This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Wishes, Fantasies, Delusions, And Dumbasses
Submitted by James Howard Kunstler, via The Burning Platform blog,
We Wish
Wishful thinking now runs so thick and deep across the USA that our hopes for a credible future are being drowned in a tidal wave of yellow smiley-face stories recklessly issued by institutions that ought to know better. A case in point is the Charles C. Mann’s tragically dumb cover story in the current Atlantic magazine - “We Will Never Run Out of Oil” - setting out in great detail the entire panoply of techno-narcissistic “solutions” to our energy predicament. Another case in point was senior financial writer Joe Nocera’s moronic op-ed in last week’s New York Times beating the drum for American “energy independence.”
You could call these two examples mendacious if it weren’t so predictable that a desperate society would do everything possible to defend its sunk costs, including the making up of fairy tales to justify its wishes. Instead, they’re merely tragic because the zeitgeist now requires once-honorable forums of a free press to indulge in self-esteem building rather than truth-telling. It also represents a culmination of the political correctness disease that has terminally disabled the professional thinking class for the last three decades, since this feel-good propaganda comes from the supposedly progressive organs of the media — and, of course, the cornucopian view has been a staple of the idiot right wing media forever. We have become a nation incapable of thinking, or at least of constructing a consensus that jibes with reality. In not a very few years, the American public will be so disappointed and demoralized by broken promises like these that they will turn the nation upside down and inside out, probably with violence and bloodshed.
Charles Mann’s Atlantic article begins by cheerleading for the mining of methane hydrates from the ocean floor. These are natural gas molecules trapped in ice formations in the muck around the continental shelves. Mann spotlights the efforts of a Japanese research ship conducting tests. Guess what: the Japanese are engaging in this because they have absolutely no fossil fuels of their own, and a failing consensus about nuclear power, and they are on a course to become the first advanced industrial nation to be forced to return to a medieval economy. That is, they are the most desperate among the desperate. You could say they’ve got nothing to lose (but a few billion of their rapidly depreciating Yen).
Methane hydrates are stable only at extreme pressures or very low temperatures. They also exist in the arctic permafrost, for instance, Siberia, where conventional natural gas drilling operations have been carried out for decades, with no contributions from methane hydrates. Undersea methane hydrate exploration projects have gone on for decades in the US, Canada, India, Russia, China, and Japan. The hope is that this so-called “hot ice” would turn out to be the gas equivalent of tar sands, which would mean at best a very expensive way to get more fossil fuels as the conventional sources dry up. That hope has dimmed in nations other than extremely desperate Japan. Like a lot of techno-wonders, the recovery of methane hydrates can be demonstrated on the “science project” scale. For now, no viable technique exists for getting commercially-scaled streams of natural gas out of methane hydrates. The Japanese themselves state that it would take at least ten years, if ever, to commercially mine methane hydrates. Japan doesn’t have ten years. It’s banking system is imploding, and without capital even the science projects will come to an end.
Charles Mann is equally rapturous about shale oil and gas. He writes:
“Today, though, fracking is unleashing torrents of oil in North Dakota and Texas–it may create a second boom in the San Joaquin Valley–and floods of natural gas in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio. So bright are the fracking prospects that the U.S. may become, if only briefly, the world’s top petroleum producer. (“Saudi America,” crowed The Wall Street Journal. But the parallel is inexact, because the U.S. is likely to consume most of its bonanza at home, rather than exporting it.)”
This is very misleading. The US consumes roughly 19 million barrels a day. The Bakken and Eagle Ford shale formations produce about a million barrels a day combined now, and guaranteed to get a whole lot lower within the next five years. Today’s near-peak production is based on furious drilling and fracking of extremely expensive wells — known as “the Red Queen syndrome” because they are running as fast as they can to keep production up. Meanwhile, the depletion curve on shale oil is a reverse “hockey stick.”
The situation is similar for shale gas, the difference being that the temporary glut of 2005 – 2012 happened because we didn’t have the means to export surplus gas from the initial burst of development and it briefly flooded the domestic market. The price of shale gas is still below the level that makes it economic to produce and when it eventually rises to that level, and beyond, it will be too expensive for its customers to buy. Shale gas is also subject to the Red Queen Syndrome.
These arguments have been well-rehearsed many times in this blog and elsewhere. But the key to understanding our energy predicament is ignored in cornucopian cases like Charles Mann’s Atlantic piece, which is the role of capital. Non-cheap oil has already worked its hoodoo on advanced industrial economies: it has already destroyed the process of capital formation. These economies were not designed to run on non-cheap oil and they can’t, and the capital is no longer there for even the research-and-development to change out the infrastructure, let alone carry out any as-yet-undesigned changes. Furthermore, there is no prospect that we can rescue the process of capital formation at the scale required to continue financing things like shale oil. The absence of real growth in the USA, Europe, and Japan has already destroyed the operations of interest and repayment of debt, and any new debt issued will never be repaid, meaning it is functionally worthless (we just don’t know it yet). These impairments of capital formation have left the major commercial banks insolvent and central banks have worked tirelessly to rescue them by issuing more “money” in the form of credit that can never be paid back.
What all this means is that the capital does not exist to run non-cheap oil economies, or to continue indefinitely the production of non-cheap oil and gas, not to mention methane hydrates and other fantasy fuels.
