| Clive's profilePeak Oil & Interesting t...BlogLists |  Tools  Help |
|
December 18 Oil, Smoke and mirrorsI am posting this video link, as it is excellent and a real must watch.
March 08 Game over for fossil fuel addictionLast week I visited one of London’s large West End book stores and stood looking at a couple of books in the environment sciences section. A middle aged women and her husband stopped to look, then the women proclaimed at the top of her voice, “Hmmm, here we have the DOOM Section”. As they walked off, she was heard to say, “I am still not convinced!”, as she referred to global warming. The fact that the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland are melting, which is quiet obvious when you look at satellite images over the past 20 years. Never mind the melting frozen tundra of Siberia that is releasing more methane or greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Perhaps these things aren’t really happening, because we choose not to believe them? This brought home to me, that we really do live in a society of denial. It is universally recognized that the burning of fossil fuels, which are really the stored up carbon from plants and animal matter from millions of years ago (every year we use four centuries’ worth of plant and animal matter in burning this fuel), is releasing this carbon into the atmosphere in the form of CO2. This is nothing new. It is also recognized, but not discussed as much, that we may be nearing a tipping point, that after which, the process of climate change speeds up, as a chain reaction starts, thus bringing major global climate changes within our life times or that of our children’s. The other thing we seem to be totally oblivious to, is the fact that we are almost at a point, where the very fuels that run our civilisation (and are damaging our climate) are now unable to keep up with demand. With the revelation at the end of last year, that two of the world’s largest oil fields are now in decline. It’s becoming clear that not only will oil production not be able to keep up with market demand, but that production on a global scale will start declining soon. Many experts say, this could hit us as early as the end of this decade. There are some of course, who say we have nothing to worry about, that market forces will provide, as though money is interchangeable as energy. A clear example that this isn’t the case, can be seen in the current gas markets, where the news has been of continual price rises. The conversations in the media, haven’t really touched on the underlying issues. Gas markets are more localised (gas is a stranded energy form and very expensive to transport frozen, across continents) and in the demand areas of North America and Europe, gas supplies are beginning to run short. Rather than blaming the gas companies for the high prices, it would be more constructive to ask why our gas supplies (and oil) were over estimated, why the data wasn’t verified and why our governments continue to subscribe to such data? George Monbiot summed this up, so well, when he wrote in the Guardian, that every generation has its taboo, and ours is this: that the resource upon which our lives have been built is running out. We don’t talk about it because we cannot imagine it. This is a civilisation in denial. Technology is a wonderful thing, but historically technology has given us more amazing ways to use and burn fossil fuels. Technology has not, in itself produced energy. Even nuclear power, would not be possible with out vast inputs from oil and gas (for instance, the uranium ore is mined on the other side of the planet, using oil powered machines, shipped across continents and then processed, using machines that run on fossil fuels). There are some that say that so much energy is put into building the nuclear power planets and processing the fissionable material, that there is little carbon pay back and that we might have just as well burnt the oil and gas that went into this process directly. Seemingly we are all currently in a trance and are sleep walking. The markets are our gods and we will be provided for by the wonder of technology. We have a very rude awakening coming and that shock will be here quicker than most of us can imagine. No combination of nuclear or alternative technologies will be capable of plugging the gap of projected 3-8% declines per year in global oil production, in the next decade, without major, if not war like preparation. These “alternative technologies” are not waiting in the wings, to take over from fossil fuels. Not with out long lead times (10-20years) and many trillions of pounds or dollars spent and time is running very short. The amount of energy that we get from a barrel of oil (and the world uses 84 million barrels a day, 30 billion a year) is truly amazing. It will propel a 1 ½ ton vehicle 900miles and gives the equivalent of 23200 hours of hard human labour in energy terms. Oil is so versatile, that it produces the pesticides for our food production (not to mention all the farm equipment as well. Some 10 calories of fossil fuels, go into every 1 calorie that you eat), our medicines, fuel for all transportation and it does this in a way that no current alternative can match. The alternative energy sources, be they wind, solar or nuclear power are built using our current energy sources of oil and gas. Once we move to an age of energy scarcity (once supply cannot keep up with our demand) will we have the spare energy and investments to build the needed alternative energy infrastructure? What I mean by this, is once we realise on a public level that the good old days are gone, once the market is bidding the price of oil and gas to unimagined levels. Now we