DrumBeat: November 5, 2006

[Update by Leanan on 11/05/06 at 9:24 AM EDT]

Bush Says U.S. Pullout Would Let Iraq Radicals Use Oil as a Weapon

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, President Bush and his aides sternly dismissed suggestions that the war was all about oil. "Nonsense," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld declared. "This is not about that," said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer.

Now, more than 3 1/2 years later, someone else is asserting that the war is about oil -- President Bush.

Chavez Threatens to Halt Oil to U.S.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez threatened Saturday to halt oil exports to the United States and said opponents of his leftist government are not welcome within the military or the state-run oil company.

Also on Saturday, tens of thousands of supporters of Manuel Rosales, Chavez's main challenger in Dec. 3 presidential elections, staged a 16-mile march through the capital Caracas.

Some musings concerning the end of the world as we know it

For some years now, a thought has been troubling me. It's this: things cannot go on the way they have been forever, and sooner or later this machine we call the economy is going to completely destroy itself and in all likelihood take our civilization down with it.

The blood of our economy is oil, and it will not last anywhere near forever. Without it's continuous flow, everything we take for granted stops.

Cities can vote to dump PG&E for public utility

The quest for cheaper utility rates in parts of Yolo County began in Davis in the late 1990s, as California began its failed experiment with energy deregulation.

The ensuing crisis, marked by blackouts and soaring utility rates, led PG&E and other utility giants to rack up billions of dollars in debt. Municipally owned utilities emerged relatively unscathed.

Investors are filling up with biofuels

HENRY FORD dubbed ethanol “the fuel of the future” and planned to run his ubiquitous Model T car on it. Unfortunately, the discovery of cheap petrol and the prohibition of alcohol in America in 1920 put the brakes on his plans.

But now ethanol, a type of alcohol, is making a comeback. It is one of two biofuels — fuels made from plants rather than pumped out of the ground — that are being driven into the limelight by fears over climate change.

Soaring global demand for energy

The global demand for energy is expected to increase 50 to 60 per cent by 2030, much of it from newly emerging markets.

Oil producers learning to face up to the challenges of decline

UKOOA estimates that just over half the UK's oil reserves have been extracted, leaving an estimated 27 billion barrels, worth around £850bn, under the waves.

The North Sea's oil barons are concerned that competition from newer oilfields, an ageing workforce and an out-of-date tax regime may make it hard to get the remaining oil out.

Low-cost carriers hit back on climate change

The aviation industry is desperately defending itself against last week's Stern report, which said reducing air traffic to cut carbon and other emissions would be crucial in preventing climate change.

Scientific news grim for UN talks on global warming

An upcoming UN conference on climate change is taking place against a darkening background of scientific news, for barely a week goes by without a major study adding to a tall pile of distressing evidence.

Doubts about the reality of global warming that were significant half a dozen years ago have today shrunk to zero, leaving only denialists and fossil-industry lobbyists in opposition.

Green Power on the march: Thousands unite to rally against global warming

People power comes to the fight against climate change today as Britain witnesses its biggest march and rally demanding the Government acts against the threat of global warming.

Climate warning is a bit too stern

A FIERCE DEBATE has been raging, mainly on the internet, and for once it isn’t about Princess Diana, September 11 or UFOs. The debate is about oil, and whether the world is about to run out of it.

Australia calls drought summit as economy threatened

SYDNEY (AFP) - Australian Prime Minister John Howard has called an emergency drought summit as climate change and rising interest rates threaten a 10-year economic boom -- and his grip on power.

Shaping up as the worst drought since white settlement more than 200 years ago, the "big dry" is likely to cut agricultural output by 20 percent and GDP by around 0.7 percent, government officials say.

Fourth day of wargames continues with air operations


Fourth day of the ongoing wargames code-named The Great Prophet (S) 2,' continued by launching air operations including troop deployment and interception, said a military official on Sunday.

Deputy commander of Ground Forces of the Islamic Revolution's Guard Corps (IRGC) Brigadier General Abbas Nilforoushan told IRNA that special units of IRGC ground force were taking part in this stage of the 10-day maneuver.

The military exercise started in the Persian Gulf on Friday and continued in 10 other provinces in the south, southwest, southeast, northwest and northeast of the country.

The maneuvers are aimed at displaying Iran's defense capabilities and the progress it has made in its missile industry.

In this stage of the wargames, said the general, Saberin (Tolerant) special units would carry out penetration operations into a vast area deep into the territory of the hypothetical enemy and demonstrate their combat force by taking over
pre-determined positions.

Saberin special units are using different modern tactics including air fights, interception and penetration into the targets located deep inside the hypothetical enemies' territory, Nilforoushan added.

He said that the first stage of the wargames was completed successfully with the participation of ten armored, motorized and infantry brigades.

Flying with radar-evading planes and conducting operations in different terrains including mountains, jungles, deserts, sea and marshlands were among other parts of the maneuver, the general said.

He added that night operations were also to be conducted in the fourth stage of the military exercise.


The first article below is one I usually do not buy into because there is always someone saying that we will do this or that, or this nation will this or that in the next 30-120 days, or early in 2007, etc. But John Keegan is a noted older military historian who is widely published and he is pointing out a basic problem facing Israel.

Desperate people do strange and not thought out stuff lots of times.

Why Israel will go to war again - soon

By John Keegan
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 03/11/2006

There will soon be another war in the Middle East, this time a renewal of the conflict between the Israel Defence Force (IDF) and Hizbollah. The conflict is inevitable and unavoidable. It will come about because Israel cannot tolerate the rebuilding of Hizbollah's fortified zone in south Lebanon, from which last year it launched its missile bombardment of northern Israel.

Hizbollah has now reconstructed the fortified zone and is replenishing its stocks of missiles there. Hamas is also creating a fortified zone in the Gaza Strip and building up its stocks of missiles. Israel, therefore, faces missile attack on two fronts. When the Israel general staff decides the threat has become intolerable, it will strike.

See for rest of article:


This was a comment from one reader on the article that I thought was insightful

An expat Lebanese Christian I chatted to recently, criticised Israel, not for defending herself as she did but for causing, as a common enemy, a sort of temporary alliance of otherwise quite mutually hostile Lebanese Muslim groups: Sunni and Shia. Even so, this person was in no doubt about the Muslim (divided or not) intended final solution: Israel's total destruction and the restoration of Islamic sovereignty, launched from Lebanon (and now Gaza), over the Jewish State.
Israel's return to original borders would bring no end to the conflict. The Jewish State's entire obliteration would.
This is a religious war with political and territorial implications; not a territorial conflict with peripheral religious connotations as it is often presented. It's a clash of ideas and beliefs. Possibly even a fight to the finish.
Knowing this, Israel will continue to defend herself (there's no choice) for as long as the intention to destroy her and crush the sovereign Jewish presence, is there. And it's there. Hezbollah and Hamas put it there. And Israel will have to strike again. John Keegan is correct.
Lebanese Christians, caught in the middle, are leaving, so I was told.

Here is some other recent material:

DEBKAfile's Military Sources: The spectacular swarm of sophisticated missiles fired in Iran's surprise military exercise stuns military planners in the US, Israel and Europe

November 5, 2006, 2:43 PM (GMT+02:00)

Our sources reveal that scores of surface missiles - a record for any war games anywhere - were tested simultaneously at a desert testing site some two hours drive from Tehran Thursday, Nov. 2. Precisely planned, the testing went smoothly. Input has not yet come in about the accuracy of their targeting.
A senior American missile expert told DEBKAfile that the Iranians demonstrated up-to-date missile-launching technology which the West had not known them to possess. They also displayed unfamiliar warheads. But their most startling feat was the successful first test-fire of the long-range Shehab-3 with its cluster of tens of small bomblets, as DEBKAfile revealed Oct. 31. The entire range bore the imprint of new purchases from China.
This Shehab-3, whose 2,000-km range brings Israel, the Middle East and Europe within reach - may be more than a match for any anti-missile missile system in American, Israeli or European arsenals - depending critically on the point of its fragmentation. Some of its features are still an enigma in the West.
If the Shehab-3's cluster separates close to target, the Israel-US Arrow has a chance to intercept it, but the Americans and Israelis have no defense against the multiple warhead if it separates at a distance.
Another point made by DEBKAfile's sources is that the spectacular missile show may have been designed for European consumption as much as to impress the US and Israel. Rather than making a secret of the display, General Rahim Safavi, commander of the Revolutionary Guards, which staged the exercise, bragged that Iran had proved its ability to strike targets outside the Middle East. Europe, which Tehran sees as susceptible to such threats, was being warned that it would be first in line for a backlash from a US or Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear facilities.
Iran announced its war game Wednesday night, Nov. 1, in response to the to the US-led naval movements and buildup in the in the Red Sea (see separate item).
Some of the other missiles tested in the exercise were the Shehab-2, Aolfaqar-73, Fateh-110, Scud B and Zelzal-2.

Israel's total destruction and the restoration of Islamic sovereignty

And with peak oil looming, I see that as inevitable.  

The only question is whether Israel will take down the world when she falls.

I put it it about 50-50...

The whole world? Gee, I hate to break this to you, but the jews are just people like you and me, they don't really control anything, they don't have the capacity to destroy the world, and female jews don't lay jew eggs unlike what
Borat may have told you.
That's not what I meant.  I meant they have nukes, and may be willing to use them if it looks like they are losing a conventional war.

It's not like this is some wacky idea.  During the Yom Kippur War, Israel gave some consideration to the "last resort."

And no, it's not "because they are Jews."  I think any country in their situation would be tempted.  Or rather, that some of the more extreme types within any society would be.

Who is "bringing down the whole world" in your scenario Leanan ??

Israel, if they were to use a nuclear weapon as a "last resort"  (even though they have had that weapon for decades and have not used it before...)... or the Radical Islamic Army stationed at their borders?

Who is the aggressor?  Were the Jews in Germany were the cause of "bringing down the world" in WWII.

Golda Mier loaded nuclear weapons on F-4 Phantoms "on the runway" before a single Arab tank crossed Isreali pre-1966 borders (i.e. their internationally recognized borders).

From the one woman show "Golda" which I assume is correct.


Loaded and actualy used are two different things.
The world was not brought down in WWII.  I was being a bit flip, but there are some scientists who believe that modern nuclear weapons might have undesirable side effects, like destroying our atmosphere.  In any case, the radiation would fall all over the world, while the damage from WWII was pretty much limited to where the fighting was.  (One reason why it worked out so well for us.  Aside from Pearl Harbor, we escaped the kind of destruction Europe suffered.)

Who is right and who is wrong doesn't matter.  Who pulls the trigger on the nukes does.

Who WAS right or wrong may not matter after-the-fact... but we are still "before the fact" and there might still be time to prevent such a situation.  

But how to do that when you start by saying The Country being Threatened is to blame?  

If the Radical Islamic Army next threatens France, Germany etc  - do you blame France, Germany, etc for  (I think they look, smell, taste, etc and even worship the same godz... harder to abandon maybe)?

Forget blame.  It doesn't matter.

Islam is not a serious threat to France, Germany, etc.  There may be occasional terrorist attacks, but they are not an existential threat.  

It is an existential threat to Israel, though, which is why they were tempted to use "the last resort."  

As for prevention...unless we somehow get Israel to follow Ahmadinejad's advice and move to Europe, I don't see anything we can do about it.  They are vastly outnumbered, in the midst of a sea of people who hate them...and who are reproducing a lot faster than they are.  Oil is allowing them to maintain military superiority.  It's a temporary situation.  

The time to do something was back in the '60s, when Israel was becoming a nuclear nation.

Islam is not a serious threat to France, Germany, etc.  

We are not talking about Islam.  

We are talking about Whether or Not the Radical Islamic Army assembled by Iran is a threat.  How serious a threat is another question, a threat to whom at PRESENT and in the not-too-distant future are still other questions.

How many countries did The Nazi's take before the rest of the world woke up?

I don't think anyone should take "Ahmadinejad's advice " and I don't think stopping Israel from becoming a nuclear nation would have been a solution.


Actually, if I had a time machine, I'd go back and prevent Israel from ever being created.

Three of the hottest hot spots in the world today are due to England's hasty dismantling of their empire: Israel-Palestine, Pakistan-India-Kashmir...and Iraq.  

But leanan, you would have to use your time machine to also go back and heal the rifts between shiites and sunni and islam and christianity and kurds and turks and arabs and persians and ... and...

Israel is just the starting point for the Radical Islamic Army.  

What we would like and what is are two different things.

eWe have to deal with what is.  Israel exists and is the First Target for the Radical Islamic Army of Iranistan.

But leanan, you would have to use your time machine to also go back and heal the rifts between shiites and sunni and islam and christianity and kurds and turks and arabs and persians and ... and...
Nah. Let 'em fight. They don't have nukes.
Israel is just the starting point for the Radical Islamic Army.
They wouldn't give a rat's rear about us if we weren't meddling in their countries. And the reason we're meddling is oil.
We have to deal with what is.
Which was actually my point. I don't see anything we can really do about the mess we've made now. But Israel is not sustainable. That is painfully obvious.
"Israel is not sustainable."

Okay, so Israel will be Voted Off The Island first...

I think "We" meddled in their region because "they" have The Oil and that is the only reason "we" pretend to give a rat's hinder for "them."  

The Tribes are forming... "The Needy" team is thinking of who they will expell first... meanwhile...

(I think "painfully obvious" will become a common phrase for all of us soon enough.)

If I had a time machine I would go back and kill the false profet Muhammed.
Besides being a false profet, he was also a bandit, a murderer, and a pederast.

Small wonder Hitler admired his self-made religion.

Change a symptom but the cause remains the same.

Maybe send terminator back to take out Drake...

If you really wanted to put a stop to this you would have to take your time machine back 100K+ years and knock off "eve" and maybe "adam" too...

I would take out the snake and leave the Garden of Eden alone.
I'd just take out God.
I'd just replace God with myself.  Any honest observer would admit that I'd do a better job.  Either that, or with bender from Futurama.  
I agree. It was a bad idea, probably implemented because Europe and the US  didn't want to take in the holocaust refugees.  It was like the Europeans planting colonies in North America, only they neglected to kill off 90% of the native inhabitants as they did here.
Unfamiliar disease killed off the great majority of the indigenous population in the Americas.  The Russians and others who have invaded Palestine live among semites, with overlapping ancestry.

"Unfamiliar disease killed off the great majority of the indigenous population in the Americas."

Sending in Smallpox on clothing to the villages kinda helped things along too.

They're doing it more slowly.
England always had a divide and rule policy for governing. Find a minority populace/tribe and give it overwhelming power over its much bigger rival (Sri Lanka, Ireland etc) or better still, promise the same land to two different people (Jews and Palestinians). It made running the Empire much easier, with the dominate tribe hating the minor one rather than the English. Of course once we pulled out, trouble exploded, but that wasn't our problem anymore...
Leanan says:
"I'd go back and prevent Israel from ever being created."

Using the same arguements and looking at what how our country has been a major player in what we now face, it seems that the time machine might have been better used to prevent the USA from ever being created.

Is a bit of bias showing in your remarks? They predate the US by many hundreds of years and actually owned the land they now have a small piece of. They simply ask to live in peace and yet you would prevent them from assuming that land?

I think you are way off base here. Way way off.

Again,,they simply ask to be left alone. They did not start any of the agressive wars against them. They merely attempted to survive.

This is bullshit.

Using the same arguements and looking at what how our country has been a major player in what we now face, it seems that the time machine might have been better used to prevent the USA from ever being created.

I'm sure a lot of people think that.  And maybe they are right.

But I have a feeling it wouldn't make much of a difference.  If the U.S. didn't arise here, another, very similar country would have.  

