 | Steve Andrews of ASPO on CNBC | The Oil Drum | Old Sunlight vs Ancient Sunlight -An Analysis of Home Heating and Wood |  |
DrumBeat: July 11, 2007
Posted by Leanan on July 11, 2007 - 8:56am
Topic: Miscellaneous
Kuwait says has 100 billion barrel oil reserve
OPEC-member Kuwait reiterated Wednesday that it had oil reserves of 100 billion barrels, again disputing a report that the figure was around half that amount."We confirm that Kuwait's oil reserves are 100 billion barrels," acting oil minister Mohammad al-Olaim told reporters after briefing parliament in a closed-door session about the levels of reserves in the Gulf emirate.
Mexican gas explosions force shutdowns
Honda, Hershey's and other multinational companies temporarily shut down their factories in western Mexico on Wednesday after rebels attacked a key natural gas pipeline....At least a dozen companies including Honda Motor Co., Kellogg Co.'s, The Hershey Co., Nissan Motor Co., and Grupo Modelo SA were forced to suspend or scale back operations because of the lack of natural gas, the daily newspaper Excelsior reported. They said they faced millions of dollars in losses.
Oil supplies are down and alternatives not yet available
A rule of thumb for the price of oil in the past five years has been to take the last digit of the year and add a zero: 2002 saw prices in the $20s; 2003 in the $30s; now oil is hovering around $70 a barrel. These high prices are desirable for steering the economy away from oil, but in the meantime they could also spell trouble. Oil companies need to adjust to this new reality and rethink their business model.
Russia Mulls Potentially Oil-Rich Arctic Seabed
A Russian research vessel has begun a 90-day voyage to the Arctic as Moscow continues to pursue claims to the potentially energy-rich seabed under the Arctic Ocean.
Iraqi Parliament delays meeting on oil law
Iraq's Parliament will wait a week to hold sessions that could tackle controversial issues such as the proposed oil law.Meanwhile, Kurds say the current version must be changed and Sunnis are calling for a vote of the citizens to make the law official.
African forest under threat from sugar cane plantation
The Mabira Forest Reserve, on the north shore of Lake Victoria, is home to 300 bird species as well as rare primates, and plays a vital role in the country's eco-system, storing carbon and regulating rainfall. The Mehta sugar corporation wants the reserve carved up so they can expand sugar cane plantations for biofuel production.Yoweri Museveni, the Ugandan President, is attempting to push through legislation that would strip the forest of its protected status. This would flout a deal signed with the World Bank in 2001 under which the government received £180m to construct a hydroelectric dam on the Nile in return for guaranteeing the forest's protection.
Omani develops date palm alternative to petrol
An Omani entrepreneur is promoting a biofuel for cars using extracts from date palms to cut the use of petrol in the oil-rich Gulf region, a newspaper reported Tuesday.The vehicles are running 85 percent on the new fuel and 15 percent on petrol without the need to convert the engine.
High palm oil prices squeeze Indonesia biodiesel mix
Indonesian state-owned oil firm Pertamina has cut the biodiesel blend in diesel fuel to 2.5 percent as rising palm oil prices and lack of incentives have reduced margins, an official at a biofuel group said on Tuesday.
New York publisher turns a green page
NEW YORK - In the concrete jungle of Manhattan stands a paragon of green: the new Hearst Tower, rising from the original Hearst building’s historic facade.Ninety percent of its steel is recycled. It uses 26 percent less energy and 10 percent less water than a conventional office building. Sensors detect when a room is empty and automatically turn off the lights and computers.
Watch out for $80 oil: Growing demand, tight supplies, turbulent geopolitics, hurricane season - a witches brew for crude prices
So, with both the geopolitical scene and hurricane season heating up, will we see $80 oil in the next few weeks?"I don't see anything blunting the price rise until it disrupts our way of life," said energy analyst Mike Fitzpatrick, who's firm Man Financial has an $83 target price for crude by the end of September. "With the economy the way it is, that clearly hasn't happened yet."
Saudi leader: Don't blame us for high prices
Near-record oil prices are unrelated to supply and demand and none of Saudi Arabia's customers is asking for more crude, the kingdom's Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi said on Wednesday.
'Peak oil' doomsayers are wrong - there is plenty out there. It's just a question of whether we are willing to pay the environmental price to get it.
Troubles at BP's Whiting refinery hurts gas prices
A leak that forced BP to temporarily shut down a Lake Michigan refinery's biggest crude unit has helped fuel this week's jump in gasoline prices, industry officials said.
The fragile process of refining: Several factors determine the price of fuel
Another summer of mercurial gasoline prices is here, thanks in no small part to the Achilles heel of the petroleum market - a tight supply chain vulnerable to the slightest of oil refinery hiccups.
Cold prompts fuel crisis in Argentina (audio)
A holiday blizzard blankets Buenos Aires for the first time in decades, but there's little to celebrate. Argentina's coldest winter in 40 years has spurred a massive energy crisis. Dan Grech reports.
Total, Trafigura Ship Diesel Cargoes to Chile From South Korea
Total SA, Europe's third-largest oil company, and Trafigura AG are shipping diesel cargoes to Chile from South Korea as Argentina cuts natural gas exports because of a cold spell.
Tehran to host trilateral peace pipeline meeting
Vaziri-Hamaneh stated that needed fuel for groups of people who are providing services in the country has been discussed and their fuel quota will be announced soon. The minister said there is no concern about eliminating gasoline shortage to do away with public worries, adding, “Fuel quotas considered for service and major consumer sectors are sufficient and some sectors whose needs had not been already paid due attention have been discussed during the past few days and they will be supplied sufficient fuel in the near future.”The minister of petroleum further noted that people should use more public transportation means.
Rebels say attack on Mexican pipeline is just the beginning
The Popular Revolutionary Army, or EPR for its initials in Spanish, said Tuesday's explosion and two similar attacks on Pemex pipelines in Guanajuato state last week marked the beginning of a "national campaign of harassment against the interests of the oligarchy and this illegitimate government."
United Kingdom: Beyond Nuclear - Scotland´s Energy Options
Hunterston B power plant was shut down earlier this month amid fears regarding temperature controls. This shut down comes within only a few weeks of the plant reopening following the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) concluding that the plant should be allowed to operate once more. Hunterston B had been shut for almost 6 months to allow repairs to be carried out for cracked heat exchangers. Ironically, in its periodic safety review, the NII provisionally stated that both Hunterston B and its sister plant Hinkley Point B power station, would be allowed to extend their lives from 2011 to 2017. This was on the proviso that the plants invested £4.5m on upgrading and repairing their premises.The decision to provisionally extend the lives of these power stations may need to be reconsidered in light of this further shut down. Currently nuclear power accounts for about 40% of all electricity generated in Scotland. The question arises of what Scotland would do to fill the deficit in electricity should Hunterston B close in 2017, 2011 or sooner.
Lula resumes nuclear program to make Brazil 'world power'
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on Tuesday relaunched the country's nuclear program, promising to complete a nuclear submarine and a third atomic power plant both mothballed 20 years ago.
India: Of fixing price for natural gas
We know air pollution is choking our cities. But they also need electricity. The option is to build coal-based power stations to supply this need. But even with the best of technology (which we don’t have) for so-called clean coal, air and solid waste emissions are high. Gas would be an ideal option for these cities. But if the price of gas is determined based on non-existent market rates, then there is no way it can compete with coal—domestic or even imported.
BBC Radio Play – Second To Midnight
Western governments, oil companies and business analysts have long predicted that the "peak", when oil reserves become finite and the markets begin to panic, is as far away as 2030. However, Rob Turner, oil company geologist, has just uncovered that the peak is not tomorrow. It was yesterday.(They usually archive their programs later on their web site.)
U.S. airlines may face huge plane bill
US Airways (LCC) officials went to the Paris Air Show last month and did something executives at most big U.S. carriers haven't done in years. They ordered planes: 92 new Airbuses at an estimated cost of $10 billion.After a brutal half-decade in which the USA's airlines rang up $35 billion in losses, they're again profitable. But, US Airways' order notwithstanding, the little money they're making isn't nearly enough to cover what they'll need to rejuvenate and enlarge their fleets in the next two decades.
Feds Could Proceed with Drilling in Alaskan NPR-A Area
The Bureau of Land Management could allow drilling work on a sensitive region of Alaska's North Slope after it completed additional environmental research on the area, an agency spokeswoman said.
Solar ovens utilize nature's rays for energy-efficient, everyday cooking -- even in foggy San Francisco.
Ghana: Govt distributes free energy saving bulbs
The Energy Commission officially began the distribution of over six million energy saving light bulbs as part of a national campaign to conserve energy throughout the country yesterday.
Nigerian textile factories may close down
Nigeria’s 30 textile factories may be forced to close down next week because of acute shortage of production fuel, manufacturers said here Wednesday.
Venezuela, Iran to team up on $4 billion oil project
Venezuela and Iran, oil-exporting countries that have sought to assert independence from the US, plan to spend a combined $4 billion on a joint project in Venezuela's heavy-crude-producing Faja del Orinoco.
Food Conscious: The new food crusade
Organic farms, conservation, fruits and veggies in schools - the Bay Area leads the charge to change how Congress subsidizes farming.
Where have all the bees gone? Blame people, not cellphones
But as a Salon round table discussion with bee experts revealed, the mass exodus of bees to the great hive in the sky forebodes a bigger story. The faltering dance between honeybees and trees is symptomatic of industrial disease. As the scientists outlined some of the biological agents behind "colony collapse disorder," and dismissed the ones that are not -- sorry, friends, the Rapture is out -- they sketched a picture of how we are forever altering the planet's delicate web of life.
With Al Gore III barrelling down a California highway in his Toyota Prius at 105 mph, hybrid gas-electric cars may be at the tipping point of becoming a mainstream item in America.
Kuwait's oil reserves debate set
The Kuwaiti government will discuss the size of the country's oil reserves in a closed-door session with members of parliament today.The size of the reserves in the world's seventh-largest oil exporter became a sensitive issue last year when industry newsletter Petroleum Intelligence Weekly (PIW) said it had seen internal records showing reserves were about 48 billion barrels - half the officially stated 99 billon.
The difference is equal to more than four percent of global proved oil reserves, according to data in BP's annual statistical review, the oil industry's most trusted.
Kuwait and IEA Show Declining Oil Production Future
Crude oil prices could reach levels of US$100 per barrel or more if some of the latest production factors in the news become reality.
Venezuela Denies Talk of Falling Oil Output
The government on Monday denied a press report that labor conflicts at oil fields in western Venezuela have reduced output by 200,000 barrels per day."There is no diminution of production. Currently, oil production is 3.07 million barrels" per day, Energy Minister Rafael Ramirez told reporters, responding to a story in the Caracas daily El Mundo.
Salon.com published an article today, discussing how Alternate Reality Games can be used to change people’s real world behavior, and cited World Without Oil as a good example. In this game, participants acted out the scenario of prohibitively expensive and unavailable oil - from personal to systemic effects - via blogs, audio, art, and any other means at their disposal. Besides impacting the players’ individual behavior, this was meant to draw from the wisdom of crowds to find the best solutions before this happens in real life.But how well did it meet either goal? The article doesn’t say. Based on a cursory survey of participants, most seemed tuned in to oil conservation to begin with, so it’s not like that aggressive SUV driver was helped to see the error of his ways. Along those same lines, where are the jerks? Where are the guys getting mad wealthy off of peak oil at the expense of others? And where are the incompetent idiots?
So what’s behind the rise? Hedge funds? Jittery investors? Geopolitical tension?Nope. Energy watchdog, the International Energy Agency, puts it down to one thing.
Mideast power demand growth provides fuel oil new lease of life
Surging economic growth and power demand in the Middle East is giving fuel oil a new lease of life and heralding big changes in international trade of the dirty left-over product of refined crude.
Far from the protests, the Corrib drilling continues
The government or the people do not own the gas. Shell do. And if there is an energy crisis, Shell can turn off the taps. They have no moral obligation to sell it to the people of Mayo or Ireland.”
“Biofuels are going to stay at the margin,” Simmons predicted, explaining that given the food vs. fuel debate and other issues surrounding biofuels, biofuel production will never be high enough to displace the bulk of the millions of barrels of oil per day that Americans pour into their tanks as refined gasoline.But if, as Simmons has also predicted, the U.S. could be in for gas shortages as early as this summer, how are Americans going to continue traveling as much as they are today?
They’re not, Simmons told EnergyTechStocks.com.
Higher fuel prices blamed on flooding at S.E. Kansas refinery...
Consumers are beginning to pay more at the pump because flooding at a southeast Kansas refinery has reduced fuel supplies.Prices spiked ten cents a gallon overnight at some stations.
Carolyn Baker: WHAT TO DO? WHAT TO DO? Taking Action In The Face Of Collapse
Every time I write an article on collapse such as my most recent one "Happy Independence Day; You Have No Government", I am bombarded with emails asking me "what should I do?" For those who have just discovered this site, that is a legitimate question because for them, the reality of collapse may be new. Those who have been following this site for some time have heard many suggestions on what to do, but this article will offer those and other suggestions again more clearly and more adamantly than they have been offered here before. The intensity you are likely to hear in this piece is driven by the urgency which I and many of my peers are feeling at this moment. Quite frankly, it's time to quit screwing around with talking about collapse and start acting. The Rubicon has been crossed, we're not living in Kansas anymore, and we are living in the closest thing we've seen to pre-World War II Germany than anything since then. Suit up and stop theorizing and speculating. It's showtime.
Nigeria's Moni Pulo Seen Shutting in Output After Attack
Nigerian oil company Moni Pulo is expected to shut-in its production following an attack by militants on an oil production barge in the Calabar River in the Niger Delta, a trader of West African crude said Tuesday.
One Militant Killed in Failed Kidnap Attempt in Nigeria
Nigerian troops have foiled an attempt by militants to kidnap workers at a Korean firm in Southern Rivers state, killing one insurgent and injuring several others, police and locals said.
Mexico confirms attacks on pipelines
Mexico's government on Tuesday called a series of gas pipeline explosions a threat to the nation's democratic institutions and vowed to step up security after a guerrilla group claimed responsibility for the blasts.The Interior Department said it would take measures to protect "strategic installations" across Mexico after an explosion Tuesday at a pipeline run by the state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, and two other blasts that rocked gas ducts on Thursday.
Saudi Arabia to cut oil supply to Asia
Saudi Aramco, the world's largest state oil company, will cut crude oil exports to Asian refiners for a tenth month in August, refinery officials said.The Dhahran, Saudi Arabia-based oil producer will reduce supplies of its Arab Light and Arab Heavy crude oil to refiners in Japan, China and South Korea by between 9 per cent and 10 per cent below the volumes set out in annual supply contracts, said three refinery officials, who received notices from the company and asked not to be identified because of confidentiality agreements.
OPEC can do nothing about high oil price: Qatar
OPEC can do nothing about the high price of oil because factors other than crude supply have sent the market to near record levels, Qatar's Energy Minister said on Wednesday...."OPEC cannot do anything about it," Attiyah said. "The world is facing a shortage of gasoline and diesel, but not crude oil. If the market needs more oil, OPEC will do its utmost but it needs to be convinced that there is a shortage."
Strong gasoline demand to push up prices: government
Strong demand for gasoline and tight motor fuel inventories will push pump prices higher in July and August, the government said on Tuesday...."This is due to a combination of rising crude oil prices, strong demand for gasoline and low gasoline inventories," the analytical arm of the Energy Department said.
China, Syria in talks on refinery
Syria and China are discussing jointly building a $1 billion oil refinery in eastern Syria, state media reported Wednesday.