Joe Nocera’s op-ed in last week’s New York Times was shorter and even dumber (and lazier) than Charles Mann’s foolish Atlantic article. It was based on remarks made by Canada’s Energy Minister, Joe Oliver, who said (among other patently false and idiotic things) that Canada “has the resources to meet all of America’s future needs for oil.” Oliver was pimping for the Keystone pipeline project to transport tar sands byproducts from Alberta down to the US. Nocera swallowed everything Oliver said whole, such as “oil mined from the sands is simply not as environmentally disastrous as opponents like to claim.” Is that so, Joe? And what’s your source for that assertion? Canada’s Energy Minister? The slug at the bottom of Nocera’s column said he was invited onto the op-ed page because regular columnists Gail Collins and Nicholas Kristoff were off (or on book leave). Nocera’s column was disgracefully ignorant. The editors should send him back to the Times business section where unreality is the order-of-the-day.
Now, many people may draw the conclusion that some conspiracy is underway when the major mainstream media report the news so disingenuously, but that is just not so. The reason we, in effect, lie to ourselves incessantly is because of the master wish behind all the subsidiary wishes: we want to keep driving to WalMart forever and we can’t imagine any other way of life, let alone the way of life that the contraction of industrial economies is tending toward — which is to say a way, way downscaled and re-localized economic life centered on farming and artisanal manufacture. Yes, we are going medieval too, eventually, just like the Japanese, who will get there a little sooner than we will. It’s hard to swallow, I’m sure. That’s why we prefer the more digestible propaganda gummi bear treats like Charles Mann’s Atlantic article and Joe Nocera’s stupid op ed.
»
- 16827 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
“We Will Never Run Out of Oil”
We will never run out of liars. And those who will believe them. Wall Street is a prime example. The Fed another. The CFTC yet another - there is no manipulation of silver.
Normalcy bias runs thick. Need a Black Swan to change the balance.
ABnormalcy bias runs in the thick-headed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH97lImrr0Q
I am consciousness in a physical body.
Quantum physicists say we co-create.
With too much stress, mammals simply dissociate.
The Serenity Prayer: acceptance, courage, wisdom.
My ego wants power, control, security, and approval.
Fuck it. That's a beautiful sunset.
I'm gonna enjoy my dinner and get laid.
If shit happens, I'll deal with it.
You can only prep so much,
then you just have to go through it.
And, hey, if existence becomes unbearable, I have my Saturday Night Special.
We will never run out of oil . It will simply become too expensive to use, or have you forgotten the Supply/Demand curve?
It's actually the opposite. Read Julian Simon. Proven over and over in history.
"So bright are the fracking prospects that the U.S. may become, if only briefly, the world’s top petroleum producer."
The prospects of the next major earthquake along the New Madrid Fault just went up exponentially with that comment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyklt01lN_I
This would be really convincing if read by the "Sham-Wow" guy. Or maybe the Oxyclean dude.
Or billboard broadsides on the First Church of Somebody buses running the Oxycontin Express.
Don't buy the 'peak oil' argument?
Careful what you say as you'd be arguing with a guy who went through adolescence with 'kunt' in his name, so I'd figure he knows, by necessity, how to handle himself (leastwise in the schools I attended).
Yeah, if Johnny thought boy named Sue was bad...phew.
Yes, how much "stuff" do you need? Want? Desire? Do "things" make you happy? Then keep on reading the slick magazines so you will know what to wear, what to drive and where to live.
Stupid article. How much oil is under the California Coast ahole? How much in California in general that can't be touched because of prohibitions on fracking?
How much oil is in the Sand Tar in Utah?
How much in the stupid Federal parks in Alaska?
...cough...ahem, ... literally tens of thousands of oil fields pumped dry, we WILL exhaust the oil deposits if we choose to continue on the path that the civilization engineers has chosen for us.
We've never run out of anything.
Everything has always been in shortage, at a price.
okay. I need 12 million tons of American Chestnuts, and a massive herd of American Bison, and 2 billion pounds of Gold...at what price???
Bingo. Thoughtless, heedless supply and demand economic argument applied universally to all commodities in complete disregard of 4/3*Pi*RE3.
Stupid comment.
You and others whining for "your share" are going to be fucked (and will forever blame anyone and everyone else, NO MATTER WHAT).
He specifically mentioned CAPITAL FORMATION. WTF don't you understand about that? Don't you get it that we are B-R-O-K-E, that we cannot even afford the CHEAP shit now, let alone such away capital, that we don't have, to engage in shitty-poor EROEI schemes?
Never fucking mind. Just put your fucking money into it if you think it's so great. And don't use any excuses because those that can pull the limited amounts out now will, if you believe your shit, be sitting HIGH when YOUR reality comes clear.
Fucking Unicornicopians!
Keep dreaming pal. The point of the article is the expense. X3 usury was fine as long as cheap energy and machine slaves paid the vigorish. In an economy where all capital is debt, what happens, not when the energy is gone, but when it gets expensive?
An acquaintance of mine, as dumb, if not dumber than you,told me he was confident that solar and wind would keep us going.
"What about sulfuric acid?" I asked him. Because he is a dumbshit, he gave me a blank look.
"Sulfuric acid, you know, that basic precursor to almost every industrial process? What happens when the sulfuric acid company goes belly up, because they can't service their debt because the banks are belly up, and there's no more loans and you can't even buy a lump of coal for five bucks? Where are your solar panels then? Huh???"
We're fucked in som many ways, it's imposible to describe them all. But no worries, dipshits like yourself will want to drill for oil in Yellowstone at 250/barrel.
Uhh, I assume you know that Kennecott Copper Mine (owned by Rio Tinto) is a HUGE bi-product producer of Sulfuric Acid. Sooo - it's like, already tight, since the land slide and all...
