it looks like that energy went to good use eh?
"America simply hasn't developed any other alternative to oil for transportation because our military power makes oil so inexpensive, and because our existing oil distribution infrastructure is so incredibly widespread and so thoroughly integrated into our society, that it would involve a major disruption to change it."
Not true. The US now produces some 14 billion gallons of ethanol annually. This is more than 10% of annual gasoline consumption. Also, infrastructure improvements allow for distribution and refueling with ethanol, and also quick charge EV stations. Our local gas station has just recently installed a quick charge station. However, some EVs (Chevy Volt, etc) can be charged with standard 110V outlets that already exist throughout the country.


text:
Unlock the entire Houzz
697 Souderton, PA Kitchen and Bath Fixtures and Accessories
Kitchens and bathrooms are the most renovated rooms in any home. Storage is a top concern in these rooms, so hiring Souderton, PA professionals to create and install custom cabinets in your home can be key to expanding your spaces and controlling clutter. More
The Grothouse Lumber Company (610) 767-6515
Grothouse custom wood countertops, butcher block countertops bar tops, and tables are custom made daily by our master craftsmen in Pennsylvania. We utilize only the best wood for... Read More
Fretz (866) 987-2122
Our knowledgeable consultants will help you plan the kitchen of your dreams, then refer you to a local dealer who can help make it a reality. See my projects
American Standard Brands (800) 442-1902
It all begins with our unmatched legacy of quality and innovation that has lasted for more than 140 years. It is this tradition of quality and innovation that puts us in three out... Read More
Porcelanosa USA (201) 562-3556
PORCELANOSA endeavors to be the industry leader by providing trendsetting cutting-edge designs of unparalleled beauty and refinement, uncompromising quality, and technologically superior products. See my projects
YesterTec Design Company (610) 838-1194
YesterTec Designs and Manufactures Alternative Kitchen Solutions. So if you're looking for something different, please visit with us for a while! Our Kitchen Workstation... Read More
Ferguson Bath, Kitchen & Lighting Gallery (610) 337-8856
Ferguson showrooms are where your plans of a dream home turn into a reality. Ferguson showrooms are the place to see all the latest styles in kitchen and bathroom products. See my projects
Granite Transformations (888) 484-3969
Granite Transformations provides revolutionary products that are designed to fit right over your existing surfaces. Our granite countertops come with a limited lifetime warranty,... Read More
Trending Accessibility (866) 829-8335
A leading supplier of bath and shower accessible products tailored for the elderly, physically challenged, those with a handicap, or those with or without disability. Specializing... Read More
Lowe's of Avondale, PA (610) 806-9033
Kitchen and Bath Design and Installtion Contact Members of Our Team: - Interiors Project Specialist: Maureen Jacobs - Kitchen Specialist: Mike Eller & Ashley Rodenkirch ... Read More
Fine Cabinetry LLC 21570234633463
With over 45 years of experience, we can design and install the kitchens and bathrooms of your dreams. Customer Service is our # 1 priority. DYI and Contractors welcome. Read More
TheBathOutlet (877) 256-1645
TheBathOutlet.com is an online retailer offering luxury bathroom fixtures at affordable prices. Our large selection of home and bath furnishings includes sinks, showers, faucets,... Read More
Design Solutions, Inc. (302) 834-2350
Design Solutions is a full service kitchen & bath design-remodeling firm established in 1994. We work hard to help you bring your remodeling ideas to life while working within... Read More
Creation Cabinetry (610) 562-4700
Creation Cabinetry LLC is an award winning, locally owned and operated kitchen remodeling company. Founded in 1986. Creation Cabinetry LLC is one of the most experienced... Read More
LA Signature Home Interiors (215) 600-2860
LA Signature is a full-service Interior Design firm that specializes in Kitchens, Baths, Tile & Lighting with two Philadelphia showrooms. Our Marketplace Design Center showroom... Read More
Lowe's of Whitehall, PA (610) 686-5231
Kitchen and Bath Design, Sales and Installation Read More
Lowe's of N.E. Philadelphia (215) 776-9006
Kitchen & Bath Design / Sales / Installation Read More
List your business here for free - Learn More

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Sony's next-gen Move could heat up or cool down as you play
Sony's new patent application puts a new spin on a Nintendo idea that never quite saw release. Sony is running with the idea of biometric feedback, seeking a controller that provides force feedback well beyond a rumble pack.
The next generation Dual Shock or Move could potentially heat up or cool off based on the games you play and the way your body is reacting to them.
The patent application itself is rife with interesting ideas. When a gun overheats in a game these days, there is usually a small meter that the player must keep an eye on to prevent the weapon from becoming unusable. Using a heat-adjusting controller, that same situation could be conveyed to the player more, and in a more intuitive and immersive fashion. The patent also cites uses more practical than artistic, such as cooling the controller when the system senses your sweaty palms.