are so heavily in debt, where is the money (or indeed the oil and gas) going to come from? All of the oil and gas that we can buy, along with vast conservation, will only just about keep our economies functioning in the first years…….. So where is the extra going to come from to build our stepping stones to safety? When President Bush spoke about America being addicted to oil, other than stating the obvious, he spoke about nothing new and gave no real money to research programs that are badly needed. Hydrogen and biofuels are primarily a distraction, from this colossal problem. They take more energy to manufacture or grow, than you get from the final product. For instance, hydrogen is currently manufactured using natural gas. In the process it takes five times more natural gas, than you get in energy terms from the hydrogen that you produce. You can produce hydrogen from a process of electrolysis, but this is also very energy intensive. What I am getting at, is that we have a huge problem. We have no clean alternative energy sources that can make up for the loss of oil and gas and continue to run the world (with all the cheap fights, cheap car driving, cheap consumer goods from China) as we know it. We could of course dig up the majority of the world’s coal reserves over the next 50years (if we take this step, most of the hydrocarbon energy on the planet will have been consumed in this time frame, from our need for growth and a growing global population) and in a very uneconomical and environmentally damaging process (Fischer-Tropsch), convert the coal to synthetic oil. Without again huge investments and early planning, this would still be too late to cover the short fall in global oil production. The environmental issues with using coal, are the phenomenal CO2 emissions as our coal use would be ramped up. Finding huge quantities of fresh water to run the process of course is only one of the other many problems. In the late 1970s US President Jimmy Carter, spoke of the moral equivalent of war, so great was the task of reducing dependency on foreign oil, even then. The United States’ own oil production had only just peaked in 1970 and the US was importing much less oil than it does today. The six point plan that President Carter put in place in 1979 (later reversed by Ronald Reagan in 1981) was extensive and would have provided the US, with the real possibility of halving their oil imports. The current rhetoric from the Bush administration, seems hollow in comparison and offers very little in the way of real investment. It does more to insert the subject in the mindset of the US population, for the coming energy crisis, almost as though the Bush administration can say that the issue is a new one. It would seem that Iran is becoming a real headache for President Bush, as it was for Jimmy Carter back in 1979. It seems to me that there must be more to this, than just nukes (weapons of mass destruction, anybody?). The Middle East holds 60% of the remaining world oil and most of this is out of bounds to western oil companies. Unfriendly oil producing countries sitting on the majority of the world’s oil resources with nuclear weapons will not be tolerated, it would appear, this seems to be the bottom line. The supple lines from the Middle East are to be guaranteed and the US is currently completing 7 huge new military bases in Iraq to this end (to add to the 702 bases in 130 other countries worldwide). The threat of further conflict should come as no surprise. Before the last presidential election, Bush threatened that Iran would be next. We can see the run up to this and the build up of tension, following the same path as it did before with Iraq. I truly hope that this doesn’t happen, that somehow the negotiations can find a peaceful route. The true consequences of conflict with Iran cannot be imagined. Firstly the 5% of global oil that Iran produces would be removed from the market. This at a time, when there is no spare capacity in the global system (no oil producing country has spare capacity, everyone is pumping at full output), would be worse than the 1979 embargo. The price of crude oil would rocket, western governments would implement petrol rationing and central banks would hit the panic button and raise interest rates, as has been done before. Need I remind you of the effect that this would have on the economy and housing markets. Can we really be this stupid, or does some long term goal, outweigh this? Ironically such demand destruction (economics for recession, when people don’t have jobs they don’t consume) would cool oil demand and pull us away from the cliff of peak oil for a few more years. What is needed is real foresight and will, to confront these issues. The 10bn euro project to create a fusion reactor over the next thirty five years, needs to be scaled up. The world does not have thirty five years to come up with a plan b. We need to be spending 10 trillion euros as a world economy over the next 10years, while putting major conservation plans into action to cut unnecessary use of fossil fuels. So that we have the materials and investment to be able to transition. This is no longer only about climate change, it is about our need and ability to cut the use of oil and gas, before this is taken out of our hands. It is not good enough for politicians to pay lip service to the issues, whilst doing nothing, hoping that the crisis will not come in their term. That is of course, assuming that they even admit in public that there is a problem in the first place.
Sources
Is the Modern Banking System Entirely Dependent on Cheap Oil?We all need to know about this, taken from oiltruth.com
"Is the Modern Banking System Entirely Dependent on Cheap Oil?"