It's one thing for the dipshits to be drilling with their OWN money, but it's altogether different when it's MY money (via subsidies).
People have very little understanding of how woven things are. In Jared Diamonds book "Collapse" he clearly notes that civilizations have collapsed due to the loss of a key trading partner.
Sorry ronaldawg, but you're sort of talking out your ass here. I worked in the CA oilfields and the fields you refer to are called the Monterey Shale, and if oil reaches $120 bbl, I assure you they WILL drill them. Environment be damned. You also seem to be one of these petro-utopians who buys into the CERA bullshit about energy independence. Anyway, not going to argue with you cause it's clear you don't know very much about oil or gas at all. Ciao.
All I know is that my (international) LCS is clean out of silver, bar a handful of Morgans. One gold sovereign next delivery of silver some time in June (6 dollar premium).. I think the American people have voted with their feet.
There are two things we really will never run out of. Excuses and blame.
We will nver run out of suckers either.
Who needs H2o when you have Unicorn farts to breath?
"breathe"... but I liked it! :-) [arrow-up!]
Besides, that dihydrogen monoxide can KILL.
Spot on analysis, except the author misses the intended audience for the 'endless American energy' propaganda from a co-opted US media:
Iran...and not the American muppet proletariat.
These energy articles serve the same agenda as Michelle Obama in a sexy dress rewarding an Oscar for a movie about America triumphing over Iranian Islamic revolutionary stupidity.
PBR, the worst run global oil company, up > 6% today. And their oil is miles under water and several years away.
PBR, the worst run global oil company, up > 6% today. And their oil is miles under water and several years away.
Have you checked those PBR reserves? They're something like 2 miles under the sea surface then another mile under that. And nobody has extracted one fucking bbl from that reserve. I'm not saying it can't be done. It probably can but a $2 million dollar a day burn rate for the drilling rig wouldn't surprise me. And I'm probably low-balling it.
Yep, we've been seduced, lied to, gang raped and left for dead by the monied interests that have a stranglehold on the world and everything in it. Same old same old.............
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKlKGB3YwjE
Advice and observations from a former CIA official. (10 min or so) voice clip.
"We will never run out of oil" is a true statement. However...we will soon run out of 100$/barrel oil...then we will run out of 150$ oil....then 200$ oil will be gone. There will always be oil around at some price just not at what most people can pay.
I agree in general, but I have to wonder whether it's really true that it'll always be available at some price. I'm thinking that at some point, when there is ONLY really, really hard to get oil the cost of operating the necessary equipment (and add in the "risk" issues- folks looking to still take it all out on the wealthy) I'm thinking that there is a possibility that no more oil will one day be extracted (though not because there wouldn't be someone who wants it). Drilling operations. Refining operations. Transport operations. Economies of scale in reverse will make everything increasingly more expensive in orders of magnitude.
we will soon run out of 100$/barrel oil
Et voila.
Other lies:
"Ethanol from corn saves energy."
"GMO's are perfectly safe."
"There is no water shortage."
"Modern agriculture is not a house of cards completely dependent on petroleum and petroleum based products."
"Your assets are perfectly safe in a bank."
"Gold is a barbarous relic."
'dick cheney is an american hero'
Isaiah Thomas isn't gay.
Fuck! You had to go and ruin it! Maybe that's why he was such a great ball player? (couldn't pass up the joke)
"the american way of life shall never be questioned"
'carl lewis was clean, man!'
That's a Dennis Miller (goto Google) knuckleball.
Wasn't it: "the American way of life isn't negotiable?"
Same same...
sorry i got confused : it's the US Debt that "shall never be questioned".
haha
It was fun while it lasted Bitchez. It's time to trade FantAsia...
+1
You're making real sense lately! Someone steal your login? Or, did you lose your kodebook?
We? Don't include me in your conspiracy.
the actual title of the Atlantic article is "What If We Never Run Out of Oil?"
not " We Will Never Run Out of Oil"
did the Atlantic change the title or did te author of this article get it wrong?
i still have to read the rest of the article but just thought i would mention this
JHK sometimes gets a few facts wrong. But let's be honest. That Atlantic title is every bit as fatuous as the one Kunstler (mistakenly) quoted.
We're going to let the oil companies run this train right to the end of the rails, over the edge, and down the chasm to the bottom.
Could have built a bridge at one point. But building a bridge would imply there was a problem. Can't have that now, not when someone can get rich on there being no problem.
And watch this. The bastards will be selling funeral plots at the bottom of the canyon, too. They never miss a bet, this bunch.
what was that line about selling ya the rope you hang em with?
Any bridge would be yet to another chasm. ALL of it is about continuation of growth. At some point there won't be the ability to, nor the space, to build yet one more bridge- the growth game WILL end. We can blame "oil companies," "politicians," the "illegals," etc all we want, but ultimately the real blame has to shift to Mother Nature, and, well, good luck rationalizing that one.
Yes, growth will end if all inputs continue as they are now, but population worldwide is set to decline, and there's no guarantee that rampant materialism will be a permanent ethos. So you're talking about a very long term hypothetical.
NOT so sure it's a longterm hypothetical;
once the MIC goes into it's death roll they'll surely take it all down to the bone so they can control every last drop of usable....I'm not sure but i think some aussies made a movie about it back in the day
In a world without gas...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdv5EtZQ6jg
It happened slowly, then all at once...
