This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Extreme Energy, Extreme Implications
Submitted by James Stafford via OilPrice.com,
If oil and gas is a profoundly dynamic phenomenon, then so too must be environmental risk and conflicts over natural resources - and we are not getting the full picture from the mainstream media, according to Michael T. Klare, professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College, TomDispatch blogger, and author of Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy (Metropolitan Books, 2008). As risks multiply, conventional sources evaporate and we are left with “extreme” energy, renewables may be the only way to avoid war and disaster.
In this Tom Dispatch exclusive interview with Oilprice.com, Klare discusses:
- Why we are talking about a “resurgence” of American power
- Why the issue of US natural gas exports is a geopolitical dilemma
- Why Myanmar is important but not critical to the US Asia-Pacific “pivot”
- Why Myanmar IS critical to China
- Why India and Japan are key to the US’ evolving Asia policy
- Why the shale revolution is the number topic around the world
- Why unconventional oil and gas has the unfair advantage
- Why WE don’t need Keystone XL, but the tar sands industry is desperate
- Why the renewables are the only way forward
Interview by. James Stafford of Oilprice.com
Oilprice.com: In a recent article, you opined that "Militarily, culturally, and even to some extent economically, the US remains surprisingly alone on planet Earth in imperial terms, even if little has worked out as planned in Washington." Can you add to this from the perspective of the unconventional oil and gas boom in the US?
Michael Klare: The United States emerged from the end of the Cold War with the most powerful military force on Earth and, because of the decline of the USSR and its other rivals, was seen as the world's dominant power. In recent years, however, the rise of China has led some analysts to question America's overwhelming superiority, saying that China's accumulation of economic and technological power will allow it to compete on equal terms with the US in the not-too-distant future.
This, combined with the economic toll generated by the economic crisis of 2008 - largely attributed to lax economic oversight in the US - has led some to speak of the eventual "decline" of American power. But now, with the rise in domestic oil and gas production, that talk is disappearing; instead, analysts are speaking of a "resurgence" of American power based on strong oil and gas output.
Oilprice.com: In terms of the pending decision on whether to expand US natural gas exports, the geopolitical argument for this appears to be trumping the economic arguments. Will the geopolitical argument--natural gas exports to challenge Russia and Iran--win out in Washington?
Michael Klare: This is hard to predict, as the geopolitical argument cuts both ways:
while increased exports bolster American power vis-a-vis Russia and Iran, a revival of domestic manufacturing based on cheap energy also bolsters American power in the global economic equation. I would predict some exports, but not so much as they endanger the expected surge in domestic manufacturing.
Oilprice.com: How important is Myanmar to Washington's Asia "pivot", and how should we interpret the sudden blossoming of relations here despite the systematic ethnic cleansing that is taking place? China has the foothold here, but can it maintain it?
Michael Klare: Myanmar is important to the Asia-Pacific pivot, especially in symbolic terms (as it was long in the Chinese orbit), but not especially critical. Far more important are US ties with Japan, the Philippines and, above all, India. You can expect a major US drive to bolster military ties with New Delhi - this will really capture the attention of the Chinese!
Oilprice.com: How important will Myanmar's potential hydrocarbon reserves be against its position as a strategic gateway?
Michael Klare: Myanmar's hydrocarbon reserves are not that important to either China or the US. But it is becoming very important as an alternative delivery route from the Indian Ocean to southwest China, diminishing their reliance on the vulnerable Strait of Malacca, which is largely dominated by the US Navy. China is keenly determined to reduce its reliance on sea lanes controlled by the US Navy.
Oilprice.com: Iraqi Kurdistan is shaping up to be one of the hottest exploration venues in the Middle East, and while it comes with a lot of political baggage, oil companies show no concern. What do you think the political risk potential is once the Kurds get a new pipeline up and running directly to Turkey by the end of this year or early next year, courtesy of Anglo-Turkish Genel Energy?