While the patent application only cites what looks like the Move controller, it applies for motion controllers more generally. We will forgive you forgetting, much like Sony has, that the Dual Shock is a motion controller as well.


text:
"The Apple iPod iTunes Anti-Trust Litigation"
Filing 702
Brief re 698 Brief, 700 Order [Renoticed Joint Proposal Regarding Notice Plan] filed bySomtai Troy Charoensak, Mariana Rosen, Melanie Tucker. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Related document(s) 698 , 700 ) (Bernay, Alexandra) (Filed on 3/23/2012)
1 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 2 JOHN J. STOIA, JR. (141757) BONNY E. SWEENEY (176174) 3 THOMAS R. MERRICK (177987) ALEXANDRA S. BERNAY (211068) 4 CARMEN A. MEDICI (248417) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 5 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619/231-1058 6 619/231-7423 (fax) email@example.com 7 firstname.lastname@example.com firstname.lastname@example.com 8 firstname.lastname@example.com firstname.lastname@example.com 9 Class Counsel for Plaintiffs 10 [Additional counsel appear on signature page.] 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 14 THE APPLE IPOD ITUNES ANTI-TRUST ) Lead Case No. C-05-00037-JW 15 LITIGATION ) ) CLASS ACTION 16 ) ) RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL This Document Relates To: 17 ) REGARDING NOTICE PLAN ) ALL ACTIONS. 18 ) Judge: Hon. Chief Judge James Ware Date: April 30, 2012 19 Time: 9:00 a.m. CTRM: 9, 19th Floor 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 674909_3 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 On November 22, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and 3 directed that the parties file a proposed form of class notice and joint proposal for dissemination of 4 the notice for approval by the Court. On January 9, 2012, the parties filed a Joint Proposal. The 5 Court ordered that the parties renotice the Joint Proposal within ten days of the Ninth Circuit's ruling 6 denying Apple's Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f) petition. 7 The parties hereby renotice their joint proposal for dissemination of the class notice. 8 II. ADMINISTRATOR 9 To facilitate the notice process, Plaintiffs have retained Rust Consulting, Inc. 10 ("Administrator"), an experienced and highly qualified notice administrator, to assist and provide 11 professional guidance in the implementation of the notice program. 12 III. FORM OF NOTICE 13 The parties jointly submit:1 (1) a proposed summary notice for publication ("Summary 14 Notice"), attached as Exhibit 1; (2) a proposed Notice of Pendency of Class Action to be emailed to 15 those prospective Class Members for whom the parties have email addresses ("Notice"), attached as 16 Exhibit 2; and (3) a proposed long-form notice to be published on a website ("Long-Form Notice"), 17 attached as Exhibit 3.2 The notices define the Class and describe the nature of the action and the 18 binding effect of a later Class judgment on Class Members. In addition, the notices inform the Class 19 Members that, if they do not want to be a Class Member and wish to retain their right to pursue their 20 own independent action at their own expense and appear through their own counsel, they can request 21 to be excluded from the Class. They can do so by mailing a letter to the Administrator setting forth 22 their name and address and requesting exclusion. Any requests for exclusion from Class Members 23 24 25 1 All references to "Exhibit" are to the exhibits attached to the Declaration of Alexandra S. Bernay in Support of Renoticed Joint Proposal Regarding Notice Plan, filed concurrently. 26 2 The parties have agreed to use the domain name 27 the Long-Form Notice and other case-related materials www.ipodlawsuit.com as the website where will be located. 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -1- 1 shall be postmarked via U.S. mail, no later than 75 days after the last day on which the Notice is to 2 be disseminated. 3 IV. TIMING OF DISSEMINATION OF NOTICE 4 The parties submit that the Notice be disseminated within 30 days of the Court's approval of 5 the notice form and plan. 6 V. PROPOSED NOTICE PROCESS 7 The parties propose that individual notice be disseminated to potential Class Members via 8 direct notice and publication. 9 Apple maintains email addresses for customers who provided them when they purchased 10 iPods directly from Apple through its online and retail stores and when they registered their iPods 11 with Apple. Apple also maintains contact information for resellers (physical mailing addresses, and 12 for most, email addresses of the contact at each Reseller) who purchased iPods directly from Apple 13 during the Class Period. If the Court approves the Notice Plan, Apple will provide approximately 14 4.2 million email addresses, plus additional contact information for the resellers, for customers who 15 purchased iPods directly from Apple during the Class Period. The email addresses and other contact 16 information will be designated as Confidential under the Protective Order previously entered into in 17 this case. Class Counsel will provide the email addresses and contact information to the third-party 18 Administrator, which it will use solely for the purposes of disseminating the Notice. The 19 Administrator has signed Attachment A to the Protective Order and given its assurance that it will 20 comply with the provisions of the Protective Order. Notice will be disseminated to the Class within 21 30 days after the Court approves the notice form and plan. In addition to the direct Notice detailed above, notice will also be disseminated through 22 23 publication. The Administrator shall cause to be published the Summary Notice in Entertainment 24 Weekly and Wired as a means of reaching prospective Class Members not receiving individual 25 Notice. 