Let' see.  Somebody writes some fiction which states that some god gave some land [supposedly Israel] to some group [supposedly the Jews, whatever that means], and now the world is supposed to kowtow to the current group calling themselves Jews claiming Israel.  Please!
First, Leanan was addressing a completely different problem with his time-travel quip.

"They predate the US by many hundreds of years and actually owned the land they now have a small piece of. They simply ask to live in peace and yet you would prevent them from assuming that land?"

Wow! You have little, or a very biased, understanding of the history of the region including and surrounding Israel (also called "occupied Palestine" by some). I can't think of a single conflict where it can't be argued that Israel had a hand in the conflict. Sometimes the hand was small, most of the time it was astonishingly huge. The Wikipedia page on the History of Israel bounces back and forth a bit in its bias, but isn't a bad place to start cultivating an understanding.

I agree that the vast majority of Israeli citizens just want to live in peace. However, their government is definitely not acting in a way that will bring that peace. And the Israeli citizenry seems to grudgingly accept that their government's actions are justified. The American occupation of Iraq has some of the same themes.

Frankly, I agree with Leanan that Israel is between a rock and hard place and will probably get squeezed out of existence eventually. Things will get much worse in the region before they get better. I would much rather see an end to the hostilities and everybody in the region live in a symbiotic way, but I'm far from hopeful.

There is NO radical islamic army in Iran you twit. There is a radical Christian army in the USA controlled by proven deviants shown to be more than willing to kill hundreds of thousands.
Iran is stil surrounded by big powers all fronts. Threat of a radical islamic army is a myth. Islamic societies are still poor and controlled by western slaves; they are of little threat to anyone. Occasional terrorist threats are nothing more than a nuisance. Israel, on the other hand is a miltary garrison state, a nuclear mini super power backed by the greatest miltary power on the face of the earth unconditonlly, stronger than all muslim arimes combined.
Well, actually, the country that was threatened and has been occupied by an enemy is Palestine.  Just because the USA and GB decided that Israel should exist does not justify its continuing existence.  If the Zionists weren't so belligerent and insistent on using old fictions to justify their attitude, negotiations might solve the problem by allowing the Jewish poputo some extent lation to move elsewhere.  The peoples of Western Europe, and North America, were responsible for the Holocaust, not the Palestinians.
The most informative piece I've ever read about Palestine/Israel is from the UN:
              The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem

It's full of primary source material and direct quotes. One of the more prescient quotes is by British Member of Parliament, Lord Sydenham in 1922:

     "... the harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country - Arab all around in the hinterland - may never be remedied ... what we have done is, by concessions, not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, to start a running sore in the East, and no one can tell how far that sore will extend."
 "The world was not brought down in WWII. "

 You are right. And, on the day it ended, the world  inventory of nukes was 0; we were out. And the 3 which had been exploded  were pretty small....

From a high of 65,000 active weapons in 1985, there were about 20,000 active nuclear weapons in the world in 2002. Many of the "decommissioned" weapons were simply stored or partially dismantled, not destroyed.[1]


 An all out war would be TEOTWAWKI

Ben Dover@KissRat'sAssGoodbye.com


How about four?


Port of Chicago.  

The question is whether a nuclear blast creates, around the world, strategic maps with a whole lot of extra moving dots and parabolas on them.  A nuclear attack is a genocide, but a nuclear war may still be a trigger for a World War - hence Einstein's "I do not know with what weapons WW3 will be fought  - but WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones."

Israel nukes southern Lebanon
A head of the Pakistani intelligence service decides to sell nukes to Syria as revenge (seeing how Syria's got to deal with the fallout)
Syria hits Jerusalem
Israel reflexively nukes every target it has in the Middle East, making the Qa'ba as radioactive as a reactor core.
Pakistan hits back at Israel
India's drawn in with justification to attack Pakistan

All without three of the most belligerent entities - Al Qaeda, North Korea, or the United States - doing a thing.


Do it yourself version. The dude nailed it in'02

I remember that.  The exact way it unfolded was different, but as he predicted, we're "up Shi'ite Creek without a paddle."
Yeah, I remember that too - so much better than the latest round with stupid accents and Australia saying 'wtf mate'.
you are quite correct in worrying about Israel taking down the rest of the world if she falls. Israel lobbing nukes around in her death would most likely cause other country's with nukes fire them too.
Cue Tom Lehrer:

We Will All Go Together When We Go

When you attend a funeral,
It is sad to think that sooner or'l
Later those you love will do the same for you.
And you may have thought it tragic,
Not to mention other adjec-
Tives, to think of all the weeping they will do.
(But don't you worry.)

No more ashes, no more sackcloth,
And an arm band made of black cloth
Will some day nevermore adorn a sleeve.
For if the bomb that drops on you
Gets your friends and neighbors too,
There'll be nobody left behind to grieve.

And we will all go together when we go.
What a comforting fact that is to know.
Universal bereavement,
An inspiring achievement,
Yes, we will all go together when we go.

We will all go together when we go.
All suffused with an incandescent glow.
No one will have the endurance
To collect on his insurance,
Lloyd's of London will be loaded when they go.

Oh we will all fry together when we fry.
We'll be French fried potatoes by and by.
There will be no more misery
When the world is our rotisserie,
Yes, we will all fry together when we fry.

Down by the old maelstrom,
There'll be a storm before the calm.

And we will all bake together when we bake.
There'll be nobody present at the wake.
With complete participation
In that grand incineration,
Nearly three billion hunks of well-done steak.

Oh we will all char together when we char.
And let there be no moaning of the bar.
Just sing out a Te Deum
When you see that I.C.B.M.,
And the party will be come-as-you-are.

Oh, we will all burn together when we burn.
There'll be no need to stand and wait your turn.
When it's time for the fallout
And Saint Peter calls us all out,
We'll just drop our agendas and adjourn.

You will all go directly to your respective Valhallas.
Go directly, do not pass Go, do not collect two hundred dollahs.

And we will all go together when we go.
Every Hottentot and every Eskimo.
When the air becomes uranious,
We will all go simultaneous.
Yes, we all will go together
When we all go together,
Yes we all will go together when we go.

Of course, now it would be more like "nearly 7 billion hunks of well-done steak."

"but there are some scientists who believe that modern nuclear weapons might have undesirable side effects, like destroying our atmosphere"

Then those scientists are idiots.  The U.S. alone did at least 331 atmospheric tests.  There were probably twice that many world wide last century.  A few atomic bombs set off by terrorists, iran, israel, etc., will have zero long term impact outside of the detonation zone.

The only way nuclear weapons can pose a global threat would be if the US and Russia decide to shoot their entire arsenals at each other.  I put the chance of that happening at about the same odds as finding out that the abiotic oil theory is correct.

"Were the Jews in Germany were the cause of "bringing down the world" in WWII."

Here is a typical example of distortion in order to misinform.  There is nothing about Israel which likens the situation of its Jewish population to that of the "Jews in Germany".  There are many similiarities between the lot of the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto and elsewhere and the Muslim and Christian Palestineans in Ghaza and the West Bank.

Years ago I met an old German, whose son had converted to Judaism in the early 1960's after finally learning the true horror of the Nazi era and whose shame and anger turned him against the Catholicism of his father.  (the son became a spy for Israel, was captured filming in Egypt, sentenced to death, but after a year in Egyptian prison was released due to the intervention of the German government.)

The father tried to defend himself by saying that he knew nothing of the systematic, state organized murder of Jews (and others).  I think he could make a case for his ignorance and for that of the majority of Germans because of the absolute control of public information which characterized the totalitarian state of Germany from the mid-thirties to the end of the War.

Now the brutal occupation of Palestine, the continuing and indiscrimate murder of Palestineans, and even the murderous air and artillery attack on Lebanon does not a holocaust make.  But it is dreadful.  And what strikes me is that no one today has the excuse of the old German.  While the media may be heavily influenced by Zionists (Christian and Jewish), it is not difficult to get accurate information on the ongoing tragedy that is Palestine.  Decades of disinformation from official Israeli and other sources notwithstanding.

Jews have made a great historical error falling in behind the Zionists, turning Arab and Islamic populations into enemies.  The next time Christian civilization turns on the Jews, where will they go?


The germans did not know about the treatment of the Jews?

Go to the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC. Near the pit where the Jewish drawf is shown on video screens 'sawn in half' to be studied(in a pit for its too horrific to all any to see that don't wish to). Near that pit is a simple map with all the concentration camps and prisons in Germany highlighted with a red dot.

I stood there next to an officer who was there in WWII and though the whole musuem was filled with silence he couldn't keep quiet. He looked at the map and had a huge problem and starting yelling about how they HAD TO KNOW,,they just HAD TO KNOW for the map was unbelievabley full of massive numbers of red dots.

That officer knew the truth then. He only found the truth there in that quiet tomb of a museum.

I challenge anyone to visit it entirely and then castigate the Jews. Any takers? You will not exit as you came in.

I walked by the nail scared bunks, the actual bunks made of wood the Jews laid in and died. I touched the scared wood where their nails had raked it with pain and agony.

I couldn't swallow for a long time afterwards. These were innocent people and today they ask but to live alone.

Nah...the terrrorists want the dead and we just watch and bitch about them defending themselves.

Shame on us.

Go to the museum and then tell me about it.

I was in DC that day helping my son pack his office to move back to St. Louis and out of DC. That was the day and he wanted to stay but I said , "lets get in that car and get the hell back over the mountains and home to kentucky"..One day later I saw the towers burning back on the farm. We were sitting next to the Pentagon on our way out of DC.

Thats how close it was. Then chaos stalked our land and we got a taste of reality brought home by Islamic Terrorists and now we all bitch cause we are in their lands and taking the fight to them.

You know on this site I find a lot of people who like to bitch about MY country. The USA. Sure they have the right to but I want to state that not everyone who is an American is an asshole or a conspicious consumer or a big fat ass oil consuming jerk.

This is my country. Stolen from the Natives for sure just like all the rest of the 'civilized' countries did as well.

Just as the English came here and started the process. How about blaming them for starting it then? Huh?

All this anger against the USA just because you don't like Bush or his policies? Well he will be gone shortly and we will elect a new batch and I submit that everyone will bitch about them just as much.

I still believe in my country, if we can make it thru the dieoff. We used to be a great people and nation. I submit that a bunch of candyass yuppies took the wrong path and , as S. King puts it so well, "Forgot the face of their fathers".

Airdale--try to give the USA a break here. After all didn't we come to your aid(Europe)once when all was just about lost? This generation of vipers will pass on to the dustbins of history. Those of us who can survive will do so. The future is cloudy. We all need to scream and yell about the outrageous issues. For Gods Sake we have just about killed all the f**cking fish in the oceans? Do you think the USA did that by themselves? Think about it? All the fish gone. What kind of idiots can do this?

Bitch about Bush and the politicos all you want. I am not a politican. I am a farmer and a retired IBM staff programmer. I am not responsible for the idiot. I will vote as lead and don't care what other countries think or want. Its my country.

I haven't lived in a totalitarian state, where 'talking' can have horrible consequences, but I do know that today we have a plethora of media, and that today there is no excuse for most people living in most countries not to be aware of the plight of the Palestineans.  It is true that politicians and media types keep their heads down on the Palestinean question given the forcefulness of the Zionist reaction every time someone suggests that Israel has crossed another 'line'.  But good information is out there from reputable sources in Israel and elsewhere.

As for the U.S., is it really 'your' country, or the place where, due to chance, you have lived your life?

"Is it really your country?"

Yes it is and became more so when I enlisted in the Military and took an oath to defend it.

Palenstians? No such animal existed. Israel was named Palestine by the current conquerors , Rome.

Later it was pretty much barren until the Jews were given occupation by the powers that be, British conquerors then.

Later it was pretty much barren until the Jews were given occupation by the powers that be, British conquerors then

Gee, where did all those people in those camps come from !?!

One of the worst of the Zionist propaganda lies.  There was nobody here till we moved in, and whoever was here was not really anyboby.  By definition a "non-people".

There was a Palestine as there was an Egypt.  Nassar was the first native Egyptian to rule Egypt since Alexander the Great.  Does almost 3,000 years of foreign rule make Egypt a non-nation ?

There was a violent depopulation of Israel & Judah almost 2,000 years ago and a new mix of people repopulated it and developed a nation.  Kind of like what happened in North and much of South America and Australia in just the last 300 or so years (>> 1,900 years).  

The Queen of England still rules Australia & Canada.  So I guess there is no such thing as "Australians" and "Canadians", just Englishmen that live in the colonies.  They should be glad to move back home if someone else wants their land.  Perhaps the Roma (Gypsies) who lost as high a % of their ethnic group as anyone in the concentrationn camps should all move to Melbourne, or British Columbia ?  And have the Englishmen (there is no such thing as Canadians and Australians) living there peacefull resettle back in London and Leeds.  This is your logic quite frankly.

There was no historic justification for Zionism, BUT there is a reality on the ground now.  A just settlement should recognize the reality of people living today, which means an Israel, but a changed Israel and changed Palestine to accomadate both.  But justice is not the criteria that anyone is looking for.



How many died in the concentration camps ?

11 million.

How many Jews ?

About 5 million in the camps and 1 million in pogroms, stravation, etc. outside the camps. A legitimate case has been made that 5.5 to 5.7 million Jews died at German hands, but I will steer clear of that gruesome accounting for it makes no difference.

I knew well one German woman (age 25 in 1945, father cashiered from police force for being an active Social Democrat and went to live in a small village in the hills, two uncles arrested by Gestapo, one killed by suicide during the arrest, the other died in the concentration camps.  Her father-in-law was an anti-Nazi Lutheran minister who escaped the camps because he had taught religon to the children of the Kaiser).

She knew that the Gypsies were being exterminated per se, as well as political prisoners, gays, mentally retarded and Russian & Polish POWs were in "bad camps where many died" but not the Jews until after the war.  She honestly missed the Holocaust, but did know that genocide was going on for others.

From memory, the crematoria at Aushwitz or another large camp were originally built for Polish POWs.  Only when they were eliminated did the Jews and others fill their bunks.

I fault the Holocaust Museum for forgetting the 5 million !

Let us remember the 11 million !


could not of said it better.
They do.

And they watch what's going on in our own time, too.


What always intrigues me is the implication that Germany was an anti-semetic country.

As an exercise, go to a German WW1 war grave. Count the jewish graves. (There are loads - you can't miss them). Very enlightening.

generally, the most anti-racial hatred grows out of the most integrated society.
I don't think so. Its the less integrated ones.
What does anyone know? I knew an old German gentleman who had done research and development for Germany's atomic bomb project. He did not know that Hiroshima and Nagasaki had occurred until DeGaulle threw him out of France in 1958. He spent his days thinking about mathematics.
God knows what or if people think.
It would be nice if the general population was alert and awake and aware and could be treated as responsible adults. That's not the case.
Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians and Iraqis are people too. Cluster bombs are not the solution to any social problems, and neither are insane religious freaks.
Absolutely correct.  

All of the citizens of the middle east are threatened by the Radical Islamic Army of Iran-istan (where they drink fermented oil maybe ??).

The insane religious freaks are one mechanism but ancient hatreds and Peak Oil are the catalyst.


Yeah, good thing there are no "insane religious freaks" in this country...  ;-)
Bush might qualify as an "insane religious freak" ...

But now imagine Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell or the recently outed creepy Meth-Head, Closet Homo Evangelical being president and a congress of their peers in charge of the USA...

Sounds like Iranistan, christian style.

Hurin is stating nonsense. Like or dislike the Jews they have excellent genetics as is proven by the huge number of intellectual genius they have produced. They are not an ignorant people like as many wish to portray them.

The disapora did not break them down , it only strengthened them. They easily have the ability to take out all the major ME cities with nuketipped cruise missles and IMO will not hesitate to do so when they are facing the destruction themselves. They will strike first and we will enter
what can be called Armegeddon by the religious or Death on a Stick by the rest of the populace.

