Let me first say that I completely agree with the idea of reducing our dependence on oil. Mass transit, alternative energies, and exercise (yes, I ride a bike) are definitely the way of the future and should receive a great amount of funding in the present. And guess what? They Are!
But seriously are you people (the ones that have given this film rave reviews) all nuts? This movie deals with a really interesting subject, but turns it into an incredibly manipulated , highly suspect, piece of political propaganda. The entire premise of this movie rests on the notion that we aren't just going to run out of oil (which is obvious) but we're going to run out of it so suddenly that it's going to cause a worldwide trauma. As if one day there will be oil, and the next oops! All the wells are dry! Next scene: chaos, murder, war, yada yada yada.
The idea that we might, possibly, run out slowly over a long period of time (maybe 3 or 4 decades?) – allowing nations to CONTINUE switching over to alternative sources of energy doesn't seem to exist. Indeed, one "genius" says that Hydrogen fueled cars won't ever work because the technology might not be fully ready for 30 to 50 years. Why is such a time scale a bad thing? Because this film basically tells us that the world is going to end before then.
Look, I get the point. Oil = bad. But why lie and manipulate facts in order to scare people? It just makes the film seem ridiculous and the creators like left-wing hippies.
Examples? Sure, I have TONS, but I only need one. If you actually watch this POS (which I do recommend, if only to question it and learn how politically motivated movies can be) I'm sure you'll find dozens of other factual inaccuracies
Canada's extraction of oil from oil shale: One guy tells us it must only be happening because of growing desperation. After all, who would go after such an uneconomic source of oil as oil shale if our world supply weren't falling apart? Well, smarty, Canadian companies apparently. Why? Because They Make Money Doing It! Shale excavation actually does turn a profit, especially when oil prices are high (as they would be if/when reserves begin to run out). Oil need only be above $30 a barrel (they're about double that right now) for shale extraction to work on a large scale.
Guess what else? There are (conservatively) 3 trillion barrels of RECOVERABLE oil in shale reserves. What's that mean? 100 years of oil at current usage. Double the usage? Fine, still 50 additional years IF the Middle East were to run out today. Plenty of time to develop those alternative energies that this movie scoffs at (yes, they scoff and scoff often).
Again, I get the need to cut our dependence on oil. And ya know what? So does everyone else. I don't need fear mongers trying to put forth easily debunked theories and manipulated facts in order to sway my vote. If anything, I think I'll go out for a nice long unnecessary drive tonight just to show my displeasure with their movie Congratulations.
But seriously are you people (the ones that have given this film rave reviews) all nuts? This movie deals with a really interesting subject, but turns it into an incredibly manipulated , highly suspect, piece of political propaganda. The entire premise of this movie rests on the notion that we aren't just going to run out of oil (which is obvious) but we're going to run out of it so suddenly that it's going to cause a worldwide trauma. As if one day there will be oil, and the next oops! All the wells are dry! Next scene: chaos, murder, war, yada yada yada.
The idea that we might, possibly, run out slowly over a long period of time (maybe 3 or 4 decades?) – allowing nations to CONTINUE switching over to alternative sources of energy doesn't seem to exist. Indeed, one "genius" says that Hydrogen fueled cars won't ever work because the technology might not be fully ready for 30 to 50 years. Why is such a time scale a bad thing? Because this film basically tells us that the world is going to end before then.
Look, I get the point. Oil = bad. But why lie and manipulate facts in order to scare people? It just makes the film seem ridiculous and the creators like left-wing hippies.
Examples? Sure, I have TONS, but I only need one. If you actually watch this POS (which I do recommend, if only to question it and learn how politically motivated movies can be) I'm sure you'll find dozens of other factual inaccuracies
Canada's extraction of oil from oil shale: One guy tells us it must only be happening because of growing desperation. After all, who would go after such an uneconomic source of oil as oil shale if our world supply weren't falling apart? Well, smarty, Canadian companies apparently. Why? Because They Make Money Doing It! Shale excavation actually does turn a profit, especially when oil prices are high (as they would be if/when reserves begin to run out). Oil need only be above $30 a barrel (they're about double that right now) for shale extraction to work on a large scale.
Guess what else? There are (conservatively) 3 trillion barrels of RECOVERABLE oil in shale reserves. What's that mean? 100 years of oil at current usage. Double the usage? Fine, still 50 additional years IF the Middle East were to run out today. Plenty of time to develop those alternative energies that this movie scoffs at (yes, they scoff and scoff often).
Again, I get the need to cut our dependence on oil. And ya know what? So does everyone else. I don't need fear mongers trying to put forth easily debunked theories and manipulated facts in order to sway my vote. If anything, I think I'll go out for a nice long unnecessary drive tonight just to show my displeasure with their movie Congratulations.