50% loss of natural gas would be the apocalypse made real.  Since most gas-fired power plants IIRC use turbine drivers, you might be able to crash convert them to use gasoline or kerosene, but you still wouldn't have enough for residential and industrial heating and synthesis use.

A possible complication with refinery restarts is that a large supply of nitrogen is required to purge the units.  This usually comes from a pipeline, onsite liquid, or mobile units.  If all of these are out then no start.

If this is all true why are prices for oil, natural gas and gasoline declining on the market?  I can understand that demand will be less but based on what this guy is saying I would think we'd be seeing $100 oil.

From the article: "The USA is a massive exporter of nitrate fertilizer to the rest of the world. We also use massive quantities of it. The exact tonnage of this is difficult to estimate but this loss of supply is enough to risk the loss of a very significant part of the world fertilizer supply. This is going to affect the supply of food in the world for about 2 years. This will not be a minor loss."

Farmers are really taking a hit on this. About 77% of the cost of ammonia fertilizer is due to natural gas. And the fall harvest and winter wheat planting are getting underway. There's no real relief in sight for natural gas either, the EIA in their most recent short term energy outlook see the price of natural gas going up to around $12/mcf by December for every single scenario vs the $9/mcf that it was in August.

Also with regards to the article, I didn't see him mention energy efficiency (or what I call conservation) at all when he was talking about solutions to the energy problem. North Americans just use way too much energy and they don't have to. It's crazy to be driving in the city at 20mph in a car that has a 120hp (90kW) engine when 500W does the trick.

I guess I need help from a geologist:

The dikes along the Mississippi river remain intact but most of the land adjacent almost into the city of New Orleans is gone.  This extends on a line almost to Morgan City.   There is some question if this is an extended “storm surge” (Note no such thing has been observed before) or if the area is permanently gone.  The area involved is about 2000 square miles.  The entire area of the state south of Baton Rouge is now in danger of sinking into the sea forever.   This includes some areas into the State of Mississippi and the ENTIRE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS.

There is some question if the 30-foot storm surge didn’t shift the land and cause the area to sink several feet.  This if so would be mass effects of the water on a porous geologic structure.  (The Oil industry caused the pores.)

This is the first I've heard that the land is or may actually be sinking / sunk.  I know that New Orleans has had a slow problem (since they began holding back the Mississippi from flooding about eighty years ago the Delta has not had any fresh silt) but did Katrina really cause a big shift?  Or is this guy just looking at standing water and assuming the land beneath it has dropped?  

Anybody know more about this?  Sorry, it's not really a peak oil related question, but it does relate to whether they will be able to keep a workforce in the area, I suppose.

My first question has to do with pesn.com itself.  I haven't really visited this website in the past, so my first question is what type of reputation do they have?  Are they fearmongers (like Kunstler), or do they tend to present a more level-headed view?

I'll go along with the others on the Pesnn.com link. and would like to add one more comment.  It seems they are pushing the "Fairtax"  B.S.  i've beem investigating this since it came out a couple of years ago, and believe my "YOU DON'T WANT THE FAIR TAX INITITIVE" to pass under any circumstances. If it goes through It will be curtains for pensioners like myself, and millions of others.   It' isn't fair at all.    Remember it cost The Donald the same price for a loaf of bread as I pay. If he doesn't want to buy that new BMW or 100' yacht, that's his choice, I can't even look at one.   It's nothing more than a national sales tax in discuise.

For what it's worth, their article here titled "Gulf Oil Disruption and Government Ineptitude" has this:

The farmers were scheduled to begin the cotton harvest this week which is a major demand of fuel supplies. A typical farmer will burn thousands of gallons of fuel during the harvest. Harvest is on a natural clock. It cannot be held. This is a very substantial part of our food supply at risk here. Cotton seed is food. Cotton fiber is clothing etc. The seed is 50% of the crop.

A very quick Google News search shows a score of articles such as this one, all of which echo the refrain "In its monthly crop report, the Agriculture Department raised the forecasts for cotton, rice, soybeans and corn over last month's estimates. And though farmers are expected to grow more sugarcane than in 2004, the department lowered the production forecast from last month." and "Nationwide, cotton production is forecast at 22.3 million 480-pound bales, up 5 percent from last month's forecast but down 4 percent from last year's record production. If the trend continues, this year's crop would be the second-best on record, the department said."

Cause for alarm?  Not so sure.  Yes certain individuals will be harmed, no doubt.  But that happens every year.  This is cotton farming we're talking about.

