Billionaires

December 13, 2005 12:04 PM

"Richard Rainwater made billions by knowing how to profit from a crisis. Now he foresees the biggest one yet". Rainwater discovers peak oil and wants to profit from it. Among other things, "he's thinking about opening a for-profit survivability center". Admittedly, his peak oil obsession goes beyond profiting:

But there may be something more important than making money. This is the first scenario I've seen where I question the survivability of mankind. I don't want the world to wake up one day and say, 'How come some doofus billionaire in Texas made all this money by being aware of this, and why didn't someone tell us?'

posted by samelborp (20 comments total)

Isn't he a little late to the party ?
posted by troutfishing at 12:33 PM on December 13, 2005

PEA COIL?
posted by dios at 12:36 PM on December 13, 2005

posted by dios at 12:42 PM on December 13, 2005

hah! that's pretty funny, dios.

leslie nielsen. roffle.
posted by Hat Maui at 12:47 PM on December 13, 2005

one thing, tho -- are they sandwiches? 'cuz if they're the other kind of "hero" then "heros" is missing an "e."

so i guess, tell the guy that made the poster.
posted by Hat Maui at 12:49 PM on December 13, 2005

While you can certanly make money betting on peak oil, I think it's pretty silly to think it's going to destroy civilization. It'll just mean a few changes.
posted by delmoi at 12:52 PM on December 13, 2005

it's interesting to see into these people's lives, but the dicksucking going on in that fortune article makes it unbearable to read. funny that one of them might think that making money off "a few changes" would be poor form is newsworthy.
posted by carsonb at 1:03 PM on December 13, 2005

If I keep guessing when Peak Oil will come, eventually one day I'll be right.
posted by geoff. at 1:08 PM on December 13, 2005

But you don't get to be a multibillionaire investor—one who's more than doubled his net worth in a decade—through incremental gains on little stock trades. You have to push way past conventional thinking, test the boundaries of chaos, see events in a bigger context.

how lame can forbes get?
posted by yonation at 1:11 PM on December 13, 2005

Let's review:

90's00's
Web 1.0Web 2.0
IPOYahoo buyout
Serbia/Bosnia/KosovoSyria/Iraq/Iran
Y2K BugPeak Oil



posted by StarForce5 at 1:17 PM on December 13, 2005

Even though that article was stoopid, I would still like to think that this is why capitalism works. If a billion dollars is needed to get someone to save the world, then it's a billion dollar well spent.

But this guy ain't saving beans, yo.
posted by travosaurus at 1:46 PM on December 13, 2005

Okay so let's recap: Ominous sounding predictions, from a megalomaniac billionaire who thinks he's been touched by the hand of God. Getting all choked up because the "help" has a son who just got back from Iraq. What are we supposed to take away from this story? It's a puff piece camouflaged as crucial investor news. This guy thinks he's prescient because he invested in oil and real estate and made a killing? Jeez.

Hey Rainwater: Yes, Fossil fuel is a limited resource. No shit Sherlock. This country is going to be in economic crisis when a global Hubert's peak (Peak oil) is reached and we get on the other side of that bell curve. Thanks for helping to create that situation and thanks for patting yourself on the back now that you so "prophetically" realize it and look to exploit the situation for more gain. This garbage is just a way to cover your ass. How about really doing something to help the country and the planet by calling for the development of alternative fuels and an end to dependence on fossil fuel.
posted by Skygazer at 2:18 PM on December 13, 2005

This is why they call it "Dough Nuts"
posted by stbalbach at 2:45 PM on December 13, 2005

Um. I bought oil futures a few year back. I don't think it took a genius to see that one coming.
posted by tkchrist at 3:28 PM on December 13, 2005

I will never understand why the standard "Conservative" position is to mock the development of alternative energy sources.
posted by I Love Tacos at 4:32 PM on December 13, 2005

A successful alternative energy source might prevent our returning to 1800, when everyone was skinny, cold, and virtuous.
posted by jfuller at 5:10 PM on December 13, 2005

A successful alternative energy source might prevent our returning to 1800, when everyone was skinny, cold, and virtuous.

And when everyone was only 1 billion of us.
posted by wolfey at 6:40 PM on December 13, 2005

Great. Who's going to rock me to sleep tonight?
posted by mrnutty at 8:00 PM on December 13, 2005

A successful alternative energy source might prevent our returning to 1800, when everyone was skinny, cold, and virtuous.
posted by jfuller at 5:10 PM PST on December 13 [!]

Its gonna have to be a REALLY good source at a cheap price to keep up the present energy consumption levels.

Humanity has developed a great set of tools VS 1800. Advances in metallurgy and knowing how to make really great alloys. It doesn't HAVE to be just like 1800, but many of the ideas of a resource constrained world will come back with a vengeance. (Death penalty and Eugenics based on IQ/'laziness' are examples) If you are not a benefit to society - you'll be gone.

Already changes have happened to the supply chain. Example - 64 Oz peeled garlic from China has been replaced with 32 Oz Peeled garlic from the USofA.
posted by rough ashlar at 5:17 AM on December 14, 2005

"Humanity has developed a great set of tools VS 1800. Advances in metallurgy and knowing how to make really great alloys."

Except to make those, it takes a rather impressive amount of electrical power and/or heat energy, as well as a well-functioning chemical industry capable of deriving very pure elemental chemicals.

Not saying it's impossible, just saying the energy allocation would be pretty different from today.
posted by zoogleplex at 12:32 PM on December 14, 2005