26 The Administrator shall establish a website, www.ipodlawsuit.com, to make available to 27 Class Members the following information: (1) the Order granting class certification; (2) Plaintiffs' 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -2- 1 Complaint; (3) Defendant's Answer; and (4) the Notice and Long-Form Notice and other such 2 documents as the parties may agree or the Court shall require. 3 The Administrator shall also establish a toll-free telephone number for Class Members to call 4 if they have questions or to request copies of the Class notices or other documents. The 5 Administrator shall provide staff to answer the telephone, respond to ministerial matters such as 6 requests for copies of the notices and direct any substantive questions to Class Counsel. 7 VI. THE PROPOSED NOTICE PLAN AND FORM OF NOTICE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF RULE 23 8 A. 9 10 The Proposed Class Notice Provides for the Best Notice Practicable Under the Circumstances Rule 23 requires the "best notice that is practicable under the circumstances." Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 23(c)(2)(B). The notice should be "reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise 12 interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their 13 objections." Silber v. Mabon, 18 F.3d 1449, 1454 (9th Cir. 1994) (quoting Mullane v. Central 14 Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314, 70 S. Ct. 652 (1950)). "There is no one 'right way' 15 to provide notice as contemplated under Rule 23(e)." In re Wireless Tel. Fed. Cost Recovery Fees 16 Litig., No. 4:03-MD-015, 2004 WL 3671053, at *8-*9 (W.D. Mo. Apr. 20, 2004) (citations omitted). 17 Notice plans are not expected to reach every class member; Rule 23 requires the best notice 18 'practicable,' not perfect notice. Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). "Due process does not require actual 19 notice, but rather a good faith effort to provide actual notice." In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales 20 Practices Litig., 177 F.R.D. 216, 231 (D.N.J. 1997). As described in detail above, the proposed 21 notice plan comprised of direct Notice supplemented by publication notice will reach a wide number 22 of Class Members. 23 B. Each Identified Class Member For Whom the Parties Have an Email Address Will be Sent Notice 24 The notice program provides that Apple will work with Class Counsel and the notice 25 Administrator to cause the Notice to be sent by email to each identifiable Class Member by sending 26 the Notice to the Class Member's last known email address in the customer databases of Apple. The 27 Notice will consist of a summary of the Long-Form Notice and a link to an official website, where 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -3- 1 the entire Long-Form Notice and other documents related to the case may be viewed and printed by 2 Class Members as detailed, below, in §VI.E. The Notice has been designed to minimize the chances 3 that it could be blocked by spam filters. For example, the Notice will not include an attachment of 4 the Long-Form Notice because such notices are known to sometimes trigger spam filters. Instead, 5 the Notice will direct the recipient to the official website for complete information. The notice 6 program provides that in the event a Notice is returned to the sender because it could not be 7 delivered ("bounced back"), the parties may, if it is deemed useful, resend the Notice. 8 Similar programs for notice by email rather than regular first-class mail have been accepted 9 in other cases by courts throughout the country. See, e.g., In re Classmates.com Consol. Litig., No. 10 C 09-45 RAJ, slip. op. (W.D. Wash. Apr. 19, 2010) (Order attached hereto as Exhibit 4); Cho v. 11 Seagate Tech. (US) Holdings, Inc., No. CGC 06-453195, slip. op. (San Francisco Super. Ct. Mar. 1, 12 2010) (attached hereto as Exhibit 5); and Barker v. Skype, Inc., No. 2:09-cv-01364-RSM, slip. op. 13 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 17, 2009) (attached hereto as Exhibit 6).3 In the specific circumstances of this 14 case, because iPod users are likely heavy technology users, email is likely to be a more efficient 15 means of communicating with Class Members than regular first-class mail. As to Resellers, the 16 notice plan calls for email and mail notice to these Members of the Class. 17 C. 18 Apple has provided the contact information it has maintained for the resellers who purchased Resellers Will Receive Notice Via U.S. Mail and Email 19 iPods directly from Apple during the Class Period. This information includes physical mailing 20 addresses, and for most, email addresses of the contact at each Reseller. In order to ensure the best 21 practicable notice of the Reseller Members of the Class, notice to these entities will be via U.S. mail 22 and email. 23 24 3 See also Browning v. Yahoo! Inc., No. C04-01463-HRL, WL 4105971, Cal. 25 Nov. 16, 2007) (citing Lundell v. Dell, Inc., No. C05-3970, 200620073507938, at *1 at *4 (N.D.Dec. WL (N.D. Cal. Browning v. Yahoo! Inc., No. C04-01463-HRL, 2006 26 5, 2006) (approving notice by e-mail);2006); see also Chavez v. Netflix, Inc., 162 Cal. App. 4thWL 3826714, at *8-*9 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 27, 43, 58 (2008); Farinella v. PayPal, Inc., 611 F. Supp. 2d 250, 256 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) (e-mail notice sent 27 to more than 2.2 million PayPal users). 