Weblogs are like assholes

I wanna new drug...

2006-10-01T13:33:00.000-04:00

Moms, Dads, drug councelors.....lend me your ear.

I want to talk to you all about a drug that's more addictive than crack, heroin, meth, crank, squeeze, ball, tranq, reds, blues, greens, purples, perrywinkles, alcohol, nicotine, and caffine all combined. It destroys families, businesses, and lives.

The kids are calling it WoW.

Right now, their probably using it, or at least thinking about it. They're in front of their computers, getting another fix.

That's right, I'm talking about World of Warcraft. It's been around for a year or two now, and if you know what's good for you, you'll stay away. All these WoW addicts ever do is play, play, play. Their vocabulary is full of elite lingo like "grinding mobs" "adds" and "aggro". If you hear someone using these terms, they're probably a WoW addict, so stay away.

And Mothers, never, ever let your children go anywhere near this game. It's destructive and violent.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've got to go grind some mobs.

Chat with Chris Martello

2006-09-26T20:42:00.000-04:00

5:08 PM me: Oh dear.
I didn't realize that Word of Command was small enough to put on a stick.
5:09 PM Chris: Haha
Too bad WoC is too fucking expensive
5:10 PM me: I can't wait to open some TS. There are soooo many combos I have envisioned. The only way to decide what deck to build next is to see what I get.
Yeah, Fuggin $40.
I want a Stuffy Doll to put a Pariah's Shield on.
Chris: Not to mention, it is one of the cards that gives judges nightmares
5:11 PM Stuffy Doll == love
me: hehehe
THUG love
Chris: HEAVY BLOODY
5:12 PM me: Yeah. And then Char and Psionic blast!
With Orcish Artillery!
And pain lands!
5:14 PM And ERG RAIDERS that don
't attack!
And Lord of the Pit!
5:18 PM Chris: orc artillery is win
and with teh stuffy doll, it's even better
5:20 PM me: I'm going to build such a sick McFuckdeck.
5:21 PM Chris: whoops
5:22 PM me: Whoops?
Chris: closed gmail by accident
me: Ah. See how you are?
5:23 PM Chris: Huh?
me: With all the "I'm going to wear pants in public 'cause I'm a big shooter" attitude.
5:24 PM Chris: dude
"Look at what happened to the indians, they had a liberal immigration policy!"
5:26 PM me: Yeah, dumb bastards!
5:27 PM They should have put out Aether flash.
Chris: ...
me: Well! They were already in play.
Chris: Dude, you know that's out of the format
me: Not back then.
5:28 PM Chris: Ohh
me: And it's not like they don't play red.
Chris: >_<
5:29 PM me: "Oh, we'll just hide behind this COP: White and hope that Ponce de Leon doesn't have a disenchant.
Chris: ouch
5:30 PM that didn't work out so well
me: No. Indians were Noobs.
Chris: They didn't prepare for the meta at all
5:32 PM me: They had Goblin War drums, sure, but there wasn't enough cards for a goblin deck back then. They should've gone Zombie.
Chris: Ouch
me: Montezuma's revenge, if you know what I'm saying.
5:33 PM I should Blog this shit.
Chris: Haha
hands you a shirt that reads "i'm blogging this"
5:34 PM me: LAWL

The Punisher

2006-09-15T18:58:00.000-04:00

Well...

..I guess I didn't make the cut to get to round 3 of the Wizards thing. The test was tough, but I thought I'd done alright.

So, the next best thing for me to do is start publishing decklists to make me feel like a better magic player than I really am.

This is one that I just ordered some missing cards for at starcitygames.com, so I haven't got a chance to play it for real. I hope it works, it's my meanest design yet.

The Punisher

Creatures

4 - Hunted Dragon 3RR
4 - Hunted Troll 2GG
4 - Varchild's War Riders 1R
2 - Dancing Scimitar 4

Enchantments

4 - Aether Flash 2RR
4 - Burning Sands 3RR

Artifacts

4 - Dingus Staff 4

Instants

4 - Lightning Bolt R
4 - Incinerate 1R
2 - Naturalize 1G

Lands

12 - Mountain
10 - Forest
1 - Stomping Ground
1 - Mountain Valley

We'll see how she runs in a few days...

..until then, I've got to start saving up for Time Spiral (BWANG!)

-LG

Round 2, BABY!

2006-09-04T12:34:00.000-04:00

Apparently I gave Wizards of the coast my alternate email. I only check that one every once in a while. Also, apparently I got an email 3 days ago that told me I've made it to ROUND 2, BABY! of the Great Designer Search thingie.

There's a whole slew of things I'm not allowed to talk about, so I'm not going to say another word.

Word!

Magic Carpet Ride

2006-09-03T12:29:00.000-04:00

This post is going to stray from the norm a bit, and this is why. Hopefully this won't be too long to read.

Wizards is running this contest, and I've entered the damn thing. Giant essay to follow...

1: Introduce yourself and explain why you are a good fit for this internship.

1: My name is Matt Swanson and I’m from Battle Creek, Michigan. I’ve been playing MTG since Ice Age was new, and I’ve seen a lot of crazy things come and go. I’ve never advanced very far up the tournament ladder because of my preoccupation with building crazy theme decks and combos that break the game (but seldom work). I once built a deck that involved re-casting Icatian Javelineers over and over so as to kill every player in a 5 player multi with javelin counters (what a way to die). I consider it a personal challenge to find a way to make “unplayable cards” useful, even though it usually takes 27 tries to do it. I have a great sense of humor and a tendency for bad puns (watch out Mr. Rosewater, I’m after your job!).
The things I would bring to the table as a designer: 1: The ability to spot broken cards and combos. Since my brain is hard-wired into min/max mode, I can spot a broken infinite combo a mile away. 2: Vivid imagination. I can think of a thousand story lines and ways to tie in cards and mechanics. You could say I think in five colors. 3: Humor. I’m trampling out the vintage where the Apes of Rath are stored, and I’ve been a long-standing member of the Itappa Mana fraternity. I think magic needs more [really] bad puns, and not just un-sets. On a serious note, though, I can tell that the majority of the designers of MTG have a sense of humor. At least those whom post articles on magicthegathering.com do, anyway.