Dolphin starts pumping Qatar's gas to UAE
Dolphin Energy Ltd announced Tuesday that it has started pumping natural gas through a submarine pipeline from Qatar to the United Arab Emirates."This is the culmination of a visionary nine-year project, linking the nations of Qatar, the UAE and shortly Oman in a unique regional gas grid," the company said.
Now, sheiks, emirs and other leaders throughout the Arab OPEC states of the Middle East and North Africa are afraid that a return to pre-petroleum poverty will quickly arrive with the end of the Oil Age, so they are turning towards the ever-present desert sun.
London readies for 'energy revolution'
London Vice-Mayor Nicky Gavron plans to spearhead decentralised generation so that every household in the city can eventually produce its own energy and cut CO2 emissions. New fines for polluting trucks and coaches are also planned for 2008, she has told EurActiv in an interview.
Ford: Hydrogen cars close to production
The relatively quick-and-easy answer to foreign oil dependence and automotive greenhouse gas emissions is circling the grounds every day at Orlando International Airport in Florida, according to a top Ford Motor Co. official. It's a utilitarian 12-passenger parking lot shuttle bus powered by a 6.8-liter internal combustion hydrogen engine, which Ford officials said is their hydrogen technology that's closest to mass production.
Sun is not to blame for global warming: study
Scientists on Wednesday said that the rise in global temperatures that has been detected over the past two decades cannot be blamed on the Sun, a theory espoused by climate-change sceptics.
A new Round-Up has been posted at TOD:Canada.
Wall Street's ratings agencies are starting to abandon their efforts to hide the real market value of the debts that are ironically still marked as assets in the books of countless institutional investors. To say unpleasant surprises will be revealed would be a tragic understatement. Credit markets are tightening in anticipation, and spreads are set to widen dramatically.
Hedge funds and banks are heavily exposed to the derivatives market, and losses will be colossal and widespread. Increasingly, pension funds look to be the biggest losers of all. The key-word will be 'leverage' - cheap credit borrowed to make 'easy' profits, that will now lead to hard losses.
On the energy scene, Americans are concerned about rising costs, labour constraints and environmental issues in the Alberta oil sands. Combined with increasing Canadian domestic energy demand, this could reduce energy exports to the US just as it was looking to Canada to fill its looming energy supply gap.
Resource ownership and control in Canada continue to be hot issues at the national, provincial, and territorial levels. Alberta looks to carbon trading and Ontario will have to get through a hot summer with a reduced electricity supply.
Most of you probably saw the Moscow Times article on Drumbeat yesterday about Russian oil production.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2007/07/10/042-full.html
"Alfa Report Sees Trouble Looming in Oil Sector"
With this article, we now have problems reported or actual production declines in all of the areas of the world producing 3 million BPD or more.
• Russia - Forecast worsening outlook (9,247,000 barrels per day in 2006)
• Saudi Arabia - Declining Production (9,152,000)
• United States - Declining Production (5,136,000)
• Iran - Declining Production (4,028,000)
• China - Largest oil field peaked in 2006 (3,686,000)
• Mexico - Largest oil field peaked in 2006 (3,256,000)
• North Sea - Declining Production (4,343,000)
This would certainly strengthen the peak oil now or very soon argument.
This would certainly strengthen the peak oil now or very soon argument.
Hilarious deadpan.
I think.
or Edvard Munch's "The Scream" in a rearview mirror.
Objects in mirror are closer than they appear..
"Do you think he's gonna have that on the ride?"
- Ian Malcolm, Jurassic Park
No problem. We will run our transportation networks on oil reserves.
The doomers keep focusing on production. Be happy and focus on the huge worldwide reserves of oil.
Huge pools of oil inside the earth regenerating themselves every day.
Switching to CNG cars is growing rapidly as natural gas production was not supposed to peak for sometime.
In Peru they have 11 tcf of natural gas (EIA) and have been building an LNG plant for export. There are three CNG stations with ten more planned. They have both CNG and LPG cars.
Compressed natural gas did not require expensive refineries, reformulation additives, and was cheaper than gasoline. It had less carbon per molecule and burned clean. It did not require heavy bulky fuel cells. The natural gas was ligher than air and dissipated if disrupted by collision.
CNG and LPG may work in a few places in the world (Peru, Iran), but the supply beyond the next couple of years is questionable in places like the United States and Europe.
It seems like LNG will not help the world supply situation much because the amount of LNG available is going to be much less than the world will be demanding.
Consider Russia, Qatar, Bolivia, Australia, Malaysia, PPNG, Egypt, Oman, Algeria, Libya, Angola, Nigeria, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia to name a few more.
About 115000 Btu’s per gallon of gasoline--octane varies ($2.33 Nymex wholesale).
1 mcf of natural gas = 1020000 BTU's ($6-7 Nymex wholesale).
It appears like natural gas is currently about 4-5 times cheaper than gasoline in the U.S. in terms of BTU's per dollar.
In Germany retail gasoline was 2-3 times more expensive than in the United States.
It seems fuel switching in NG producers might reduce some of the oil panic.
Correction NG might be more than twice as cheap as gasoline
Note this fits the Westexas export substitution model.
1st oil (already) 2nd gas (starting now) 3rd coal (soon).
No problem.
Oh Really?
We will run our transportation networks on oil reserves.
And when the reserves are used?
Huge pools of oil inside the earth regenerating themselves every day.
How is that possible?
http://www.geo.vu.nl/%7Erondeel/grondstof/oil/oil-total-web.html#_Toc531...
You are a little light on data to back up your position. But go ahead, convince me. Convince others.
Don't worry Gunga, sarcasm is completely lost on some people.
Ron Patterson
On TOD, with our occasional cornucopian denyers, it's hard to say when when it's sarcasm and when it's delusion.
Unless of course, one knows the person throwing in the comment. That helps :)
That's why I always try to include a ;) or put [sarcasm] tags around my sarcasm. :)
~Durandal (http://www.wtdwtshtf.com/)
On TOD, with our occasional cornucopian denyers,
Tis best to ask these folks "why" when they show up.
Because if they are wrong, they might learn something while their answer is being addressed. Or all of us might learn something we didn't know.
Ummm... Eric...
I think he was peddling a bit of sarcanol there.
At least I sure hope so ;-)
A bit? How about gallons??
Or, rather, barrels...
One correction to the above listing. China's largest field peaked in 2003, and has been declining a few percent a year since.
China's total oil production for the first three months of 2007 is pretty similar to last years, but it is too soon to say that China's production has peaked.
So perhaps I should say that that six out of the seven largest production areas have production problems. We don't really know yet about China.
The bombing of the Pemex gas pipelines is a bit of a warning shot that will be a factor in the "above ground" issues sending oil and NG prices higher. It is similiar to what is occurring in Africa. Local insurgents throwing a monkey wrench into the status quo of those "stealing" the natural riches of their country.
I'm not saying I agree with what they are doing, only that I think it will become more widespread and lead to more "militarization" of the pipeline infrastructure around the world. These are the domino effects that will lead, IMO, to the total nationlization of petroleum/NG resources in the not too distant future.
These are also "wild cards" in what will happen to energy availability and prices at any point in time and any region of the world.
Yeah. This is why I think it's foolish to ignore "above ground" factors. They have always been a part of oil production. (If they weren't, peak oil would have hit a lot sooner.)
And I fully expect above-ground factors to become more important, not less. Scarcity and high prices embolden the leaders of oil-producing countries (like Putin and Chavez), attract attack by insurgents, and encourage energy workers to strike. It is also encouraging oil drilling in riskier areas, whether further out in the ocean or deeper into politically hostile territory.
But, that's only because you probably believe oil is a finite resource...
Seriously, that is a very very good point that Colin Cambell makes often. The more efficient and successful you are at extracting the stuff, the faster you deplete the resource. Duh. Why economists can't grasp this concept is very interesting.
No, it isn't. A lot of peak oilers fall back to the "it's only above-ground factors" argument. They believe oil will peak, but not until next year, 2010, 2015. Right now, it's only "above ground factors."
Then there's the bottom-up analyses, even by peak oilers like Skrebowski. Way too optimistic, IMO, because there's not enough of a fudge factor...for those above-ground factors.
Anytime you try to run a system of any significant complexity at or near it's maximum capacity for an extended period, you will run into limitations ("above ground factors"). The system just becomes too vulnerable to each individual failure - it's entropy I suppose. Try it on a crowded highway - you know that road can carry a higher volume of traffic if people just paid a little more attention, but it won't happen. If there was enough spare capacity then people would not target the oil infrastructure because it wouldn't be effective.
This is why I don't understand why people insist on considering a purely geologic peak, and ignore the "logistical" peak. The geologic peak is only an upper bound which at best can be achieved only for a short time. Those "above ground factors" will always limit it to less.
This is well understood in the theory of complex adaptive systems, and especially resilience theory. A complex adaptive system goes through a process of growth and increasing exploitation of its environment. As it grows it gains efficiency and interconnectedness, and loses resilience as direct consequence. Near the peak of its development the system is very brittle (has very low resilience), and "synchronous failures" or failure cascades can be triggered by various external or internal shocks. These failures ultimately push the system into a "release" phase, which may be an outright collapse depending on the system dynamics.
This is the key insight in Thomas Homer Dixon's book "The Upside of Down" and is the main area of study for The Resilience Alliance
THANKS !!!!
I've been jumping up and down all over the place trying to express this. You did it with a simple example.
Another one is the cracking of steel a steal beam or breaking ice on a pond these systems collapse early because small microscopic cracks in the system widen and cause breakage.
So ELM despite its serious repercussions is a upper bound on oil supply going forward. Also you can look at the fact that prices begin to increase exponentially once supply is less than
5% of demand.
The point is we need only consider ELM as the major contributor to the worlds oil production and esp exports until it is 5% less than demand. Taking demand as remaining constant at the 2006 production levels we can see that we cross this threshold in late 2008-2009. Past this point above ground factors will ensure that production will be less than ELM predicts and depending on how things play out
probably a lot less over time.
The only way out is for some serious conservation that allows a cushion to form.
Considering all the geopolitical factors the easiest way to get this cushion if form OPEC to cut even more oil supply.
They actually should cut and additional 2mbpd and maintain a real and sustainable 2mbpd or more buffer in production.
If they do this then it will allow them to keep above ground shocks from spreading.
The approach thats needed is similar to fighting forest fires where you back burn from a fire line to put out a fire. Thus post peak the answer is to fight fire with fire and deliberately drop the normal production well below real capacity so you can cushion the certain disruptions.
I don't think we can save ourselves but I do think OPEC can if they cut production wisely and only increase again when shortages threaten collapse.
If we could only have a leader in the Arab world to come forward and offer to save the west from itself. Our Arab brothers have to put someone out front other than bin Laden that could articulate the issues and lead the discussion. Maybe Obama could lead America toward that end if our Arab brothers do not assume the leadership mantle.
The Muslim countries are no more a monolitihic bloc than are the Western States. For the 'Arab Brothers' to put someone forward as a leader, first the Caliphate would need to be reestablished, the possibility of which we are opposing in Iraq, Iran and Syria and elsewhere. Besides, it would not be in the interests of a new Calaphate to 'save the West' since they would see the West as their tormenters since the time the first crusades were launched. Although Obama would probably form a more credible leadership than our current administration, I dont think that he would be perceived in the ME as a 'Muslim Brother.'In other words, we have sown the winds of the ME, now we will reap the whirlwind.
Well said.
One of the things I've mused about regarding PO is "discontinuity" and the effect it will have on society as a complex system. This may seem so obviously true it's trivial, but some I've talked to haven't thought about it much, seemingly.
There are more aspects of our society that you might think which are not resilient against discontinuity. One metaphor might be a leaky boat with bilge pumps running; I had occasion to operate a WWII subchaser for some projects and it was basically kept afloat by being constantly pumped. When the pumps stop, a boat sinks, and at that point it is irrelevant whether the bilge pumps can be made to work again.
Similarly, in the complex system that's the human body, a hiatus of 6 minutes of oxygen will destroy large amounts of the brain, and no amount of oxygen or anything else after that will restore the system.
This is, for instance, the case in many mines. I think a lot of 'em have to have the water constantly pumped out; at the point they ever flooded it might or might not be possible to return them to service. This may, in fact, be a huge issue, since many things could cause an industrial discontinuity.
In a more subtle way, I think our entire industrial society has aspects which will not be resilient to discontinuity, in a thousand ways. Like, if the power goes off, all of a sudden it's safe to steal the copper cable. If there's a hiatus in law enforcement, those forces held in check by it will move into a new stable state. Once there is a hiatus of retail supply and the psychology of scarcity crops up, people's shopping habits will abruptly change from "just enough" to "hoarding", turning a shortfall into an unbreachable gulf of supply.
The thing about evolved complex systems is that they suck at being resilient to hiatus in detail; like the rainforests, you can permanently lose a huge amount of complexity if there is discontinuity in any parameter. Such systems wind up holding themselves up by their own bootstraps in a very real way; the amazon forest sustains its own climate, etc. Huge complexity built on marginal soils, and it is the continued play of complexity which sustains itself.
A lot of discontinuities will be showing up in many places. Human industrial civilization and the ecosystem require continuity in myriad ways, and that will be failing.
This is why shortages are much more damaging than high prices.
I think we are going to have shortages simply because to many oil users are fairly well matched in capitol. To many deep pockets is the problem. Think of it this way the US is wealthy enough to purchase all of the worlds oil supply. Same with the other major economic regions. So I think we will see demand destruction from outright shortages before we see it from price.
The US GDP is 13.3 trillion.
about 30 billion barrels a year at say 100 dollars a barrel = 3 trillion a year for all the worlds oil at a fairly high price.
The point is the world has enough wealth for most of the oil consuming nations to afford to purchase all the worlds oil many times over even if it goes to 200 a barrel.
So shortages are far more likely than demand destruction from price.
Similarly, in the complex system that's the human body, a hiatus of 6 minutes of oxygen will destroy large amounts of the brain, and no amount of oxygen or anything else after that will restore the system.
This is one of my favorite metaphors for the critical nature of oil, and why "running out" is not the point. Same with blood: someone with an arterial bleed will go into hypovolemic shock a hell of a lot sooner than when she "runs out" of blood.
Dragonfly41,
Mexico nationalised its oil and gas resources in the 1930's. The petroleum sector provides about 30% of the government income. This is a direct blow at the government, and they did it without bloodshed.
By contrast in Nigeria the oil is produced in foreign concessions-and the revenues are stolen by the political elite with the help of the multinationals. They are likely to have a revolution and nationalisation.
Yes...what I am saying is that I see reserves that are currently owned by "corporations" to be nationalized in the future due to "national security issues".
"The bombing of the Pemex gas pipelines is a bit of a warning shot that will be a factor in the "above ground" issues sending oil and NG prices higher. "
Anyone want to wager we will see "Terrorists in Mexico Trained by Venezuela military" headlines in the near future??
... and funded by Iran!
Damn those pesky commies and rag-head islamists!
Stealing _our_ oil!
How dare they!
Keep rigging and stealing elections and sooner or later people are going to resort to democratic mechanisms that do work. Just like HeIsSoFly posted yesterday. The Ballot or the Bullet. Find your tribe, as Baker writes in her article on the Drumbeat today.
I'm getting scared. About time, I guess.
cfm in Gray, ME
Keep rigging and stealing elections and sooner or later people are going to resort to democratic mechanisms that do work.