Michael Klare: I think it would be very dangerous to make predictions about this, given all the instability in the region. The Iraqis in Baghdad are obviously very unhappy about this, and have various means to make it difficult for companies that invest there. But these companies may feel that the risks can be overcome, or minimized. Given the unrest in Syria and Turkey, I just don't know how all this will play out.
Oilprice.com: We've written a lot about the petro-politics surrounding the conflict in Syria, both in terms of the Iranian-Qatari race for good pipeline acreage as well as the recent discoveries in the Levant Basin. What role do you think hydrocarbons and hydrocarbon infrastructure are really playing in the end game for this conflict?
Michael Klare: Well, I always tend to look for the role of oil and gas in conflicts like this, and I'm sure that they're present. But I suspect that this is less about oil and gas per se than about the ultimate division of power in the Middle East between long-contending actors - the Iranians, Kuwaitis, Turks, Iraqis, Russians, Americans, and so on. Of course, this has a lot to do with oil and gas in the long run, as the victor in this power struggle will be able to dominate the production and sale of hydrocarbons. But for now I see it as a power game first and foremost.
Oilprice.com: What is the number one energy topic that grabs your readers, and how does your coverage of it go beyond the depths (or shallows) of the mainstream media?
Michael Klare: Right now the number one topic is how the "Shale gas (and oil) revolution" will alter the power balance between the United States and its major rivals, especially Russia and China. I heard this in Russia, China, and Mexico during visits to universities and think-tanks to these countries last year - it was always the #1 question. They want to know if other countries can replicate the US success in this field, or will be forever dependent on American fracking technology. People also want to know how this "revolution" will affect the future of renewables. Will more gas production prove a "bridge" to renewables, or a "bridge to nowhere?"
Oilprice.com: In your view, how is the mainstream media being manipulated in the climate change debate? How is the public being cheated out of a rational, smart debate?
Michael Klare: I am concerned that the media is not adequately explaining the difference between conventional and unconventional oil and gas. Proponents of fracking, the Keystone XL pipeline, deep-offshore production, and so on all say that these are just other forms of "oil" and "clean-burning natural gas," without explaining that vastly different production techniques are involved and that these techniques have significantly worse impacts on the environment.
Oilprice.com: Will we ever get to the real debate, or will interest groups continue to maintain control?
Michael Klare: We can have a fair debate in universities and think-tanks, but the American media are saturated with advertising paid for by the oil and gas industry that distorts the environmental consequences of relying on these fuels - and it's very hard for ordinary people to challenge these accounts.
Oilprice.com: Recently you have expressed your disappointment over the climate change rallies, focusing on the Keystone XL pipeline. What's gone wrong? Has the movement lost its momentum?
Michael Klare: Perhaps I've expressed some disappointment from time to time but I've been very impressed by the emergence of a new movement on college campuses--including my own--to get colleges and universities to eliminate their investments in big carbon corporations, as a way of persuading them to keep unproduced carbon in the ground.
Oilprice.com: Do we need the Keystone XL pipeline?
Michael Klare: We Americans do not need Keystone XL - there are plenty of other available sources of energy, and we can reduce our demand through conservation efforts. But the tar sands industry desperately needs KXL, as all other practical conduits for exporting increased tar sands production seem to be closed off (like the Northern Gateway pipeline through British Columbia) - meaning they'll have lots of resources, but no export options. No wonder they're desperate to get Obama to approve the pipeline!
Oilprice.com: What should we know about Keystone XL that the mainstream media doesn't tell us, or doesn't understand?
Michael Klare: The fact that KXL will not carry "oil" at all--despite their claims--but a heavily polluting mixture of bitumen, diluents, and toxic chemicals that must be processed through extraordinary means before it can be refined into anything resembling a usable fuel.
Oilprice.com: How do you address the renewable energy-vs-fossil fuels race?