2:Explain three positive ways "mana screw" affects Magic.

2: First off, “mana screw” is another way of saying “weed out the dumb and the weak.” The quest for the right number of lands in a given deck is as never-ending as the quest for the Holy Grail (except that John Cleese has yet to appear on any cards, much to my dismay). I’ve played with players everywhere from “I’ve been watching you guys play this for the last three weeks, teach me how to play” to my friend Kurt “I have the Controlicore deck type named after me” Walli. One thing I’ve noticed is that the basic grasp of how many lands to put in a deck is like a high school diploma in magic. Once you’ve completed this level of deck construction, you can go on to get your degree in control, combo, or VCR repair.
Secondly, though it’s never fun to be on the “draw, discard, go” and of mana screw, it does give us a reminder of the randomness of the game of magic. Mana screw is the great equalizer. It can’t be bargained with, it can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse. Kinda like a evil robot from the future; you never know when it will strike again.
Thirdly, the card “mana screw” is a good way to make your opponent forfeit at the end of a long night of playing magic, similar to the Shahrazad, fork, twincast, mirari combo. Nothing says “I give up” like watching your opponent flip a coin for 45 minutes.

3:Name a popular, existing mechanic and explain how you would make it better.

3: Unfortunately for me, the magazine ‘Popular Mechanics’ was no help whatsoever with this question. I can re-roof my house now, but I couldn’t find any rulings on banding in any of the back issues.
I would have to say that the most popular mechanic, consistently, throughout magic has been flying. It’s cool on so many levels. Evasion, blocking, and lets face it, critters with wings are more neat-o than those without. But how does one improve on such a staple mechanic? This is how: The freedom of flight has been mankind’s greatest desire since he first looked skyward. Flight is sovereignty. It is the ability to chase, to avoid, or to ignore altogether. It gives you a position to look down upon the field of battle and choose where and when you want to strike, to see the near future, as in Sage Owl or Sage Aven, or to spy on an enemy encampment, as in Aven Soulgazer. The ability of flight puts a creature or military unit amongst the ranks of the elite. A flying-modified mechanic might go something like this: Soar (X): This creature comes into play with (X) soar counters. As long as it has a soar counter on it, this creature cannot attack or block, is indestructible and cannot be the target of spells or abilities. Remove a counter: Target player reveals his or her hand or look at target face-down creature or look at the top 3 cards of target player’s library and put them back in the same order.
This creature would not just fly like a bird, but soar like a U2 spy plane (if only Francis Gary Powers had had this ability…).

4:From a design standpoint, what was the best thing about the Champions of Kamigawa block?

4: The Kamigawa block was a refreshing change from the continued tales of the Weatherlight crew and their associated shenanigans. From a flavor standpoint it was a flavorful foray into the realms of the non-European fantasy realm. A whole hemisphere of legend material had gone mostly unrecorded, save for Arabian Nights, which was only Middle Eastern and not far Eastern. Samurai were real samurai; dragons were real dragons; and ninjas were… well about anything they wanted to be.
From a game mechanic standpoint it introduced the revolutionary new “legend rule” which made legends more playable both as their true form and as a “legend-control” spell. Running multiples in a deck became more viable. The playing field became a little more fair for those who didn’t get their legend out first.
The ninjutsu mechanic was also a revolutionary new way to play. In the past, blocking or not blocking a creature depended only on the imminent giant growth cast by a player with an untapped forest. Now you have the “surprise, I’m a ninja!’ aspect. Never before was there away to bring a creature into play, not just as at instant speed, not just with haste, but already attacking and unblocked! Complacent players beware, there are ninjas lurking about. Ninjutsu has proven that there are still new ways to bend or break the standard rules of magic. New surprises are always good. They keep the game new and exciting, break traditional barriers, and provide the thinking magic player with more mental ammunion.

5:From a design standpoint, what was the worst thing about the Ravnica block?

5: The Ravnica block was touted by some as “Invasion revisited”. Whereas I don’t completely agree with this assessment, there is some validity in the argument. Any set that focuses on multiple colors is apt to run into design repeats from previous sets, specifically Invasion. The two sets did differ greatly in one aspect, though: the number of colors that were prime for a deck. Invasion was all about how many of each color you had. You were penalized by some cards for only running one color, and rewarded by others for running multiples. Tribal decks became the in thing. Everything was spread out evenly, making tool decks viable.
Ravnica, however, was all about running two colors and no more. A change, but not much of one. Monocolor decks were still widely punished for being so, as were three color decks, save for in booster drafts. The ever-changing wheel of available colors made two-color selection almost impossible in this format. The same green/black combo cards in the Ravnica boosters were scarce in Guildpact and Dissension. It made for an interesting new challenge, but I’ve heard many complaints from all but the most seasoned booster drafters. Though the overall block was strong, the individual sets lacked cohesion between them. Without reoccurring color combinations, themes, or mechanics, one was left with only a vague understanding of how the whole thing fit together. Though the storyline was very rich, it did little to enrich the overall play of the cards.
I can’t believe I’m bashing the best block ever made.

6:We design cards for three player psychographics: Timmy, Johnny and Spike. In the average set, who should the most cards be designed for? Why? Who should the fewest cards be designed for? Why?