A different observation of the same idea:
If one does not have a legitimate (non violent reaction as an example of legitimate action) means of redress to being 'wronged' (incorrect perception or really being wronged) then non-legitimate means will be tried.
If there was a functioning world court where 'wrongs' could be addressed - would Osama Bin Laden's POV have gotten 'the traction of action'?
(and to head up the 'courts are corrupt' response http://www.skolnicksreport.com/ used to be the site of Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts as an example of corrupt courts)
From the link above titled "WHAT TO DO? WHAT TO DO? Taking Action In The Face Of Collapse"
I was reading a back drumbeat (july 9th) a while ago and one of the posters made a remark about another posters' name "estamos jodidos." I didn't get the joke, but after reading that link - I do now!
ha ha
I am very flattered by the compliments. Guess it was is my subtle sense of humor.
As a footnote, after 2 years of being peak oil aware, I am now in the process of closing a 40 acre property in a remote wilderness section of the country. Frantically looking to get out of suburbia and set up an off the grid, self sufficient farm. I feel really good to be moving from a level of intellectual awareness and discussion to the steps of taking action.
Respectfully,
EJ
Don't forget to lie in bed tonight staring at the ceiling, counting your blessings. How lucky you are to be in a place to be able to do it!
Would you describe how you are planning for your vehicles, farm machinery, and power tools like chainsaws to be self-sufficient?
Are "vehicles, farm machinery, and power tools like chainsaws " necessary to attain self sufficiency?
Electricity generated by my wind machines and solar panels and biodiesel made from my castor beans.
Being in a similar position as EJ, though not able to move there full time, yet I've been using vehicles, farm machinery and chainsaws on my land for most of my 48 year old life, I anticipate that these tools will still be useable, though much more expensive over the next 30 to 40 years. We'll have to use them much more judiciously and store more fuel to have during shortages. Of course at anytime it could run out so back up measures need to be available. Hopefully at some point electric vehicles and maybe tractors will become available, even if with less horsepower.
My father always used electric chainsaws on our land. Of course out in the woods we had to cart along a generator with it, but it was the thought that counted :)
A friend suggested various brands of ATVs and Four Wheelers instead of a tractor. I am more seriously interested in obtaining some appropriate four leggers. I am not fully there yet but the plan is to move to self sustainance and off the grid. Suspect that a lot will be done with muscle and sweat. I just picked up a copy of John Seymor's
The Self-Sufficient Life
and How to Live it
So far it has been extremely interesting and relevant.
Also starting to look at PV Panels and possible micro-hydro as there is a live creek on the property. Wind not so much for power but perhaps pumping from a well. Looks like I may be able to close next month but will be later before I can make a move up there...
My two cents. Stay away from the ATV's and 4 wheelers. They
are expensive, complicated toys designed for weekenders.
Get yourself a good small tractor with a three point hitch and
PTO. Mower decks, fence auger, etc. are essentially one size fits all and can be rented or bought new or used. Tractors are
made for working and four wheelers are made for playing.
boby is quite correct.
The friend who recommended a quad instead of a tractor probably shouldn't be listened to for any other advice either.
I've enjoyed watching guys in suburbia, who convinced their wives to let them get a quad because they can use it to plow snow, repeatedly ram themselves at snowbanks in order to clear a driveway that has six inches of snow on it.
-Don
I hope you have a lot of gunss and are ready to kill people who WILL try to take your land when TSHTF.
..or maybe they'll just be after your guns.
A lot of electric tractor conversions around, if you look for them.. and the old deadweight blocks you would have to gain traction are now batteries. Your PTO or power take-off can be an independent electric motor, dc-electric hydraulic pump, or an inverter, so the tractor, with a nice shady PV rooftop can also be your portable (and House) power for other tools/needs.
Allis Chalmers 'G' Electric Conversion
http://www.flyingbeet.com/electricg/
Pete Seeger's electric Pickup Truck that runs chain saws, carries wood and Banjos..etc.. (PDF)
http://www.renewablenys.org/retrieve_file.php?type=article&id=13
GE 1970's electric tractors, still running strong
http://www.elec-trak.org/
Jean Pain's Methane-powered/heated farm..
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/methane_pain.html
Best,
Bob
I've been working on an essay entitled Time for another forum that is germane to this. It opens with the following: Time Is On My Side. Yes it is., The Rolling Stones, 1964...Time Won't Let Me. Oh no!, The Outsiders, 1966.
The general thrust is that people just don't understand how much time it takes to have any chance at even bottom of the barrel self-sufficiency or even providing for a major proportion of their needs. I think most of us concerned with preparedness see, at most, a 2-5 year window of opportunity. This is barely enough time to even get started.
Among the issues are skills and infrastructure. Just learning basic skills requires seveal years. For example, carpentry, plumbing, electrical (AC/DC), food preservation, food production, animal husbandry, fencing, timber felling, engine mechcanics and on and on. Successful country people really do have huge skill sets.
The same thing is true of infrastructure; doing it wrong the first time is a sure way to never-ending problems.
For those who are still on the fence as to what to do about the future, if they believe they will seek self-sufficiency, yesterday was the best day to start.
Incidentially, even people who plan on remaining in suburbia or urban areas will find tons of really useful information in The Integral Urban House - Self-Reliant Living in the City, ISBN 0-87156-213-8
Todd
Good point, Todd. People can start learning some of those skills before making any physical relocation of course, but the amount of time needed still shouldn't be underestimated...
"You can never solve a problem on the level on which it was created."
Albert Einstein
Please post a link to that article when completed, it sounds very interesting.
That article really rang my bell. The reply I posted to her blog is a development of the argument I've been making here recently:
There is no overarching ideology beyond "making the world a better place", there is no unifying organization, no white male vertebrate leader setting the agenda.
Sounds oxymoronic WRT realization 1
It only sounds oxymoronic until you realize that genetic determinants of behaviour leave room for individual variation while broadly constraining group behaviour. Individuals are not genetic automata, but the behaviour of larger and larger groups (up to the full species level) tends to converge on the genetically-selected pattern. The larger the group the stronger this convergence will be, but at the individual and small-group level obviously considerable variation is to be expected.
GG great idea formulating- stuck with me thru the night. Could you give some examples of the groups Paul Hawkens is referring to. Typical environmental groups is what I get going to amazon. I don't see these groups as 'tight ' enough to do the kind of work I thing will be necessary to stand a chance of being a powerful enough 'antibody'.
My concern & experience is the type group formulating that is needed will require the crisis itself to be upon us; then it might be too late- not that there are any assurances in this crisis. Thanks.
For a look at the kinds of organizations Hawken is talking about, visit http://www.wiserearth.org/organization - you can drill down into a database of over 100,000 such organizations. They're primarily American as far as I can tell, but it gives the flavour of Hawken's conclusions. Hawken himself is listed there at http://www.wiserearth.org/user/paul.
The groups probably are not tight enough to affect the overall outcome, particularly given what we at The Oil Drum understand about scale and time lines. I see their antibody action manifesting primarily at the local level, and they may give their local communities a better chance when the troubles hit in earnest. For me this is their greatest near-term strength. Only lifeboats will make it through, and lifeboats are exactly the sort of local feature that the antibodies have the best chance of promoting.
Valuable though it is, this quality is still outweighed IMO by the potential for them to act as value carriers through the bottleneck.
It's a tremendously powerful idea, and one that has given me more hope than anything else I've encountered on this dismal quest.
Thanks. His statements & the list clarify.
Dismal this stuff is. My wife forbids any talk re peak oil until I get permission- she already tends towards depression. She gets it & tells me it is like I have told her she has terminal cancer- I only learned about 2 yrs. ago. We have 3 kids launched now for 3-12 yrs. & one grandson so this stuff weighs even heavier re their future.
I do therapy for a living- used to do lots of groups. I also lived communally & studied that arena several yrs.So a more intense , close knit group life is something I would be seeking w/o this crisis & what I now see as a necessity.
I agree I don't expect any groups to effect major change on other than a local level. Actually I think it will be the fairly immediate [ like walking distances]local folks; by the time we get to power outages.
I keep looking to help form a group/family to best 'live' while in this crisis but no consensus for now - hell we live near several secondary nuclear targets - though good semi- rural place in other ways.
In America I don't expect the type groups Hawkins [ & you]
hope will be seed carriers being such until they reform into much tighter groups during duress. Then I see the values you espouse[ & I do too] being in keeping with some of their wiser more committed members using these values to form small groups for those lifeboats[ hope we/they have time].
I am grateful for your couple hundred yrs. looking back idea - gives sustainability -the place it has to have.
Thanks again.
Should I be more afraid of being robbed by my neighbors or by the taxman?
http://www.examiner.com/a-822682~Could_fines_find_a_home_in_Md__.html
In my opinion a great way to quickly cut down on gas consumption would be to implement driver's license suspensions for a wide range of driving infractions.
I have "0" sympathy for people caught making driving infractions. Poor drivers put our lives at risk every time they get behind the wheel.
It doesnt matter if you suspend their liscenses, they continue to drive. Every day I read the police docket in the newspaper and it seems as if half the arrests are for people driving with a suspended liscense...many of them drunk at the time...and some with suspended liscense, drunk, and driving a stolen vehicle! The jails are full so someone has to be released before another is incarcerated, so they go for a ride while awaiting sentencing.
Many attempt to flee when they see the blue light in the rear view mirror, anything can happen at that point.
Hello River,
Good points, therefore start loping off their fingers when they continue to drive illegally. Serious infractions or deaths of innocents: blind them--no incarceration thereafter will be required.
Consider that over $5 million bucks was spent by govt on the Scott Petersen murder trial. The future court system will be a quick 'thumbs up-thumbs down' trial, then a necktie party. The criminal amputees obviously cannot vote in this method.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Bob, I hope that you realize that all these 'high profile' cases tried in the public arena of MSM are only for the distraction of Joe & Jane six pack. Those 'trials' are aired so that the MSM will have garbage to fill the airwaves while real news goes unreported, which is exactly what the MSM wants. Notice that the MSM continues to do this although their ratings are falling.
No, River, I think that people actually demand their "garbage" and the MSM obliges them in delivering it to market--hence news cycles of inanity. MSM lets enough information slip through, especially in Europe, but also here in the "free West". You're right, they are scoundrels, but I honestly think a lot of them probably have good intentions. They believe they are doing a service for the world--that's why they're all so chipper (plus the beta blockers). The internet is eating away at their ratings, but who knows, when things start to get worse maybe all the unemployment and shenanigans going on around the world will help with that--as people attempt to distract themselves from their ever-devolving local environs.
If one actually pays attention, is diligent, and reads through stuff, it is quite easy to be educated about what's going on. All takes in common sense, a slight education and an inquiring, scientific mind. Certainly an ability to intelligently question authority, and find it usually to be lacking in authenticity and justification. Most people are too busy, lazy or generally stupid (or have intense emotional problems, through genetic predispositions and, of course, the environment) or they're stuck in a cognitive dissonance feedback loop of "feeling good" by whatever means possible--shopping, religion, etc. Or, one is an extremophile ideological assassin--which usually occludes true understanding because you need to be a pluralist in more ways than one to try to put together a reasonable picture of what "reality" is.
I thought Bob's comment was hysterical... "Loping off fingers"--maybe someone needs to talk to Mr. Shrum about that? Or perhaps they should lop off one of his fingers! This could be just to ticket to invigorating the Democratic party with some "tough-love" during these tumultuous times. [sarcasm alert]
Are you being sarcastic or are you really a retarded fascist?
Hello Dezakin,
Thxs for responding. I am not aware of your age, but perhaps you missed the 70s energy crunch. Perfectly good former citizens became petty criminals, or worse, in their desperation for FFs. Gasoline Queue assaults and gas thefts were widely noted by the MSM, and even tanker rigs were hijacked. Google gas-thefts and driveaways that are occuring presently.
Speculation ahead!
How much postPeak Overshoot carnage will be acceptable to you? Consider that we love tools, and powered tools above all else; even cavemen long ago recognized the tremendous extrasomatic utility of chunking rocks, thrusting firebrands, or swinging clubs.
If gas & food prices ever hit with a super-rapid increase and there exists no easy alternatives [Go Alan Drake!]: you will see remarkable #'s of citizens going extrasomatically psycho as Hans Selye's GAS genetically kicks into high gear. Tadeusz Borowski, #119198, has written much about what people will do to hope to sustain their personal MPP in dire circumstances. Even bare hands will do.
Even today we have citizens professing that they will not give up their driving privilege until we pry their cold, dead fingers off the steering wheel. Again, how many people convicted of DUI or driving on suspended licenses are habitual repeat offenders? I think you are drastically under-estimating how severely bad people will want to drive.
Heavily addicted, irresponsible detritovores gradually losing finger counts will, at some digital calculation: accept an extrasomatic Liebig Minimum. It is merely my proposed PostPeak process to keep their live, deadly fingers off the steering wheel, gun, or machete' to limit the infliction of pain and death on innocent others.
Please consider that walking, pedaling, mass-transit, taxis, or calling a buddy should be the obvious first choice; the ONLY Choice for these detritovores, but they willingly choose otherwise. The current penalties are not lizard-brain level recognized as sufficiently punitive, but worth the risk and great dopamine rewards in their warped judgement.
Consider that as gasoline prices rise: we will see lots more bicycles, scooters, motorcycles, lighweight PHEVS, buses, and car-pools in traffic, etc. More people exposed on drastically less crowded roads: a perfect recipe for a careless, speeding maniac to reach great speeds to really inflict mayhem and gore when things go wrong. Believe me when I say their first choice for motorized criminality will be a large, high-powered vehicle to match their high power weapons. It won't be a mere bicycle and a weak slingshot, but a stolen sportscar or SUV, with rifles and pistols for MPP effect.
How about criminals that run from the law vs. just pulling over safely as the higher brain function should dictate? Many are just juveniles, some are repeat offenders, but they are addicted to the mobility rush with no heed to the damage that massive tonnage can do to innocents. Losing a pinky finger for a non-injury car-chase, or bank-robbery, would be a constant lizard-brain level reminder to choose more wisely with the higher brain processing function in the postPeak future.
IF they persist in driving, or other stupid and violent criminality: the gradual loping off of their fingers will eventually preclude them from driving at all, or wielding a gun--much to the relief of the other upstanding citizens.
IMO, we won't have networked computers postPeak to easily access criminal rapsheets--asking to see a person's hands will be most instructive as to the intelligence and character of the just caught miscreant.
Imagine what a psychopathic criminal will do to keep a set of wheels postPeak. They will have no concern for blowing away an entire family to keep their food & fuel desires fulfilled, and we won't have the postPeak police force to chase them down. It will have to be a community effort. This is not fascism, but community cooperation and trial by a jury of your peers on a very tight postPeak budget.
Consider the infamous Tison family, and the panic and horror they brought to the Southwest back in the cheap oil days:
http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/012097/memberof.htm
-------------------------------
Marine Sgt. John Lyons, 24, of Yuma and his family stopped to help [the criminals]. Their bodies were found five days later.
Lyons was lying near the abandoned getaway car, close-range gunshot wounds in his head, shoulders, chest and wrists.
His 23-year-old wife, Donnelda, was in the back seat, cradling 22-month-old Christopher. She had been shot in the chest and neck; the toddler took a shotgun blast to the head.
The body of the couples niece, Teresa Tyson, 15, was found a quarter-mile away. She had crawled off, mortally wounded when a bullet shattered her thigh bone, fragments of which pierced her abdomen. She bled to death and was found with a leather dog collar buckled around her ankle, apparently in a misguided attempt to staunch the bleeding.