Michael Klare: My argument is that the production of oil and gas is not a static phenomenon but is undergoing profound changes, involving greater risk to the environment and greater risk of conflict over disputed sources of supply (such as offshore and Arctic reserves). These risks are bound to multiply as all sources of "easy" oil disappear and we become increasingly reliant on hard-to-reach, hard-to-process "extreme" energy. Only through the accelerated development of renewables can we avoid an inevitable spiral of war and disaster.
Oilprice.com:Is there a point at which we will be able to say that the two can help each other?
Michael Klare: Some investments in biofuels may have this capacity, but otherwise I do not see how.
Oilprice.com: There has been a lot of transparency activity in the US and Europe this year aimed at punishing big oil and its bankers for manipulating energy prices, for which the end consumer eventually foots the bill. Energy price manipulation is a time-honored tradition and usually the giants get a slap on the wrist and a fine that wouldn't even make them blink. Are times changing, though? Will things be different now?
Michael Klare: Well, we can always hope so. But with Chinese, Indian, and Russian state-owned companies playing an ever-increasing role in the extraction of fossil fuels, I'm not optimistic about this!
Oilprice.com:Thanks for taking the time to speak with us Michael.
For those of you interested in seeing more of Michael’s work please visit his authors page over at TomDispatch
»
- 12468 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"There has been a lot of transparency activity in the US and Europe this year aimed at punishing big oil and its bankers for manipulating energy prices, for which the end consumer eventually foots the bill."
Really? Transparency aimed at punishing?
Brahahahahahahaha
transparency...
Another term being abused by those interested in maintaining the status quo, the memes, the matrix, unreal environment in which we currently struggle to remain uninfected.
Another term of derision, distraction and diminution meant to redirect the attention form the reality at hand to the incidental and immaterial of the conversation.
Indeed, the pure application of the Hegelian Dialectic...
No different than claiming the opposition to be Conspiracy Theorists... in fact, complements such.. Essentially saying: "They are the irresponsible irrational Conspiracy Theorists, we are the Bringers of Truth."
Like terming Snowden a traitor and spy... how ironic... but many accept it as a given...
There is No Transparency.
There are no Conspiracy Theories... they're all to some degree Fact, just as all folk lore and "myth" is generally based upon some great fact meant to be handed down over the centuries.
It's not often that I see others that understand how dialectics actually work. Cheers from a friend Knuckles.
"Will we ever get to the real debate, or will interest groups continue to maintain control?"
Hmm, let me think for a minute.... I think Ben's SAT (he scored perfect, and that was pre-beard which makes him so smart he's crossed the rubicon into full retard and he took no prisoners once he invaded QEland) was filled with these questions.
"...renewables may be the only way to avoid war and disaster."
This bunch of monkeys? Nah, we'll kill each other first.
I think you may very well be correct...
There is so much more money to be made in taking other people's shit from them.
I didn't say it was right, I just said a lot of money can be made that way...
"...a lot of money is made that way..."
No need to qualify your statement....
Your point is why minarchist utopias will only ever be found in subsistence level agrarian societies. There is always somebody who thinks they can simply take and is charismatic enough to convince others to tag along for a cut of the spoils...
You disqualify your statements by implying that he is advocating utopia, when clearly he defined his implication of reality to be anything but.
Sarcasm is a fine tool, often missed by the hasty....
Back in, oh, around 1973 or so (about 40 years ago), I was sitting with my Aunt Dot, as we often did, on the couch in the den after supper watching the Down East Country Western Jamboree broadcast live out of Frankenstein's Diner in Bangor, Maine. Kind of like American Idol with, uh, more modest production values. (If you think I'm making this up, may I recommend for your consideration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIrQ9ilL8aw).
Anyway, after the show, a local reporter and inventor came on. The inventor had a pail full of water, a photovoltaic cell (which was, at the time, pretty exotic and expensive technology), a couple mason jars, and a Briggs and Stratton lawnmower engine.
Obviously, using electrolysis to split water and collect hydrogen and oxygen in the mason jars. He explained, "I had to modify the engine a bit," which consisted of nothing more than screwing a mason jar top onto/into the intake manifold. After a few minutes, he takes the jar with hydrogen, screws it into the lid, and fires it up.