6: Of the three magic psychographics, I identify most with Johnny. He’s the player that likes the cards that no one else likes. He’s the guy that pulls off the amazing combo. He’s the guy that most cards should be designed for, and here’s why:
In life there are rules. Laws. Physical limitations to the nature of earth, wind, fire and water. These rules cannot be bent, broken, or otherwise mistreated. They are what they are, and most of them suck and most people agree that bending or breaking the laws of nature would be a pretty neat idea.
In magic there are also rules. Turn structure, lands per turn, cards drawn during your draw phase, summoning sickness. But this, of course is not real life. If you need a rule broken, you must merely find the card that bends or breaks it. The rules are not set in stone because this is a fantasy, an escape from the reality which is everyday life. Play by the rules and you lose. Where’s the fun in that. We all want to be Superman, don’t we? If the laws of physics didn’t apply to us, wouldn’t we be free?
The same is true in magic. We need cards that bend rules. They, in combination with other cards can break the rules. It’s the combination, the thinking, the grind that compels Johnny to seek that new card that will make his other card break all the rules.
To this end we do not need one all-powerful card or small set of them. No, we need many. We need the subtle, the unimpressive. A two piece puzzle is not a challenge. Magic is a 60,000 piece puzzle. Its assembly is the adventure. Go Johnny, go!
On the other hand we have Spike and Timmy. Timmy needs the fewest cards, because he’s low maintenance. All he needs is that small handful of prized creatures and spells. Back in my day, all we had was Craw Wurm and we liked it! For years it dominated the tables of my hometown games. The bigger the better, but how many big scary creatures does one need? In the end, they’re all just Craw Wurms with different wigs.

7:Imagine you must eliminate a card type (artifact, creature, enchantment, instant, land or sorcery) from Magic. Which one would you choose and why?

7: If I were forced to eliminate a card type, my choice would be sorcery. By simple process of elimination, we can see that we need the rest. Lands: Unless MTG becomes powered by a large series or pitch cards, we’ll need to keep those around. Creatures: Let’s face it, that’s what the game is all about. No matter how much power you have, you need someone that will seize the land for the victor, to rend the flesh of the loser. For that you’ll need some kind of critter. Enchantment: What better to provide variety to the game? What sets your Serra Angel apart from mine? Could it be the Armadillo cloak on her back? Or the is it the Glorious Anthem following in her wake? These have to stay in order to keep things from monotony. Artifacts: They are the “go in any deck” cards. They are what keeps the machine going. They are the go between for Enchantments and Creatures. They are the +3 swords of wounding, all grown up and moved off from the RPG family farm. Instants and Sorceries: They are one in the same, save for timing. For an experienced player, the idea of casting a sorcery on someone else’s turn is preposterous (except for Johnny, he’ll find a way). To a new player, though, what’s the real difference? The idea of not being able to cast a spell whenever is confusing to those starting out, which is why the beginner sets turned everything into sorceries and made all sorceries able to be cast whenever. It’s clear that the only card that could be tossed out is the sorcery. Then we could have instant Time Walks!

8:You stumble upon a time machine and travel back to the early 90's. What is the one change you would recommend Richard Garfield make with Alpha? (You must recommend a change.)

8: If I were to arrive in the early 90’s to meet Richard Garfield, the first thing I’d do is buy a set of Alpha and ask him to autograph it. Then I’d get critical and tell him about all the stuff he messed up.
Most of the things that needed to be fixed, starting with the Alpha set, were fixed in 6th Edition. Interrupts, the color wheel mess, it’s all fixed. In hind-sight, it’s easy to point a finger and laugh at the wording on Disenchants “target enchantment or artifact must be discarded”. I mean, the play zones are now rigidly defined. Discarded is discarded. Destroyed is destroyed. Ninjas are still ninjas. So, I guess number one on my list would be to set the rules for play zones and the wording that affects them into a rigidly designed structure. Everyone knows what a disenchant does now, but back then I could imagine the conversation would end in, “how would you know if I had an artifact or enchantment in my hand?”
Number two in my grip list would be creature types. I’ve noticed that WoTC has done this with D&D as well. A list of creature types to pick from is better than a hodgepodge of everything goes creature types that are just the same as their name. I mean, should Uncle-Istvan really his own creature type? What about my Uncle-Bob? When does he get his own creature type?
Number three is simple: More Chickens. Why did we have to wait ‘till Unglued, RG?

9:You are forced to move counterspelling out of blue. What color do you move it to and why?

9: If I was forced to move counterspelling out of blue, it would go strait to green without pause. Green has always been the anti-magic color. Nature has it’s own magic, and that has it’s place opposite of artificial, man-made magic on the cosmic color scale.
Traditionally, if there’s been an animal that has existed in real-life, it’s been a green creature. Whippoorwills, boars, bears, alligators, wolves, snakes (on or off the plane), apes, hippopotami, ants, badgers, bees, cats, dogs, and Jeff Goldblum, are all creatures that are found both in real life and in green magic. Giant critters surreal critters are all well within the realm of green, but they aren’t necessarily magical. I mean, hey, the dinosaurs from Jurassic Park were real, and they could’ve been a Pigmy Allosaurus back in the day.
For this reason, green as sort of the anti-magic color. It seems to me that is would make the best hero in the quest to foil blue’s magical villainy.
Red would be the runner up, because of its randomness. Nothing says “ooh you didn’t really want to cast that, did you?” like a Dwarf swinging a hammer at your crotch.

10:What is Magic design currently doing wrong? How would you do it right?

10: Magic design and what they’re doing wrong. Oh, man, do I really only have 350 words? Just kidding.
I think that the magic design team needs to come up with a few less keyworded game mechanics. Some of these really make sense and add a lot to the flavor and gameplay of magic. There are others, though, that didn’t really need keywords. For example: Sweep. There was no reminder text for sweep, it was all described in the body of the card. The sweep was completely unnecessary. The same is true for Channel. You knew exactly what the card did without the word Channel there. It wasn’t like a true keyword like flying, banding (back in my day!) or even Bushido. In some cases these cards needed reminder text, but they were tight, well-written gems. Fading was a neat mechanic. Its meaning was clear, but the ability of the card came from the things you could do with the fade counters. Every fading thing had a different purpose, but the same base ability. When the keyword is just tagged on the end of the card description for no better reason than to fill the empty void of creativity, I think it takes away from real keyworded abilities. The common bond is broken between cards of a similar type.
I would fix this by bringing back the sanctity of keywording. Not just any old thing should have its own key word. A little more imagination and less rush might be all that’s needed.
I would also bring back Ed Beard Jr.