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -4- 1 D. 2 As noted, the Administrator will cause the Summary Notice to published in Entertainment Notice Will Also Be Provided Through Print Media 3 Weekly and Wired as a means of reaching prospective Class Members not receiving Notice. 4 Entertainment Weekly is a weekly magazine and online periodical that covers all aspects of pop 5 culture and entertainment including movies, television, music, books and new media. The magazine 6 is "the leading consumer brand for entertainment and pop culture." See 7 http://www.ew.com/ew/static/advertising/pdfs/EW_2011MedaiKit.pdf. It has won more than 100 8 photography, design and editorial awards, including the 2010 Ad Age Media Vanguard Award for 9 Best Magazine App with a Purpose as well the 2010 MIN Best of the Web Awards, the 2010 MIN 10 Integrated Marketing Awards, Multiple Magazine Title Program and the 2009 Folio Magazine 11 Awards for Consumer, Entertainment, Full Issue (6/27/2008). Id. 12 Wired is a monthly magazine and online periodical that covers "how ideas and innovation are 13 changing the world" and "the future of business, culture, innovation and science." See 14 www.wired.com/services/press/center/about. "AdWeek named WIRED to its 2011 Hot List and 15 made WIRED its first-ever 'Magazine of the Decade' in 2010. It was named to Advertising Age's 16 A-List in 2010, received three National Magazine Awards for general excellence in 2005, 2007, and 17 2009, and was nominated for a National Magazine Award for Magazine of the Year in 2011." It was 18 also "named 2009's Best Magazine Website by AdWeek, Best News, Business & Finance Website 19 in 2009 by MPA Digital, and was a 2011 National Magazine Award for Digital Media 'General 20 Excellence' finalist." Id. 21 The Summary Notice will be published in Entertainment Weekly and Wired within 10 days 22 after completion of the emailing program described above. The Administrator will oversee 23 publication of the Summary Notice and will certify to the Court that publication occurred. 24 E. 25 An official website, www.ipodlawsuit.com, will feature copies of important case documents Notice Will Be Posted on a Designated Website 26 including the Long-Form Notice, the Notice, the Court's Order granting class certification and other 27 documents the parties agree to post or that the Court requires be posted. The documents will be 28 available for Class Members to review and print. The website will be available until at least one674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -5- 1 year after settlement or conclusion of trial in this action. No material may be posted to the website 2 without Apple and Plaintiffs' joint agreement. The website will also feature a toll-free number Class 3 Members may call if they have questions. 4 F. The Proposed Form of Class Notice Adequately Informs Class Members of Their Rights in This Litigation 5 Class notice must "clearly and concisely state in plain, easily understood language" the 6 nature of the action; the class definition; the class claims, issues, or defenses; that the class member 7 may appear through counsel; that the court will exclude from the class any member who requests 8 exclusion; the time and manner for requesting exclusion or for raising objections; and the binding 9 effect of a later class judgment on class members. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). As detailed 10 above, the email and Long-Form Notices proposed here comply with each of these requirements. 11 The parties respectfully request that the Court approve the proposed forms of notice, and 12 direct that Notice be disseminated as proposed. 13 DATED: March 23, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 14 15 16 17 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP JOHN J. STOIA, JR. BONNY E. SWEENEY THOMAS R. MERRICK ALEXANDRA S. BERNAY CARMEN A. MEDICI 18 19 20 21 22 s/ Alexandra S. Bernay ALEXANDRA S. BERNAY 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax) 23 Class Counsel for Plaintiffs 24 25 26 27 THE KATRIEL LAW FIRM ROY A. KATRIEL 1101 30th Street, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, DC 20007 Telephone: 202/625-4342 202/330-5593 (fax) 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -6- 1 BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C. ANDREW S. FRIEDMAN FRANCIS J. BALINT, JR. ELAINE A. RYAN TODD D. CARPENTER 2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012 Telephone: 602/274-1100 602/274-1199 (fax) 2 3 4 5 6 7 BRAUN LAW GROUP, P.C. MICHAEL D. BRAUN 10680 West Pico Blvd., Suite 280 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Telephone: 310/836-6000 310/836-6010 (fax) 8 9 10 MURRAY FRANK LLP BRIAN P. MURRAY 275 Madison Avenue, Suite 801 New York, NY 10016 Telephone: 212/682-1818 212/682-1892 (fax) 11 12 13 GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP MICHAEL GOLDBERG 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: 310/201-9150 310/201-9160 (fax) 14 15 16 17 Additional Counsel for Plaintiffs 18 DATED: March 23, 2012 19 20 JONES DAY ROBERT A. MITTELSTAEDT CRAIG E. STEWART DAVID C. KIERNAN 21 22 s/ David C. Kiernan DAVID C. KIERNAN 23 25 555 California Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: 415/626-3939 415/875-5700 (fax) 26 Attorneys for Defendant Apple Inc. 24 27 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -7- 1 2 ECF CERTIFICATION The filing attorney attests that she has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this 3 document from the signatories to this document. 