Every new IDF recruit is supposed to be sworn in on the mount of Masada where they swear and oath...'Never Again..Never Again' or so I read. Might have to do another google just to be sure of my statement.

The Europeans and many Muricans like to portray them as despicable folks. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The best doctors,lawyers, physicists and the list goes on and on.

They will not go quietly. In My Humble Opinion. What do I know other than I have been reading the JP for a long time, read slowly Hebrew, have many books on Judiasm etc..etc.

Airdale-I could be wrong for I have been before(once)and I assume some here will forceably tell me so.In fact I expect it but thats my opinion and I'm standing by it.

"Excellent genetics", eh?

My good man, you have fallen into a terrible trap.  Hitler would be happy.  Start thinking in terms of group genetics and boy does he have a program to sell you.

Except for a higher incidence of aryan and slavic blood, Jews have llttle to differentiate their genetic history from Palestineans and other arabs.

Great to see you posting again Jack Greene.  

Iran's resupply of it's surrogate armies in Lebanon and Gaza continues as we prepare for Round Two of the undercard.

I think it is funny that the expat Lebanese Christian quoted above criticised Israel "for causing, as a common enemy, a sort of temporary alliance of otherwise quite mutually hostile Lebanese Muslim groups: Sunni and Shia. "

Since Israel's existence is the cause of their alliance I wonder what the Lebanese Christian thinks would be the solution?


Thanks for the thought. I should have more time. The election is almost over. My guy, running as an environmentalist in an enviroment district for County Supervisor should win easily - I got to run his campaign in my town, the biggest in his district which is something I have not done for 30 years. So part of my life will be back to normal after Tuesday.

Then all I have to do if finish my book for Indiana University Press (by April?) and hope it rains a lot this winter so I do not work too much at my real world job.


Two points. 1) Europe is requesting and we are going to build the 3rd missile defense shield in Europe, the same one that may work based in Alaska and at Vandenberg.

2) Christian population in the Middle East is in decline, as many are moving out of Lebanon and also the few in Syria.

1) So then "Israel is Voted Off" it is...  maybe ;)


2) watch for the pope to issue a "be fruitful and multiply" statement next.

Good luck to you in your campaign and in your real world job Jack.

I definitely see the Lebanon/Israel conflict rearing its ugely head again if anything comes down between US/Iran...it's another front in the same battle and the reason, I believe, the USS Eisenhower is  bobbing around near the Medditeranean.

The article Leanan cites below also leads me to believe that the something is coming to a head...it is a HUGE politically risk for Bush to make this statement, but for some reason, he felt it was time to let it out...

Bush Says U.S. Pullout Would Let Iraq Radicals Use Oil as a Weapon


I think it's just election posturing.  Protecting Israel is a big deal for "the base."  (Never mind that they only want to protect Israel so they can hurry the End Times along, and incidentally, hurry all the Jews to Hell.)  

Still, it is a pretty remarkable article:

Bush said extremists controlling Iraq "would use energy as economic blackmail" and try to pressure the United States to abandon its alliance with Israel. At a stop in Missouri on Friday, he suggested that such radicals would be "able to pull millions of barrels of oil off the market, driving the price up to $300 or $400 a barrel."

If that actually happened, I think the average American would happily abandon our allegiance to Israel.

And speaking of the election...gawd, I can't wait until it's over.  People are banging on my door all day.  I'm tempted to put up a sign: Bother me, and I swear I'll write in "Mickey Mouse" before I vote for your candidate.

Then there's the phone.  Wow, I'm so popular.  Everyone from Laura Bush to Howard Dean is calling me.  I'm tempted to yank the phone out of the wall already.  

If that actually happened, I think the average American would happily abandon our allegiance to Israel.

I think Bush framed the future question of blame for $300 oil in that statement - blame the owners of the oil using it to "blackmail" the poor US of A (west in general).  

I think the idea is to get Americans to Vent their Anger towards the Oil's Owners and not to blame Israel for being the target of the Radical Islamic Army in it's quest to "Wipe Israel Off The Map."


It is indeed time to wipe Israel off the map.  A nuclear disarmed confederal state, with no official religion, in which minority rights are guaranteed, democratic institutions and security are guaranteed by international mandate is clearly a better choice for Jew, Muslim, Christian, pagan and others.

Hitler thought the creation of a Jewish State in the middle east was a good idea.  It's sadly ironic that Israel has become a vessel for hatred largely because that monster's actions created liberal sympathy for the Zionist idea.

I think people should remember that the largest Jewish population in the middle east outside of Israel is in Iran, where the Iranian constitution guarantees the Jews representation in Parliament.

Hezbollah was not created by Iran.  It was created by Lebanese after the Israeli invasion in 1982 left 20,000 Lebanese dead.  It was and is an army of national defense.  It necessarily has to function unlike a national army, given Israel's air and armament superiority.  That it turned for support to Iran is no more surprising than the decision of American revolutionaries turning to France for aid.  To say that Iran controls Hezbollah is as ignorant as would have been the claim that Washington was a puppet of the French.

The implication is that the oil really belongs to the USA and its allies.
I expect to see more explicit talk about oil next year by BCR.  And I predict the big story in the Oil Patch next year will be declining production from both KSA and Russia.
Yes..could be true.  BCR only has two more years to "ease" the concept of declining worldwide production into the public psyche.  It needs to be firmly implanted within  the minds of the populace in the "correct" framework before the next round of Prez elections.

That framework, in my opinion, is that access to the world's reserves is the right of the entire planet regardless of political boundaries.  Any nation that disagrees is opposed to free and open markets and should be forced to participate.

It's called armed robbery!!
Perhaps to some, but to BushCo, it is "Democracy" and "Capitalism".
That's what you get for registering.  I haven't, so they leave me alone.

I say "Don't vote: It just encourages them..."

I refuse to participate in crooked elections.

I would vote but their is no doomer party.
 Please vote. You can register your displeasure by voting for whatever third party or independents are running.
You mean pull another Ralph Nader.  You have to be freakin kidding.
It'd be more subversive if you just always voted for whichever party was out of power.
Definitely...the campaigning this time around has been a huge turnoff.  I will do my duty and vote, but have tuned out all political ads in all forms.  I know the candidates and their positions.  I don't need someone telling me what the other guy/girl thinks.

I was getting hit with a bunch of calls, but they petered out last week. Perhaps someone got the message after hanging up on them ten times.

I did disconnect my phone a few hours last night.
Leanan, exactly where do you live.

I find your statements to be almost incomphrensible.

Its clear you despise the jews. A reason for that?

'The base'? You are talking about what here?

I think you mean folks who actually have a christian belief system? Do you think all of them are what the MSM portray? Is that where you get you beliefs in the people of this country? Again my question. Where ,in general , do you live?

Using a phone wisely is very very simple. You attach an answering machine and simply screen the calls. Or better yet do not use the phone. Get a cellphone and only give the number out to those who you wish to communicate with.

And then quit bitching about it on the forum.

Many people fought and died to create our system of government. Your constant bitching shows how little you really care.

airdale-Semper Fi..to quote some jarheads I used to hang with..

I find your statements to be almost incomphrensible.

It's mutual, I'm sure.

Its clear you despise the jews. A reason for that?

I don't despite the Jews.  I don't despise anyone based on their country of origin, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnic background.

However, I see a terrible tragedy looming in the Middle East.  Nuclear war or not, this is not going to end well.  Not in the light of peak oil.  It's going to be a tragedy that dwarfs the Holocaust.  

'The base'? You are talking about what here?

"The base" is the term Karl Rove uses to describe rightwing Christian fundamentalists.  I always found it amusing, because "Al-Qaeda" means "the base" in Arabic.

Where ,in general , do you live?

I am currently in the northeast, but I've lived in the West and South as well.

Apparently you aren't alone in the northeast with the calls:
GOP robocalls people saying its the dems.
More from some blog
Holy Heisenberg.  

It never occurred to me that some of the calls could be from the candidate's opponent, with the express purpose of trying to annoy voters.  Cheez Whiz.  I guess I really am naive.  

The Robocalls were still coming as late as 9pm tonight, which seems a tad late to me.  Whoever recorded the call was so hoarse I could barely understand him.

Cheez Whiz indeed.  This from the second link: "If the recipient hangs up, the call is automatically redialed 7 or 8 times."  Definitely intended to annoy.
The Talking Points Memo blog is all over this story:


Wow.  Just wow.  

A part of me is just in awe of the sheer underhandedness of this.

And yes, I have definitely been a target.  My district is specifically named in one of Josh's posts, and I have gotten calls just like he describes.

3 1/2 years ago, The Party's Over was just going to press, almost all of the readers of this site (let alone the general public) had never heard the phrase "peak oil" and oil was very cheap.  No Blood For Oil was just an antiwar phrase and was therefore ignored by BCR.  
Much is different now.
Wow...it seems like decades ago..I believe you are correct that much is different this go around.  We will find how much different in the last part of this year (starting on 11/8).

I am already seeing some postings on other websites talking about "swift action" if there is any hint of voting fraud.  Not quite sure what this "swift action" will be, but I'd stay away from the toll booths on the highways (ref: to Mexico's recent events).

A MAJOR Problem with Electric Vehicles

Hot & Cold.  Or rather climate control within the vehicle.

EVs will need to be lighter and without parasitic energy losss to give "decent" range and performance.  Yet Americans are used to their comfort.  Heat on a freezing morning, air conditioning on a hot summer day (see the % of vehicles where a/c is even an option, and the % that buy w/o a/c when they can).

Heat can be added with extra weight and care (catalytic burner of gasoline or alcohol or charcoal).  Perhaps not as good as today/s ICE, but it will prevent frostbite.

Air conditioned can only come from a unit that adds dozens of pounds and consumes quite a bit of electricity on an EV.  Turn on the a/c on a hot summer day, and one's range can drop from 50 miles to 32 (hypothectical) in city traffic.  The slower the traffic the worse the impact of a/c.

I wonder how many Telsa pre-launch buyers know that they are getting a car with "natural" environmental controls ?


Forgetting AC but in northern climates internal heating is more than a comfort issue.  Keeping the windows from fogging or frosting up is a safety problem plus keeping snow and ice of he windscreen is a must to keep clear for any practical winter driving.  In the end all these "solutions" to prolong our addiction to personal mobility will have to be abandoned.  There will be many cumulative solutions from living arrangements to mass transit but I doubt my grand children will own an "auto" mobile.
"There will be many cumulative solutions from living arrangements to mass transit but I doubt my grand children will own an "auto" mobile."

I don't think the auto will ever quite die.  People have always sought ways to get around with less effort (horse, bicycle, car, plane..).  But the future of transportation may look more like a Hybrid Human-Electric Velomobile than a Prius, Insight, or Loremo.

"Forgetting (sic) the air conditioning"...
I see you don't live in a hot climate. I can
remember trips in the 50's in the old plymouth
without a/c; sure hope we don't return to that
miserable era. Here in Texas if the a/c breaks
we call a wrecker. ( and ride in the a/c cab of
the wrecker to the repair shop).
Having lived through a few Canadian winters, I've dealt with iced up or fogged windows on numerous occasions. The most hilarious thing I've seen is how owners of the old model VW Beetles handled this situation on cold winter days.

The old Beetle had an air-cooled engine, and there was therefore no hot water/antifreeze circulating through a radiator core inside the cab like regular cars. Instead there was a gasoline heater, but this heater would inevitably break down after a few years. People would of course still drive Beetles in the winter.

This would be accomplished by wearing a fur coat, Russian hat, and artic mitts while driving. Another essential tool was a handy window scraper, which was used to clear a small viewport on the inside of the windshield. It wasn't fun but it worked.

Sounds like they are related to Series owners of Land Rovers. The unshuttable air vent that blew a stream of air over the steering wheel was a special feature for use in wintertime. One of many reasons for not travelling fast in cold weather (60 mph wind on fingers in freezing weather was most unpleasant), other features were very noisy engine and/or gearbox echoing around the unsound-proofed cabin.
Winter transport in Canada... late 1940s... and late 2040s??

This is certainly a significant problem, but frankly I think it is a problem that hasn't been worked on very hard yet, mostly because it hasn't been necessary.  This is very similar to situation with fuel-efficiency thirty years ago.

Cars aren't really insulated.  They don't use thermally-efficient glass.  They don't tend to have anti-fog coatings on their windows.  They mostly don't have heated and cooled seats.  They don't use electronic cooling.  They don't use heat exchangers to recycle ventilation heat or cooling. As far as I know, they don't have any dehumidification independent of cooling.

Using some or all of these things should significantly reduce heating and cooling loads in cars--of course there would be trade-offs, but the point is that as far as I can tell they haven't even been explored much.

I agree.

There is a process of maturation in design for any "new" technology and EV's have hardly taken Step One.

I think the problems will be solved for a city car (I like GEMs)


but that will take time.  And more years to mass produce even 20 million EVs (~9% of fleet).

Suburban & Exurban EVs will take even more development.

OTOH, we could start on all of the Urban Rail projects mentioned within 3 years (several within 12 months).  A century of design and operating experience with new details being added to a mature technology.


I agree too.  Just because electric cars are feasible doesn't mean they are a panacea.  But even if we have a lot more rail, and I hope we do, in a lot of cases people will need some kind of vehicle to get to the rail lines.   There are some van pools around here, and I am sure there are a lot of other possiblities (I bicycle myself--it isn't for everyone), but all these transit modes are part of a system and I see electric cars as part of that.  Better electric than corn-ethanol powered, in my view.  Of course coal-electric isn't so wonderful either...
Simple solution for northern climes: don't put any windows on the north side of the car.
Careful where you put the Trombe wall.

Or the geothermal well.

Tesla pre-launch buyers are in for a bigger shock than that, when their calender-life-limited li-ion batteries die in 2-3 years, and they need a $30k replacement.  The Freeway Blogger meets The Neistat Brothers.

Climate control CAN be designed for - like a house, it's possible to seal up a car so that it needs a fraction of the energy it uses now - it's just a lot harder in a mobile vehicle.  The designers of EVs simply need to take this into account, they can't continue to pretend that halving the mileage for something people use all the time is acceptable.

Double-seal windows, better insulation, tighter controls on vents...  A few thousand watts of solar heating is available in the daytime, and even the motors may be able to be water-cooled.  Reflective window tintings could greatly decrease the greenhouse effect.  Wire heaters or transparent resistive surfaces in all the windows could de-ice and de-fog quite effectively, as they currently do in the rear windshield.

There will always be some sort of extra drain associated with climate control, but right now the drain is engineered to consume as much waste heat as the engine puts out - I'm betting that adaptation to 1/2 or 1/3 the energy is possible.

Worst case is Phoenix to Vegas in June - lugging a tank into the back for a Swamp Cooler anyone?

You obviously have no idea what your talking about in regards to the Tesla battery lifetime.  If they had just plugged all the batteries in, then obvious the heat would lead to extensive capacity loss over time.  As it stands, they developed a 'cradle' that isolates the batteries not only form each other but from the environment, and it moderates the temperature to allow the batteries to not get hot enough to cause systemic capacity loss.

The batteries they are currently using are good for 1000 charges at a 15% degredation.  This is a fact I have never ignored.  I have, however, always pointed out that people wont plug in their cars every night.  They will only do so when it is needed, and that will be most likely every 2-3 days.  So instead of a battery lasting 2-3 years, it will last 5+ years.

Also, the Tesla does cool and heat :P

If the pack is actually $30k, then even at 5 year replacement you're talking about $6,000 per year replacement cost.  Now, with Altair Nano batteries, or A123 systems...it might be a little more reasonable.
Obviously, neither do you.  The batteries are going to die in a few years even if we leave them on the shelf.  Calender life issues limit lithium ion cells to around 3 years of usable life, even if they're never used.