It's never good to be late.
oh please....as the u.s. continues its slow implosion, oil usage will continue to decline.........the millennials have no desire to drive......they prefer the monthly iphone bill and $100,000 college loan payment plan............as it stands, gasoline and fuel consumption are at 10 year+ lows.................energy availablity simply isnt an issue for the foreseeable future.......................
I agree that there's contractionary forces happening (and thanks for ensuing this was pointed out), but that sill doesn't smooth things over for the "alternative" fuels development; as a matter of fact, it makes it worse. I figure that at some point the US will be consuming more of its own oil (as energy becomes more widely nationalized- less exports by/from all). It'll be the end of what Forbes (which one?) advocated back in the 70's, that the US should look to consumer others oil, thereby saving its own (precious) supply.
Down arrows for what? Stating that things are contracting? Or, for something that Forbes said? Or, that the US won't be consuming more of it's own dog food, er, a, oil?
COME ON! I present some perfectly reasonable points. YOU MAKE NONE- from empty minds comes empty thoughts...
Chinese and Indian oil consumption continue to rise. The world will be consuming greater and greater quantities of oil and gas for the next 20 years at least. We need to find another "North Sea" sized resource every 5 years. Shale oil was the most recent one but is largely uneconomic under $90/bbl.
"Chinese and Indian oil consumption continue to rise."
I'm thinking that it won't. Both countries are highly dependent upon export markets, markets that are contracting. They may push for internal stimulus but that will only be short-lived (kind of hard for folks in those countries not to notice ths sinking ships all around them and wonder if they too are soon to be taking on water).
"We need to find another "North Sea" sized resource every 5 years"
The "System" (I'm not invested in this, so "I" and not engaged in looking- I am NOT part of "We") needs MOAR. BUT... are you basing these numbers on that which would cover the expected growth while also filling the holes by existing declining fields?
"Shale oil was the most recent one but is largely uneconomic under $90/bbl."
Based on the today's market, which is so fucking distorted that it's anyone guess as to what the real costs are (I'm figuring that it's MUCH greater- factor in continued decline in wages and total consumption in general and the volume pricing just starts to struggle- poor margins get only worse)).
This article misses the point entirely. Oil may well be a limited resource, and we will eventually run out of economic supplies, but this is only a problem because the statist system allows government bureaucrats (who are often revolving door types from the oil and financial industries) to override the free market system of resource allocation. If markets were allowed to work, alternatives to fossil fuels would be developed as they became economic and the general standard of living would continue to increase. Limited resources are only a problem in a planned economy. A free economy can respond to these changes in the same way it responds to changes in consumer preferences and availability of other inputs.
The problem is statism, not resources.
So, it really is an infinite world?
You think we're gonna run out of solar energy?
Do you fucking think I'm stupid?
Of fucking course not!
We're talking about planet earth, not the sun.
STUFF ON PLANET EARTH IS LIMITED. Energy, let's just pretend that we can do what nature cannot do and suck up vast quantities of solar radiation and concentrate it, is only PART of the equation. It takes materials along with energy and "process" to make stuff happen. If you have no process or have no resources then abundance of energy is not all that impressive, is it?
And about that solar energy, as you thinking we can harvest MORE of the sun's energy that it produces each day? Should we do more deforestation so that we can grab more energy (that the trees would consume)?
actually at some point in the very very long term future the sun will burn out.....so yes we will run out of solar.....i'm sure humans will be finished by that point though...
"We will never run out of dodos!"
Dodos died out because they weren't tasty enough (given their life spans / breeding cycle).
Volkert and his men were fortunate to find dodos on the islet. Ever since this peculiar bird had first been sighted in Mauritius in the 1590s, it had been ruthlessly hunted down for food.It did not make for a tasty feast: the dodo was often known as the ‘loathsome bird’ on account of its disgusting taste. But it was extremely easy to catch, and the sailors who hunted them were so hungry that anything was better to the putrid salt-pork they had on board ship.[source]
If Dodo's were tasty, they'd have been domesticated.
Giant Tortoises died out because they were too tasty (given their life spans / breeding cycle). [source- seriously, watch this]
No-one can wait 40 years for that amazing tasty treat.
Lesson: if your predator is hungry enough, nothing is going to save you. You don't even want to know about the other mega-fauna.
When I was down in the Philippines it struck me as odd that I didn't see that many birds. Back in North America in a park I recall my (now) wife noting some wild ducks and saying that she wondered where there eggs were...
Interesting. Kunstler is one of those perennial doomsters, but I'll still read him (and already had before ZH syndicated it).
Mann's Atlantic OpEd is getting traction, and mentions Japan blew $540mm on the exploratory vessel, while France's Iter project is costed @ $13 billion, and is desperately trying to prove the "not another 20 years" idiom to fusion. When even people like Lovelock have stated that 20+ nuke plants / industrial country are required to keep civilisation going (more nuclear and fracking), and yet only 60 are being built worldwide, and that is in China, Russia and Asia, the West looks desperately behind on action.
Perspective: China alone builds a coal plant every week; Arctic CO2 just hit 400ppm; fish in NW America region have started moving for keeps; drought in USA is up [add in another couple hundred data points I bother with].
Projection: triage will begin soon. Hedge accordingly.
