DrumBeat: December 31, 2006
Posted by threadbot on December 31, 2006 - 10:05am
Russia, Belarus sign gas deal; Europe supplies safe
MOSCOW - Russia and Belarus on Monday announced a last-minute deal on gas prices, moments before Moscow was to start cutting off supplies with potential knock-on disruption for customers in Europe.At a joint news conference, Alexei Miller, CEO of Russian gas monopoly Gazprom, and Belarus Prime Minister Sergei Sidorsky, said Russian gas exports to Europe via Belarus were out of danger after a deal was agreed.
"A mid-term agreement was reached on gas prices to Belarus and on transit shipments to Europe," Miller said.
Under the accord, Belarus agreed to pay Gazprom $100 per 1,000 cubic meters of natural gas, up from the $46 ex-Soviet Belarus has been paying until now.
Dan Lienert On The Automotive Industry
Hybrids, diesels and ethanol-powered cars are not solutions to America’s energy crisis and in fact buy very little time. Ethanol has way too many drawbacks. It’s expensive to produce, doesn’t deliver as many miles per gallon as gasoline and is not available in many places. More important, hybrids, diesels and ethanol depend on fossil fuels. The world is going to run out of cheap crude oil, and as China motors up, the decline only accelerates. We need a replacement for fossil fuels, such as hydrogen- or solar-powered cars, not a massive government program to sell people on ethanol.
The problem isn't that Iran is running out of oil; the nation has the world's second-largest oil reserves behind Saudi Arabia. In fact, the concept of "running out" of oil is bogus for any country. The question isn't how much oil is in the ground but how much a country produces in a given year and how quickly production can ramp up. The term "peak" oil refers to peak production, which occurs long before a country depletes its reserves.
The top ten green stories of 2006
Exporting segregation: An ugly side of the oil business exposed
From the beginning, ARAMCO's camps in Dhahran were set up according to a strict hierarchy of racial divisions. Ostensibly based on skill levels, this system allocated the best housing and amenities to Americans -- of all ranks -- while European and South Asian workers had to make do with significantly less, and Saudi workers were consigned to "barastis," palm-frond huts without floors or lights. A visiting State Department official called the company's camp "a disgrace to American enterprise," while the American vice consul at Dhahran visited the company hospital and reported that "it is apparent that ARAMCO's medical director takes little interest in the health and care of Arabs."
World Bank: Dominican energy crisis due to mismanagement
The prolonged energy crisis affecting the Dominican Republic and ineffective measures assumed to remedy the problem generated a vicious cycle of periodic blackouts, high operational costs burdening energy distributors and causing huge losses due in part by theft through illegal connections.
Building the future: Chicago architects envision what the city will look like 100 years from now
Garofalo's scheme is in some ways the most radical of the contest projects, envisioning the abolition of automobiles not only from Chicago but from the entire state of Illinois. In the team's vision, transportation (as well as shipping, heating and utility systems) would be accomplished by means of an "aeroduct," a network of underground tunnels along a one-mile-square Jeffersonian grid, with a station at every crossing point. The aeroduct would be powered by electricity generated by air drawn upward from below ground inside the walls of double-skinned skyscrapers. Old transportation systems, including the L and highways, would be converted to green space for use as recreational and/or arable land.
'Tomorrow will be a better day'
n a recent night, while I was busy thinking about important social issues, like what to do over the weekend and who to do it with, I overheard my parents talking about my future. My dad was upset -- not the usual stuff that he and Mom and, I guess, a lot of parents worry about, like which college I'm going to, how far away it is from home and how much it's going to cost. Instead, he was upset about the world his generation is turning over to mine -- a world he fears has a dark and difficult future, if it has a future at all.He sounded like this: "There will be a pandemic that kills millions, a devastating energy crisis, a horrible worldwide depression and a nuclear explosion set off in anger."
How to claim the energy battleground
...I worry that energy policy will end up being captured by the right, because they still hold on to a major asset: their closeness to the corporate world, and, more to the point, the perception by the business world that they are more friendly to them, and thus that they are more likely to bring about less painful (for the corporations) energy plans.
Standing alone, the five leading Internet search engines will consume 5 gigawatts of electricity in 2006. That equates to the amount of electricity needed to run the city of Las Vegas.Meeting the insatiable energy needs of technology firms and creating adequate power supplies for the new economy is, therefore, an issue of national and state import - both for international competitiveness and Colorado's comparative advantage in the national economy.
Driven To Conserve: Pulling the Plug on Excess
Schultz read an article on peak oil theory -- the hypothesis that the Earth is at its peak use of oil supplies now and the resource will only get scarcer.He got interested in the politics and problems of oil, and started attending local meetings with other people worried about a looming crisis. He eventually left the group, but his interest in environmental issues had been piqued.
Russia, Belarus start last-ditch gas talks
MOSCOW - Belarus's top gas negotiator was in high-level talks in Moscow on Sunday, raising hopes of a last-minute deal in a pricing dispute that threatens to disrupt Russian gas supplies to Europe from New Year's Day.Russia's gas monopoly Gazprom has said it will cut gas supplies to Belarus from 07:00 GMT on January 1 if no deal is reached, while Minsk said it would retaliate by halting flows of Russian gas crossing the country bound for Western Europe
James Woolsey had an article in yesterday's WSJ called Gentleman, Start Your Plug-Ins. It's subscription-only, but someone at PO.com liberated it here.
CITIC buys oil company stake for $1.91B
BEIJING - China, which is aggressively seeking overseas energy assets to fuel its booming economy, said Sunday that one of its biggest conglomerates has bought the Kazakhstan oil assets of a Canadian company for $1.91 billion.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Happy New Year to everyone.
Being in Melbourne and nearish to the International Date Line, I thought I should kick off the new year welcome with a first post. Have been reading for almost a year, and it has had a profound and positive effect on me. It is a fantastic forum. Many thanks to the regular hard-working punters who make it so informative, analytical and relevant.
Thanks all for your efforts. I learned a lot. I wish everybode a resourcefull 2007.
Keep it going.
This is nuts. How long does this have to go on before goverments realize the world cannot sustain it's population with people consuming like those in the US?
Globalization sure gives us cheap sh%t at Walmart, but it looks like it's going to be expensive when it's all said and done.
How Long?
Probably not at least until the US really realises and champions the change herself.. which would be just a minute or so before 'too late' (Which many say has already passed) China seems to have a funny (from a US persp) mix of pragmatism and ambition. I don't see that pragmatism as a really essential part of the American (US) Culture, if it is in any way obstructing either our Pride or our Illusions of 'Independence'.
We can be brilliant, but as the old saw has it, "Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing, once they've exhausted all the other options.." ~ Churchill?