Yes, they do experience severe wear problems with high temperature and humidity - which are mitigatable but not exactly removable either in a wet climate, a sun-baked car.  

To put this into perspective, one Tesla will cost roughly the equivalent of buying 2 BMW sportscars outright and paying leases on 3 more.

From a comment on the Tesla blog:

The subject of calendar life of the batteries was broached. It was artfully dodged ;^/ However, it appears that Tesla has some propietary methods on liquid-cooled battery technology. Patents were mentioned. I might try and dig around for them, but I haven't yet. For those who wonder why there's a connection, battery longevity is a function of average temperature, average voltage, and time. I don't know if Tesla is using the full voltage range on their batteries. I expect they are, given some of their answers -- pointing out that "dead" in the industry means "80% of original capacity", and that losing only 20% of range when range is 250 miles is a lot more forgivable than losing 20% of a 40 mile range. Also, to the question "can I upgrade the batteries when my old ones wear out?" their response seemed to be "uhm, we haven't really given that a lot of thought -- our current battery focus is on next vehicle..." They seemed more concerned about impedance aging. I am not sure which environmental factors play a greater role in that specific type of aging.

Myself, I was brought to this point of interest on
Dan's Data.  Who talks about the Tesla here:

Maybe the Tesla guys actually will come up with a sellable product, for Jay Leno to buy and forget about. I guess that'll be some sort of vague philosophical step forward.
But, as mentioned above, until we come up with a high-energy-density battery that doesn't wear out and leave you buying a new one for $15000-plus every two years, the whole concept is just stupid. You can keep making Teslas and Fetishes and so on for as long as you like and it'll make no difference whatsoever to the lack of feasibility of the fundamental idea.

Don't get me wrong, plenty of major changes to battery technology are in the works, but traditional lithium ion is not going to be suitable for mass market cars anytime soon.    

Battery technology needs a breakthrough or three(which I'm hopeful about, especially Altair Nano), but even without one, we could transition to a $10/gallon future without needing a 250 mile range pure EV.  I personally like plug-in strong hybrids with modular gensets spinning up per-wheel motors(electrifying 4WD, traction, breaking).  So in 5 years you can drop in that hydrogen tank if it suits your fancy, in the meantime you can use an 10kw diesel generator for the few trips you need long range for, and run around on grid electricity for most trips.  Or add another bank of batteries for medium range trips.

I'm hopeful about, especially Altair Nano

Don't get your hopes up !

Altair Nanotechnologies was Altair Int'l Gold not long ago.  A hype "company" without substance.  Of course, Hothgar found them and pumped them earlier.


Oh, I'm aware.  They're a bloody mining company which was looking for something profitable to do with their titanium deposit.  Forbes put them on a list five years or so ago of nano-hyped companies to avoid.

But their press releases have gotten pretty concrete - that means either fraud, or they may have something there.


In an on-line description of electric car conversion by a tinkerer in a Northern clime was the claim that electric air heaters work well and take relatively small amounts of battery energy to run compared to that required for motion. He had had built several over the years and had used them for commuting year around. I failed to bookmark it and can't find it at the moment but I need to turn this electron diffuser over to other household members with higher needs than mine.

Ready to Go Rail Projects

The following list was composed by Lyndon Henry and me from memory and likely overlooks some projects.  The degree of engineering on file for each project varies significantly, and much of the information is dated.  However, all of the projects noted below could start construction in one to three years if it was an urgent national priority.

A rough guess is that the projects below would cost roughly $125 billion to complete.

Albuquerque - Light Rail and Commuter Rail plans
Atlanta - Beltway Light Rail, Northern suburbs Light Rail extension, downtown streetcar
Austin - Two Light Rail Lines plus Commuter rail and downtown streetcars
Baltimore - East-West Light Rail Line, 4 mile extension to current subway
Birmingham AL - Streetcar lines   Boston - All rail plans promised as environmental offset to "Big Dig" Buffalo - Planned extensions to current light rail subway
Charlotte - All plans currently scheduled
Chicago - Expansions to Metra, South Shore Line
Cincinnati -Light Rail plans voted down
Columbus OH - Light Rail and streetcar lines
Corpus Christi TX - Streetcar line
Dallas - All plans through 2015 and all 2015-2030 options (roughly 145 mile system)
Dayton OH - Streetcar plans
Denver - 117 miles of Light Rail and Commuter Rail (already locally funded)
El Paso - Downtown to Border Light Rail
Ft. Lauderdale - Light Rail and streetcar plans under active development
Honolulu - Line currently under development
Houston - All plans voted for, 65 new miles light rail 8 miles commuter
Indianapolis - Light Rail Line plans
Kansas City - Light Rail Line proposed
Las Vegas - Light Rail plans
Little Rock - Short extensions of existing streetcar line, Light Rail line
Los Angeles - Red Line "Subway to the Sea", Vermont Avenue subway, XX miles of Light Rail, electric trolley bus plan, electrify commuter rail
Louisville KY - Light Rail line plans
Madison WS - Streetcar and Commuter Rail plans
Memphis - At least two Light Lines in comprehensive plan
Miami - 103 miles of elevated Rapid Rail (subway type) + Miami Beach streetcar (already locally funded)  90% of the population would be within 3 miles of a station, half within 2 miles of a station
Minneapolis-St. Paul - Central Light Rail connector between the cities
Missoula MN - Commuter Rail
Nashville - Commuter Rail in process
New Orleans - Desire Streetcar Line, Riverfront Streetcar Line extensions
New York City - 2nd Avenue Subway, 3rd Tunnel under Hudson, Penn to Grand Central connection, Staten Island Light Rail, New Jersey Light Rail extension, commuter rail improvements
Norfolk - Light Rail Plans
Ogden UT - Streetcar plans
Orange County CA - Center Line Light Rail plan voted down
Orlando - Light Rail plan voted down
Philadelphia - City Branch
Phoenix - 90 miles of Light Rail already approved Pittsburgh - Two Light Rail Lines north from current, under construction line Portland - Green Line (both routes, one funded, other "studied" for future), Streetcar both sides river
Raleigh-Durham NC - Streetcar plans
Sacramento - Additional Light Rail expansion
San Antonio - Light Rail plans voted down
St. Louis - All plans evaluated, perhaps 100 mile system
Salem OR - Streetcar plans Salt Lake City - 90 miles of Light Rail, streetcar and Commuter Rail (vote soon to accelerate)
San Diego - Light Rail spur to North, another to West
San Francisco - New TransBay tunnel, trolley line, BART extension, eBART
San Jose - BART extension, several Light Rail extensions
Seattle - Proposed north extension
Spokane - Light Rail line planned
Tampa - 1992 and later plans
Toledo OH - Streetcar plans
Tuscon AZ - Streetcar plans
Washington DC - Tyson's Corner-Dulles extension, Purple Line, 40 miles of streetcar lines in DC, Columbia Pike Light Rail Winston-Salem NC -  Streetcar plans  

Did I miss any ?

Best Hopes,


Missoula "MT", not MN?
There's also a commuter rail project prepared from DT Minneapolis to the northern suburbs, the North Star Line

I lack the talent & time to do this, but a web site for tracking new rail projects and their progress would seem a logical next step for this list.

Missoula Montana.

I did forget the Northstar commuter train.

As I posted yesterday, only 5 rail projects underway ATM in the US.  Bush's policy of birth control for new Urban Rail has been successful :-((

Wouldn't you REALLY prefer a FF bus ?


Add to that Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) project, bringing back into use 70 miles of the abandoned rail line along US 101 north of San Francisco. It is being voted on on Tuesday.


Wouldn't it be better to not build in cities like New Orleans, where sea level rise will destroy it or like Las Vegas where lack of electricty for air conditioning and lack of water will make them uninhabitable?  This includes Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Phoenix, Houston?, etc..
New Orleans has a unique advantage to protect against rising sea levels.  We can redirect, every spring, the deposits from the Mississippi River and raise the protective wetlands as sea level rises and be considerable safer with +1 meter sea level, good levees and wider wetlands than we were for Katrina with criminally faulty US Army levees.

New Orleans is the lowest energy option for shipping with our location, barge & rail connections.

Just give us half of the offshore oil royalities and we can do it.

We asked for decades and got a pittance ($700 million) in the Energy bill passed a few months nefore Katrina (vs $10 billion to save lower value Everglades and $14 billion for Chesapeake bay).

Best Hopes,


Someone at PeakOil.com is reporting that the European power outages were actually caused by a power surge...from German wind turbines, due to the high winds.  

Is that true?

Detailed forensic engineering always follows events like the recent short but widespread blackout.  I would expect preliminary results in a few weeks.

A power surge would be VERY easy to control.  Simply turn off WTs as output exceeds demand.  Their 18 GW is spread over about 10,000 WTs and these are largely sited over tens of thousands of km2.  So no "sudden gust" would have an impact.

Perhaps Germany needs a better generation shedding control system.  By law, the grid must accept wind power so that may need to be changed.  If so, just part of the learning curve as wind energy matures.

Best Hopes,


A power surge would be VERY easy to control.  Simply turn off WTs as output exceeds demand.

This is what happens quite often. It is normal to turn off the wind turbines when wind's blowing too strong.

There is currently a lot of wind here around. But this is certainly not unusal. And of course, the 18 GW wind turbine power didn't emerge in just one year.

matthias, berlin

The online pages of "Der Spiegel" write, the reason for this power outage is maybe the new norwegian cruiser ship 'Norwegian Pearl' which passed a canal in northern Germany.

Obviously high voltage transmission lines are being switched off, when a big ship is passing under these lines. This might be the reason...However thi is something which happens quite often. Here is the link (in german)

Probably there are many reasons which worked together. Wind energy? It is well known, the large german electricty suppliers always try to blame everything on alternative energy. Not only their continously rising pricesc.

No - neither from what I have read at spiegel.de or heard on the radio was the problem related to a surge, it was caused by a power drop. Which is the way most electrical transmission systems collapse - a power drop is very easy to cause, but a power surge is quite difficult to propagate through the system, apart from the occasional massive solar storm.

The radio report at 1:45pm was fairly detailed, but obviously, the event is still recent, and in Germany (and Europe, in large part), Sunday is a day where much normal activity is very reduced, with many functions simply not operational until Monday morning. For example, there aren't really any Sunday editions of any papers (with a few exceptions - and even then, the topical news tends to be real light).

Apparently, a mostly finished cruise ship was lauched from a slip on the Ems, a river in the north, and as a precaution, a major E.on (I think the company spells it name that way) transmission line was shut down to allow the ship to pass. This seems to be a routine and normal operation, but for whatever reason, the information was not correctly passed on, leading to cascading failures down to Italy. In Germany itself, the power outages tended to last a few minutes to an hour or so - the German system itself is quite redundant, for much the same reason the autobahn is quite redundant, with parallel routes - Germany literally sits in the middle of much of European economic activity, and the routes for commerce are quite robust, whether rail, electric, or road. (As for redundancy - a new high speed rail line is being built very close to where I live - part of the north/south system which the Swiss are creating. As part of the project, two different municipal water systems were connected here, to make certain that if there is a train wreck, even if one municipal water system fails, there should be enough pressure from the other to deal with an emergency - and to make sure that the groundwater pumping stations, which are in the forest near here, would be available as long as someone could rig up a powerful enough generator.)

Pure speculation - the recent extreme weather played havoc with the schedule, and being a weekend and late, the information was incorrectly passed on - this has also happened in another case at night, when a Swiss air traffic controller flew a Russian passenger jet into an American cargo plane - no one answered the phone, essentially, when the German air traffic people tried to reach the Swiss center, which was also undermanned. (As a sad note - the Swiss air traffic controller was later murdered by a Russian parent - the Russian jet was flying school children at the time.)

As a side note - all of the current wind turbines I have looked at stop generating power when the wind is too strong - a massive wind storm, like what recently happened here, is unlikely to create a huge power surge - it is much more likely to cause a power drop as the blades are essentially feathered (there is a lot of ignorance concerning wind power - there are challenges in a number of ways relating to how variable wind is). I would assume that this is a design question, with some room for different design parameters - an offshore turbine in the stormy North Sea will have a different (robuster) profile than a land based one on a fairly moderate windy ridge on a mountain, but at some point, the mechanical load on the system requires the generator to be taken offline to allow the free spinning rotors and their tower to withstand the storm.

As more information becomes available, I will do my best to post it along.

As said repeatedly during the radio report, all this information is very preliminary.

I may add, the French perspective seems quite more alarmist than the German, but then, I have no idea what happened in Paris or eastern France.

The power failure was caused by two transmission lines failing.  This caused a house of cards effect as several power plants shut down for safety measures.  You guys should also realize that power was back up and running in less then 2 hours for almost everyone.
Well, we'll know in a few more days, but it seems as if it was human error, essentially. The transmission line(s) (don't know where the two figure comes from, except from very early reporting) was shut down intentionally, but without apparently telling anyone adequately, to let a newly built cruise ship by - which ironically, didn't leave the area, since the power outage prevented safe passage (the locks weren't working, according to reports).

Currently, the gallows humor is that next time, the ship will hopefully leave without bringing down the electrical system.

I may add, this is the sort of occurrence which tends to sour people on nuclear here - you just can't design out human error as a factor.

I may add, this is the sort of occurrence which tends to sour people on nuclear here - you just can't design out human error as a factor.

Exactly. I was thinking the same as I read your first paragraph...

Melting Arctic makes way for man

The Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker Amundsen weaves in graceful slow motion through the ice pack, advancing through the legendary Northwest Passage well after the Arctic should be iced over and shuttered to ships for the winter.

The fearsome ice is weakened and failing, sapped by climate change. Ultimately, this night's ghostly procession through Icebreaker Channel will be the worst the ship faces on its late-season voyage. Much of the trip, crossing North America from west to east through the Northwest Passage, will be in open water, with no ice in sight.

Saddam Hussein gets sentenced to death and 'world leaders', like those all over Europe. express satisfaction with the verdict.

Last time I looked none of the countries they represent has the death penalty, something they all on occasion say they're very proud of.

But it's alright if it happens elsewhere, apparently, not a word of protest.

And then they went to church.

Saddam verdict, violence in Iraq, Iran war games probably gave Chavez the theatre to make the threat of oil stoppage again. With these three in the weekend news, plus talks of Rumsfeld firing, I would guess oil prices will be up tonight.
OK, they're back from church, and now the UN, Vatican, EU, and several European countries call on Iraq not to execute the verdict.

Only exception is Britain, which wants Saddam to "undergo Iraqi justice".

Bush is silent so far, likely too busy trying to cement a deal selling them a leftover electric chair from Texas, much more profitable than the piece of rope they usually go for.

bush is just plain desperate     bush is not appearing on behalf of republicans in actual competitive races    bush's recent appearances are in races where the republicans have nothing to lose
Carbon offsets are becoming a major 'industry', with numbers being thrown around of up to $1 trillion shortly. So there is ample reason for governments and industries to not question the ability of trees to soak up CO2. This report, once more, shatters the illusion.

It's been said before: buying off your guilt with a few dollars while getting on a plane is like buying absolution in the Middle Ages: the emperor's clothes.

 No more hiding behind trees

Although it has long been thought that Canada's forests are helping to prevent global warming, new research suggests the opposite is true

Canadians rely partly on our nation's forests to help save the world's climate. Now evidence says it's time to stop.

In Canada we know we burn too much coal, gas and oil, creating the "greenhouse" gas called carbon dioxide.

But we have learned for years that in the fight against climate change, this country's vast forests -- too many trees to count -- pull carbon dioxide out of the air again, locking it up as solid carbon in branches, roots and trunks.

Just one problem with this view, scientists now say. It's largely wrong.