4 Dated: March 23, 2012 5 By: s/ Alexandra S. Bernay ALEXANDRA S. BERNAY 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 674909_3 RENOTICED JOINT PROPOSAL REGARDING NOTICE PLAN - C-05-00037-JW -8- 1 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on March 23, 2012, I authorized the electronic filing of the foregoing 3 with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to 4 the e-mail addresses denoted on the attached Electronic Mail Notice List, and I hereby certify that I 5 caused to be mailed the foregoing document or paper via the United States Postal Service to the non6 CM/ECF participants indicated on the attached Manual Notice List. 7 I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the 8 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 23, 2012. 9 s/ Alexandra S. Bernay ALEXANDRA S. BERNAY 10 13 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-3301 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax) 14 E-mail: 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 674909_3 firstname.lastname@example.com CAND-ECF- Page 1 of 2 Mailing Information for a Case 5:05-cv-00037-JW Electronic Mail Notice List The following are those who are currently on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case. Francis Joseph Balint , Jr email@example.com Alexandra Senya Bernay email@example.com Michael D Braun email@example.com Michael D. Braun email@example.com,email@example.com Todd David Carpenter firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Andrew S. Friedman email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,email@example.com Alreen Haeggquist firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Roy Arie Katriel firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Thomas J. Kennedy firstname.lastname@example.com David Craig Kiernan email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Carmen Anthony Medici email@example.com,email@example.com Thomas Robert Merrick email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Caroline Nason Mitchell firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Robert Allan Mittelstaedt email@example.com,email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Brian P. Murray email@example.com George A. Riley firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,email@example.com Elaine A. Ryan https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/MailList.pl?804918385062095-L_1_0-1 3/23/2012 CAND-ECF- Page 2 of 2 email@example.com,email@example.com Jacqueline Sailer email@example.com Michael Tedder Scott firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Craig Ellsworth Stewart email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com John J. Stoia , Jr firstname.lastname@example.com Bonny E. Sweeney email@example.com,email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Helen I. Zeldes firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.com Manual Notice List The following is the list of attorneys who are not on the list to receive e-mail notices for this case (who therefore require manual noticing). You may wish to use your mouse to select and copy this list into your word processing program in order to create notices or labels for these recipients. (No manual recipients) https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/MailList.pl?804918385062095-L_1_0-1 3/23/2012


text:
Your shopping cart is empty
Visit the shop
Jason Hou rips it up on the 'sphereFresh from Beijing, AlphaSphere user Jason Hou rocks out with
Glowing review in Future Music Magazine
The popular magazine praised the "innovative format" of the device
AlphaSphere praised in Sound On Sound
Described as "fast to trigger, sensitive and responsive", "stunningly designed",
AlphaSphere and Chauvet create a light and sound extravaganza – BPM 2013!
Last weekend I attended my first ever industry trade show
Understanding the AlphaSphere kicks off tutorial series
Adam Place, inventor of the AlphaSphere showcases and discusses some
AlphaSphere – Tutorial videos coming soon
With the first AlphaSphere elite series now dispatched to locations
AlphaSphere in MixmagAlphaSphere featured in mixmag, the world's biggest dance music and
AlphaSphere – Now electrically compliant
For the last several months we have been electromagnetic compatibility
Preview on Cycling 74
Preview by Gregory Taylor from Cycling 74, the company behind
AlphaSphere on Dirigent JapanVideo from NAMM 2013 by Dirigent Japan, our distributors for
AlphaSphere on KTLA 5 News
Featured on KTLA 5 morning news, 'Music Product Trade Show-
AlphaSphere on UniqueSquared.com
Featured on uniquesquared.com blog covering NAMM show 2013.
Article on Dont Panic
Featured on Dontpaniconline.com, "Is it a rave football? An inverted
AlphaSphere in Wired World of 2013
Featured in "The 'Wired' World of 2013″ magazine under inventions
AlphaSphere Dubspot Interview
Adam Place, founder of nu desine, was in the United
AlphaSphere in MusicTech
Featured in MusicTech magazine.
Koven – Quiet Life (feat. AlphaSphere)
Koven performing a new track called 'Quiet Life' on AlphSphere
AlphaSphere at Summer NAMM
AlphaSphere at Summer NAMM 2012 show in Nashville, Tennessee. It
Design of the Year 2012?
So we've been nominated for Stuff Magazine's Design of the
AlphaSphere in Professional Engineering
AlphaSphere shown in a feature on Additive Layer Manufacturing (3D
AlphaSphere in Interface Mag
AlphaSphere was featured in Dutch magazine Interface.
AlphaSphere in Stuff
AlphaSphere featured in Stuff Magazine as part of their gadget
AlphaSphere in the Telegraph
AlphaSphere was featured in British newspaper "The Daily Telegraph".