Bob
Hello Bob, The actual quote is:
You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
Other quotes can be found at:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/w/winston_churchill.html
Enjoy! (Everyone should read them).
I went through Datong in 2003 and it really was pretty bad. Right across from a huge open pit mine is the wall of 50,000 Buddhas. The Buddhas, ranging from 1 inch to 50' in hight are carved into a sandstone wall and are reputed to be the oldest carvings in China. Sadly, the pollution is disolving the Buddhas and many are already lost forever.
I've just started reading Big Coal and the opening chapters would suggest we need look no further than the Appalacians to find similar ecological devastation and economic inequality.
However, the gapping difference between current US practice and that in China has to be the issue of health and safety. This is an issue on which China has a very long way to go.
Expanding worldwide the burning of coal in conventional powerplants will have detrimental effects on populations far from the source of pollution. Mercury emissions will increase as will the amount then going into the food chain, especially seafood. Since the Chinese have less pollution controls on their power plants, acid rain will increase in other parts of Asia.
The only way to get the PTB in China to adhere to international standards (US and EU) for air pollution is through sanctions and tarrifs on Chinese goods. In a sense we are trading cheap Chinese made products sold at Wal Mart for early deaths and lifelong illnesses in other parts of the world.
China is where the US was in 1920's as far as pollutants generated. Difference is that in 1926 we did not know all the harmful effects of industrial pollution; leadership of China knows these hazards but chooses to ignore the problem.
This China focus here has to stop somewhere, I'm sorry, but it turns into an ever weirder excuse to not look at ourselves.
We do, however, expect the Chinese to act. Why? I'll tell you why: so we can feel less guilty. Good luck with that.
Want to look at per capita income, lifestyle etc? We have so much more,
We have no God given rights to have more than Chinese people. We have to come down from our pedestals first, if ever we want to accomplish something. A constant rant vs someone else's pollution doesn't make us one bit cleaner. And WE are the biggest polluters, by far. Not them.
I don't dispute that our coal consumption is bad, just that China produces much more pollution per pound (kilogram) of coal burned than the US does. Most US plants have scrubbers that catch nearly all of the ash and some of the sulfer dioxide, though the latter is still a problem which has been partly solved by using low sulfer western coal. Mercury pollution is a problem of much more complexity and requiring massive investment.
Yes, of the 150 coal power plants in planning or construction stage in the US, only one (FutureGen Program sponsored by US DOE) will be truely "clean". We definitely need to reform our own power industry and urge conservation with requirement to build "clean coal" power plants. But that does not let China off the hook for being one of the world's greatest emitters of GHG and pollution.
As I said before, one of the best incentives for reducing pollution is a disincentive like a tariff. Start with a tax on all goods made by foreign countries that do not adhere to our pollution standards. Also tax goods that are not energy efficient and use the proceeds to reduce taxes on income and perhaps food.
If the US government does not take the lead, no one will. We are soon headed down the "path to destruction" because of GHG and Peak Oil, and getting off the path will require world wide cooperation. Setting an example to the rest of the world should be the US's first step. But that may have to wait until after the 2008 elections, unfortunately.
The idea of a tariff to encourage pollution controls is very good one. Unfortunately, the U.S. govt is in too weak of a position to make such an attempt. U.S. govt officials have very recently been in high level talks with the Chinese to request that China's move away from holding the dollar be done in a gradual and orderly fashion such that the decline of the dollar will not occur in a precipitious manner. The unsustainable debt of the U.S. and the threat of a global move away from the dollar (esp. with the expected emergence of new petrocurrencies) means that China has the U.S. by the gonads and, for better or worse, the Chinese will be in full control of their own destiny.
It is unfortunate that there wasn't enough political will 3 decades ago to embark on the path of setting an example of conservation and using trade related incentives to encourage other countries to adopt environmentally sustainable economies. It appears that the opportunity to effect real change and alter the current global trajectory has passed.
And you have proof that the US government has been in 'high level talks' with the Chinese to request that their move away from the dollar be done gradually?
I highly doubt it.
Sounds to me like someone is trying to blow smoke up the worlds arse by jumping on the current doomer-centric bandwagon ~_~
You realize that China has almost 5x our population, and ergo, a 3.5x per capita consumption of coal in the US means that China is STILL using FAR more coal then we are.
And since you like facts...China has plans for 500 MORE COAL PLANTS, many of them being built with systems that were considered gross polluters back in the 50's.
Well-stated.
Note also that China is ruled by a Communist oligarchy; unlike the U.S. and European nations they can ignore the suffering of millions of their "citizens" and pay no attention to public opinion. So what if the Chinese people lose ten years of life expectancy due to pollution? The oligarchs have oxygen masks, bottled water and air-conditioned luxury cars, not to mention countryside retreats.
It's because of these kinds of arguments that I see no improvement in the future. The problem is here, not over there, much as that would make you more comfortable.
Yes, HG, China uses more coal than the US. but then again the US uses more than Belgium. Does that mean the Flemish should complain about us, and you'll say they're right? My bet is you won't. How absurd will we get?
The US uses 10 times more energy than China per capita, and until we come down from that big time, the Chinese won't budge. Good on them.
And Don, do you really think the Communism vs Democracy that you're trying to establish will hold up for more than 2 seconds? That your leaders care more about you than the China Politburo does about their people?
You can poke all the fun you like at the U.S. political institutions. In fact, we have a functioning republic. In fact, China is a Communist dictatorship. You may not like these facts, but my guess is that as long as historians write these big differences will be acknowledged.
Happy New Year!
China is a Communist dictatorship.
A "dictatorship", certainly, but how do you define Communist?
To use a metaphor probably of your liking, communism is as christianity, it has never been tried.
And probably never will, just for the same reason as christianity, not realistic.
In the meantime it comes handy as an epithet.
As for a "functioning republic" the US certainly is MUCH MORE CLEVER in its "functioning" than the USSR/China brutes, stealth bombers but also stealth torture : The History of U.S.Torture.
The US is slowly drifting toward Brazil (the Terry Gilliam movie, that is).
"Best Hopes" as one use to say for solving PO & GW problems in such a context.
Both of you did not answer the main point. What does it matter what kind of government China has? It is the majority of their population that demands more power and it gets it, government form has little to do with it - it just follows . You both seem not to understand that China is still a poor country and the population pressure is much stronger than the clean energy pressure. This includes srubbers - they remain costly and time-cosuming investments for a country commited to lift 1 BILLION people from poverty.
Yes, China is doing exactly what US did in the beginning of the last century. Cleaner energy in USA become priority LONG AFTER IT ACHIEVED A HIGH LIVING STANDARD. Poor people care more for necessities than clean air - this is the sad reality and simply bitching at China is NOT GOING TO CHANGE IT.