Saturn is facing us tonight. (For the credulous; for reference, NASA just spotted the centre of the hexagon)
from the black cube vid:
Kaaba : shrine of the sacred stone in Mecca: formerly dedicated to the pre-islamic Trple Godddess Manat, Al-Lat (Allah) and Al-Uzza, the "Old Woman" worshipped by Mohammed's tribesmen, the Koreshites. The stone was also called Kubaba, Kuba, or Kube and has been linked with the name of Cybele, the Great Mother of the Gods. The stone bore the emblem of the yoni, like the Black Stone worshipped by votaries of Artemis. Now it is regarded as the holy center of patriarchal Islam, and its feminine symbolism has been lost, though priests of the Kaaba are still known as Sons of the Old Woman.
tip's addition : see also Kabbalah, Black Madonna
Dawg, that Black Cube shit rocks! Blew my mind!
WOW! Thanks for getting me away from the earth for a little while. The universe sure is a big place.
here's one to wrap your noodle around: if the ancients who worshipped Saturn had only primitive technology, how in the heavens did they figure out that there was a hexagon on its North Pole? or is it a coinkidink that the symbol that they used for the planet is the exact same one that actually is naturally occurring there?
I will come across like a total kook (which i am) but there is a school of thought that claims that other planets are not real, as in having a permanent physical manifestation, but instead are just demons (fallen angels) masquerading as such. The basis for this assertion comes from the Bible (Genesis) where is mentioned that GOD created just the Sun, Moon, Earth and the firmament, ignoring planets. Considering that the cosmogony is detailed in Genesis it would be odd to gloss over these heavenly objects (especially since the Sumerians/Akkadians were well versed in astronomy - their ziggurats were both temples and astronomical observatories and they charted the stars well before the alleged date of Genesis' writing; furthermore, Abram - Abraham was from Ur of the Chaldeans, and is very unlikely that he wasn't aware of this well known fact).
Just my 2 crazy cents.
Entire history of extra-planetary missions in a really neat graphic. Seriously: the person who made this has done an amazing tribute to the entire saga of great science. For instance, Russians landed a probe on Venus in 1982, and even transmitted pictures back.
If you're looking for the mythical and legendary (or even Virtual), ignoring the actual is folly. It's all part of the same weave. If you don't get this, you're not even ready for the weird.
We will never run so low on oil that we cannot maintain an industrialized civilization. Substitutes will be used, and the frivolous use of oil will be curtailed, but we'll never face forced localization or forced 'artisanship' because of a lack of energy. A lot of the oil we use now isn't necessary - plastic crap where glass and ceramics would suffice, and joy-riding. We may have to do things differently, but we will survive and prosper, so long as we don't allow governments to screw up things beyond repair by ruining any vestige of actual markets.
Son, do you understand JUNK MAIL?
JUNK MAIL holds up the economies of scale bar. Without all that extra crap most of the "meaningful" (crap) won't have such great price points.
Yes, JUNK MAIL will end, but in no way do I believe that all the "good stuff" will continue along on its merry way.
The markets will be fucked not because of governments, but because of Mother Nature.
Again, "economies of scale in reverse." As volume drops margins get hammered. And all those folks who once had jobs pushing JUNK MAIL won't have the money to prop up the economies of scale in the "good stuff."
JUNK MAIL: stuff that provides padding for economies of scale, stuff that is of little value in and of itself.
"Substitutes will be used" And how sure are you that this will be the case, as it applies to very important things?
GROWTH is how things work. The System knows no other way. Everyone bought the notion that housing never drops; this meme was pushed because it was the thing that helped prop up growth.
"plastic crap where glass and ceramics would suffice"
Do you realize how much energy is used in blast furnaces? Maybe there's a reason why plastic stuff is everywhere? No, I'm not against glass and ceramics, I'm just pointing out where reality lies.
Relentless growth is necessitated by the monetary system. Basic human needs are fairly limited, and freer markets will find a way to meet most needs. Most people would be happy to work 10-20 hours/week and spend the rest of thei time with family and entertainment, and with productivity what it is, that is what we would have if not for debt-based money.
Since Malthus people have been proclaiming the end is near because of overconsumption. 'Peak ___' is just a more sophisticated but similar argument. Ultimately energy is heat or motion, and the world is swimming in both.
The overall idea that a system of closed resources can't expand forever simply doesn't apply to this species and this planet. Once population tops out at 11 or so billion people, the emphasis will turn to quality and longevity of products and services. The system need not keep eating itself until it breaks down.
"population bottleneck" ...look it up
the bottleneck starts in washington dc
Can you say D E F L A T I O N ?
Deflation by any other name would mean you're broke. When you're broke, you can't buy anything. When you can't buy anything, people that make things to buy go broke. Then they can't buy anything, like L A B O R. Then all those workers are broke, and they can't buy anything. When everyone's broke and can't buy anything, the oil companies go broke. They can't pump the fucking oil out of the ground. When the oil can't be pumped out of the ground, then even more people go broke, because there's no
E N E R G Y to run the fucking industrial economy...
So, expensive energy makes for a deflationary dynamic, and the deflation makes for no energy.
You's better buy a fucking horse and some arable land.
Good thing we've never experienced defation before.
All of the world's actual wealth will still be there. Those caught with their pants down will have to find a way to trade something they still have (labor, a sob story, their bodies) for what they need to survive. You're letting the nature of the monetary system dictate yoru worldview; take the vast expansion of the money supply out of it and what does your argument amount to? If it still holds, it means that a post-fiat system is inevitable and everyone is doomed. Not likely. Deflation may suck donkeys, but we (most) will live.
"take the vast expansion of the money supply out of it and what does your argument amount to? If it still holds, it means that a post-fiat system is inevitable and everyone is doomed. Not likely. Deflation may suck donkeys, but we (most) will live."