Musikmesse 2012
Last month saw our first visit to the largest international
Exporting for Growth Competition Winners
We have been lucky to win UK Trade & Investment's
On Discovery Channel Canada
Feature on the Discovery Channel during the Consumer Electronics Show
TEDx Bristol 2011
Video from TEDX Bristol "The World Around Us" event in
AlphaSphere on BBC News
Featured on BBC News Bristol, "New electronic musical instrument AlphaSphere
AlphaSphere – Now AlphaTesting
A call for musicians, producers, DJs et al. to get
AlphaSphere v0.2
The second AlphaSphere prototype.
AlphaSphere v0.1
The very first AlphaSphere. The pads were made from electro-conductive


text:
« New Music: David Banner f/ Chris Brown & A$AP Rocky – 'Yao Ming (Remix)'
Video: Miguel – 'Adorn' »
J. Cole on Grammy Prospects: 'Anything Is Possible'
J. Cole will be looking his best when he heads to the Grammys next weekend. The Roc Nation rapper, who will compete for Best New Artist against Nicki Minaj, The Band Perry, Bon Iver, and Skrillex, spoke to USA Today about his nomination for his debut Cole World: The Sideline Story, and where he was when he first received the good news.
"I'm very happy just to be nominated. If I don't win, it's OK," said a humble Cole. "Now don't get me wrong, I would love to win."
He already has his outfit picked out. "I'm going to be looking very nice in a good suit," he said. "I'm going to bring my family and friends and celebrate. I don't know how likely it is that I'll win, but I've learned that anything is possible."
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
13 Comments
Leave a Reply
©Copyright 2014 Rap-Up.com. Rap-Up® is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.
A Member of Townsquare Music | Advertise


text:
COOKIES: This site uses Google Analytics Cookies for performance monitoring only. By using our website you agree that we can place these cookies on your device.
Ownership of copyright is key to the use of works created in universities and colleges, as the owner has control over their reuse. The following summarises the legal position.
Posted on 06/06/2011
Jisc Legal is hosted by the University of Strathclyde, a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC015263 | The contents of this website are provided for information purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. | Login


text:
Mike Allen's Birthday Reunion
The "Politico Playbook" from Mike Allen is usually filled with insider information that Washington has grown to love. Birthdays, "Facts of Life," behind-the-scenes political strategy and various other words of wisdom find their way into our inbox each day.
However, on Saturday, Mikey might have been dealing with a slow news day. He gave us a few legit news stories on immigration, but then it took a sharp turn into Bro-ville. He eased us into a story about an "epic" birthday party that his fraternity brothers threw him. Mike describes it this way: "25 Sigma Phil Epsilon brothers and wives converged on Sequoia, on the Georgetown waterfront, from Dallas, Columbus, Indianapolis, Birmingham, Syracuse, N.Y.C., Philly, Princeton, the Eastern Shore of Maryland, Suffolk, Newport News, Richmond, Old Town, etc. The guys spanned five class years, and most hadn't seen each other in 25 to 30 years."
Allen, who can seem robotic at times, really cut loose and spilled some details on the bash, including old fraternity nicknames. Oh, this is going to be really good. Read more


text:
- FrontPage Magazine - http://www.frontpagemag.com -
Contact Us
Posted By FPM Admin On August 21, 2009 @ 12:42 pm In | 2 Comments
Your browser does not support iframes. The contact form cannot be displayed. Please use another contact method (phone, fax etc)
FrontPage Mag
P.O. Box 55089
Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964
phone: 1-800-752-6562
fax: 818-849-3481
Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://www.frontpagemag.com
URL to article: http://www.frontpagemag.com/contact-us/
Click here to print.
Copyright © 2009 FrontPage Magazine. All rights reserved.


text:
Kirkland's Spin to Win
Genres: [Lifestyle | Reference]
Developer: KIRKLAND'S, INC.
✿ Release Date: Sep 05, 2012
✿ Version: 1.1.2
✿ Size: 4.31 MB
Developer: KIRKLAND'S, INC.
✿ Release Date: Sep 05, 2012
✿ Version: 1.1.2
✿ Size: 4.31 MB
QR Code
This iOS application is compatible with iPhone 3GS/4, iPad 1/2, iPod Touch 3rd/4th.
The review includes the developer's description, customer ratings, user reviews and screenshots for iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch.
if you like this mobile application, please share It with others (click on the social media icon links).
• Use the Spin to Win app to get a new coupon every day. You never know which coupon you'll get, but every spin wins.
• You can save as much as 15% off your entire purchase!
• No printing necessary. Just show the coupon on your phone to the cashier at checkout.
• Coupons are good at any Kirkland's location for the whole day.
• Get inspiration from our design tips while you shop.
• Coupons must be used at a Kirkland's location on the day awarded.
• You may still access the Design Tips and other content even if you don't spin the coupon wheel.