I remember very clearly the look of the reporter staring at this in disbelief. Both Aunt Dot and I laughed.
Then, he takes a hose and a gas mask, hooks it up to the exhaust, puts it on and takes a deep breath, saying, "It's cleaner than what you're breathing out there."
In short, anyone who says renewables are difficult or impossible or years away or too expensive or, well, any such thing has an agenda.
Great anecdote, with just enough truthiness to deflect claims of bullshit...
And I do remember Stacey's Country Jamboree....
But, seriously, it is quite possible that H2 from electrolysis may play a role as the storage media in an alternative gridverse, currently it is trailing other technologies but that could change...
I'll be damned. You're correct:
http://cultureshock.bangordailynews.com/2012/11/13/listen-up/charlie-ten...
http://bangordailynews.com/2010/08/04/living/staceyrsquos-country-jambor...
Please don't tell me, though, that the name of the diner was not "Frankenstein's Diner."
You will shatter one of my most treasured memories.
(Wonder if I got the hydrogen thing wrong, too? I don't think so, but I'd'a sworn it was the Down East Country Western Jamboree broadcast live out of Frankenstein's Diner in Bangor, Maine. Too, I thought it was Friday nights, but the articles say Saturday. Crap. I guess I really am getting old. Getting old sucks.)
Actually, I read the articles a bit closer. My recollection of Frankenstein's comes, apparently, from Whitten’s Frankenstein Store of Milbridge. But then Stacey goes on to say that he was booted out of the studio, and so he started producing the show from "his lounge," which I have no idea what he's referring to. In his house? In a diner (in Bangor?). If someone could weigh in and clear my confusion, I'd be grateful. We might be talking 1974-1975, but I'm pretty sure that it's more 1973-1974. I gather there were some changes right in that time period.
By the way, Aunt Dot is still doing okay, despite having been diagnosed with cancer some three to four years ago, now, I think it's been. To her credit, she disdained conventional treatments in favor of alternative therapies, and, while it might be a bit of a stretch to say that she's thrived, she's done quite a bit better (and lived quite a bit longer) than those who accepted unquestioningly the advice of doctors at the Penobscot Bay Medical Center.
Hydrogen from urine may be quite cost effective:
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/african-teens-create-urine-powered-generator/5206
monkeys with guns
It takes more energy to produce "renewable energy" than you get out of it in return.
Beg pardon?
I'm sorry, did I interrupt you while you were simply making shit up?
No you didn't interrupt. I never read comments about my comments. You can keep on making shit up about me making shit up if you want to.
Not bad....
"I never read comments about my comments."
Hm.
(He. Is. A. Liar. Q.E.D.)
Hey, oil and gas are sorta renewable, assuming you have 200 million years or so...
The commonly accepted definition is not "will it ever come back?" but rather, "can it be replaced with an equal amount of it, within one human lifetime?"
Either we get solar working on a scale to support 2 billion or so people or we are doomed...
Did I mention that we will be lucky if the world population is ~1.5 billion by 2100, it has a very good chance of being even less...
Do you count zombies in that equation? Speaking of zombies, gotta go. CNBC is on.
NEVER gonna happen. I suggest you prepare yourself mentally to live like those people you see in the Oxfam commercials.
I saw one of them once, didn't they claim you could feed a person for "pennies a day"? Well, I got me a couple of gallon jars of pennies, so bring it on!
Did I interrupt you while you were making shit up? Oh me oh my.
This however, is lame....
The faster we are off oil, the less chance of more stupid wars.
Think getting off oil is hard? Look at the via electric truck. Most workmen would rarely need gasoline with 40 miles range. Plug your tools right into the truck. If I was a builder would have one on reserve already.
electricity has to come from somewhere, if not HCs then take your pick - nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric. not enough.
WTF? And you use the word entropy in your screen name – WOW.