-----------------------------------------
When the postPeak stock market collapses making 401ks, IRAs, pensions, and Social Security defunct--How much are you willing to pay in taxes, especially if there is no functioning govt to collect it, and anyone who has any job will be considered a lucky duck? Somehow, I don't think the avg. Murkin is going to volunteer to mail funds to D.C. or his State Govt, and this is assuming the US Postal Service is still functional. Money for prisoners will be way, way down the taxpayer list postPeak in five, ten, fifteen years.
IF Martial Law is imposed, most will be even more reluctant to voluntarily ante up their declining wealth. But if you think that we will continue to spend huge sums for long and involved trials when most of us are starving or forced into slavery, please feel free to put forth your explanation.
Additionally, the days of long incarceration whereby the prisoners are non-productive; an energy sink or money sink supported by taxpayers: this will be ending soon too as it is postPeak unsustainable. When a prisoner has to labor for his food: he will realize that working a garden-hoe, or plucking a chicken with ten fingers is much easier than with just two thumbs.
Finally, when the Machete' Moshpit is the Thermo/Gene norm: would you rather defend your family by having all your fingers to heft whatever weapon you can? And how many fingers would you like the bad guy to have that is initiating the extrasomatic attack?
Your success odds increase considerably if your criminal attacker can barely grip his weapon, causing him great difficulty as he tries to wield it against you.
Obviously, peaceful, well behaved biosolars will understand the necessity of finger retention as they go about their lawful business.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
How many Santa Clause rapists can dance on the head of a pin? Its a stupid question because its paranoid fantasy.
The rest is just a paranoid screed about why you support fascist retributive justice. But dont worry, government and the police are allways your friend, so no harm can come from granting them the legal authority to chop off body parts of people that must allways be dangerous psychopaths.
They run from volunteer firemen? ;)
Firemen are scary!
BLUE?
Bad firemen! Should have red!
Blue is for police only.
One problem with the article though: Texas has a massive surplus! They didn't implement these laws because of a lack of funds.
Thanks for the info Donal. I have a list of states that have oppressive laws (highway robbers) that I will not drive through. Even though the fines are only for Va. residents, Virginia will be added to my list. The list is getting so long that there will soon be few states left to drive through. 'I cared so much that I dont care anymore.'
Actually, in the US the taxman is robbing your non-driving neighbors to pay for your car use. Anyone driving a car is benefiting from massive tax subsidy.
If the taxman stops robbing, auto use will cost more and property tax, sales tax, and income tax will go down.
jbunt
If you google "burning saltwater" you can see a demo of hitting saltwater with radio waves, which releases oxygen and hydrogen, which then burns. Does anyone know whether this really has any potential for providing energy?
That was big news a few months ago. Most people here seemed to think it was a scam of some sort.
If you review the info you will see he has the temperature on the seawater cranked up to 3000 F degrees. You can't get anything to that temp without some significant energy. Granted he is powering the reaction with a very efficient Stirling engine that would help but don't forget the laws of Thermodynamics you can't change forms of energy and get more energy. He is transforming his electricity into heat which will be wasted for the most part and hydrogen which he is burning. It may be efficiently done but it will result in less effective energy than what he started with. Now if he could use solar or wind to generate the electricity it could still have a positive effect in creating a form of energy that could be stored i.e. the hydorgen and used later. Like maybe to heat your house in the winter but it's not a silver bullet.
Of course not, even if it "works". You make electricity somehow, you use some fraction of it to generate radio waves, apply to water. The water absorbs some fraction of the energy from the radio waves, splitting the water into H and O. You can then burn the H and get some fraction of that energy back.
I don't know if this could possibly be any more efficient than plain old electrolysis. In any case, it wouldn't provide energy - it merely converts it from electricity into H2 with some loss. At best a way to store off-peak electricity surplus? I admit, I haven't looked at the details. Don't really have to:
You should simply google "laws of thermodynamics" rather than "burning saltwater" ;-)
Relevant to discussions of thermodynamics and wishful thinking re: "free energy":
The Perpetual Myth of Free Energy (BBC Science)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6283374.stm
hitting saltwater with radio waves, which releases oxygen and hydrogen, which then burns
It costs the same energy to break the H2O bond as you get back when it "burns". Plus, you have to make the radio waves, which represent the energy you break the bond with.
first law of thermo: you cannot win.
second law of thermo: you must lose.
ciao,
Bruce
actually more! :)
You cannot get even the same amount of energy out of a system that you put into it.
1: 2H2O(l)+Energy1=>H2(g)+2O2(g)+delta_Entropy(not recoverable ever)
2: H2(g)+2O2(g)=> 2H2O(g)+Energy2(harvestable)
Energy2
I think the Kuwait reserve transperancy debate could be a real come to reality moment if they fess up and drastically and officially lower reserves. The inferences would be not only the pressure on KSA and others to do the same potentially shattering the hazy psuedo reality the world now exists in but also the potential to vastly accelerate the WT's declining export scenario as to me the next step at least for Kuwait is to restrict exports to a percent of real time reserves. IMO the price impact will be rapid and extreme.
As this is at least the 2nd year this has made headlines it appears that the Kuwaitie's are moving into that decision set. It may still take a year but my bet is they will come out of the closet sometime in the next 12-15 months.
Re: Ongoing Saudi & Iraqi crude oil export cuts to Asia
Reduced refining utilization in the US is a factor in higher crude oil inventories, but I have wondered if there is another factor at work. Note that Iraq is following the same pattern as Saudi Arabia--exports up to the US, down to Asia.
It seems to me that there is a positive correlation between military forces in the Persian Gulf area and crude oil inventories. The US (for now) is at the top of the military/inventory hill. Asia is at the bottom, and Europe is kind of in the middle. Whatcha think?
http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=businessNews&stor...
Oil holds near $73
Tensions between Iran and U.S., supply woes and big rise in speculative investment help push crude, Brent higher.
July 10 2007: 6:47 PM EDT
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=143533
World Oil Outlook: China & US Remain Primary Contributors To Consumption Growth
7/10/2007 11:38:00 AM
Areas not covered by OECD statistics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:OECD-memberstates.png
It seems to me that there is a positive correlation between military forces in the Persian Gulf area and crude oil inventories. The US (for now) is at the top of the military/inventory hill. Asia is at the bottom, and Europe is kind of in the middle. Whatcha think?
Oh, you and your conspiracy theories! Don't you know the world is run by Coincidence?
Let's see, oil prices in Asia are higher than in the US, but Saudi Arabia and Iraq are cutting crude oil exports to Asia.
Let's assume that the US was still a major oil exporter (but militarily weak), and that we had around a quarter million troops from a nuclear armed foreign power in the area, and that the foreign power had three aircraft carrier battle groups in the Gulf of Mexico. Would we show some crude oil preference to the foreign power that had massive military force on our doorstep or would we sell to the highest bidder?
Kind of makes you wonder if the crude oil inventory statistics in Asia and the Pacific are giving us a better idea of what is actually going on in world oil markets.
WT:Seems fair- the US taxpayer is paying a pretty penny to prop up those Saudi dictators.
Also, it is my understanding the Saudis have more money invested in the USA than in Asia. Win-win.
Yeah, I think that the Neocons would argue that--regarding crude oil exports--everything is going according to plan.
The problem is that it is becoming increasingly apparent to everyone in the Army/Marines below the general officer level that increasing numbers of American soldiers and Marines are being killed and maimed in order to maintain the "American Way of Life." I'm sure that it gives the mother of a killed 19 year old soldier considerable comfort to know that her son died so that her neighbor could keep his H2 Hummer filled up.
I still think that we need a special draft for "Neocon Brigades," consisting of all armchair pundits who are still in favor of staying in Iraq and everyone with a large SUV with a George Bush sticker on it.
Can we draft the neoliberals as well? The ones who "take impeachment off the table," who drive SUVs but have a vote democrat on their bumper, who were part of the 78% who approved of Bush when the war was going well...you know, the ones who tell us to change a light bulb yet consume 20xs the amount of energy as an average american. My friend, it is not just the neocons who are arguing everything is going according to plan. Your political ranting discredits your awesome scientic work.
Ludan: Nah- WT's political ranting is entertaining. It in no way discredits his oil depletion insights (not to anyone with a functioning cranium).
I don't think there any neoliberals. It's the independents who have swung from supporting Bush to not supporting him. The hardcore Republicans still support him, the hardcore Democrats never did.
In many states, there are more independents than Democrats or Republicans. This is rather disturbing, since it suggests that a lot of people don't feel there's a party that speaks for them. The rise of the independent voter is probably the most striking element of U.S. politics in the past 50 years.
"Democrats or Republicans. This is rather disturbing, since it suggests that a lot of people don't feel there's a party that speaks for them. "
I would suggest to them to read some of the articles by Ron Paul and see if he is what they were looking for.
http://www.dailypaul.com/
Samsara
There was an interesting article in the Houston Chronicle about a week ago about Ron Paul. As you perhaps know, his district is southwest of Houston in the metropolitan area. He's been loading up bills with earmarks put in for some of his constituents, then voting against the bills because they have too much pork.
Sorry, he's just another Washington hypocrite.
Bob Ebersole
Wait a second, he's not being hypocritical at all. He votes against the pork because he doesn't want to the government to spend the money. But he includes the earmarks so that if the bill *does* get passed, at least his constituents will get some of the money (in other words return some of their taxes to them.)
Perfectly consistent with his principles.
I'm sorry, I live in his district. The guy is nuts, he's an abortionist looking to get the Republican nomination. He puts pork in spending bills so he can get political donations then votes against the bill, so he's a hypocrite, and he's a fair weather libertarian. He voted for DeLay as speaker-so he's a political slut.
I think he's being primed as a spoiler, like H. Ross Perot or Nader. Meanwhile, he's not representing his district while he gallavants around the country with no hope of a nomination.
Bob Ebersole
Sorry, but you are obviously trolling or extremely ignorant. How can you live in his district and not know he's adamantly pro-life and always has been? As a doctor who has delivered over 4000 babies, this isn't hard to understand. (I'm pro-choice myself and I'm not an American, but I believe he is pretty much the best candidate you guys have from either party.)
Your facts are completely wrong as a quick google search will reveal to anyone. If you disagree with him fine, but don't spread FUD.
The main reason I live in Ron Pauls district is that he voted for Tom DeLay for speaker, and they had a redistricting that eliminated the district of Nick Lamson, my excellent Democratic Congressman.
If you'll actually read his literature instead of projecting your own fantasies, you'll see that he's pro-choice because he says that the government shouldn't interfere with a womans right to her own body, and that the relationship between a woman and her doctor should be private. I personally agree with that position, but its pro abortion. And yes, as a gynecologist he has performed abortions. Look at his vote on partial birth abortion.
I am occasionally ignorant, but I've laughed at this nut's antics since he was a state legislator. As far as trolling, I didn't bring him up, all I did was point to a newspaper article from the main paper serving his district and tell the truth about Ron Paul. He's an extremist libertarian, and I think he's being set up a a spoiler, just as Nader and Ross Perot were spoilers.
If you want to campaign for him, fine, just don't expect a free ride for him. He needs to answer to the people of his district first, yet he's spent more time in Iowa than in Galveston since we were gerrymandered into his district.
Here's an article from him in 1981 on why he believes libertarians should be pro-life.
http://www.l4l.org/library/bepro-rp.html
News article from a week ago where he says that privacy rights and individual freedoms do *not* include abortion:
http://www.lifenews.com/nat3222.html
And here's an article about a major pro-lifer endorsing Ron Paul:
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/48722973_republican_party_pro_life_le...
Your statements above about government involvement and a woman's right to choice are completely contradicted by the above. He considers abortion murder and that is one area where the government *should* get involved.
Note, again, I don't actually agree with this myself, but you have clearly misrepresented his views on abortion.
I find it very unlikely he has performed abortions, unless in life-saving situations. Please back up this statement with a reference.
Specifically the state government; Not a provence of the federal government or its much abused interstate commerce clause.
Sadly, we might find ourselves wishing abortion had been legal from the beginning...
The neocon's and the neolib's are one and the same. AIPAC's bit(hes.
the hardcore Democrats never did.
I'm a hardcore democrat (actually a hardcore republican hater), and I supported Bush for about 2 weeks after 9/11. When he didn't go to the American people after the attacks and explain that it happened because of our dependence on oil, and propose a drastic restructuring of the American way of life, I knew it was all over.
Bush (and too a lesser degree, almost every politician in Washington) ended any possibility for a better future for our county in the first month after 9/11.
With 90% support, just think of the truly great things he could have done. Instead, he told us to shop. I wish there was a god, so he look forward to an eternity with his fellow shallow, stupid, evil brothers.
I'm a hardcore independent, who has voted for both Republicans and Democrats.
But I never supported Bush. Even after 9-11, when the attack had cut off my Internet access and I had to watch TV to get news...when Bush came on, I turned the TV off. Even though I'm a news junkie. I just couldn't stand him, and a big reason was that so many other Americans seemed to be fooled by him at that time.
I used to be an Independent, then a staunch Democrat. Now, I'm a political atheist (at least at the federal level). I don't believe it really exists in two separate camps any longer.
I really have no expectations that the Democrats or Republicans will do anything to help the long term future of this country. Independents are pretty much impotent. As the Feds screw around and parade like they give a cr*p about anything, the country loses the quality it once had.
The sooner we all realize that we will soon be on our own (ie, New Orleans), the quicker we can prepare for it.
I have been proudly earing the tin foil since 1972. When Nixon (David Rockefeller employee 1962-1968) was replaced by Gerald Ford/Nelson Rockfeller and then Jimmy Carter with David Rockfeller's Trilateral Commission...the game was pretty obvious.
Note, the song remains the same. The currently notorious neocon lawyer Scooter Libby arranged for Bill Clinton to pardon international gangster Mark Rich. Come on, the Bushes and Clintons go on holiday together. How anyone with two neurons to rub together can believe in the authenticity of either US political party is beyond me.
Why disturbing? What disturbs me are those who always vote the same without genuinely questioning which party is offering the best deal.
Ideally every single one of us should be a swinging voter.
What it would mean is the end of the two-party system, and hence probably the need to reform the laws for the formations of government. AIUI, in many European countries (and elsewhere), government is often formed by free-forming coalitions at each election. Now arguably this can go too far, and end up with a government never able to agree on anything, but it strikes me as preferable to a situation where only one of two parties ever has any chance of winning government.
It's disturbing because of the way the U.S. political system is set up. The real choice is in the primaries...and in most states, you can't vote in the primaries unless you're a member of the party.
So independent voters are letting a small minority choose who they can vote for.
You can't vote unless you're a member of the party? What sort of democracy is that?
Its part of the freedom of assembly provision of the first ammendment. Every citizen gets to vote but parties are allowed to assemble as they choose.
Picking the candidate a party wants to put forward for instance, and restricting such private nominations to party members.
Well that's the same as here, and presumably most democracies...parties have their own pre-selection phase (which may or may not be democratic), then the public selects from between the candidates. It's hard to see how it could feasibly be otherwise. So why does Leanan call it the "real choice"?
Because it is. By the general election, the choice is basically whittled down to two candidates, and the independent voter had no say in picking either of them. (You can of course write in anyone you want, but you're throwing your vote away if you do that.)
The primaries are where the real choice is, and these days, it's the extremists who tend to rule there. Hence, a moderate candidate like Guiliani might have a very good chance of winning the general election, and better reflect what the people want...but he's unlikely to survive the primaries. He's pro-choice, he's pro gay rights, he slept around on his wife and didn't care who knew it. And his last name ends in a vowel. The religious right who are the "base" of the GOP now aren't going to pull the lever for him. The moderates who do want to vote for him will likely never get a chance.