USA has greater consumption per capita. Surely this is the valid comparison on ethical grounds. I can imagine no reasonable basis upon which it could be argued that the pollution of the two groups of people existing within Chinese national boundries and USA national boundries should be compared in aggregate.
Of course, globally, we seek to reduce aggregate emissions. But comparisons between countries in the context of ethics and fairness should proceed on a per capita basis, surely.
Also, rather than compare the location in which the pollution is created, perhaps it is more reasonable to compare the location where the pollution is caused. In other words, consider the proportion of Chinese pollution that goes to create value consumed in the USA.
This adjustment would bring you closer to a reasonable comparison.
One can also use energy use per unit of GNP. China has the stated goal of reducing energy per yuan of GDP.
Software beats steel making and chemicals by this metric though.
Alan
A kilogram is a kilogram is a kilogram. Regardless of where it happens, pollution and greenhouse gasses matter. So what if China has four times as many people as the U.S.--does that make its burning of coal any less harmful?
The problem is not to reduce percentages or per capita emissions: The problem is to reduce total global emissions. China is on the way to becoming a much bigger factor in air pollution than is the U.S., and there is absolutely nothing in the form of the Chinese government that is likely to slow down or mitigate the growing use of coal.
In the U.S. there is at least talk of cleaner coal--and by and large our coal-burning utilities are less dirty than they were thirty years ago. Thus one can reasonably argue that the U.S. is on the right track--with a lot of distance to go. The problem is that both China and India are on a fast track to accelerating their emissions of CO2 and all the other pollutants that burning coal creates.
Thus there is no comparison between the U.S. and China: What is happening in the U.S. offers at least some hope, while China is pushing the world faster and faster toward a possible tipping point in regard to abrupt climate change. These facts are unpleasant, but that does not make them go away.
So basically, the USA has more than their fair share, but because the USA got there first the damn Commies can go hang. The USA is the greedy pig who got it's nose in the trough early and ate everyone else's share.
And Americans wonder why they have an image problem...
As Heinberg often points out, this is the whole point of globalization. It allows the U.S. to grab other countries' resources, like a greedy kid who has eaten his own desert and now wants to eat everyone else's.
When you are right, you are very right ;)
I guess the other arm of the military-industrial complex is there to ensure US "leadership" stays that way.
Before I get accused of being anti-American, this is exactly the same policy that the former British Empire used to operate. Been there, got the T-shirt. We annexed Hong Kong because the Chinese objected to our "free trade" - selling their peasants opium, that is. We eventually gave it back though.
But if someone is yelling at the neighbour to clean their yard, he should instead start with cleaning his own yard. And I don't just mean talking about, actually doing it.
At least the Chinese exercise some restraint on population growth, which is the underlying problem.
Does the U.S. force the Chinese rulers to ignore mine safety?
Does the U.S. force the Chinese to ignore worsening pollution?
I could go on, but this mindless bashing of the U.S. and claiming that this country is the root of all global evil is nothing but twaddle and nonsense.
BTW, the Communist countries had and have a far far worse record in regard to pollution of air and water than any capitalist country in history. What is it, I wonder, about communism that forces it to pollute to the max? Somehow I am thinking that it is not globalization.
Of course, the US was never concerned before about pollution in the evil communist bloc. So what changed? Oh yeah, now there is a possibility it might have a financial impact on the good old USA. Now suddenly the US becomes environmental champion, demanding that everyone should clean up their act. (Not the Americans themselves mind, 'cos they are the blessed democracy, they are "non-negotiable". It's OK for them to just talk about it. Praise the Lord and drill the ANWR)
For your information, complaints by the capitalistic countries (especially the Western European ones but also the U.S.) about pollution and environmental devastation in the Communist bloc go all the way back to the nineteen fifties and were quite notable in the nineteen seventies.
People in the U.S. could make just as much (or more) money if the commies cleaned up their act than otherwise. For an interesting contrast, look at the old East and West Germany: Same culture, same language, same traditions--but in the Communist East bloc energy wastage and the grossest pollution was rampant while West Germany was a leader in cleaning up its environment and in wind power and energy conservation. Or for that matter, look at North vs. South Korea today.
Political systems make a huge difference.
Political systems, indeed. But capitalism and communism are economic systems. There have been more than enough capitalistic dictatorships, a democratic communism hasn't existed yet on a large scale. I agree that a democracy (or at least a parliamentary system with elections and civil rights) is better than a dictatorship.
Apart from that, never has a system been implemented purely. West Germany built up an extensive social security, up to the point where roughly 50% of the GDP is controlled by governmental or non-commercial institutions. On the other side, even the USSR engaged in international trade.
Don: Most If your definition of "Communist" is a country where all the cards are stacked in favor of the business community and the worker holds zero power, then China is a "Communist" country.
In order to support this point of view with an ethical framework, you need to argue that because Chinese national borders contain a greater number of inhabitants, each one those inhabitants has a smaller claim to resources.
If national borders are ethically arbitrary, then the claim becomes absurd.
I submit that national borders are ethcially arbitrary.
The Chinese oligarchs brutally repress labor unions: Thus there is no hope for workers in China to get decent working conditions. The Chinese oligarchs censor news of rural riots, hence conditions in the countryside continue to deteriorate with little notice by the media.
BTW, the population increase of China is much greater than the population growth in the U.S., despite the widespread practice of female infanticide (covertly favored by the Powers that Be in China).
China is a cess pit. Why glamorize it?
The Chinese government is of the Communist hierarchy, by the hierarchy and for the Party. Yes, it really is that simple.
The US oligarchs brutally repress labor unions: Thus there is no hope for workers in the USA to get decent working conditions. The US oligarchs censor news of rural riots, hence conditions in the countryside continue to deteriorate with little notice by the media.
BTW, the population increase of the US is much greater than the population growth in the Norway, despite the widespread practice of female infanticide (covertly favored by the Powers that Be in USA).
USAis a cess pit. Why glamorize it?
The US government is of the capilaist hierarchy, by the hierarchy and for the Party. Yes, it really is that simple.
Have you ever heard of the United Mine Workers?
Why do you flaunt your ignorance so egregiously?
Utter nonsense, China's population growth rate is much less than that of the US.
What matters for environmental impact is absolute numbers, not percentages. Please check your data to verify that in fact China's population growth is much more than that of the U.S.
If only China had introduced democracy in the 90s as Russia did, no doubt life expectancy would have fallen by 10 years or more, and their population would now be declining.
China has been incomparably better served by its political leadership over the past 30 years than the US by its own, if you look at any measurable benchmark.
Consider changes in life expectancy as a benchmark.
Consider cleanliness of water and air as benchmarks.
Don: Actually, U.S. life expectancy is not at all impressive when measured against countries of similar wealth.
I was talking about changes in life expectancy. By any measure, U.S. increases in life expectancy over the past 100, past fifty, past twenty and past ten years have been impressive.
