 | Oilwatch Monthly - April 2008 | The Oil Drum | The Energy Return of Nuclear Power (EROI on the Web-Part 4) |  |
DrumBeat: April 22, 2008
Posted by Leanan on April 22, 2008 - 9:10am
Topic: Miscellaneous
Bush voices concern about record oil price
NEW ORLEANS (Reuters) - President Bush Tuesday said he was concerned about record-high crude oil and gasoline prices, and said the United States needs to tap an Alaskan wildlife refuge to boost supply."I am obviously concerned for our consumers," Bush said at a news conference along with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Mexican President Felipe Calderon.
...Bush declined a reporter's request to comment on whether big OPEC producers like Saudi Arabia were coming to the aid of U.S. consumers, but heaped praise on Canada and Mexico - consistently among the top five U.S. suppliers.
"Fortunately Canada and Mexico are our biggest providers, for which we are grateful," Bush said.
New fuel economy standard will be 31.6 mpg
WASHINGTON - The nation’s fleet of new cars and trucks will be required to achieve 31.6 miles per gallon by 2015, the Bush administration said Tuesday.Transportation Department Secretary Mary Peters outlined the plan on Earth Day, setting a schedule that was more aggressive than initially expected by industry officials.
Changing the current - State environmental laws drive power producers to renewable resources
WASHINGTON - The Imperial Valley of California is ideal country for solar and wind power. It rains less than three inches a year. Temperatures hit 110 degrees in the summer. The wind blows pretty steadily, too. And it's just east of San Diego.Now, because of a California law requiring utilities to get 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2010, this untapped renewable-energy basin has caught the attention of Sempra Energy. The utility, based in San Diego, gets only 6 percent of its electricity from renewable resources, so it has proposed building a transmission line to bring solar power from the desert to the city.
Ineos refinery strike could shut-in 700,000 bpd of North Sea crude oil - BP
The looming strike at the Ineos Grangemouth refinery in Scotland could reduce North Sea crude output by as much as 700,000 barrels per day (bpd), a British Petroleum spokesman said on Tuesday....'A full Ineos Grangemouth shut-down would impact essential services which are required to operate the Forties Pipeline System,' said BP spokesman Richard Grant in Aberdeen, adding that the complete closure of the pipeline remained a possibility.
The petrol picture in Scotland
Queues at the pumps have been reported in some areas of the country, while others are still waiting for the effects to bite.Below is a round up of the situation in your area.
US to Keep Filling Oil Reserve Despite Price
The U.S. believes current crude prices are too high for consumers globally, echoing many analysts and other governments, but will continue filling its strategic petroleum reserve despite record prices, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Jeffrey Kupfer said Tuesday."We see no need to change the policy," he told journalists here at an industry conference.
Kupfer said the U.S.'s strategic oil reserve was a vital cushion needed in order to make up for any big supply interruptions in the future.
Oil must stay high if world to have enough supply
ROME (Reuters) - Energy producers cannot halt a rally that has driven oil to nearly $120 a barrel and the world might have to live with even higher prices if it wants supplies for the future, exporters said on Tuesday.
"This (price spike) isn't an issue of supply and demand," says Joel Fingerman, principal of Chicago-based Oil Analytics, an energy consulting firm. "This is about money flow. It could stop here or at $150."In other words, traders are bidding up the price of oil. It's the downside, in one sense, of the scramble by the Federal Reserve Board to rescue the financial markets in the wake of the subprime mortgage meltdown. Since October, the Fed has been consistently cutting interest rates -- most recently on Mar. 18, and it's expected to do so again on Apr. 28. Each time it does so, the value of the dollar falls against other currencies. Traders react by investing in other commodities as a hedge against the falling dollar, and dollar-denominated commodities (such as oil) become more expensive.
Home Prices Drop Most in Areas with Long Commute
Economists say home prices are nowhere near hitting bottom. But even in regions that have taken a beating, some neighborhoods remain practically unscathed. And a pattern is emerging as to which neighborhoods those are.The ones with short commutes are faring better than places with long drives into the city. Some analysts see a pause in what has long been inexorable — urban sprawl.
How to take your family's summer trip and still have some money left when you get there.
The Green Consumer: Myth or reality?
When polled, most consumers overwhelmingly say they want to buy green, according to Joel Makower, head of Greener World Media and author of The Green Consumer. But they aren’t actually doing it. According to the research, Makower says, “If it is green, consumers assume it isn’t good.” And that means, in many cases, green products are entering the marketplace with a deficit.
Pakistan: LPG smuggling from Iran hurting local industry
ISLAMABAD: Continued smuggling of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) from Iran is hurting the business of local industry, industry sources told Daily Times on Monday.They said, “Local industry is being deprived of about 30 percent share of their business due to continued smuggling of LPG from Iran that is also depriving the national exchequer from billions of rupees in term of taxes.”
Natural gas company offers to fuel AEL&P generators for less money
An Alaska natural gas company offered Monday to provide fuel to Alaska Electric Light and Power generators for between 30 and 50 percent less than the cost of diesel.Following the avalanches that destroyed the Snettisham transmission line, AEL&P has provided about 85 percent of Juneau's electricity through diesel generation that consumes 100,000 gallons a day at an estimated cost between $300,000 and $400,000 per day - a cost fully passed on to the community.
Australia: Electricity workers walk off job
Electricity supplies were not expected to be affected in Ergon's areas of operation outside the southeast corner.But there may be some disruption from a series of rolling stoppages by linesmen, mechanics and electrical fitters starting tomorrow, Electrical Trades Union (ETU) assistant state secretary Peter Simpson said.
Climate Change: Comparing the Candidates
The remaining Presidential hopefuls talk of transforming the economy to save the environment. But who would actually get the job done?
Starving The Poor By Pandering To Big Ag
This is not a negation of the energy crisis and the need for alternative fuels. Nor is it some silly pooh-poohing of pollution and all its ugly brood. What I take it to be is an appeal for sanity, for common sense, for adult judgment and choices among difficult potential solutions.I also like to think that putting the gas tank and the stomach face to face, and demanding that we decide which is more important, is an existential challenge we as individuals and nations should have answered long ago but haven't bothered to this day.
Examining Energy Consumption in the Data Center
Mounting storage needs have led to soaring energy consumption, just as an energy crisis is looming. Can IT become more efficient before all the juice is gone?
Major report links smog to deaths
Short-term exposure to smog, or ozone, is clearly linked to premature deaths that should be taken into account when measuring the health benefits of reducing air pollution, a National Academy of Sciences review concludes.The findings contradict arguments made by some White House officials that the connection between smog and premature death has not been shown sufficiently, and that the number of saved lives should not be calculated in determining clean air benefits.
Disaster in progress: North America's home heating transition
A 2006 report from the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, a nonprofit association of Northeast air quality agencies, found that average particulate emissions from one outdoor wood boiler equaled that of 22 wood stoves, 205 oil furnaces or as many as 8,000 natural gas furnaces.
Unqualified experts create fear in market, says Naimi
Saudi Arabia has dismissed claims that it is overstating its real oil production capacity and said resulting fears and speculation are to blame for the sharp increase in crude prices....“Take for example the issue of petroleum resources: all respected petroleum engineers, geologists and upstream professional organisations believe the world has enough resources to easily meet demand for at least the next 30 years.
“Yet, a handful of non-specialists are able to scare the world with theories about peaking oil reserves,” he said, in a reference to recent remarks by some analysts the world’s proven oil resources have reached their peak and started to decline.
Saudi Arabia urges calm in face of surging oil prices
ROME (Thomson Financial) - Saudi Arabia's petroleum minister Ali al-Naimi called for calm in the face of runaway oil prices on Tuesday, saying there was no imminent oil shortage.'This is not the time to panic and grasp for exotic, unproven solutions,' he told the International Energy Forum being held here.
A £15 fuel limit has been imposed at a Dundee city centre petrol station in a bid to stop panic buyers bleeding the pumps dry
Coal isn't cool but our growth depends on it
Thanks, Jim. What a good idea. Australia, with its abundant, high quality coal, should stop mining, exporting and using coal forthwith while we wait for carbon capture and storage (CCS in global warming jargon) technology to emerge. When might that be?
UK: Gas and electricity prices rise by record one-day amount as oil cost hits all-time high
Oil, gas and electricity prices hit fresh records yesterday, raising fears that the global economy is becoming "destabilised".
How Many Earth Days Do We Have Left?
Of all the resources needed to build an economy that will sustain economic progress, none is more scarce than time. That is one of the key messages of PLAN-B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, the newest book by Lester Brown -- available as a free download at earthpolicy.org.Plan A -- the western fossil-fuel-based, auto-centered, throwaway economic model -- is not going to work for China, India, or the 3 billion other people in developing countries, and it will not continue to work for the industrial countries either.
It's time for Plan B -- an all-out response at wartime speed proportionate to the magnitude of threats facing civilization.
Solar Building a Wise, and Ancient, Philosophy
The cheapest solar technology is just situating your home or office in the right direction when it’s built. You don’t have to be Socrates to understand the concept — but it might help.
The current trend for countries to take increasing control over their own oil resources, forcing out the multinationals, is the one thing that could truly bring the "Peak Oil" nightmare to pass, a future in which we are condemned to use ever-diminishing supplies of oil without yet having discovered adequate substitutes.Russian oil production, thought to be the great new "swing source" of non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries expansion, appears to have peaked in the face of expropriation and embezzlement, while autarkic Mexico, Nigeria and Venezuela have all seen substantial recent production declines in spite of high prices. There are a few counterexamples: Iraq's oil reserves have doubled since grown-up oil companies were allowed back to explore there in 2003, while recent Brazilian oil discoveries have been substantial because Petrobras has become open to foreign exploration and production partners.
Good old fashioned risk premium revisited the oil market complex and growing fears of peak oil. Friday, after reports that Nigerian rebels blew up a key Nigerian pipeline, the bulls ran prices again to a new all time high. The trial of militant leader is underway and his group is pledging further attacks. For the first time in awhile the market focused on increased geo-political risk.Yet with ample supplies and slowing demand the question is why oil still drives higher. Some strong handed bulls may be having their that it’s the markets' realization that the world is just plain and simply running out of oil.
Lack of capacity foils action on oil price - Libya
ROME (Reuters) - A lack of spare global output capacity means very little can be done to tame record high oil prices, the head of Libya's National Oil Corporation Shokri Ghanem said on Tuesday."Very little can be done by anyone, there is not enough spare capacity to help," he told reporters. "At a price of $115 everyone is producing what it can, equally there is no more demand either."
Car Companies Target Customers (And Each Other) in Hotly Contested Asia Battleground
Every automobile on the roads of the world reflects a long and complex chain of industrial production and energy usage. Yet we live in a world where many of the highest quality resources and energy supplies have already been exploited and lower quality resources are more expensive to extract and exploit, if they are even available. So the world’s automobile industry is in the midst of a revolution in both resource availability and energy consumption.
Recently, protesting truckers slowed large sections of national highways to a halt. Around the same time, several airlines were closing or cutting operations. Meanwhile, car manufacturers were reporting some of their worst numbers in a generation.A close look reveals that all three of these transportation problems -- and indeed many other non-transportation ones -- are tied together with a common bond, the ever increasing costs of non-renewable fuels such as oil.
Very clearly, the financial and mass media finds it is not ‘politically correct’ to explain high oil prices as due to oil simply depleting and running out.
Envirogeddon!Is it time to start wishing for the end of the world?
I would write off this hatefully regressive book as a fluke, unconnected to the environmentalism I know and love, if not for the resonances it shares with so many other green fantasies of the apocalypse. Kunstler and Weisman seem to relish the idea of an emptier earth—a longing that must have grown during eight years of Bush-era inaction on climate change and pollution. Their stories invite us to imagine how awesome the world would be if we could just live through one tiny apocalypse: Politicians, naysayers, and people who drive Hummers would get their final comeuppance.
Promise of ethanol getting lost amid global food crisis
With all the brouhaha over ethanol, its impact on food production and the near-record price of oil, the question I'm hearing the most these days is "what on earth are we going to use for fuel, then?"How are consumers, investors and companies supposed to decide what to do when the best green fuel option has browned?
Forget carbon: you should be checking your water footprint
Ethical shopping just got harder – but the latest attempt to help conscientious consumers calculate their impact on the environment could do more to preserve scarce resources than all its predecessors.The concept of water footprints – or "virtual water" – will tell consumers the amount of precious H2O that has been used in the manufacture of products they buy. As with carbon footprints, a "virtual water" figure will indicate the extent to which a particular product has cost the earth. And, as with carbon footprints, the message is clear: less is better.
Biggest onshore wind farm plan rejected
Plans for Britain's biggest land-based wind farm were turned down by the Scottish government yesterday, in a landmark decision with wide implications for the future development of renewable energy in the UK.The 181-turbine development on the Hebridean island of Lewis was vetoed by Scottish ministers because it was at odds with tough protection for wildlife sites afforded by European law.
Capacity warning for oil producers
The International Monetary Fund warned oil ministers on Monday that their expansion in capacity was failing to keep up with surging demand, leading to instability in the market.John Lipsky, the IMF's deputy director, told a meeting in Rome: "While oil demand has remained robust, the supply side response to rising prices has been disappointing."
...Supply projections had been revised downwards, particularly for producers outside the 13 Opec nations, including Mexico, Russia, and the UK, he said. That, said analysts, left the biggest producers, such as Saudi Arabia, with a greater role in increasing capacity.
However, Abdullah al-Badri, Opec's secretary general, revealed that rising costs could delay some of the cartel's expansion plans for a year or two.
OPEC Lays It on the Line at IEF: 'Increase Security for Demand'
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) Secretary General HE Abdalla Salem El-Badri addressed an audience at the 11th International Energy Forum (IEF), held in Rome April 21, where he spoke earnestly about the need for demand security in an "increasingly interdependent energy world."The oil is there, said Badri, particularly in OPEC's Member Countries, but "minimizing uncertainty" by ensuring "appropriate demand conditions" is necessary to alleviate the investment fears of operators.
Angola Overtakes Saudi Arabia as Biggest Oil Supplier to China
(Bloomberg) -- Angola was the top supplier of crude oil to China in the first quarter, ahead of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Oman and Russia as the world's second-biggest energy user boosted purchases to ease a domestic shortage.Angola exported 8.48 million metric tons of crude to China in the three months ended March 31, about 688,000 barrels a day and 55 percent more than a year earlier, the Beijing-based Customs General Administration said today. Saudi Arabia shipped 8.18 million tons, a 38 percent increase.
