<More goings-on around the world The Oil Drum Poll: Vacation travel>

232 comments on Saturday open thread

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Leanan on February 18, 2006 - 11:50am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
There was a story about Kuwait's oil reserves in Delta Farm Press this week:

If recent reports are true, the world's energy crisis just got worse. Kuwait, long assumed to have some of the world's largest oil reserves, may actually have much less.

In late January, Petroleum Intelligence Weekly, an energy industry newsletter, said internal Kuwaiti records show the nation's oil reserves are only about half the 99 billion barrels previously cited. If there, the 99 billion barrels would translate to about 10 percent of the world's reserves.

Delta Farm Press is a publication for  farmers, which usually prints articles about corn prices, soybean rust, farm subsidies, etc.  But high fuel prices have been so brutal on farmers, they're now covering Kuwait's reserves.  

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tom deplume on February 18, 2006 - 11:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think a recent post put Kuwaiti reserves at only 24 Gbbl.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 18, 2006 - 12:05pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Yes, it was the same story, actually - the PIW one.  The info in the article isn't news here.  I was struck by the fact that it was in a farmers' trade journal, though.  There seems to be growing awareness in the mainstream that something about energy has fundamentally changed.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
JMG on February 18, 2006 - 1:58pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Energy, fossil fuel and electrical, is a high proportion of the input costs in conventional agriculture, a point missed by many. To harvest the sun's energy as plants, tillage, irrigation and harvesting require a lot of horsepower. A typical farm tractor used in tillage or harvesting is 100 HP to 400 HP (and cost $800 or so per hp - think of a typical tractor as 2 nice Beamers or a Mercedes).

http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCatalog/FR/category/FR_TRACTORS.html (not the utility tractors)

Forage choppers and combines are even higher hp:
http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCatalog/FR/series/spfh_forage_harvesters.html

In typical use, a tractor burns about 4.4 gallons of diesel per hour per 100 Hp in size. Then there is the cost of fertilzer, irrigation power, crop drying costs, transportation to market and so on. Historically 40% of the on-farm costs for alfalfa, a major feed crop for cows, is the direct or indirect cost of energy. For milk production the cost of feed is about half the input costs. The increasing production of biofuels displaces the production of either human or animal food, reducing their supply and thus increasing their prices as inputs. IMO, increasing energy prices are a double whammy for food agriculture (animal or human) and ultimately the cost of food.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 19, 2006 - 12:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Matt Stockton of the West Central Extension Center gave a presentation at an ag conference last week.  He said, "There is no bigger headline ... than where our energy costs are going for diesel fuel and fertilizer."

I'm inclined to agree.  Along with transportation, agriculture is the industry most dependent on petroleum.  It will be difficult to maintain our current levels of production, let alone grow biofuel crops.  

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stormy on February 18, 2006 - 6:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Great link, Leanan.  

This year's growing season may well cause a real spike in the cost of food.

Remember, the spike in oil prices occurred after the last planting and growing season.  This year, farmers see real hikes in all sorts of products necessary for growing.  There is a direct correlation, the article says, between the cost of these products and the cost of oil and natural gas.

Perhaps because economists are not farmers, they have overlooked a real inflationary cause that will bite later this year.  

I wonder what kind of demand destruction is going to occur here?  Cut down on the calories?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 19, 2006 - 10:10am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Portions might be smaller.  There's a theory that one reason Americans are so prone to obesity is that we have a surplus of food, thanks to agribusiness.  And being a good capitalist society, naturally, the solution to that problem is to try and get people to consume more.  Hence food is highly processed (because people will more of it, and you can charge a higher markup), and portions are huge.  (Why not supersize those fries, if potatoes are cheap?)  Many European countries, like France, have protected their small, local farmers.  So food is expensive, the portions much smaller - and the people are thinner.  (Though that's changing, as globalization brings in more McDonald's.)

