DrumBeat: June 6, 2007

Americans not very big on very small cars: Even with high gas prices, tiny minicars unlikely to make waves, study says

Despite a rush to offer them the smallest fuel-sipping cars, it seems one aphorism is likely to ring true for some time when it comes to Americans and their cars — size matters.

Persistently high gasoline price have spurred automakers to make plans to introduce tiny cars into the U.S. market, beginning early next year, when Mercedes Car Group plans to begin selling tiny, two-seater Smart models. At the New York auto show in April, General Motors unveiled three small Chevrolet concept cars aimed at young car buyers in urban markets.

But research from consulting firm CSM Worldwide shows that American consumers are not very big on very small cars, which are popular in many markets around the world because they are so fuel efficient and easy to park.

Enbridge, Exxon forge link to Texas refineries - A Pipeline from Calgary to Houston?

"Exxon Mobil has said to us it makes no sense to ship crude away from this continent," said Steven Paget, an analyst at FirstEnergy Capital in Calgary.

"This continent needs more oil than it produces -- it should not be shipping crude overseas." He added that Mexican production could slide sharply in the next years.

Bitumen production from the oil sands could rise to 1.9 million barrels a day by 2010 and 3.1 million by 2016, up from 1.25 million last year, according to new numbers yesterday from Alberta's energy regulator.

It is a "round one" victory for U.S. refiners over competitors in China, according to Stephen Calderwood, a Raymond James Financial Inc. analyst.


Why no one's making more gas

Motorists must get tired of hearing how refinery problems are causing high gasoline prices.

In a free-market economy, if there really was such a shortage (most experts say there is), and refining profits are so high (any oil company earnings report will attest they are), then why aren't people building more refineries?


Iraqi unions fight to keep oil out of corporate hands

The Bush administration calls the Iraq occupation an exercise in democracy building. Yet from the beginning, many of the Iraqis who want democracy most are treated as its enemies - Iraq's unions.


Uganda: Oil Discovery - Curse Or a Masked Blessing?

BLACK gold or commercially viable oil deposits have been discovered in Uganda generating quite a buzz what the future will look like when oil dollars start flowing into resource starved government programs. So far little public discussion has gone on about that future.


Green group hits at Canada over oil sands

Canada is unlikely to be able to hit its target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 because of the rapid growth of its oil sands industry, a leading research group has warned.


Richard Heinberg's Museletter - The Oil Depletion Protocol: An Update

My book The Oil Depletion Protocol: A Plan to Avert Oil Wars, Terrorism and Economic Collapse was released eight months ago; given the importance of its subject, I thought an update might be useful.

Relevant developments during these few months have been both encouraging and discouraging.


Dems' energy-policy plans worry oil and gas industry

Democrats, sensing growing consumer angst over high gas prices and a winning political issue in tightening the screws on "Big Oil," are moving ahead in the House and Senate to produce energy legislation — and to do it quickly.


China's Axis of Oil

It is not difficult to find examples of China's growing ties with the Middle East. Although Beijing's primary focus in the region concerns access to oil and gas, the resulting increase in foreign direct investment and trade between the two regions is redefining geopolitics.


Ecuador launches campaign to keep oil underground

Ecuador offered on Tuesday to drop plans to develop the country's biggest oilfield if wealthy nations pay it to safeguard pristine land near the proposed drill site.

Leftist President Rafael Correa hopes developed countries and environmental groups will pay the poor South American nation about $350 million annually to leave the oil in the ground and reduce carbon dioxide emissions to slow global warming.


Former World Bank Energy Specialist on China's Renewable Energy Development

Martinot believes that China will have no problem achieving its targets for different forms of renewable energy, such as hydro, wind, biomass, solar power and bio-fuel. However, Martinot's concerns remain regarding biomass because of insufficient raw materials, solar power because of its high costs and bio-fuel because of its technology and the wide dispersion of raw materials. He further suggested that the Chinese government should set higher power tariffs for renewable energy, which would mean larger profits, in order to attract more players to the market.


