<Coal Crunch? The Oil Drum DrumBeat: January 26, 2008>

220 comments on Shell Energy Futures

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

olepossom on January 25, 2008 - 1:02pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The only way I can read "scramble," or the "mountainous desert race" is as a euphemism for resource wars. That has been the way that mankind has traditionally resolved the allocation of scarce and vital resources. "Excitement" and "fierce competition" sound an awful lot like "Saving Private Ryan" or "The Thin Red Line." At least there is some acknowledgement in the industry that the alternatives to cooperation is the Great War for Oil.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Black_Dog on January 25, 2008 - 1:28pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Resource wars? Aren't those situations where one nation invades and conquers another nation with known resources? Sort of like Saddam in Kuwait? Sort of like Japan attacking Pearl Harbor as a prelude to the march toward Indonesia's oil fields? Like Hitler invading the Balkens to get the oil fields, then attacking Russia for the same reason. Looks to me like war's not the alternative, it's been the plan for a long time.

As for "Excitement" and "fierce competition", think of the after effects of a bunch of nuclear blasts delivered to select Third World Mega cities. It would give a whole new meaning to the "Survivor" programs, with camera crews dressed in lead suits catching every round of the tooth and claw fight for survival. There's more than one way for "Demand Destruction" to occur.

Of course, our conquest of Iran had absolutely nothing (Bush Co. said), NOTHING, to do with oil, got that? :<(

E. Swanson

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Cid Yama on January 25, 2008 - 1:37pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Like the US in Iraq - Noticed you missed that one - How could you miss the obvious?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Black_Dog on January 25, 2008 - 5:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Woops! A typo in the last line, should have been Iraq, not Iran.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
DRAGONDONK on January 25, 2008 - 9:40pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I thought you were reporting from the future so I figured Iran was what you actually meant.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jamest on January 26, 2008 - 3:01am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I thought he was talking about 1952, when the US and GB overthrew a democratic government in Iran and replaced it with a dictatorship, so their oil companies could regain control of Iran's oil supplies. Isn't it interesting how the US and British press never mention this when discussing the current frictions?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Squalish on January 26, 2008 - 2:31am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Resource wars for the last of a resource considered vital (which will appreciate, year on year, with certainty) are an entirely different level of conflict than speculative wars over future profit.

It's the difference between "If we succeed, we could become rich" and "If we fail, we are certain to starve." The latter has all the power of the status quo behind it.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

220 comments on Shell Energy Futures

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version