China sees 2008 power shortfall at 10 GW
BEIJING (Reuters) - China's power demand this year could outpace supply by up to 10 gigawatts (GW), with temporary brownouts hitting parts of the south during the summer, the deputy head of the country's power regulator said on Tuesday.China's power firms are building new power stations each year but coal burning generators are struggling with soaring fuel costs, an over-stretched domestic transport system and strong competition for supplies.
Australia: National bonanza sitting on shelf
AUSTRALIA may be sitting on an oil and gas bonanza after winning legal ownership of a slice of undersea territory five times the size of France.In a landmark judgement by a United Nations commission, Australia expanded its borders by almost 35%, or 2.5 million square kilometres, including a seabed thought to harbour fossil fuels and minerals.
Readers from around the world have sent their reaction to the rise in global food prices.
Biofuels starving our people, leaders tell UN
The leaders of Bolivia and Peru have attacked the use of biofuels, saying they have made food too expensive for the poor.Speaking at the United Nations, the Bolivian president, Evo Morales, said the increased use of farmland for fuel crops was causing a "tremendous increase" in food prices.
Eco-friendly events can leave large, unfriendly footprints
Events with green themes are drawing unprecedented crowds — and often leaving crater-sized environmental footprints.That's the message from concerned activists and consultants who are calling on organizers of everything from green conferences to environmental festivals to green up their own acts. At stake, they say, are more than the copious waste and carbon emissions that public events routinely generate. Lost in waste-intensive events are precious teaching moments and a measure of credibility for environmental initiatives.
Marketing efforts may end up in green blur
Earth Day — a day designed for promoting environmental issues — has been around for 38 years. But the annual event has been gaining visibility thanks to marketers seeking favor with increasingly green-conscious consumers through ad campaigns, press releases and websites that ballyhoo their eco-efforts.
Oil hits new record above $118 a barrel
LONDON (Reuters) - Oil rose to a record high above $118 on Tuesday, boosted by a jump in oil demand last month from China, the world's second biggest energy consumer, and worries about supply from key producers Russia and Nigeria.U.S. light crude for May delivery was up 25 cents at $117.73 a barrel by 1108 GMT (7:08 a.m. EDT), easing from an all-time peak of $118.05 hit earlier in the day.
London Brent crude was up 40 cents at $114.83 a barrel, after rising to a record peak of $115.03.
Oil has hit a string of record highs this month, driven by booming demand from emerging markets such as China that has coincided with long-term supply constraints.
U.S. says high oil prices risky to economy
ROME (Reuters) - Oil prices that hit a record on Tuesday are clearly too high and not beneficial for the U.S. economy, a top U.S. energy official said.The United States has been remarkably resilient in the face of expensive energy, but a rally on oil to more than $118 a barrel is an economic threat, U.S. Acting Deputy Secretary of Energy Jeffrey Kupfer told a news briefing.
OPEC says it will lift production capacity by 5 mln bpd by 2012
ROME (AFP) - The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) plans to lift production capacity by five million barrels per day by 2012, the cartel's secretary general Abdalla Salem El-Badri said here on Tuesday.Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the International Energy Forum here, El-Badri also said that the cartel aimed to boost production capacity by nine million bpd by 2020.
Indian oil minister visits Pakistan for talks on Iran pipeline
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India's oil minister Murli Deora was to hold talks in Pakistan this week on a seven-billion dollar transnational gas pipeline from Iran, a senior oil ministry official said Tuesday.
Kazakhstan gears up for electricity shortages
ASTANA (Reuters) - Kazakhstan plans to build new power plants and import more gas from neighbouring Uzbekistan to cope with an electricity deficit it is likely to face later this year, Energy Minister Sauat Mynbayev said on Tuesday.The economy has grown by 10 percent a year on average since 2000, fuelled by booming oil and metals exports. A record-cold winter in early 2008 made the government cut supplies to some industrial consumers due to high electricity consumption.
Arch Coal sees power shortages if plants not built
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Electricity shortages are likely in the United States in two or three years unless more coal-fired power plants are built, the head of coal producer Arch Coal Inc said on Monday."We are heading toward serious shortfalls," Chairman and Chief Executive Steven Leer said during a conference call with analysts to discuss the company's first-quarter financial results.
"Much of the United States will fall below the 15 percent reserve level in '09," he said.
Barclays Capital said it expected non-OPEC supply to be "at best very weak in 2008" and that it expected supply to actually fall, despite daily record high prices. OPEC producers do not have spare capacity to make up for the decline, which are thought to be worst in the North Sea and Mexico.Russia, the second largest oil producer in the world after Saudi Arabia, has been producing less and less oil, and has seen a sharp drop in output since 2004, with a 7 per cent decline last year. Barclays Capital expects Russia's supply reduction to have significant ramifications in the global oil market.
U.S. oil firms want Libya exempted from terrorism compensation law
WASHINGTON: One by one, top executives of American oil companies met privately over the past year with the Libyan leader Muammar el-Qaddafi - often in his trademark Bedouin tent - as they lined up contracts allowing them to tap into the country's oil reserves.But now, thanks to a law that threatens those deals, the new allies are working Capitol Hill. The American oil industry and the Libyan government, once a pariah in Washington, have hired high-profile lobbyists, buttonholed lawmakers and enlisted help from the Bush administration, all in an effort to win an exemption from a law that Congress passed in January that is intended to ensure that victims of terrorist attacks are compensated.
Peak Oil: Why Oil reserves are depleting
MUMBAI: Do you know what is Peak Oil and how the decline in oil production is affecting companies and countries across the globe?
Peak oil problems need facing now
AN audience at a recent meeting in Candelo was advised not to wait for the impacts of Peak Oil to hit Australia, but to plan and act now to cushion its effects.The advice came from Cuban Permaculturist, Roberto Perez who works as an educator for the Foundation For Nature and Humanity, Cubas major environment organisation based in Havana.
Climate projects prevented 135 million tonnes of CO2: agency
OSLO (AFP) - Projects to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in developing countries have prevented 135 million tonnes of CO2 emissions from entering Earth's atmosphere so far, the Norwegian classification group Det Norske Veritas (DNV) said on Monday.
Climate change talks 'heading for trouble'
SINGAPORE (AFP) - Governments negotiating a new climate change treaty, due next year, remain far apart on many issues, and this should be a "warning sign" that the world is facing trouble, a top UN environmental official said Tuesday.
Norway gives Tanzania funds to fight climate change
OSLO (AFP) - A Norwegian aid package will give 500 million kroner (100 million dollars, 63 million euros) to Tanzania over five years to tackle climate change and deforestation, Norway's government said Monday.Tanzania has one of the fastest rates of deforestation in Africa, which aggravates climate change, Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement released in Oslo.
When Storms and Floods Menace Business
Whether related to climate change or not, recent windstorms, floods, and other natural disturbances are causing greater losses than ever to U.S. multinationals, says Shivan Subramaniam, chairman and chief executive of FM Global. The Johnstown (R.I.) company insures about a third of the 1,000 largest U.S. corporations. Subramaniam says CEOs are going to have to do a better job anticipating disruptions to their global supply chains and information technology systems, among other steps, to avoid losing market share.
247 comments on DrumBeat: April 22, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
247 comments on DrumBeat: April 22, 2008
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
- Some predictions on the forthcoming Russian-Ukrainian gas 'crisis'
- The US stimulus and "green jobs" for wind energy
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 13th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
The Wall Street Journal firmly enters doomer territory today, with two front page articles about peak oil:
First, the admission that the easy oil is over in Saudi Arabia, and that we can't count on them to grow any further:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120881050953632313.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
The article quotes Simmons, Skrewbowski, Saleri, and Hussieni. Finally, recognition on the front page that Saudi Arabia is "dipping into its last big basins of oil."
Then, right below it, is the article on suburban agriculture:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120882472974233235.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
A bus driver in Boulder, Colorado is turning front lawns into vegetable gardens, and is effectively farming on shares: the owners of the yard get a portion of what he grows, in exchange for the land and some gardening services.
I think we all know how these relate.
From the WSJ article:
The second quote especially seems to contradict some of the assumptions of those who are expecting endless increases in production from the middle east.
And what does it tell you when their only two potential one mbpd range fields are problem plagued fields that the Saudis have barely bothered to produce in the past? BTW, waterfloods, especially in a lower permeability reservoir, are never sure things.
It tells me that oil has been rising at about 20 cents a day for the past six months or so, and that there is no end in sight. It tells me that Shell is sending their people out to NPR, trying to let everyone know that we have two choices: cooperation in powering down, or a "scramble" for resources involving young men in kevlar, tanks, and helicopters. Shell isn't saying that last part out loud, of course, but what else does a scramble between nations mean?
There seems to be an emerging pr campaign: Shell says cooperate as oil production floats downward, Saudi says we are saving some unknown, hidden fields for our grandchildren. Just different ways of saying the peak was probably in 2005, and hang on for the ride.
Good to point out Shell's recent PR/educational moves.
My colleague comments on the Shell scramble/blueprint scenarios here:
http://www.commoncurrent.com/notes/2008/04/shell-oil-scenario-oil-supply...
Since he and I work more on the "blueprint" side of government policy and programs, the blog discusses our efforts there.
Cheers.
Ken
That's great news that some people are pulling their heads out of the sand. Now if only the same could be said for the IMF's Lipsky:
"While oil demand has remained robust, the supply side response to rising prices has been disappointing."
Is it just me, or is that like saying "Bad Dog!" to the dingo that just ate your baby?
Their heads were actually in their own tookus' and apparently that is where Lipsky's (and Yergin's et. al.) still is (are). Perhaps if their heads were in the sand they could have seen that there was less oil there than they had been positing.
Kuntsler and some others are always talking about "the death of suburbia". I have heard high rises referred to as "green". Try growing crops on your high rise balcony - assuming you have one.
I think rural towns are going to be the hardest hit by peak oil, not suburbia. There was an article recently on small towns in Northern California. If you didn't work in the town you were in, it could be a very long drive to get to your job in some other small town. And the jobs were not high paying, so any large increase in gas prices would seem to force a move, as there is no public transportation - unlike suburbia which usually has some mass transit, even if not at the same level as a city.
I disagree. I think that the less densely populated the region, the better. People living in really remote areas will fare better than those living in agricultural deserts, rural people will fare better than those in the suburbs, and suburbans will fare better than city dwellers. The more land, better topsoil & more water one has available the better, altho when mass starvation impends defending a crop from hungry marauders won't be easy.
I think it depends on how long electricity continues to be available most of the time. Once we get to serious electrical problems, the less dense areas will fare best, especially if people can get sufficient water and grow their own food. Areas with a very deep water table will have problems, especially if they don't get a lot of rain.
I don't believe in the kind of apocalyptic collapse that many here do, but I would like to point out that a small farm is very difficult to defend against a fair sized number of armed men (say, 20). If one genuinely expects a collapse then it would make sense to get in a position where you're the guy in charge of the raging mob, wealthy and powerful enough to offer protection from the raging mob or a member of the clergy who often end up either in charge or acting in lieu of a justice system. At least that's the way it played out when Rome collapsed.
How did these 20 armed men get to the farm? On camels? You see, if things get that bad, transport will be back to animal/bicycle. I think that the more likely scenario in that case is that no one ever shows up.
A well-organized group of people determined to rob and steal to survive, or even prosper at the expense of others during a period of lawlessness, will move from household to household, and from homestead to homestead, stealing supplies as they go. It is not improbable that they can hopscotch through the countryside this way.
People will not sit still and starve, and even some of those who would never have dreamt of harming a neighbor during good times, will rationalize "temporarily" setting aside their morality in order to feed their families. Rabble-rousers will demonize the "haves" as being either: 1) the rich who "got us into this mess," 2) "profiteeers" who have benefitted from chaos at the "average person's" expense, or 3) "hoarders" who are responsible for a scarcity of supplies and who are "holding out" on "the rest of us".
Protection will come as it always does, through an organized militia that is better coordinated and has better arms and communication than the roving bands of thieves. Justice will be dispensed locally. If a larger force comes one's way (an army), you'll give them what they want and profess loyalty to their cause, or flee and become a refugee.
FiniteQuantity, you need to look around the corner. The problems you describe of small town workers losing their jobs and having to move long distances for another job is an issue for 2008. By 2009 people everywhere will be losing their jobs and by then a rural location will be a much better survival choice. This is not going to play out as "a rough patch in the economic road" but as a collapse of the economic system as we know it.
If society collapses you had better be very rural and very well armed and very skilled at all the things one needs to do to survive. A collapse of society would be so bad that a large bottle of sleeping pills might be the best item to horde.
Sharecropping + prolongued strife over land = feudalism.
Not if. When.
The 3 scenarios outlined in the Hirsch report assume a "crash program rate of implementation." In the most dire scenario, mitigation is not undertaken until global oil production peaks. This will leave the world with a "significant liquid fuels deficit for more than two decades" that "will almost certainly cause major economic upheaval".
Thus far, mitigation efforts in the U.S. have been (at best) non-existent. At worst, counterproductive. Biofuels are an unmitigated disaster.
Optimists say "we" can turn this sorry state of affairs around once people start to feel the effects of a deteriorating food and energy environment. This is rubbish. As one poster puts it, "we" will do nothing (one has to define we). As an example, consider the idea that the the market, technology, and human innovation will save "us". Naomi Klein writes that "far from saving us from catastrophe, the market is developing fortresses to shield the haves from the victims of the future":
Serious mitigation won't be undertaken until well after the peak, if ever. Some posters still seem to think non-collapse is still in the cards. However, if the Hirsch report was updated, so as to include the latest information on Saudi, Russia, & net exports, I believe this assertion could be put to rest once and for all.
One thing is clear. As civilization rolls off a cliff, there will be no shortage of bickering and blaming. The pro-nuclear camp will insist that it is the anti-nuclear crowd that is standing in the way of viable technological "progress". On the other side, the blame will be put on the shoulders of the technophiles, who refuse to accept realistic limits to growth.
This will merely confirm what some here have said all along: ours is a people problem, not a technical one.
I think that is exactly right, the question before us then isn't what to do about then energy problem. It's what to do about the people problem, also known as the collective action problem, the prisoner's dilemma, and the tragedy of the commons. All of which are manifestations of the human proclivity to engage in zero sum games. Until we solve this problem Rome will fall again and again and again.
Peak oil and global warming are not the problem, they are the consequences. the problem is a collective action problem and an inability to make good long term plans.
-Tim
Rural towns will be hard hit, of course, and poverty will be rampant.
However, rural poverty will be quite tolerable compared with urban squalor. For a while, anyway, people will imagine that their chances are better in the city, and the rural poor will continue to sell their sons and daughters into urban slavery, but cannibalism is self-limiting. Cities are not the wave of the future.
It just occurred to me that the safest place to live might be the Washington DC metro area. With the world's most powerful military and all our politicians headquartered there, it is likely that they will do everything in their power to keep that place running.