Get now this application with your unique ID and secured password.
Application Screenshots
How to download the AppDownload Kirklands Spin to Win app for free for iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad and iPad mini.
Download Kirklands Spin to Win on PC or Mac:
1. Go to the Kirklands Spin to Win application page in your iTunes.
2. Click the button to download the App.
3. Sync your iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad or iPad mini with iTunes to install the Kirklands Spin to Win app.
Download the App With iOS App Store:
1. Open the App Store on your iDevice.
2. Search for Kirklands Spin to Win.
3. Click the button to download and install it on your device.
4. Enjoy.
You can securely create an apple profile with your information, but you have to be registered to iTunes in order to get the Kirklands Spin to Win app to your device.
If you don't have an active account, please register to iTunes store with a credit card number. In case you are not interested to open an account with your credit card, you can select the option 'None' during the secured registration.
*This Kirklands Spin to Win application may be available in some countries.
User Ratings
Sep 23(5★) App not working! PLEASE FIX!
App not working! Love the app when it works! Never had a problem with the app before.
Aug 24(5★) Love it so much
I saved ten present off my 50 dollar purchase which means my price was then 40 bucks
Jul 05(2★) Not Worth It
The discounts are so small. It barely makes a difference unless you were buying something extremely expensive. Definitely not
worth the used space on the phone.
Mar 24(5★) works
works but usally lands on 5 or 10 off but still works but somethimes it could land o 50 to 100 off which is awesome!
Mar 20(5★) Savings
Excellent App. It save me 10% off today.
Feb 05(4★) Fixed!
Update: uninstalled and reinstalled 2/5 and it works. :)
Dec 08, 2013(2★) Misleading
You will NEVER get higher than 15%. My boyfriend and I spin daily.
Oct 17, 2013(2★) False advertisement
2 stars for good concept. Best u can do is 10 off 50 or more. Took stars away for false advertisement Dislike this app because
after u spin, it freezes itself on 30% off, making it look like u can ge
Sep 01, 2013(5★) The deals just get better
Downloaded this app yesterday while shopping the Labor Day sale.10% off my entire purchase! Sale prices with 10% off, great deals
Aug 30, 2013(5★) Awesome!
I got 15% off an amazing lamp! It was a little expensive so before I bought it, I asked the clerk working if there were any sales
or coupons available and she told me to download the app! So pumped!
Jul 20, 2013(5★) Love it
My favorite store and LOVED getting the 15 percent off!
Jun 02, 2013(4★) Great app
So happy got 10% off 2 days in a row! Woo hoo!
Apr 01, 2013(5★) Best App Ever
I love this app.I decorated my whole house with the discounts I get on this app.
Mar 15, 2013(5★) The Secret.
I love this app. I keep loading and unloading it until it gives me what I want!
Mar 09, 2013(2★) Bring back the good deals!
While any deal is a good deal, but 5% every time. Great idea for an app. 5 stars for this app before the update.
Mar 08, 2013(5★) Incredible money saver!
Incredible application for a home decor shopper. It applies coupons directly at point of purchase to save ! Also, tons of helpful
decorating tips!
Dec 20, 2012(5★) Great
I love it, comes in handy when I need an extra percentage off. Just Great!
Nov 21, 2012(5★) Awesome App
Love the way it lowers my pay at the register!
Nov 08, 2012(5★) AWESOME LOVE IT!
I spin every day and when I get a good coupon I stop by after work to do some shopping. love it!
Oct 28, 2012(5★) Fun way to save any day!
While some coupons from the app are not the standard 10 off 50 from the email coupons, this is a way to save no matter when I
visit. Many times the email coupons are weekend only. With this app I ca
Oct 13, 2012(5★) Addicted
I love this app. I love coupons. I love saving money. This works out pretty nicely.
Oct 01, 2012(5★) Great app!
Just love your app! Easy to use. Simply pulled up app at register, they scanned barcode and I received my savings! Super easy
Sep 27, 2012(3★) They changed the coupons :-(
When I first downloaded it had 30% and 20% off coupons, but they removed them! The highest you can get now is 15 off 50. I want
the percentage coupons back!
Sep 06, 2012(5★) Love it!
Just DL the app and got 30 off a 100 purchase and they were even able to scan the barcode from my phone without zooming in or any
problems. I love kirklands and will use this alot!
Total 24 reviews with ratings for this app.
Featured - price drop
Super Lemonade Factory
3 hours agoFree $ 2.99
4 hours agoFree $ 4.99
5 hours agoFree $ 0.99
F-Sim Space Shuttle
5 hours ago$ 0.99 $ 7.99
Seeds For Minecraft
5 hours ago$ 1.99 $ 2.99
6 hours agoFree $ 1.99
Greek Letters and Alphabet
6 hours agoFree $ 0.99
Pre-Civilization Marble Age
23 hours ago$ 2.99 $ 4.99


text:
Desert Oasis Vacation Home Las Vegas
Official Contact Details - Desert OasisPhone: 01 1 702 5151 9191 Fax: 01 1 702 947 6738
You will enjoy this open floor plan home and relax at the large family room with the state-of-the-art flat screen TV, stereo, cable, DVD player and a Playstation for your enjoyment.
