[deconstructionist]

read this on my blog, with links to sources
violent self destruction

our way of life itself is adversely affecting our ability to continue to engage in our way of life. our way of life is exponential growth, it's not sustainable--and I believe that we may very well see the proof of this in our lifetimes. it's not that we're using natural resources or fossil fuels, those things are here for us to enjoy responsibly and sustainably. the problem is that we're using them at a rate that is severely out of balance with the rate at which they are naturally created. we're not altering the planet in any way that is detrimental to the planet's existence. the earth preceded us and it will follow us as well. but we are altering the planet in ways that inhibit its capacity to sustain human life at the rate at which our population and consumption is growing. we are squandering not only our environment but the natural resources that sustain our way of life itself.

during recent years, as a globe our petroleum usage is growing about 1.4% more oil per year, every year. currently, we use 82.3 million barrels per day. at 1.4% growth in 20 years we will be consuming about 108 million barrels per day. the most optimistic amongst petroleum reserve reports is the USGS survey. by their estimates, in 20 years, we will have added enough production, even in spite of rapidly depleting wells in every region other than the middle east, to meet or exceed our demand. that's the good news from the optimists.

keeping in mind that the USGS estimate is more generous than any other that I’ve seen (and I’ve seen quite a few)--their 2026 estimate for global peak oil is probably the long end of things... it's what they predict is 95% likely to happen (which is then averaged with what they predict is 5% likely to happen and then averaged out, as is noted in their graph linked above). after 2026, you see the steep down slope of global production. even if we stem our demand growth to 0% at that point, we will never again have enough to meet demand. at that point, the economic future is uncertain--to say the least. our demand for energy from oil would have to begin a 4% annual decrease in order for us to avoid economic disaster. given our current observable growth in alternative energy production, we will not be ready to make up the difference with alternatives. also keeping in mind 2026 is a generous estimate, by global standards. the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas predicts global peak oil in 2008. the World Oil Production Capacity (Wocap) model suggests sometime between 2006-2007 is more likely. after that date, we will never produce significantly more than we did the year before.

in the face of this, why are we so divided as a nation, and as a globe? I would look no further than the Project for a New American Century. America's foreign policy statement is clear in their document entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses". America will wage war against anyway who opposes our global dominance over fossil fuel resources or the currency for which they are bought and sold. anyone that doesn't oppose our global dominance is invited to tell us what they believe is in their best intentions, and we will consider their requests. this is world war III. America/Great Britain are the aggressors. we are fighting resource wars instead of developing alternatives.

we are racing towards the day when our energy supply outpaces our energy demand. the American attitude seems to be "if the shit's gunna hit the fan, we are for damn sure not going to be holding the fan..." we are violently self-destructing in a selfish and nationalistic attempt to "win" the game of Risk that the neo-cons behind the P.N.A.C. view the world as.

[Seadragon]

Excellent post. I'd add to that America's example is held up before the world as the one to emulate, with all the disastrous consequences that implies. Another point: the arrogance of the "nonnegotiable lifestyle"--American exceptionalism, which causes us to think we can repeal natural laws, impose martial rule on other nations (notice how successful the War on Terror, oops, I mean the War to Maintain Oil Supply, has been...), and generally continue expotential growth. There's no indication that the folks who believe that the nation with the biggest military budget will always prevail have learned a thing from the last five years, so I fear greatly that more lessons are going to be needed.

[RonMN]

I agree, this is a great post...but at the end you wish to turn it into a "noecon" Vs. "Neolib" battle...

I disagree (respectfully)...i see it as a matter between myself & family members who can't possibly imagine turning the heat down & putting on 2 sweatshirts.

Who can't imagine storing any food or water (even after what we've seen in New Orleans). Who can't imagine owning a gun, and loudly say "if anything bad ever happens...i'd just rather die".

They can't seem to see the folley of their ways and there's nothing i can do to convince them...after all, convienence stores never close.

Rather than a political argument...i see it as a matter of looking in the mirror & recognising what you really see.

[hoplite]

Yes, well, at what point should I expect MY standard of living "exponential growth" notwithstanding to decrease? What you fail to realize is that the Earth is a BIG place and it will take much longer for your wet dream-class envy-revenge fantasy to take place, indeed if history is any sort of guide it will take generations for the US "empire" (I guess, but not really) to collapse. Remember the veiled Bolshevik ideology you spew requires a few simple conditions before it can ever have a chance of taking hold in the proletariat:

1: Food, the sheeple must become hungry- literally. (Did you SEE any of the footage of the Katrina refugees, the "poorest of the poor"? Well I did and none of them appeared to be suffering from malnutrition...