I don't know. One might have said the same thing about Baghdad and the Green Zone.
The Green Zone is starting to remind me of the Alamo.
Re: Getting to a job....There is an underlying assumption that business as usual (BAU) continues in some form and that people have jobs to get to. I have long argued that BAU based upon an economy that relies on consumer spending for 60%+ of GDP is a dead end.
Aside from population overshoot exceeding our resources bases, one has to consider all of the turmoil in the financial markets and the vast, essentially unpayable, debt of individuals, corporations and governments. In my view, a collapse of some kind is inevitable. Whether it follows the five stages of collapse outlined by Orlov - http://www.energybulletin.net/print.php?id=40919 - or not is unimportant to me.
What is important is the degree to which people can provide for their own needs. In this, I agree with dd above that it is more likely that people in less densely populated areas will probably have a better chance.
One decided advantage of living in the boondocks as I do is that one has to have a large skill set to survive. We have immediate knowledge of what it takes to get by because that's the way we live now. We are also used to living low on the hog and making do. We are used to co-operating on projects and helping each other.
Here's a real life example of what I mean: We get snowed in for 1-3 weeks every winter and often more than once. The power may or may not be on. It gets old after a while but it's hardly the end of the world. My question would be, "How many urban or suburban people would take this as the natural course of life?" But, isn't this closer to what the future may hold than BAU?
Todd
I agree, Finite.
I agree because I live in Exurbia, in the outer asteroid belt, and people ARE losing their jobs, scraping by on what few benefits they can get (and out here in Reddest Red America, getting a gov't check even if just for Food Stamps is a badge of honor) and the percentage of homeless is the highest you'll find outside of San Francisco's Tenderloin.
And hi-rises if they are surrounded by ponds and fields, classic say Vietnamese style intensive farming, are very green. As green as Viet or Indian type shacks? No, but far more green than the 2-3 acres and a horse and 100+ miles commute daily that's the norm here. Or the gov't check for people not growing anything (you can't here) and living on Kraft mac and cheese.
high rises above about 5 stories are pretty hard to negotiate without elevators. Not so green, I think
Looks like it's now out from behind the paywall.
Saudis Face Hurdle In New Oil Drilling
Mudd and Diesendorf publish paper on nuclear resources and it's eco-efficiency
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/sample.cgi/esthag/2008/42/i07/html/es702249v...
Sustainability of Uranium Mining and Milling: Toward Quantifying Resources and Eco-Efficiency
They are now just using FUD instead of directly lying. That's something. For instance, in the Olympic Dam mine they are giving the energy cost as if it was a uranium mine instead of a copper and gold mine with minor uranium, iron ore, and silver values.
That's an improvement over direct lying.
From NPR's Morning Edition:
Very peak oil without saying so. It sounded like another step in laying groundwork for the new no-fuel reality.
Shell's CEO sent an email to all company employees in January basically outlining the same scenarios. In the email, he explicitly stated that employees could use the information in their external communications.
I think that the senior managers at Shell have a very good idea of what is coming and they want to ramp up the PR campaign as quickly as possible.
I guess when you are contemplating mass murder, it really does take a village.
Take things out of context much?
She said if Iran launched a nuclear attack against Israel, she would retaliate.
When I first read Hillary's comment above, it sounded a little like Reagan's goofball comment about "We start bombing Russia". He was kidding, of course. I don't think Hillary is kidding about Israel. Iran's chief is no moderate on the thousands-of-years old mission of the Arab clan to destroy Israel.
It's interesting that the price of oil has gone into its present climb while things on the never-ending Arab/Israel front have been about as peaceful and loving as it ever gets with them. What's going to happen when the next flare-up hits?
"Iran's chief is no moderate on the thousands-of-years old mission of the Arab clan to destroy Israel."
Ahmadinejad is not Arab.
Doesn't matter-he is an Evildoer. Also, the fact that Iran has never threatened to attack Israel- they have said they will attack Israel as their only defence if first attacked by the USA. They are evil through and through, and Hillary is tough as nails, so vote for her. I actually think Randy Couture should be President of the USA-the main qualification appears to be proving how "tough" you are.
You mean an "Evildoer" like our President and Vice President?
Could you supply some links, please, as to the "evil" nature of Iran? What exactly is it that makes them "evil through and through?"
Wake up and smell the sarcanol :-)
I say we vote Ahmadinijad in for President! He'll have to change his name to John Smith or something, because even I, a very Un-American American, can't spell or pronounce his name to save my life, but he is at least a magnitude more rational, more sane, and more concerned with the fate of the "little guy" than the Evil Ones running our gov't now. I'm sure Hillary can hardly wait to start bombing, and Obama, McCain, even Ron Paul, would be no different. It's the nature of Empire.
I couldn't pronounce his name either, until I came across this hint: The way his name properly scans out is on the same rhythm as "I'm a dinner jacket".
Try it! Works for me every time!
:-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcYkn9e3OOw
Rory Bremner on top form.
he is an Evildoer
Now then, just what evil has he done? Did he invade Lebanon? Gaza? Continue illegal squatter settlements in the West Bank? Invade Iraq? Impose "genocidal sanctions" on the Iraqis prior to escalating said genocide through invasion? Allow the CIA to import crack and cocaine into major US metropolitan areas to finance an illegal war in Central America?
And the list could go on and on and on...
Adjust your irony filters. He wasn't serious.
I find ZERO irony in war, genocide, postulating the Other as evil, etc.
Then you're going to have a rather difficult time here at TOD, where the supply of sarconol is endless.
I've been here for 2 years and 34 weeks. I can usually spot the sarconol. I was once a soldier, now a student of Empire, thus my finding little irony in war, etc.
He was parodying our fearless leader, George W. Bush. Bush is the one who came up with the term "evil-doer." If you can't make fun of the president, dammit, who can you make fun of?
True, Ahmadinejad is not an Arab and Iran is actually an Islamic nation with only a minority of Arabs. I meant only that he is an Arab sympathizer. Islam has had varying levels of hostility toward Israel because of the Arab-Israeli conflict ever since the 1917 Balfour Declaration (this conflict can actually be traced back more than that). Before the Iranian Revolution of 1979, Iran was actually friends with Israel.
In Ahmadinejad's controversial speech where he is said to have called for Israel to be wiped off the map, many claim the proper interpretation was that only the regime in control of Israel must be ended and that there was no call to mass murder Jews or even to relocate them - no need for Hillary's nuclear saber rattling (except for political points). There was no renewal of Hitler's war, but certainly no moderation on the Arab-Israeli problem.
Just to clarify, the "wiped off the map" is a mistranslation of something Ahmadinejad was quoting. The actual quote comes from an old speech of Khomeini at a time when Iran was still selling oil to and on good terms with Israel. Here is a Google search of the phrases "wiped off the map" (totally destroyed) "erased from the pages of time" (regime change) which should help everyone understand the context a little better.
Ahmadinejad and Khomeini were referring to the Israels government, and the actions thereof, not the Jewish people or faith. This distinction is similar to German and Nazi, yes there was an overlap, no they are not the same thing. Iran actually helped to evacuate Jews, Children of the Book, from Europe during the Holocaust. Of course, that was before the USA toppled the Iranian democracy and installed a dictator.
It's important to remember that the news media that brought you this "wiped off the map" debacle is the same news media that brought you the "weapons of mass destruction" justification for Iraq.
Iran has Jews in their elected Parliament.
Alan
"Iran's chief is no moderate on the thousands-of-years old mission of the Arab clan to destroy Israel."
Israel was destroyed by the Romans thousands of years ago and didn't exist again until major powers like the US and Britain decided to reestablish it in the 20th Century. Arabs did not begin hating Israel until this decision to create it on Arab land, which occurred shortly after WWI - see Balfour Declaration. Also, Iran is not an Arab country.
FinateQ--
No critical thinking allowed when talking about Israel----
Israel is a occupation, created by the stroke of a pen, as you pointed out, but that cannot be the accepted history.
Pretty much all the countries in the Middle East were created by the stroke of a pen in the aftermath of World War 2, as the European powers divested themselves of their colonial empires. The pen strokes created 19 Arab countries and one Jewish country.
Pretty much all the countries in the Middle East were created by the stroke of a pen in the aftermath of World War 2,
Actually, after WW1, when the Ottoman Empire was broken up through the Sykes/Picot secret treaty that both France and UK were incensed about being made public by Lenin after the 1917 October Revolution.
It divided one Arab nation between 19 fake countries that were meant to be ruled by European and American puppet kings, and created one country specifically to be colonized by Europeans. If I were an Arab in 1947, I would have been thus convinced that I was scheduled to head the way of the Sioux, the Maori, the (extincted) Tasmanians, the (extincted) Yahi people of California, and many other peoples at the hands of Europeans, unless I used any means necessary to drive out the white men and their agents. The very fact that only 2 years earlier Hitler and Stalin were both exterminating entire peoples would in my eyes have been proof that Western civilization could not be trusted.
Funny thing. When Hitler was doing his exterminating thing, there was plenty of Arab participation on part of the Arab Higher Committee, whose leaders recruited Bosnian auxiliaries to the effort.
Actually, Jews were safer living under Moslem rulers than Christians until after 1945, when Israeli agents intentionally provoked incidents in Arab countries to cause mass expulsions of Jews to Israel.
The Jewish war on the Arabs began in earnest with the intent of Zionist planners to take the entirety of Palestine decades before the Holocaust. The Zionist leader Jabotinsky, who is still a state hero in Israel, wrote that the Arabs would have to be eliminated as the Americans had done to the Indians. It should be obvious that my ancestors intended from Plymouth Rock to steal as much of America as they could get away with. Why should any Arab have believed the Israelis would settle for less when they can choose Bible verses defining Hebrew borders any way they please, even claiming all the land from the Sinai to the Euphrates? The Arabs did in 1948 what the Native Americans should have done in 1620, and it was the responsibility of Europeans, not Arabs, to give their own land to the Holocaust survivors for their failure to stop Hitler.
Actually, the Arab war on the Jews began with massacres of Jews in Ottoman Israel in 1834, during the war between the Ottomans and the new Egyptian polity.
In 1840, the Turks began reforms matching Egypt's which among other things gave equal rights to Jews. This caused Arab violence on Jews from Syria all the way to Yemen. In Yemen the oppression of Jews was so severe that in the 1880's Jews began stowing away on ships to immigrate to Palestine. Long before Zionism, mind you.
It is highly debatable to claim that Jews were safer under Muslim rule. It is also morally repugnant, as it implies Jews were obliged to choose between those two options.
Ah....but who spurred on Egypt? France, through Napoleon's attempt at colonization, followed by the British, who were successful in their endeavors. Also, the Ottomans were kept very busy fending off assaults by the Russians and Hapsburgs. The point being, one must look at the whole region's history to see the many causes and effects that have led to our contemporary tragedies. And because of the strategic nature of the region, it is very difficult to objectively educate oneself about its history, which of course makes it very easy to propagandize.
The desire to modernize is what spurred Egypt and Turkey. The desire to keep things as they are, and to keep Jews under a thumb was what spurred the Arabs to commit those massacres.
Sure it was out of context. No matter. Responsible people don't talk about "totally obliterating" a nation of people.
Politicians seem to think that sound bites make for good PR. Well, let this sound bite come back to bite her in the @ss (as it should).
I doubt it. Politicians say things like this because they work. Honestly, I don't expect any of the three remaining candidates to say anything else.
What are they supposed to reply, if someone asks what they would do if Iran launched a nuclear strike against Israel? "I'm not sure, let me think about it"? "More UN sanctions"? "I'd call them up at 3am and express my extreme displeasure"?
Actually, I would like for a leader to say, "I'm not sure, let me think about it." We seem to have two modes of response to crises in this country: knee-jerk and too late. There is a middle way, it seems to me, that is based on just that--thinking about it.
I would love to see a leader practice thinking before either acting or never acting at all.
I would, too. Heck, I'd also like a president who would say that infinite growth can't continue on a finite world, and we have to cut back...voluntarily or not. But politicians who tell the truth don't get elected. And we have only ourselves to blame, since we keep voting for the liars who tell us what we want to hear.
This "controversy" started at last week's PA "debate".
She "clarified" her comments for - at least - Keith Olbermann - here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24246275/
Clinton shows up about 2:50 into the 18 minute video and before she clarifies her "mass retaliation" comments she make some - ahem - interesting comments about oil/gas prices...
Pete
Political rhetoric on an election day.
In regards to an uptick in world oil production. I live in Texas and I can tell you that current oil prices have people reopening wells that have been abandoned; spacing requirements have been reduced and new holes are being drilled between existing wells in mature fields.
I assume that the same is happening world-wide.
While this will provide a brief increase in oil production, in the end, it may hasten depletion rates of the fields.
Let's all act surprised at the witch hunt that is unfolding.
The IMF? To understand the perspective of the IMF read "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein:
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
The New York Times had an excellent editorial
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/opinion/21krugman.html?em&ex=120900960...
That is happening in Southern California to the chagrin of local businesses/homeowners. Apparently according to what I recall from a recent article you can own the rights to the oil in the ground, and that allows you to start pumping again even if the property owner of the land is against it.
The mineral estate is the dominant estate, the surface estate is the subservient. The theory is that, whent the two estates are split, if the surface owner had the power to block access to the mineral estate, they would effectively destroy the mineral estate owners' property interest. So, the mineral estate owner gets priority and is guaranteed access to minerals even if the surface owner suffers. Some states, such as Colorado, increasingly incorporate a "reasonable accomodtation doctrine" into this calculus, requiring the mineral owner to make "reasonable accomodations" to the interests of the surface estate owner, but these do NOT act to stop the mineral owner, usually just to minimize pad size, require rehabilitation after development has ceased, etc.
Yeah, and it doesn't hurt that the ones who own the mineral rights are usually the ones with the money, as opposed to the poor sap on the surface. Let's see actual human citizen vs. corporate super citizen......
The lesson for any land owner is to purchase the subsoil rights to their land. I find it quite interesting that the Mexican Constitution specifically says mineral/subsoil rights are the property of the Mexican people, which is the root of the current contoversy in Mexico. What Calderon and Wall Street want to do is unconstitutional under Mexican law.
Unfortunately this is usually not possible, and (at least when it comes to capturable minerals like oil and gas) it won't necessarily prevent development--the concept of mandatory pooling means that a well can exploit the oil or gas under your property even if you own it, because if your property does not meet the minimum pooling area size it may be involuntarily pooled with surrounding mineral tracts for development. And, if well spacing requirements only allow well placement on your surface parcel, it is even possible that the well can be placed involuntarily on your surface parcel, even though you own both the surface and the mineral and don't want to allow it. Gotta love it! Unless you own as much as 640 acres of contiguous surface and mineral rights, you aren't really guaranteeing freedom from exploration on your land.