Ah well...yes, you're talking about presidential elections, with essentially only two candidates for the entire population to choose between. In that case, I tend to agree, the notion that each party only puts forward a single candidate, whom the public have no control over, is problematic - although it's true that here we get no real control over the prime minister, but he doesn't actually have all that much power per se (other than by media presence). However, surely parties do their best to put forward the candidate that that they think the majority of the population will vote for? For instance, the Republican Party would hardly want to put foward a candidate that was strongly pro-war and a known Bush supporter, even even over half the Republican Party's members felt that way.
Silly question, but why is it so hard for indepedendents to win office? (other than the obvious reason - lack of a huge party, and its funding, to support you). I gather its never happened since Washington.
I gather its never happened since Washington
Actually Lincoln was elected as the candidate of the 4th Party ! A new party with (from memory) it's 3rd time to even nominate anyone.
The Republican Party was not even on the ballot in most Southern states. When that radical crazy was elected, many Southern states exercised what they thought was their Constitutional right and left the Union.
Alan
Actually, to my everlasting regret, I voted for Bush in 2000. For the first time in my life, I voted for a Democrat for president in 2004. IMO, anyone in July, 2007 with a George Bush bumper sticker on a large SUV must think that it is a swell idea for young Americans to die to keep the oil flowing.
Rod Dreher, a conservative columnist for the Dallas Morning News and a former editor for The National Review, was on NPR yesterday. He basically called Bush a liar who led the country into war based on misrepresentations, and Rod called for a rapid withdrawal. Of course, Rod's brother-in-law is being deployed to Iraq next week.
If I could dictate policy, I would abolish the highly regressive Payroll Tax and replace it with a tax on energy consumption to fund Social Security and Medicare and an Electrification of Transportation program.
Like the dead people in the movie "The Sixth Sense," for most of us the American Suburban Way Of Life is dead, but we just don't know it yet, and we only see what we want to see.
Westexas,
I understand your shame, I'm in the same boat. And my "discredits your scientific work" statement is a bit of hyperbole. Actually, I scan for your comments often. I just don't see "the other side" really getting it. In fact, if you listen to some of the liberal talking shows, it seems to be the same old thing..."the evil oil companies." Yeah, I like your "sixth sense" analogy, but to me its more like "pleasantville."
Actually, to my everlasting regret, I voted for Bush in 2000.
Wow. I'm actually "blushing" for you. I can't imagine why any Texan would vote for someone who doesn't have English as a first language.
Maybe it was his creationist beliefs that swayed you? His failed business ventures? What? Not that I would have anything against you. My Virginia grandma still adores the little inflatable cowboy.
But then, I don't vote for president at all; so, according to American folklore, I don't have a right at all to speak about it...
In any case, part of my mind continually suggests that "we're" getting what "we" deserve. Part of me actually wishes Bush "stays his course." In order to dash the ship against the rocks more quickly.
'In any case, part of my mind continually suggests that "we're" getting what "we" deserve. Part of me actually wishes Bush "stays his course." In order to dash the ship against the rocks more quickly.'
Yeah, there's a real problem with Bush leaving office in 2008 and someone else having to come in and start taking all kinds of actions to try and put the brakes on the runaway train. Is that going to make things worse in the end or better? I think it's 50-50. Can what's been squandered be retrieved? Thermodynamics says no.
As for those who voted for Bush, while none is individually responsible for his actions, the American people and the press are culpable in a big way for Iraq. Whether it was their ignorant, viceral reactions to 9/11, or apathy, Hollywood war movies, ratings chasing and warlike DNA, the American people and press drank the kool-aid and asked for more. It's amazing how fast the memory of war fades in the human consiousness, er, if it ever gets there at all.
Allowing the press to be 'embedded' in the Iraq war zone was a stroke of genius worthy of Hitler. It sucked all the major news services into towing the line to get the story up close. And who wasn't riveted to their chair as the army stormed up the highways to Baghdad.
-Don
What if we anti-war folks get what we ask for and all troops leave? From an Oil standpoint, not an Islamo-facist Caliphate nonsense POV?
I think it will.
Last night on CNN, they said the White House had formulated a plan for Iraq that involved abandoning the U.S. bases there. That's the first time I've heard that. Of course, the White House denied the report, but I don't believe them. I think the Iraq War is going to end the same way the Vietnam War did, only much sooner...and they know it.
I can't believe that the oil there will ever be abandoned to the markets - not after the price "we" paid for it. In contrast, Vietnam offered no reason to stay.
There is no shortage of statements like "Islamo-facist Caliphate" on this site. Don't any of you read articles like this:
Time for the truth about the Liberty
What is the difference between Democrats and Republicans? They are two faces of the same coin.
Yikes! A few hours later, I sound MEAN!
I hope, WT, the "he said with affectionate irony" part made it through to you.
No problem. Actually, Bush as governor was fairly popular with a lot of Texas Democrats, and a lot of them voted for Bush in 2000. It would appear now that he was "playing nice," biding his time until he got to the Oval Office.
BTW, you should have seen the response I got in Texas Oil Patch circles when I started criticizing Bush before the 2004 election. Even in the Dallas area, my Kerry for president yard sign was constantly knocked down by local Neo-Nazis--sorry, local Neocons.
On the block where I live there were more than a dozen signs out in 2004 for the election: Every single one, without exception, read "Bush-Cheney."
For 2008 I am hand-lettering signs, "Alan Drake for President" and plan to post one in my front yard.
Let us now begin a write-in campaign for Alan Drake, who has more good workable ideas than all the Republicans and all the Democrats combined.
Westexas, how about you for VP? With a Louisiana-Texas base, the ticket could gain a lot of traction.
I talked to Alan this morning on the phone, and I told him he had my vote for 2008. I'll serve as an unpaid advisor.
You know, what we ought to do is start selling Alan Drake for President bumper stickers.
Three critical points:
(1) Did Switzerland get by, in the Second World War, consuming oil at about 1/400th the rate that Americans now use? Yes. How did they do it? EOT.
(2) Did the US implement EOT on a widespread basis, using rudimentary technology around the turn of the 19th to 20th century? Yes.
(3) So, if we did it in 1908, why the hell can't we do it in 2008?
If you do (print bumber-stickers for Alan) count me in for one or three.....
I guess we could do an image of a streetcar to one side of the bumper sticker, and then Alan Drake For President covering the rest of the sticker. If you do a Google Search for Alan Drake, he is listed three times in the top 10, or we could do:
Alan Drake For President
Light Rail Now
(there may be some copyright issues on Light Rail Now)
I will buy 1,000 bumper stickers and give them away.
Printed lawn signs would be nice too.
If we lose in 2008, there is always 2012 . . . .
Naw won't make it to 2012 :)
2008 or bust
The population in 1908 in the US was approximately 89 million (interpolated from 1900 and 1910 censuses). Today it is approximately 301 million.
Source: Wiki Demographic History of the US
Cheap energy gave us a phantom carrying capacity. How will we support 3x the population in the same geographical area without cheap energy?
Ay, there's the rub.
Do I remember right that Alan said he was a Canadian? If so, then time out -- no can do, doesn't meet constitutional requirements. Sorry!
Nope ! Born in Lexington, KY and have only had a US passport.
I do promise to rapidly deplete and squander our record levels of superb quality sarconol, painstakingly (one could say tortuously) stockpiled by the current administration.
I hope to turn the USA from being the world's greatest exporter of sarconol (both in distilled and raw form) into a modest importer of sarconol !
Best Hopes for Peak Sarconol !
Alan
WT, My wife has a sense of humor and is pretty handy with her computerized sewing machine. For the 4th she made us a flag to fly in front of the house...It is a large yellow banana on a light brown background. My neighbors said it was a hoot. We had a little block party in the cul de sac at the end of our short street. There are large live oaks and St Augustine grass and we built a couple of picnic tables for the area a couple of years ago. We did steaks, burgers and the usual with long necks. Good people, good time. BTW, they are well aware of what is going on in the world...well...as much as any of us can be.
There needs to be a "truth in advertising" law for political candidates as well. We certainly didn't get what we thought we were getting in GWB. I think even a lot of those hard core Rebublicans are just going through the motions of supporting him, but are secretly quite disappointed in how he has turned out. I just don't hear anyone raving about what a great president he is and how he should be added to Mt Rushmore, like we did at this point in Reagan's 2nd term. (Not that I think that George, Tom, Abe & Teddy should have moved over for Ronnie, either!)
how can you say (you) didnt get what (you) thought you were getting in gwb ? or more specifically, what did you expect ?
He specifically promised to
1) be a compassionate conservative.
2) not engage in nation building.
3) scale down the US presence of the international stage and show more respect for/not bully other nations.
Apparently all read from cue cards written by Prof Goose aka Karl Rove.
Alan
In retrospect he has kept his promise on #2.
compassionate conservative
that is one i havent heard much of lately.
It was a little hard to believe that compassionate conservative crap after seeing him on the TV news chortling about executing Carla Fay Tucker. I also remembered his slurs against Ann Richards-falsely calling her a lesbian, and hypocriticaly outing her as a recovering alcoholic and former drug user. He is a hateful person.
I didn't vote for him in 2000. I voted for Nader, mainly as a protest against the Democratic Party not even bothering to campaign in Texas. I knew Bush was going to win the Texas vote, and I wanted my vote to count. I did vote for Kerry in 2004, but it was only by holding my nose, I despised his position on the war. I like John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden in that order for next year. Hillary Clinton is unelectable-for some reason she gets more BS talked about her than any other candidate, plus, she supports the war. Obama sounds good, but I think the US is too racist to elect him, and, he has supported the war. Bob Ebersole
Done Already:
The Warmonger’s Brigade
by Michael Gaddy
It appears the Bush administration has a real problem on its hands – the war effort is not going well at all and the military is on the verge of "breaking." I do believe I have a plan, which if implemented right away could provide the needed relief Bush is desperately searching for. Desperate times call for desperate measures. If this country is indeed in danger of having to fight the enemy on our soil, it is time to pull out all stops. If the Bush administration is serious about "protecting our freedom" and this is not a war started on lies to increase the bottom line of companies from the Military Industrial Complex, it is time to deploy the Warmonger’s Brigade.
First battalion would consist of all male and female members of the immediate families of everyone in the Bush administration. Of course W’s daughters would be the first to be placed in this battalion, followed closely by Dick "water boarding" Cheney’s daughter, Mary. I am aware that she is pregnant at this time but within a reasonable time after giving birth, she could rejoin her battalion in preparation for deployment to the Iraq Theater of Operations. After all, her significant other is also female so the infant will not lack for maternal care. This administration has found no problem with sometimes deploying both parents to Iraq, so Mary Cheney being deployed would be business as usual.
Included in this battalion would be the children of all cabinet members, led of course by any eligible children of Alberto "torture is ok" Gonzales. I’m sure Karl (the leak) Rove has some children, nieces or nephews that would make good cannon fodder. Included in this battalion would be all eligible employees and family members (18 to 38 years of age) of CIA, NSA, DIA, and BATFE. Since these agencies have declared war on American civil liberties, extending the declaration to include real enemies should present no problems.
So he would not feel left out, all of Donald Rumsfeld’s eligible kin would be immediately drafted for service, even though he is no longer with this administration. They of course would be required to ride in unarmored Humvees while wearing Vietnam Era flak jackets.
Full Polemic here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gaddy/gaddy31.html
Aircraft carriers today are as vulnerable to attack as battleships were in WW2. 2,000 mph plus missles have become too numerous and too cheap to operate carriers close to enemy shores within range of this new generation of missles.
How many aircraft carriers have been sunk by enemy action since 1945?
I have to agree with River here: The ubiquity of cheap, accurate missiles is a new phenom. For a target the size of the Enterprise, inertial guidance is all that's needed. And they don't have to be wave-hugging cruise missles, either, since the shipboard defenses can be overwhelmed quickly by ballistic missiles, too. The key to their vulnerability is the proximity of the hostiles - there's just not enough warning time to react.
How many aircraft carriers have been damaged at all by enemy action since 1945.
Also: The Japanese sent about 4,000 kamakazi aircraft to attack U.S. carriers in 1945. How many U.S. carriers did the kamikazis sink?
How many aircraft carriers have been damaged at all by enemy action since 1945.
How many naval battles since 1945?
I have an excellent ju-ju to prevent elephants trampling urban areas, it NEVER FAILED.
(Except may be in one case, but the elephant got shot by Groucho Marx...)
Aircraft carriers have been deployed on offensive missions hundreds of times since 1945.
In the Falklands War, how many exalted French Exocet missles were able to reach a British carrier?
You may not believe in the Tooth Fairy, but I wonder why you seem to believe in the vulnerability of carrier task forces--in the absence of a scintilla of evidence to support your position.
Don, your argument could have been used for battleships prior to 1940 - how many battleships got sunk between 1919 and 1940? Jeesh. It's amazing how many armchair analysts think the tactics of the last war will win the next one. The battleship was unable to counter the advance of the airplane. The aircraft carrier, a 70 year old concept and with a real big radar signature, will be countered with something else - most probably missiles with superior guidance systems that‘s just the evolution of war. The Russians realized missies were the future by the eighties when they realized they could not match the US ship for ship. Ship defenses such as the Phalanx could be overwhelmed by mass missile attacks. Unlike a plywood plane with a bomb missiles traveling at mach 2 deliver an astounding amount of kinetic energy. And missiles are cheap, unlike aircraft carriers, and are capable of being employed by smaller less powerful nations.
Y'know, that's the peak oil problem in a nutshell.
I think most of the worries regarding the carriers stem from the "Millenium Challenge '02" war games with General Rippen commanding the forces for the unnamed Middle Eastern country.
Rippen sank the carriers and the game was started over with new rules which Iran is sure to follow. they wouldn't do the sneaky, underhanded things Rippen pulled. One link of many describing the debacle:
http://www.exile.ru/2002-December-11/war_nerd.html
The War Nerd is must reading to anyone who is fascinated by military strategy. He’s the Rude Pundit of military analysis.
There is military strategy, planning on a grand scale. Military tactics, planning and attempting to acheive a tactical advantage so that the strategic goal might be accomplished. Military logistics, attempting to get all the expensive garbage to fight a war where you need it when you need it...And, my favorite, military intelligence, usually a group of notorious ass kissers that have become general officers and their aides (aspiring ass kissers) and are responsible for assesing all the information pouring in from the field and making reccomendations on what tactical measures should be taken to meet their strategic goals...after they finish the back nine and knock back a few drinks. Rumsfeld sacked all of the non ass kissers so now we should have a fully qualified group in military intelligence. War is hell...for some.
From above link
ROFLMFAO
They got very close to sinking a carrier, they sunk a very large container ship full of military equipment and supplies ... (from the BBC)
It is thought the Atlantic Conveyor, owned by Cunard, was mistaken for the aircraft carrier HMS Hermes.
She was attacked by two Super Etendards which fired French-built Exocets like the ones that sunk the Coventry's sister ship HMS Sheffield on 4 May.
One that I know of. The Invincible had a nice little hole in one side.
The missile was launched from the same Super Etendard that sank the HMS Sheffield. :-)
Also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
It can be done if someone has the brains and the ballz.
Well, probably none, but in fairness only one was fired at a carrier, HMS Invincible, on on May 30th 1982. Seems like it missed, or at the worst did little damage, versions of the story differ
They only had 5 air launched Exocets to start with.
2 of the others were fired at the HMS Sheffield May 4th, one was diverted by chaff, the other hit and crippled the ship, which later sank while under tow.