My parents took me to a French restaurant over the holidays.  They are light eaters, so I was really surprised when they ordered an appetizer, entree, and desert, and insisted we all do the same.  In most restaurants, I can't finish the entree, let alone apps and desert.  But they said portions were French-sized at this restaurant, and sure enough - you really could eat appetizers, entree, and desert.  And walk out not feeling stuffed.

In any case, smaller portions would be the easiest way to deal with higher food prices.  People get upset if you raise prices, but if the price is the same and there's a few less fries in the bag, they may not notice.  Or if they do notice, they won't get too upset.  

 

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
dissident on February 19, 2006 - 11:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Volume of available food isn't really the key for obesity.  Obese Americans tend to be poor and consume the cheap starch laden junk food.  In the last 30 years the type II diabetes rate has been growing rather rapidly including onset in teenagers.  The only plausible explanation for this is the low fat hysteria that started in the 1970s and which led food processors to substitute fat with corn starch.  People with a genetic predisposition to type II diabates are insulin resistent and preferentially turn sugar (aka starch) into fat instead of burning it off and producing heat.  American rich don't have an obesity problem since they consume better food.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on February 19, 2006 - 12:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There is more to the issue than that.

Other issues, driving and not walking a few blocks.

Living in NYC requires quite a bit of walking and hence obesity is lower as well as diabetes.

Oddly, New Orleans, with the best food in the world, also has high obesity but not so high diabetes.  A bit of exercise goes a long way, even if eating a roast beef po-boy :-)

I was shocked during my summer evacuation just how much HIGHLY processed food clogs the supermarket and how little basic foods.

I am used to a large selection of rice types, frozen and fresh vegetables and a limited selection of frozen pizza and hot pockets, gourmet popcorn, etc.  I found the reverse in the rest of America.

I have gained 20 lbs since moving to New Orleans, but it was GREAT tasting, well prepared food, not junk.  Quite frankly worth any reduction in lifespan.  Sex, laughter and good food are the primal pleasures of life.  McDonalds is not.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on February 19, 2006 - 12:58pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I ate a McDonalds once. 1978, in Wood Green north London. I'd never seen a McDonalds before, nor heard of them, it was probably among the first few in UK. Little did I know, LOL.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
knmnloyd on February 19, 2006 - 2:11pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In 2003, I visited my daughter, then active-duty Navy, in Iceland.  (Absolutely wonderful place, but that's the focus for another post).  We went to McDonalds one time in Keflavik or Reykjavik, (can't remember).  It cost us US $25 for a meal for two adults and one child, but the food there beat American McDonalds in taste, juiciness, etc. by an amazing amount.  I don't know what the standards are for other overseas McDonalds, but in Iceland, it's just about worth the consumption of all the transfats, etc. for actually a really good meal.
Of course, it didn't come close to the Icelandic fish, soups, bread and milk (where do they get it and why is it so good?) that we ate most of the time...
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
shawnott on February 19, 2006 - 2:22pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In 1998 while backpacking around Sweden,I was amazed how difficult it was to find a 'traditional Swedish meal' yet there were 25 McDonalds in Stockholm.

The only benefit to this was that at least I always knew where I could find a restroom. lol.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Magnus Redin on February 19, 2006 - 3:16pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The best bet for finding a traditional Swedish meal is at a simple lunch restaurant. Realy traditional Swedish food is food for heavy manual labor, lots of fat and starch. And often salt or sour taste from older ways of conserving food. I think black pepper, white pepper and mustard are the most common spices and cinnamon and saffron for deserts and very often cardamom for bread. But most important butter, cream and sugar. I do not think peak oil will change this. A chef will probaly give a better answer, I dont cook much.

The most common Swedish fast food is a fairly thin pizza with white cabbage salad with a mild sweet and sour taste and black pepper. Any place with a few hundred houses or more have a pizza baker that almost allways is run by an immigrant selling pizza and often kebab and fairly often cheap lager. 99% of the pizza owens run on electricity.