As a note on the Mexican system vs. the US system, it's worth noting that the Mexican legal system derives from European (French and Spanish) civil law traditions, whereas the US derives from UK common law traditions. It would probably take a Constitutional amendment for the US to provide the same kind of protections to US surface owners, as any legislation protecting surface owners from mineral owners is a potentially unconstitutional taking... we're pretty well locked in to a private property system, love it or hate it. My guess is that the best way to maintain control over your surface estate is to own surface where there is nothing of value underneath... don't even get me started on gravel...
Thanks Jeff. I knew there was something wierd about the US laws when it comes to non-hardrock minerals that I couldn't remember. So to modify my statement: Regional landowners must band together collectively to insure they maintain control of their subsurface mineral rights.
This is setting up for a repeat of the 80's. If a well was abandoned years ago because it was uneconomical at low oil prices it will still be uneconomical now because of the much greater costs of services to return it to and maintain production. It is the law of receding horizons that has been much discussed on this site.
I need post-peak career advice...
Currently I am a software engineer building interactive web interfaces but I don't know how long software engineers will be in demand. Plus I feel rather unfulfilled knowing that the world is likely about to go to hell while I am typing away at my computer. I think I could be having a more direct impact on the future if I changed careers.
Right now I am functioning as a Peak Oil educator in my community. I use alot of visuals from this site. I enjoy doing this but is only something I do on the side. I would really like to get into something that makes a more tangible difference.
I am interested in moving into some sort of energy solutions career but I don't really know where to begin.
I have thought about wind / solar industries but I don't really know what I could contribute. I am very technical / detail oriented but don't have a mechanical or electrical engineering background. I am also interested in rail but again, what can I contribute?
I would not mind taking a big salary cut and being an apprentice as long as I was learning useful skills. At the same time, I don't want to end up making the company website full-time for some alternative energy startup just because I am already good at that.
So I guess my questions are:
What steps should I take to get involved in a post-peak career?
What sort of positions would be a good fit for a technical person who would like to transition into a new industry?
Kohesion;
Don't write off software yet. The storm that's coming will call for all sorts of intelligent applications of programming and the countless tasks that existing computers and microprocessors can do for us.
My little 1995 HP (200LX) addressbook, essentially an 8088 computer running on AA batts and now little solar panels has vastly more memory and processing power than the computers in the Apollo capsules, and could easily guide any number of energy-management devices. Transistors, used as gates, valves, and amplifiers are invaluable tools for efficiently managing energy use.
Sure start the garden for your health, mental health and household resilience, but I'm sure your skills are not unneeded in the next decade.
For what it's worth.. and good luck.
Bob
WOrk in the railroad industry. They will be around a long time and can use your skills. Email me.
I suggest you get a book called 'What colour is your parachute?'
I havn't read it myself but I am told it's perfect to aid 'career-switching'.
Link:
http://www.amazon.com/What-Color-Your-Parachute-2008/dp/1580088686/ref=p...
Nick.
P.S. I'm also of the opinion that software engineering is going to be of value -there's going to be a need for a lot of Greentech type solutions if we have to powerdown to help efficiency, growing food, etc.
My wife has that book, she's been trying to get me to read it.
Maybe I'll check it out.
I hope you are right about software.
I believe I have read that the wind industry needs people to install and maintain turbines and that there is (or will be) a shortage of people to do that.
This sounds interesting....
Do you know of any companies that perform monitoring / installation services?
Here is a link to an article that talks about the need for people. They mention Horizon Energy and Enel North America Inc.
Wind energy booms turns into tech shortage
The future is a breeze for local ROP wind technician students
'Green Collar' Jobs Seen As Prosperous
Wind energy hasn't blown in enough workers
Wind energy boom runs into tech shortage
Look into industrial automation programming - instrumentation, logic controllers, and SCADA systems. As we build distributed energy production facilities, the need for such instrumentation, monitoring, and control systems will likely increase. Also, you might look into railroad signaling systems.
I work in the wind industry and second this. Brother Kornhoer is right on.
For the engineers in the peanut gallery, here are some other opportunities:
Electrical -- wind farms are sensitive to jiggles in the electrical system, and it doesn't take much for them to trip off line. As they become a more important component in our resource mix, they must become more dependable. There are other really important issues related to power quality.
Mechanical -- getting blades, generators, bearings, and transmission systems to stand up to wear and tear has been more difficult than expected. Systems that monitor vibrations, condition of lubricants, etc., will become far more widespread in the years ahead.
Civil -- there's an unbelievable amount of civil engineering work in designing and constructing wind farms.
Sorry about the oversimplifications here.
There is a free trade journal on-line called North American Windpower where you might find things you are interested in. It also has a free print version.
I've come up with a rather sad little rule, that if it wasn't a viable career in the year 1500, it's not likely to be now.
In my experience there is NO MONEY in high tech. High tech people borrow themselves into a sort of false affluence, and they are the ones found on the street panhandling later. Not that there's anything wrong with panhandling! - it was a viable career in the year 1500.
OK so what was viable in the year 1500?
small farming - farmers at the little farmers markets in the bay area that I've seen make out well.
Shoemaking - Those $200 sneakers from China will become $2000 sneakers, meanwhile we need to wear something. I see this as a very bright field.
Wagonmaking - nowadays it's carts, bike trailers, etc. Alive and well and growing
Musician - I mean street musician, no one normal has the money to go to a "concert" so the one way people are seeing live music, the ONLY way most are, is by being around street musicians. Good one makes out well.
Sewing - alterations, making clothes to customers' designs, this is a sleeper, it works out WELL. You can do really well if your English is good.
Artist - I don't mean what's considered an "artist" today, I mean a REAL artist. A REAL artist like the street musician, is out there on the street, working. They'll do an oil from a photo of your granddaughter. They'll do your caricature, They'll do signs and political posters. This profession goes back thousands of years and is a good one.
This computer stuff is BS. The Internet's going to be dead in 10 years, mark my words.
The idea that we may go back to the 1500's style of economy is not unreasonable, however anyone who desires to enter these trades should really start now. Buying tools and taking adult ed classes purchase manuals and how to books.
some examples,
Of my great grandfathers one was a shoemaker, one was a tailor and one was a wheelwright/blacksmith, in order to work these trades they spent many years apprenticing learning skills and over time acquiring the equipment, of these three the barriers to being a tailor are probably the lowest, although the apprenticeship to be a fine tailor is still many years and to find a master to teach you is not easy. To engage in this trade today one could even buy a treadle sewing machine they are still being made and would be easy to maintain and learn. One should stock up on needles and thread but this trade could be quite helpful as the clothes we currently wear a few times and throw away are instead repaired and remade. However finding raw cloth in the future would be problematic as our mills have been shipped overseas.
As a skill it is one that even if we do not get to TEOTWAWKI it is quite practical.
As far as becoming a shoemaker or a wheelwright, unlike a tailor the equipment needed is probably hard to come by even if available, you can not just go to pick up a billows or an anvil at home depot.
There are places that teach old time skills, but they are not as they used to be in every community.
However some communities have beekeeping clubs, gardening clubs, quilting guilds et cet, look to these as they provide good mentoring of skills.
Another trade that will be needed is that of a mason, as someone who worked as a mason to pay for college I have rudimentary skill's in this area it is a skill that while it takes time to learn the tools are easy to come by and easily transported.
Fleam if we keep our technology and we have no valid reason to lose it computers will be around a long time. Most of the world will probably choose to pull back into enclaves with various levels of fascist policies and potentially extensive use of concentration camps.
We have a small chance of enlightened approaches as the energy supply dwindles but we have plenty of coal and oil and fairly quickly nuclear power to ensure technology continues to be produced in a fairly large number of areas.
A very nasty political and social climate is quite possible but collapse in the sense of loss of technology is probably not going to happen.
Russia, Brazil, US/Canada and even parts of China can easily create techno-enclaves.
Worldwide I can't see the population that is living a high-tech life style drop below 1 billion. This is more than enough to keep technology rolling forward.
Say for example in the US assume 100 million people remain at what we consider a middle class lifestyle or higher and 200 million or more live in hovels third world style. We have plenty of resources to support the 100 million and if they either ignore or encourage treatable epidemics and starvation if not outright genocide amongst the poor they should be able to reduce the poor population fairly quickly to more manageable levels say about 100 million.
This is what we call third world demographics and it works quite well. The Soviet Union shows that given the will high technology can be created and maintained even in a relatively poor country.
Given the crime levels amongst the poor under these conditions and the initial instabilities its hard to guess what your best move would be if you end up in this group.
However much later on if I had to guess I'd suspect society would generally stay at this sort of two tiered level for a long time most of the world lives this way already and its fairly stable. I'd guess eventually some time in the future birth control of some form would become common and we would finally see the number of poor begin to decline. Maybe after some sort of Black Plague like even that would cut the population and then allow a bit of prosperity. I'd guess in the techno-class birth control would become the norm and this would also be a route that is possible for general population control. But this would be hundreds of years into the future.
Back to your original thoughts the biggest issue if you fall into the poor class is to get into a fairly secure area then you do whatever work you have to do. Body stacker will probably be as common profession for a long time. This means building yourself a good two wheeled cart and getting a donkey if you can is a good move.
If your in a area thats not that bad you can keep some farm implements etc and try and farm given the chance. In general the authorities would probably force you to haul stuff for them instead of killing you. It makes you fairly mobile etc. Given that you would probably have a large number of light truck around that can be converted to carts the cart itself would not be all that valuable just the donkey.
THAT worthless mule? It just wants to ride all the time! Lazy ass..
I just trundled a hefty load over to the Earthday Festival, a big lighting stand, a train setup, solar panel, batteries, video camera and Alan Drake Printouts.. etc.. all on a very basic cart made from a little kid's discarded bike and some scrap plywood and pipe/rail fittings. It's the Bob Shaw Totoniela express!.. and I propelled this with One hand, carrying coffee in the other. While there, one of our City Councilors was nearby, selling his paintings which he brought in on an aluminum bike-trailer that's as long as a bed (and which he says he got for around $400 from bikesthatwork.com .. or some such site, FYI)
Just to say that there are a lot of loads which WE can push or pedal around on a well-balanced cart, too. There is a persistent mentality that insists that we need (slave) help with everything we want to do, when there is so much we can and should do with more self-and-interreliance.
Bob
fleam, they didn't ride bicycles in 1500 but I'd bet that a bicycle mechanic will do ok in the 21st century, especially those from places like Mexico who already know how to make bikes run on scraps from the dump. The dregs of the bicycle manufacturing industry ought to last 100 years at least. Back in the oil crisis(translate bike boom)days of the '70s, millions upon millions of bicycles were built, only to languish in suburban garages, where they remain to this day, next to the trophies from the mountain bike craze of the '90s.
The Internet's going to be dead in 10 years, mark my words.
Fleam it was just like you said only waaay sooner :-)
"The Internet's going to be dead in 10 years, mark my words."
memo to: bill gates
sell microsoft.
Kohesion,
My wife faced a similar predicament four years ago when we learned about peak oil. She took electrician classes at the local community college, and then a class at Solar Energy Int'l (for whom she now teaches). She landed a job right away, and now when she teaches these classes, solar installers come the last day to her classes and offer jobs to anyone. Also, solar hot waters are a much better value than PV and are not as sexy but there are not nearly enough folks who know how or are willing to install these. This is real money. If my wife wanted to work sixty plus hour weeks, she could be making six figures now that she is a registered electrician.
Lots of other sustainable jobs out there: edible landscaping (such as us: www.bountifulbackyards.com), bicycles (esp. electric ones, just had a shop open up here in the triangle region of NC, doing great), solar air heaters and retrofit, etc.
But it sounds like if you're a detail oriented guy, I would go the electrical route.
Best of luck,
Stephen Hren
I'm (educatedly) guessing that you make a lot of money right now. Even if you can only milk that out for a few more years, I'd say you should stay where you are. What you can do in the meantime is try to live off a fraction of your income, and put the rest to some good use. Take the money you would have spent on the PS3 and buy insulation for your house. Big screen TV? - solar panels! Buy efficient appliances, etc. Get yourself into a position to live well off the lowest amount of energy possible. While you're doing that you can set up a yarden (yard garden), learn to can (buy canning equipment), read books about things you think might be useful. Donate some of your skill to alternative energy websites, alternative future websites. Some of them are designed so poorly and hard to navigate and look like shite you don't bother to go back.
Sometimes it might be better to "re-engineer" and sometimes it might be better to simply "tweak"
I believe the only sure thing that can be said about jobs in the future is that their will be LESS of them. From now on.
I agree with whoever said stay in your job while it lasts (if you make a decent amount of money) with below your means, and/or train yourself on would be useful. This doesn't have to be things like the ability to install solar water heaters.
I would then stick to simple things that can lower your costs: growing food, fixing your car, fixing your bike, cauking windows.
Or bizarrely simple things like canning, rope-making, whatever that may be useful later.
Most importantly would be to find people like you in your local area.
If it is well paying, stay in your job and SAVE.
As a hobby start gardening, carpenting, repairing bycicles or whatever you think will be useful post-peak. I am also in software and do not plan to abandon it as long as it pays.
In the meantime, I have a small garden, I am stockpiling food and I also plan several useful things: building solar oven, refining alcohol (booze always sells) and maybe I will keep bees as well.
Thanks for the great advice....
I have alot to think about now.. :)
http://www.cnbc.com/id/24251412
Intrepid Potash, a producer of crop nutrients, on Monday raised $960 million with an initial public offering of shares that priced above expectations.
Rising demand for grain across the globe, driven largely by the growing needs of developing economies and the increasing use of biofuels, have led to soaring food grain prices.
Farmers trying to boost yields are using more fertilizers, leading to tight global supply conditions for crop nutrients and bumper profits for fertilizer producers.
Intrepid Potash, Intrepid Potash IncIPI
48.05 16.05 +50.16% NYSE
Quote | Chart | News | Profile
[IPI 48.05 16.05 (+50.16%) ] which accounts for about 1.5 percent of global potash production, is well-placed to take advantage of this growing demand, making it attractive to investors even in a dull market for initial public offerings.
HomeBrew writes: "Intrepid Potash, Intrepid Potash IncIPI
48.05 16.05 +50.16% NYSE"
Though important this Potash stuff is beginning to sound more "pump and dump" than an important data point. We probably need to be a little more observant of what we post.
Comments?
"The International Monetary Fund warned oil ministers on Monday that their expansion in capacity was failing to keep up with surging demand, leading to instability in the market."
I hope the IMF reserved their biggest warning for the ministers of oil consuming nations...
I've a question to pose of people this Earth day.