Don’t forget to tip your waitress. You’ve been a great audience, good night!

..a growing list of allies

2006-07-31T15:15:00.000-04:00

There is some hope on the front today. All is not lost yet. There are some in power who see the problems of peak oil and are trying to do something about it.

A few weeks ago I was at an event called "The Taste of Battle Creek", which was a giant outdoor picnic featuring foods from local restaurants as well as other products offered by local vendors. I was there with my company selling Dish Network services. We were a couple tents down from the Democrat Party tent.

Now, I've never been a democrat. I don't agree with the majority of policies brought forth by the democrats or their minions in the environmental lobby. In an attempt to keep this blog non-political, I'll keep my reasons for my affiliations to myself. Also, though I'd sworn never to vote for a democrat, I figured I'd give them a chance to change my mind if they answered any of my questions satisfactorily.

They, of course, did not.

I waited until the tent was empty of all but the staff before I entered. I simply asked, "so, what's the Democratic Party's stand on Peak Oil." I figured this question was as non-partisan and straitforward as any, and expected a similar answer. I was instead answered with another question. "You mean Dick Cheney and Haliburton?"

"No," I said, I mean about the present and future economic difficulties that we face due to a decline in world oil production."

Blank stares.

To summarize the next few things that were spewed back at me... The democrats support a huge tax on oil companies for "taking in so much money and breaking the backs of working-class citizens at the pumps," as well as an increase in hybrid sales, a higher CAFE, and the overall encouragement to consumers to drive more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Hmmm... Okay, a CAFE increase is too little too late but I'm not opposed. But, higher taxes to punish those who supply the backbone of our economy? Come on, people, what's that going to do? It's going to put more money in the pockets of our already too-bloated federal government, where it will be frittered away on a war to get decreasing amounts of oil from other countries. Short term solution at best in my book.

And encouraging people to drive more fuel-efficient vehicles? I thought the price at the pump was taking care of that fairly well, thank you. My choice to stay away from democrats remains sound and secure. From what I gathered, they're still a bunch of underachievers who are angry with wealthy people for being wealthy. No help here.

My next contact was with a gentleman who was running for the Michigan State senate. I don't recall his name, and I never did find out his party affiliation. When I asked him his view on peak oil, he hit me with, "what's that?"

Sigh.

But, in all fairness, these examples were of the local variety, and don't necessarily represent the views of politics as a whole. For this reason, I've decided to go looking for good polititions; the ones that know what peak oil is and don't think that it is going to go away as soon as the Bush administration is out of office.

Here's some that I've found:

Representative Roscoe Bartlett

Senator Richard G. Lugar Opening Remarks (transcript)

Former Secretary of Defense testifies before Senate on peak oil

Representative Roscoe Bartlett's Peak Oil Presentation in the US Congress

These are all good read, though some suggest an increase in hybrid tech as well as alcohol fuels (both of which consume more oil), but at least they're aware of the situation.

More later.

Prophets and profits

2006-07-30T12:56:00.000-04:00

This article is a good example of what I was trying to say in an earlier post.

Oil execs are sitting on a huge pile of money. Oil companies are making billions in profits. So what?

So far we have very little of that money being spent on alternative energy sources. $100 million is a number I've read. So, what's the deal guys? I've been sticking up for you so far. I'm against this crazy idea of a windfall profits tax....for now.

Maybe that's what we need. There's a lot of debate going on about what they should be spending all this money on. The environmentalists want it spent on clean energy (which uses more energy), and the liberals want to tax it for midnight baskeetball.

Almost everyone agrees that government subsidies to oil companies are unfair. A huge tax on oil profits would devistate the world economy by lowering oil production. So then what? Perhaps a huge freaking tax that has but one loophole: Alternative energy. If we had a dollar for dollar tax cut (only to offset windfall taxes) for money spent on alternative energy research we could solve this thing in a few years. Perhaps, if they want to keep their subsidies, we could index those to alternative energy projects that see some success. A sort of pass/fail test for government money, so to speak.

As always, these are just my thoughts on the subject.

Wow....where have I been?

2006-07-29T13:10:00.000-04:00

For a while there I'd forgotten I even had a blog. My journey into the depths of technology-free life is finally over.

Who am I kidding. I went for a while without an internet connection. Big deal. I love sounding melodramatic, though.

So, what's new? How've you been?
Does anyone ever read this? Did anyone ever read this?

Ah well.

So, oil prices plunge after reaching an all time high of $79.40. What's the deal?

Every time oil prices spike, the economy gets damaged. A damaged economy demands less oil. Less oil demand equals lower prices. Lower prices equal greater consumption. Greater consumption equals greater prices. PRICE SPIKE! Economy damage. The cycle continues.

Anyone else see this?

Wait......it's not over???

2006-04-18T13:47:00.000-04:00

The following are snipped from CNN and Fox News:
-----

"OPEC does not have the capacity to increase production. Right now, it is not the time to discuss such issues," a senior Iranian Oil Ministry official told a newspaper.

Fear drives oil to all-time high

Light sweet crude for May delivery, which expires on Thursday, traded as high as $70.88 per barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), surpassing the previous record of $70.85 set last summer after hurricanes devastated the Gulf Coast.

LONDON — Oil prices reached a new high of $70.88 a barrel Tuesday as persistent concerns about Iran's nuclear program and supply disruptions in Nigeria overshadowed a new report from OPEC forecasting weakening global demand.

-----

Wait a minute.

Weakening global demand? WEAKENING GLOBAL DEMAND?