Biofuel can help poor as well as climate: FAO

However, the person in charge of energy policy at the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said biofuel was getting a bad press and, rather than being a threat to the poor, it could boost food production as well as wealth.

"It's probably the best opportunity there has been since the 'green revolution' to bring really a new wind of development in rural areas," Gustavo Best told Reuters in an interview.

He was referring to the huge increase in food production in the developing world, aided in part by new plant technologies that came into vogue in the 1960s.


Vatican auditorium's roof to be covered with photovoltaic cells to save energy

Some of the Holy See buildings will start using solar energy, reflecting Pope Benedict XVI's worry about squandering the Earth's resources, said a Vatican engineer who came up with the idea.


Abu Dhabi's green move gathers pace

Last month the Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company (Masdar) launched a $5 billion initiative to establish the world's first totally green city in Abu Dhabi.


OPEC Could Rethink Post-2012 Expansion Plan

OPEC members responsible for 40% of the world's oil production capacity could rethink their capacity expansion plans beyond 2012, according to the group's Secretary-general Abdalla Salem el-Badri, unless dialog with consuming countries gives them assurances over future demand.

In an interview with Dow Jones Newswires, el-Badri said there was little enthusiasm among Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries members to spend billions on idle oil capacity.


George Soros to invest $900 million in Brazilian ethanol

US finance tycoon George Soros said Tuesday that he will invest $900 million in the production of ethanol in Brazil, and demanded that the US and EU open their markets for the biofuel produced in the South American country.


The five myths of the transition towards biofuels

The five myths

1. Biofuels are clean and protect the environment

2. Biofuels do not cause deforestation

3. Biofuels allow for rural development

4. Biofuels do not cause starvation

5. Biofuels of "the second generation" are within reach


Combustion engine set to dominate for 25 years, say experts

Engines driven by petrol or diesel will continue to dominate for another 25 years, mainly because the alternative systems still display teething troubles, are too expensive or because other sources of energy are simply not available in sufficient quantity.


Oil Prices Rise With Fears Cyclone Gonu May Hit Southern Iran

A Black Swan, by the way, is the term philosopher Nassim Taleb uses for a low probability, high impact event; they are so named because until Europeans found Black Swans everywhere in Australia, they were considered so rare as to be statistically insignificant. A cyclone impairing or destroying production capacity in the world’s most important oil region certainly qualifies as a Black Swan.

But here’s the thing. As Taleb points out, Black Swans are not as rare in financial markets as today’s modern financial models would suggest. They are more common than you’d expect. And the funny thing is, as the world’s financial markets become more complex and more integrated, Black Swans seem to be taking flight with increasing frequency. Hmm.


All World War III, All the Time

The Russians, Tom Clancy's old reliable villains, are back. The American techno-thriller author has lent his name to several computer games, including the intricate new title from Ubisoft known as EndWar.

The video game's back scenario? In the next twenty years, America deploys a space weapons system to protect the U.S. and Europe from nuclear attack, while a sullen Russia stays out of the missile shield club. A few years later, the world's peak oil doomsayers are suddenly proven right and all of the world's major oil producers - except for Russia - are found to have massively inflated their reserves. The resulting collapse of the world economy puts a remilitarized Russia on a collision course with the America and Europe.


Putting Peak Oil to the Test in 2007

One of the most telling signs that we're experiencing the effects of peak oil is the unprecedented price oil is reaching. If I were writing just a few months ago, I'd mention how OPEC was comfortable with a barrel of oil trading at $50. But now they're saying they're happy with oil between $60 and $65 a barrel.