The answer is Yes.
The global financial system is entirely dependent on a constantly increasing supply of oil and natural gas. The relationship between the supply of oil and natural gas and the workings of the global financial system is arguably the key issue to understanding and dealing with Peak Oil, far more important than alternative sources of energy, energy conservation, or the development of new technologies. Dr. Colin Campbell presents an understandable model of this complex (and often difficult to explain) relationship: It is becoming evident that the financial and investment community begins to accept the reality of Peak Oil, which ends the first half of the age of oil. They accept that banks created capital during this epoch by lending more than they had on deposit, being confident that tomorrow’s expansion, fuelled by cheap oil-based energy, was adequate collateral for today’s debt. The decline of oil, the principal driver of economic growth, undermines the validity of that collateral which in turn erodes the valuation of most entities quoted on Stock Exchanges. The investment community however faces a dilemma. It desires to protect its own fortunes and those of its privileged clients while at the same time is reluctant to take action that might itself trigger the meltdown. It is a closely knit community so that it is hard for one to move without the others becoming aware of his actions.
The scene is set for the Second Great Depression, but the conservatism and outdated mindset of institutional investors, together with the momentum of the massive flows of institutional money they are required to place, may help to diminish the sense of panic that a vision of reality might impose. On the other hand, the very momentum of the flow may cause a greater deluge when the foundations of the dam finally crumble. It is a situation without precedent.
Commentator Robert Wise explains the connection between energy and money as follows:
It's not physics, but it's true: money equals energy. Real, liquid wealth represents usable energy. It can be exchanged for fuel, for work, or for something built by the work of humans or fuel-powered machines. Real cost reflects the energy cost of doing something; real value reflects the energy expended to build something. Nearly all the work done in the world economy -- all the manufacturing, construction, and transportation -- is done with energy derived from fuel. The actual work done by human muscle power is miniscule by comparison. And, the lion's share of that fuel comes from oil and natural gas, the primary sources of the world's wealth.
In October 2005, the normally conservative London Times acknowledged that the world's wealth may soon evaporate as we enter a technological and economic "Dark Age." In an article entitled "Waiting for the Lights to Go Out" Times reporter Bryan Appleyard wrote the following:
Oil is running out; the climate is changing at a potentially catastrophic rate; wars over scarce resources are brewing; finally, most shocking of all, we don't seem to be having enough ideas about how to fix any of these things. Almost daily, new evidence is emerging that progress can no longer be taken for granted, that a new Dark Age is lying in wait for ourselves and our children. …growth may be coming to an end. Since our entire financial order — interest rates, pension funds, insurance, stock markets — is predicated on growth, the social and economic consequences may be cataclysmic.
The severe consequences of these relatively small shortfalls between supply and demand (less than 5%) have prompted the UK government to look into draconian energy conservation measures that would be enforced via house-to-house searches by a force of "energy-police."
Parts of the US are facing similarly dire possibilities. In December 2005, US News and World Report published a six-page article documenting some potentially nightmarish scenarios about to descend on the US. According to the normally conservative publication, people in the northeastern US could be facing massive layoffs, rotating blackouts, permanent industrial shutdowns, and catastrophic breakdowns in public services this winter as a result of shortages of heating oil and natural gas.
This is happening despite the fact we are probably at least a few years away from seeing the peak in either oil or natural gas production. You have to ask yourself, "what's going to happen when the 'real problems' start showing up?"
"Are the Banks Aware of This Situation?"
The central ones certainly are. (Those new bankruptcy laws were passed for a reason.) On June 28, 2005, Gary Duncan, the economics editor for the UK based Sunday Times, reported that the Bank of International Settlements (BIS), aka "the central banker's central bank", had issued the following warnings regarding the economic fallout of further rises in the price of oil:
Oil prices may well remain high for a prolonged period of time . . . Further rises — if they materialize — may have more severe consequences than currently anticipated . . . Everyone needs to commit to some unpleasant compromises now, in order to avoid even more unpleasant alternatives in the future . . .
Duncan goes on to summarize the bank's report as follows:
The US current account deficit meant that a further slide in the dollar was "almost inevitable", while the BIS sounded a warning that the deficit could yet lead to "a disorderly decline of the dollar, associated turmoil in other financial markets, and even recession."