Doubtless our life expectancy would be higher if we walked and biked more and ate less junk food; despite our bad habits, we keep living longer and longer--plus many people now have high quality lives at ages seventy-five to eighty-five, something that was almost unknown fifty years ago.
By way of contrast, look at the astonishing decrease in life expectancy among Russian males during the past fifteen years. One thing worse than communism is the breakdown of societies such as the old Soviet Union followed by government of the gangsters, for the gangsters, and by the gangsters.
In the U.S. there is at least talk of cleaner coal--and by and large our coal-burning utilities are less dirty than they were thirty years ago.
Thank you for quoting me correctly. It is always nice to see true statements repeated.
Well, the button didn't work. Let me try again.
There is talk about clean coal here, but I think it may all be just talk. Of the many planned coal-fired plants in this country, do you (or does anybody else) know how many will have state-of-art pollution controls? I would guess that the number will be considerably less than 100%.
And how many will not send all of their CO2 into the atmosphere? I would be surprised if that number was greater than 0%.
Lets clean up our act here first. Our vehicle efficiency is abysmally low (do they have many SUV's in China?). Can we get leaders who will motivate us to conserve energy (does that sound like today?). Can we make ourselves into an example that China would want to emulate?
Tony Verbalis
I agree 100% that the U.S. should set a good example. To some extent (not nearly enough) we do so.
What to do about China's policies? Ignore them? Why not slap a big punitive tariff on Chinese imports untill they clean up their act? This would help our balance of trade enormously and also help to generate revenue to reduce our chronic balance of payments deficits.
China is too big to ignore. So is India. The fact that we do not live in an environmental utopia in the U.S. should not blind us to the fact that elsewhere conditions are far far worse.
Would it be morally responsible to do nothing?
That includes North Americans. Dust and aerosols from Asia are transported episodically to the West coast and the Arctic, where concentrations of persistant pollutants in the food chain have been linked to sources in eastern Asia. In the springtime, when this transport is at its peak, it takes just 1-2 weeks for pollutants from Asia to reach the US West coast.
I can't adequately imagine how poor the air quality must be at this time of year in industrialised parts of China, where coal provides up to 70% of the country's energy and thermal needs and flue gas desulfurization is just beginning. It seems inevitable that the added stress on people and health care will build a momentum for change.
Good points, Porsena.
IMO, the critical issues surrounding the article about pollution generated by China's coal plants that are most relevant to TOD participants are:
1. The emissions from China's coal plants circulate the planet affecting terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems in a more deleterious manner than is currently understood by the general public.
2. Worldwide coal emissions are likely to increase as oil and natural gas become scarcer, the world's population continues to grow, and expectations for a Western lifestyle accelerate.
I recall reading somewhere that between the U.S., India, and China something like 850 new coal power plants were being built or about to be built.
"I can't adequately imagine how poor the air quality must be at this time of year in industrialised parts of China."
As I mentioned on a previous post, a telling example of just how bad China's air quality is can be gleaned from a comment made by a colleague of mine from China. He told me a study found that the level of air quality was so bad in China's largest cities that it was equivalent to smoking 5 packs of cigarettes a day.
While I don't believe Western nations can influence China on the issue of clean coal technology, I do believe it is critical that we do not allow complacency or fear invite a relaxing of our own pollution standards - as it stands, they are too lax now.
This is just local politics - those 90% didn't give that answer without knowing it was expected.
Re: Gentleman, Start Your Plug-Ins
I hear that GM are planning to preview a PHEV at the Detroit Auto show next month, and that GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner has said killing the EV1 was his worst decision (source: reuters). If GM seriously get behind EVs, what impact will that have?
"If GM seriously get behind EVs, what impact will that have?"
It might help support the Mass Delusion a little while longer.
It will buy time for Wall Street to put PHEV Lipstick on The Dying Pig and sell the charade to the gullible public one more time.
We need options. With that attitude why don't we all just walk out into the desert and die right now?
"We need options."
We need options based on reality - not fantasy. PHEVs are a silver BB for transportation that will be available to some people in some places at some times.
"With that attitude why don't we all just walk out into the desert and die right now?"
If you limit your hopes and visions to sustaining this civilization - with or without PHEVs - you might as well take your own advice (but why walk - drive out into the desert and die instead).
That's crap. Everything is worth trying.
Let's try and lasso another star and pull it over here so we can have solar PV and solar HW 24/7.
You might find this link useful...
"Our goal is to help you build the kind of world you want to live in. Sanely. "
Oh Goody, we can all build the kind of world we "want" to live in... the Delusions continue unabated.
The people who are "acting mental" are the ones who cannot accept the reality of The Transition. They won't give up on their previous investment in an unsustainable civilization.
The people who are "preparing mentally" are the ones who are also preparing physically and who quit "acting mental" long ago.
The people who are "acting mental" are the ones who cannot accept the reality of The Transition.
So what is this "Transition". And why do you feel its necessary to tell us about it? And in what sense is it a "reality"?
I hope it is about transitioning to a sustainable society, in a way that minimizes suffering due to energy shortages. Because we likely have the means to do that. The combination of solar and wind combined with the increasing electrification of transport is something which likely can be done. Even biomass can help, if we are careful not to destroy the land in the process.
That sustainable possibility will take time to emerge, and in the meantime, nuclear fission can provide a bridge.
IMO, the greatest danger to acheiving this are wars over the remaining fossil fuels. Not to mention the lives they claim, wars waste resources and there is always the possibility of nuclear weapons.
It is far to early to write off the prospects of continuing human civilization. There are clearly dangers ahead, and many kinds of work to be done.
"So what is this "Transition".
In this case "The transition" refers to the end of the oil age and the beginning of ... well, that remains to be seen.
I think Ali Samsam Bakhtiari's " four phases of the transition" (http://www.energybulletin.net/19701.html) is good food for thought and a good place to start. You could also look back at the many examples of similar rapid changes throughout human written and unwritten history.
"And why do you feel its necessary to tell us about it? "
Actually, I think the concept of "the transition" is already pretty clear to most people here.
And in what sense is it a "reality"?"
In the sense that Peak Oil is reality and there is not available any substitute or combinations of substitutes to replace the cheap and easy energy of oil.
So your definition of "transition" is sufficiently nebulous to allow many possibilities for how things will work out. The reality that oil will not be pumped some day does not rule out the possibility we will learn to use other sources. They are available, just depends on our intelligence and wisdom in being able to use them. I am cautiously optimistic.
They may not be cheap, and we may be able to do with less. But they are there.
Tony Verbalis
"So your definition of "transition" is sufficiently nebulous to allow many possibilities for how things will work out"
Sunman you are absolutely correct that the definition of The Transition is "nebulous." And that there are many possibilities - although not all have equal probabilities.