The remaining 2 air launched ones were fired at, and hit, the cargo ship "Atlantic Conveyor" on May 25. It burned out to the waterline and later also sank while under tow.
They also had a ground based one near Stanley (had been demounted from one of their ships) which they fired at HMS Glamorgan on June 12. It hit the vessel and did serious damage.
WRT the US and Exocets on May 18, 1987 the Iraqi air force fired 2 at the USS Stark in the Persian Gulf. Both missles hit the vessel having found a blind spot in the close in defense system radar. Only one of them detonated, if they both had it could well have sunk her.
The exocet seems to have quite a high "dud" rate on its warheads, but be that as it may, I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest that fast sea skimmers pose a threat to modern navies
Yikes. I hope you are right. My son is on an aircraft carrier--fortunately, it is in dry dock right now.
Debbie
P.S. Please sign the petition at www.stopiranwar.com (General Wesley Clark and VoteVets). As a Navy mom, this administration's aggressive behavior scares me to death.
***Corrected URL***
Your son is about as safe as a small-town policeman is. There is a hazard to being on a carrier: Both landings and takeoffs of aircraft are inherently dangerous, and there is no way to get around this fact.
What I find amusing is the numbers of people who buy into all the Internet gibberish which is based on no evidence at all.
If the Argentineans could have sunk a British aircraft carrier, they would have done so. Ditto for N. Koreans and N. Vietmamese with respect to American carriers.
If I knew in detail the defense systems, obviously I could not tell you how and why they work. Suffice it to say: Look at the evidence.
Thanks Don Sailorman. That's good to hear. He was previously stationed on a battleship in Pascagoula, MS (the Ticonderago). His job was to operate a gyro to help helicopters know when to land on the deck. He also had to run under the landing helicopter and chain it to the deck. And he is 6'6"!
Don, even the Navy has admitted that the Aegis system cannot possibly stop more than one 'sunburn type' missile at one time and it is doubtful if Aegis could stop enen one sunburn. There is now a new and improved sunburn type missle that travels even faster and is a terrain hugger at 50 feet. These missles are traveling at such velocity that they dont even equip them with warheads, their momentum is enough to destroy or put out of service most ships. Lets not make the same mistake that was made when Billy Mitchell was court martialed. Dont shoot the messenger.
I do not shoot messengers.
The evidence is overwhelming: Carrier task forces are not vulnerable except to people who spin fancy theories. Show me the evidence.
If we attack Iran I believe that they will 'show you the evidence.' Take a look at the Iranian shoreline of the Persian Gulf. Mile after mile of cliffs that have been tunneled for missle installations and then concealed by good camo. Just because you believe that carrier task groups are impervious to fast missle attacks does not make it so.
Please let me know when the first Iranian missle hits the first U.S. carrier.
Enquiring minds want to know.
Reaction time may be needed for missle to missle defenses, but there are other options as well, including a particular favorite of mine, the Phalanx.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS
If in defensive mode, they can have these things shoot at anything that flies their way, if they're so inclined.
Or, how many 155mm Howitzers line the Straight of Hormuz?
Don, I think you should google 'sunburn missle' and do a bit of reading.
How many front line ships had been sunk by aircraft before Taranto?
Hello River,
Don't forget Thatcher called the French President and said she was going to nuke Argentina if he did not give her the disable codes for the Exocets. He complied.
Wonder what strategy Bush would use to get the Iranian Sunburn disable codes from Putin? Or would Putin just laugh at the request?
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
How many aircraft carriers have been sunk by enemy action since 1945?
Considering the lack of sunburn style missiles the number is 0.
The type of question you have asked relies on the past being prolog. And that kind of argument (we had an oil crisis in the 1970's and it all worked out) gets shot down here often.
Rather than idle theorizing, I am looking for evidence.
Where is it?
Actually, they weren't that vulnerable, at least in the case of American battleships late in the war. By then a U.S. battleship was so loaded with flak guns shooting proximity fused weapons, it was tough for anything to get through, even kamikazes. (The proximity fuse never gets as much credit as it deserves) The things were floating flak traps.
Which was part of the reason no carriers were sunk by kamikazes. They had numerous escorts with heavy flak to fight them off. It wasn't just the fighter planes shooting them down, though the fighters probably did the majority of the work.
The 'flak guns' you speak of were not 40MMs but 5inch auto load fast fire and radar controlled with proximity fuses. There is a world of difference between a 5 inch twin mount and a 40MM twin mount. There is also a world of difference in the speed of a WW2 Betty and a Sunburn missle.
The same thing happened a few months back when the Nimitz steamed in to relieve the (I think) Stennis. It probably is just what they say it is, a routine rotation of carrier groups to give the poor sailors some leave.
I think there is definately some bizarre marketing action going on here. Basis a link last week on KSA pricing I put this together. This appears to be FOB pricing
Europe X-Lite +$.65..ArabLite-3.2..ArabMed.-4.7...ArabHeavy-6.6
U.S...A.X-Lite+$1.25..ArabLite-2.15..ArabMed..-4.75....ArabHeavy-7.10
Asian...X-Lite..+$3.50..ArabLite+.55..ArabMed+1.85...ArabHeavy-4.30
I'm not sure what base markets they are basing their premiums off. Any ideas? If they are basing off the markets like Brent, WTI and Sure look like they are putting it to the Asians. To your point on troops in M.E. may earn a discount seems plausible but not definitive.
More pricing info
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_wco_k_w.htm
I would not begin to attempt to unravel how Aramco pricies their crude but believe me they are extremely sharp and they have market intellegence second to none... add freight to the above levels and see what the landed price was to the various locations.... then look at refinery margins in Houston, Rotterdam and Singapore....after you have looked at all the tangible economics....then find out how many bbls headed to various locations on the basis of ongoing barter deals, which other countries are exporting less that the Saudi's can take advantage of short term with larger market share...
Bottom line is you can do as much analysis as you like and not come up with the right answer.
land o' goshen, WT....you think there's some favoritism here??..bandar bush hard at work!..meanwhile screwing over our latest least good friends, the chinese, at the same time..the world is full of surprises!
Very interesting pieces of information, westexas. Looks like Asia will really have to start bidding up the price of oil at some point.
They aren't changing any story in Kuwait. 100 billion barrels of reserves, no problemo.
http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article137027.ece
Lincoln, CA is a small town about 20 miles northeast of Sacramento. It has made more progress toward retrofitting for slow-speed electric vehicles (called Neighborhood Electric Vehicles, or NEVs) than any other place in the U.S. The town has installed dedicated NEV lanes and there is a network of businesses that provide electrical outlets for vehicle recharging in the parking lots.
Check out the LincolNEV website. It has a number of interesting features to explore like:
How does this strike TOD readers as an adaptation to Peak Oil? Lincoln CA is like a lot of small towns in the U.S.: an older grid of blocks around a Main Street, overmatched by sprawling suburbs that are low density, unwalkable, with no mixed use and pavement everywhere and no public civic space. A lot of Americans like living that way. With NEVs, oil shortages become less of a direct concern to residents.
Also, suburban lots have the potential to go far in the direction of sustainability, with gardening and permaculture onsite, and solar, wind and geothermal collection for home energy and HVAC.
Still, the suburban format has many structural inefficiencies and dependencies built in. For instance, just maintaining all that asphalt requires a hefty amount of oil.
What other pros and cons are there to this model?
I'm sympathetic to Kunstler's argument that we have to think beyond keeping the cars running at all costs. Although I'm also sympathetic to the idea that it may be too late and too expensive to re-develop much of suburbia. Particularly in areas where there is a walkable core surrounded by non-compact sprawl, some sort of vehicles like this might be helpful. A significant benefit is the small size which needs less space devoted to storage, which might allow more compact urban form in the core. It frustrates me that municipalities still continue to *require* developers to size their parking spaces/drive aisles etc to accomodate gigantic vehicles.
I'm reminded of Kunstler's current Eyesore of the Month, the Santa Monica parking garage, a.k.a. "a prime example of how America is blowing green smoke up its own ass."
GEMs http://www.gemcar.com work well in New Orleans due to our compact size (Environ Atty did a 10 mile radius search for McDonalds, little realizing that the majority of the area within 10 miles of the CBD is outside New Orleans). GEMs are appearing around New Orleans (I want a photo of one parked as a streetcar passes by).
Few of my trips (except the Airport) are more than 5 miles (10 miles RT) and most are 3 miles or less.
For small towns (Lincoln CA booming to 40,000+) similar distances likely prevail with much lower density.
Sadly, people will use NEVs instead of walking or bicycling, but NEVs are still better than SUVs.
The energy demands of NEVs are low enough that the grid should be able to cope (not so true of larger EVs).
IMHO, NEVs are suitable for smaller towns where side streets connect and are not just funneled into larger multi-lane streets and highways.
NEVs are also likely safer as well (although 1,200 lb at 20 mph can still do damage !)
Not so suitable for larger towns.
Best Hopes,
Alan
PS: It appears that Daimler is not including the GEMs in the Chrysler spin-off. Wonder why ?
Alan, both I personally and my employer (a small municipal govt) are seriously looking at buying GEMs. Have you taken a ride in one? How do you like it? Do you think it has enough power to handle non-flat terrain?
I have taken a short test drive.
How does it handle hills ?
Don't know. New Orleans does not have any hills (except Monkey Hill at the zoo; off limits for test drives) and freeway on-ramps (think suicide).
Speed limit on most streets is 25 mph and (pre-Katrina) New Orleans drivers are/were pretty mellow. Perfect for those streets. Less suitable for divided streets with 35 mph speed limit but "OK".
Max speed varies with load (2 people is supposedly slower than 1 by a mph or two).
Test drive one, even if you have to travel a bit would be my advice. Also, you need a city or town without road rage types in abundance IMHO.
Best I can tell you,
Alan
And buy a high visibility color(s). White body if driven after dark. White body and red or orange fenders might be best.
Thanks. I'm thinking I'd mount one of those orange slow moving vehicles on the rear, even if not legally required, and also mount a flashing light of some sort just to assure I don't get rear ended. I think I'd be pretty safe in my small town, just concerned about people coming up from behind that were not paying attention.
City of Asheville uses them for their "Meter Maids" and there's even a 4 seater that the police use. I thought you were from this area...?
Do they allow bicycles in the NEV lanes?
Yes, it looks that way if I am reading the city's Bikeway Master Plan correctly.
I believe there is some question as to the suitability of suburban plots as cropland. In a typical suburban development, the builder will come in and grade the land, in the process removing most of the nutrient rich topsoil. They'll then fill in with a mix of what they removed and all kinds of low quality earth made up of stones, clay and many time construction debris.... in general whatever they can find easily and quickly. Their goal is to make the footprint of the house (and sometimes of the whole lot) nice and flat to build upon. They also want the soil to be stable so they'll compact the soil with heavy machinery (which would be used anyways even if compaction wasn't a goal). The resulting soil can be almost as hard as a rock. They top this with sod and maybe enough good soil to keep the newly laid grass from dying before the house is sold.
Modern lawns do ok with growing grass but for true crops, it might not be very suitable. I've seen reports that trees in suburbs built in the past thirty or so years don't grow as quickly or as large as they would otherwise because of these poor soil conditions.
All of that is before we even get into the fact that most people don't have the slightest clue as to how to grow crops. There is much more to it than dropping some seeds in the ground and watering now and then. State extension services and agriculture degrees exist for a reason.
--Jason
IME, you are correct. Topsoil is considered "unsuitable fill" (too much organic matter), and is removed before paving. It's often sold to farmers and such.
This is why Lester Brown likes the idea of moving to the center of old cities. They were likely built before removal of topsoil became part of the construction process. And they are often situated on the best land, being the oldest settlements.
Hello Leanan,
Recall my earlier postings on setting sewage infrastructure flowvalves to rapidly retopsoil designated urban areas. Gravity flows can be a wonderful thing if harnessed appropriately, much better that waiting for the infrastructure to crumble, then having uncontrolled overflows into the housing we wish to retain for relocalized permaculture.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
setting sewage infrastructure flowvalves to rapidly retopsoil designated urban areas.
No frickin way.
This is a poor plan due to the toxins humans dump down their drains in addition to the pathogens.
Using the waste stream - sure. After treatment. Without treatment is just begging for an ecological disaster.
Hello Eric Blair,
Thxs for responding. I am not an engineer, but I bet some sewage experts could work out a good way to accomplish this onsite. Dirt berms around the designated area, decanting of fluids, adding tons of mulch and food-waste from the neighborhood, chemicals to minimize smell and disease, dirt coverage and methane harvest until suitable for planting, etc, etc.
It is the long-distance, highly energetic road-transporting of biomulch [sewage, plant matter, discarded biodegradable items] that will be the constraining factor. Don't forget: It is all uphill from the sewage treatment plant. As far as I know: only Zimbabwe built sewage treatment plants above their freshwater sources. =(
Currently, I can go to my local Home Depot and buy planting mix from California. That won't last postPeak.
Currently it is politically impossible. IMO, it is better for community Earthmarines to willingly go for advanced Humanure Recycling in early mitigation phase. Otherwise, Mercs, using 'volunteers' from the Halliburton camps, will assert this later mitigation phase, or just use sewage to help decimate the sheeple. It is hard to run fast and dodge sniper bullets when you are slipping and sliding away.
I hope this speculation gives you a 'strong whiff' of several potential future outcomes. I could be wrong.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
The future is now: Humanure.
However around here at least, people expect to have blooming shrubs and flowers, so builders typically create fairly large raised beds around the house as part of the landscaping and fill these with good dirt. These could be used for growing vegtables if necessary. I noticed as I drove past a nearby subdivision, that one house this year had a row of tomato plants interspersed among the shrubs where flowers have been in previous years. One of my concerns with this is that most of these people have used treated weed-inhibiting mulch and 'Preen' to keep weed seeds from germinating which would keep most vegetables (which are really annual weeds) from germinating as well. These things are designed to be somewhat persistant in the soil.
Jason,
The mistake people make regarding home food production is to view it from a "farm" perspective, that is, growing crops in soil. People can grow a shit load of food if they use hydroponic and modified hydroponic methods.
It might be argued that this requires fosil fuel produced inputs for the fertilizer - which is true. But what isn't said is that even organic growers are going to be in deep dodo because they won't be able to get the inputs they need either. Here I'm thinking of things like rock phosphate, calcium sources and trace minerals. Further, as a former certified organic grower, people have no idea of how much organic matter it takes to produce a little pile of compost.
Were I in suburbia and concerned about home food production, I'd buy a pallet of 20-20-20 plus trace mineral soluble fertilizer, a pallet or 2 of potting soil and a bunch of 5 gallon grow bags. Fill the bags, put in your seeds or starts and water/fertigate. Simple. No fuss. No tilling. Blah, blah, blah.
Two good books are More Food From Your Garden by J.K. Mittleider, ISBN 0-912800-15-1, 1975 or for the more technically oriented, Hydroponic Food Production by Howard Resh, ISBN 0-88007-222-9, 1978-2001.
I agree that people will not likely have the right varieties and cultivars much less open pollinated ones. I've been growing stuff for over 40 years and during that time I have trialed hundreds of varieties on everything from corn to tomatoes. My last trials were two years ago when I reviewed about 400 varieties of tomatoes looking for a good OP one for juice. I finally tested 25 of them and found one that was good. But, people will still be better off growing something than nothing!
I also grant that most people will not be growing grains. I know in my own case I began testing about 8 years ago. I looked at spring and winter wheat. Spring wheat did rotten but the winter wheat did OK so I spent the next 7 years developing my own strain of beardless WW. However, I did start tests on ouinoa last year that are still ongoing.
