[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

I think it's pretty clear the US will just keep on trucking until they phyically can't do it any more, which might not be that long.

[Trab]

Our leaders have publicly stated that "The American way of life is non-negotiable." Asking a consumer-driven economy to reduce their consumption is more or less asking Wall Street to cut its own throat, and I doubt that would happen without it being forced by outside circumstances.

Sounds like Q4 2005 should start the US (and the world) on the process of reducing demand whether they like it or not. This whole process right now is more and more about brinksmanship, I think.

[SD_Scott]

I've thought for some time that this issue will be a major sticking point for the US. It's a totally valid criticism.

[MD]

What if the US is not given a choice? Once the world buys into PO, could it possibly become the one rallying point that could bring the entire world into consensus against the US?

I can hear the chant "6% for 6%, no more glut, 6% for 6%, no more glut".

It is the 6%-25% glaring statistic that could possibly unify the world into defiantly telling the US "no more", once the trusth of depletion is evident to all.

What could the US possibly do in reponse? Load tankers at gunpoint? My fear is that the US government just might try, since there is NO other leverage available

[DomusAlbion]

By the way, I wouldn't call Brazil, China and Russia "ineffectual" countries. You'll be surprized to see how powerfull they'll be in the coming few years.

I wouldn't call China and Russia (well maybe Russia) ineffectual either.
But Brazil, the other South American nations and the Arab states that managed to attend the conference are definitely ineffectual impotent Lilliputians. Those were the ones I was refering to.

[katkinkate]

...It's all a bunch of political posturing by weak and ineffectual countries and amounts to a fart in the wind.

They need to get Europe and China on board. Thats a lot more substantial than a fart.

[DomusAlbion]

...It's all a bunch of political posturing by weak and ineffectual countries and amounts to a fart in the wind.

They need to get Europe and China on board. Thats a lot more substantial than a fart.

Agreed! I believe the US needs to reduce its oil consumption by at least 25% or more if possible, but hypocritical pipsqueaks such as Chavez have no place in dictating what the US should or should not do.

[TS]

As to the world calling upon America to reduce consumption, in a word: interdependence. America requires about $2.8 billion a day in T-bond sales to keep itself going and the world readily provides.

I am wondering if Chavez (who is in the habit of threatening to cut off oil to America if he is assassinated, saying Venezuelan oil is being sabotaged, upping the tax, training a new civilian army, etc.) is trying to drive up the price of oil simply by being erratic?

If the world is serious about halting consumption it will stop buying T-bonds but then it would have its own people to answer to when exports to America drop.

Interdependence. That's America's ace in the hole.

[eric_b]

...It's all a bunch of political posturing by weak and ineffectual countries and amounts to a fart in the wind.

They need to get Europe and China on board. Thats a lot more substantial than a fart.

Agreed! I believe the US needs to reduce its oil consumption by at least 25% or more if possible, but hypocritical pipsqueaks such as Chavez have no place in dictating what the US should or should not do.

Heh, seems to have hit a nerve with you.

Have to admit Chavez does have a point about the US consuming
a grossly disproportionate share of the global oil pie. If oil
were ever to be distributed equitably it would bad news, at least
short term, for the US.

Energy is money. The US was the first country to drill for oil, and
to use it extensively as an energy source. Beyond a certain point wealth
is self-perpetuating. So when the US began to run out of oil domestically
various thugs in the US government have assured a steady supply
of the stuff from other governments. Now that supplies are tight people
in the US still can't accept the writing in the wall. A lot of people outside
of the US feel the same way Chavez does regarding the US and oil

Interesting times.

[DomusAlbion]

Heh, seems to have hit a nerve with you.

Have to admit Chavez does have a point about the US consuming
a grossly disproportionate share of the global oil pie.

Chavez is correct that the US consumes much more than other countries (though on a per capita basis the US and Canada are about tied). But oil is a fungible commodity traded on the open market. If the US can pay for that commodity then it can get as much as it can pay for. There's no such thing as equity, so forget that; we aren't the Socialist States of the World and never will be.

What ticks me off about Chavez is that his statements are purely for domestic consumption and he is a complete hypocrite. Venezuela gets 60% of its export income from the US and some 30% of its imports are from the US. If he really were so anti-US he would put all that business to a halt. But he doesn't and he won't, hence he's a hypocrite. These statements and his fantasy that Venezuelans will care if he’s assassinated (by whomever) and they’ll shutdown business with the US are pure politics and delusional thinking.

Venezuela, in spite of their oil wealth, has huge internal problems and his statements are political; aimed as strengthening his base among the some 47% living below the poverty line and giving them an external enemy to blame for the country’s inherent problems.

[ArimoDave]

Oh great. Foriegn calls to the US to reduce its oil consumption.

That's not unlike telling a child not to steal cookies from the cookie jar.

It's a guaranteed way to get the US to increase its use -- not reduce it.

ArimoDave

[MD]

I doubt the United States controls its own destiny with regard to oil supply.

The notion that we are just a bunch of children with our hands in the cookie jar may be true, but I submit the rest of the world has the ability to put the jar out of reach.

The only question is when will it find the will to do so?

[ArimoDave]

I doubt the United States controls its own destiny with regard to oil supply.

The notion that we are just a bunch of children with our hands in the cookie jar may be true, but I submit the rest of the world has the ability to put the jar out of reach.