History offers some guidelines (e.g. the work of Jarad Diamond, Joseph Tainter, David Hackett Fischer, Charles Kindleburger and many others - not to mention general biological/ecologic principles that apply to us humans as much as they do to the other critters whose population dynamics we typically study - maybe consider reading some work by Desmond Morris on TheNaked Ape and The Human Zoo ).
Unfortunately, there is no recipe for the exact sequence of events likely to follow Peak Oil.
The lessons we learn from studying our past episodes of Transition may be of limited use since the past episodes frequently dealt with individual, small civilizations that may have had unique circumstances which may or may not parallel the circumstances we face now with our global village of 6+ billion.
Some of those past civilizations perished and some collapsed but the survivors carried on one way or another - and the mechanisms, sequence of events and the timing of collapse varies greatly from case to case.
"The reality (of peak oil) does not rule out the possibility we will learn to use other sources."
I agree - but the more we examine the possible alternatives to fossil fuels, the more we discover their limitaions. There are no combinations can replace oil and prevent catastrophic change to our current civilization. IF we had started 30 years ago and if we could get the world to act together ... it's too late to avoid the Pain of Birth of whatever is coming next.
Too bad we did not get Fusion working by now.
I too am cautiously optimistic - but my optimism rests on the ability of our descendents to pick up the pieces and carry on with a much lower world population after the very traumatic transition period we are entering now.
Substrate - I sincerely apologize for my hasty initial response to this link you provided.
One major problem for our communities will be the psychological adjustments - whether to the shock of the implications of peak oil, or to the effects on families and individual lives of the symptoms of peak oil (I imagine huge increases in divorce, domestic violence and child abuse, suicide, drug abuse, etc).
One problem I am working on is getting our local mental health professionals to recognize this issue and try to prepare for the deluge of mental health problems.
The link you provided is a start - I will be passing it on to several area shrinks ;)
Honestly, thanks for the link
"-One in four, 25 percent, anticipates the second coming of Jesus Christ."
I predict "Peak Jesus" at about 74% of the population.
Post-Peak Jesus will be a fun time to be alive I bet.
60%:- terrorist attack in the US
- bio/nuke attack abroad
70%:- major natural disaster in the US
- worsening global warming
less than 30%:- US Iraq troop withdrawal
- second coming of Christ
Think these are the same people in all three instances? Like those who don't see a troop withdrawal also don't see Jesus coming back?.
And those that DO see the troop withdrawal AND the Christ comeback also see the draft comeback?
Does Jesus need to return to reinstate the draft?
Is that what the Da Vinci Code is all about after all?
Don't you just love shoddy statistics? They make for a great family game around the dying tree!!
Hello Substrate,
As much as I like the idea of Phevs, I believe our national security would be more enhanced by greatly enlarging RRs, Mass-Transit, and electrified delivery trucks to best ensure that food and water is getting to where it is needed to reduce future violence levels.
Hopefully, at a minimum, the Govt. is at least drawing up plans to quickly implement this when our system crashes. Perhaps that is the true plan behind the Hirsch Report. Spiderwebriding, and 150 million bicycles and wheelbarrows will be required too, IMO.
Kunstler talks about the making of other arrangements, but I believe we will have to do this virtually overnight if our society continues its present course. I think it is likely the Govt. will requisition energy supplies to direct our behaviors towards this end, along with other draconian measures to minimize wastefulness.
A rapid societal collapse plus a huge Peakoil Outreach program will make most realize that their basic needs can be met by bicycling for the essential supplies if the remaining fuels are directed towards water & food production and distribution till relocalization and the Biosolar Transition is fully accomplished.
I think a military Draft will be futile, because the parents will realize that keeping their kids at home to help tend the gardens will be a better long term strategy than having them killed or maimed in some foreign land. If America has a moral backbone left: we should gladly accept the challenge of detritus powerdown to Bangladeshi levels BEFORE it is geologically imposed upon us. Countries that transition early to Biosolar Powerup will enjoy long term advantages over those that cling to the old lifestyle.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I would put Thailand, Switzerland, Sweden and Brazil as ahead of the curve.
None of them are doing "enough" but there is great competitive advantage is doing half of what needs to be done vs. nothing at all (see USA).
Once the impact of post-Peak Oil hits, it is far easier to speed up from half speed to full speed than to wildly search around for some response (like a drowning man grasping at straws).
In 2015, almost everyone agrees we will still be producing at least 65 million b/day in the world. Those that have something to trade to the remaining oil exporters will get SOME oil. The nations listed can make a small smount of imported oil go a long way if they have to; and they have exports that others want.
The key may not be a full-scale transistion to Powerdown, but the building of non-oil alternatives. Use oil whilst it is still cheap and abundent, but build an alternative that some will use today, and all can use tomorrow.
Best Hopes,
Alan
Found this video about starting a show on urban permaculture that I think is great. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-882082844236943883&q=Filmshack&...
What really got me interested is the discussion over at http://peakoil.com/fortopic25817-0-asc-0.html
where Patti is posting and where she mentioned a PV/Listeroid generator which is the rout I am taking, I am adding some wind power for my area. She is living a life that she is weaving from the knowledge and tools available today. I think it is a great fist step and she needs help getting the idea and link sent around, I just did.
The first time I just turned it off after 2 minutes, but OK, I tried again.
And I'm somehow glad, because now I know why I hate that video (first time is intuition, 2nd reason)
It's presented in a way that would make it fit right in between Carlton Sheets and kitchen appliances on early morning TV. The how-to-appeal-to-morons way.
Permaculture as a sales pitch, make money from misery . If that's our future, keep it.
Maybe the girl has great intentions, but if so, she's way off track in her presentation.
PS: there are many people on this forum who could do the same or better, but would never have thought of catching the limelight in this fashion. Yeah, entrepreneurs are what made this country, I hear ya. Now look around and see what it looks like.
Sounds like she is on the right track by your dislike of it, the target audience is main stream American to show a different way than BAU. What would be your message and how would you get it across?
If money is what she's after, she's found her spiel. Sure, she can sell a bunch of rabbits at 3 in the morning.
If she wants something real, a forum like this is her audience, and her tone sorely lacking.
If you read her post over at PeakOil.com money is not her goal. What she is doing now locally in her area for over 10 years is inspiring. She feels compelled to try and bring the message to a wider mainstream audience and feels the time is ripe, no hawking of product that I have found.
While I agree there is no perfect economic and social system that we can turn to at least she is trying to work the message through the existing system that there is other ways of living and having healthy food. Besides she has been kick off some blogs and posts deleted on a couple of sustainable sites, why? Because she is promoting a lifestyle change that worked in the past and can be adapted to each persons level of involvement and it spans many different areas with no real "way".