-----

In its latest monthly report, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries on Tuesday revised its demand-growth forecast for 2006 to 1.42 million barrels a day, down from 1.46 million barrels per day in the previous report. The cartel estimates that global crude-oil demand will be slightly above 84.5 million barrels per day — about half a million barrels per day lower than the current Wall Street consensus

-----

Are they saying that oil prices are going up because it's not in demand as much? They want us to believe that economics work backwards for oil?

OPEC: "Will you buy oil at $40 per barrel?"

American consumer: "No thanks, I don't need it"

OPEC: "Okay then, $70.88 it is."

American consumer: "SOLD!"

I mean, WTF?

-----

Crude oil production is only barely keeping up with rising global demand, leaving a slim margin for error if there is a prolonged supply interruption, experts say.

Traders are anxious that U.S.-led efforts to stop Iran, OPEC's second-largest member, from pursuing a suspected nuclear weapons program would lead to a disruption in Persian Gulf supplies.

And in Nigeria, militant attacks have led to the shutdown of crude oil production. Platts estimates Nigeria's output fell by 220,000 barrels per day in March, compared with February.

Also underpinning high oil prices is booming demand in emerging economies such as China and India.

-----

Crude oil production is barely keeping up with rising oil demand. Wait, what? I thought it was falling. huh?

Booming demand in emerging economies such as China and India. Oh. Thank god. That's why the price is so high. Demand in CHINA and INDIA. Whew.

For a second there I thought we still needed oil here.

I was scared for a moment.

Glad that's over.

False alarm.

-lord GOTWA

PEAK OIL IS OVER! We found more oil!

2006-03-21T13:50:00.000-05:00

This has been mercilessly stolen from Pastpeak.com without permission.
"

Mexico's President Vicente Fox has announced the discovery of a significant new deep-water oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. AP:

President Vicente Fox climbed aboard a drilling platform in the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday to formally announce a new deep-water oil discovery [called Noxal] he said could eventually yield 10 billion barrels of crude oil. [...]

Government estimates say the find could exceed reserves at the giant offshore field Cantarell, Mexico's largest oil field, which has seen its production decline but is still expected to yield 1.9 million barrels a day this year.

Luis Ramirez, chief executive of Mexico's government-run oil monopoly Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, said Noxal is the fourth deep-water well explored by Pemex.

Ramirez said that while production tests will be conducted in coming weeks, "evidence found is sufficient to infer potential reserves to be discovered that could reach 10 billion barrels of crude oil equivalent."

"This number, compared with annual production of 1.6 billion barrels of crude, shows its strategic importance," Ramirez said, adding that crude oil production at Noxal likely won't begin for eight to 10 years. [Emphasis added]

10 billion barrels is a significant find, but here are some things to bear in mind:

10 billion barrels is being cited as a best-case number. It remains to be seen if 10 billion barrels can actually be recovered.

The world currently uses 10 billion barrels of oil every four months.

Production at Noxal is 8-10 years away. By that time, other Mexican production will have declined significantly. As we saw a month ago, Mexico's Cantarell field, the world's second largest producer, is facing precipitous decline. Noxal will simply plug part of the hole left by declines in other fields.

According to an industry insider quoted at The Oil Drum, the new find "is supposed to be nearly as big as Cantarell, but is a lot heavier." That's what we would expect in a peak oil world: the light, sweet crude has mostly all been discovered. Now we're on to the harder-to-find, harder-to-produce, harder-to-refine oil.

All that being said, this discovery may indicate that Mexico's deep-water exploration has been spottier than previously thought. It's possible they'll find more. Which is good news on the peak oil front (though not wildly good news — as noted above, it just postpones peak by a few months).

But every new find is bad news on the global warming front, and that is likely to turn out to be the bigger problem in the long run. Every new find is that much more carbon that will be pumped into the atmosphere, and it's that much longer that people will delay doing what has to be done to reduce carbon emissions and start to get a handle on the accelerating rate of increase in atmospheric CO2.

People tend to follow the path of least resistance. As long as we've got relatively cheap oil, the path of least resistance will be to continue to burn it.

"
So there you have it! A new four month supply 10 years from now ends all arguements. The next time you tell someone that we're running out of oil and they say, "someone will find more," you can tell them. Yup! We just found another 4 month supply that'll only take 10 years to tap! CRANK UP THE SUV!!!!

-LORD gotwa

I say it best when I say nothing at all...

2006-03-14T13:13:00.000-05:00

lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Peak oil is closing in

http://www.peakoil.net/

http://www.peakoil.org//

http://www.peakoil.com//

I tip my hat to the new constitution

2006-03-11T16:05:00.000-05:00

Recent developments have lead me to realize that we need to re-vamp our bill of rights to more accurately reflect the behavior of the American people and their government.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS (Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution)
The Conventions of a number of the ~~States~~[Special Interest Groups] having, at the time of ~~adopting~~[Raping] the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to ~~prevent misconstruction or~~ abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added, and as extending the ground of public ~~confidence in~~[Slavery to] the Government will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution;
Resolved, ~~by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring,~~[in a secret cabinet meeting] that the following articles be ~~proposed to the Legislatures of the several States~~[immediately and illegally added], as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, ~~when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures~~, to be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. [Furthermore, the people shall be protected by the government against anything a person may find offensive. This includes but is not limited to: Rascism, Religion, Sexism, Common Courtessy, Patriotism, Life in General, The French, Nakedness, Money or Wealth, Crime, Nationalism, Darwinism, the word "Ism."]

Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a ~~free state~~[Federal Government], the right of the ~~people~~ [Federal Government] to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed [Much].

Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by ~~law~~ [John Ashcroft].

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
No [Any] person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, ~~unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service~~ in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. [Unless you are a citizen of a soverign state that we've chosen to invade. In that case we'll forcibly remove you from your own country, lock you up, and throw away the key you terrorist bastard.]