2:There must be an overwhelming, overbearing police state, arguably we're in a police state already, but the average citizen is not experiencing jack-booted thugs on a daily basis- unless they're frequent fliers...

3: There are other facets of the Bolshevik equation but let me sum it up, before the civil war that you are alluding to can occur, the majority population must feel they have NOTHING to lose. Until that happens, JOhn Q. Public has a vested interst in the staus quo.

Face it; we're no more a "divided nation" today than we were in 1900 no mater how much you wish it to be so...



---"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkard, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. Sitting there; on your loathsome, spotted behinds, squeezing blackheads, not caring a tinker's cuss for the struggling artist. You EXCREMENT. You WHINING, Hypocritical toadies..."

[bobcousins]

As has been shown elsewhere, the great division in the US is largely illusory. The issues that divide are things like abortion and gay marriage. These have nothing to do with resource depletion. The wars that have been fought have been as much about ideology as anyhting else.

The article trots out standard doomer thinking. "Because oil is running out, we must therefore be fighting resource wars and chaos must be nearly upon on us". The evidence is fabricated to support the conclusion.

[deconstructionist]

As has been shown elsewhere, the great division in the US is largely illusory. The issues that divide are things like abortion and gay marriage. These have nothing to do with resource depletion. The wars that have been fought have been as much about ideology as anyhting else.

The article trots out standard doomer thinking. "Because oil is running out, we must therefore be fighting resource wars and chaos must be nearly upon on us". The evidence is fabricated to support the conclusion.

i have not fabricated any evidence. view this article on my blog with links to sources. nor is the "standard doomer thinking" you state part of my logic or my philosophy.

the fact that the division in the US is illusory and about things that seemingly have nothing to do with resource depletion is exactly why it has everything to do with resource depletion--we are so focused on this trivial bullshit and the left so focused on hating the right and the right so focused on hating the left because of it there is no space in the public discourse to talk about the problems which affect us all equally. most notably--resource depletion.

the only ideology involved in the fighting of this war is "might makes right."

[deconstructionist]

Yes, well, at what point should I expect MY standard of living "exponential growth" notwithstanding to decrease? What you fail to realize is that the Earth is a BIG place and it will take much longer for your wet dream-class envy-revenge fantasy to take place, indeed if history is any sort of guide it will take generations for the US "empire" (I guess, but not really) to collapse. Remember the veiled Bolshevik ideology you spew requires a few simple conditions before it can ever have a chance of taking hold in the proletariat:

1: Food, the sheeple must become hungry- literally. (Did you SEE any of the footage of the Katrina refugees, the "poorest of the poor"? Well I did and none of them appeared to be suffering from malnutrition...

2:There must be an overwhelming, overbearing police state, arguably we're in a police state already, but the average citizen is not experiencing jack-booted thugs on a daily basis- unless they're frequent fliers...

3: There are other facets of the Bolshevik equation but let me sum it up, before the civil war that you are alluding to can occur, the majority population must feel they have NOTHING to lose. Until that happens, JOhn Q. Public has a vested interst in the staus quo.

Face it; we're no more a "divided nation" today than we were in 1900 no mater how much you wish it to be so...



---"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkard, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. Sitting there; on your loathsome, spotted behinds, squeezing blackheads, not caring a tinker's cuss for the struggling artist. You EXCREMENT. You WHINING, Hypocritical toadies..."

i'm not a bolshevik, nor am i spewing their ideology.

food: yes, when supermarket shelves run dry or food prices triple thanks to increased transportation and cultivation costs, the sheeple might get a bit ornery.

police state: it's getting damned near close to being scary. can you believe that "liberal" senators and congresspeople are afraid of "backlash" from opposing the patriot act?

civil war: that might be coming too. most likely due to the secondary issues (abortion, gay rights, social welfare, etc). for instance: when roe v. wade falls, abortion will be regulated by states... that's when people will start to change residence based on red and blue states. civil war is a few short steps down the road from there...

whether we are more or less "divided" now than we were in 1900 is irrelevant. the fact remains--we are divided and the issues that divide us are what is stopping us from dealing with the more serious and pressing problems that affect us all equally. why you think it is my "wet-dream fantasy" that things should be the way they are is beyond me. i'm not exactly thrilled about it. i'm just an observer...

[deconstructionist]

I agree, this is a great post...but at the end you wish to turn it into a "noecon" Vs. "Neolib" battle...

I disagree (respectfully)...i see it as a matter between myself & family members who can't possibly imagine turning the heat down & putting on 2 sweatshirts.

Who can't imagine storing any food or water (even after what we've seen in New Orleans). Who can't imagine owning a gun, and loudly say "if anything bad ever happens...i'd just rather die".

