Excellent Posting!

Questons: What is your best guess?

1. How long until an oil shortage or 2nd oil shock? 2 years? 4 years? 10 years?

2. How long until US oil imports go to zero? 10 years? 15 years? 20 years?

3. How long until the US government goes bankrupt and unable to pay loan interest???

Well, I'm not the poster, but looking at all the varied inputs and the overlapping nature of the feedback loops, I'd think that those questions are not answerable with any high degree of confidence.

It is interesting how the lines seem to indicate that the chosen solution to the economic problem may make things worse.

Since no one replied, I will submit my answers:

1. 4 years until the shortage or shock - based on a 3 year recovery and 1 year to push demand into the shortage level.

2. 20 years until US imports are zero - based on the top 5 net export analysis, but only 6 years until 50% of current imports.

3. 10 years until US goverment goes bankrupt based on current debt will double and interest alone will approach current annual budget total.

What does this mean? We will have a solution to peak oil in 10 years, or..........

Those are good questions. You will remember my financial forecast for 2009 was pretty pessimistic. Matt's financial / peak oil diagram touches on many of the same issues that I have touched on in some of my past posts.

It is not just the United States that is in poor shape. Governments around the world are in poor shape, and the whole system is networked. It seems to me that the there is a significant chance of major breakdown in the next five years. Even if it doesn't happen this quickly, it takes a long time to plan. Because of this, I think readers should be planning as if we will have very much less oil (as in very little oil imports), and our monetary system will no longer work, in the not too distant future. It is possible our electrical system will be affected as well, since electrical workers like to be paid, and a problem with the monetary system could affect them as well.

The current credit crisis is a major problem. It does not take too much imagination to see it spiral out of control, and countries stop buying nearly as many products from each other (to protect local workers, and because of concern about credit of other countries). I doubt that the US would formally become bankrupt, although we might have hyperinflation or massive deflation.

define 'formally bankrupt'...

Governments do not go "formally" bankrupt, they just lose the ability to pay obligations (default), and they lose their ability to make loans from other governments.
Then the currency crashes, and people go back to bartering or using other currency.
Look at the current state of Zimababwe - it takes trillions of their dollars to equal one US$.
If the US cannot pay it's obligations, then services will go away, social security, defense, health, welfare, etc.... Other nations holding the debt may attack to get their money back.

The states are already in bad shape and are now going to the US govt for help just to meet their budgets. What happens when the US cannot help the states? Budgets will get cut by default.
State services in California are about to go to IOUs for payment. Try to buy groceries or electricity with an IOU?

Seems like the states have been heading south ever since Ronnie's ever so popular fed to state block grant system went into play. I never really understood any of it.

The current financial crisis is first and foremost an ecological crisis. I'm still working on that, I can't get a formal handle on it, the "proof" still eludes me. Like proof of water eludes the fish. But Wendell Berry, in his essay on education, writes about how milk producers and milk drinkers need to speak about cows that make too much milk badly. About intuition. Cows that make too much milk are not something that only Monsanto biologists can discuss, but everyone who drinks milk, eats cheese or wears shoes made of leather or shoes that should be made of leather. Anyone that lives in those communities. [And related, we can no longer figure that "fair process" or "due process" produces good results, rather more the opposite, but I digress from my digression.]

Gail, I don't know that you were pessimistic. Zero degrees of separation. Volatility. It's already way "out of control". Hell, our economic system is designed to be "out of control". It's supposed

I suspect your preditions were optimistic. If only because what you and I don't see. We can't factor that in. Other than the suspicion that matters will be worse than we expect. Like the ice. Every dollar, less ice.

Talk to anyone in the 501C3 world. Precious few understand what's going on, but the narrative is the same. No money. Big cuts. Or the munis. No money. Big cuts. [States are different - hey, they are getting all this cash from Obama that they can spend on THIS YEAR'S OPERATING EXPENSES.]

Debt for operating expenses.

My girl, CFO at a largish community C3 is asking about "swadeshi". Yeah.

We're in the crash so we don't see the crash. It's well advanced. Right now, Maine is about to lose 150K acres of organic dairy because of the tanking of milk prices due to bankruptcies in the commodity milk chain. Milk. The budget is already 20% down and running up against all sorts of fixed constraints.

The network needs to be taken down. Keeping it up, $1T, $2T, $4T - hey, geometric growth in bailouts??? Doubling time of what, two months? All those charts at the newscientist a couple of months back - the use of every resource gone geometric. HAL 9000 can't handle that.