A bank as crucially important to the world economy and as influential to the markets as the BIS doesn't just casually toss out terms like "unpleasant compromises", "severe consequences", "even more unpleasant alternatives", "turmoil," and "disorderly decline" in relation to the oil markets and the dollar (which is the reserve currency for all oil transactions in the world) unless something very nasty is brewing in the background.
Dick Cheney made the following statement in late 1999:
By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day.
To put Cheney’s statement in perspective, remember that the oil producing nations of the world are currently pumping at full capacity but are struggling to produce much more than 84 million barrels per day. Cheney’s statement was a tacit admission of the severity and imminence of Peak Oil as the possibility of the world raising its production by such a huge amount is borderline ridiculous.
A report commissioned by Cheney and released in April 2001 was no less disturbing:
The most significant difference between now and a decade ago is the extraordinarily rapid erosion of spare capacities at critical segments of energy chains. Today, shortfalls appear to be endemic. Among the most extraordinary of these losses of spare capacity is in the oil arena.
Not surprisingly, George W. Bush has echoed Dick Cheney’s sentiments. In May 2001, Bush stated, "What people need to hear loud and clear is that we’re running out of energy in America."
One of George W. Bush's energy advisors, energy investment banker Matthew Simmons, has spoken at length about the impending crisis.
(Note: Although he has advised Bush/Cheney, Simmons considers himself strongly non-partisan on energy issues. His writings are highly regarded amongst the energy and banking community for their grounding in nonpartisan, heavily documented, and virtually infallible research & analysis.)
Simmons' investment bank, Simmons and Company International, is considered the most reputable and reliable energy investment bank in the world.
Given Simmons' background, what he has to say about the situation is truly terrifying. For instance, in an August 2003 interview with From the Wilderness publisher Michael Ruppert, Simmons was asked if it was time for Peak Oil to become part of the public policy debate. He responded:
It is past time. As I have said, the experts and politicians have no Plan B to fall back on. If energy peaks, particularly while 5 of the world’s 6.5 billion people have little or no use of modern energy, it will be a tremendous jolt to our economic well-being and to our health — greater than anyone could ever imagine.
When asked if there is a solution to the impending natural gas crisis, Simmons responded:
I don’t think there is one. The solution is to pray. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that it’s a certainty.
In May 2004, Simmons explained that in order for demand to be appropriately controlled, the price of oil would have to reach $182 per barrel. Simmons explained that with oil prices at $182 per barrel, gas prices would likely rise to $7.00 per gallon.
Simmons predictions are downright tame compared to what other analysts in the world of investment banking are preparing themselves for. For instance, in April 2005, French investment bank Ixis-CIB warned, "crude oil prices could touch $380 a barrel by 2015."
A March 2005 report prepared for the US Department of Energy confirmed dire warnings of the investment banking community. Entitled "The Mitigation of the Peaking of World Oil Production," the report observed:
Without timely mitigation, world supply/demand balance will be achieved through massive demand destruction (shortages), accompanied by huge oil price increases, both of which would create a long period of significant economic hardship worldwide.
Waiting until world conventional oil production peaks before initiating crash program mitigation leaves the world with a significant liquid fuel deficit for two decades or longer.
The report went on to say:
The problems associated with world oil production peaking will not be temporary, and past 'energy crisis' experience will provide relatively little guidance. The challenge of oil peaking deserves immediate, serious attention, if risks are to be fully understood and mitigation begun on a timely basis.
. . . the world has never faced a problem like this. Without massive mitigation more than a decade before the fact, the problem will be pervasive and will not be temporary. Previous energy transitions were gradual and evolutionary. Oil peaking will be abrupt and revolutionary.
As one commentator recently observed, the reason our leaders are acting like desperados is because we have a desperate situation on our hands.
If you've been wondering why the Bush administration has been spending money, cutting social programs, and starting wars like there's no tomorrow, now you have your answer
http://www.democrats.us/editorial/wise041105.shtml http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2099-1813695_1,00.html http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/051219/19energy_2.htm http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9072-1671957,00.html http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/economy/loonie_rebounds/pressures.html http://www.energybulletin.net/4740.html http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/Cheney_PeakOil_FCD.pdf http://www.counterpunch.org/everest12132003.html http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/research.aspx?Type=msspeeches http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stm http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/73CE8286-740C-482B-8150-DA57696BC02F.htm http://www.peakoil.net/USDOE.html http://www.energybulletin.net/4673.html
Taken from oil truth.com (www.oiltruth.com) Written by Matt Savinar January 11 Gold Bullion makes an excellent investment by Clive SmithFor example, a year ago I bought a 1oz Krugerrand for just under £280. Today it is worth £328. Thats £50 gain in one year. The value of gold seems to have a way to go, before it starts falling (a real energy or economic crisis or war and it will rocket even higher). It really does seem that in the short and long term with gold you can't lose.