They can't seem to see the folley of their ways and there's nothing i can do to convince them...after all, convienence stores never close.

Rather than a political argument...i see it as a matter of looking in the mirror & recognising what you really see.

good point, and thank you for disagreeing "respectfully"--a skill that some of our board-mates here don't seem to have in their arsenals... i get what you're saying. and i can't say i haven't thought about it that way too--but i don't think the two battles are mutually exclusive. what we choose to do as individuals is certainly important, but what our corporatocracy of a government choses to do on the international stage seems to me to have as much if not more importance on the big picture.

[Keith_McClary]

keeping in mind that the USGS estimate is more generous than any other that I’ve seen (and I’ve seen quite a few)--their 2026 estimate for global peak oil is probably the long end of things... it's what they predict is 95% likely to happen (which is then averaged with what they predict is 5% likely to happen and then averaged out, as is noted in their graph linked above).

I have a 0.00001% chance of winning $1,000,000 in the lottery and a 99.99999% chance of winning $0.00.

If I average that out it comes to $500,000. I think their "mean" is as real as my $500,000.

[deconstructionist]

keeping in mind that the USGS estimate is more generous than any other that I’ve seen (and I’ve seen quite a few)--their 2026 estimate for global peak oil is probably the long end of things... it's what they predict is 95% likely to happen (which is then averaged with what they predict is 5% likely to happen and then averaged out, as is noted in their graph linked above).

I have a 0.00001% chance of winning $1,000,000 in the lottery and a 99.99999% chance of winning $0.00.

If I average that out it comes to $500,000. I think their "mean" is as real as my $500,000.

hehe. true. which is why i use their 2026 (95%) estimate. cuz you and i both know we're not going to win the lottery.

[Antimatter]

The USGS doesn't predict dates for peak oil. The EIA does based on USGS numbers, and using the low USGS estimate of URR they say peak in 2021, not 2026.

[MonteQuest]

The article trots out standard doomer thinking. "Because oil is running out, we must therefore be fighting resource wars and chaos must be nearly upon on us". The evidence is fabricated to support the conclusion.

Well, this brings up a good question.

If TPTB know about peak oil, then two conclusions ( among many) come to mind, considering we aren't doing much to address it in the way of conservatio or renewables, even nuclear...just more coal.

1. Peak oil is a long ways off.

2. Conservation and renewables won't cut it.

So, which is it for them?

I'd say that #1 is not their conclusion and that #2 is not an option.

What is left?

What we are doing and preparing for; resource wars.

Scarcity breeds poverty, and poverty breeds conflict.

The only other realistic conclusion is that TPTB haven't got a clue, as no one I know, cornucopian or not, believes we can wait until the wolf is at the door to act.

[deconstructionist]

The USGS doesn't predict dates for peak oil. The EIA does based on USGS numbers, and using the low USGS estimate of URR they say peak in 2021, not 2026.

right, sorry. EIA estimates using USGS data. i should note that the "event countdown" scrollbox to the left says "USGS Peak Oil Date."



according to this graph, 2026 is their 95% probable date for peak production. they estimate that we will be producing about 42 billion barrels per year at that point. that would be steady growth in global production of about 1.6% anually for the next 21 years. based on what i've read from industry experts, i don't think that we can keep that level of sustained growth up for 21 years. i think that their estimate is about 10 years long.

[deconstructionist]

The article trots out standard doomer thinking. "Because oil is running out, we must therefore be fighting resource wars and chaos must be nearly upon on us". The evidence is fabricated to support the conclusion.

Well, this brings up a good question.

If TPTB know about peak oil, then two conclusions ( among many) come to mind, considering we aren't doing much to address it in the way of conservatio or renewables, even nuclear...just more coal.

1. Peak oil is a long ways off.

2. Conservation and renewables won't cut it.

So, which is it for them?

I'd say that #1 is not their conclusion and that #2 is not an option.

What is left?

What we are doing and preparing for; resource wars.

Scarcity breeds poverty, and poverty breeds conflict.

The only other realistic conclusion is that TPTB haven't got a clue, as no one I know, cornucopian or not, believes we can wait until the wolf is at the door to act.

i don't think it's even debateable that the powers that be have a very large clue, and have had for years. and that's why i think the geopolitical side of things plays a very large role in peak oil. if the world all got along great and shared nicely and treated other nations with respect and understanding, we would still be somewhat fucked. resource wars are the WORST reaction i can think of in terms of how to make what we have last the longest. if i'm not mistaken waging war is a pretty energy intensive proposition. the American stance on how to deal with resource depletion--as was laid out by the P.N.A.C.--is selfish, short-sighted, and not in the spirit of internatonal goodwill that i believe most american people would like us to demostrate.