The G8: Not the Only Show In Town

Given the centrality of oil not only to current geo-politics but also to the politics of global warming, it is interesting to recall that the G7 is a by-product of the 1973 oil crisis. Almost 35 years later, the now-G8 -- Russia was formally admitted in 1998 -- is again facing a crisis of global energy policies brought about by the increased public pressure for action to reduce carbon gas emissions, the looming fact of peak oil and, not least, the G8's incapacity over the past three decades to think beyond their own interests. But in 2007, the situation is very different from the 'unglobalised' world of 1973 (although with some surprising similarities) and the G8 is not the only game in town.


Throwing a Dart at the Natural Gas Dartboard

Whether you believe in abrupt climate change and global warming or not, growing legions of investors are betting in that direction. Whether their bets are placed on wind farms or solar panels, it may not matter much. We looked to the one sector which has been pummeled over the past 15 months. Most investors have avoided it like the plague.

We believe natural gas is primed to heat up – as early as this month.


Bharat Petroleum Expects Profit to Triple by 2010

Bharat Petroleum will boost output to meet energy shortages in the world's second-fastest growing major economy. India's fuel imports rose 30 percent to 17 million metric tons in the year ended March 31 and a shortage of natural gas has shut about 5,000 megawatts of gas-fired power generation capacity.


Thieves siphoning diesel from construction machines

In addition to securing equipment parked on work sites, a construction company is finding that rising petroleum prices mean it now must guard against theft of the fuel from the parked machines.

Jay C. Fulkroad & Sons Inc., of McAlisterville, has had at least 600 gallons of diesel fuel stolen in two recent thefts from its parked equipment, more than $1,700 worth at current prices, said Gerald Fulkroad, the company president.


Natural gas prices at highest since December

Sparked by worries about hot weather and a busy hurricane season, natural gas prices have jumped in the last week to the highest since December. Tuesday, the price for natural gas trading in New York for delivery in July closed at $8.064 per million British thermal units. Although that was slightly lower than the previous day's close, it was 25% above the price seen a year ago.

For consumers, the higher natural gas prices mean heating costs could be elevated this winter for the most popular heating source in the USA if the gains hold. Increased natural gas prices also could lead to higher electricity costs later this summer to power air conditioners, because a large amount of electricity is generated with natural gas.


Oil gives unhappy Nigerians leverage

Young boys scamper along weed-entangled pipes, transforming an oil-pumping station marked "Not In Use" into a jungle gym in the heart of Nigeria's lawless oil region. Nearby wells rust under the palm trees, and gas-flaring chimneys have gone cold.

The scene in Ogoniland, where villagers ousted oil companies in the 1990s, offers a glimpse of the industry's worst-case scenario: an absolute shutdown of production across the Niger Delta, where strife has already cut production by a quarter.


Resource Wars - Can We Survive Them?

With the world's energy supplies finite, the US heavily dependent on imports, and "peak oil" near or approaching, "security" for America means assuring a sustainable supply of what we can't do without. It includes waging wars to get it, protect it, and defend the maritime trade routes over which it travels. That means energy's partnered with predatory New World Order globalization, militarism, wars, ecological recklessness, and now an extremist US administration willing to risk Armageddon for world dominance. Central to its plan is first controlling essential resources everywhere, at any cost, starting with oil and where most of it is located in the Middle East and Central Asia.


It's time to stop doing nothing about oil depletion

Our economy is dependent not just on oil but on cheap oil. When petroleum gets more expensive, businesses will fail because fewer people will be able to afford their products. And when businesses start failing, still fewer people will be out there shopping and supporting the economy. It won't be pretty.


Calif. sees sprawl as warming culprit

California is pioneering what could be the next battleground against global warming: filing suit to hold cities and counties accountable for greenhouse gas emissions caused by poorly planned suburban sprawl.


Inland Empire's 25-year growth targeted

[Marin County] took a forceful approach to greenhouse gases in a growth plan likely to be approved this year. The county set up standards to measure greenhouse gases and set targets for reducing them.