Even as the federal government is poised to argue that our trees should reduce our Kyoto obligations, scientists say these supposed climate saviours have done about all they can to prevent global warming.

Forests can do little to improve the future climate or to lower the atmosphere's carbon levels. What they can do is make global warming worse.

OTOH Planting trees on Icelandic pastures or deserts that were deforested ~1,000 years ago will definitely capture carbon, both in the wood and soil.

Settlement of Iceland released 6 billion metric tonnes of carbon.  Annual global releases are a bit less than 7 billion tonnes.

I am the only non-Icelandic member of their tree growing club  and have introduced several new species.  Still looking for a good invasive tree :-)

Best Hopes,


Hey Alan,

Yes, the article mentions the eastern US in a similar fashion, and there are a few other places in the world. But comparing the size of Iceland with the Canadian boreal forests should be sobering.

The pine beetle threatens to cross the Rockies eastward, and there are reports from people flying for hours over nothing but red, meaning infested and dying, forests in BC. That is quite a carbon source.

Still, my efforts will capture quite a bit of carbon.

If I introduce a desireable species of tree that Icelandic humans want to plant in large #s, several days worth of global carbon emissions could be captured in my lifetime and more later.

I cannot solve GW by myself BUT I am trying to make a difference.

I look for leverage points to move the world, even if only 1 or 2 mm, in the right direction.  Icelandic forests are one, TOD is another and:


Best Hopes,


Still looking for a good invasive tree :-)

Chinaberry trees are pretty obnoxious around here. Not sure how they'd grow in Iceland. Also, the Ailanthus "tree of heaven" is known for its propensity to grow up through cracks in pavement and make rather big trees in an urban environment.

Not only is tree planting or forest conservation a dubious carbon sink some other 'offsets' are dubious as well. For example does windpower actually displace coal fired electricity or just add to it? I'd like to see the coal station dynamited the same time the wind farm goes online. Misguided 'guilt free flying' based on tree planting might actually encourage more people to fly. Carbon offsetting is a multibillion dollar industry that needs a serious rethink.

On the other hand there are plenty of other reasons to save the forests; water catchment, biodiversity, erosion control, aesthetics.

Alan - Given the climate , I believe you and your tree growing club should take a serious look at willows, cottonwood and aspen. These plants liberally self seed and are also host for two types of mycorrhizae and are pioneer species in ecological succession.

I am especially interested in willow propagation and have been collecting strains of scouler willow (Salix scouleriana) from Washington State to Alaska. One strain which I call big scouler is midsized tree than I have found in a number of places on this N/S transect.

Willows, when coppiced are candidates for biomass energy production, as are cottonwood.

Other species which seed in freely and are also pioneers are the alders and birch. There are many species of these and willows to choose from adjacent biomes.

Many of these trees are circumpolar in distribution and I would encourage using genotypes of species that may have occured there in an earlier era.

Willows are easy to grow from seed or cuttings.

Iceland plants a bit over 5 million trees/year; about 17 per capita/year. Quote from:

http://www.heradsskogar.is/Apps/WebObjects/Skogur.woa/1/wa/dp?id=1000172&wosid=zd8rD1OQbTNOJmbBY t25a0

Several exotic species planted in the 1950s and earlier, including Picea abies, P. engelmannii, P. glauca, Pinus cembra, Abies lasiocarpa, Betula pendula and Pseudotsuga menziesii are reasonably well adapted to Icelandic conditions, have good form and will all grow to be much larger than the native birch.

I would add adaptation varies by climatic zone.  Siberian larch is the #1 planting in East & North Iceland but is poorly adapted to South & West Iceland.

I have introduced red maple from Newfoundland, Sugar Pine from San Bernadino and American Chestnut from several northerly locations.  The choice of provance is crucial !

I have also sourced additional Alaskan willow seed from the eastern coast of Kodiak Island (the best provance) when their prior source disappeared.

Alaska has been effectively sampled for seed, but we are looking for more from elsewhere. We have a lead in Nepal but are looking for Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Chinese Mountains, and even Idaho.

My goal is to find more trees that humans like and will be induced to plant more for whatever reason (fall color, wood, edible nuts, nice form, etc.)

Best Hopes,


Your group may already know this but many trees are sensitive to day length. For me growing Alaskan Aspen (and others) in western Washington simply does not work.

There is a rich flora across northern Asia. You may already be familiar with the Russian seed brokers who have a large list.

There are also the shrubs and small trees as Ribes species, Prunus americana, P. virginiana and crabapples.

Great Project

Rich H

Day length sensitivity varies dramatically by species.  Rule of thumb, 10 degrees latitude move north works for most species.

OTOH, bristlecone pine from Arizona & New Mexico will grow where no other tree will in Iceland (more northerly provances of bristlecone pine are less well adapted).

We gathered sugar pine from southerly high altitude (10,000', 3,000 m) provances with limited rainfall as our first best guess for trial.

Selection of provance REALLY improves the chances.

Best Hopes,


TIME Europe Edition

Sunday, Jul. 09, 2006

Weighing a mere 450 kg, the Loremo prototype claims to get 100 km out of a meager 1.5 L of fuel -- about half the amount used by the most efficient cars available today. That, most people would agree, is an idea whose time has come. Experts may quibble over just how much oil is left buried in the earth. But no one disputes that record pump prices, geopolitics and global warming are taking the pleasure out of driving. The future of cars will definitely depend on alternatives to the traditional combustion engine, such as fuel cells that burn hydrogen and emit clean water exhaust.

But until we get there, a variety of transitional technologies will try to squeeze as much efficiency as possible out of traditional engines. All major manufacturers are now rolling out hybrid cars that combine electric or alternative-fuel-burning engines with standard gas and diesel engines. Loremo believes that its models will be the first ultralight cars to go mass transit. "Our goal is to begin mass production of the first 10,000 cars in 2009, and until then we don't see any competition. None of the big manufacturers has plans for this segment," boasts Gerhard Heilmaier, Loremo ceo.


The result is the Loremo LS, a car with a two-cylinder, 20-horsepower, turbo-diesel engine that maxes out at 160 km/h and is expected to cost just €11,000. The sportier version, the Loremo GT, has a three-cylinder engine, gets 100 km to 2.7 L of fuel and can hit speeds of 220 km/h.

There are, however, a few design issues that could give consumers pause. For example, the Loremo has no side doors. Passengers enter the car through the front end, which lifts forward. The driver steps into the front seat and pulls down the hood section, which incorporates the dashboard and steering wheel, to close the car. The car's door locks and windows are manually operated, and a navigational computer does not come as a standard feature. These were stripped out to save weight and cost. "What's wrong with manually opening the window?" asks Heilmaier.

Well, nothing, perhaps. But history suggests that austerity does not always sell. In 1999, German carmaker Volkswagen launched the Lupo 3L TDI in Europe, a no-frills subcompact that got 100 km on 3 L of gas. Volkswagen built 29,500 Lupo 3Ls and then last year yanked the car from the market. "It was too frugal," says Hartmut Hoffmann, a product spokesman for VW. "Customer interest faded."

Other manufacturers have flirted with ultralight models, but few have dared bring them to market. In 1997, Ford announced plans for what it called the P2000, which promised to be 40% lighter than conventional family sedans. And in 2002, Opel, the European subsidiary of General Motors, unveiled the Eco-Speedster, a sleek, low-riding sports car that gets 2.5 L of fuel to 100 km. But none of the manufacturers ever intended to offer their ultralight cars for sale. "The real problem is that consumers are still very wary of these cars," says Garel Rhys, director of the Centre for Automotive Industry Research at Cardiff University Business School in Wales. "People don't buy a car solely for its environmental impact but for a host of other reasons, the way it drives and how it looks."

But with fuel prices at historic highs, all that may be about to change.


"But history suggests that austerity does not always sell...

That is perfect.  We are at peak energy and matter and Sap thinks He still has a choice...

Austerity will be the norm going forward whether or not it "sells."

I think you mean Homo Colossus...

Biofuels Discovery Promises to End Dependence on Natural Gas

Researchers at the University of Minnesota have developed a new, carbon-neutral way to convert vegetable-based fuels to syngas, a breakthrough that could allow producers to power hydrogen fuel cells or create a replacement for America's dwindling supplies of natural gas, all without relying on fossil fuels.

We've all had the experience of watching cooking oil smoke once a pan reaches a certain temperature--and suffered the indignity of having to scrub off the caked-on, carbonized gunk that results. A similar problem plagued researchers trying to convert biofuels: When heated, they clogged the pores of the catalyst used to transform them into syngas, which is a mixture of gases that include hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.

The breakthrough came with the perfection of a technique that heats fuel to a temperature so hot that the smoking reaction is bypassed, said Bradon Dreyer, a chemical engineering and materials science graduate student at the University of Michigan.

Dreyer and his colleagues built a reactor capable of producing hydrogen from soybean oil, biodiesel or sugar water without any of the buildup that would have resulted from a conventional process. To get the reactor warmed up, the researchers ignited a mixture of methane and oxygen in order to bring the catalyst to a searing 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

A finnacial newsletter is telling its clients that Saudi-sized reserves may be found in Utah. Is that totally insane or there is some validity?
Potential Oil Shale = Saudi LSC??

Probably. Numbers are numbers, eh?

Sounds like financial snakeoil. They're probably talking about the kerogenous shale. There's lots of it but it's not easily extracted.
I stole this from another post. I don't subscribe to this newsletter, so don not have full access.

Dear Reader,

In Sevier County, Utah - a 3-hour drive from Salt Lake City - a small group of geologists have made the discovery of a lifetime...

It's the largest onshore oil province discovered in the U.S. since Alaska struck it rich in 1967.

Just how much oil are we talking about in Utah?
"It's enormous - it's a major discovery," says Steve Sonnenberg from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.

"The size of the structures here are massive. They're elephants," says Kimball Hodges, a U.S. oil executive. Recently, the U.S. Department of Energy made this official assessment:

"[This] discovery represents one of the most promising new onshore plays in the United States in recent years... The area has the potential to be a billion barrel province with perhaps another 10 fields to be discovered."

This isn't some hard-to-extract, oil shale field either.This is pure light, sweet crude - the cheapest and easiest-to refine oil in the world.

It's the type of oil that put Texas on the map... and turned hundreds of wildcatters and thousands of American investors into millionaires.

What's incredible is that this oil is so pure and plentiful, that even if oil prices dropped to levels not seen since 1980s prices, you could still turn a tidy profit on this Utah discovery.

Already, a small group of private investors are profiting from the first stake - a 480 acre-chunk of land that holds between 100-200 million barrels of light crude oil.
They're already selling this oil to nearby Salt Lake refineries... and pocketing more than a million dollars a month.

But that's just the beginning...

Drilling is set to begin on another section of this province. Preliminary reports suggest it could be 7-times as large... and could hold 1-3 billion barrels of oil.

The best part is, hardly anyone in the mainstream investment world knows about this discovery yet... except for local Utah papers like The Salt Lake Tribune.

In my 15 years in the field as a geologist, I've never come across a situation so amazing - both from a geological and an investment perspective.

Run away. It's a scam.
It turns up in Google ads on Peak Oil sites all the time, Colorado, Utah. I'm guessing the financial headquarters are in Nigeria.
some dr sundegard is the snake oil salesman  his blog is called daily wealth or some such
If it is so big and vital, how come this good news isnt being trumpeted from all the roof tops in Washington?
there may be significant deposits   nobody has devised a technology for turning these deposits into reserves  and not because of a lack of effort   oil shale having the same energy content as a baked potato might have something to do with it    
There is an ongoing play in the Sevier Overthrust area in central Utah.  The original discovery announcement was made by a company called Wolverine.  The was a recent article in either Oil and Gas Journal or Harts E&P that had them most information that Ive seen published so far.  The last that I had heard there were about 14 producing wells with an approximate production rate of 2k bbls day per well.  This play is tight hole and not a lot of specific information is available.  

The elephant category is probably landmen and promotors using the potential thickness of the zone and extrapolating it over hundreds of square miles.  More than likely successful operators will be drilling into precise 3d seismic targets that are regional fault traps.

I was on a well north of the area last year that was purely speculative.  After about 4 months and $10 million the operator was unsuccessful.  My guess is that they were on the wrong side of the thrust fault and also they had no seismic data, only gravity survey data.

So yes there is some truth there but the extent of the play is still being developed and many questions remain.

Here is the article I was thinking of regarding the Sevier Thrust play:


When heated, they clogged the pores of the catalyst used to transform them into syngas, which is a mixture of gases that include hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.

High temperature POX reactors don't need a catalyst. You just feed the oil while denying it the oxygen required for complete combustion. Of course the operating temperature is much higher; usually around 2500 degrees F.

I am not sure why anyone would want to convert oils to syngas. Much more efficient to convert them to biodiesel.

The Brits certainly like writing reports. But while Blair calls the Stern report "the most important document he has seen since becoming Prime Minister", he then turns to the urgent matter of planning more airport runways.

The writer of the article doesn't grasp his subject either. He lists things that people can do to avert the disaster, like:

4: USE saucepan lids. Water heats quicker with the lid on, using less fuel.

Put a lid on it, good advice.



WORLD leaders have fewer than 10 years to stop a global warming disaster, a shock report will warn this week.

Two billion people will be left without water if the planet heats up by just 3¼C - and millions will face starvation.

The rainforests of the Amazon and the Great Barrier Reef could disappear.

Vast areas will be lost under rising seas as the ice caps melt, while droughts could create new deserts.

The apocalyptic vision is painted in the report from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), a think-tank with close links to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

It outlines an even bleaker picture than economist Sir Nicholas Stern's report on global warming published last Monday.

And it came as thousands of campaigners joined a Stop Climate Chaos rally in London yesterday to demand action to combat global warming.

The IPPR report warns it will need a "Herculean" effort to keep global temperature rises to just 2¼C.

According to the unpublished report obtained by the Sunday Mirror, the IPPR wants an "urgent rethink" of the Government's plans to combat global warming.

The head of the IPPR's climate change team, Simon Retallack, says the world is in a race against the clock to cut emissions of carbon dioxide which add to global warming.

He writes: "We do not have decades in which to bend the global carbon dioxide curve. We have less than 10 years. What we do now at the global level will be of critical importance.

Roel - I can't resist.

2.25 C?!!!!  No unceratinty here then.

At least we still have water to boil!

And some sensitve Brits, like me, might take offence at your implications of down right hypocrisy among our political leaders - how on Earth are we going to achieve economic growth without new runways?  And none of our parties would ever get elected if the Sheeple weren't able to go on holiday in order to test out their mobile phones - and use their ipods on the planes.

On a more serious note, I think it may be too late.  If the arctic ice cap goes, decreased albido will lead to more warming of Arctic Ocean and this may lead to runaway melting of permafrost and so forth.. so hey we may aswell enjoy ourselves while there's is still time.


Lighten up, it could have been more precise, like. 2.2638 C, and it will soon I'm thinking.

In a country where a "most important document of my lifetime" is published twice a week, you have to do something to stand out from the crowd. And that takes creativity.

Which brings me to "no economic growth without new runways". You guys really lost the creative entrepreneurial spirit, haven't you? There were days when it would have been seen as a challenge.

To get to that serious note, I have no doubt it is too late, though what exactly that means is up for debate. Still, so far I like for instance the Onandaga Nation in NY State, who want Onanadaga Lake cleaned up, because their tradition says they have to safeguard the ancestral land for the next 7 generations.

I know, I'm a sentimental fool, and I'm working on it. But the empty language ain't helping. I don't want to have to join that choir.

Roel, on Friday night I learned a 100 year wave went through the North Sea last week - causing some damage and concern - I don't think it made the news.  It was 7 years since the last 100 year wave.

So folks are now wondering how big the 100 year wave might be.

So much good news here today I'm going to ignore it all.