There is a very good reason why we don't have plug in pickups or hybrid tractors....
you should see size of the plug on the new 787
problem is, it's not cordless
Entropy, where does the power come from to charge your fucking batteries? What you going to do when you have to replace those batteries for five grand when they wear out? Another thing to recycle. You greenies cannot follow things through to their logical conclusion...
Energy is an extremely complex topic. Electric cars run on batteries, but batteries need to be recharged and produced, all that consumes energy. The production of electricity consumes energy. When you gather that energy using solar pannels you use up water to produce them and a lot of energy. When you create dams to produce electricity you alter the natural balance of whole regions where climate changes, when you create wind electric mill farms, you also alter the whether. All energy on earth comes from the sun, and the inertia of the earth and the moon rotating around the sun and around its axis. any imbalance could destroy the whole echosystem, anything and everything we do creates unbalances that we have to pay in some way. Again, I can't go into everything here, but believe it is an extremely complex subject, and will forever away from the comprehension of the sheeple and most of us.
our energy strategy reminds me of our debt based economy. You can't spend all the past and future and expect the ride to continue. Pay as you go.
How much energy is spent in the production of "GREEN" . More than will ever be realized from savings . You have to do the whole equation, not just cherrypick a portion that supports a theory . The greenest car is the on that has already been made - almost irrespective of it fuel mileage .
That is why "GREEN" doen't work . It is a venus flytrap designed to lure the unsuspecting "naturalist" . It is pure consumption - with its attendant energy net loss .
And you should learn the concept of EROEI...
I suggest you google it or go to theoildrum.com
You need to read the book End of Growth. What you suggest will NEVER happen.
Did you know that fertilizers and pesticides are petro - based... without cheap oil we cannot grow food in the quantities needed to feed 7 billion people.
Estimates I've heard are that, using semi-sustainable agriculture and horticulture, as well as hunting/fishing/foraging, with 0 crude-based inputs, Earth's human carrying capacity is about 2.5 billion at most - optimistic scenario that isnt truly sustainable if you deduce that agriculture is not technically sustainable, while horticulture may be, and permaculture of course is - the latter having lower yields, of course.
The problem (from an anthropocentric perspective) as many have discussed, is undershoot during the transition period. The greater the overshoot, the worse the transition.
I'm all for nuclear power generation; absolutely.
I prefer thorium, in case you were wondering. Then again I don't think the government should be involved in the energy business because that is how they end up with Islands that are Three Miles long.
This guy in playing with himself about climate change.
Trying to make an American Dream out of a nightmare.
the decline of the empire has less to do with shale gas and alot more to do with the dwindling full faith and credit of a nation drowning in debt, losing influence around the world, and turning inward to protect itself against its own citizens.........................
Hooray!
The AGW, the oil shortage, whatever...
They're all part of the distract, bread and circuses...
spot on knukles and kito...
declining empires always have to do with getting fat lazy selfish and mean. That includes overusing resource. The whole world, in last 100 is built on hydrocarbons, the fact that this ever increasing game is ending is a direct parallel
If Oil sourcing were getting more difficult the pricing would reflect it. However it's not reflecting it.
Yeah sure. Like supply and demand is determining the price of gold right now, huh? Price as a signal for supply and demand has been broken a long time ago, specially for commodities.
I call bullshit on this:
China is probably going to go to war with Japan over some rocks in the ocean. Japan has a smoldering radioactive sore that is not only dusting its children with radioactive waste, it is also sharing the gift that keeps giving with China. In 8 more years Japan will be too sick to do much more than just be a victim. China will have plenty of problems of its own to deal with soon enough. Japan's dirty little accident that is not newsworthy is pretty much an act of war against all its neighbors.
On the bright side, when everyone in Japan starts getting cancer they can just get in the Toyota and take a trip to Fuckishima for radiation treatment.
LOL
That is just so wrong..............
What makes it funny is that it is pretty much not happening to me.
