Could Control Over Oil Reserves Be Critical To American Civilization As We Know It?
- 10
- Add a Comment
- No Related Post
As most of you know, I am not a Bush fan but after watching a documentary on the current state of oil one is made to wonder if an apocalypse is on the horizon. What will happen to Americans if our oil supplies are suddenly withdrawn? Following is a summary of the opinions of widely respected geologists, physicists, bankers, and investors from around the world who are absolutely terrified by a phenomenon known as global “peak oil.”
First off, according to Dr. Colin Campbell, one must realize that oil will not just run out but will become increasingly scarce and expensive as demand increases and availability decreases. Today, with China entering the race of industrialized nations, the need for greater supplies of available crude oil has increased dramatically and despite the fact that the same amount of oil is being produced, this increasing demand has escalated the cost of gasoline and home fuels.
It is this worldwide demand for oil that will result in a resource war as oil-dependent economies begin to crumble. Today we are at Peak Oil, also called “Hubbert’s Peak,” named for Shell geologist Dr. Marion King Hubbert who, in 1956, accurately predicted that global oil production would peak in 1995, which it would have, had the politically created oil shocks of the 1970s not delayed the peak for about 10-15 years. So what does this mean to the average American consumer? It basically means that in the year 2030, if oil production remains consistent there will be twice as many people dependent on it thus cutting what is available to us in half. This is going to result in prices skyrocketing which in turn will result in oil-dependent economies crumbling as it becomes too expensive to deliver necessary goods to market or for businesses to operate.
Other than government and business how will this affect the average consumer? According to geologist Dale Allen Pfeiffer, in his article Eating Fossil Fuels, it takes ten calories of fossil fuel to produce every one calorie of food eaten in the US. In other words, getting food to market would be so expensive that there would be massive food shortages. This cost is based on the cost of pesticides that are made from ammonia, which is made from natural gas, which will peak approximately ten years after oil peaks. It also includes the needed farming implements, like tractors that are constructed and powered by oil. Then you need refrigeration, which is constructed in oil-powered plants and refrigerated trucks that also require oil to deliver the food supplies.
Norman Church wrote in The Wilderness about how quickly our food stores can be depleted by recalling the summer of 2000 when protestors blockaded UK oil refineries and fuel distribution depots causing food and industry leaders to warn that their stores would be out of food within days.
Frighteningly, however, not just transportation and agriculture are entirely dependent on abundant, cheap oil but modern medicine, water distribution, and national defense are each entirely powered by oil and petroleum derived chemicals.
So what about alternative energy systems like solar panels and wind turbines? Can’t we just change to these simple alternatives? It is not that easy as even these alternative devices are manufactured using petroleum and petroleum derived resources.
According to Richard J. Barnet, author of The Lean Years: Politics of Scarcity, all electrical devices make use of silver, copper, and/or platinum. He then goes on to state that it takes the equivalent of 17.8 barrels of oil to produce a ton of copper and the energy cost of aluminum is twenty times higher. Even nuclear energy, which many American’s shy away from requires uranium, which is also discovered, extracted, and transported using oil-powered machinery.
Many may come back with questions about supplementing oil with ethanol or other oil alternatives but sadly these alternatives are actually derivatives of oil and without an abundant and reliable supply of oil, it is impossible to make the alternatives.
Basically, what all this means is that in an oil-based economy such as ours one doesn’t have to deplete its entire oil reserve before the shortfall between demand and supply will shatter our economy. Those who are used to the good life will find themselves using their fun money to survive and those who are already struggling may be forced into poverty and find it impossible to survive at all.
So, maybe the Bush Administration is a little more far-sighted than many of us wish to believe and his desire to have some control over what oil exists may save our necks in the future. If that is the case then his excuse for invading Iraq, while deceptive, was to prevent a major war while ensuring that Americans could continue to live at least for the short-term, in a manner similar to the one they already have.
[tags]oil shortages, Iraq war, Iraqi oil, Food shortages, oil-based economies, oil, natural gas, shortages, oil dependency, oil-based economies, Dale Pfieffer, Eating Fossil Fuels, Richard J. Barnet, The Lean Years, nuclear energy, ethanol, solar panels[/tags]

10 Comments
marc klink
June 18th, 2007
at 7:34am
Sounds a little bit like the end times, doesn’t it? Although I don’t think it is that near, it does seem like a precursor.
With apologies to his family, and his advisors, I really don’t think George Bush is that intelligent, or even thoughtful.
One thing I have believed, and lived, was that population was in need of control, worldwide, since I was about ten. I read a book [imagine that, today] called The Population Bomb. It was pretty scary. What was scarier was the fact that even before the days of the internet, it used facts easily checked to make the talking points. Toward that, I had 2 children, and no more. I don’t feel bad about it at all.