[RdSnt]

The article trots out standard doomer thinking. "Because oil is running out, we must therefore be fighting resource wars and chaos must be nearly upon on us". The evidence is fabricated to support the conclusion.

Well, this brings up a good question.

If TPTB know about peak oil, then two conclusions ( among many) come to mind, considering we aren't doing much to address it in the way of conservatio or renewables, even nuclear...just more coal.

1. Peak oil is a long ways off.

2. Conservation and renewables won't cut it.

So, which is it for them?

I'd say that #1 is not their conclusion and that #2 is not an option.

What is left?

What we are doing and preparing for; resource wars.

Scarcity breeds poverty, and poverty breeds conflict.

The only other realistic conclusion is that TPTB haven't got a clue, as no one I know, cornucopian or not, believes we can wait until the wolf is at the door to act.

i don't think it's even debateable that the powers that be have a very large clue, and have had for years. and that's why i think the geopolitical side of things plays a very large role in peak oil. if the world all got along great and shared nicely and treated other nations with respect and understanding, we would still be somewhat fucked. resource wars are the WORST reaction i can think of in terms of how to make what we have last the longest. if i'm not mistaken waging war is a pretty energy intensive proposition. the American stance on how to deal with resource depletion--as was laid out by the P.N.A.C.--is selfish, short-sighted, and not in the spirit of internatonal goodwill that i believe most american people would like us to demostrate.

As you all know this situation is much more complicated than this.
There isn't a single entity called "TPTB", there are many, and they don't all necessarily agree or coordinate their particular vision of maintaining their positions.
There are a very large group of people, the so-called TPTB's who are expending a good deal of thought, energy and money to maintain their power and position themselves to take advantage of the clearly approaching series of crisis.
While they may operate at the nosebleed level of power politics and finance, they are still humans. This means their motivations are quite understandable. They will all feel they can control the situations they encounter, afterall given their positions they've proven to themselves they can. They will all feel they will come out on top, that whatever gamble they may take will benefit them.
Think of the Pink Floyd lyric, "The generals sigh and the lines on the map move from side to side." The actions of TPTB elite appear to them to be quite simple, they instruct people to take certain actions and it is so. That many people may and do die is an intellectual excercise for them. It's as simple as our instructions to our children, with the expectation of obedience and no thought to the implications of the command.
For some, 3 billion people need to die in the near future. We've talked about that here. It's a very easy thing to think about, noone can grasp what that actaully means in practical terms. Yet, TPTB are in a position to manipulate the global situation to make that happen.
I'm not raising a CT here, some, not all, TPTB will be thinking this way and acting on that belief. Hell, in our discussions on carrying capacity some here believe that our planet needs to depopulate, in order for the remainder to survive.
Keep in mind there are many groups of TPTB acting in their own self-interest and many in countervailing directions, with the surfs (us) caught in the wake.

[killJOY]

Why don't you use capital letters to start sentences, like a normal human being? You're no e. e. cummings.

Such affectations disincline me to read the article.

[deconstructionist]

Why don't you use capital letters to start sentences, like a normal human being? You're no e. e. cummings.

Such affectations disincline me to read the article.

wow that's the worst cop-out i've ever heard.

it's not an affectation. i don't avoid capitalization on purpose to stylize my writing. if you're not interested, don't read it... if you are interested, i'm sure you'll find the lack of capilitalization won't stop you from comprehending it.

[HonestPessimist]

1: Food, the sheeple must become hungry- literally. (Did you SEE any of the footage of the Katrina refugees, the "poorest of the poor"? Well I did and none of them appeared to be suffering from malnutrition...

A very excellent observation, although belated here. Seem the poorest in America are also the fattest.

2:There must be an overwhelming, overbearing police state, arguably we're in a police state already, but the average citizen is not experiencing jack-booted thugs on a daily basis- unless they're frequent fliers...

A good astute point that is completely ignored by the majority of those who believed that the USA is becoming a fascist police state.

3: There are other facets of the Bolshevik equation but let me sum it up, before the civil war that you are alluding to can occur, the majority population must feel they have NOTHING to lose. Until that happens, JOhn Q. Public has a vested interst in the staus quo.

In addition that the general American public would not give a shit about what deconstructionist posted here.

Face it; we're no more a "divided nation" today than we were in 1900 no mater how much you wish it to be so...

---"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkard, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. Sitting there; on your loathsome, spotted behinds, squeezing blackheads, not caring a tinker's cuss for the struggling artist. You EXCREMENT. You WHINING, Hypocritical toadies..."

[threadbear]

The real cost of the Iraqis war

The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0, ... 19,00.html