The System, which pretty much everyone is attached to, is doomed. While I'd have to agree that it doesn't mean instant death to millions, I still cannot fathom how people are in fact going to survive when the trucks stop running. And when people are hungry all sorts of "respect" for "law" can be pitched out the window.
In past years it was more localized/regionalized. This time it's global. And this time we rely on global trade. "Wounds" can range from a scrape to a lethal gun-shot. To have experienced a scrape as a wound and then proclaim that any future wound that we might incur will be likewise survivable, well...
I had no idea that people didn't live before oil was discovered...
Imagine that.
A reasonably smart person I spoke with recently was telling me that she believes oil prices are being kept artificially high by the banks to keep the oil companies in business and keep their accounts with them. She says that precious metals will be the losing investment of this decade by design. She thinks technology will create micro communities of social "euphoria" and stock markets will never "go down again". I have to admit, I am starting to see her point.
You need either to hang out with another class of "friends" OR reassess your notion of "smart."
"she believes oil prices are being kept artificially high by the banks to keep the oil companies in business and keep their accounts with them."
So, one's business is improved through demand destruction? Holding prices up "artificially" results in lower volume, which pushes up per-unit costs and pushes down margins.
The financials make their money on volume, on transactions.
I suppose one could test this hypothesis by looking back at what was happening to banking and oil companies when oil was sub-$20/bbl. I'm kind of thinking that oil companies still used banks...
"She says that precious metals will be the losing investment of this decade by design."
Whose design? And, what is The design?
"She thinks technology will create micro communities of social "euphoria" and stock markets will never "go down again"."
So, the most precious think, oil/energy, is propped up in order that the oil companies don't fail, AND the stock markets are made robust because of "micro ["lending"] communities" which are magically, without the benefit of PMs, endowed with "stock market"-like capital?
Either I'm WAY smarter than your "smart" friend, or your "smart" friend is really, really stupid (and should fail basic logic).
Ah, Tell her that even the bankers cannot control Geology.
To a System with a built in requirement of 'Growth' or it implodes...
Check Mate.
Have her read this right after you do.
The only true metric of energy abundance: The rate of flowhttp://www.resilience.org/stories/2013-04-28/the-only-true-metric-of-ene...
" and stock markets will never "go down again".
tell the tulip market is making a comeback and you can invest her money in this new hot thing. if she doesn't bite on that, tell her you can sell her a bridge. for God's sakes don't let her get away. Fish like that don't swim by that often. good luck!
Canada does have more oil and gas than Saudi Arabia.That's fact,along with the fact that the oil companies that hold the mineral rights are mostly American branches of the main offices in America.Both economies are economically intertwined in the free trade agreement.The choice is simple,you can get your oil from a neighbour and friend or you can get it from people in the MiddleEast that hate you.Otherwise,Canada will ship it west to China and east to Europe.
Canada is in WORSE denial than the US.
How about a contest?
The US will challenge Canada in a battle of energy. The one that can amass the most energy in the shortest amount of time WINS!
Good luck sucking all that shit through the straw. Extraction and refining rates are abysmal. Just look at what's required to extract and process conventional oil vs. this pseudo-oil stuff.
"you can get your oil from a neighbour and friend or you can get it from people in the MiddleEast that hate you"
US imports come mostly from its neighbor Mexico (and Venezuela), I think it's something like 18% that comes from the ME.
It's an issue of business, not a game of whom likes whom. Given enough time and continuing tensions between the US and Canada (you're already taking on a threatening tone- do you think that this is going to get any better?) I'm not seeing that as the warm-and-cozy affair that you are pushing.
"Otherwise,Canada will ship it west to China and east to Europe."
Stop it, you're killing me! Ship it to Europe? You're going to go begging for fucking Euros?
Ask Australia how it's going with their coal exports to China...
Seriously off topic, but the mainstream media is reporting in Canada on how the Central Banks have a "war on savers".
See: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/04/26/f-rfa-macdonald-power-shift-savers.html
Neil Macdonald: The 'monarchs of money' and the war on savers Power Shift: First in a series on the rise of the central bankers and the global imposition of cheap credit
Yeah, off-topic... I see that you took a red-arrow, must be from Herdee... Canadians' think that their superiority has allowed them to do death-defying feats.
Regards your topic, growth is dead and things are contracting. Where the fuck else are banks going to get money other than from pools of it (savers)? I mean, this doesn't take a lot of high-powered logic to figure out. This is what death-throes look like. If it IS a "war" then maybe people ought to start asking if it's a war then what's the battle really about? I'd state that it's a war against inevitable contraction- no way to "win," but they've got to exhibit that guns-blazing approach as it all goes down in flames...
the myopia is alberta deep, there is no clue in alberta the world economy is about to deep six. need to book a room six months in advanced to have a shower in the middle of nowhere alberta as there are so many trucks on the road going patch crazy. the locals watch in amazement and think boom 2.0 is on again. wtf
I don't really mean to bash all Canadians; as is the case with any population, ALL should not be judged by the few. I have a connection to some people up there, so in no way could I wish ill. As you seem to have a front-row seat you must know that sometimes the best thing for someone that you care about is to kick them in the ass to get them to wake up.
Australia (also a connection to some people there) is FINALLY showing signs of being dosed with reality: revenues dropping because... SURPRISE! export market -China- is slowing.
All it takes is one or two percentage point changes and it all contorts. Very few people understand that it's all been but a razor's margin: the bubbles padded things up into a false comfort zone.