The first fast food that became common is the hot dog, it is still popular but has been complemented with hamburgers. There are probably more independent hamburger friers then McD, Burger King and Max (A local chain that is very Swedish in a 100% american way, good burgers made with a recipie more like swedish meatballs. ) Sushi is becomming very popular, probably due to the sweet and sour taste familiar from pickled herring.

We have as usual imported most american things including critizism of McDonalds. We have had and still have some young left wingnut green vegans who even burned down one McDonalds in my town a few years ago. This resulted in some more policework and people basically waiting for them to grow up. This seem to work but the next generation of left wingnuts seem to become extreme feminists. It is probably a phase in their lives some people go thru. :-) A need to hate. :-(

Myself I used to buy a McD hamburger of cup of cofee about two times each week untill they stopped serving bicyclists at the drive in a few meter from the main bicycle road to the university.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on February 19, 2006 - 2:31pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Yes, Icelandic milk is QUITE special. Better than kiwi milk ?

The butter and skyr are special as well).

The cows are a historic breed (no imported bulls/semen allowed) that has lower than typical milk production and they feed on grass and herbs )fresh 1/2 the year, hay the rest).  The herbs add something to the milk (I have noticed subtle differences, I assume based on diet).

And the pylsur !  Their hot dogs (think mutton :-)

Do the Kiwis make sheep based hot dogs ?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Proof on February 19, 2006 - 7:20pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"Portions might be smaller.  There's a theory that one reason Americans are so prone to obesity is that we have a surplus of food, thanks to agribusiness.  And being a good capitalist society, naturally, the solution to that problem is to try and get people to consume more.  Hence food is highly processed (because people will more of it, and you can charge a higher markup), and portions are huge.  (Why not supersize those fries, if potatoes are cheap?)  Many European countries, like France, have protected their small, local farmers.  So food is expensive, the portions much smaller - and the people are thinner.  (Though that's changing, as globalization brings in more McDonald's.)"

I have to disagree - the reason for American obesity is NOT a surplus of food - it is the type of food that we are eating - its the silly low-carbohydrate diet that has caused the problem - grains, potatoes, breads, pastas, pastries and sugar -- people eating a low-carbohydrate diet have to eat MORE in order to be "filled" - and being thinner is NOT a sign of good health ...

Thanks

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on February 19, 2006 - 7:52pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Umm, all those items you listed are high in carbs, right out of Ornish/Pritikin, aren't they?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 19, 2006 - 9:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I'm not sure what you're trying to say.  Pastries, grains, etc., are all carbohydrates.  A low-carb diet, which was a recent fad, emphasizes meat.  

It's not what we eat that matters. It's how much.  The food is highly processed, which makes it more likely we'll eat it.  (People will eat more potato chips than they will boiled potatoes.)  But it's the portion size that counts.  French food isn't exactly known for its health value, after all.

There have been studies done of potion sizes in the U.S., and they've gotten immense over the past 50 years.  McDonald's used to serve just hamburgers, what would be a very small drink now, and small fries.  Now few except children order the hamburgers; instead, they get QuarterPounders, BigMacs, etc.  The smallest drink is bigger than the one they used to sell, so is the smallest fries.  They aren't the only ones, either. CocaCola used to sell 5 oz. bottles of Coke.  Now cans are 16 oz., bottles are 20 oz., and 64 oz. or larger cups are common on fast food and convenience stores.  Bagels are more than twice as large as they used to be, and muffins are something like five times as big.  Even the standard dinner plate has gotten larger.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on February 19, 2006 - 9:41pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
If that wasn't tongue in cheek then I totally disagree.

When I look round an american diner the ones that are eating the two plate meals are the grossly fat ones. The obesity problem is a combination of three main factors: sedentary lifestyle, near unlimited access to food, poor choice of food.

For most people the problem can be solved by awareness and willpower, should they choose. Though peak oil and recession may come to the rescue of the uninformed and weak willed soon enough.

Being excessively thin or excessively fat are both signs of ill health, for maybe 70% of americans being thinner would be a sign of better health, LOL.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

232 comments on Saturday open thread

Comments can no longer be added to this story.