Gold today is still cheap! Now some would say at over $500 that gold is not cheap. Now in historical terms, when you look at the average persons buying power, gold today is cheap. For example, if you were to compare gold price and inflation, the price of 1oz of gold in 1960 was $37 and this is much cheaper than todays price if adjusted for inflation ($197-$200). But if you look at the average persons buying power, you get a completely different picture. The average annual salary in the UK (for a man, for women it was less) in 1960 was £190 and today the average salary is £22411. Now in 1960 the cost of a 1 oz of gold would have been just over £13. Sounds cheap doesn't it, until you realise that you only earnt £ 15 (before deductions) last month. In real terms of purchasing power thats £1556 (compared to todays average salary) in todays money. My suggestion is that we invest in some physical gold today, while it is still cheap and our purchasing power is still high. Interestingly the long-term (decades) oil:gold ratio is 15.4:1 which implies gold should be $924/oz with oil at $60/bbl. September 30 Debt & Peak Oil by Clive SmithFor those of us that think that the UK government isn’t aware of the issue of peak oil, I would ask to think again and read the newspapers more closely. Oil depletion isn’t a conspiracy theory, like some UFO on the horizon, where believers speculate whether there is some sort of cover up. Oil depletion is a known measurable that has been proven, around the world. National identity cards, a national road toll system that will charge car users large sums of money for driving at peak times by 2014. The government has already given warning that the current pension system, is not in the long term affordable. In the summer of 2004 the UK government announced that it was prudent that people should put three weeks worth of food aside for emergencies (the BBC ran several pieces on this), mainly terrorist attack. Along with plans to base the army at food depots during the next fuel strike and you begin to understand that we have all quietly been put on notice. For the majority of us, our standard of living is better than it has ever been. You just have to look around to see all this newfound wealth - although with the UK consumer debt having topped the £1 trillion mark last summer (including mortgage debt), you begin to wonder. Many homeowners discovered in the last few years that their homes are worth so much more than they paid for them, so they have borrowed extra, to finance home improvements or a new car and holidays. This new wealth is in reality huge debt running on borrowed time. With the consensus among independent petroleum geologists that world oil production will peak by the end of the decade and the North Sea having already peaked in 1999, Britain is set to become poorer. With the loss of revenue from a dwindling North Sea and higher oil prices than we currently have, the economy is going to suffer. It is very difficult trying to predict future events and many people have ideas on what peak oil and beyond will bring us. Although it seems to make sense that, since oil is the precursor to everything that we do and underpins our material wealth, a shortage or higher price will affect everything that we do. In a market economy a shortage or threat of a shortage, will raise the price of a commodity that is in demand. This is what is happening at the moment. Although there is no actual shortage of oil, the market is tight and demand is high. With bad weather and terrorism shutting off production in some countries, we now have the threat of a shortage raising the price of oil. If we can have $55 a barrel of oil on the speculation of a shortage, imagine then what the price per barrel might be when we do have real shortages. It is interesting that economists tell us, that we are much less reliant on oil since the last oil crisis in the 1970s and therefore higher oil prices will affect the economy much less. Per pound or dollar of national output, we do indeed use less oil than we did then, but if we are really less reliant on oil, why are we using so much more of the stuff? The volume of transport in the UK that relies on oil has doubled since the 70s. The 70s oil crisis showed that very high oil prices will cripple economic growth and this is not necessarily instant. Sudden actual shortage, brought on by a large terrorist attack on an oil installation has the possibility to create a huge economic crisis that would be felt in all areas of our lives. Peak oil threatens to be somewhat more insidious though. The person in the street would possibly become aware of peak oil through higher prices for all goods and food, a weak economy and higher unemployment. Who is to say how long "business as usual" could last for, before major shortages surpassed our ability to conserve and save? It is likely that much higher prices for crude oil will be seen for a while, before we have an issue with shortages. Most of our recent increased personal wealth, seen as new cars, home improvements, bigger homes, two holidays a year and expensive electrical goods, has been funded by personal borrowing. One of the most popular forms of borrowing has been to extend mortgages, as the UK has over the past few years seen a huge housing boom. Increased borrowing on a mortgage is the most expensive form of borrowing. The interest is paid over a very long period and unfortunately the housing bubble will be the first to burst in an economic down turn, leaving many people out in the cold so to speak. You are probably thinking this is all very