My point to all this is that (as much as I hate the phrase) people need to look outside the box.
Todd
Yes, that's exactly how most recent suburbs have been built, with so-called "builder's loam." Here's an article describing the building process and some solutions -- especially subsoilers, which are expensive and seem energy-intensive. Without rehabilitation it can take decades for suburban soils to start getting back to a fertile state.
But as an illustration of what's possible on a suburban lot, the Dervaes family Path to Freedom website is inspirational. When they bought their property in Pasadena, the yard was "a combination of broken asphalt, large concreted areas, weeds, Bermuda grass, chalky 'adobe-type' soil, and a few landscape plants."
Today they have a working produce business that grows over 350 different varieties of vegetable, herbs, fruit, and berries. 6,000 lbs of produce are harvested annually from the 1/10 acre garden.
The original soil in New Orleans is fertile and we add dirt from the Bonne Carre Spillway as needed.
About every ten years the spillway is opened and a fraction of the Mississippi River in flood goes directly into Lake Pontchartrain (messes up oysters for at least 6 months). The residual silt is free for the taking (preventing buildup over time).
Best Hopes for Good Soil,
Alan
You know, one of the great things about New Orleans is that it has its own unique vernacular urban culture, closely linked to local production, food, lifeways, music, what have you. I think it is unique among U.S. cities in that respect.
Thanks for all your stories about the hidden details that make life in New Orleans worth living.
Summary of Weekly Petroleum Data for the Week Ending July 6, 2007
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/weekly_pe...
Gasoline inventories up?
Did you catch the net imports were up 2.3% from July 2006?
Tot. Net Imports 13,035 (7/06/2007) 12,736 (7/06/06) 2.3%
Importing more than 13 million barrels of oil + products per day.
This is an interesting monthly graph of net exports by the top 16 net exporters (one mbpd or more), which collectively accounted for about 87% of total world net exports in 2006 (I think that "Mr. 5%" did the graph):
http://netoilexports.blogspot.com/2007/06/net-oil-exports.html
From the article up the thread:
As I noted, it's a little "odd" that oil prices are higher in Asia, but Saudi Arabia and Iraq are cutting crude oil exports to Asia.
WT: Mar 07 global exports are lower than June 04. Need an "economist" to explain that one.
Based on the Excel table, it looks like the monthly net export peak was September, 2005, and in March, 2007 we were down by abut 2 mbpd, a decline rate of about 3.5% per year (month to month basis), all for the top 16 net exporters. If the Russian production decline kicks into high gear, we could easily see a 5% to 7% range decline rate (perhaps even higher) in net exports by the top 16.
The whole Neocon plan is based on the continued willingness of American soldiers and Marines to continue dying to keep the oil flowing, but having said that, there is a certain simple ruthlessness to their plan. Facing the prospect of a post peak export world, what does one do? It's simple: Seize effective control of the oil fields in the Persian Gulf.
It's all about proportions. While stocks in the Asian bloc may be lower than that in the OECD, they use much less oil over all than the west does. You should also look at Japan, a country that has mastered the art of increasing efficiencies and has begun to use less and less oil each year. When you have an economic power house like that which is slowly decoupling itself from the 'oil economy' in a very peaceful and orderly transition, it should say a lot about the potential of the human race to adapt. Being at the low end of a 5 year supply range really doesn't mean anything there...
As for the OECD picture you like to display here now and again, I think you are grossly neglecting the facts that it represents. I have noticed that your past contention was that, from a geographic stand point, the OECD does not represent a large portion of the world, or even a large majority of the human population. And forgive me if I am paraphrasing you incorrectly, it seems you feel that because of this fact, the OECD stocks can not be used as an accurate measuring stick for global oil stocks.
For those of you who are curious as to just what portion of the world the OECD represents, here is the graphic that WT has been linking from time to time:
OECD countries are highlighted in blue.
As you can see, as a portion of the entire globe, the OECD does in fact represent a fairly small fraction from a purely geographic stand point. However, one must take a look at the facts before drawing any adverse conclusions. Some tid bits on OECD oil consumption and usage taken from the EIA:
*** The OECD used on average 49,191 mbpd of oil in 2006.
*** Global oil usage averaged 84,562 mbpd in 2006.
*** This means that the OECD uses ~58% of all the oil the world uses every year.
*** From this link, OECD member states have a population of roughly 1,168,530,000 in 2005.
*** The total population of the world stands at approximately 6.5 billion people, giving the OECD percentile at ~18%. That is, roughly 1/5th of the world uses 3/5ths of the oil.
From these statistics, we can see that OECD countries use the majority of the oil in the world, an as such represent enough of a statistical sampling to give us an accurate picture of the global oil industry. However, I am fully aware that the 'burden of truth' must be met here, so I include the following section with my own opinions and some what hasty research.
REDC countries are highlighted in red.
This is the same graphic which represents what I call the Rapidly Economically Developing Countries, or REDCs. These countries are regional power houses that are showing not only increased growth, but increased usage of Oil in a trend that is pushing up the worlds oil consumption at a faster than normal rate. Some statistics, also taken from the EIA:
*** Brazil's oil consumption has increased to 2,100 mbpdoe in 2006 and represents 40% of the oil usage for all of South America.
*** Russia was using 2,750 mbpd in 2005, or roughly 2/3rds of the Eurasian blocs oil usage.
*** India's oil consumption has increased to 2,438 mbpd.
*** China's oil consumption has increased to 6,822 mbpd.
From these known stats, we can conclude that total OECD and REDC countries combined use a total of approximately 63,300 mbpd of oil, or roughly 75% of total oil usage in the world. These four countries combined hold around 40% of the worlds population, letting us know that the 60% of the worlds population uses...75% of the oil.
It should be dully noted that oil stocks in this large sample are still above, at or near their 5 year highs. Could we begin to argue then that this statistical sample is large enough to give us an accurate representation for the state of the current global industry? Lets look a bit further, shall we?
"Asian Phoenix" Emerging Countries are highlighted in green.
Once again, this is a modified OECD world graphic that shows not only the OECD and REDCs, but also shows the Asian Phoenix Emerging Countries, or APEC. These countries represent some of the fastest growing manufactoring economies in the world, and along with the REDCs, represent the lion's share of economic growth in the past quarter century. Taken from the EIA, we know that:
*** The APEC minus India and China, Japan and South Korea consume roughly 7000 mbpd of oil.
*** This ammount represents aproximately ~8% of total global FF usage.
These countries also represent an additional 10% of the global population, which means that 70% of the worlds population uses around 80% of the oil, or a fairly balanced share. Its only in these countries that oil stocks are near the bottom of their respected 5 year stocks. Let me be perfectly frank:
APEC, WHICH REPRESENT 8% OF GLOBAL OIL USAGE IS THE ONLY REGION THAT SHOWS OIL STOCKS AT THE LOWER END OF THE 5 YEAR RANGE!
So, on the one hand, we have roughly 75% of global oil use showing higher oil stocks than normal, while only 8% show lower oil stocks than normal. The remaining lions share of oil production and usage is concentrated almost entirely inside of the OPEC countries that have not been mentioned.
Now, put your feet in OPECs shoes, and from a purely business stand point, where do you think the majority of your oil shipments should go? Where 75% of the oil is used? Or where 8% of the oil is used? The answer is self-evident of course.
Remember, the APEC countries have this one shot to build their infrastructure without repeating the mistakes that the western world has: that is without the suburban sprawl. It will be far easier for these countries to adopt a renewable + nuclear energy generation scheme then it will be for the OECD. OPEC knows this, and from an outside standpoint seems to be 'guiding' these countries on this path.
While I somewhat grudgingly state it, it seems that OPEC is correct in their statement that, from a global perspective, oil stocks are high and the market is well supplied. For the next few months it seems, this situation will no change, so their appears to be no reason yet to start increasing production.
The test for OPEC, and KSA in particular, has not come to pass. It seems only fair that all statements to the contrary be considered conjecture and speculation. When oil stocks begin to decline on a much more wide spread basis, they will have to respond. We will know soon enough!
Perhaps I missed it, but do you have hard numbers for crude oil inventories in non-OECD countries?
Lest we forget, within the overall context of my repeated warnings (starting in January, 2006) about declining net oil exports, I have been pointing out the anomaly of higher crude oil prices in Asia, versus the US, while Saudi Arabia and Iraq are cutting oil exports to Asia--and while the Pacific area of OECD is showing crude oil inventories at the bottom of their five year range.
EIA data show about a 2 mbpd--5%--decline in net exports, from the top 16 net exporters, since September, 2005.
It seems to me that something more than price is being used to allocate declining net oil exports.
So, which region more accurately reflects world oil markets--the country with hundreds of thousands of military personnel, hundreds of aircraft, and countless ships in the Persian Gulf area, or the region without any real military presence in the area?
I do not wish to get into tit-for-tat 'my opinion is better because of x quote', as your military comment seems to suggest. Suffice to say, the lions share of OECD countries, and those of the REDC do NOT have a military presence in the Persian Gulf. 3(4?) countries out of 20 doesn't matter in the slightest, especially when only one of them has 90% of the forces to begin with.
OECD stocks are well known. We can reasonably assume that Russia and Brazil, both net exporters, have high stocks, and based on the news stories about India and China creating their own SPR, we can infer that their stocks are quite high as well. The only question comes to the APEC countries. As stated above, they only represent 8% of the global oil consumption, and can not be used to accurately reflect the market as a whole. OPEC countries fall into the category of Russia and Brazil: stocks matter little to them.
As I mentioned above, Asian stocks are at the lower end of their 5 year average, as it was stated by you and several other posters, but their share of oil consumption is small. The data so far suggests that while their stocks may be lower, and hence they are bidding up the cost of oil higher, there is no systemic shortage of crude oil at the present time. This may, or may not, change this fall and winter. I suggest we wait and see, and not try to divine the future with tea leaves made of statistics.
So, we apparently don't have hard data on the non-OECD crude oil inventories.
Within the OECD, Europe is showing declining crude oil inventories.
Crude oil stocks in the Pacific/Asia area are toward the bottom of their five year range.
Crude oil prices are higher in Asia, than in the US, but--apparently because they think we are really, really swell guys--Saudi Arabia and Iraq are cutting crude oil exports to Asia, in favor of the US.
Meanwhile, world crude oil exports are declining. I'm just pointing out that it seems that something besides price is being used to allocate declining net oil export capacity.
Forgive me, but I think you are jumping to conclusions with a repeat response just for the sake of backing up your own opinion. We know that European stocks declined by ~2% for the entire year, but still remain near the very top of their 5 year stock average. We know that the rest of the OECD has stocks at or above the 5 year high as well.
In addition to all of this, we know that there is no supply crunch in the REDCs. As I have demonstrated, we now know that the APECs use only 8% of the global oil consumption. Its that number that we need to focus on.
Eight Percent.
That alone should tell most of the story, westexas. I for one can not fathom why you are harking on that 8%. Thats less than 1/3rd that which the United States uses, and only 1/12th of the entire world! While I may not be able to produce exact stocks for these countries, one could reasonably assume that they remain well above their MOL, else they would be experiencing shortages of oil.
The US has come within 10-15 million barrels of our MOL, and we are still having shortages. That 10-15 million barrels represents roughly 8% above the MOL level. One can then logically assume that stocks in APEC countries are at a minimum above 8% of their MOL, and most likely significantly higher.
Again, lets try to keep this in the proper context: thus far, there does not appear to be ANY shortfall in oil supplies to the world. The oil has to be coming from some where, and I suspect the 'blame' for the missing oil lays with the countries you are excluding from your exporter list.
Whether people can afford it or not is another topic entirely.
As you said, it looks like we don't have hard data for the non-OECD countries that consume about 42% of the world's oil production, which is precisely the reason I have been posting the graphic.
In regard to net oil exports, as the mathematical models predicted, world oil exports are declining--with the top 16 down about 5% from the 2005 peak. This has led to a significant increase in oil prices, with Brent now above its post-5/05 monthly high.
And I have simply been pointing that something besides just price is apparently being used to allocate declining world oil exports--from "less favored" importers to "more favored" importers.
Westexas, I have already explained in detail that all but ~10% of oil consumption has been covered. The 'missing' 42% that you refer too includes Brazil, Russia, OPEC, China and India. They make up roughly ~85% of the remaining tally for global oil production and usage. There is very little left to snoop around in and have any questions. As most OPEC nations, Brazil and Russia are net exporters of oil, they do not need to have much oil stocks on hand, and they can be safely discounted from this conversation, and we know the situation in India and China based purely on their SPR expansions!
Again, you are a stickler for that 8% of APEC countries. I would like to know why?
Maybe I missed something here Hothgor, but where did you post the inventory stats for non-OECD countries?
Why? Those stocks are very important. If OPEC nations are to make up for a short term production shortfall or demand increase they would draw on those stocks would they not?
Roberts around now. You should ask him if I'm 'Hothgor'.
Now, aside from the obvious trolling response, I told WT that I didn't have the exact stats on non-OECD countries. However, we can infer certain things.
1. 42% of oil production and consumption occurs outside of the OECD.
2. Of that 42%, ~80% of the production and consumption occurs in Brazil, Russia, China, India, and OPEC countries.
3. Of that group, all but 2 countries, Chin and India, are net exporters of oil.
4. We know the stock situation in China and India: its increasing! Just look at their SPR construction.
5. The net exporter countries do not need more than a few days supply of oil on hand: if they need oil for a project, they simply produce it. It would require a massive amount of destruction, on the par of a world war, to change this fact.
6. Of the remaining oil production and consumption, only 8% of the global usage occurs in the APECs.
7. We know their stocks are high enough that they do not have any reported chronic shortages of oil/gasoline/diesel.
8. We inferred this based on the USAs own MOL, and the shortages we've been experiencing when we dropped below a 10% excess cushion.
9. By that extension, APECs stocks are at least 10% higher than their MOL, which means they rest in the 'comfort' zone that the rest of the OECD countries have been in for the past 20 years.
10. OPEC stocks do not matter, as they can easily redirect oil exports for domestic consumption.
Would you like for me to discuss any of those 10 points in more detail?
Huh? 42% of both production and consumption? You lost me there. Are they the same thing now?
Again, which are you talking about production or consumption?
OK
But inventory levels usually exclude SPR levels, and their SPRs are still very small. This tells us *nothing* about their commercial stocks. And that's the problem, you have no data on their stocks!
Hogwash. SA for example has huge inventories. You are just making this crap up.
Can you please sepperate consumpion and production, they are very different things you know.
Hogwash. There are constantly reports of oil/gas/diesel shortages all over the world.
That's MOL of gasoline, not crude oil stocks. You are comparing appples to oranges.
Hogwash. There are gas shortages in several countries around the world. Nepal, Senegal,Nigeria, Iran...
Of course they matter! You are just making this up as you go along. Those stocks are used to buffer oil production. They make up for shortfalls in production due to maintainence, unplanned downtimes, or surges in demand from customers. You can't just turn oil fields on and off like a tap! They don't run a Just in Time inventory.
How would he know you're Hothgor, Hothgor?
I'm sorry. I should have used production/consumption, instead of production and consumption. And by that I mean that most countries produce and consume oil. If you would like, I could break everything down into different categories! What a strawman...
Its quite simple: If China or India were not getting the oil they needed for daily consumption, they would not have the oil needed to build a SPR. 20 million tons of oil is a LOT of oil, and Chinas first wave of SPRs include that. I don't see WT or yourself coming up with any hard data to refute me. When you can, I will be wrong. Until then, occam's razor is on my side.