A big question for those interested in research and numbers how much oil has been generated from source rocks in the Middle East, how much has been trapped, how much discovered, how much leaked to surface and how much produced by Man - how much yet to find?

See here:


Call for obscure reading list.

I'm looking for books that peak oil aware people would recommend to other aware people. Not the obvious stuff like 'Beyond Oil' or 'Twilight in the Desert' but books that made an inpression on you, and that you think could benifit others.

My list:

'The Gladiators' by Arthur Koestler. Details the problems concerning creating a new society, and has a very interesting conversation between Cato the Younger and Marcus Crassus.

'Thieves in the Night' by Arthur Koestler. Deals with the problems of living in a Kibbutz. I believe this is releant, as I consider individual survival strategies to be a joke.

'Meditations' by Marcus Aurelius. Bertrand Russell found them contradictory and inconsistent, evidence of a "tired age" where "even real goods lose their savour." Using Marcus as an example of greater Stoic philosophy, he found their ethical philosophy to contain an element of "sour grapes". "We can't be happy, but we can be good; let us therefore pretend that, so long as we are good, it doesn't matter being unhappy.

   Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near" might give pause to Doomers. His thesis, developed fully and carefully, is that exponential advances in computers, nanotechnology, genetics, and understanding the brain will profoundly change everything by 2045, and provide the ability to clean up the GW mess.
It sort of depends what kind of information you are trying to provide; practical, group dynamics, views of the future (both conjecture and fictional) or what.

Being an old fart and being interested in this sort of thing for over 30 years, most of my suggestions are old.

The Encyclopedia of Country Living - Carla Emery
Flight From the City - Ralph Borsodi
Living the Good Life - Helen and Scot Nearing
The Whole Earth Catalog series

Group dynamics:
Getting Back Together - Robert Houriet
Home Comfort: Life on Total Loss Farm - Monteverdi Artists Collective
Cooperative Communities: How to Start Them & Why - Swami Kriyananda

Views of the Future(all fictional):
The Disappearence - Phillip Wiley
Patriots, Surviving the Coming Collapse - James Rawles
Atlas Shrugged - Ayn Rand (can't forget about this old war horse)
Lights Out -  http://www.giltweasel.com/stuff/LightsOut-Current.pdf
Ecotopia - Ernest Callenbach

There are hundereds more but it depends upon the focus.

I've just read

Us and Them: Understanding Your Tribal Mind, by David Berreby


and I think it's a very useful book as we approach more interesting times :)

i just read summary and topic is of great relevance. thanks - ive added it to my wish list, which I had forgotten had Me Write Book: It Bigfoot Memoir

One I would add to the list is Darwinian Happiness: Evolution as a Guide for Living and Understanding Human Behavior

Overshoot by William Catton IMO is most compelling.
I second that motion. Overshoot is quite simply the very best book ever written on the subject, and I have read a lot of books on the subject.

Overshoot was written in 1980 and it is as pertinent as if it were written yesterday.

Also read Energy and Human Evolution by David Price if you have not already read it. It can be read in about ten to twenty minutes but covers the subject from top to bottom. It is by far the best short essay ever written on the subject. This essay was written in 1995, three years before the author's death. Why is it that all the relly good stuff was written some time ago?

Ron Patterson

The Untied States of America: Polarization, Fracturing, and Our Future  
Warning: some may find the format annoying.

Bowling Alone : The Collapse and Revival of American Community
This is perhaps not obscure enough to qualify, since it's been discussed here before.  Definitely worth a look, anyway.

The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference  "Ideas and products and messages and behaviors spread just like viruses do."

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
"Dust clouds boiled up, ten thousand feet or more in the sky, and rolled like moving mountains" in what became known as the Dust Bowl. But the plague was man-made, as Egan shows: the plains weren't suited to farming, and plowing up the grass to plant wheat, along with a confluence of economic disaster--the Depression--and natural disaster--eight years of drought--resulted in an ecological and human catastrophe that Egan details with stunning specificity.

The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World  
"Think of agriculture as something the grasses did to people as a way to conquer the trees."  All kinds of interesting tidbits in this book about man and his relationship to plants.  Why potatoes are an ideal crop for peasants, for example, and why Monsanto really is evil.

The Storm Gourmet: A Guide to Creating Extraordinary Meals Without Electricity
Even if we don't fall off the Olduvai cliff, the book is still useful for hurricanes, blizzards, etc.  

The Vermont Papers

Hartmann, "Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight"

Jensen, "Culture of Denial"

Arendt, "Eichmann in Jerusalem"

Sinclair Lewis, "It Can't Happen Here"

Galbraith, "Economics and the Public Purpose"

Gross, "Friendly Fascism"

Wendell Berry, "Citizenship Papers"

The Anti-Federalist Papers.

Check back when you are done with above for next assignment.

From Cradle to Cradle, remaking the way we make things.  William McDonough

  - He has a number of ways of looking at our systems and our technologies that considers how to make what we make-  both productively and robustly, yet not destructive to the natural world.  Great for when you've heard enough predictions about how it will break apart, and you want to think about rebuilding and refreshing the systems instead.

One example, he helped a carpet company in Germany come out with a 'Green' line of rug products, and the non-toxic components ended up being both cheaper to produce, as well as filtering out the water used to manufacture it, and the factory effluent was cleaner than the supply.

He proposes dividing our waste streams into 'organic compostables', and 'technological compostables', so as not to make a composite product which is unusable and largely inseparable, making both kinds of material inaccessible and thus, truly wasted.

Bob Fiske

Yes, absolutely recommend McDonough's book Cradle to Cradle. We can do industrial society differently, without destroying our habitat.
I second the motion to read "Cradle to Cradle".
Pleiotropik posted this yesterday:

Been reading anonymously for quite a while and have noticed that not enough info on mexican fields is provided so...
Update on mexican crude production and exports for september:

Total production 3,257,579 ; down 114,042 from jan; -3.38%
Total exports 1,678,440 ; down 373,214 from jan; -18.19%
Exports to US 1,329,656 ; down 250,504 from jan; -15.85%

Source www.sener.gob.mx

Commentary: PEMEX has been able to extend a gentle downward slope on the production plateau/decline of its fields and is pumping more light and superlight from the southwest offshore Campeche fields to offset Cantarell's decline that is steepening its curve. Due to a generally good overall economic year for the country, demand for fuels has increased so that exports have been sacrificed at an accelerating pace. The US and Spain have been favored and other clients in Asia have been dropped totally.

Cantarell's decline trend seems solid now and no new development or exploration wells are being drilled in that field as of recent months. % change jan-sept has been 12.17%; a decline of 233,682bd average, going from 1,920,114 to 1,686,432

As I have been relentlessly pointing out, the two biggest super giants, Ghawar and Cantarell, which at least at one time accounted for 10% of world C+C production, are in the same position--the remaining oil is in rapidly thining oil columns between rising water legs and expanding gas caps.  (Pemex said that they were shutting in "only two types of wells" in Cantarell--where the water cut was too high and where the gas production rate was too high, other than that, they had no problems.)

I continue to be puzzled that oil and gas insiders are predicting rising production when all four of the current super giants are almost certainly all crashing or declining.

BTW, I think that Mexico just crossed the 50% of Qt mark on Khebab's HL plot.  So, Mexico is now where the Lower 48, North Sea and the world (C+C) are--producing the second half of the oil.  

KSA is now where the prior swing producer, Texas, started its long decline, and the Saudis have recently announced their most recent "voluntary" cut in production of 380,000 bpd.  

Texas is quite similar in this regard.  To date, we have voluntarily cut our production by 75% since 1972, because we couldn't find buyers for all of our oil, but rest assured that can and will increase our production when circumstances warrant, so please proceed with your purchase of your new SUV to drive to and from your new suburban mortgage.

Has there been a recent update of this list?



Thank godz for you West Texas... and your sarcasm too - it is appreciated.  

And please keep "relentlessly pointing out" the obvious to your fellows who are still in the delusion and praying to the godz of Science and Technology, poliTics and proJecTionz, etc.

It's a shame we already reached peak horse too.  I think westexas would need an overabundant and unsustainable supply of horses to beat to death :P
May I suggest then if you don't like his position that you gather some data, do some analysis and try to refute his point. I would think that a debate on the validity of his stance would be better than more Ad Hominem attacks.  :P

Yet again, the DATA points to the fact that we are clearly not anywhere near the halfway mark, and ergo can not be at peak at present.

I bet you have some money invested in British oil exports for 2007, right? I mean, since the official British projections say that Britain won't be a net importer until 2010, though currently, they are a net importer now.

You need data to support your opinion/position, and the problem is, the current numbers in the real world of real oil is running just a bit different than the projections of what should be.

That is sort of a TOD joke - check out the British numbers posted before beating your own horse.

Of course, maybe Britain is just another exception, like all the others.

Or please, dig up some Mexican numbers to discuss - that 800 ft Cantarell oil column is likely a lot smaller these days, for example - care to guess how much? How about this - less, period.

Oil is not being magically placed in the ground because you believe your set of numbers is more accurate.

Still, we'll see - but hard numbers from places like Alaska, Britain, and Norway are not running the way your argument requires, and as for Saudi Arabia's 'voluntary' cuts - well, strangely, they seem to fall into what HL voodoo would conjure up - less oil, forever and ever.

A timing argument is one thing, but maybe you should really check into Britain - the British have a lot of economic incentive to not spend money importing oil and natural gas - it is just they don't have any choice, if they want to keep living as they do today, since regardless of what things should be, the fact is, the oil and gas just aren't there to sell, and heating and driving need fossil fuels, regardless. (Ever wonder why Blair went along with smash and grab, even though a majority of Britons have been consistently opposed to the Iraq war?)

The British are hitting a wall, and they have every reason to sell as much as the market can bear, while not buying any from other sources at all - but still, crazy as it seems, they keep buying, not selling. (Though for those with truly devious minds, maybe they are husbanding their resources to make a killing later, since after having pumped much of their oil during a low price phase, they learned from experience.)

Maybe you are right - they weren't using the right reserve numbers? Nah, that can't be it - if they were using the right ones, they would still be exporters, not importers, right?

Hmmmm. I too have a horse being beaten to death - peak oil is measured by what comes out of the pipeline, and quite honestly, the pipelines with more oil than expected in them seems quite small, while a number of producers, a large number, have less in their pipelines.

Get used to it - whether the future is now, or in a couple of years, the future is less oil being pumped.

No, I don't have any money down on any oil investments :P And I agree, in the future, we will obviously see less oil being pumped out. The point I am trying to make is WHEN that will occur. Westexas believes that is now. I believe that that is at some point in the next 5-10 years.
Christ...and you two are coming to blows over a measly decade difference.  That has to be in our standard error of..."Holy Crap, we'd better do something"!!!!
Actually, we aren't - the problem remains that anyone thinking about the future can all too easily ignore the present. Like the British projections and the British reality - and the British are actually starting to get worried, since, well, they are Europeans, and they actually remember things like no available fuel, little heat, etc. - it last happened 60 years ago. It isn't theoretical when you or your parents experienced such first hand.
I don't think he was referring to you and me, expat, but rather Hothgor vs westexas :P
Could be - I had wondered myself.
Yes, I was referring to Hothgor vs westexas.
Khebab pointed out two problems with Laherrere's plot.  

The key problem, IMO is the vertical scale, which implies that all of the data fall on the plot, which is simply not the case.  The graph IMO is highly misleading.  Laherrere needs to either show a true vertical scale, or cut of the earlier points and not imply that they fall within the vertical limits.  

When one views Khebab's HL plot of total liquids, which only shows data points that fall within the vertical limits, the "anomaly" is not even apparent.  

In any case, Deffeyes' HL plot of C+C shows that the world, like the Lower 48 and the North Sea, to be on the downslope and the EIA is showing lower C+C production. The accumulating data are only pointing to lower production and lower oil exports.  

Khebab has four HL plots in this article, on the same vertical scale for the following regions  Texas; Lower 48; KSA and the world (total liquids):  http://www.energybulletin.net/16459.html

Note that Texas, the Lower 48 and KSA, which are all now in decline, had small changes in slope right before they peaked.  You will also note that the infamous three point "anomaly" is not even really apparent on Khebab's world plot. The small change in slope seems to be a function of the region maximizing production just before it peaks.  Note that Texas production increased from 2.5 mbpd in 1962 to 3.5 mbpd in 1972, when Texas peaked.  "A bulb burns brightest just before it goes out."

IMO, C+C has peaked.  Total liquids will probably peak this year or next year.

Actually, if one just extrapolated the last three or so points prior to their respective peaks on the Texas, Lower 48 and KSA HL plots, one would get virtually infinite reserves.  We know that is not the case in regard to Texas and the Lower 48, and every few months KSA is announcing a new "voluntary" cut in production.

So, the historical models fit Khebab's and Deffeyes' plots, and world C+C is down as Deffeyes predicted.  

So, take your pick:  The model that has worked, or the one that has not.  

Ahh... now we have a nice little discussion going on. Hothgar, your turn to reply to the above points. :P
Hothgar is a disinformationalist, not a debater.  He might be getting paid or he might be practicing.  There is a lot of work in the field, especially on behalf of the 'vast right wing conspiracy'.  There is also work from people for whom politics is only about getting a snout in the trough.

Given his infantile behaviour, I think he is just practicing.  But then, maybe standards have been lowered, given that so much of the talent is tied up undermining efforts to deal with climate change, smoking, international conflicts...

Give me another few minutes.  I bet I'm going to make even Oil CEO laugh at this 'keepin it real' response :P
I'd really like to suggest, Westexas, in light of your frustration expressed yesterday, that you not try to answer Hothgar when he posts his usual stuff. I observe that you always try to answer doubters, but this person seems to be in a different category.  Not worth your time, IMO.
I agree.

Westexas your patience has been extraordinary. You have calmly and repeatedly addressed Hothgor's points. I am very much impressed.

However I think you are wasting your time. You are a valuable resource here, I don't want to see you burned out on trolls.

Hothgor has made up his mind long before he ever posted on this board. He believes it is his duty to educate us all. Peak oil is a long way off and EVs are going to save us anyway. Any thing else is just "ILL DOOMER" nonsense to him.

No amount of civil discussion is going to change his mind. He has approached everything backwards. He has made up his mind and then gone searching desperately for evidence to support his opinion no matter how tenuous or flimsy it may be. He speaks with the absolute certainty of a fanatic.

Several times myself and others have tried to help Hothgor. To point out the flaws in his approach, to advise him on researching his topics, and the validity of his "proof" to no avail.

He seems to enjoy baiting people. And unfortunately he has taken advantage of Westexas's generous nature, singling him out for some ridiculous attacks and in general wasting his time.

Westexas, you are not going to educate him because he doesn't want to learn. Replying to him just seems to encourage him further.


"it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

Upton Sinclair

See below and you will find out who exactly is disseminating false information in regards to the global HL. Hint: Its not me :P
See above response :)
Westexas,  First, Thanks for writing this stuff.  

I have read here that this is a semi famous site.  Visited by more and more important people and is seen as a "Trend Shaper"  site.

A question to you.

How much money do you think a company like BP or the others spend on advertising?  How much do they spend on pooh poohing Peak Oil?

Next question I will leave to you.

Given a couple million dollars, How many guys to you think they could get just to sit in front of a computer and visit influencial sites and run distraction, confusion and mayhem all day long, ridiculing people etc.

How much research data do you think they would have at their disposal to "Put up graphs"  to show what they want to show?

Visit my post from a couple days ago for the methods and procedures.  One, I believe even commented on a couple of them below my post :-)

Think about it.


Alright westexas,

I had all day at work to think about this little gem of a response and how best to debunk your little rant on this issue once and for all. This took me a couple of hours because I'm not a graph whiz, but this is what I've come up with.