He makes this dire prediction:

Here is how it runs, You see about 4 days more and the inventory in the grocery stores etc will be running out. (For those reading such posts who cannot think, this is a current condition forecast and could be changed if things are dealt with properly) Currently the gasoline we are being shipped is reserves from the refinery stocks pre-storm. These will run out in about 4 days. Then we see a complete shut down and serious civil and other disruption. Most of the people where I live are pretty decent folk and I expect them to pull together but this is most serious. If no food comes to the stores and the plants stop shipping one sees loss of jobs and loss of life.

in an article dated six days agao...

According to an article in the Fall Church News-Press, a weekly paper which serves an elite DC suburb where many policy makers live, Tom Whipple wrote an article  The Peak-Oil Crisis:  The Storms of August, Sept. 8-15 issue,  in it he also states "there will be unprecedented natural gas problems this winter...there will most likely be serious shortage."  As for gasline, he states that "it takes approximately 20 days for a barrel of oil to poput in Virgina once it has entered the pipeline."  According to a press release the Colonial pipeline was restarted on Sept 3. with anticipated 80& capacity that night and 100% by the end of the weekend.  Assuming this is correct on both counts, starting Sept. 23 we could experience some shortages unless the EU's gasoline arrives and is put in the pipeline before then.  From what I have read, the four refineries that are out of commission (and will be for sometime, at least through the end of the year) produce 850,000 barrels a day and the amount of gasline coming from overseas will be approximately 340,000 barrels a day for 30 days. This still leaves us short.  

I think we will be in trouble eventually this winter, but oil bulls have seen something they had not in this 5 year rally. First signs of demand pull back. Crude will go higher but when Gasoline drops in line with NYMEX prices which is gonna be a big relief for every idiot with a SUV and they gonna start warming the planet at full speed.

After spending a little more time on the PESN site, plus reading the comments here, I have a couple of comments:

1. Kudos to the OD camp for being reality based and taking such a level-headed view of these critical issues.

2. The author of these PESN articles has just been added to my Apocalypticon Hall of Fame.  Honestly, how can anyone read this stuff without detecting a distinct whiff (if not the overpowering stench) of civilization death wish?  I'm as unyielding a proponent of freedom of speech as anyone here, so I'm not about to say that that author or anyone else shouldn't have the right to say whatever he or she wants.  But that doesn't mean we should accept it uncritically.  Extraordinary demands STILL require extraordinary proof.

With regard to fertilizer produced from gas and starvation
I'd suggest reading Diet for a Small Plant by Lappe.  That
book is about 30 years old now and many others scream about
the unsustainable agriculture system we have.

My family, buys organic and local - no unnatural fertilizers and
pesticides.  We eat a predominately veggi diet. Those that
eat meat bio-concentrate the pesticides and other toxins
that we've put into the biosphere.  It takes aprox 2500 gal
to get one pound of beef - 10 calories of oil to make one
calorie of processed "food".  16 pounds of grain makes for
one pound of beef.  That grain could have fed a lot of people.

There is no shortage of food on this planet - it's just
that we're feeding it to aminals so that the rich can kill
themselves eating meat.  Read Diet For A New America or
The Food Revolution by Robbins or The China Study to find
out about the links between our western health problems and
what we eat.  Western health problems (cancer, clogged arteries,
obesity, osteoperosis) are primarily due to our high fat, high
protein, high dairy, low fiber diets.

My hope for surviving peak oil is that so much can be done
by a shift to a predominately veggie diet - both in terms of
health and less oil intensive industrial farming.

However, for decades we've already known about the salination
of our farm lands (reducing or killing productivity) as well
as polluting of aquifers. Because of that, and paving over our
best farm land, I'm not sure that we're going to take well to
peak oil.

I want to second Sealth's comments that the numbers in this article do not jibe with numbers I've seen elsewhere and therefore make this article seem factually unreliable.

The one that I am sure is wrong is their statement that 15% of US refining capacity will be offline for months.  I have followed this issue closely, and every other source states that 5% of US refining capacity will be offline.  This is a huge exaggeration, and it seems likely that the article is full of such exaggerations.  I don't think that it should be taken seriously.

The farmers can benefit two ways from a nitrate fertiliser shortage. They could skip buying it this year and cut their expenses. The lower yeild will drive up commodity prices disporprotionately just like it has for oil and natural gas so next year's income will be higher.