Export markets... can't push on a string.
the cracks are forming yet no one connects the dots in alberta, an almost 4 billion dollar deficit goes by without so much as a WTF from the populace, and this place is fucking falling over itself with cash and jobs. yes it's 2013 and CORRECT it's all on a razor thin margin and the spigot in alberta gets turned off in one business week. happened umpteen times before but like always its "different this time".Lots of sour faces a comin
And the environmental damage left behind...
Like a bunch of spoiled kids always thinking that their parents will clean up after them.
profitabliity is measured in weeks, geology in epochs,mankind in centuries the disconnect is all proportional
Yes, it's all about TIME. Energy buys time. If we wish to speed up the processing of a given energy source then it costs more energy in the process. Nature is as efficient as it gets, and it has all the time; this should kind of be a tip right there :-)
Sadly, humans are in a hurry to find out that being in a hurry isn't a good thing...
To Jim Kunstler:
How exactly is it different from central planning, when you in a know-it-all manner completely write off methane hydrates already, when they're just starting to try if those could be produced in an economically feasible way?
Apples and squirrels...
Got NOTHING to do with central planning. He's saying that there's not enough capital to bear the burden of our exiting faltering economy AND ramp up something that is UNDENIABLY more expensive.
Because you aren't comfortable with math that doesn't mean that someone that is is a "central planner."
I'm the opposite of a "central planner" yet I did community service to warn people of the dangers of promoting another stupid fuel idea- ethanol from corn.
Fishes and bicycles...
He's saying that there's not enough capital to bear the burden of our exiting faltering economy AND ramp up something that is UNDENIABLY more expensive.
So you too can make a prognosis of the capital needed, and the availibility limits of capital, into the future?
"We know it all", no need to even try anything else??
You're another one trying to sell central planning as reason.
that's a really familiar looking curve, now where have I seen that steep decline before? give me a sec it'll come to me.
I'm all for being a healthy skeptic....but it's just as sheep-like to gobble up posts like this while masturbating furiously to post-hydrocarbon world....the resource is there, we might as well f*cking use it.....no one is smart enough to allocate it in the best interest of future humanity....when the wells finally dry up, it will definitely be a big, unpleasant, even horrible shock to our easy-ass lives...we either accept it and overcome it, or we panic like little fruitcakes.....won't happen in any of our lifetimes but should humanity make it to post-hydrocarbon phase it would be interesting.....
Go ahead, Mr. non-masturbator, tell us how we should BEST use our fossil fuels.
ALL of it was based on promoting WORK. What WORK is it that you think that we should be doing. It's one thing of using a given resource, it's another to identify WHY and for WHAT.
"we might as well f*cking use it."
Who is "we," and what do you mean by "use it?" Just burn it up partying? Who is to say? Increase the price in order to make it reflect the real scarcity, which would throttle senseless wasting of it, and people will be up in arms (some conspiracy about bankers forcing the oil companies to keep the prices high...).
For what it's worth, I'm busy burning it. I've got over 300 hours on my tractor in a little over 2 years. Lots of work to do before I lose the biggest slave power that has, and ever will, come our way.
"won't happen in any of our lifetimes but should humanity make it to post-hydrocarbon phase it would be interesting....."
Oh, like YOU have a crystal ball? When economies of scale start to unravel, reverse, things will happen VERY fast. I'll wager that, if you're under 50, that you WILL experience fuel rationing (or fuel prices that pretty much will make you long for a horse, or a bicycle...).
i'm NOT claiming to know how we should BEST use them, i did say that nobody is smart enough to know how to allocate hc's, presumably myself included, hence the word nobody.....but since you seem to be curious, no i don't think we should "burn it up partying"; use it for agriculture & shipping & plastics.....there is still a lot of oil & gas out there so I'm fairly confident that hc's will still be our primary source of energy consumption when i die;yes I could be wrong....finally, you mock me for thinking i have a crystal ball (i'm not the one whose username is 'seer'), and then you conjure one yourself:
"When economies of scale start to unravel, reverse, things will happen VERY fast. I'll wager that, if you're under 50, that you WILL experience fuel rationing (or fuel prices that pretty much will make you long for a horse, or a bicycle...)."
Politicians often send me surveys asking my opinion on various policy choices. If you write checks to campaign funds you get on many mailing lists. Before i got involved by writing checks , i saw the results of surveys and always wondered why no one asked me what i thought. Any way one question that often came up was to drill or not to drill. i always replied that we should let the Arabs pump their fields dry first. If obama was not our president , it would still be a good idea, but fracking has stymied his plan for our energy dhimmitude.
One of the Forbes stated back in the 70's that the US should burn up everyone else's oil first. Not sure if people grasp what this means: uber capitalist stating that US oil should be nationalized. Anyway, your "answer" was beat to over 40 years ago.
"Any way one question that often came up was to drill or not to drill."
There's some other way?
Or, are you referring to the idiotic notion of drilling our way to self-sufficiency? As Dr. Albert Bartlett refers to this strategy: "Strength through exhaustion."
What is the PROBLEM?
"but fracking has stymied his plan for our energy dhimmitude."
WTF does That/This mean?
Obama is a puppet. He has no PLAN of his own. Gawd, I give fucking up... Party Pussies are some of the densest people on the planet!
I recall Porter Stansberry interviewing Chris Martensen last year, regarding Peak Oil. He went on and on about fracking and Baaken.
His derisive and arrogant manner was offensive, and I lost a lot of respect for him. No longer read his daily reports, as I see that place as an AFAB (Anything For A Buck). One writer is on one side of an issue, another writer on a different side. Strike me like a pump & dump outfit, especially since they went on and on about some GS guy they hired. Thanks but no thanks.