We know that given the choice peoples' idea of a paradise usually runs to a pastoral idyll full of natural scenery, gambolling lambs and plenty of space. We also know that the reality of living in the countryside is backbreaking toil, rising with the sun to work all day and slaughtering those lambs whilst shovelling manure. There is a reason why people tended to run away to the city in past ages.
We also know that the McMansion development was born of the same aim for 'nature and plenty of space' ideal - but without the sh*t.
At the same time most people would consider living 20 miles from the nearest neighbour to be 'isolated' and would tend to seek the comfort of a community. You can be too far 'back to nature' for most people.
Now we are suggesting on one hand that more urban, high density living is required, whilst also saying that people will need to get back to something closer to self-sufficiency, or at least acting as serfs on the land to take the place of tractors. Slightly confused maybe?
So what do people think is the optimal spacing for people, taking into account their inbuilt desires, the needs of transportation/communication, and the needs of resilience, etc.? Is it multi-story apartment living? Is it rural farms?
What does the ideal look like in peoples' mind's eye?
My ideal is out my front door.
Mixed 1 to 3 story, mixed SFRs to 8-plexs (one 12-plex I know of) with small front yards (varying setbacks). Average and median housing < 1,000 sq ft (I would guess median is between 700 & 800 sq ft). Enough greenery and flowers to be called the Lower Garden District. Beautiful architecture only helps :-)
28' wide one way streets with mainly on-street parking leave a high % of land for people. Nearby park (4 blocks), nearby streetcar (2.5 blocks) grocery store (five within 7 blocks, closest 2.5 blocks), dry cleaning (2.5 blocks), bank (3.5 blocks), world class restaurants (two within 7 blocks plus many merely great ones, 15 James Beard award winners within a streetcar ride), bars, insurance agents, barbers, office supply, etc. within walking distance and even more within a streetcar ride. Lots of bicycles in use.
Pre-Katrina we rivaled NYC for fewest miles driven my residents and the Lower Garden was one of the "Manhatten"s of New Orleans (least car dependent).
Quite different solution, same result.
Best Hopes,
Alan
A number of photographs (he concentrated more on the homes than the streetscape, I prefer the streetscape) of my neighborhood. Prytania is a "main street" (2 way traffic) 1.5 blocks away, I live on St. Andrew, other keys are St. Charles, St. Mary, Josephine, Chestnut, and any of the Greek Muses :-)
http://www.asergeev.com/pictures/archives/compress/2006/528/26.htm
In retrospect, if we had been smart, the city planners would not have been allowed to drive ALL the farms out of each city. Ideally there would be businesses, homes (whether single family or high-rise) and farms in each community. And that would include Manhattan. It seems far-fetched to think of farms on Manhattan, but they once existed, along with forests. Wall Street got its name because of a wall that kept pigs away from the stock exchange. But city planners only plan for one thing - more construction and paving over raw land.
It's funny how people focus in on animal poop as some big, major horror. It is on an industrial scale, of course, but really it is not something to be all worked up about on a small farm. Especially when you realize how valuable it is. So yes, backbreaking labor is hard, and people try to avoid it. But look at Fleam's shipbreakers link from yesterday's Drumbeat - for most people life is very hard physical work. I'd rather deal with poop from domestic animals than live in an industrial hell like that.
The ideal "spacing" is based on the population the earth can support - much less than what it is now I think. Hopefully utilizing more of the land for farming, and maybe concentrating more of the population in villages, towns, and cities. I believe that would leave a much reduced net population in the countryside. I have to assume that the basic model that worked once before fossil fuel power was derived for good reason, and that it would work again at similar population levels. But getting there seems to have some issues associated with it, and I doubt any of us will live to see that.
Let's look at this from a frontier homestead point of view. The best you can say about density is that "it depends." Take my area in the Coast Range Mountains of northern CA. It takes 30-40 acres for a cow-calf pair on unirrigated range but in a desert region it will take over 100 acres. In the east, someone might get by with just a few acres.
The same kinds of constraints apply to food production. Is there sufficient rainfall or do crops have to be irrigated? Can the right kind of crops be grown for both human and animal consumption? Etc. Returning to my area, it's mostly range and timber because the only sufficient water for crops is in the valley. However, there is little flat land for row crops and the climate is tough.
Therefore, it is likely that people would be far closer in the east then the west simply because of the land's productivity. And, if farming returns to draft animals one day, there are optimum sizes based upon animal efficiency which will also affect population density. FWIW, the density in my area is roughly 1 person per 50+ acres. But, it's hard to know where to draw the line, it could be as low as 1 person per 200 acres.
Todd
Excellent points. Too bad they're often forgotten, even by those who you think know better.
Just ask John Wesley Powell what he thought of the 160 acre homestead allotment.
It's hard to draw the line now, it'll be much different in a few short years. For an idea of how it was, try old Metsker's tax maps before WWII.
Get by with just a few acres! Here in my part of the country we stock cow/calf one-to-one in acreage. Lots of green grass and water, at least until last summer.
Contrast the Dine' (Navajo) with their Puebloan neighbors. The Dine' live in scattered homesteads comprised of clan / extended family enclaves that are hyperdispersed. The Puebloan peoples live like ants in clusters. Of course, before the influx of Na-Dene speakers (Apacheans including the Dine'), Puebloan peoples tended to be more dispersed and only began living in defensible clusters as a consequence of the arrival of the "headbangers" (literal translation of the Hopi word for "Navajo.") The Na-Dene speakers were subarctic big game hunters who happened to wander south whereas the Puebloan peoples were maize & squash farmers influenced by the cultures of Mexico. The Na-Dene speakers took up pastoralism over settled farming, for the most part, and to this day move their herds & flocks up the mountain in summer & back down to lower elevation in winter. As times change, I expect that the semi-nomadic Dine' will revert to raiding the cornfields of their more settled Puebloan neighbors. Many Dine' still keep horses and many are very well armed. Western educated & acculturated Native people will have a harder time than those who have stuck more closely with the traditions of their people. The hyperdispersed settlement pattern will be vindicated as the optimum.
Let's not re-write history wholesale.
American Indian tribes moved around quite a lot at the "request" of the American Government, which also wittingly or unwittingly supplied them with horses and guns. The Navajo did not "wander" south from sub-arctic big game areas. They were re-settled in Northern Arizona, and deliberately placed in conflict with the Hopi.
Hyperdispersed settlement is one pattern, while small city development (e.g. Chaco Canyon -- long before Dene) is another. Success or failure depends on externalities -- weather, neighbors, invaders. I don't believe you couldn't really say that one or the other is "optimum."
OK, let's not.
http://cpluhna.nau.edu/People/navajo.htm
They were forced to relocate to Fort Sumner for awhile, but were allowed to return (under the treaty of 1868) to where they were before.
My first, much longer comment to this just got nuked: Not authorized to make comments because I suppoosedly wasn't logged in. BAH!
The Navaho were "supplied" guns and horses by the Spanish, and traditionally have several different homesteads, one specifically for farming like the Hopi, the others for grazing their animals. One of the best parts of the Peoples of the Southwest course I took while at Northern Arizona U. was a lecture/field trip on ethnobotany. The Anasazi didn't disappear; they are the Hopi and Puebloan peoples.
Sorry, they had to re-boot the server, which automatically logged you out.
Happens to me sometimes, usually with an hour's worth of work in the DrumBeat. Just rarely enough that I forget, and hit "post" without copying my work first...
Leanan, I'm not complaining about a free service but I am finding TOD incredibly slow (slowest on the internet?) even when the server has been rebooted - does anybody know what the problem is? ... bandwidth? ... software? ... hardware?
I don't know. People have said we have plenty of bandwidth for our traffic, but the site runs really slow anyway.
My guess is that it's Drupal. I really, really hate Drupal. I gather it makes it easier for SuperG, and if so, it's worth it. But for us users...it sucks big, green, warty pickles. I much preferred our old software, Scoop.
In particular, Drupal refreshes the whole page every time you access it. So if there's a problem with a post, or even if you accidentally click a link you didn't mean to click...you lose everything you wrote. The rest of the sites on the net, you can hit the "back" button and get your work back. Not here.
I suspect this is hammering our database, since each time you access a page, it checks the database to see who you are and serves a "custom" page for you. I find it a right pain. I'd rather refresh when I want an update, and read from the cache otherwise. Unfortunately, it seems to be impossible to do that with Drupal (it's a known issue, that has generated a lot of complaints).
Well, thanks for all your efforts anyway - slow or not, it stretches my brain (and yours too, I suspect) - and thanks to SuperG as well.
I just find stuff that doesn't work as well as it should frustrating and annoying and can't help but try and fix it - hence my lifetime employer paid me a lot of money to work out my frustrations on their difficult problems - and hence my interest in protecting myself from the worst effects of 'net exports' problems, hopefully we get a slow catabolic collapse!
Where I'm living in France the countryside is networked with villages, each within easy walking distance of its neighbouring villages (1 to 3 miles apart). Often, farms are situated along the outside edge of the village or in nearby hamlets. No one is remote in reality, although they may appear to be sometimes. Village housing is dense (populations normally in the region of 100 to 500 people), but with most houses having vegetable gardens and the larger villages having shops, bakeries, pharmacies, etc.
Distance between major commercial towns/centres is usually between 10 to 30 miles. This layout has of course been developed over hundreds of years (my village has been here for 1200 years) and long before mechanical methods of transport. There is also rivers and canal systems which are still navigable.
I get the feeling that something akin to this is close to the optimal - a village with houses close enough to create a community feel, but far enough apart to give privacy. More rural setting around this, with a 3-5 mile distances to the next village.
I wonder what density that requires?
Something like 13 people per square km (if my maths is right)?
That's about the New Zealand level. France is 110 people per square km.
How about both?
If you look at the history of Europe, for example, you'll find it's both.
Take a tour around the French countryside, for example. You'll find historic villages where there are close-spaced, multistory buildings. This is surrounded by agrarian estates, or possibly independent farmers.
The answer, historically, is that urban places are urban, and rural places are rural. When I say "urban" I mean anything from a tiny village to a metropolis. But the main point is: people who work on farms are on farms, and people who don't work on farms are in urban areas, of various sizes. What you don't have is people who don't work on farms living on spread out ersatz-farms, ie suburbia, which has been sustainable only because people have been able to deal with the spread-outness by driving their personal automobiles.
I'd like to make another point here. In the US, we focus on "small town America" and also the more traditional cities of the 19th century. These had some niceties, but they were ALSO an exercise in consumerist giantism, fueled in those days by the expanding productivity created by the Industrial Revolution. Thus, I see today's Suburbia (super-giantism) and "small town america" (19th century giantism) as a continuum of the same materialistic, gluttonous streak.
If you go virtually anywhere else in the world and look at pre-1800 neighborhoods, whether in Asia or Europe, you will see a rather high level of urban density. Multistory buildings set side-by-side are the rule. Also, streets are much narrower, perhaps 20-40 feet across from one building face to the other (not curb-to-curb). I call this the "medieval" format, although what I really mean is the time period from antiquity up to the Industrial Revolution.
Small-town America (I live in a small town in New York) is actually a sort of mini-suburbia. The houses are detached, with a yard on four sides. They are single-family erstaz farm houses, instead of multi-story buildings set adjacet. The streets are very wide, by "medieval" standards. This is OK. I can walk to the supermarket, some restaurants etc., the post office and bank. However, it is not really "urban" in the traditional, medieval-village sense. It is 19th century ersatz-farm giantism instead of 20th century giantism.
I would even say that 20th century suburbia and 19th century "small town america" are EXACTLY the same! The format -- street size, house plot size, single-family detached with a yard on four sides format -- is exactly the same. The thing is, in the 20th century people tried to size it up, and it didn't scale well. One of the results was that more and more parking and more and more roadways were necessary, which is the main difference between the 19th century format and the 20th century format. That's why Americans are always looking for somewhere that is "uncrowded" -- because their building habits don't scale. The bigger it is, the worse it gets.
First, I think the dichotomy posed is somewhat false, that is, either idyllic countryside or backbreaking shit shoveling. It is possible to work smarter than was once done to minimize the backbreaking toil and maximize garden/small farm production. An awful lot of back-breaking toil is done that can be at least ameliorated with some fairly simple techniques and inventions.
Second, one ideal explored in various books is the cluster housing in green areas mode of living. This attempts to emulate the small village within farmable land that is accessible by foot or at least by simple means of transport. In this way of structuring the mode of living, one can have the community and the open spaces and enough small industry to supply small-scale farming and living needs.
Some good points, ET. Let me add on.
First, there is no one "ideal" for everyone, clearly.
Second, I think the problem that most sub/urban people would have with a true rural existence is not the "backbreaking" nature of the work (what a crock of shit that is), but rather the low drama factor. I.e., boredom. Peace. Quiet. People talk about wanting peace and quiet, but most folks are so acclimated to stress and noise and speed and TV and office politics that they can't stand peace and quiet.
The vast majority of farm/garden work is actually not that physically difficult, but it can be monotonous at times. That's when it's nice to have something in your head to think about. Or just get into the zone.
On the plus side, living a rural life is the antidote to the ADD sort of things - there is always a long list of things that need attention, and if you're tired of doing x, why, go ahead and do y! It's not like you're going to get to the bottom of the list of "things that need to get done" anyway. :-)
But surely we don't all have to live the "one true way". I like the quiet and physicality of rural life. You may not. I like growing a portion of my own food. I like getting my own firewood from my own woodlot with my own horse. OK, OK, so my back gets a wee bit sore from time to time ;-) What the hell, I'm 50-something, cut me some slack!
A free clue to anyone contemplating taking up a rural existence: Pace yourself! Sometimes something has to get done right now, but usually not. And to the extent that you can blur the line between "work" and "not-work", you are winning.
That's my approach.
It helps that some folks grow certain crops that make it easy to 'get into the zone'. ;->
Why, I never thought of that! :-)
The psychological aspects of rural living should be discussed more for the benefit of people who are considering such a move - either now or later. I've posted about it on other forums but nothing here.
Here's the bottom line based upon observations of people who move to my area ... over half of the relationships break up within 5-7 years. It really takes special people to make a go of it.
It might be the two trips a day to haul a child to the bus stop a half an hour each way. Or the cost of the gas and doing it in rain or snow.
It might be that jobs pay crap wages with few or no benefits, if you can find one.
It might be overestimating ones skills or believing the endless books that country living is "fun."
It might be finding that things in the country cost far more than in suburban and urban areas. (The nearest COSTCO to me is a 2 1/2 hour drive each way.)
It might be running out of money and growing dope and the paranoia that goes along with growing.
It might be that there is nothing to "do." (I don't go to movies because it's at least a one hour drive each way.)
