<The Specter of RecessionThe Oil DrumDrumBeat: October 5, 2006>

67 comments on A slight feeling of disquiet

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Dave Cohen on October 5, 2006 - 9:32am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
They do indeed know what they are doing.

The Asian Times remains one of my favorite information sources.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
totoneila on October 5, 2006 - 9:47am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Hello Dave Cohen,

I agree, thus the sooner we abandon the '3 Days of the Condor' scenario, the better off we will be as a country.  IMO, the govt. should be rapidly moving ahead to shift most of the labor force to relocalized living and permaculture.

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az  Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
NC on October 5, 2006 - 11:07am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Dave and Toneila,

Agree and I am pushing for more manufacturing base in the midwest.  Historically manufacturing followed available energy.  New England water begot mills.  Pennsylvania coal begot foundries.  Texas oil begot refineries.  Each step led to manufacturing of goods based on what raw materials were produced.  Mills = food, cloth, lumber.  Foundries = metals, tools, building components.  Refineries = carbon compounds, plastics, portable energy.  All of these industries are now offshore with labor following them.

We need a new energy base of biofuels, wind and solar which will lead to ---- what?  Whatever it is will require labor and new plant construction.  The point is not to grow the economy so much, as to employ people to make things locally.  Lots of multiplication of the money when there is a good manufacturing base locally.  And I am convinced we need to be producing the energy locally to get that base back.

It doesn't matter if this isn't as much as currently provided by fossil fuels.  New England had a thriving economy based on water power 250 years ago using a fraction of the energy they use now.  It's the difference between making and buying that leads to a viable economy.  We only buy now and that has to change.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Don in Colorado on October 5, 2006 - 12:57pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Relocalizing is great, but the people who have the guns (U.S., Britain, Israel) have already committed to the opposite view. There'll be a great war lasting for generations, and when it's over, they'll somehow end up on top.

I watch the western banking system (the real power), and so far they're staying with imperial plan. I suppose they realize if global capitalism dies, they die, too.

So the wealth needed to rebuild and relocalize our towns, cities and countryside is instead going into the vast military machine.

I feel like such a meaningless bystander in all this ...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Oilrig medic on October 5, 2006 - 12:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Bob,

If you hit the eject button on your DVD player you can remove your 2 days of the Condor DVD and put in some other movie.  

Matt

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
totoneila on October 6, 2006 - 5:41pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Hello Oilrig Medic,

Thxs for responding.  I think that scenario best expresses worldwide detritovore desire, therefore I encourage all to post it as often as possible until we see a worldwide shift to a more appropriate direction.  I often wonder what degree of future horror will be ignored by the average American.  The population declines in Iraq, Darfur, and other places don't seem to concern most Americans now.  If 2/3 of Mexico dies due to energy shortages: will Americans be shocked, or just accept that as normal routine?  If 1/3 of Americans are in hard labor camps under a harsh Govt. boot: will the other 2/3 still applaud these actions as long as they have food and water?  I think they will.  Consider this link on Dieoff:

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az  Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jack on October 7, 2006 - 7:37am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Eject the DVD !
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jerome a Paris on October 5, 2006 - 5:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I tend to be skeptical of the Asia Times. They often have a superficial knowledge of the energy sector, but weave partial facts into apparently convincing big theories.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Don in Colorado on October 5, 2006 - 5:40pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
What about this particular article, Jerome?

Does the world submit to becoming resource colonies of the West? Or does Asia/Middle East have its own plans for the future?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jerome a Paris on October 5, 2006 - 6:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
As I wrote recently over at eurotrib, Europe's current energy policy seems to be "you arrogant Russians had better give us your gas cheaply, or else we'll call you a nasty imperialist dictatorship", so it's no surprise that Russia is (i) reacting somewhat incredulously, and (ii) hinting at other plans.

But the fact is that all Russian pipelines (both for oil and gas) go West for now, and those that will eventually go East (i) are far from being built, (ii) will use other reserve areas than the Western ones to be filled, (iii) bump against China's unwillingness to pay more for natgas than prices used to be in the good ol' days ($2-3/MBTU), and (iv) are still subject ot Russia's games viz. Japan and China.

So sure, Russia and China talks. I'm not convinced it means much in practice, in the short term anyway.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dave Cohen on October 5, 2006 - 6:32pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Sorry, Jerome, but this strikes me as a bit naive. Russia & China are in this for the long haul -- many years. It's just commonsense to believe that American "hegemony" is part of the target. North American natural gas production is declining. One needn't be Sir Isaac Newton to figure this out. Russia and China are clearly making separate plans together. It's all about political leverage. Pipelines can be built. It takes a while to turn an elephant around. Russia's got the gas, China's got the T-bills, what's the problem?

But there's more. Qatari gas is not secure. They are just a few miles away from Iran across the Persian Gulf. Iran is aligned politically with Russia and China. Again, I say, you don't have to be genius to figure this out. The world's changing but you dismiss it.

I can't read where you are coming from on this stuff. Why do you downplay these obvious reports?

What's the link on your Eurotrib article?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Don in Colorado on October 6, 2006 - 1:21am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Jeez, I hope Europe doesn't dismiss Cheney, Putin, China, etc., as baffoons unworthy of serious consideration.

I think this is the great game, the resource war, and I think it's all extremely dangerous.

I like France; I like how it's prepared (somewhat) for peak oil. I like its preservation of local agriculture. I love Paris.

But France will not be immune if this all goes badly.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jerome a Paris on October 6, 2006 - 4:53pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Don't mistake me, I am not dismissing any of them. Just saying that their public pronouncements, their desires and the reality can be 3 different things. And as I am in the business of actually putting up the money (someone else's, but still) to pay for that reality, i think I have a decdent grasp of what's feasible and what's less so - and thus what's bluster, what's bluff, what's grandstanding, what's wishful thinking and what's ignorance.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jerome a Paris on October 6, 2006 - 4:49pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I did note that this was not significant in the short term. I am also skeptical in the medium term. In the long term, the intense rivalry between China and Russia might reasssert itself, so it's hard t osay what would happen. I'd be Russian, I'd be wary to commit myself to a pipeline with a single (Chinese) client.

Thus the attractiveness of LNG, more easily tradeable. The trouble is that the LNG chain is surprisingly hard to master. Iran has proved totally incapable of it, and Russia is discovering that it is harder than pipelines.

We'll see, but i am not convinced that Russia's long term strategic interests are aligned with China's. Taking advantage jointly of the absolute stupidity of the current White House host is one thing, committing to the allies of the moment for much longer is another.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.