If by huge inventories you mean several days of supply, plus oil in a pipeline, then yes, I suppose they have 'huge inventories'. Unfortunately, you have no data to back up your claim on this aside from the constant conspiracy theory drivel that states they have a few billion barrels in storage to flood the market!
We are discussing a small group of countries here: the APEC countries. Not Africa. Not South America. Not some random island in the pacific or a backwater town in North Dakota. When you can provide specifics, I will deal with them. Remember, we had spot shortages in the US circa 1998, when oil was abundant and cheap.
Not at all! Unless the APEC countries move all their oil by trucks/rail, or have it all stored on site at their factories, which conveniently for you happen to be located right next to their ports, they are transporting their oil via pipelines, just like gasoline. How do you think the oil gets to the Cushings in the first place, my friend...
Hogwash yourself! Nepal and Senegal are not a part of the APEC countries, Nigeria is corrupt and Iran suffers from a severe shortage of investment, and thus must import gasoline. Iran does NOT have a shortage...at least not yet! You can cry all you want about the countries that use less than 1% of the oil in the world: you have to treat them in the context they belong! Poor economies, corrupt regimes, and with colonial boot-prints still on their foreheads. These countries have ALWAYS been having trouble. To suggest other wise is very ignorant of you. And don't even try to confuse the issue by brining up the rationing. They are doing that so they still have products to export circa 2015. Your blowing smoke out your rear on this one.
But you can prevent the oil you are producing from being exported. As long as you are producing a surplus, you technically do not need any more than a few days domestic supply in storage. How you have failed to grasp this simple concept is beyond me.
I suppose in the same what that you KNOW that I am Hothgor? I believe I am the, what, 10th person in the past month that you have 'outed' as 'Hothgor'. Does he scare you that much that you must constantly jump at anyone who doesn't agree with you or any of the more 'established' posters at TOD? Robert and I are friends, btw...
Tit for Tat. Tit for Tat! Don't you ever get tired of doing this, Rethin?
The simple facts are
1. Your claim that OECD stocks are "at or near their 5 year highs" is demonstrativly false.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/gifs/Slide25.gif
2. You have provided Zero evidence of non-OECD stocks. Your long string of specious logic and false conjectures prove nothing. Without inventory data this argument is pointless.
...
You do realize that that chart shows projected stocks based on an arbitrary scenario, and not actual numbers right? The last month we have reliable data for clearly shows OECD stocks above the median quantity for this time of year, while nations like the US are near the top or above...
...
I can't believe you missed that and actually posted that! Did you just look at it at a glance and decide to yourself "mmm, I think I will 'pwn' this guy with this!'?
That chart shows that as of July OECD stocks are in the middle of the normal range haven fallen off their above average highs from last year. These are actual numbers as of July.
You claimed that OECD stocks are "at or near their 5 year highs." The graph disproves this.
I'm still waiting for non-OECD inventory data.
The graph is based on conjecture because we don't have accurate date for June, much less July, which has a data point on your graph! And we ALL know how reliable the EIA and the IEA are when it comes to graphs. In fact...you are usually the first person on hand to dismiss any predictive facts that come from them! Honestly friend, are you just deliberately trolling my posts? Because you are doing a terrible job at it!
The simple facts still are
1. Your claim that OECD stocks are "at or near their 5 year highs" is demonstrativly false. No predictive data needed. No conjecture. Just reported inventory levels "as of July" (which means June is the last data point since you insist on being so obtuse).
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/gifs/Slide25.gif
2. You have provided Zero evidence of non-OECD stocks. Your long string of specious logic and false conjectures prove nothing. Without inventory data this argument is pointless.
So you can attack WT as much as you want. Come back with non-OECD inventory statistics and then we can talk. And if you insist that OECD stocks are "at or near all time highs" why don't you show some evidence that contradicts the IEA.
I don't think you understand the entirety of your blunder, Rethin. Your only remaining contrary argument against me is based on a projective graph that has 'projected' data that the EIA and IEA have not even reported on! They haven't reported the numbers yet! You have no proof to demonstrate that I am wrong, because there is no proof that shows that I am wrong. I have just about had enough of your trolling for the night.
Good evening to you sir.
Edit: I present to you the graph of current OECD oil stocks. This includes the latest current data we have, the month of April. You will find your graph on the bottom of the first page of the PDF. I hope that you will take note, and allow the data to sink in that OECD oil stocks have been trending upwards for the entire year, and remain well above the median 5 year average. I look forward to hearing your contraction, and apology. Have a wonderful, trolling, day.
1. Stop claiming that OECD stocks are at record levels. They are not. They in the middle of the normal range and dropping. This is not projected data, it is reported data from the IEA up to and including June. Simple inventory numbers are not in dispute.
2. Stop claiming that non-OECD stocks are high since you have absolutely no data either way as to the state of said stocks.
Did you even bother to look at the PDF? They show that OECD stocks ARE trending upwards, and ARE near their 5 year high! My god man, are you daft or something?
ugh, you are so dishonest I feel dirty just replying to your posts.
That graph at the bottom of the first page is *industrial* oil stocks for *just N America*.
You didn't even bother to scroll to page 5 where it shows All OCED oil stocks to be far from their 5 year highs.
Actually, it clearly shows that total oil stocks are within 1% of their all time high for the OECD. You are now trying to substitute days of supply at current rates with total stocks, a straw man and highly trollish response if I ever saw one. Not once have I commented on Days of Supply. Not once have I suggested that we aren't using more oil.
The fact is, days of supply has been trending downwards among almost every major industrial economy since the 1980s, after they reached their zenith during the oil crisis. Total stocks DO matter when explaining price phenomenon. For instance, in January, the price of oil plummeted $10, from $60 to $50 a barrel, because Cushings was full. There is very clearly a maximum oil storage volume, and we nearly exceeded it! Humans may be very good at manipulating our environment, but we haven't quite mastered the storage prowess of Mother Nature herself.
And you are one to talk of dishonesty, Rethin! You are calling me names in an attempt to discredit me by labeling me as 'Hothgor', which I very, VERY clearly am not. The only reason I even mentioned Robert was because he does know who Hothgor is, and by extension who I am not. Perhaps I should not have characterized him as a friend, but when hes one of the only people you know in the briefest sense at this site, you really have no choice. Imagine how YOU would feel if you were a new poster who was labeled in a negative light by someone you don't even know!
If what Robert says is true, and Hothgor is trying to get reinstated to TOD, you might end up looking very stupid, now wouldn't you?
Shame on you sir.
A couple of things. First, I am not sure who partyguy is. If we are friends, he needs to e-mail and let me know who he is.
Second, "Hothgar" has e-mailed me several times, so I do know who he is in real life. He has made some requests to get reinstated here, and I supported that request. As I said to others, if you don't confront opposing views, you can never sharpen your own views. Personally, I love to go up against critics (as long as they aren't personally insulting).
Third, I think this debate is a good one, and PG has put out a well-researched post. I have indicated as well that this hang-up with non-OECD stocks is a bit misplaced, because we do have transparency for the vast majority of the world's oil consumption. Pointing at the unknown as support for your position is not a very sound debating tactic. And it is true that inventories, where they are transparent, are in good shape. If one wishes to suggest that they are in horrible shape in non-OECD countries, the burden in on that person to demonstrate this.
The problem with Hothgor isn't that he presents an opposing view, there are plenty of opposing views presented on this board, its that he is dishonest.
I really do wish we had better data on non-OCED countries. If someone used such asinine logic as Hothgor used above to demostrate that non-OCED inventories were alarmingly low you would be up in arms. Its not the claim so much as how it's argued.
BTW me and Kehbab are bestest buddies since kindergarten. So nobody can argue with what I say.
Dishonesty should certainly be highlighted. But in this case, I don't think either of you are being dishonest. You are looking at 2 different things. PG is arguing that stocks are near the upper end of the average. This is true on an absolute basis. You are arguing that they are not, that they are in the middle of the range. That is true on a days of supply basis. So, let's not be hasty about characterizing positions as dishonest.
As far as physical inventories go, the important number for sellers is the absolute number. All that is important is how much room you have in the tank. Days of supply can diminish (for example some tanks may be decommissioned) but this is irrelevant to the seller who is looking at the physical tank levels to determine whether the market is well-supplied. Now for consumers, days of supply has a lot of meaning. Lower days of supply raises the risks of running out of product in the event of a disruption.
He claims that you and he are friends. Is that honest?
Then he links to the above pdf and claims the chart at the end of page one proves OECD stocks are at the high end of the range. But that chart is only industrial OECD stocks in just N America. Is that honest?
How about that whole chain of conveluted BS he uses to "prove" non-OECD stocks are healthy. Is that honest?
In reply to your comment about physical inventories, they too are far off their 5 year highs. There is plenty of room in them tanks. Just scroll to page 5 of Hothgor's above linked pdf.
RR, honestly, why do you suspend your critical thinking skills just cause Hothgor is saying something you want to hear? I've seen you open a can of whoopass for far smaller transgressions when they go against your way of thinking.
He claims that you and he are friends. Is that honest?
I get a lot of e-mails. Some come from people who are regular readers. If that is the case, then it would not be too much of a stretch. But I really don't know, because he hasn't e-mailed and told me who he is.
Then he links to the above pdf and claims the chart at the end of page one proves OECD stocks are at the high end of the range. But that chart is only industrial OECD stocks in just N America. Is that honest?
It was at least a mistake, but if you scroll down to the other chart you will see that the absolute inventories are still bumping up against 5 year highs. As I said, you are looking at days of supply. Look at the graph on the right.
In reply to your comment about physical inventories, they too are far off their 5 year highs.
Ah, I see what you are doing. You are looking at the absolute, regardless of the season. That's not really valid most of the time, because of seasonal maintenance. You have to look at where it is in the band. In the band, it is at a 5-year high. Again, you are looking at 2 different things and coming to 2 different conclusions. That doesn't mean someone is being dishonest.
RR, honestly, why do you suspend your critical thinking skills just cause Hothgor is saying something you want to hear?
Why would that be something I want to hear? I think his assessment is accurate: We do have data on the vast majority of world inventories, and they are in pretty good shape. That doesn't mean this is what I do or do not want to hear. It just is.
As far as right now goes explain 70.
Next I suspect I rank as the biggest doomer and oil stock shortages from peak oil should begin to occur later in the year Sept-Oct potentially worsening through the year. Understand we probably won't make enough heating oil early enough this year gambling big time on another mild winter. Its next summer that we will begin to see serious problems with oil stocks and into 2009 past 2009 is simply unkown. The 70+ oil price and tightening spreads for lower quality oils indicate tightening oil supplies now and simply watch how things unfold over the next 4-5 months. If refinery utilization was higher in the US we would have low stocks now.
This is assuming we don't get a hurricane or a cold winter. Both of those events will result in a shock that I think will surprise a lot of people. Barring above ground events the first fairly clear signals of the effects of peak oil start about Sept just wait a bit.
there's so much conflicting data out there, I don't know what the real stocks situation is. this graphic from the eia suggests that OECD stocks are not all that high:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/gifs/Slide25.gif
even though it is in 'days of supply', the rapid drop compared to the five year trend suggests that the absolute stock level has also fallen recently.
Substrate,
Read the report again. It said that blending componeents rose 1.2 million barrels, but finished gasoline fell. So the refineries have a backlog, and the backlog is growing. since blending components are at least partially ethanol and the US has added so many ethanol producers, this may explain some of the inventory figures.
All in all, the US is still losing ground on gasoline, we're very vulnerable to a hurricane.
Yes, I did notice that it said the rise was mostly in blending components. However, based on historical trends, I was expecting quite a drop so this rise is a surprise. If you look at TWIP, the stocks graph shows it on a trajectory to the stratosphere. The last few times there were mysteriously large gains, the week afterward corrected it.
Yeah...but Finished gasoline fell 800K barrels.
Production fell 9.2 MMBPD, against demand at 9.6 MMBPD.
Utilization flat at 90.2%
Imports 1.4 MMBPD.
Crude imports down? Swap finished for crude maybe, obviously the plants in the US are having some trouble producing at higher rates....OR....it is more inexpensive to import the finished goods.
Nothing to see here...move along :-P
A critical topic related to the politics of oil: Religious Scare Tactics.
One of my brothers forwarded an essay to me which I saw somewhat debunked at a site called Breakthechain.org .
The article is located here:
http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/rickmathes.html
A Christian Prison Ministry leader claims to have shamed an Imam into silence with the claim that all Muslims are commanded by fatwah to kill Christians as a way to get into Heaven, while all Christians are commended to love Muslims as a way to get into Heaven.
Therefore, according to this minister, Christianity is good and Islam is evil.
This is an odd argument to make in the face of the Iraq slaughter of innocent civilians, and yet some Americans believe it. Islam is a religious bogeyman in contrast to American Christianity.
As it turns out, the minister in question was not shaming an Islamic Imam into silence, but rather a Muslim inmate who agreed to represent Islam as the officials putting on an orientation for prison workers was not able to get an Imam to do so....????
I am going to google Franklin Graham's comments about the Iraq War opening up a great missionfield for christian missionaries.
I know that my nephews in the military are fed all sorts of stuff to keep them pumped up for war.
I also know that this type of hate-mongering and fear-mongering is fundamental to stirring up people for war.
Our resource war is not fought in a cultural vacuum. Any info that TODers can proovide on similar instances or on critiques of such religion-based agitation would be welcome.
I've been writing lately and have had articles published in one little local paper, and intend to begin writing with an aim for publication in various publications with articles related to resource war, peak oil, and religious and cultural conflicts.
Thanks for any ideas, info, or critiques.
Beggar: I don't really follow the subject, but in passing I heard yesterday that the guy with the conehead says you Christian Murikans are nothing but phonies (except for the ones going to Mass).
I think the demonizing of Muslims in the U.S. is a big problem and could become much bigger. If a U.S. Hitler is to rise from the ashes of economic collapse, his scapegoat most likely will not be Jews but rather "Muslim-extremists" (all one word) and possibly also illegal immigrants.
Let us hope the economy goes to stagflation rather than collapse, because bad as the Bush administration is, we're dealing now with a bunch of goody two-shoes compared to a genuine fascist regime.
Were I Emperor of North America, I would mandate classes in comparative religion in high schools, with the goal of bringing critical thinking and respect for other faiths into our culture--i.e., an anthropological approach to religion, which is the one that makes the most sense to me.
Don,
We've got a religeous crusade combined with a resource war. The competing religeons are Christian, Sunni, Wahabi Suni and Shia, the nationalities are Kurd, Arab, British and American with the Israelis pulling strings and cheerleading behind the scenes. The Turks appear to be massing infantry, and I'm sure the Iranians are mobilising. The Saudis are financing the Sunni militias and Al Quaida. The Americans are financing everybody but the Iranians.
Its too bad that God won't make His will very clear. Maybe we should finance classes in atheism instead.
Bob Ebersole
"Its too bad that God won't make His will very clear."
Godz just loves these scenarios. He just sets them up to watch them fall. It's rather boring in Eternity, you know, and although our wars are small potatoes in the cosmic scheme of things, they do provide a momentary diversion for the Big Guy.
BTW, I don't believe in godz.
We do have classes in atheism: They are called "Sunday School."
Of the ferociously committed athiests I know, every single one was subjected to mindless and forced Sunday school classes. Indeed, speaking as an historian of ideas, it is hard to get to atheism except by an irrational hatred of theism, which usually is a result of forced dogmatic education.
It was my great good fortune to go to a private school, Verde Valley School, in Sedona, Arizona, whe