The gamma rays go through a process called skyshine where they bounce back down and irradiate the ground. They get free radiation treatments for the rest of their lives.
Hey speaking of healthy, you can order food grown in Fukushima and have it shipped to you ( http://wwwcms.pref.fukushima.jp/pcp_portal/PortalServlet?DISPLAY_ID=DIRE... )
FGB
Tell ya what we know about China's economy. Fuck all nothing.
None of the numbers are reliable. In fact, the BLS horse-shit is Bible, fact, proven compared thereto.
It's fantasy.
We do know there are one hell of a lot of em, they like rice and talk funny.
Those are things of which we are certain. Bank on them.
And the place is horribly polluted, the people live in miserable conditions, the gubamint is repressive (golly, whoda thunk)
But to assume that any statistics from China are "accurate"?
Go for it....
(yes, there's a lot of cynicism and sarcasm, but it is reality)
Stopped reading at:
....the "Shale gas (and oil) revolution" will alter the power balance between the United States and its major rivals.........
Smells and tastes like a “pump and dump” hyperbole – ridiculous.
according to Michael T. Klare, professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College
I'm sorry, you lost me right there.
I think you should open that can on this "author"...
What were the geopolitical implications of the US exporting natural gas? Increased "power" vis-a-vis Russia? Economic "power"? What's that?
Smells like bullshit.
"Renewables" will NEVER replace fossil fuels. Do the fucking BTU math. NEVER. So if your answer is to shrink the world population by 90 percent, then be my fucking guest. Good luck with that bullshit...
You got it bass-ackwards: the answer is not "shrink" the population, that will be taken care of all by itself. Just watch real market forces in action....
Hey, I've got a bright idea!
We already ferment corn into ethanol. How about fermenting people?!
Screw soilent green! I want to be able to fill up my car with fresh corpses instead of fossilized fish and dinosaurs.
Ethnically flavored gasoline brands? Oh, that's a guarantee! GS exect would fill up on nothing but 94-premium white high-testosterone! The rest would get 89-basic-yellow shipped straight from China. I'm pretty sure their government would jump right into the business opportunity.
The benefits of "hydrocarbonated" people are humongous! The moral dilemma of food vs. fuel present with corn, goes straight out the window. There's also a geopolitical bonus. When sending our young men to fight wars on behalf of private oil cartels, we can have'em come back with oil or "as" oil! Win win!
Overpopulation - solved! Hunger - solved! Hello suburbia!
And jobs! Don't forget jobs! Them special fermentation bodybags aren't gonna weave themselves.
Now Julia, why is it I note and am compelled to point out that your energy sources speak naught to some other ethnicities?
Hmmmm
Everywhere one goes, it's soooo taboo it remains ..... unspoken.
As if we must ignore the reality
Yes, that's a grand idea, society, let's just ignore the problem and it'll go away.
Unspoken...
And that in and of itself is a social, political and intellectually dishonest crime...
But alas it is what it is, no?
We are all pressured in some way to abide by social norms and values, however questionable they might be...
Wouldn't that be great?
I'm an idea man.
Interesting idea and similar to one I had-Let's take all the enormeous fatties and lardasses, liposuck them free of charge, and render the resulting tonnage into oil! I bet we could get TONS of stuff FAST and render it down to gasoline, lubricant, and (Cheers ZH) soap in no time. What's more, our welfare, foodfare, SNAP, WIC, whatever govt-funded fatties could be harvested at intervals like shearing sheep. We could set up an entire industry around feeding excess food to our nation's fatties, letting them grow, then harvest them for their useful lipoids. What's more, we could make it a patriotic duty, tell people FAT IS WHERE IT'S AT! and even award the biggest losers some kind of small kitchen appliance. Maybe a George Foreman Grill for the first 100 pounds removed, a Donut Maker for the 2nd 100 pounds, and a IR oven for the 3rd 100, etc.
I even have a nickname for the folks in the harvesting industry-Whalers!
You go into the Whaling industry and help recruit, suck, process, and market what I'll call "PEEP-OIL."