All the knowledge is out in the commons. She is also humble in that she knows that there are others more knowledgeable and is open to ideas and input. I really believe her message is the goal. Since what she is promoting is not some product or book I think it is competing with those blogs message and we know what happens when you go against the tribe.
There's no point in preaching to this crowd, most of us are already aware of what we need to do, and are aware of the resources to find out how to do it. What we need is not some small elite group who thinks they are better than everyone else because they know about PO and what to do about it. We need every human being on the planet to be aware.
Most people are not going to read this forum every day. They need some mainstream media version to get the point of permaculture and lower energy usage across. I don't care how the message gets out, as long as people get it.
No preaching intended. Just putting out there what I read on her journey in trying to get "something" going and the friction so far. I agree that she has the goods to take a message forward to a larger group and hopefully plant a seed of change.
sorry, that part of my comment was directed towards HeSoFly :)
I love it!
I hope this women gets her TV show. This kind of show would be much more useful than the mind-numbing Plastic Palace crap peddled 24/7 on cable comavision.
I really doubt this approach will save the cities as they are now, but it might help save small towns and maybe help those who remain in the cities during and after The Transition.
This is the kind of thing we really need to "liaison" our message to the masses. It IS packaged like a Morning Show and that's what it takes to get the message out to the soccer moms of the US. It's positive and doesn't harp on the "bad news". It also has the feel of the popular home "makeover" shows on (a la Trading Spaces).
As much as it irks some folks here to watch something like this, this is what the masses respond to.
That was my thought that it would appeal to HGTV crowd and might spark a thought that if she can do it so could they. She does not come across as some fringe "tree hugger" and the message is positive!
Found this video about starting a show on urban permaculture that I think is great. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-882082844236943883&q=Filmshack&...
What really got me interested is the discussion over at http://peakoil.com/fortopic25817-0-asc-0.html
where Patti is posting and where she mentioned a PV/Listeroid generator which is the rout I am taking, I am adding some wind power for my area. She is living a life that she is weaving from the knowledge and tools available today. I think it is a great fist step and she needs help getting the idea and link sent around, I just did.
Sorry do not know why it double posted?
This seems to be happening a lot...is the site hanging up, so you wind up hitting the post button several times? I'd suggest to anyone that makes double (or quadruple) posts to edit it blank, and just leave "duplicate" in the body. That should keep it from spawning dueling threads.
For my personal needs a cheap electric car similar to the GEM (only capable of 45 m.p.h.) combined with a 2 kw solar array would suffice. This would not solve the transportation fuels problem by itself, but the truckers could have what I don't use in this scenario. I would sure hate to be making payments on a behemoth when gasoline hits $10/gal, that's for sure.
I think people will just walk away from their huge vehicles--or, more accurately, let the repossession man have them when the price of gasoline goes up into the five to ten dollar per gallon range. Why keep a car when it is worth perhaps only half as much as you owe on it? The car finance companies are, I think, going to take a big cold bath.
The world banking and finance systems are fubar. Part of the problem is that the corporations don't want people with smaller cars that run on solar, they want dependence and a breakneck economy, they need it. There is isn't enough profit in solar.
The world banking and finance systems are fubar.
Exactly.
And that is one reason the Giant Dead Pig we call GM will not be saved by PHEV lipstick (but that won't stop them from selling the rotting corpse to the gullible public).
I could give a rat's a$$ about GM or the world financial system. I want transporation alternatives to the Hummer and F250. Make available to me an affordable, street legal electric vehicle, and I, for one, will be happy. The rest can go rot.
"I want transporation alternatives to the Hummer and F250."
There's always feet, hooves and bicycles (maybe homosap-electric powered hybrid bicycles??).
"Make available to me an affordable, street legal electric vehicle"
Find a genie and repeat the above mantra long enough and maybe Rumplestilskin will appear and throw a tantrum.
With the GM's, the world financial system and the rest going to rot in a rat's anus you might be waiting a very, very long time for someone to "make available" to you an affordable, street legal EV.
What do you have locally - materials, people, talent - to do it yourself now? Maybe import whatever you lack ASAP before it's no longer available to import.
You are just being pugnacious.
No, I'm quite serious.
Most people live with many flawed assumptions about our world and have unreasonable expectations for our future (and our present for that matter).
Read "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" and/or "Manias, Panics and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises." Even the most intelligent and educated are susceptible.
We are currently living under the spell of the Mother of All Mass Delusions, and Peak Oil will bring a rapid and painful end to the spell.
I am not a newb to the subject matter of this blog.
sendoilplease,
You know, you're really starting to piss me off. I mention that I would like an affordable electric car and you start going off on me about my sense of entitlement and delusional thinking. Oh? I'm delusional because I want a sensible factory made electric car. If I don't know how to build it myself I should walk or ride a bike? FYI, I can go buy a factory made Expedition and pump it full of gas tomorrow. You jump on my case because I suggest that I might like to do something to further reduce my consumption of fossil fuels? What kind of freak are you? I already admitted that this move wouldn't solve the energy crisis and you start acting like some kind of peak oil nazi preaching the gospel according to sendoilplease. Listen up, bub. I have no children. I have no reason to conserve a damn thing, but I do. People like you make me want to buy a speedboat and motor around the damn lake all day. Why don't you go peddle your sense of doom, hopelessness, and judgementalism to someone else before I quit giving a f2ck altogether?
The doomers have the most unreasonable expectation for our future.
We will never go back to a an agrarian society.
We will never go back to a an agrarian society.
Yes, but those who expect ONLY that are NOT doomers.
The common denominator amongst doomers is the collapse of the western industrial society and a return of 70% or more of the population to the farms. They just debate how long it will take, usually ranging from very short to 35 years from now after the US loses some global war over oil a la Solstice 2050, 2100 and 2150 (chortle)
Hello Sendoilplease,
I think the same applies to much of our national spiderwebs as the complexity may be too much to maintain postPeak; the functional spiderwebs will have to vastly shrink to what is biosolar supportable.
I believe subsidizing the poor or allowing electrical and water thefts to be counter-productive long-term. Thus, utility rates should rise at a rate sufficient to maintain at optimum levels of 24/7/365 supply. Blackouts resulting in food spoilage or water shortfalls should be avoided to minimize violence. The govt. can dictate doubling or tripling up into one household by identifying those neighborhoods that will be removed from the various grids to support the relocalization.
Then, those designated areas can be fenced off, guarded, then carefully recycled; no sense in letting thieves wastefully recycle the best items to the detriment of the remaining house infrastructure, and it is especially true to prevent vandals from wrecking or stupidly burning these abandoned structures. Burglary will be mostly non-existent because nobody will want to break into an occupied house if fifteen to twenty people are huddled inside against the cold or heat. Even Grandpa can sit there in a wheelchair with a shotgun across his lap while the younger folks are tending the neighborhood gardens.