This is also one of the problems I have with the Mormon candidate in the next election. Mormons do everything they can to have as many children as they possibly can to have as many children as they can. Not only is this bad for the population as a whole, it is bad in the smaller context, as how much quality time can a mother and father spend, one-on-one, with each child in families with 10 or more children. [I have a lot of personal experience with these situations]
The only thing I must credit Mr Bush for is to publicly mouth the word HYDROGEN. Our economy and our lives can be turned around if an efficient way of extracing and gethering this useful substance can be found. Once the word was uttered, it became a topic of conversation, and work already begun decades before came into the light.
marc klink
June 18th, 2007
at 7:36am
oops. should be extracTing
reflections
June 18th, 2007
at 12:52pm
Hi Marc
I agree that overpopulation is a problem and will be interested to see what you have to say about the next article I am posting on Tancredo. Have a wonderful evening. Jackie
TechnoJabber
June 18th, 2007
at 6:26pm
I’m not a US citizen so I reserve my opinion of the current US president. However, your statement that “his desire to have some control over what oil exists may save our necks in the future” is extremely naïve. Admittedly you do acknowledge that control of oil reserves is a short-term fix but the point you have completely missed is that the US and other energy-hungry countries of the world may well spend the next few decades killing each other over the easily obtainable black goo left in the ground.
It is up to us to put pressure on all our governments to do the right thing and invest money on developing alternatives rather than waging war just so the current standard of living can be maintained at bargain basement prices.
reflections
June 19th, 2007
at 4:05am
Dear Technojabber
I agree wholeheartedly that our countries to need to seek alternative sources of energy but I as a private citizen have no power to make that happen. If I did I would work on creating refineries to produce steam run automobiles similar to the old fashioned boats and trains. I know that there must be engineers out there with other alternatives but we don’t hear about them.
In the United States it is hard to make a difference unless you belong to certain families and/or have a lot of money or important people behind you. Basically it comes down to the fact that many of us don’t support a lot of is done or not done but we are not politically connected so it makes little impact.
If you have suggestions as to alternative energy sources I hope you are able to get your country to follow through on them.
Have a good day. Jackie
Bluestocking
June 19th, 2007
at 4:54am
Peak Oil is nothing new — I’ve been reading about this for at least the past two years — and considering that one of the primary figures in the Peak Oil movement (Matthew Simmonds, a longtime investment banker in the energy industry) was reputedly part of Cheney’s energy task force, it’s a little hard to believe that the Bush administration is unaware of the situation. But perhaps instead of accepting the Bush administration propaganda that the War In Iraq Is Critical To Our Way Of Life (and perhaps not for the purported reasons), perhaps it would be worth asking why the Bush administration has not done more to encourage conservation? Or the development of alternative and sustainable fuel resources? Or why they’re not suggesting ways in which the American people might begin adapting our mode of living so that the impact of Peak Oil if and when it does hit is much less severe? The unfortunate fact is that the American people have become accustomed to a style of living which our great-grandparents and even our grandparents would hardly have dreamed of when they were young and which the majority of people around the world would still consider unbelievable luxury — but we also waste energy (and other things, such as food and fresh water) a great deal, and the unfortunate fact is that many Americans have become so accustomed to this that they practically consider it an entitlement or even a necessity of existence. The unfortunate truth is that many Americans have their heads in the sand and will probably only give up some of their wasteful ways if and when it becomes a decision between comfort and survival.
John Gossop
June 19th, 2007
at 6:17am
The timing of Peak Oil is very important because oil and gas have temporarily raised the carrying capacity of the earth, allowing us to support a population several times what would be possible if oil and gas supplies were severely reduced due to Peak Oil, Mid East war or whatever.
The trouble is that food production faces many other problems such as climate change, land loss,water shortages,competition for land from biofuels and falling wild fish stocks. These are all discussed at http://www.peakfood.co.uk
reflections
June 19th, 2007
at 3:13pm
Dear Bluestocking
If you have read other of my writings you know that I am definitely not a Bush fan. I agree that there is much that the Administration could have done in the last seven years to protect the nation. I also think that they have done a lot to put the nation at risk by it warmongering stance but I do try to pose every side of issues in an attempt to be fair minded.
I wish there were some people out there who could propse alternative energy sources as well as easy to follow conservation ideas for those of us who do care about the overall dangers of the American life style. I know that for one I have no problem with turning off the tap while brushing my teeth, doing dishes by hand, and turning off lights when they aren’t needed.
Have a wonderful evening. Jackie
reflections
June 19th, 2007
at 3:18pm
Dear John
I spent my young years on a farm and I do know the difficulties faced by farmers and feel that they are the most important producers in our society. It is too bad that they have to compete against giant corporations for their very survival. I hope that there will come a time when the American populace will stop being so greedy, give up their V-8 motors, and realize that they aren’t the only ones that need to survive on this planet.
Peak oil is perhaps an awakening especially for the younger generation who would be most affected. It may perhaps also be something that would alert the powers that be that even their life styles will be affected if they don’t adopt some much needed conservation measures.
Have a good night. Jackie
control oil and you control nations control food and you control the people
June 1st, 2008
at 12:51am
[...] food shortages, oil-based … Admittedly you do acknowledge that control of oil reserves is a …http://www.lockergnome.com/reflections/2007/06/18/could-bush%E2%80%99s-intent-to-control-iraqi-oil-r…US to Get Control of 10 Billion Per Year UN Oil-for-Food Program by …US to Get control of 10 [...]