Huh? Huh?! That's what I'm talkin' about!
Anyone remember Kentucky Fried Movie and Argon petroleum?
"At Argon Petroleum, we know that a country that runs on oil can’t afford to run short, but conventional drilling is not always possible. Now, new ways must be found to produce crude oil.
Here at our multibillion dollar refinery here, in Fairbanks, we’re extracting over 5 billion barrels each day from teenagers’ faces. Crude oil can be shipped in mammoth supertankers in order to better utilize our country’s vast supplies of yet untapped natural resources.
And here in Milan Italy, an affiliate of Argon Petroleum has developed a way to reclaim oil from the discarded combs of local residents; enough to fill an 1100 foot tanker and save 60,000 gallons of valuable energy.
Back in the United States, we’ve developed a way to filter the oil from carry out foods, an amount sufficient to supply the entire city of Oakland, California.
And for the future, the promise of capturing over 40 trillion cubic feet of natural gas has brought us to Beaumont, Texas and this unique recycling method. (collecting methane and belches at a chili dog stand)
At Argon, we’re working to keep your money!"
The hilarious part of it is this ad is over 30 years old and even more appropriate today than back then! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6ZAktYiumc
Columbia University B.A. in 1963 and M.A. in 1968, Ph.D. from the Graduate School of the Union Institute in 1976
That's this Michael Klare guy's resume.
Note BA and MA. Not BS or MS. No geology. No physics. He writes about politics and oil. He doesn't write about oil geology or oil technology. He has no engineering or science credentials.
Why do people like this get interviewed? The subject is geology. Why don't they interview Petroleum Engineers?
Why not TheOilDrum?
BECAUSE, GODDAMNIT IT'S PROPAGANDA!
Pushing the statist norms, the memes of the times, furthering alternative agendas, FFS
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insead/2013/05/08/shale-oil-and-gas-the-contrarian-view/
Here's the sober reality re: shale oil and gas http://www.forbes.com/sites/insead/2013/05/08/shale-oil-and-gas-the-cont...
Ordinary people should find their own planet to live on.
"renewables may be the only way to avoid war and disaster."
The Answer is clearly "No" when the world consumes 400 years of solar energy every day. Consider it took more that 300 Million years to produce the fossil fuels we use today. Every day we burn about 400 years worth of energy. There is no way renewables can ever come close.
The avoid war and energy the worlds energy demands need to fall back to pre-industrial levels, which isn't going to happen without lots of destruction and death.
No question.
Warfare is mankind's oldest profession; it certainly existed long before oil and gas were extracted. Warfare exists in chimps, who know nothing of technology and civilization.
The notion that oil is the cause of warfare is a strictly nonsense, strictly marxist materialist interpretation of history that can be proven demonstrably false by simply looking at current events.
The Taliban, in Afghaninstan, are the primary current example of a spiritually motivated force achieving victory over a materialist force, even while possessing vastly inferior weapons and firepower.
Materialism has never conquered spiritualism, and it never will.
Mankind needs to constantly exand in order to satisfy its aggressive nature. The answer to that, today, is expanding mankind into space, where there are no limits to what can be explored. Mankind's natural aggression must be channeled into productive measures if civilization is to survive and thrive.
Mans expansion into space will just have to wait until the war on terror is finished, and also the war on drugs, and also the war on cybercrime, and let's not forget the war on global warming.
Let's just prioritize a bit eh?
"Energy" is not really on the minds of those who live moment by moment protecting their illusion.
When you spend every moment protecting your illusion, everything else is nothing but a pesky inconvenience.
India is thinking twice about aligning with Japan, [Brunei?] Philippines, and Vietnam. The Russian's have a good strategic partnership with India regarding trade,... as China with their arch nemesis Pakistan [Kashmir?]-- but? [think of the possibilities http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi and how much money it's gonna cost us to buy off Pakistan again?]