And it's not like our monetary system might not work in the near future. It's pretty clear that it has not been working - or that it's been "working" in a destructive manner - for some time. At least the 70s, though the trajectory goes back beyond that. Some literature suggests the concept of permagrowth didn't really get institutionalized until Post WW2. ["Friendly Fascism", Gross among them, also Henry Wallace] I'm not so sure that it's not the human condition, but I am sure that until about that time there were important figures that recognized scale. And now it's only Nate and Herman and Kirkpatrick.

We're not about to go into overshoot. We've been in overshoot since Apollo 13.

Me? I've got 5 trays of test-seedlings under the lights today. Different seedling soil mixes. All saved seed.

cfm, half-farmer in Gray, ME

"Like proof of water eludes the fish"

That is a classic quote. It sounds like something that came out of the Kung Fu TV show.
thank you grasshopper.

Cows Milk is for Baby Cows, not for Humans. Human Breast Milk is for Humans, and only for a few years at that.

Everyone would be much the wiser, and better off if all the subsidies stopped and all the milk (DAIRY) producers went out of business.

Grow veggies on that land, man.....

But it's so yummy!

As to the answer to number 1, I'd say that maybe the financial problems will lead to food shortages (empty shelves, closed supermarkets) long before you actually see serious gasoline shortages. So no one will really care that much about gasoline at that time, people will be focused on getting food for their families. Credit disappeared and the govt tried to restore it with bailouts. Food will also disappear and the govt may not be able to restore it even with a command economy since it can't print energy.

Umm..Maslow,s hierachy of needs?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

1. I've long felt that 2012/13 was going to be a time period when something pretty serious happens. It is pretty obvious from the present megaproject data that by then, new capacity coming on line starts to fall significantly behind what is needed to replace depletion. Given present oil prices and economic conditions, it is also very likely that we are not going to be seeing a lot more megaprojects entering the pipeling in time to make much of a difference in this. SO, by around 2012, there should be a pretty substantial supply shortage, even if demand continues to be constrained.

2. Based on some of the ELM analyses that westexas has posted, it looks to me that 20 years out for zero US imports is probably about the best case (although the US might still be getting a trickle from Canada then). I'm more inclined to think that China and Japan will use their massive accumulation of US $ and treasuries to lock in long-term supply contracts, thus shutting the US out earlier rather than later. (As for the US using its military to acquire by force what it cannot acquire through legitimate commerce, that is likely to destroy as much or more supply than it will secure.)

3. The most credible scenario is sovereign default. Nations elect to exercise sovereign default only when they are so backed into a corner that the pain of sovereign default looks to be less than the pain required to honor their debts. Of course, sometimes national governments miscalculate, or just plain make bad decisions.

For the US, sovereign default would mean instant loss of reserve currency status for the US dollar, and probably also almost instant curtailment of all oil imports. Needless to say, the minute this happens, the US becomes a 3rd world economy for certain, and probably forever. Some might assume that such a thing is unthinkable and would never happen. The question is, though: are there scenarios where the burdens of continuing to honor our national debts to foreigners would be so unbearably painful that the consequences of sovereign default would start to look preferable?

To answer that question, consider whether you think that TPTB or the American public would prefer that the US FedGov continue paying interest on that portion of the national debt owed to foreigners, at the expense of:

Having to withdraw all of our military forces from overseas, even if they are in the midst of a conflict, and of having to make huge cuts in our military forces?
or

Having to make huge cuts or even eliminating altogether Social Security and Medicare obligations?

or

Having to eliminate almost all other federal government programs?

or

Having to raise federal income taxes or implement at VAT, raising the AVERAGE tax burden to 50% or more?

We are probably less than 4-8 years away - and maybe sooner - from having no choice but to face up to one of these fundamental, painful tradeoff decisions. Maybe we'll have to accept all of the above in order to keep making payments on our national debt. Are we willing to do that? At what point does sovereign default start to look not quite so painful or unthinkable after all?

Of course, once TPTB finally realize that we've only got a few more years of imports coming in any case, and once they've finally come clean with the general public about this, then a lot of the downsides of sovereign default start looking a lot less painful.

My guess is that a US sovereign default is probably not in the cards anytime before 2015, and may not be avoidable anytime much past 2025 or so.

Of course military action will destroy more oil than it acquires. It will stop overseas transport altogether if not halted quickly. Then you see what economy will stand and what will fall or at least to what degrees all will fall without lots of oil.

Societal memory of the debacle and fixes surrounding the financial crash of 1929 faded almost completely by 1999, a mere 70 years, setting us up for our current financial pickle. 1945 + 70 is 2015. Assuming WWII left a deeper more indelible societal memory add 85 years instead of 70, that takes out virtually all of the WWII era participants and almost all those who grew up in its immediate shadow. Soceital memory of world war gone by 2030? Don't expect reasonable response when we are in a stranglehold. We have little time.