The list goes on and on. My point is that anyone even remotely considering a move to a rural area needs to seriously consider whether they have what it takes to make it. I have always suggested that people try to find a rural mentor.
Todd
If people are willing to riot like this over their hockey team winning, imagine the degree of rioting once fuel gets more expensive and in short supply.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/416962
Never been to Montreal I gather? Or to a Canadiens game? That's pretty much par for the course. Montreal's a special place and I wouldn't expect other cities to react with such "elan," such "joie de vivre" as "les habitants."
Although, things did get a little nasty one night in Edmonton two years ago when they were in the finals it was nothing like when Montreal won the Cup in 1993.
My hometown Senators made it to the finals last season, and other than a few jay-walking incidents things were pretty tame.
Canadian greenhouse gas emissions rise
I can't wait now for the Conservatives' big earth day press conference trumpeting the success of their intensity-based emissions reductions.
I sure hope our esteemed environment minister isn't in court today.
Canada, like the US needs to curb it's population growth. This means restricting immigration. Trouble is like the US immigration is the elephant in the living room. No politian or MSM mentions it. If not emissions will contiue their inexorable rise.
Exactly. All our problems are symptoms of overpopulation that no one is willing to talk about. Especially immigration, as you are labeled a racist. The Conservatives want to change the blanket rules of immigration into allowing those who we need the skills of first and they got flamed big time by the other parties as being racist.
It is grossly unfair to criticize any government on trying to control emissions when the publis refuses to heed to the real cause of increases in emissions -- immigration.
But one day the public is going to get a dose of reality when they have to cut back even more on their lifestyle every time new people come to Canada. It's just a matter of time.
I believe that they are mistaken. The EIA shows that production had been flat at between 9.4 and 9.5 mbpd (C+C) from 10/06 to 12/07, and recent Russian data show declining production.
Yes, that is an obvious error. Russia reached a post USSR peak in 2007 with an average daily production of 9,437,000 barrels per day. It looks like Russia's April production will be around 9,300,000 bp/d or a drop of about 1.5% from their 2007 average.
Ron Patterson
Sounds like an attempt by this writer to smear all "anti-American" governments as an impediment to extracting endless oil.
Well, we know Dick Cheney's solution for this problem.
So , I guess Irag was/is the "prize"
It's one of my "I'm having a problem with a post" post:
I looked through the ENERGY BULLETIN today and found: "Future looks bleak at the peak" by Jonathan Porter, The Australian. He wrote:
1. "Your property in the inner city will be worthless, because that is where most of the roaming armed bands will be concentrated."
Oh Yeah?.. where will these bands be getting their food (calories to roam around) from?
2. "Well, before all this happens, you will have to relocate to somewhere you can grow your own crops, raise your own swine and tend your own steak...."
EVERONE seems to be focusing on farming. I'm wondering, who's going to make the soap?.. or mend shoes?.. or even make shoes?
From what I understand, in early colonial America, almost everyone - even city dwellers - had a kitchen garden where herbs and special vegetables were grown for personal use. Okay, But most of the city dwellers weren't employed as farmers. Craftmen made up a significant percentage of the population. If most here are planning a post-peak (?)doomer's(?) society, at least plan for some of Life's more pleasurable non-necessities. I'm being serious.
Hmmm... Come and see my travelling comedy show, complete with my kicthen-garden-in-pots-on-a-wagon. Check you local crier for dates and times. (I believe in advertising as early as possible).
;-)
There's a jolly band of working bakers, tinsmiths and shoemakers at Upper Canada Village in eastern Ontario.
UCV commissioned a study last year to determine its way ahead. After reading it, I boldly wrote the chief administrator suggesting that selling its land beside the 401 Hwy for mall development would be wasteful in the face of peak oil, but that expansion of the village to the St Lawrence waterfront was admirable. I suggested UCV might consider running extended "live-in" workshops on its trades while there is still some tourism potential. Do I need to mention the response I got?
YOU GOT A RESPONSE?!?!?!
Seriously, I've seen it happen to a few living history museums where the municipality brings in a developer... who eventually kills the place. On the other hand, a few actually thrived because the new shops sold items that were related to the museum's theme.
Is there an address as to where to get the study? I really am curious if that's the place near Midland, Ontario.
Sad (for me) to say, but Canada has way more of those type of places (per capita) than the US has. I always enjoyed visiting them. The biggest I ever saw was King's Landing, N.B.. Bigger yet was Louisbourg, N.S.; but they didn't have as many craftmen.
No, it's not near Midland.
I can't find the original files on their corporate site, but have made them available here:
http://groups.google.com/group/Brockville-Discussion/files
The two relevant files are prefixed 'SLPC'. At 42 Mb, the detailed report is too large for the Google Groups server, but "destination retail" is mentioned in the Summary and shown on a map there.
Thank you.
Very interesting.
Sandstorms, cold wreak havoc in northwest China
http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSPEK303639
Hello Burgundy,
Thxs for this cascading blowback info. As I speculated in yesterday's DB: all the problems occurring in China make their initial control attempts in Zimbabwe and other parts of Africa seem like a common sense strategy to me; to try to stake their colonial topsoil claim before postPeak Overshoot stresses in Europe or Japan inevitably force them to the strategy of sequential building and enlargement of biosolar habitats.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Yes, I think a new push by the various powers to extend their resource base is underway (Iraq obviously included). Some kind of new colonial expansion which will intensify as globalisation (financial colonisation) fails.
Gordon Brown is one of the neo-colonialists IMO and I expect his interest in Zimbabwe is along these lines (although I don't expect him to go along with the Israeli inspired neocon visions of empire). Seems the Chinese beat him to it in Zimbabwe, so I suspect British Special Forces are already active there setting the scene for the next act. The militarisation of the British Royal Family also seems to be leading in that direction (the old school way - leading from the front).
France also, they never really quit their colonies, some of which still use the French Franc, and they're always quick to act when something untoward occurs in any of these "ex" colonies. I expect the French will becoming increasingly active in Africa as their interests there are threatened.
Africa is likely going to be the battleground for the next major conflict between the major powers IMO.
Many Wisconsin dairy farmers switch to grazing
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jozCmrYP-RXLlQvY6pqL89yH474wD906SN1O0
Not to mention the cows produce for more years than when kept in confinement, it's not how much you gross but what you net that counts.
Interesting makes sense too. Is it the same concept for chickens who get to run around rather than cooped up in little boxes to produce more eggs? Also does being able to graze help with the cows milk taste? The only reason I ask is my father in law raises a few chickens in his backyard and they lay the best damn eggs I've ever tasted! No salt, pepper, or ketchup needed!
NYMEX at $120/B by days end Wednesday? Is there any force at work that may stop the recent skyrocketing of prices?
If not by wednesday, the end of the week perhaps?
IMO, food & energy prices are being set at the margin, as increasingly desperate food & energy importers bid for declining food & energy exports.
As we have previously described, our model and recent case histories show that net oil export decline rates tend to accelerate with time, which requires an accelerating rate of increase in price, in order to balance supply & demand.
Also, as forced energy conservation moves up the income ladder, energy costs as a percentage of income tend to fall, which also requires an accelerating rate of increase in prices, in order to balance supply & demand.
I think that what we are seeing is forced energy conservation beginning to move up into the middle income area.
Some people may recall that I have been freely (redundantly, repetitively, annoyingly etc.) offering some advice for some time about this very topic.
Not reduntantly. Not annoyingly. Repetitively...perhaps.
But very much to the point, and helpful for the newcomers, who hopefully will be numerous given the recent media exposure.
Thank you !
WT
This just in from Reuters
This increased demand has occurred in the past week and a half. Limits on these items have been enacted at some of its stores, including certain locations in California's Bay Area.
It seems that we are starting to see people in the US stocking up on staples, this is a very interesting development. It was even reported on CNBC this afternoon.
Something is happening here, I have to believe it is tied to the 120 a buck per barrel oil.
I fear we are beyond the beginning of the beginning of what Kunstler calls "long emergency"
Louisiana sweet at $120.55/barrel at 15:10 GMT. And look at the spike above $118 in today's WTI prices... Wow...
-best,
Wolf
From above:
They can't put out the headlines fast enough ($119.57 atm, but that's a bit off the high, which was over $119.90).
Err, it seems to be coming today ... $119.70 for WTI at this moment !
Wow!
And here I thought I was being bold to predict the spike by the end of tomorrow! I hope TOD can update its server soon.
For the record, the average price of a barrel of WTI (spot market) has just passed $100/barrel for the 2008 calendar year. At the current rate of climb, the year-to-date average should close out at about $101/bbl by the end of this week.
Can someone provide a good link that shows the average spot price to date for the year for barrels of oil? And what exactly is the year? Calendar or fiscal? Either or both WTI or NyMex would be good.
I'd like to either see that or find a way to track it. Thanks!
You can find the daily price of both spot and Nymex at:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_spt_s1_d.htm
Life spans decline in some U.S. areas
Apparently, progress hasn't been as progressive as we thought...
One thousand counties had a fall in life expectancy.
Whether you blame it on wealth/income distribution, fast food diets, sedentary post-industrial jobs, a collapsing primary medical care system, pollution, or increasing stress, Progress is now pushing some of us out of the lifeboat.
MSNBC Video: Saving The Planet
Here's a good MSNBC video of Jeffery Sachs discussing world population problems and lots of other important issues. He does a good job linking all the scarcity problems together to create a coherent view of the situation.
“One of the main challenges is dealing with the artificial fear about the availability of oil supplies, resources and production capacity. Frankly, I believe this fear has neither a scientific nor an economic basis. Nevertheless, it is creating a perception of scarcity and is therefore helping push oil prices higher”.
That quote was from the Saudi oil minister. It seems to be aimed at us Peak Oilers. Is it possible that the notion of oil reaching peak production is the culprit in rising oil costs, rather than the perceived reality of peak?
One question I have in regard to this question is: Is worldwide fuel demand higher than production, and if so what should be current bpd production be to meet demand at a much lower price?
The Saudi guy shouldn't have said the next 30 years-the globe has enough oil to meet demand for the next 300 years. Amazingly, demand will shrivel up when a barrel of oil costs $2000-voila, demand is met. In answer to your question, yes, there is a large demand for $1 a barrel oil-Haitians might buy some of that.
The Saudi oil minister is lying. L-Y-I-N-G. He is deploying propaganda to keep the masses calm.
Here is a trick for estimating the degree to which prices are caused by speculation. Look at the amount of backwardation, and not just for the front month contract to the next month, but also a few months farther away. Just subtract the price of a future month's contract from the contract for the month before it.
50 cents would be low. When that price hits around $1.00-$1.15, we normally see a short sell-off and consolidation.
In the past couple of days, it's gone up from 70 cents-ish to 85 cents-ish. We're also seeing a sharp increase in mainstream media headlines about peak oil. So speculation is increasing right now, but we're probably still not at the point where we've really gone too far.
Also, usually in a price run-up like this you see a short mini-consolidation at about the middle of the run.
Even when we hit the point that we've really gone too far, don't expect a long-term price drop. The price will drop roughly 10% in a very short panic speculator sell-off. When it has dropped 10%, commercial traders who are holding off on buying right now will immediately step in and start buying. Specs who missed selling in the initial panic sell-off will then sell some more, and commercials will buy some more. This will repeat for a few weeks. This is what creates a consolidation.
Our last consolidation lasted about 4 weeks before the price started heading up again.
This price rise is based on fundamentals. Supply is in decline while consumption in China, Russia and the Middle Eastern oil producing nations is sharply up. Plus, summer is a high energy consumption season in the Middle East. Exports will be down.
Hi Moe:
I've been looking at the charts for quite a while and after we puntured 110 thought the next move likely to take us to around 125. Any thoughts?
The question you have to ask is WHY the Saudi's are lying ?
The fact they are lying is pretty obvious. Did they suddenly get blindsided by depletion in Ghawar or other fields that caused production problems ?
Or have that been planning how to handle peak oil for 30 years ?
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3884#comment-333546
The answer is they have been planning for a very long time to ensure that KSA is the primary export nation as the world peaks.
Why they are lying is far more important than the lie itself.
from netoilexports.blogspot.com
If you continue the trend from 2002 to 2005, when prices were under $50, Net Exports would have to be in the vicinity of 50mb/d. Instead they are about 42mb/d. Enough said.
Texas Railroad Commission Supports Statement by Naimi
Leanan has an article up on PO. China has had to buy a potful of oil from Angola After Saudi Arabia Couldn't Meet Their Needs.
You guys do realize that the "handful of non-specialists" are you.
A true story. After the Dallas Morning News published pro/con opinion articles on Peak Oil in 2006 (I took the Yes We Have Peaked position), the head of the editorial board at the Morning News was visited by the Saudi Ambassador to the United States. I asked what they talked about, and only received a vague answer. The only opinion piece that touched on Peak Oil since then was a column by Rod Dreher earlier this year.
My Yes We have Peaked article (with a lot of help from Bart at the EB, and Alan Drake): http://www.energybulletin.net/17009.html
It also means you're not among "all respected petroleum engineers, geologists and upstream professional organisations..."
Do you think Naimi made any friends today?
I am somewhat surprised at the vehemence of the statement. He sounds like he is afraid of something.
He sounds like he is afraid of something.
Sure he is as he knows his "friends" Bush, Cheney, Rice, McCain, Clinton, etc. are all irrational and very violent people quite capable of stabbing their erstwhile friend in the back.
For awhile it was speculated that Saddam Hussein didn't openly admit to liquidating his WMDs because he thought they had a deterent effect toward Iran. The same psychology can be applied to the Saudis/OPEC regarding their "spare capacity."
I also find it very illustrative that Egypt, Qatar, UAE, KSA, etc. have all voiced the need/want to develop nuclear power, and some like Egypt have actually entered into contracts, yet the Israelis and neocons haven't squawked one bit, but Iran is subjected to economic war for developing the same--"Our trade blockade is perfectly legal."
Given that Naimi almost certainly took classes from M King Hubbert I'm surprised that most people don't grok that he understands peak oil well. In fact I'm pretty certain he got his current job by doing a depletion/peak analysis for Saudi Arabia.
Its sad that no one on the Oil Drum has followed through with the implications of this.
What do you think the implications might be?
I think he is deliberately seeking to mislead, and is well aware that peak oil is here, and Saudi supplies will be much more limited.
KSA is and has been following a depletion protocol for 30 years.
And the US knows this.
Ah, but how do you know?
Hi, Jeffrey.
Sometimes there is some evidence that one can muster to back a point of view. Their statement strikes me as very difficult to substantiate, given your graph.
Does the RRC cite any evidence that it can't find buyers?
-Andre'
If this were an actual statement by the RRC, one might think that they would have been lying about not being able to find buyers for all of their oil, "Even their light/sweet oil."