- Price from 275 USD / Day
- Capacity up to 14 people
- 5 bedrooms & 3 bathrooms
(click on a photo to view it)
Last updated: 02/27/2009
This is your property ?
A gorgeous 3,000+ sq.ft. home offers 18 ft. high ceiling living room and dining room. You will enjoy this open floor plan home and relax at the large family room with the state-of-the-art flat screen TV, stereo, cable, DVD player and a Playstation for your enjoyment. 5 bedrooms, 3 baths, a gourmet kitchen with granite counters and center island, all stainless steel appliance. The pool table will add hours of fun to your stay. For outdoor entertainment, you'll have the private use of the free-form swimming pool and spa, a large patio with patio furnitures to enjoy a delicious meal from the BBQ grill. This home will truly a vacation dream come true.
Prices & deals
- Lowest Daily Price:
- Highest Daily Price:
- Lowest Weekly Price:
- Highest Weekly Price:
- Cleaning fee:
- Charging Method:
- Payment Types:
- Cash
- Credit Card
- Cheque
- Travellers cheque
- Paypal
- Wire Transfer
Location & area
This great home is located in an upscale, quiet, residential community in the southwest part of Las Vegas. The major cross streets are: W. Flamingo Road and S. Buffalo Drive. Via W. Flamingo Road you will reach the center of the Strip (Caesar's Palace, Bellagio, Paris etc. etc.) in just 5 miles.
- Address:
- 5300 Yellow Daisy Street & Climbing Rose Street, 89147, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
- Accommodation located in:
- city, las vegas strip, leisure area, near cultural interest, near golf course, near restaurants & bars, near shopping area, near ski area, near tennis courts, near water sports!
Amenities & services
A large free form pool and spa (*) ;
Garden setting patio ;
Patio Furniture ;
Gas BBQ Grill ;
5 bedrooms ;
3 baths ;
All linen, towels, beddings ;
42" LCD Flat Screen TV in Family Room ;
37" LCD Flat Screen TV in Master Suite ;
Personal TVs in all other bedrooms ;
Cable ;
High Speed DSL Internet Wi-Fi Access FREE ;
DVD Player ;
VCR Player ;
Stereo ;
Playstation ;
Pool Table ;
Gourmet Full kitchen ;
Laundry Room with Washer and Dryer ;
Huge Walk-in Closets ;
Central Air Conditioning ;
3-car garage ;
This is a Non-Smoking/No Pet, Allergen Free home ;
(*)Heating of Pool/Spa is available at extra charge
# of Units: 1... and each unit includes:
- Bedrooms: 5
- Bathrooms: 3
- Single beds: 8
- Double beds: 2
- Baby cots: 0
- Single sofa beds: 0
- Double sofa beds: 0
- Towels:
- Bath:
- Hair Drier:
- Shower:
- DVD Player:
- Fax:
- Washing Machine:
- Work Desk:
- Bed Sheets:
- Bikes:
- Cable/Satelite TV:
- Internet Broadband:
- Internet Dial Up:
- Ironing Board:
- Stereo/Radio System:
- Library:
- Telephone:
- 24h Concierge:
- Tours & Excursions:
- Butler Service:
- House Chef:
- Local Guides:
- Local Transportation:
- Microwave:
- Oven:
- American Kitchen:
- Fridge & Freezer:
- Crockery & Utensils:
- Dish Washer:
Living room
- Fireplace:
- Sofa Bed:
- Table & Chairs:
- Tennis Court:
- Terrace:
- Parking:
- Pets Welcome:
- Barbecue:
- Private Beach:
- Garden:
- Sauna:
- Shared Bathroom:
- Spa / Jacuzzi:
- Swimming Pool:
- Lift / Elevator:
- Disabled Facilities:
- Air Conditioning:
- DVD/Music Collection:
- Ensuite Bathroom:
- Balcony:
- Safe:
- Sea View:
- Central Heating:
- City View:
- Daily Cleaning:
Review - Desert Oasis
Desert Oasis - Contact the owner
Important Notice : Avoiding Fraud
It's rare, but some helpful hints to watch out for with regards to fraud:
- It is important to NEVER wire funds or use/employ other fund transfer mechanisms such as western union: Always use a credit card to protect yourself against fraud. If owners pressure you into providing a deposit or refuse to accept credit cards, there is a high probability that this is a scam.
- If at all suspicious of fraud, ask to see their website, or any other literature they can provide or send to you. Ask them for contact details for guests who have previously stayed on their property insisting on telephone numbers. Be suspicious of emails that originate from free email services (yahoo, hotmail, gmail, etc)
- Research the property thoroughly on the internet to see if there is any history or mention of scams associated with the property.