Surrounded on three sides by water, Marin also started planning for possible rising sea levels, as polar ice melts, by identifying areas that shouldn't be developed or, if already built might need sea walls and levees. Marin has long had a progressive, "green" electorate, so fighting global warming came naturally, says community development director Alex Hinds. "We feel fortunate that our population recognizes these concerns," he says.


Auto execs go to Hill to discuss mileage

The heads of the domestic auto industry are pressing congressional leaders to revisit a plan to increase fuel efficiency standards that automakers say could hurt their industry.


No G8 accord on global warming cuts: US

The Group of Eight summit final communique will not set long-term targets for cutting the emissions that cause global warming, an advisor to US President George W. Bush said Wednesday.


China balks at emissions caps

China echoed the Bush administration's stance on global warming Monday, refusing to set firm caps on its greenhouse-gas emissions and saying that economic growth remained its "first and overriding priority."

Drive on biofuels risks oil price surge

Opec on Tuesday warned western countries that their efforts to develop biofuels as an alternative energy source to combat climate change risked driving the price of oil “through the roof”.

I heard this report on Marketplace (the public radio show); they had a commentator from the Financial Times of London, who noted that biofuels will have no appreciable impact on woridwide demand for petroleum for decades, that OPEC hadn't been able to increase oil production for some time and was probably at peak production, and that Cyclone Gonu was going to impact prices of oil and gas here and in Japan dramatically in the next two weeks, so everyone shoudl be prepared. Well, that is what he should have said. Instead, he took the threat as something serious, thus giving Americans the impression that biofuels can actually do something about the death grip that KSA has on the American economy, and further lulling us all to sleep.

If OPEC really wanted to destroy biofuels, they would open the proverbial taps and drive oil prices to the floor.

But they can't. You know it and I know it.

The cartel is backed into a corner and they have no option but to resort to scaremonger tactics with a biofuel boogeyman.

If you can find a quote from a biofuel proponent who believes that petroleum demand will decrease because of biofuel usage... then by all be means post up!

Yeah, sounds like a cheap excuse they are looking for.

On the Paris OPEC meeting (2005?) some oil minister from Arabia spoke about doubts in regard of future oil demand.

I was really astonished about that - if there is one sure thing it is the quenchless western thirst for oil, or am I wrong? That's definetely something they can count on for decades.

From Biopact:

"In two different interviews ahead of the G8 summit, OPEC secretary-general Abdalla El-Badri contradicts himself: in the first, he says biofuels threaten oil investments and may cause petroleum prices to go "through the roof", whereas in the other, he says the cartel does not feel threatened by climate change measures aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions, of which biofuels are an important part"

Round and round we go.

If you can find a quote from a biofuel proponent who believes that petroleum demand will decrease because of biofuel usage... then by all be means post up!

What is this, a trick question? Must you post challenges that I can meet, all day long, with half my brain tied behind my back?

President Bush, Please Declare a War on Oil!

My analysis shows 39 billion gallons of biofuels production is possible in the United States at reasonable cost by 2017 on 19 million acres, and 139 billion gallons by 2030 on 49 million acres. Soon we will be replacing all 150 billion gallons of gasoline that we use on a very small fraction of our agricultural lands while improving the environmental quality of our agriculture (through corn/soy and biomass crop rotation schemes) and improving our rural economy.

Says Vinod Khosla, who is also making these claims to the folks formulating our energy policies.

No Robert not usage - demand.

There's quite a difference between biofuels replacing petroleum usage vs. biofuels reducing petroleum demand.

I've cordially stated as such on prior occasion so please untie your brain and find a quote from a biofuel proponent who has stated that petroleum demand will be reduced because of biofuels.

There's quite a difference between biofuels replacing petroleum usage vs. biofuels reducing petroleum demand.

If biofuels replace 150 billion gallons of gasoline usage, then they have replaced 150 billion gallons of gasoline demand. Perhaps you can clarify what you think the difference is.