Expect a young thug who is not willing to work a shovel or pick to be very quickly neck-swinging from a stout tree branch; postPeak, we will not have the time or money for luxurious trials like Scott Petersen or OJ enjoyed, nor the expense of long incarcerations. Since TV will be mostly extinct--area 'necktie parties & community tradefair' will become the predominant popular entertainment again.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Egad. It's Attack of the Soylent Green people. Better go dig a bunker and fill it with the necessities of life ASAP. Oh, and sendmoreoil, I have more survival skills than you do. ;-)
Hello Petropest,
Nonsense, just a realistic, hypothetical outlook at some postPeak time with a farther event horizon than your short-term horizon. We all know that Peakoil will be geologically imposed sometime, the key will be the degree of our societal Detritus Powerdown response before the dire effects have a chance to kick in. If early Biosolar Powerup and voluntary population control is successful--Peakoil will be mostly a non-event as the transition period will be relatively smooth and peaceful.
Just as Putin is using his power to leverage Belarus into an earlier transition-- we can eventually expect our exporters to do the same to the US--we should be 'going with the flow' instead of planning any covert, military, or other method to continue unfair extraction rates.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Greetings totoneila,
I see. Well, I'm not going to worry too much about the future of mankind seeing as I have no control over anything but my immediate surroundings, and precious little at that. Some disaster or another has been hanging over the heads of our species throughout all time. If people are concerned for the welfare of their progeny then maybe they shouldn't have so many children. As for me, I can see that there will be social turmoil whether war comes or not because those who direct the decisions about how things are used and what is being made are only concerned with short term profit and not the long term betterment of mankind. When things are thusly arranged conflicts are inevitable. The U.S. as a nation could survive and even flourish with a greatly reduced oil consumption rate but people will not change until they are forced to. This too, is not my problem. I plan to watch the show and eat popcorn.
t
"I think the same applies to much of our national spiderwebs as the complexity may be too much to maintain postPeak;"
I agree completely Bob. Kunstler is exactly right about the "profoundly local" nature of our post-peak oil future.
Hi Petropest
If you are interested in a 2nd hand electric car then they are available
eg. http://www.austinev.org/evtradinpost/ I bought one last year in the UK and I don't think I will be able to buy another petrol vehicle. I have been bitten by the EV bug.
Carbon
Awesome! Thanks, I bookmarked that site. I have a gasoline powered truck that I don't drive much and I will not buy another gasoline powered car. I am going to wean myself or walk. Some of the new electric cars have a top speed of 25 mph and look like golf carts. I don't mind the look and the price is right (well under $10k) but the speed is no good for me. I would like real wheels like on the Geo Metro and a top speed of 50 mph. I plan to put a 110v ac outlet from a pv solar array in the garage. Then I can charge my car, mow the lawn, and possibly run a small ac unit when possible. I really appreciate the link.
A small wind turbine would be good for a winter time trickle charger for my GEM II.
Various recent forecasts for 2007 and beyond:
EIA (Dec 12 Short Term Energy Outlook)
IEA (Dec 13 Oil Market Report)
OPEC (Dec Bulletin)
Nymex Light Sweet Crude Futures (2006 year end)
World Bank
Reuters Poll of 32 analysts
Lehman Bros
Merrill Lynch
Goldman Sachs (commodities division, not equities team which predicted $105 super-spike)
Friedman Billings Ramsey
Global Insight
Center for Global Energy Studies
Moodys
Boone Pickens
Christopher Helman (Forbes)
Russian Economic Development and Trade Ministry
(Sorry, don't know why this is formatting with a gap between heading and table)
(Oil in million tonnes, natural gas in billion cu m)
NYMX spot prices for 2010 oil are in the $65-67 range, while World Bank and Lehman Bros. see it at $45 to $50. Either some traders are going to lose bigtime, or WB and Lehman have been reading too many CERA reports.
I've no idea how the World Bank get an extra 15 mbpd of capacity by 2010, but that's what they predict in their Global Economic Prospects 2007 report.
BTW they believe that high prices in 2006 chopped worldwide demand by 1.5-2.0 mbpd. There's also an interesting graph in the report (Fig. 1.15) which shows a sharp divergence in 2006 between minerals/metals prices vs energy prices.
I did not look at the report as it looks complicated to obtain. But, I know from watching commodities on www.Bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/cfutures that many metals prices have increased two or three times value in the last 18 to 24 months. Part of this is from growing demand in China & India, part from higher extraction costs for metals/metalic ores that are getting more scarce, and partly from futures trading in metals that have brought fast buck investors into the market.
My company has thus profitted from these higher prices as we salvage metals from the transportation equipment that we scrap or rebuild. I don't see these mineral and metal price increases of 50%/year continueing much longer. As peak oil becomes a factor in the economy, activity that uses these metals will decline, thus causing steady or falling prices. But, I see oil prices continue to increase even as many nations' economies stagnate.
Sorry above link does not work.
go to www.Bloomberg.com/markets/commodities/cfutures.html or just www.Bloomberg.com and click on commodities
FTX-
Thanks for all the work you put into gathering these numbers.
Knowing what is really going on, the likelihood of 2007 turning out as well as predicted seems low. With such a concensus, it is difficult to talk to people about the underlying issues.
I expect we will start seeing serious problems this next year, in at least one of the problems areas (oil, natural gas, or climate change). Only after several such shocks occur will the forecasting agencies start thinking in more realistic terms.
New investment in production facilities will work wonders? Dream on.
So EIA and IEA predict 1.3 - 1.4 million bpd extra "demand" in 2007. Given world C+C output has been flat for at least 18 months, I would say this say this means either:
1) This plateau has indeed been due to infrastructure, etc, etc, and those on this forum who have said we are now on plateau will have to eat humble pie - which will be quite a blow to the short-term credibility of TOD, or;
2) This demand will not nearly be met - in fact there could be shortfall of as much as 1 million bpd even with NGLs chipping in. If demand cannot be met it can only be destroyed by either:
a) Demand destruction on a BIG scale, esp. in developing countries, by a price well above current levels (maybe above $70), or;
b) Some serious recessions in oil importing countries.
Here in mild, wet, windy Britain, house price rises have been over 10% this last year, with the FT 100 also up over 10%. Though Christmas spending was a little slow, there's no real sign of trouble in most people's view. Maybe a la Kunstler's predictions for USA, Britain's property bubble, huge personal debt load and rising interest rates will cause the whole house of cards to tumble in '07.
Or maybe the crazy show will stagger on here for another 12 months. My bet is actually it will, especially as we will manage another year more or less self-sufficient in oil thanks to the Buzzard field. Then we'll start the tumble some time (maybe late) in 2008, likely precipitated by the rest of the world going down at the same time.