Oil was $25/barrel in 2002. Silver was $4.50 and gold was about $325. Someone's doing a piss-poor job of manipulating oil prices and/or convincing people of its scarcity and the doom that portends: oil can't even keep up with the real money. It must be really scarce. The only place people can find it now is in Russia, under thousands of feet of bedrock - you know, right where lots of dinosaurs and plants once lived.
tmosley posted a vid here a couple years ago and got bucket loads of shit for it.
I think Trav was his main persecutor and their repartee was intense, even for a fight club.
As soon as I saw it I realized Peak Oil has been reset and is no longer a part of my vocabulary.
But Climate Change is.
True, the capital may run dry, collapse may occur or we may lack the will to develop this method for extracting the oilsands oil but the method is there, without the need for a "Manhattan Project" like the dreamers over at TOD regurgitate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGDKxlW1ZoQ
Please stop the oil company propaganda already. There is no need for oil at all unless you want to make profits from oil by fleecing the public.
In the Bay Area, all I see is giant SUVs in every direction. I sure hope there's infinite oil.
in the chicago burbs-the smaller the blond bimbo soccer mom is-the bigger her black SUV is(freud would have a field day)
Every couple of years I re-read the Bhagavad Gita. I came across something today that I had missed previously. Krishna saying (paraphrasing heavily) to Arjuna, don't trouble the ignorant and weak minded with truth. Don't try to disabuse them of their false notions. It will only frustrate them and confuse them. They have their role to play and you have yours. I didn't really like this advice from his Spectacularness, but I have to admit, it is probably the best course of action. You can't teach a pig to hum, let alone sing.
unfortunately the weak minded and ignorant tend to rise to the top of the poltical/govt power structure and then everyone is affected by their decisions. tis the price we pay for such a hyper-connected modern society.
Yes, this does seem to be the way of things. Arjuna was thinking if he could just walk over and talk some sense into his cousins and uncles the whole thing could be settled with a conversation. And thus he wouldn't have to slaughter all his relatives. Krishna said no. They wouldn't understand even the most eloquent argument. To quote from a line from Generation Kill, sometimes war is the motherfucking answer.
if the rich and powerful had to send their sons into the breach war would become much less popular-I would dare say it would become extinct. who in their right mind would waste the lives of their children on the stupidity that soldiers are dying for now? but when there are no jobs and little hope for the future the huddled masses will queue up to become cannon fodder for a fistful of dollars.
Is this really true? If history is any guide it is not. Crassus was one of the wealthiest men in Rome yet sent his son Publius to fight and die against the Parthians in Syria. Phillip II of Macedon practically weaned his son Alexander on war. Stalin sent his son Yakov to fight on the eastern front where he was captured/killed.
So, anyway, I'm sure you don't want me to bore you with too many examples, but I question using that premise (the rich and powerful don't send their sons to die in wars) as an axiom. I think they do. As a gambit for power and more power.*
*Very good fantasy series on HBO that illustrates this point called Game of Thrones.
How about if they, themselves, go to war?
And it annoys the pig.
As soon as I read the title, I knew it was the Burning Platform :D
The "Zeitgest" movement uses truth to sell lies.
Part of the pattern is to present several truths - but from the point of view of a lie. Since part (or most) of what you can easily see and point to is true, then you are drawn into accepting the unspoken lie. When it's done well, it's difficult to see how you're being led down a path, or where that path leads - particularly if you're not an expert on all the subjects involved.
"What all this means is that the capital does not exist to run non-cheap oil economies, or to continue indefinitely the production of non-cheap oil and gas, not to mention methane hydrates and other fantasy fuels."
The implication above is that "cheap oil" caused our current mis-allocation of capital. While there is some truth there, it is not the whole story.
The biggest mis-allocation of capital comes from the flaw inherent in fractional reserve banking. By stealing choice from individuals, and accruing it to the increasingly few, capital is allocated according to the wants and desires of those few, and not to the society at large.
The aim of today's "Zeitgeist" is mis-direction of your mind.
We must every one of us fight against BULLSHIT and LIES. And whether that is the "soft lies" of the Venus Project or the Zeitgeist Movement, it doesn't matter. All lies about sustainability must be dismembered like a Walrus corpse on the beach of Wrangel Island.
Canada “has the resources to meet all of America’s future needs for oil.”
The author produces no facts to refute this claim, only some snide remarks. Those with a little curiosity can look up the reserves in the oil sands for themselves.
This dude seems real angry at something, calling people dumb, morons, liars. He needs to chill. If he is into farming and artisanal manufacture, maybe he needs to go milk his cows, gather the new eggs the hens have laid, forage for mushrooms. Let the problems of the world to people that may have a better understanding than he has, or at least are more rational.
Oil will last until it gets too expensive to push hundreds of tons of shit around the world. The end of cheap oil means the experiment in globalization will end as well. It simply becomes too expensive.
New technologies may help somewhat through a transitional phase but French wine will stay in France and local production and consumption will return to all countries
The horror is that they might have to legalize hemp for plastics, oil, fabrics and building materials for domestic production instead of importing from 3rd world slave labor camp countries.
The oil saturated 20th century will take it's place as the historical anomaly in mans evolution as we recognize the incredibly wasteful costs of cheaply made disposable goods. The subsidy for stupidity will be withdrawn as the cost becomes too high.
Used tire sandals will become fashionable again.
The bright side is that centralization will become increasingly less relevent as the world reverts to a more localized economy.