First, I downloaded the Total World Oil Supply for the last couple of years xml file from the EIA at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/t14.xls.

Then, I downloaded the Total World Oil Supply from 1980-2004 xml also from the EIA at http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/tableg2.xls.

Now I will admit that I was unable to find the EXACT figures of cumulative production from the pre-1980 years, but after studying several global charts and a little trial and error, I was able to come up with an approximate number of 560 Gb.

After plotting these figures in an excel chart, I came up with this:

Which approximates with the previous posted graph:

Now the entire crux of your argument is that Laherrere uses a different vertical axis then you do, and this 'distorts' the chart making the anomaly appear to be more important than it actually is. Because you quote the 20% vertical scale as appropriate, I chose to use your own figures to come up with this:

As you can see, the new vertical axis only 'compresses' the figures, actually making them harder to read. After some more tweaking, I included my own 4% axis:

Now at this point, we have 3 different views of the same chart. This shows how much easier and harder it is to view the same information using a different vertical scale. Now for the fun part:

I updated Laherrere's chart to include 2006 at the current posted 8 month average. The above chart is what I came up with. Note that it doesn't exactly match his previous chart. I can offer only 3 solutions for this:

First, he manipulated his own trend line to show the ultimate recovery to be far larger then it actually will. Second, my own figures are not exact enough to accurately produce a trend line in agreement with his own. Third, I included the 2006 figures, helping to paint a more accurate picture over all 'My figure was based on the current 8 month average, perhaps if its higher the trend line would extend'. Personally, I believe the third option is the most likely.

Now I know that you don't like using the 8% vertical axis, so I included the following based on your own 20% axis:

Notice how the ultimate trend line does not change! 'Please use your imagination and fill in the remaining blank part of the line' Finally, I 'zoomed in' to a 4% vertical axis:

Again, the trend line does not change at all! The ultimate recovery amount is approximately 2550 Gb. This is 300 Gb more then Deffeyes states!

But how does 300 Gb affect the peak of production? Its quite simple: 300 Gb / 2 = 150 Gb for the 50% point. 150 Gb / 30 Gb = 5 more years until the peak. Deffeyes stated that the peak was approximately on January of 2006, and these figures push this back to January of 2011, in VERY close agreement with the latest ASPO projection of 2010, and to Cry Wolfs own projection of 2012!

Again, I must also point out that these figures will be modified in the future as a lot of production is scheduled to come online next year and a few giant fields in 2008. How will this confound the issue? Rembrant could probably shed some more light on it. I suspect it will push the ultimate recovery rate out to a maximum of 2750 Gb. That figure will undoubtedly increase as we discovery more oil in the future.

In conclusion:

Your assertion that the vertical sale of a HL significantly changes the outcome is based on bogus knowledge: There is clearly NO DIFFERENCE when using a 20%, 8%, or 4% scale! Furthermore, the lower % vertical axis serves only to allow a viewer to 'drill down' and see fluctuations in the total production clearly. In fact, it actually helps the average viewer see the ultimate recovery figure more accurately using a SMALLER vertical scale.

Westexas, I do not want to hear from you again that my statements in regard to this are not based on actual fact. I have done my homework and debunked your entire argument using your own cherished HL plots. Furthermore, the global average for HL correctly showing production peaks at 50% thus far is mostly correct, as 95% of all fields peak within 48-52% of their ultimate recovery amount 'as per the same HL'. There is no reason whatsoever to suspect that the world production will not follow this trend, as it is simply based on the average of every fields production in its 'region'.

But I guess I'm just a paid troll and disinformation spreader!

Hothgor - well done! I'm planning a post called "A geologists view of Hubbert's Peak" to try and look at some of the assumptions, myths and legends.  My view on peak date is actually based on the work of others, in particular Khebab's loglet work - which still has imperfections, but IMO tried to take into account methodological problems with conventional HL.

I think HL is a very helpful guide, but care needs to be taken to not over-state its predictive powers - especially with non-linear production history.  The UK peaked at 67% of indicated QT - and production is now "crashing".  That partly lies behind my statement saying I think doomers are over-optimistic.  I suspect that World will peak well after 50% of QT (QT is of course wagging up and down right now) but after that production decline may be rapid - actually leading to a period of total chaos.

I also think the effect of higher price on productive capacity / actual production is underestimated by The Doomers.  However, I do recognise that drilling rig and man power availability set constraints on the industry's capacity to exploit the high price environment.


Thank you, Cry Wolf :) I think you may be on to something in regards to the % of QT that world production actually peaks at. The vast majority of oil reserve potential is located in countries that have so far shepard their remaining reserves, increasing the longevity of their fields and increasing the total amount of oil that can economically be extracted. The fact that KSA and others have NOT been producing all out for the past 40 years has thus far been underestimated in PO circles. While I know that from a 1000 year historical view, it would only be a drop in the bucket, its a very important fact to consider from a policy standpoint. I only hope someone is listening and realizes that while we MAY have a slight reprieve in imminent peaking, it will only be all the worse when it does. Action needs to be taken NOW.
see my reply on the Monday thread
For starters, all liquids have little correlation with crude oil, and crude oil is what it is all about.  The peak will be all about crude oil production, not ethanol production, or biodiesel production and not even bottled gas production. And as has been pointed out before, ethanol production counts twice, it counts the oil used to produce ethanol and then it counts the ethanol. That is double counting. And counting the 30% water in Orimulsion, which all liquids does, is cheating. Water is not oil.

The first line is invalid because the sudden decrease in world production was caused by the Iran-Iraqi war and the "Tanker Wars." The Hubbert Linerization is only valid when everyone, or almost everyone, is producing full tilt, like right now.

And there will always be animosities.

Add the 2006 data to this graph and you will get an entirely different result. The 2006 data pulls everything right back in with the second line, the only one that is valid.

Ron Patterson

No. Crude oil is NOT what its all about. Its all about the TOTAL LIQUIDS produced. In some magical world where biofuels are sustainable at 85 million bpd, would you still be saying its all about the crude oil? Of course not. Its all about the total liquids. Period.
In some magical world where biofuels are sustainable at 85 million bpd, would you still be saying its all about the crude oil?

Yes.  At least when it comes to HL.  HL is about geology.  The model applies to oil.  It doesn't apply to ethanol, and it doesn't really make sense to try to apply it to ethanol.

Exactly. If ethanol production were to be entirely sustainable at 85 million bpd, then obviously this would mean that peak oil was less significant than most of us think, but this would not in any way have any impact whatsoever on arguments about the validity of the HL method for determining peak oil.

HL is about oil extraction, not about what you then choose to do with that oil, such as, for example, producing ethanol.

I agree with your main point, that HL and alternatives are two separate issues. However, the interrelation may be a bit more complex.

If ethanol could be produced sustainably at anywhere near 85 mn barrels per day (at a competitive cost), it would reduce the need for oil and slow extraction.

It is wrong to claim that even corn derived ethanol has anywhere one unit of oil for each unit of output. I expect that corn-derived ethanol gets most of its energy input from natural gas (fertilizer and heat) and coal.

Brazilian sugar cane ethanol has an energy balance of somewhere near 8:1 and not all of the 1 is oil.

Likwise if electricity could be used for transport, coal, wind and solar could offset the need for some oil. Or mankind could die off or blow itself up in a nuclear war, then extraction could stop altogether.

HL is a useful model for forecasting a potential scenario, but it is not cast in stone. There is a human element to the whole thing. No one else is extracting oil.

I agree that the relationship between ethanol production and oil production could be more complex.

However, the point is that the HL model is a model for prediction the ultimate amount of oil that there is in the ground which can be extracted. That is all.

If oil is not being extracted close to the maximum possible rate, then the HL model will not provide accurate estimates, so ethanol production could conceivably mean that the HL method will not work accurately, if it reduces demand for oil. However, this does not mean that ethanol production should be included in the graph as this makes no scientific sense whatsoever. Nobody has ever claimed that HL can be used to predict ethanol production. Some people believe, that under certain conditions, it can be used to estimate the total amount of oil available for extraction, and ethanol is not extracted, it is produced from a crop.

Do you or Jack know what total global ethanol production is? I always think of it as 500,000 barrels per day(with Brazil producing half of that). This would then be half of the Global 1,000,000 barrels per day of other liquids (out of the total 85,000,000) - South Africa with 200,000+ barrels using Fisher-Trosch(spell that for me RR).People get all bent out of shape about it, but it's only 1.2% at best.
Here what I have. The figures are for 2005 and are in millions of tons. I think a tom of ethanol is equal to 808 liters, but can't remember where I got that. I think biodiesel is about 1/7th of ethanol on a volume basis. These figures include non-fuel ethanol, which i think is about 1/4 of the total.

US: 13.0
EU: 2.2
Brazil 14
India 1.5
China 3
Other 6.3
World total: 40.0

Source: Renewable Fuels Assoc.

It takes 10 BTUs of fossil fuels to produce 13 BTUs of ethanol.  The best analysis would be to simply ignore ethanol (and reduce Orimulsion #s by 30% for water content).


Again, these figures only apply to corn-based ethanol, not all ethanol. They are accurate for dicussing the current US energy supply, but should be used cautiously outside of that context.

Until recently Brazil was the largest global producer of ethanol and the ration there appears to be closer to 10:1.

I agree, my oversight.  Although 8:1 to 6:1 appears to be the best estimates for the best run Brazilian ethanol sources.


Do you have links for the 8:1 to 6:1 calculations? The first round of studies that I have seen (and linked to frequently) cite 8.5-10:1. However, these are not peer reviewed and may not have the rigor of the corn ethanol studies. If yours are better documented, I would like to see them. Thanks.
It simply does not matter what the ERoEI is of ethanol. The Hubbert Linerization cannot apply to agricultural products. It would not work on soybeans, pork bellies, corn or corn based products. Likewise it would not work with sugar cane based products.

After all, we are talking about how long before we must switch to something other than oil, if that is possible. Therefore mixing that something else in with what you are trying to count, is just a confusion factor.

Peak oil is peak oil, it is not peak corn or peak sugar cane or peak palm oil.

Ron Patterson

While I agree with you, the bickering over this little point is ridiculous.

It seems patently obvious that if one is discussing the timing of peak oil, then ethanol (electricity, coal, etc.) have no bearing and must be excluded. It is crucial that we measure resource decline using a single consistent measure, which seem to be crude + condensate.

If we are discussing how mankind will cope with declining energy resources, it is equally crucial that we look at all energy resources available to mankind. In this regard, the availability of resources with EROEI in the range of 6-10:1 is a valid and important issue.

I think there is room on TOD for both of these important discussions. In fact, if we were to stop quibbling about this seemingly straight-forward issue, we would have even more room!

it's about crude, bud.  
As I posted on the thread below those figures I find a tad odd. They are of course comparisons between particular months, and production figures do bounce around a bit on a month by month basis. Th EIA AVERAGE figures for 2005 as against 2006 (Jan-Aug) suggest Mexican production is down by 30,000 barrels a month (ie barely changed).
Yet Cantarell seems to be tumbling down (and I have no reason to doubt the figures provided, they have been backed up elsewhere) - so in the space of a few months the Mexicans were able to almost seamlessly cover a decline of several hundred thousand barrels of oil from their main field by pushing up production from other fields?
One has to ask why werent they pushing output from those fields a year ago (adding significantly to their total production) when they could have got $60plus a barrel.
OK so I know you can make the arguement that perhaps they were holding some oil back (treating their reservoirs with care etc) but somehow Pemex with the way its run as an auxillary bank by the ever demanding Mexican bank doesnt seem to be that sort of organization.......

I suppose the proof of the pudding will come in the next 12 months - they cant compensate for Cantarell's spectacular decline forever..can they?

Hurricances reduced Mexican production last year, by probably about 3-400,000 bpd in July. This year there has been no disruption of production due to hurricanes. Had last year's production not been disrupted, it would probably have been about 75,000 bpd higher during the first 9 months than it was this year. So while that is not a huge fall, it is still significant.

Also, in yesterday's Drumbeat, pleiotropik has given more detail about one of the smaller fields which have partly compensated for Cantarell's decline.

OK thats sounds reasonable, hadn't factored that in, thanks.

Soooooo......those effects will have now pretty much dropped out of the numbers, so we may see a steadily increasing total production decline from Mexico as the Cantarell situation worsens? It will be interesting to see where they stand this time next year.

The offical PEMEX report states that Cantarell production is being mostly offset so far this year by increased production from KMZ fields.  KMZ produces very heavy oil.  It is collected and mixed/refined with some higher grades to make it marketable for export.

Also minimal (but not zero) hurricane interference this year helped.

October 23, 2006

Even, it confirmed that Mexico will fit its level of production to the loss in 2007, in spite of the new discoveries. It explained that the decrement of Cantarell is of the order of 200 thousand barrels; there are important increases in deposits like Ku-Maloob-Zaap and of several others, so that the decrement of the production for 2006 will be of 60, that is to say, instead of 3 million 300 thousand barrels will be of 3 million 230 thousands or 240 thousand barrels per day, it honored the civil employee. We hoped, added, that this level stays above in 2007 with a slight increase but by of 3 million 300 thousand barrels.

IMO, what you are seeing in Mexico is classic tug of war between declining older larger fields and newer, smaller fields at the 50% mark.

The key point is that Mexico, like KSA, is hugely exposed to the decline from its largest field, since it represents such a huge percentage of total production.

One point:  Mexico might be fudging the production numbers somewhat.  Note the very large decline in exports.

Also minimal (but not zero) hurricane interference this year helped.

Did I miss one? I was under the impression that not a single hurricane entered the Gulf of Mexico this year. And I live right on the Gulf.

Which one did I miss.

Ron Patterson

They evacuated some rigs when Ernesto was projected to pass through the Gulf.  It changed course and passed over Florida instead.
the masking of Cantarell's decline came form the development of three fields:

Ku; Zaap; Maloob.

They were identified in 1999 and development drilling began in 2003. They are projected to reach peak in two years with a combined 450,000bd All the info and historical series are at.

México Still has potential 500,000bd in the onshore Chicontepec area but development has been slow due to complexity of strata and a high proportion of low porosity sands. the south part of the field is sweet and light. Done right perhaps 200,000bd at peak.

Due to constitutional constraints and overall social climate, development will go slower than normal (which is perfectly fine with me, if anybody is asking... Mexicanos will get a better deal for their drilling in just 3 years).

   Exxon's behavior perplexes me. Do they believe what they say about Peak Oil and Global Warming?  Do their geologists agree with management?
Exxon's behavior perplexes me.

I have described it as the "Iron Triangle."  I think that I defined it in my "Mainstream Media" article on the Energy Bulletin.  Go to the search function and search authors under Jeffrey Brown.

When I debated ExxonMobil and Michael Lynch regarding Peak Oil, I couldn't even get the ExxonMobil guy (when we talked before the program) to admit that Cantarell is declining.  "Hear no evil; See no evil; Speak no evil."

With regard to Exxon scientists are saying, take a look at this guy's on-line presentation:

Green, Arthur R., chief geoscientist for ExxonMobil Exploration Company (retired),
Global Energy - The Next Decade and Beyond - 2004-05 AAPG Distinguished Lecture HTML pdf (18MB) - Search and Discovery on-line journal

He spoke for an hour and while answering questions, which he did for another hour and a half, indicated that he had approval from the then Exxon chairman (who he was on first name basis with) for his access to internal Exxon documents and for his message. He had huge charts that covered entire walls showing where the conditions for oil and gas had likely occured around the world, where these prospects had been investigated thoroughly, how they had investigated off-shore methyl hydrates but concluded they weren't feasible and so on. I remember him saying that in his professional opinion only the South China Sea remained to be investigated.