BTW, the light/sweet statement was one of many reasons given by the Saudis for their early 2006 decline in oil production, as shown on the above graph.
Sorry, missed that...thanks for the reply.
Naimi (and those like him) don't get it. You keep telling us that we are wrong and yet you bring nothing to the table. NOTHING!!!!
Does he not get there is no proof whatsoever of his so called production capacity? Does he not get that Saudi Arabia is and has been producing less oil that it did 27-28 years ago? Does he not know there is an easy way to dispell the rumors that Saudi Arabia has overstated it's reserves and production capacity.
Remember, it was a bunch of so-called specialists and experts that got the US into Iraq while the non-specialists were telling the "experts" it was a really stupid thing to do and that there was no proof in what the experts said. Turns out the non-specialists were right in that one as well.
Actually, if the non-specialists are correct, then KSA's "star" dims considerably and while their production may remain significant, their future viability is equally at peril and they might not receive such favorable glad-handing in the future.
From our own little group of quotes in the upper right hand corner:
"First they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win."
-Gandhi
What gets me is that King Abdullah said flat out that production will not increase beyond 2009. WTF!!! and I repeat WTFF!!! This is the biggest story of the decade, since Saudi Oil production must and again I repeat, MUST! at least try to keep up with demand. I have no doubt now that we have hit peak oil and the world is sleep walking into the greatest catastrophe and paradigm shift in global history.
I agree. It's amazing how much it takes to get through to the public at large. Peak oil is still considered a fringe offbeat notion, yet the price of oil stands at 117 and the denial continues ad infinitum. Worse yet is when the Saudi's talk everyone listens, like they are the kings of oil, and if they say there's lots more then we should all just accept that for face value. Hopefully there is some price point that will break through the denial and then a concerted effort can be undertaken to do something about it. Otherwise, your right we're all headed for catastrophe.
Where is CERA in this? Their optimistic projections absolutely require the Saudis to massively increase production. Inquiring minds want to know. Maybe some reporter will ask them.
I suspect they're huddled in the basement of a Boston townhouse hording ammo and 3 yergin bills.
futureseeker - Seems to be pretty arrogant for people in the US to demand that SA MUST produce more oil, while we demand that the US must not produce any new energy at all: - no oil drilling in the most promising areas; no nuclear; nothing to do with coal; no LNG ports; no windfarms that obstruct the view; etc., etc., etc.
This site is pretty much dedicated to composting our way to the next century, and re-training for jobs that worked in the year 1500.
I agree, what I meant by must is that according to non peak oil (standard) theory Saudi Arabia is the key to our global energy future if we continue to rely on oil. So in order to meet future demand the Saudis will have to produce more oil. The comment referred to King Abdullah's amazing comment about not producing oil that was ignored by the MSM. I believe that we are at peak oil and I agree with you that it is arrogant for us to demand that Saudis produce more oil but I fear that as this crisis deepens the United States will do far more than demand Saudi Arabia to produce oil because we are hopelessly addicted to the black stuff and covering our eyes and ears and saying lalala like a child trying to ignore the future.
CNN now has this headline:
OPEC to boost oil production
Seems unlikely. Perhaps replace some declines elsewhere, but not boost production capacity by 5 million barrels.
This is nothing new. They, or at least Saudi Arabia, has been spending billions in an effort to increase production capacity. In four years, they say, if they spend $160 billion, they expect to see capacity increased by 5 million barrels per day.
Everything that comes from OPEC must be taken with a grain of salt. Every oil producing nation is trying to increase oil production. And the vast majority of those nations predict an increase in production as a result of these expenditures. However they are likely to only slightly slow their decline. And if these expenditures are directed at just sucking the oil out faster from old fields, this will result in a dramatic decline after a few years of the use of these super straws.
Ron Patterson
I dont envy the King and his ministers at all.
On the one hand, he must try and keep the flows up and look after America.
On the other, he must be a 'river to his people' and there are a heck of a lot more people now than 30 years ago.
Imagine his plight? Telling the world and his own people that it will soon be over.
He cannot state true reserves or that KSA is at peak. The only way that he can allay fears is substantiating the claims that a lot of spare capacity is potentially on tap.
Naah. They will deny it right up to the last armoured convoy that takes them to the private jets that will take them to the Riviera...
Go to CNBC right now (9:19am pst) and oil is trading at 119.43!!!
I want to thank those who responded to my post the other day regarding the connection between rising prices and rising production, to whom I did not respond directly.
On the one hand, it seems reasonable to suppose that higher prices would bring on more production. It could be a temporary thing, such as emptying out of storage, or it go along the lines of the anecdotal evidence pointing toward the revival of old wells, etc.
On the other hand, it seems strange prices should be so high in light of record production. The production graphs don't tell us what proportion of the energy is going into energy production, which is clearly rising.
In other news, Frontline on PBS is doing a program tonight on the politics of global warming.
Well, the cumulative crude + condensate (C+C) shortfall between what the world would have produced at the May, 2005 rate and what we actually produced has stayed constant or increased for 31 out of 32 months, based on EIA data. Through January, 2008, the shortfall is at about 704 mb. And annual EIA data showed three years of flat total liquids production. We have seen a recent short term bump up in estimated production, but we shall see what happens for all of 2008. In any case, it does not look promising.
Regarding supply though, the key metric is net oil exports. Total net exports from the top five net oil exporters dropped 800,000 bpd in 2006 (EIA) and I estimate that they dropped one mbpd in 2007, on track to approach zero net oil exports around 2031, which is our (Khebab/Brown) middle case.
I believe that we are looking at a geometric progression in oil prices: $50, $100, $200, $400. . .
But fundamentally, the conventional response we have seen in many post-peak regions is the following:
Higher oil price + Increased drilling = Lower crude oil production
This is the pattern that Texas showed in the Seventies, and it is the pattern that Saudi Arabia is currently showing.
One year ago today, the price of WTI was around $64/bbl. Now, it's $119/bbl and flirting with $120/bbl. That's nearly a doubling in one year. Going back three years, the price was around $53/bbl, so somewhat more than a doubling in three annums. Looks like hyper price-inflation (largely driven by the fundamentals, IMVHO).
-best,
Wolf
Actually, the "Yergin Indicator" is working quite well. Last summer, Yergin said that in the absence of a geopolitical event, oil prices in 2008 would be back down to $60. At the time, I noted that this suggested that oil prices would trade around twice Yergin's predicted index price, within one to two years of his prediction.
The time period between prices doubling to twice Yergin's predicted price is actually decreasing. For $38 (One "Yergin") to $76, it took about 20 months. For $60 to about $120, it took about 10 months.
For more info, do a Google Search for Daniel Yergin Day.
BTW, this was a test post. After trying and failing to get on to the Drumbeat thread as westexas, I tried a different account name, and got right in. Or it could just be a slow server, or it's just a sign that I need to get back to work.
WT,
I understand that the key metric is exports, but from your first paragraph I also seem to get the impression that you believe that we (i.e. the world) is either at the apogee/plateau of P.O. or even perhaps passed it. Do you think we have peaked?
What Jeff says about net exports is true. But it is also true that you can have increasing prices with increasing production if demand is increasing faster than production. It clearly is.
From a pricing perspective, it is not surprising to see a slow increase in price that accelerates as actual shortages approach. The recent rapid rise in oil prices is genuinely worrisome, especially in conjunction with the story about KSA not being able to supply China with enough oil. During the Enron manufactured crisis in California, a 3% shortfall in natural gas caused prices to triple.
The bubble in China has popped. The Chinese stock market is down 50% over the last 6 months. It will probably fall another 5% overnight and continue on down from there. The stock market is the most accurate leading indicator of economic activity in China just like anywhere else. The China bubble may well have been the biggest economic bubble in human history. Lending growth has averaged more than 20% per year over the last decade. This is the definition of unsustainable lending-driven economic growth. In other words, a bubble. A big, freaking bubble. The commodities bubble was created by the China bubble. When the China bubble pops, so goes the commodities bubble.
You can ridicule this post all you want.
"You can ridicule this post all you want."
I won't ridicule it, I have been saying it's coming for the last 6 months.
The problem is, no one knows how much American money has been poured in the combo commodities/Chinese bubble. If the decline happens too fast, you could see multiple bank and hedge fund failures that will make the so called "sub-prime" housing crisis look like a piss in the sea. The sub prime thing was a whipped up hysteria from day one. The crisis in China and commodities will be the real thing.
China had hoped to hold it together past the Olympics to put on a good show for the world, and had used every cheap trick in the book to prop up a raging bubble. They fell short.
Oh, one more little issue. If the China bubble breaks, has anyone tried to figure out what that does to world oil consumption? KSA is scared our of it's wits of a coming consumption crash. They have good reason to be.
RC
RC
Well, Bubbles, I'm not going to ridicule your post. I'm just going to point out the various errors you've made.
Stock markets are not necessarily leading indicators. The US housing bubble began to deflate in 2005, but it wasn't till 2007 that the stock market began to reflect that. It was so far behind the curve it had to be hit with a 2x4 to wake it up.
The Shanghai exchange has declined as China as raised interest rates, increased reserve requirements, and strengthened the Yuan. They knew the market was a bubble, and they've been trying to deflate it deliberately, in start contrast to the US Fed trying to re-inflate ours.
However, it is a huge error to jump from an equities bubble to a commodities bubble. Commodities are real things produced by real producers and consumed by real consumers. There never has been, nor ever will be, a "commodities bubble." Equities, housing values, tulip bulbbs, and South Sea Co. shares can bubble. Commodities respond to supply and demand.
What people misinterpret as a commodities bubble is the natural rise and fall in prices caused by supply/demand cycles. When supply is tight, prices go up, which induces increased supply and reduces demand. The increased supply and reduced demand lowers prices, which causes demand to rise again and production to fall. Prices fall, and the cycle starts over again.
Except this time. This time it is different, because the price increases won't bring about increases in supply. The commodity cycle is broken.
This isn't a bubble. It's the apocalypse. (TM)
Better an engineered crash for a people who work hard, care about reality and can adapt to change, than a fake empire propping up markets by lawyer tricks and accountant tricks to put off the day its people must face their own uselessness.
Nah, it's not the apocalyse. It's just lack of investment in commodity production by people chasing the internet boom and the housing boom. Face it, sulfur didn't increase in price thirteen times in thirteen months because we were running out of sulfur. Nor are we going to run out of the huge, huge, reserves of potash and phosphate. My god, just look at a map of the Canadian potash field, it's bigger than New York State!
Short term, the next fifty years, we aren't going to run out of coal, either.
Rainfall shifts are what I worry about. That's the one we can't adjust to fast enough to stop mass starvation. Doesn't matter if it's caused by Global Warming, Global Cooling, or the Easter Bunny. If the rainfall moves we are screwed.
There's plenty of rain in the world - but also a lack of investment to capture it!
Just like there's plenty of oil, copper, gold, uranium, coal, phosphate, etc. etc. Quoting the size of the Canadian potash field (or URR for world oil as another example) misses the point - as always (as with rain also) it's not the size of the reserves but the FLOW RATE that is important.
The supply problem is ALWAYS inadequate investment because the investment has to be PROFITABLE.
It had to happen. Recently one blogger to the Economist said that it seemed that China was combining the growth rates of the US 100 years ago with the business cycle of present day Germany. If China pulles it off it would be the biggest economic miracle of all time. Like the US 100 years ago the odd savage correction may be in order.
While a big slowdown in China may temprarily deflate the commodity bubble in the long term supply will struggle to meet demand. A Chinese slump will only buy us time.
What happens to America when a gallon of gas equals the minimum wage?!
My guess: Congress mandates an increase in the minimum wage.
And sends out more stimulus checks! Bigger ones!
That question has been asked a few times here.
Because the question is about the future - and no human (should be able to) knows the future, the correct answer is unknowable.
Rhetorical points of interest in the matter:
$5 a gallon (the bill type switches)
Min wage - taxes (your take home per hour)
Min wage
wage-taxes for the job you and others do
wage for the job you do
The effect on the low wage working section should be interesting - why go to a job for a part time job for 2-3 hours? What is the transport costs to/from the job location?
Looking for canaries? - Rural Wal-Marts might be a place to look towards. Same with rural trailer parks VS urban cheap housing
I was just thinking about gas prices vs. minimum wage yesterday. In 1979, I was making minimum wage of $2.65 an hour, and when gas hit $1.25, it really hurt. I was driving a beautiful 1964 Olds 88 that got about 12mpg. I sold it and bought a 1974 Chevy Vega, which got about 25 mpg of gas and about 400 miles per quart of oil, which was 50 cents at the time. It was a disaster of a car.
I am on the waiting list for a smart, having put my order in a year ago. It is due to arrive sometime this summer. I am not sure I am going to be buying the car, because I think I might get a Ford Focus instead. Cheaper out the door, only slightly worse gas mileage, and it has a backseat. This is likely to be the last new car I ever buy, and I really need more utility than the smart provides. They are cute though. The US distributor underestimated demand, and has had some teething problems, so deliveries have been slow.
You were a rich kid. I didn't own a car until I was 30. I must confess I had a weakness for mopeds though, and would have been better off sticking with the bicycle. (Bicycle is actually cheaper than the bus, a monthly bus pass in the US ranges from $35-$65 a month, and on that you can maintain a bike or two just fine on that and have money left over, besides not having to be housebound on sundays, evenings, etc.)
Rich kid!!! Uh, right. The Olds cost me $325 and I sold it for $350. I had made the $325 with paper routes and working in the fields at $2.10 an hour. The Vega cost me $400, and I sold it for $500. I had (and still have) an eye for used cars. I expect my current vehicle (1997 Toyota 4Runner, bought used for $7500) to give me 100K miles for about $2000 in depreciation. Unfortunately, at 20mpg and $3.50 a gallon, it will cost me $17,500 in fuel....
The cost of many vehicles is now dwarfed by fuel and oil costs. I think I will create a spreadsheet that will allow people to enter the number of years they expect to keep their vehicle, the number of miles they expect to drive, the MPG, the current price of gas, and a projection factor for the rise in gas prices. I think most people will be shocked. A friend just bought a big Dodge pickup with the biggest Cummins Diesel he could get. It gets about 15mpg, pretty good for a truck that can tow a small house. However, if he drives it 200K miles as he did his last one, at $4.20 a gallon, he will spend $56,000 on fuel. Of course, he will actually spend more, since in ten years the price of diesel will almost certainly be over $4.20/gal.
That sounds like it would be a fun thing to put on a web site or something. Let people see what that car is really costing them.
"Because the question is about the future - and no human (should be able to) knows the future, the correct answer is unknowable."
I agree.