To save yourself some time, Google ethanol and "reduce petroleum demand." You will find many instances of ethanol advocates stating that ethanol can/will/may reduce petroleum demand.

As I said, there is nothing to your challenge. Even if you do think that reducing gasoline usage by 150 billion barrels is not a reduction in gasoline demand.

And besides, wasn't reducing petroleum demand or usage kind of the point in developing ethanol? Or was it just to make a heavily subsidized buck? If it is not supposed to reduce demand or usage, then it is more worthless than I thought.

I am not interested in Google search parameters.

I've asked you and other TODers to find me a quote from a biofuel proponent who has stated that petroleum demand will decrease as result of biofuel usage. This is a rather simple request that so far no one has been able to fill.

Nor for that matter, will the choosing of an arbitrary number deflect the standing of my position.

For example: If I were to replace 10 barrels of gasoline on the world market with 10 barrels of ethanol would demand for those 10 barrels of gasoline be removed? No, of course not. How about 100 million barrels? Same effect. Why?

Because demand for petroleum and its byproducts i.e. gasoline is ever increasing and for all intents and purposes, will not cease until it’s all gone.

If this assertion wasn’t fundamentally true, then the IEA and EIA would have nice charts detailing the future demand of gasoline as sloping down and away into negative territory.

I've asked you and other TODers to find me a quote from a biofuel proponent who has stated that petroleum demand will decrease as result of biofuel usage.

That's what I gave you. You just wish to apply your own definition of demand in order to avoid the conclusion. I am pretty familiar with that tactic.

Do you know how the EIA, keeper of U.S. energy statistics, defines demand? Product supplied to the market. If gasoline supplied to the market went to zero, then demand went to zero. So I am really not interested in your special version of demand. Biofuels advocates are saying that biofuels are going to displace gasoline. You know, that whole 20 in 10 meme? So, the fact remains, no matter what your definition of "is" is.

You did not fulfill the request and the patronizing EIA comment is uncalled for.

Product supply and product demand are not the same -ECON 101- but since you’ve decided to 3rd party the EIAs definition as your own, are we to assume that during the Arab oil embargo when 1000’s of people were lined up in their cars at service stations that did not have gasoline to sell, that demand for gasoline did not exist?

“Biofuels advocates are saying that biofuels are going to displace gasoline.” – which has been the crux of my position all along.

Biofuel usage displaces gasonline usage. This is a measurable fact.

Biofuel usage does not, however, reduce gasoline demand. To erroneously infer otherwise and assign such inferences to participants in the biofuel sector is your own personal agenda.

Biofuel usage does not, however, reduce gasoline demand.

You are confusing fuel demand with gasoline demand. If I can put either ethanol or gasoline in my car, and I choose ethanol, then my gasoline demand went down. But my fuel demand did not.

And there was nothing patronizing about the EIA comment. I am just pointing out that my use of demand is exactly the same as theirs.

Syntec,

Yes he did fulfill the request. You are just posturing to avoid his clear answer. This is annoying.

ciao,
Bruce

Unfortunately, 40 gallons of petroleum are used to grow one acre of corn. Factor in the petroleum used to move corn to market and to get ethanol back to the market, other depletable energy sources like natural gas used to make fertilizer to grow the corn, to run the distiller...

Ethanol produced from corn is a scam.

Best case scenario gives a slight increase in energy. Best case scenarios rarely hold up in the real world.

I did inhale.

"There's quite a difference between biofuels replacing petroleum usage vs. biofuels reducing petroleum demand."
key part biofuels reducing petroleum demand
Maybe not that far from the truth. Food or fuel will become a serious issue IMHO just a matter of when.
Hay prices are way up $120- $130 ton vrs $85 - $90 last year.
Milk prices are up too.
Rising fuel costs is like a rising tide.

food "usage" will soon go down as the "demand" evaporates in the face of high prices.

People can live on 1000 calories/day. But they won't like it.