interesting and you have probably heard some of it before, "so what has this got to do with me?" Since we have done nothing to prepare for the coming oil shocks, we are completely reliant on increasing our supply of oil to power all of our transport needs, our food production, our manufacturing of goods and 40% of our total energy needs. With an economy that is based on perpetual growth, this is very bad news. As a lack of surplus energy, means a lack of economic growth. It is generally given in simple terms, that a shrinking oil supply will mean a recession and high prices for all goods. In a recession, people tend to lose their jobs and spend less money. Thus the spending of less money - a consumer downturn - makes the spiral even worse and more people lose their jobs. I had a conversation with a friend who works in the airline business the other day. He has known about the basics of peak oil for a while and could see the price of oil continuing to rise into the future. He suggested that as the price of crude oil increases and thus the price of holidays and flights, people would just pay more as they wouldn’t stop travelling to go on holiday. This idea is very common, put completely incorrect. In the short term this might happen. Although as many people lose their jobs and there is less money around as the economy enters into a crisis, the majority of us will not be going on holidays abroad whatever the cost. Many companies will go to the wall. Not only will there be less money available, but also less goods. It’s a spiralling down effect that will continue, even if we manage to find a miracle that can replace oil, for many years. If I could offer you three pieces of advice that would make your life easier in the future, it would be the following;
The future is likely going to be tough. Many changes will happen and we will have to change our very ideals and ways we live. Governments have known about this for years, but the changes that are needed to secure our futures are unpopular and not vote winners. So nothing will be done, until it becomes complete obvious to all that we really are in trouble and most of our beliefs about our lives and prosperity come crashing down around us. If you are up to your eyes in debt, with a mortgage, loan(s) and credit card(s), what will happen when you lose your job or are forced to take a job paying substantially less then you need to service these debts. "Your house is at risk, if you are unable to keep up the repayments on it". This well-known phrase should give you an idea of what is likely to come. The economic downturn that brought on the last housing market crash in the early 90s was small, compared to the possible energy crisis ahead. Many people lost their homes and were left with huge debts. The current housing boom has taken personal debt to new highs and left many families very vulnerable. I can’t stress the importance of this. Having excessive debt is going to make things very difficult. Although, I do think it is important to have some sort of balance, between this and things that you want to do in your life. What I mean by this is, if you have always wanted to travel the Far East or back pack round the world, now is the time to do it. It’s a balancing act, between getting your life in order and enjoying the party, whilst we are still living through it. Try to clear loans and credit cards and reduce your mortgage. This is far more important in the long term to your well being, than buying a new car (or the latest plasma screen, dishwasher etc), when a cheaper second hand model is adequate. You could also sell expensive assets to help pay off your debts or mortgage quicker, i.e. downgrade from a prestige car to a more economical cheaper model. You might decide that this is the right time to sell your house/flat in London and move to a house in the country or a small town, thus reducing your mortgage. Try to live without the expectation that tomorrow will always be better than today and do not rely on the government to support or supply your future. I will leave you with one last thought. The CIA publishes its own report on world oil resources, which stated that as of 2002, proved world oil reserves stood at 1025 million barrels. If you divide this by current yearly consumption we have just over 34years (as of 2002) worth of oil left. This does not take into account that world oil consumption is increasing and in real terms this figure is more like 25 years worth. With a little imagination you can understand having read about oil depletion that we will be in a major crisis long before the 25years are up. We are doing nothing to prevent this other than going to war and preparing for other wars with countries that have resources that we need. Time is short to get your lives in order and the quicker people wake up to this fact, the happy we will all be. Sources http://www.energybulletin.net/308.html http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/fields/2178.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3907941.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3906187.stm http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-523-1302571-523,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1232445,00.html http://www.energybulletin.net/3690.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4101021.stm http://www.livescience.com/environment/end_oil_041214.html http://www.energybulletin.net/3506.html http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1129_041129_global_oil_supply.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1361836,00.html |
|||
|
|