Happy New Year to all TODers.
... So given the real estate bubble here will keep inflating even if more slowly, my bet is on scenario 2a. Poor Africans...
Tossed out for pondering with the arrival of the New Year:
Isn't the human quest for energy essentially a genetically driven quest undertaken by all life? If so, what are the implications of this? Any lessons here?
selfish gene theory
Richard Dawkin's "The Selfish Gene" - wiki - Amazon
John Catalano's The World of Richard Dawkins - book web site
From the jacket:
Chapt. 11 excerpt - the origin of "memes" - wiki
Edge: The Third Culture The Selfish Gene: Thirty Years On
Energy Philosophy For Entropic Times
JMG3Y,
This is entirely off topic. However, since you brought it up, I remember reading the Selfish Gene some decades back. Consider the following question as regards evolution. Is there any way to prospectively determine the fitness of a gene? That is, are any genetic characteristics inherently fit? Consider the gene for sickle cell anemia. In a heterozygous state this trait confers some protection towards malaria and is advantageous, though homozygous individuals suffer disease. If one lives in an area where malaria is endemic it is a fit characteristic, (heterozygous individuals avoid malaria) otherwise, if there is no malaria, it is merely a propensity towards disease. Numerous other examples are known and likely many fold more are not yet apparent. The point being fitness is related to environment. This issue is not merely academic as time and again one group or another has discerned itself the master race and acted in accordance with such belief. There is also a tremendous blurring between genetic characteristics and civic structures. Perhaps not for you, but one of the characteristics I am highly attuned to in a potential employer is whether I consider them selfish. There is much more I could speak on here though perhaps it is best not to, such as, what is the definition of life and what is the teleolgy of evolution, avoiding the now loaded word of intelligence, may one rationally speak of a process if a-priori it is judged to be irrational?
Evolution, when applied prospectively, is all too often a circular argument stating that I survived therefore I was meant to survive.
Entirely off topic? ZPDM123, I hope you are right but I fear you are not. You touch on the problem when you mention the blurring between genetic characteristics and civic structures. Civic structures evolve to reinforce selected behaviours and suppress others, usually with widely varying success both at indivdual and group levels, providing bounds and serving as a means of control. Some systems manifest more success than others but even this depends on the metric used. Evidence is mounting from the fields of evolutionary psychology and sociobiology that we are not blank slates. The emerging field of neuroeconomics is poking further holes in the paradigm that we function primarily as logical, rational beings, operating on the basis of empirical fact. Consider the difficulty of changing the behaviour of even family members, a common thread on TOD. What of our "hard wired" behavior impedes energy transitions to our detriment? How can this be overcome? For a successful transition, considerable cultural evolution will have to occur but are we inherently able to accomplish this without first experiencing much disruption and pain?
I find the oil production figure for the US in the article Production Means Investment of 6.8 million barrels a day rather surprising; I recall a figure of about 5.1 for 2005 and 5.3? for 2004 or some such. Perhaps the barrel equivalent of natural gas production has been added in. Given that the consumption of oil and gas involved in the 'production' process - I would rather it be referred to as gathering as the production occurred naturally over millions of years and we are but scavenging - is rising and seems likely to vastly increase, net production figures are what we should be using for purposes of comparison. Perhaps another poster has and could reply with the actual figures.
I can see how SA could have several production figures: total raw BOE, net BOE, net BOE including plastics feedstocks, etc., total exports after domestic consumption, and so on. To be fair, this article seemed to choose a parameter for SA which also seemed high, but which one?
If we take Canadian total wellhead production as a comparator of past and present, the apparent decline of conventional production being replaced by "oil' sands production is consuming a not inconsiderable amount of NG. Do we adjust this according to price or BOE energy equivalents? I find articles stating figures which don't qualify which figure is used are potentially misleading. While wellhead figures are useful for royalty assessment an such, for the consumer they are small comfort.
From a US perspective, what matters is that there is access to about 15 million barrels a day of other countries' excess production. If Canada had 60 million people, we'd cease to be a significant participant in the export market instead of being one of, if not the, largest suppliers [including NG]. Of course, as the man says, it is a matter of investment, but a signature on a trillion dollar cheque doesn't instantly tool up the world. This is doubly so if the resources are in Faroffistan or Upper Bunga. If flow drops faster than investment can be actualized.......Happy New Year.
With regard to New Year's Resolutions, most of us are probably best off recycling most of our old ones:
From Greg Mankiw's blog:Random observations for students of economics
(right of center Harvard economics professor and former chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisor s) - wiki
Resolutions for Another New Year
Repeat After Me, By N. Gregory Mankiw, The Wall Street Journal, January 3, 2006
(bolding mine)
MEES released their estimate for OPEC's November crude production.
Total was 29.25 mbpd, lowest since January, 2005. KSA was 8.78mbpd, lowest since May, 2004.
Thanks for that. In your opinion how do the MEES estimates stack up against the more often quoted agency figures ie EIA? Do they fit well with what these agencies later estimate is being produced by Saudi etc?
Also one obvious interpretation for the fall off in production is of course cuts as agreed upon by OPEC - in which case it would appear that Saudi is shouldering over 50% of the cut (I seem to recall their production being at 9.4mbpd earlier in the year). Generally of course it is held as a truism that OPEC 'cuts' are routinely ignored by producers - yet here if this interpretation is true we have the Saudis at least more than doing their bit.
The other explantion is of course that there are troubles at the well head.
As pointed out elsewhere I guess we wont know which interpretation is correct until we get the next surge in the oil price - then do we see OPEC open the taps again with all this production they may have cut back?
Though of course if the above estimates are correct it seems OPEC has never really been able to raise its production much above what it produced in the autumn/winter of 2004 ie 30mbpd - yet since then prices have increased markedly yet they apparently havent been able/didnt want to turn the taps on over 2 years.
Angola joining OPEC will change things a bit - I wonder when new estimates will be made including their production?
The IEA is also saying 8.8 mbpd (Crude Oil only) for November for SA, the targeted cut for November 1st was 380 kbpd:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/3atab.html
Looking at long-term ups and downs in OPEC production, they are the same -- even if actual production numbers differ slightly. I wouldn't be surprised if the EIA and others subscribe to MEES's data as part of their collection apparatus. I've been following their data for years, but I don't subscribe to their journal ($2,400 per year).
KSA is down to 8.78??? Ouch!
More troops, that's the ticket...
Happy New Year TOD!! Thanks for all your hard work. I'm sensing no lack of interesting things to talk about in '07, we're counting on you to keep bringing us the Truth! (or something real, real close...)
Gazprom and Belarus just signed a deal.
More later.
Hello TODers,
Interesting article on your electricity entitled, "Electricity Entitlement?"
http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=1335
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?