Think of it this way LNG.

You eat apples. LOVE apples, can't get enough of them. Apples in fact, are needed for sustenance by you, your family, your society and like a hamster on a treadmill, demand for these apples is ever increasing but there's a twist - the supply of apples is finite (which is key to the concept).

One day, someone brings you oranges. You now have the choice of eating either apples or oranges or BOTH.

Oranges are not finite. They're a nice change for certain and although you could switch to eating just oranges, there really aren't enough oranges to go around for everyone to do so.

Will demand for finite, society sustaining apples decrease because oranges are being eaten as well or will you not free up more apples for those who weren't getting enough in the first place?

Jevon's paradox no?

No one is bringing you anything - you're buying it. The apples are steadily getting more expensive and the oranges have always cost more than the apples, and still do. Even worse, for some reason the increased availability of oranges means that lots of other important goods are more scarce and cost more, too.

IOW, you are actually being less efficient by eating oranges, so Jevons Paradox does not apply.

Oh man this could turn into a messy fruit salad real quick =]

Ok, I buy the oranges and yes, I agree that the increased availabilty of some 'types' of oranges means that lots of other important goods may become more scarce and cost more too.

Would you not agree, however, that the orange-related scarcity and cost concerns of these other goods, are absolutely miniscule when compared to what is going to happen when apple prices go through the roof? Or worse, when apples are no longer available?

No, I suspect all those prices will rise together. More and more people will not get apples or oranges.

This weekend I'm supposed to be driving out to a hydroelectic power station in a car hired by someone on a rostered break from their job at an outback gas field. The hydro dams are low and the gas field only has a few years left, yet these are the prime sources of peaking power. What will replace them? Countries like Germany are shutting down their nukes in favour of importing more Russian gas. Seems like we're speeding down a dead end street.

Maybe we will learn to live with variable power. Blackouts in some areas, when power is too low. Manufacturing carried out when electricity is available.

will learn to live with variable power.

*clap* *clap*

Some things are going to fall under the 'need' 'continuous power' and the restart costs justify many expenses to have such power. (Refineries, steel mills to keep the furnace hot, I'm sure there are others) Many others are wants people think are needs.

So the whole PV/Wind suck because they can't provide 24/7 will get a smack upside the head of 'Ok, at least we have power'

Precisely.

At some point, the geniuses will see that 150 years of our oily 'Big Gulp' is in fact LESS stable and dependable than the Sun coming up every day for Billions of years, the tide traveling back and forth like a piston 4 times a day..

I'd like to see a fridge with an overbuilt compressed refridgerant tank, so it could have some potential to make it through brownouts or scheduled power.

To those who say they'd never believe people would compromise their full-time power.. I guess it's unthinkable to them that we may not have a seat at that negotiating table.

Make hay while the sun shines!

Bob

I'd like to see a fridge with an overbuilt compressed refridgerant tank,

1) Many parts of humanity lack refrigeration. ANY kind of bacteria retard-ing, decomposition stopping tech would be a plus.

2) Insulation, combined with a tank placed inside the insulation envelope would be a good plan.

To those who say they'd never believe people would compromise their full-time power..

What is better - you moving some tool with your muscle (plus guiding the tool) or you using some power tool where you are just guiding the tool?

Spotty electrical power + machines is FAR BETTER than just plain old human muscles.

(Today, when the power was out I just shrugged and thought how much better off I was than Africans or the people who are in Baghdad.)

The only way I could ever see that happening is by having reliable information about energy availability in advance. You just can't have dozens or hundreds of men idling around and waiting for something that *might* happen.

... In his first book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins told the story of his work as a highly paid consultant hired to strong-arm leaders into creating policy favorable to the US government and corporations, what he calls the “corporatocracy.” ... John Perkins has just come out with his second book on this issue. It’s called The Secret History of the American Empire: Economic Hit Men, Jackals and the Truth about Global Corruption.