I think it's very hard to speculate and be sure of getting the scenarios which will unfold right. Getting it wrong may cost more than money.
That's why I don't think adopting mitigating mega projects right now is the right way to go.
We should try and wait to gauge the various impacts and effects of peak oil and climate change.
That's not to say we won't get strong signals along the way which we can act on.
Conserving now and maintaining a ready response ability to my mind is safest and most efficient.
What we can bank on though is that people will move.
The problem with that is, where they will move to. Can we be sure, should we attempt to make it sure?
I don't think people will stay, do without and fade away quietly.
People will move to where there is work, food, shelter and clothing.
They will come with what they can carry, push and pull.
Will house full signs go up? Will those in the lifeboats repel people trying to be saved, less they be swamped?
Those families getting by will be desperate to protect what they have and families in need will be just as desperate to have a share.
A scenario could be house full signs being put up by towns and cities, states and even countries, it's human nature.
If we knew what and how much to squirrel away.
If then we could be sure of protecting what we diligently saved.
Imagine if you had saved your money and purchased a farm and stocked it with, hogs, cows, horses, chickens etc.
Maybe even a couple of silos with a few tons of wheat and rice. What if you have thought of everything. You have enough water, power and maybe even the correct currency and trade goods.
What if your neighbours have not saved or prepared.
I know I have posed a lot of questions but that is the nature of a mostly unknowable future.
What if your neighbours have not saved or prepared.
Time for me to link to a peak oil cartoonist:
http://www.thepaincomics.com/weekly080423.htm
Unemployment and an increase in crime.
Two years ago, the hip suburban/progressive show car was the Toyota Prius. Now almost overnight I've seen the Smart Car popping up around Chicago. If my hip eco-sporty suburban neighbors are the trend setters they believe themselves to be, this thing is going to be a huge hit in the U.S. and will spur many imitators. It's a lovely transitional automobile on the way to bicycles built for four.
"bicycles built for four"
Any links ?
I thought bicycles legally had to be 2 or 3 wheels ??
Semanticly bicycles have to have 2 wheels. Add a third and you get a tricycle. : ) That out of the way, are you suggesting there is a law against 4 wheeled pedal powered transport!?!?!
Maybe the right word is "Quadcycle." I was thinking of something like this:
http://www.surreycompany.com/images/OrangeDXLimousine_000.jpg
At less than half the price of a Smart Car, it will put you in range of the local supermarket with infinitely better gas mileage. An urban sub-commuter car for the 2020s.
Here's another idea.
My wife and I pilot one of these SUV's and can comfortably crank out 50 miles and even a hundred in a pinch. Cheap initially and easy to electrify later on.
So you're gonna power your SUV with coal? (...Sigh for the world...)
:-) OK so I'll change out a couple of lightbulbs. That should be plenty.
You assume that the individual doesn't plan on spending the $30k+ that would have gone towards gas into buying solar panels instead. If they produce more power than the vehicle consumes, you can say that it's not making any pollution. After all, tis my plan!
Yes I agree. I am 'somewhat hopeful' about people discovering the ability to adapt their transportation to an appropriate size for what they are doing. It's partly technology. Like we could easily power our two wheeled wonder (our SUV) with the output from a few solar panels. But by reducing the mass by a factor of 10 it's fuel needs are right to the job at hand.
For longer distances and heavier loads we use a vehicle which routinely gets 56 mpg. We load the crap out of it with supplies for several people or it don't need to go. A truck is rarely needed. Living way out will mean making every BTU of transpotation energy squeal.
Other countries have done this for years and it will be 'interesting' to watch the US go through the process. Ton's of fat here to trim.
A two-seater should get a lot better fuel economy than the Smart. The gas version is like 38 mpg. But in Europe the diesel makes 70 mpg. But then so do some 4-seat European cars, like the upcoming Volkswagen Up.
Americans are gonna have a long learning curve to catch up to real fuel economy. In the meanwhile, keep an eye out for the 2nd generation Prius.
Hello TODers,
If the Chinese can get this built before postPeak materials reach Unobtainium pricing, it will do much to lower future sulphur prices until these sourgas fields peter out from depletion:
http://english.rednet.cn/c/2008/04/22/1490193.htm
--------------------------------
Dazhou to become Asia's largest sulfur base
Dazhou, a city in the eastern part of Southwest China's Sichuan Province, will make full use of its natural gas reserves to build Asia's largest sulfur producing base by 2010 when its annual sulfur output is expected to surpass 4 million tons.
---------------------------------
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
This guy should be voted (American) Man Of The Year! Great article!
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=34682
fleam-
I agree---
Did you notice the responses? Calvinism is a deeply embedded meme, and the poor sheeple will not stop.
Workers of the world, relax.
Hats off for your tip and the articles author! So true! Laughed all the way through the piece.. What the hell is wrong with people actually wanting to work in offices and crap jobs 8 hours a day? I never understood them. I've been working ten years for the government doing as little as possible every day and they basically have no way of firing me either. Of my ~ $2900/month I use only $1200 for living and rest goes to a savings account thats sole purpose of existence is to buy me a nice peak oil proof farm somewhere far away where I don't have to meet ignorant idiots all day long..
Oil Price Hits Another All-Time High
Shell Petroleum Development Co., declared force majeure on its April and May oil delivery contracts from its 400,000-barrel-a-day Bonny fields, effective April 22, a move that protects it from litigation if it fails to deliver on contractual obligations to buyers.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=4700612&page=1
Not sure if this one has already crossed the desk but, if not...
It looks like we should ignore peak oil for the moment and worry about peak digits instead
When fuel hits $4 a gallon, pumps at mom-and-pop stations inadequate
http://wenatcheeworld.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080422/NEWS04/970...
Cheers,
Paul
This is a cool video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NLmiuyLa98
Hello all. I am giving a lunchtime "brown bag" talk on Peak Oil at my company's office next month, and I need a bit of help. My intention is to present the theoretical basis for peak oil, including the Scientific American 1998 article by Campbell and Laherrere, the work by Chris Skrebowski and Kenneth Deffeys, the observed declines in field production rates, and the German Energy Watch Group report released last October. I then intend to discuss the potential consequences of peak oil, citing the Hirsch Report and the work of Gail the Actuary.
What I need is graphs of EIA data over the last three years, showing both the May 2005 C+C peak and the total liquids plateau. I'd rather not use the IEA data, as I believe the books may have "accidentally" been cooked. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Hi TH in OR--Are you in Portland or ?
Anyhow, see this post by ace in yesterday's DrumBeat.
I am indeed.
that means, there is still gas avalable ...
Hello TODers,
http://news14.com/content/headlines/595097/as-gas-prices-soar--so-do-sco...
-------------------------------
As gas prices soar, so do scooter sales
Scott Morgan, general manager of Scooter Vita in Greensboro, has seen his sales triple over the last year and knows exactly why. The scooters he sells have tiny gas tanks but get 60 to 80 miles to the gallon
---------------------
I have written much about this before. Everyone should have a bicycle, a high MPG or Batt-powered moped/scooter, and if desired, a regular vehicle.
Hopefully, all states will allow lane-splitting soon I as believe this will help further spur scooter and motorcycle sales, plus reduce road congestion.
There are lots of options now: 2-wheels for those that like to lean, the 3-wheel Piaggio scooter, or a person can buy a 4-wheeled Quad, then street legalize it. As usual, I recommend a used purchase before the prices go too high.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
An on earth day - videos!
http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=1485308505
The Toxic Gyre
Thanks Eric - I guess in two hundred years or so the Earth will essentially be free from us - I'm sure it has seen worse in the past and recovered, what a mess!
Woohoo, a stash of hydrocarbons for our future waterworld!
Even in Libya they know about Peak oil:
"The oil market is in a state of fear, if not panic," he said. "There is fear over speculation, volatility, wars, peak oil, there is fear for both consumers and producers, fear on both sides."
Maybe fear will be the first step towards a collective worldwide acceptence of the basic geological premise of Peak oil. Which, I suppose means it's less likely the intellect of the populace can be penetrated, however if the most basic primordial reptilian brain is accessed, then information does make it into the cranium. In other words it has to enter by way of pure palpitating panic.
I posted this a few minutes ago and it didn't take. Anyway, does this site need some donations to move it to a more reliable server?
Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Naimi must be getting very worried as he is now blaming unqualified experts for downgrading real oil wealth, from Leanan’s article above.
http://www.business24-7.ae/cs/article_show_mainh1_story.aspx?HeadlineID=...
Mr Naimi, someone doesn’t need to be an expert to understand Saudi Arabia’s real oil wealth. The chart below shows the creaming curve for discovered oil in place to end of 2004, being about 580 Gb. Big fields are usually found first then smaller ones later which gives the shape of the curve. Ghawar might have up to 200 Gb (billion barrels) initial oil in place.
Extrapolating the curve indicates that discovered initial oil in place should be about 600 Gb now. On the other hand, Naimi would want you to believe it’s now about 700 Gb.
How much of this oil is recoverable? Ivan Sandrea, Vice President, International Stategy E&P, Statoil Hydro (also ex Principal Supply Analyst at OPEC) and Rafael Sandrea, President IPC Petroleum Consultants, estimate that only 165 Gb is the ultimate recoverable reserves (URR) for Saudi Arabia from this Oil & Gas Journal Nov 2007 article. (I've also emailed Ivan Sandrea to confirm his 165 Gb URR)
http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1171379/recovery_factors_leave_vas...
and original article
http://www.ipc66.com/publications/Global_Oil__EOR_Challenge.pdf
This URR represents a recovery factor of 24%. The global average recovery factor is around 32%, so perhaps Saudi Arabia’s 165 Gb URR might be too low.
http://www.spe.org/spe-app/spe/meetings/FSE1/2007/index.htm
Using an optimistic recovery factor of 35% gives a URR of 210 Gb.
Optimistic Naimi would like you to believe that Saudi Arabia’s URR is about 380 Gb (produced about 114 Gb to date plus 264 Gb remaining). This implies a recovery factor of a ridiculously high 63%! The record is 66% for the Statfjord oil field. While some of Saudi Arabia’s fields like Abqaiq and parts of North Ghawar might reach a 60% recovery rate, it is beyond my imagination that all of Saudi Arabia’s fields could have an average recovery factor of anything close to 63%.
Even if a URR of 210 Gb is assumed, Saudi Arabia has produced 114 Gb, which is over half of its oil wealth gone. Saudi Arabia’s crude oil production rate is now at about 9 mbd, down from 9.2 mbd in Feb 2008, and is likely to decrease further.
click to enlarge
Source
http://www.cge.uevora.pt/aspo2005/abscom/ASPO2005_Zagar.ppt
The map below shows Saudi Arabian oil fields representing the 600 Gb discovered initial oil in place. The year in black next to each field is the discovery year. The years in red refer to new capacities in mbd. Note how long ago the discoveries were made – Ghawar, 1948; Abqaiq, 1940; Khurais, 1957 and Khursaniyah, 1956.
Mr Naimi, you don’t have enough oil fields to justify your overoptimistic statements. You can’t even disclose how much recoverable oil remains, on a field by field basis.
Manifa (0.9 mbd) and Khurais (1.2 mbd) are Saudi Arabia's last big projects. After Manifa, many of the remaining small fields, shown on the map below, will be developed. However each of these small fields will only produce small increments of about 0.05 mbd which will not be enough to offset production declines from existing fields.
click to enlarge
I have a theory that the current surging price of Crude Oil is due to traders calling OPEC's bluff, to see whether they actually do have any spare capacity left. Soon people will start screaming at OPEC to up their production, and we will see this in the MSM (I thought this would have started by now, maybe $120 or $130 will do it, or when gasoline in the USA breaks some threshold like $4/gal.) Then if OPEC do increase, the price can fall back. But if they say no to increasing supply, it will assumed that they can't and the high price will be justified, and will continue to rise.
I don't think oil will come down until traders see a reason for it to.
Nigeria had a million barrels a day shut in.
OPEC claimed they might boost production by five million barrels a day.
While Saudi oil resources are finite, they may attempt boosting production capacity this year and next.
Iraq is a wild card. They might be able to boost production 2 million barrels someday.
The ACG field in Azerbaijan just started a platform that is supposed to peak at 300,000 barrels bringing that field's performance to over a million barrels per day in an era when there are not many fields that will produce more than a million barrels per day. The Kazakhs have a field that is expected to produce over a million barrels a day that is not producing yet.
Supposidely oil peaked in May 2005 and some people on this board considered you ignorant if you did not agree; then there were statistics from the IEA that show oil reached a new peak in January of 2008. Some people would not call natural gas liquids oil, but their energy content is similar even if they were lighter than the heavy oil from untapped fields known to exist around the world.
With Mexico and the North Sea in decline plus the declines of Argentina, Australia, Ecuador, Malaysia etc. a peak in world oil production might become apparent.
Like U.S. real estate, commodities might form a bubble. Some people were putting their retirement accounts into commodities futures. Prices eventually might break to the downside and the highly leveraged (indebted) will suffer the worse for it.
Currently there were over a hundred U.S. banks at risk of bankruptcy due to real estate speculation. Wachovia, Citigroup, and Bank of America posting huge drops in profits. Some smaller banks were less intelligent and lost more. LTV's were high, fraud was rampant, and some mortage payments were more than double what local rents were.
With oil speculation these are boom times. United States auto sales are falling, but hybrid sales were up 38% in 2007: http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/stories/2008/04/21/daily7.html
Eventually maximum short term oil price will be reached and the prices will flatten out or fall.
Am yet holding my oil & gas stocks with hopes for the long term value of such.
Is OPEC purposely holding back production to raise price as a way of slowing the US (economy) down from invading or bombing another OPEC member, such as Iran? They couldn't have been too pleased with the invasion of Iraq, so is it possible? Maybe with a peace oriented leader as the next president instead of a war first mentality, OPEC would raise production. Not certain of this idea, but it could have merit.
Some good news from the IEA. The IEA will be assessing more than their original 250 large fields in their World Energy Outlook 2008.
From Tanaka's speech for the 11th International Energy Forum in Rome, 21 April 2008
http://www.iea.org/
http://www.iea.org/textbase/speech/2008/tanaka/iefrome.pdf - page 9
Matt Simmons must be getting very frustrated that his warning about oil supply shortages is not being heard. In his latest presentation on Ocean Energy April 17, 2008, he used a shark as shown below!
http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/research.aspx?Type=msspeeches
http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/files/Global%20Renewable%20Energy%20Conf.pdf - slide 7
"Jaws of Hell" phooey.
The "Jaws of Gotta Buy a Scooter" maybe.
Ace: Great posts as always. Yes, the shark is a little cheesy-Matt could have used the roving gangs of Mad Max Thunderdome types sometimes depicted by TOD posters.