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed ~~twenty dollars~~[The Ratings of the Current Story], the right of trial by ~~jury~~[Public Opinion] shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a ~~jury~~[Unprincipled Media Source], shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the ~~common law~~[Sensationalist Yellow Jounalist Media].

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.[Unless you are a citizen of a soverign state that we've chosen to invade. In that case we'll forcibly remove you from your own country, lock you up, and throw away the key you terrorist bastard.]

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.[Unless you are a citizen of a soverign state that we've chosen to invade. In that case we'll forcibly remove you from your own country, lock you up, and throw away the key you terrorist bastard.]

Amendment X
The powers ~~not~~ delegated to the United States by the Constitution, ~~nor prohibited by it to the states,~~ are [now] reserved to ~~the states respectively, or to the people~~[George W Bush].

Big Oil companies are not the problem.

2006-02-23T15:48:00.000-05:00

Nor are they the solution.

It gets brought to my attention every time I talk about oil prices that "the big oil companies are making billions of dollars." That's absolutely true. I never argue.

So what?

Why does a company making a profit matter? Why, in this present state of wealth animosity and class warfare, do we care so much about other people becoming rich? No one complains about how much freaking money the pope and the queen of England have. And they're not even providing us with the energy that's so vital to our economy. Why do we need a queen of England and a pope, anyway? We should take their money and use it to finance biodiesel research, wind power and advanced solar cells.

Kinda like what the oil companies are doing.

Now, am I saying that we should let them have all this money because they're going to provide an alternative to their own product that will save our future? Hell no. A lot of what people are saying is true. They're a bunch of greedy fatcats that are rolling in cubic money. But that's not where the problem is.

The problem is that nobody sets the price of oil anymore. Back in the good old days when the price got too low, you turned down the spigot, when it got too high, you turned the spigot back up again. But that was then. Now everyone is pumping as much as they can and the price continues it's rise. We can't keep up with depletion. We can't feed demand. Price is found where supply meets demand. It's that simple. So the price goes up. Profits go up. The problem is not that the profits are up.

It's the shortage of oil.

If we were to "force" the price of oil back down, people would use more of it than they do when the price is higher. That's just how it works. How much less gas are you using today as compared with last year? If you are using just as much, what items have you been going without to make up for your increased fuel bill? I bet those items are made of oil, by oil, or at least tranported by truck.

The point is, the higher price exists when the supply goes down relative to demand. The only way to bring the price down is to reduce demand or increase supply. We know (if you've been paying attention) that we can't increase supply. We must reduce demand. That's what the high price does. It just so happens that the oil companies are there to take in a bigger profit. So what?

Q: So, why don't we just force them to lower the price by cutting their profits?

A: That would result in shortages due to overuse of oil relative to price. People would continue to live the way we have and use as much oil..... almost. There wouldn't be enough. Someone, somewhere would have to go without. I'm not expert enough to know who, but my guess is it would be the people the furthest away from sources of oil. Michigan perhaps? Nebraska? I'm not really sure, just guessing on that part. The point is, who goes without? The free market system decides that for us. If we tamper with that, then who decides who goes without? You? Me? The pope? The queen of England?

-LORD gotwa

Cantarell is dying

2006-02-21T18:43:00.000-05:00

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/cantarell.htm

What does this mean to you?

Well, for starters, don't buy that SUV.

In plain English, the decline in production of oil means that there is less supply. Less supply means higher prices. Higher prices mean economic troubles.

Kinda like the ones we're having.

It is a very common opinion amongst traditional thinking economists that increased prices will encourage companies to find new supply. This is partly true. What they're not taking into account is that there is a great deal of decline to make up for in order to even break even, let alone to come out ahead. And where will all this supply magically come from? Ghawar, the first largest oil field, is dying too, according to most experts.

Let's put it this way. We have a family of Six. Mommy makes 250k / year as a lawyer and Daddy makes 300k /year as a doctor. Mommy dies and Daddy goes insane. It's up to the highschool-ages kids to earn their own living. Four kids can make enough cash to hold up a 550k / year lifestyle, right.

So, Mommy is Cantarell, Daddy is Ghawar. The kids are all the other fields, tapped and untapped. There just isn't going to be enough to make up for the loss of the big ones.

Ever.

So, what, you ask is the point of all this?

We're all F.U.B.A.R.'d, run for the hills. It's all over. Park your SUV and pass the ammunition.

-LORD gotwa

So much to say, but I don't actually say anything.

2006-02-09T20:01:00.000-05:00

I haven't been good an pissed off enough to blog in the last few days. I'm sure something will get me riled up enough sooner or later.

Syriana

2006-01-28T10:58:00.000-05:00

I went and saw this movie last night.

Everything I'd heard up to that point about the movie told me that it would be hard to follow. I went to see it because it was about oil.

Well, it was indeed hard to follow. However, because I had a bit of a background in some of the events they were parody-ing (is that a word?), I was able to somewhat keep pace.

Throughout the first hour and a half of the movie there are a bunch of sub-plots stirred around in separate pots. The presumption is, of course, that all these things are going to come together in the end in some sort of dramatic conclusion.

The conclusion, though dramatic didn't have the Hollywood punch that I was expecting. Not that I was diappointed by this. It shows more of a real-lifeism (I must be W, making up all these words, weeee!) than your typical 'hero saves the day' kind of thing.

What I was disappointed in is the lack of solid messages found in this movie. I'm a fan of thinking man's movies, but there is a great message that could be passed along here that wasn't. Everything in this movie was implied: peak oil, corporate meddling, government coups, etc.

I love a movie where you have to make up your own conclusions. However, with the documentary feel of this movie, it should have been more informative. They could have told us more about the imminent peak in the world's oil production. They could have been the first in movie history to fire that warning shot across the bow, so to speak.

Ah well, perhaps I'll have to make that movie myself.

I'm ready for my closeup Mr. DeVille.