We work many different ways, but perhaps the most common one is that we will identify a third world country that has resources our corporations covet, such as oil, and then we arrange a huge loan to that country from the World Bank or one of its sister organizations. The money never actually goes to the country. It goes instead to US corporations, who build big infrastructure projects -- power grids, industrial parks, harbors, highways -- things that benefit a few very rich people but do not reach the poor at all. The poor aren’t connected to the power grids. They don’t have the skills to get jobs in industrial parks. But they and the whole country are left holding this huge debt, and it’s such a big bet that the country can't possibly repay it. So at some point in time, we economic hit men go back to the country and say, “Look, you know, you owe us a lot of money. You can't pay your debt, so you’ve got to give us a pound of flesh.”

When I was sent to Ecuador as a Peace Corps volunteer in 1968, Texaco had just gone into Ecuador, and the promise to the Ecuadorian people at that time from Texaco and their own politicians and the World Bank was oil is going to pull this country out of poverty. And people believed it. I believed it at the time. The exact opposite has happened. Oil has made the country much more impoverished, while Texaco has made fortunes off this. It’s also destroyed vast areas of the Amazon rainforest.

So the lawsuit today that’s being brought by a New York lawyer and some Ecuadorian lawyers -- Steve Donziger here in New York -- is for $6 billion, the largest environmental lawsuit in the history of the world, in the name of 30,000 Ecuadorian people against Texaco, which is now owned by Chevron, for dumping over eighteen billion gallons of toxic waste into the Ecuadorian rainforest. That’s thirty times more than the Exxon Valdez. And dozens and dozens of people have died and are continuing to die of cancer and other pollution-related diseases in this area of the Amazon. So all this oil has come out of this area, and it’s the poorest area of one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere. And the irony of that is just so amazing.

But what I think -- one of the really significant things about this, Amy, is that this law firm has taken this on, not pro bono, but they expect if they win the case, which they expect to do, to make a lot of money off of it, which is a philosophical decision. It isn’t because they wanted to get rich off this. It’s because they want to encourage other law firms to do similar things in Nigeria and in Indonesia and in Bolivia, in Venezuela and many other places. So they want to see a business grow out of this, of law firms going in and defending poor people, knowing that they can get a payoff from the big companies who have acted so terribly, terribly, terribly irresponsibly in the past.

And Steve Donziger, the attorney -- I was in Ecuador with him just two weeks ago -- and one of the very touching things he said is -- he’s an American attorney with, you know, very good credentials, and he says, “You know, I’ve seen a lot of companies make mistakes and then try to defend themselves in law courts.” And he said, “That’s one thing. But in this case, Texaco didn’t make mistakes. This was done with intent. They knew what they were doing. To save a few bucks, they killed a lot of people.” And now they’re going to be forced to pay for that, to take responsibility for that, and hopefully open the door to make many companies take responsibility for the wanton destruction that’s occurred.

The whole story of Africa and the Congo is such a devastating and sad one. And it’s the hidden story, really. We in the United States don’t even talk about Africa. We don’t think about Africa. You know, Congo has something called coltan, which probably most of your listeners may not have even heard of, but every cell phone and laptop computer has coltan in it. And several million people in the last few years in the Congo have been killed over coltan, because you and I and all of us in the G8 countries demand low -- or at least we want to see our computers inexpensive and our cell phones inexpensive. And, of course, the companies that make these sell them on that basis, that “Oh, here, mine’s $200 less than the other company.” But in order to do that, these people in the Congo are being enslaved. The miners, the people mining coltan, they’re being killed. There’s these vast wars going on to provide us with cheap coltan.

I think it’s very sad and very telling, once again, that the Israeli people, for the most part, are led to believe that they’ve been given this land as a payoff, basically, for the Holocaust, because they deserve to be recompensed. And, of course, the Holocaust was terrible, and they do deserve to be taken care of and recompensed and have stability.