I walked into that presentation thinking that there may be something to peak oil but expecting to hear the industry line and walked out thinking that the problem is real and close. If I recall correctly, he said that we need the equivalent of a Manhattan Project, involving a full partnership of government, industry and academia, to solve our looming energy crisis and that only something of that scale and intensity would do it.

From Oil producers learning to face up to the challenges of decline...

Some still think the future is bright, at least for natural gas.

[Patrick Heren, the chairman of data company Heren Energy]...estimates that by 2012, the UK will have access to about twice as much gas as it will actually need and the trend will be for gas prices to fall. "Most of the time UK prices will balance out around continental prices. It should be a good time to be in the UK Continental Shelf, especially if you are an independent. However, there is a question over the commitment of the major [energy companies] to what they see as a clapped-out province."
The problem isn't geology, it's not enough investment. Lower taxes, and all will be well!
Chris Vernon has an interesting post over on TOD UK. An excerpt:

For August the UK net imports after subtracting exports were a total of 1.682 million tonnes of oil, NGL, process oils and petroleum products. This comes out as approximately 0.42 million barrels/day.

The Government's Energy Review of July 2006 suggested the UK would not be a net importer until 2010.

The UK has swung from being a significant exporter to importing 420,000 bpd.

The overall North Sea, after peaking at 50% of Qt (C+C) is precisely following the predicted downward (HL plot) trend. The overall North Sea is probably about 70% depleted.  

Ladies and gentlemen:  

As they say this is not "rocket science."  It doesn't matter whether we are drilling in Texas, overall US, Russia, the North Sea or the Middle East.  We find the big fields first, and with sufficient production history the HL method gives us a pretty damn good estimate of the area under the curve on a production rate versus time chart, i.e., Qt, or URR.  

Absent unusual circumstances, accidents (like Piper Alpha), political problems and swing producers like Texas and KSA, regions tend to peak at around the 50% of Qt mark.  Regions that peak later than 50% tend to have sharper decline rates, e.g., Texas and especially the UK.

When the big fields start downhill in the vicinity of 50% of Qt, historically no amount of drilling has been able to reverse the decline.  

Furthermore, as I have repeatedly predicted, and as recent events are bearing out, we are going to see a shaper fall in net oil exports than in overall production.

The EIA in this summer's International Energy Outlook 2006 agrees, and sees few problems with natural gas till 2030. Both consumption and production can safely double in the next 23 years, and it's probably to infinity and beyond from there. They don't mention lower taxes, but something tells me they'd find it a good idea.

Roel - I'm about t go to bed and sign off for a week to do some work, but my take on what you said earlier is that we should only be posting serious stuff here.

''A question of commitment''. Maybe the G and G teams have got it all wrong. Maybe they should let politicos and economists and data gurus decide where to drill. They could use a wall map and some darts, or , like monkeys, they could throw their own shit at the map.

After all, the G and G types only focussed on that narrow bit in the middle called the Viking Graben :-)

An interesting turnaround:

Because of the heated ethanol market, corn prices have risen some 50-60% over the last two years. That's huge for the farmers. Furthermore, to prevent farmers from changing fields over to corn, prices on almost all other farm products, such as soybeans or sorghum, have also been bid up. All of this prosperity rests on the booming ethanol industry, which in turn rests on high oil prices.

Historically, because their use of heavy equipment and need to drive long distances, rural voters and farmers have been the most opposed to gas taxes.

Yet now that high gasoline prices have led to unprecedented prosperity, perhaps we could see a full turnaround. We could see the rural lobby switch gears, advocating, not condemning, new gas taxes when the price of oil falls again.

At least in my state, where rural voters have kept gas taxes off the agenda for decades, even spearheaded a constitutional amendment to make their passage difficult, this could be huge.

The Myth of Energy Insecurity: Increasing oil imports do not pose a threat to long-term U.S. national security.

Philip E. Auerswald, Director for Center for Science and Technology Policy, School of Public Policy, George Mason University.

The current national debate on energy policy is held together by the proposition that increasing reliance on foreign oil is a national security threat that requires urgent action. . . The reality is that increasing oil imports do not pose a threat to long-term U.S. security. The intense concern with oil imports reflects a view of markets that has been rendered obsolete by globalization. Surging prices are driven not by malevolent forces but by largely positive developments in the world economy.  

Consensus on the security threat rests on the dubious proposition that oil price changes have serious impacts on the overall economy and aggregate welfare.  

Oil price increases have the power to succeed where policy and rhetoric have failed, creating powerful incentives for overdue investments that have the long-term potential to increase the productive efficiency of firms, lower costs for consumers, and limit the adverse impacts of global climate change.  

Issues in Science and Technology, Summer 2006

Other papers under "Energy Conundrums"

Nuclear Waste and the Distant Future

Power Play: A More Reliable U.S. Electric System

Natural Gas: The Next Energy Crisis?

Kuwait is claiming to increase oil production
by 200,000 bopd by 2009 and from Burgan of all
places! http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:reuters.com:20061105:MTFH38307_2 006-11-05_11-45-58_L05931368&type=comktNews&rpc=44
They are letting the IOCs in, after years of resistance.  It's not a popular move, so they must be expecting a significant payoff.
Or it's damage control, as in:

They have figured out that they have a lot less oil left than they thought, as predicted, and what's left is a lot harder to get at, so they will need all the tech assistance they can get. Women and children first!

Hello TODers,

From the [CIA https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2024.html] on the makeup of the Mexico military:
18 years of age for compulsory military service, conscript service obligation - 12 months; 16 years of age with consent for voluntary enlistment (2004)

Further analysis by a US Colonel:

"Time Bomb on the U.S. Border:  
Mexican Military Unable to Counter Insurgency"
by Colonel Rex Applegate

(Author of a number of standard texts on military and security topics,
Col. Rex Applegate lived in Mexico for 15 years, representing
U.S. military and police equipment companies.)

Mexico is about three times the size of Texas.  The terrain varies
from coastal lowlands to central high plateaus.  Two-thirds is
mountainous, with jungles in the south and deserts in the north.
There is a 2,000 mile border with the United States and a 750-mile
frontier with Guatemala. The current Mexican military cannot expect
to always maintain peace in a nation of this size and topography.

There are 146,000 miles of roads (45% paved), 16,000 miles of
railroads, approximately 100 airfields with scheduled flights, 5,000
miles of oil pipelines and more than 13,000 kilometers of gas lines.
The potential for sabotage and disruption are enormous, including
Mexico City's vulnerable water and power supply.

    Indian populations in Yucatan, Tabasco, Chiapas, Oaxaca, Guerrero,
and Veracruz have historically harbored violent potential.  Mexico's
crucial petro- leum and petrochemical operations are mostly in
Veracruz and Tabasco.  Any insurgency threatening Veracruz and Tabasco
creates serious priority problems, given the army's limited resources
and immediate reserves.

In a civil war, military control of Mexico City would be paramount
and the principal responsibility of the army. It would not be able to
protect the seat of government and infrastructure, control the local
population and concurrently conduct major operations elsewhere, as the
same time.
A country- wide civil war would probably force garrisons
in the 35 other zones to protect major urban and industrial centers in
the areas of responsibility, leaving the rest of the country to
dissident forces.

    Mexico's current armed forces cannot adequately handle the
magnitude of the problems they face. [...]

Young kids will find it difficult to shoot their friends.  My guess is the quantity of rich mexican kids in the military is almost non-existent.  Civil war or revolution is much more difficult than invading another country, but once it spirals into being, it is much more difficult to resolve.

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az  Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

Hello TODers,

If all Hell breaks loose in Mexico: I expect the Mexican Topdogs to eventually hire Blackwater Security and other mercenary outfits to be their Praetorian Guard.  This will work until Blackwater realizes that there is much more money to be made with much less risk by taking over the Mexican FF infrastructure.

Time will tell if Exxon, BP, Big Banking, and other corps will have sufficient cash on hand to Seal the Deal, but I would expect this to be an easy way to re-privatize PEMEX while giving the impression that actual American troops have not invaded Mexico.  The actual US troops will be posted along the Border as visual proof.

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az  Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

Blackwater is just a very heavily marketted example - there are numerous other comparable firms.  Really, the private security industry isn't anywhere near up to the task of taking over Mexico - they're currently about halfway between a bodyguard agency and a First-World special forces.  At their best, they might shift the balance of a minor African war, but they don't have the staying power, the numbers, the funding, the heavy armaments to fight off any major nation's regular military or special forces.
Plus they are mercenaries, bullies and assholes.  It does NOT pay to die for your employer.

I DESPISE their deployment in New Orleans !!

The Americans despised the Hessian mercenaries far more than the British redcoats.  And today the United States of America deploys mercenaries to "surpress" it's own civilian population.


I don't know...  the US military is basically being marketted as a moneymaking venture - free college, steady salary, free room + board for 4 years, great lifelong benefits, and even a signing bonus!  I'm not saying that's why a majority of soldiers enlist, but for a significant portion, it's about self-improvement, not a responsibility to protect their fellow man.

I have a problem with the entire military-industrial complex  at this point - killing people should not be institutionalized as a for-profit venture on such a mass scale.  A mercenary isn't necessarily any worse morally than someone working at a munitions factory.  Just another element in the rise of modern fascism - the collision of corporatism and militarism.

at the same time the same group of people would also tear down any social programs to prevent the vast majority from going other routes to 'improve' themselves.
Hello Squalish,

Thxs for responding.  May I suggest you read more about American interference into Latin Affairs?  We have a long history of using small forces and covert actions to disrupt political change to the desired US direction.  

Consider if SuperNafta is the desired goal along with the Hirsch update of fifteen detritovore states.  The streamlining of petrol flows to the minimum supportable infrastructure spiderweb is the overall design goal.  The remaining areas will be driven to a mostly biosolar lifestyle.  Thus it is not unreasonable for corporate US to be glad that a revolution maybe getting started inside Mexico.  A collapse of the Mexican status quo maybe the just the ticket for them to buy Pemex for pennies on the dollar, or take it by outright mercenary force from the Mexicans themselves.  

Recall, how after the Russian economy collapsed: that international oligarchs through Korodovsky and others, nearly took over the Russian FF's infrastructure until Putin put an end to that process.  The Russian military was always of sufficient strength that any covert military action could not be applied.  I conjecture that this may not be the same dynamic operating in Mexico [not that I am in favor of any of this happening, I think a voluntary Mexican Powerdown is the better overall choice].

With appropriate funding, private security firms could ramp up their capabilities very fast.  The people in their employ are very experienced, battle-tested, battle-proven warriors comprised of formers SEALS, Green Berets, Army Rangers, Delta Force, etc.  Not 16-18 year old Mex kids with very little knowledge and training, and no real military experience.

In the meantime, I am not enough informed on Mexican-US geopolitics to know if any covert action on the US part would be to strengthen the Mex Right to help crush leftist dissent OR vice versa.  If civil war and/or revolution is the overall goal, then maybe covert action is occurring on BOTH sides to help drive Mexico to maximum polarization and conflict.  The less energy Mexico burns, the more US exports we receive.  

Just the threat of US interference in Mexican affairs maybe enough to swing the Mexican elites to maximize their profits now by going for re-privatization of Pemex [at the expense of the poor Mexicans], versus us instigating a full Mexican upheaval.  Economic hitmen, ala John Perkins, maybe working to bring this scenario to fruition now [I have no proof of this however, just speculation].

The Mexican oilfields are offshore, or onshore along a narrow geography of the GoM coastline.  Controlling this small slice of land, and the offshore component with maritime forces can be easily done, thus allowing 90% of Mexico to be ignored.  Sealing the Border can be easily achieved with US forces acting in concert with Minutemen.  Full biometric identification can then allow millions of Mexicans to come across the Border to work across America, but I expect enhanced financial tracking to preclude them from sending remittances back home to their families.

The nearly two million barrels/day of US imports could quickly jump up to the entire output of the Mexican oilfields of about 4 million bbl/day with infrastructure enhancements and further efficiency improvements.

Rest assured that geo-strategic planners in the Pentagon and CIA are monitoring events in Mexico.  The hypothetical loss of Mexican FF imports would immediately be a top priority National Security Issue.  The loss of 10% of our fuel supply would immediately cause petrol prices to skyrocket: this alone might make every redneck pickup owner with a full gun rack to decide to invade Mexico on their own.  Driving to Veracruz is possible as compared to driving to Baghdad or Kirkuk.

Bob Shaw in Phx,Az  Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?

On invading México. It would be a cakewalk.

Could be acomplished perhaps in three days. no military resistance would be shown in my humble opinion. What happens afterward...

  1. With perhaps 30 million mexicanos living in the US?
  2. 40 million living in rural areas of southern Mx near to those strategic resources.
  3. With a net import of grains equalled only by Japan?

If invading Iraq seemed nutty, invading México would become a suicide pact. (and no, i will not elaborate on the kind of scenarios i envision, i'm not into war porn).
Spreading effects of the housing slump


The North County Times. "A slowing North County housing market could be more than Shelly Trisler can handle. The recent drop in North County housing sales and new housing construction has cost her $850,000 in residential flooring business since January, a 35 percent decline in sales compared to the same period last year."

 "`We haven't seen it this bad in 10 years,' she said. `This business is for sale. Shelly is done.'"

 "Other, similar business have been hurt financially as customers chose less expensive products to meet their home improvement needs.

`Everybody is feeling it,' said Cees Molenaar, executive vice president for the California Professional Association of Specialty Contractors' San Diego chapter."

 "An Encinitas home decorations store owner, who didn't want to be named, said store traffic has dropped from about 500 people per day three years ago to 10 today. `People are scaling down,' the owner said. `We aren't the first thing on their list.'"

A breakthrough in hydrogen Proton Exchange Membrane fuel cell costs may have just been made, with a cheap means of organizing platinum catalysts into high-surface-area nanostructures.
General Question to the Group:

Has the "Saddam will be Hanged" been effectively pasted onto the front page of every MSM and will it stay there until after Tuesday.  If so, BushCo has successfully sweeped all the little annoying stories that were hurting Republicans last week under the rug and spotlight.  Rove has masterminded another "Diversion" that could hide many things.  

Remember to use paper when you vote or at least take a picture of the damn screen. Hey...that's not a bad idea. I wonder if that's legal?

Case in point...the story about the military newspapers coming out against Rumsfeld has now magically evaporated.
i voted with a mail in ballot.. bet it will be lost in the mail.
I'd love to think all of this bad news for the GOP this election cycle would matter.  I know there are a few conservatives that have jumped ship ("Bush has lost his mind."  Sullivan and Hitchens eviscerate Bush), but I don't know there are enough swing voters who follow news closely enough for this to make a difference, especially in the midwest where I'm from.  I thought the military papers saying Rumsfeld should quit was impressive news.  I wouldn't hold my breath that it makes much difference though.  The reason?  I travelled home to eat sunday dinner with the family and told them this story.  My sister's response was "who is Rumsfeld"!!!!!  Her husband, a republican, didn't even look up from the paper he was reading.  He heard me, but there is basically nothing that would ever change his mind about voting republican (probably didn't help the story was delivered by this particular messenger).  And, of course, he doesn't follow world news anyway.  You have to be remotely inquisitive and open minded for any of these stories to matter.
Only idiots would care about Saddam's fate in regard to their votes.
  Welcome to the world of the average voter in this country. Remember, two years after we landed on the moon 40% of the American public believed it was done in a movie studio. Have you never seen the Leno or Hannity man on the street gigs. The average young voter is lucky to know their own name.
Sadly, you are correct.  CNN had a story the other day about how the average American cannot name their senators and representative...but they can name all the winners of American Idol.
I see that CNN has dropped it as their headline story this morning...Kudos for not being manipulated by the Rove machinery.  

THE FRONT PAGE NEWS this morning are the elections tomorrow.  Since when has a midterm election taken on the fervor of a presidential election? It, and the issues associated with it, should be on everyone's mind going into the voting booth.