Anger is such a waste of time

2006-01-26T14:34:00.000-05:00

I mean, really.

It's the bad side of humanity. The beast within. The result of a fight or flight reaction. Anger is everything that we don't want to be. Ugly darkness boiling out from within us. Anger is not rational, though we can rationalize it later.

So, why are we angry? Why are so many people so damn mean? There are a thousand thousand reasons for this, I suppose. The greatest question I guess shouldn't be, "why are we angry?"

"What good does anger bring to us?" That's the question.

Just today I've seen pissed off parents berating their children (and using double negatives and ain'ts to boot, poor kids); I've seen a woman get an earfull from another woman following a near collision in the mall parking lot; I was told a story this morning about a gentleman responding to "I hope your day goes better" with "stick it up your nose."

So I ask you, which of these situations has furthered the goal of humanity. After all, we've only got 5 billion more years before the sun burns out. How much time do we want to spend trying to keep our fellow man down? Bastards.

We need to smile in the face of anger. Show the people that they're wasting their time with their foolish temper tantrums. The unwashed masses must be educated on the futility of their negativity. I'm not talking free love and flowers here, I'm just talking about being nice to people.

So where do we start? Right here. Repeat after me.

I'm going to be nice to people. Mean people suck. I don't want to suck. I won't be mean.

Now, go my brothers and sisters. Stop the suck.

Before it's too late.

A word from our sponsor

2006-01-25T23:10:00.000-05:00

This blog is brought to you by Spoon Guard

Get yours today.

Are you in my generation?

2006-01-23T15:04:00.000-05:00

Here's a one question survey that will determine if you're in my generation. You may be too young, too old, or you might not get it at all.

Q: Did you ever try to shoot the dog when you missed both of the ducks?

Capitalism has made it this way. Old fashion fascism will take it away.

2006-01-22T14:41:00.000-05:00

I'm just making a prediction here. I just want to stick it up here for an I-told-you-so in the not too distant future.

The way I see things happening around me, there is a lot of growing sentiment against illegal aliens here in America. There's always been anti-alien feelings, but I'm talking about genuine discord. People in the south taking up arms and guarding our borders. The seeds of hatred being sewn.

I'm not here to stick up for either side. I'm all for legal immigration and I'm all for secure borders. I also believe that if I wasn't born here in the good ol' USA, I'd make tracks to get here asap; Legally or otherwise.

But that's neither here nor there.

What is important, right or wrong, is the hatred. The need for scapegoating. The need to blame our problems on the people who can't defend themselves. As our economy worsens, so too will this need, this denial of the truth. We, the people, cannot cope with things that our beyond our control.

We make gods to things we fear and do not understand, but we only make enemys of things we fear. This is human nature. Once again the thing that makes us what we are will help to bring about our downfall.

You've seen the direction our democracy is going. You know for yourself we have less freedoms than we did six years ago. We have less privacy. We have less autonomy. All in the name of security.

In the name of security we will have one rise to power that will reap this harvest of hatred. In the name of freedom we will brand illegals as our scapegoat. In the name of our national god and the security that only he can bring we will strike these people to the ground and crush them beneath the heel of patriotism. We will be proud once again. After years of economic suffering caused by a shortage of energy we will be willing to accept whatever means ncessary to restore our former glory.

Blood will flow. Freedoms will die.

We will be secure.

Just a prediction.

O is a LETTER!

2006-01-21T11:16:00.000-05:00

Sorry, this is a break from the normal drivel to give you this important update.

"Oh" is a letter.
"Zee-roh" is a number.

It's no wonder you fucking rednecks can't get out of the damn trailer park.

Supply and Demand and Peak Oil

2006-01-17T12:51:00.000-05:00

This is a follow-up to my rant (or perhaps a continuation thereof) on peak oil.

Supply and demand does indeed fit this model. A shortage in supply traditionally has prodded the market to increase production by finding an alternate means. Basically, demand exists, therefore someone will provide supply.

However, here's the problem. Oil is a finite resource. The "end of the petrolium era" does not mean that we've run out of oil. We've only run out of the cheap, easy to find, not too hard to refine oil. We thrive on that oil. Light, sweet crude we call it. I guess you could call this phase in our history the end of easy oil.

There continues to be, and there always will be oil. The oil contained within the earth falls into one of two categories: Ultimately recoverable and the rest of it. Ultimately recoverable oil is precisely that. An example of oil that isn't ultimately recoverable would be oil that is too deep, or in a spot that it would take more oil to extract than the oil you extracted. (see the Wolf at the Door website and their definitions of Energy returned on energy invested, they explain it better than I do).

So, the crux of the problem isn't that we're going to be out of oil. We're going to be out of cheap oil. The only reason society exists at the level it does is because oil is cheap.

Lets say that air was a lot more scarce (just as an example). Right now we don't give four tenths of one fuck about air because ISN'T scarce. If it was, life as we know it wouldn't end, per se. However, it would not be life as we know it. We would find ways of conserving air. We would find ways of purifying used air. We would do whatever it takes to do as much as we could and use as little air as possible. The end of the world would not come from the scarcity of air.

The end of the world would come from the wars fought over the continued dwindling supply of air.

So will it be with oil.

-LORD Gotwa

SMITE ME!

2006-01-16T20:28:00.000-05:00

I think this whole article speaks for itself - The Chirstian Reich is going too far...