The only question is when will it find the will to do so?

Since when has putting the cookie jar "out of the childs reach" stopped a determined child from getting cookies.

Oh, were raiding the cookie jar even as we speak. And, were getting spanked a little for our trouble.

ArimoDave

[Tanada]

What if the US is not given a choice? Once the world buys into PO, could it possibly become the one rallying point that could bring the entire world into consensus against the US?

I can hear the chant "6% for 6%, no more glut, 6% for 6%, no more glut".

It is the 6%-25% glaring statistic that could possibly unify the world into defiantly telling the US "no more", once the trusth of depletion is evident to all.

What could the US possibly do in reponse? Load tankers at gunpoint? My fear is that the US government just might try, since there is NO other leverage available

What could the USA possibly do in response? How about total import ban on all Chinese trade goods? Without American dollars flowing into Chinese factories they grind quickly to a hault, and they are very well aware of that fact. Any open threat like your 6% for 6% statement would lead directly to economic warefare and instant recession, soon followed by world wide depression. It is in everyone's best interst to make PO as peaceful and non-disruptive as humanly possible, we are like a family of 108 siamese children attached at the heart. Kill one economy and you kill them all.

[MD]

What could the USA possibly do in response? How about total import ban on all Chinese trade goods? Without American dollars flowing into Chinese factories they grind quickly to a hault, and they are very well aware of that fact. Any open threat like your 6% for 6% statement would lead directly to economic warefare and instant recession, soon followed by world wide depression. It is in everyone's best interst to make PO as peaceful and non-disruptive as humanly possible, we are like a family of 108 siamese children attached at the heart. Kill one economy and you kill them all.

Let's not forget, when the peak has passed, the world economy will already be in disarray. The time will come when the economic cost of oil embargo against the United States will be considered worth the price.

By the way, China is busy running around creating new markets for their manufactured goods. In fact they seem rather eager to exchange them for oil.

[eric_b]

Chavez is correct that the US consumes much more than other countries (though on a per capita basis the US and Canada are about tied). But oil is a fungible commodity traded on the open market. If the US can pay for that commodity then it can get as much as it can pay for. There's no such thing as equity, so forget that; we aren't the Socialist States of the World and never will be.

Well, that's my point. The days of oil being a 'fungible commodity' are
likely numbered. More and more, the majority of oil is being produced by
just a few countries, many of them somewhat (if not very) hostile
towards the US. If they decided to merely limit the amount of oil
they sell to US it would hurt us, badly. It wouldn't take much. At this point
they wouldn't have any trouble selling (say) an additional 1-2 million barrels
(what the US lost) to other countries. No problem.

Oh, and you have to admit it would be ironic. The US has been
practicing various forms of 'economic sanctions' against other
countries for years. Millions of children likely starved to death in
Iraq under the regime of Saddam the insane, indirectly because of
US sanctions. You have to admit it would be pretty rich if it happened
to us. And it could.

What ticks me off about Chavez is that his statements are purely for domestic consumption and he is a complete hypocrite. Venezuela gets 60% of its export income from the US and some 30% of its imports are from the US. If he really were so anti-US he would put all that business to a halt. But he doesn't and he won't, hence he's a hypocrite. These statements and his fantasy that Venezuelans will care if he’s assassinated (by whomever) and they’ll shutdown business with the US are pure politics and delusional thinking.

Sure, you can call Chavez a hypocrite, but the US certainly is too. Afraid
the US does not have the high ground on this issue. And as an aside,
look at the recent (20th century) history of the US in central/south
America. Not pretty. For a country that likes to talk about spreading
'freedom and democracy' we were busy propping up puppet dictatorships,
petty regimes and socialist states (in latin america) to further our
economic interests.

[jimmydean]

Sure, you can call Chavez a hypocrite, but the US certainly is too. Afraid
the US does not have the high ground on this issue. And as an aside,
look at the recent (20th century) history of the US in central/south
America. Not pretty. For a country that likes to talk about spreading
'freedom and democracy' we were busy propping up puppet dictatorships,
petty regimes and socialist states (in latin america) to further our
economic interests.

I'm sure Chavez will find some other nation to buy his 2.5m bbl/day in this marketplace.

U.S. foreign policy is to create "democratic" governments with pro-US policy and to ensure they have an economic dependance on U.S. dollars It's the next best thing to owning the currency It's no wonder Negroponte is in Iraq now for his fabulous job in Central America under Reagan.

[fossil_fuel]

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid={1cd4f4e1-a06a-4d46-93bb-4c7f3f828598}&siteid=myyahoo&dist=SignInArchive&archive=true&param=archive&garden=&minisite=

free registration required, but i'll give you the important part:

If the provision becomes law, the president would have one year to propose and implement a plan to cut petroleum use by 1 million barrels a day, or 4%, from projected 2015 levels.

Well.... okay, they're not going to reduce oil consumption at all, just slow the rate of growth, and they have no idea how to do it, that's up to the president to figure out. wtf is this trash coming out of the US senate?

[turmoil]

I realize that this question is easy to answer, but i'd like to see how many people will figure it out, and comment on the use of this non-renewable resource that we BURN all day and all night.

[turmoil]

come on guys do the math. bad math is the reason we are in this mess now.

ill give you a hit: there are 60 * 60 *24 seconds in one day