But why would we locate that place in the middle of the Arab world, their traditional enemies? Why would we locate that place in such an unstable area? It’s because it is serving as a huge fortress for us in the biggest oil fields known in the world today, and we knew this when Israel was located there. And I think the Israeli people have been terribly exploited in this process.

So, in fact, we built this vast military base, armed camp, in the middle of the Middle Eastern oil fields that are surrounded by the Arab communities, and in the process, we’ve obviously created a tremendous amount of resentment and anger and a situation that it’s very difficult to see any positive outcome there. But the fact of the matter is, our having this military base in Israel has been a huge defense for us. It’s been a place where we could really launch attacks, rely on. It’s been our equivalent of the Crusaders’ castles in the Middle East. ...

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/05/149254

from the comment above:

When I was sent to Ecuador as a Peace Corps volunteer in 1968, Texaco had just gone into Ecuador, and the promise to the Ecuadorian people at that time from Texaco and their own politicians and the World Bank was oil is going to pull this country out of poverty. And people believed it. I believed it at the time. The exact opposite has happened. Oil has made the country much more impoverished, while Texaco has made fortunes off this. It’s also destroyed vast areas of the Amazon rainforest.

I joined the Peace Corps in 1962 -- while in training, JFK was assassinated. I was sent to Brazil, and in the first week I was there, the military "revolted" against the elected civilian government. Only 40 years later was it confirmed that the U.S. CIA engineered the "coup."

I went to the Northeast of Brazil, recently "liberated" from communists by the "coup." Sugar cane was the major cash crop, but world price was extremely low, and sugar cane ethanol was just getting started with grants from U.S. government, and who knows where else.

No conpiracy here -- just the first visible glimmering of the neocon/neoliberal revolution that is sweeping the world, fuelled entirely by cheap fossil fuel.

Things will look different as the revolutionary tide recedes on the drawdown of geologically stored hydrocarbons.

Excuse me if this is too "off topic", but I was wondering if any of our fellow readers has seen any episode of the TV series Jericho (broadcasted in the US, but available in the internets if you know what I mean).

JERICHO is a drama about what happens when a nuclear mushroom cloud suddenly appears on the horizon, plunging the residents of a small, peaceful Kansas town into chaos, leaving them completely isolated and wondering if they're the only Americans left alive. Fear of the unknown propels Jericho into social, psychological and physical mayhem when all communication and power is shut down. The town starts to come apart at the seams as terror, anger and confusion bring out the very worst in some residents. Jake Green (Skeet Ulrich), prodigal son of the town's mayor, becomes a reluctant hero when a school bus crashes as a result of the explosion. Mayor Johnston Green (Gerald McRaney) is conflicted with the return of his estranged son, but is called to action when the town begins to riot. Johnston's wife, Gail (Pamela Reed), is the strong, savvy first lady of the town who runs interference between her husband and her favorite son. Attempting to usurp the mayor's power is Johnston's political adversary, Gray Anderson (Michael Gaston), who is not above putting his personal agenda before the welfare of the very community he wants to lead.

What I found interesting is the similarities between the worst doom and gloom scenarios (caused by peak oil) and some of the situations shown in the series: Jericho makes a deal with a neighborg town in exchange for some wind mills to produce energy, the problems with food, roaming militias, etc, etc.

BTW, the show has been cancelled.

I never watched it (I don't watch much TV, except news and sports). But several of my friends did. (I hang with a sci-fi crowd, when I'm not here in peak freak land. ;-) They were disappointed. They thought it was going to be a nuclear holocaust survivor type story, like On the Beach or Alas, Babylon. But apparently, the producers felt that they needed to be more like "24," to get the coveted young male demographic, and the show became a strange mishmash that turned everyone off.

(I hang with a sci-fi crowd, when I'm not here in peak freak land. ;-)

You mean...you actually leave?

;)

Some people claim this site is the sci fi crowd.