Robertson suggests God smote Sharon
Evangelist links Israeli leader's stroke to 'dividing God's land'

Friday, January 6, 2006; Posted: 5:33 a.m. EST (10:33 GMT)

(CNN) -- Television evangelist Pat Robertson suggested Thursday that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution for the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which Robertson opposed.
"He was dividing God's land, and I would say, 'Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America,'" Robertson told viewers of his long-running television show, "The 700 Club."
"God says, 'This land belongs to me, and you'd better leave it alone,'" he said.
Robertson's show airs on the ABC Family cable network and claims about 1 million viewers daily.
Sharon, 77, clung to life in a Jerusalem hospital Thursday after surgery to treat a severe stroke, his doctors said.
The prime minister, who withdrew Israeli settlers and troops from Gaza and parts of the West Bank last summer over heated objections from his own Likud Party, was breathing with the aid of a ventilator after doctors operated to stop the bleeding in his brain.
In Washington, President Bush offered praise for Sharon in a speech on Thursday.
"We pray for his recovery," Bush said. "He's a good man, a strong man. A man who cared deeply about the security of the Israeli people, and a man who had a vision for peace. May God bless him."
Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, compared Robertson's remarks to the overheated rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Full story)
He called the comments "outrageous" and said they were not something to expect "from any of our friends."
"He is a great friend of Israel and a great friend of Prime Minister Sharon himself, so I am very surprised," Ayalon told CNN.
Robertson, 75, founded the Christian Coalition and in 1988 failed in a bid for the Republican presidential nomination. He last stirred controversy in August, when he called for the assassination of Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez. (Full story)
Robertson later apologized, but still compared Chavez to Hitler and former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in the process.
The same month, the Anti-Defamation League criticized Robertson for warning that God would "bring judgment" against Israel for its withdrawal from Gaza, which it had occupied since the 1967 Mideast war.
Robertson said Thursday that Sharon was "a very likable person, and I am sad to see him in this condition."
He linked Sharon's health problems to the 1995 assassination of Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin, who signed the Oslo peace accords that granted limited self-rule to Palestinians.
"It was a terrible thing that happened, but nevertheless, now he's dead," Robertson said.
Rabin was gunned down by a religious student opposed to the Oslo accords. The killer, Yigal Amir, admitted to the crime and was sentenced to life in prison.
Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, criticized Robertson's comments Thursday, saying the televangelist "has a political agenda for the entire world."
"He seems to think God is ready to take out any world leader who stands in the way of that agenda," Lynn said in a written statement.
"A religious leader should not be making callous political points while a man is struggling for his life," he said. "I'm appalled."
Ralph Neas, president of liberal advocacy group People for the American Way, said "it is astonishing that Pat Robertson still wields substantial influence" in the Republican Party.
"Once again, Pat Robertson leaves us speechless with his insensitivity and arrogance," Neas said in a written statement.
According to The Associated Press, Robertson spokeswoman Angell Watts said of people who criticized the comments: "What they're basically saying is, 'How dare Pat Robertson quote the Bible?'"
"This is what the word of God says," Watts told the AP. "This is nothing new to the Christian community."

Copyright 2006 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

Astonishing Panorama of the Endtimes

2006-01-16T11:21:00.000-05:00

Ok, now that I've figured out how to do this, get ready for the pain...

So, here's how the whole thing goes:

http://www.washington.edu/research/or/symposium/hirschman.pdf

If this link works, take a look. As you see, the world population in 1900AD was 1.6 billion humans. This year represents the basic beginning of our use of fossil fuels. Oil and Natural Gas, mostly. We'd been using coal for quite some time, but at nowhere near the scale we use it today.

So, why is this relevant? Because our entire society is based on oil and natural gas. Everything. Oil is in plastics, fertilizers, diesel fuel to plant, harvest and haul food, etc. The list goes on for miles.

Now, let us look at 2000AD. Oil and Natural Gas production are in the midst of a peak in production. After the peak comes the decline. Every day we will produce less than the day before (as an overall trend, though there will be bumpy ups and downs). As the production of oil declines, so does our ability, as a race, to feed all the humans.

There are 6.1 billion people now. These people need oil. Oil is life for 4.5 billion people whose live cannot be sustained without that sweet, sweet crude. 4.5 billion people must die in order to reach the equilibrium we had in 1900 before the unsustainable widespread use of oil. 4.5 billion deaths from starvation.

Do you think they'll all go quietly. Almost 74% of the world population is going to be hungry and desparate. Are you among the 74%. A family of 4 will see 3 family members die. Will it be you who survives, only to see your loved ones starved to death? Or do you band together and take out 4 other families to hoard their resources.

This is the bright future of the world. The future brightened by 4.5 billion funeral pyres.

I know what you're thinking. America will be unaffected. Americans will prevail.

But we've already seen a preview of what is to come. We've already seen the worst of humanity rear it's ungly head in the wake of the hurricanes along the gulf coast. We've seen what extreme scarcity does to the human beast. We are animals. For a thousand years we have fought to remove our animals selves from within us.

But it will come out again.

Soon.

-LORD Gotwa

All I wanted to do was log in...

2006-01-12T22:10:00.000-05:00

It's too damn easy to get a weblog these days. I didn't even have the common sence to realize I wasn't creating a login name to post on someone else's blog. Sorry Spook if you read this and I haven't posted like I promised I would.

Pardon me while I shake my monitor to re-boot my computer.

So, since I have your attention. Do I have your attention? Mmmm.....coffee. This is where the 10:13 caffiene kicks in and I start to write a lot.

So, I guess a little about myself. I was once the average guy until I was bitten by a radioactive spider. Now the CIA puts listening devices in my groin and I have to spend an hour every day searching for them. On the good days, it takes me two hours.

I once had a fiance' and a dog. The fiance' moved to another state and my dog died. Man, I still miss my dog. His name was Winston. If I was smart enough to post a picture on this thing I would. Perhaps someday. Wow.... Now I know why all these weblog people do what they do. I think they all type stuff because they assume that nobody's going to read it.

But we both know that isn't true, don't we precious?

So, I guess I should do my civic duty and theme this bitch and do some good. Let's talk about Peak Oil. Does anyone know what Peak Oil is?

Ok, here's some links.

www.peakoil.org
http://www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk/

Do some homework and get back to me. There will be a test. I guess that's all for now. Remember, it's the end of the world as we know it. ButI feel fine.

-LORD Gotwa