The Chinese can make life very difficult for India if they side with the Japanese [American's], and the last thing New Dehli needs is a water war? ref: "China and India: Diplomats Jostle, Militaries Prepare" [Dam lies, Damn'd lies,... Damn'd`dammit?] http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/china-and-india-today-diplomats-jostle-militaries/prepare Note: the Buddhist in Myanmar are literally committing genocide?...against what's left of the minority indigenous muslims. As noted [Burma?] Myanmar is a strategic old Darwinian-route for a[new] Chinese hub/node?!
The Kurd's in Northern Iraq don't stand a chance, period! Baghdad has told the big oil interest to stay the fuck-out, or they're shut-em-off in the southern-east-western fields... with China getting more and more contracts daily.
China has Iran's Chabadar Port [currently the construction license has been turned over to India because of China's slow progress?] as a hub/node when finnished! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Chabahar ,and Pakistan has granted the Chinese full authority of Port Gwadar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwadar_Port to transport overland pipeline through Balochistan to Quetta Pakistan? India's gotta swollow-hard and make peace with China to get some of that gas/oil 'LifeBlood Energy' if they no what's good for them??
Lastly, the {IIS} Iran, Iraq, Syrian pipeline will bypass Turkey for a Damascus `Tartous Port http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartous vis-a-vis Latakia Port http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latakia via Russia's Gasprov? Ankara is a fucking mess, and, with a Muslim/Turk Arab`Spring being fomented by the west, things don't look promising for Istanbul's Erdogan's AKP!
Finally, now that the Iranian electorate has voted a populus-moderate as President-- Mr. Rouhani... America and Israel's ipso facto hillary`ious triathlon axis-of-evil tripolism-calculus has been turned upside-down... inside-out, especially with Assad winning with al Qaeda supplying the Sarin!?--- ha! ha! ha! DRAMAticKilly USSA Shit-Prism-Storm gone terribly, awfully vewy SHale-LOW :) Ps2) * Just think how happy american consumers will feel when our inexpensive energy is/has become a byproduct of Ameri-OPEC for the good of the world and is exported???
Ps. Qatar's Kerry?, wants a 'Free-Taliban-Now' campaign, with the one-eye'd Omar placing and abetting his fake-eye on RED?
From what I've seen, the Kurdistan region is pretty self sufficient. They've got a nearly homogenous population, their own troops and weapons, and they could probably beat the new Iraqi Army if they tried to do anything. The Iraqi Army is a joke, anyway. They're hardly able to keep the lid on things in the South without trying to threaten the North. Kurdistan is poised to succeed, while Iraq just sucks. The Iraqi government can say what they want; Kurdistan is practically a separate nation already. The issue, in my opinion, will be getting Turkey to agree to an oil pipeline through the Kurdish region and to the West. They don't seem to like dealing with Kurds very much.
"Only through the accelerated development of renewables can we avoid an inevitable spiral of war and disaster."
Really?!, I just got back to Denver from Arkansas and as I drove past the 500 or so windmills near Limon, CO they were all STOPPED, BECAUSE there was NO WIND.
Renewables are a FUCKING SCAM!
Dear sir: you are an idiot!
Keep it simple - there is no such thing as a "renewable." If you view photovoltaic, wind, hydroelectric, biofuels as "renewable," then answer this question:
When the oil, coal, natural gas, and nuclear are all gone, how are you going to dig out the silicon to make PV cells? How are you going to mine the iron and alumininum and process it to make windmills? How are you going to make the giant replacement turbine in the HE plant? How are you going to plant and harvest and transport your biofuels?
Point is, the only real renewable resource is the sun, at least for a few hundred million years. Everything else is critically dependent on fossil fuels to be made and operated.
By harvesting the Millions of tonnes of greenhouse methane created in ruminant animals stomachs, electricity can be generated in mobile gas fired power plants and global warming can be halted in it's tracks at the same time.
We just need to work out a few small details of how to capture the cows flatulence first...
Hell, why do I have to do all the thinking for you global warming doomers?