153 comments on Some thoughts on Georgia and other Russian actions
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
153 comments on Some thoughts on Georgia and other Russian actions
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
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
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
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
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
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- 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!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
—Albert Einstein
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
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
@ dave
A bit of nitpicking:
Germany was the up-and-coming power, having been put in its place in WWI. Whether it was resource arm or rich had little to do with its upandcomminence. Instead, it had more to do with its new economic power, its tech. prowess, and its demographic dynamics.
Sounds somewhat like China, although we're still waiting for them reaching the tech. cutting edge. Their demog. are also not real dynamic.
Germany had LOTS of coal, making LOTS of steel (cannons, etc..)
Russia might be preparing for "Cold War II", like you suggest, but sadly it has little other than oil. Now it's learning to play this card "right". Hyperpower USA might just have to give up their influence in the Caucasus, for cryin' out loud.
@PolR
Their logic is power logic, not PO logic. The strategy will be amazingly flexible, once PO is come and gone.
@ holic,
Nice article. However, have you ever tried to tell a child to stop egging on a sibbling / stop letting themselves get egged on, i.e. to get out of the game? The problem with the suggestion is that neither the power brokers in Washington nor in Russia have any plans of getting out of the game.
Power to those that BE is the only game in town...
Cheers, Dom
"Germany had LOTS of coal, making LOTS of steel (cannons, etc..)"
I've been reading William Shirer's Berlin Diary, 1934-1941 recently. He described the hardships the Germans faced in the winter of 1939, 1940 and 1941, with the authorities going so far as forbidding the use of cars and coal, large-scale scrapping of unused iron (including cars from conquered countries) and more.
But you're right, it had a lot to do with the upandcomminence of the people in power, which caught most democracies at the time by surprise (since they desired peace at any cost).
I'm more worried about simply having to collectively bite through hardships, rather than NATO declaring war on Russia.
Basides oil, Russia has a very diverse mineral resource base that makes it largely self-sufficient in all metals, natural gas, phosphates, potash, etc. Not to mention having more arable land and fresh water than any other country, both in absolute terms and on a per capita basis (20% of all of the world's fresh water is in just one Russian lake - Baikal). Shrinking population, vast forest resources and extensive electrified rail infrastructure also make it pretty well positioned to survive future resource crises.
Though I agree with your general point, keep in mind that with their generally severe climate constraints, Russia's (Siberia's) vast forest resources are pretty much a one-time windfall. Regrowth rates are generally very slow.
This is true, but less than 20% of Russia's population lives east of the Urals. The regrowth rates in the European part of the country are much faster due to warmer climate and more precipitation compared to Siberia. While on a visit to Russia a few years ago, I had a pleasure to pick wild chanterelles in a forest that only 15 years ago was a Soviet-style collective farm field, now fully overgrown with pine trees. BTW, in Russia forests are largely considered an important food source (mushrooms, berries, hazelnuts, etc. - see Dmitry Orlov), not necessarily a source of wood to be cut and burned. It will be a while before most Russians have to heat their houses with firewood again.
Hey Pete,
I guess I really need to qualify on my appraisal of Russia.
You are most certainly right that Russia has plenty of mineral resources. I won't argue that the trains are a definite advantage.
Now let's look at Japan: Little to no resources (Back then coal and some steel) but success out the kazoo.
Russia's on top of the world and will never be able to change that. It will spend its oil wealth and wonder why it's poor again. It will mine its Uranium under the Siberian dessert and wonder why the US or Japan (ok, probably Europe) is the beneficiary. It will sell its phosphates and potash to those in better climates and buy back the expensive. It will be strong, it will be weak, depending on the long, long business cycle. It will certainly survive.
But will it be a vibrant, dynamic nation like most in Europe, the US and the Far East? For some reason I have my doubts.
I would also warn, that the shrinking population is hardly an advantage, whether world resources are failing or not.
Forests for foraging are different than socio-economic health. My actual statement should be: "Where would Russia be without it's oil and gas wealth?"
Cheers, Dom
What you describe is the economic regime of the 1990s and not today. Russia's GDP is driven mostly by domestic consumption and not raw materials exports. Residential construction in Russia is experiencing explosive growth as is retail. Fossil fuels, Uranium and other minerals are going to be increasingly consumed domestically.
Russia's richness in resources is probably why the communist system survived so long. The land was so rich it could afford the inefficiency of the system. Without the revolution it could have been the World's preeminent economy.