Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

$100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

    As I've been saying this whole time... Just keep this all in mind if this crisis does occur, and keep in mind which executives are getting filthy rich from this and why they lobbied against and supressed adoption of past and presently viable alternatives to oil's use. Pre peak, each barrel of oil sold for much less than each barrel post-peak. Oil companies then make more per barrel, so you can damn well bet they want this crisis to happen, regardless of all the harm and perhaps massive starvation is could cause.

    http://www.oldamericancentury.org/rowan_021.htm

    Oil and Economic Crash Possible This Winter

    By Rowan Wolf

    The "oil crisis" may be much closer than most thought. It may be less than six months away. Matt Simmons, CEO of Simmons and Company International (an investment banking consultant firm to the energy industry) recently stated that Oil 'will hit $100 by winter' . A forty dollar a barrel rise in oil in six months could indeed shake the global economy. It could lead us into the war game scenario recently played out - Oil Shockwave. In that simulation, former US officials were presented with a scenario of escalating oil prices and global economic instability. What they determined was that there was virtually nothing that the United States could do to avert economic collapse. [See Oil Crash Would Crash the U.S.]

    The issue of peak oil revolves around remaining oil reserves. That is actually a generic statement. Peak oil is when the "light" or "sweet" crude has largely been used and the "heavy" or "sour" crude remains. Sweet crude is relatively easy to pump, and has lower sulfur content. Sour crude is more expensive to pump, has higher sulfur content, and is more expensive to refine. All reports clearly indicate that the oil coming out of OPEC is sour crude. OPEC has consistently been increasing the amounts of oil they are pumping, but have also said that this will have little effect on meeting global needs or lowering gas prices. That is because the real issue driving oil prices is demand for sweet oil. Most sweet oil reserves are in western Africa and the North Sea.

    This places Africa, particularly Western Africa, in the center of a massive competition for oil reserves. [See related article Oil and Politics - Africa and the World]. However, Africa holds slightly less than 8% of the global reserves. That means that the majority of the demand for sweet crude is coming out of 8% of the global reserves. I have no idea how much of those reserves are sweet crude, but let's assume 50%. That means that 4% of the global reserve is now the focus of intense competition. Those reserves are likely not being fully exploited at this point, and would likely need more wells put in action to rapidly extract the oil. That, would take time, and likely more time than escalating global demand "requires." Inevitably, this is going to mean a growing sweet crude shortage, and makes Simmons prediction of $100 a barrel by winter a grim likelihood.

    Part of the increasing demand for sweet crude is because of increasing pollution restrictions for automobiles. The sulfur content in the heavier oils makes them unsatisfactory for decreasing emissions. Removing those controls would make more of the heavy crude available for gasoline use, but would also dramatically accelerate the global warming problem. Truly, the world is between a "rock and a hard place" in its dependence on petroleum.

    In the Oil Shockwave scenario, the triggering "crisis" was a decrease of 3.5 million barrels of oil out of the 83 million barrel daily demand. That is only a decrease of 4.2%. What is amazing about that number is how close to the edge we are running if there is less than 4.2% "wiggle room" in the global (and U.S.) economy. In early June of 2005, the FX cable channel aired a documdrama called " Oil Storm. The movie focuses around a hurricane that breaks the Louisiana oil pipeline, and a series of things go wrong after that. The result is that the U.S. experiences at 3% decrease in available oil. What results from this scenario is chaos, the collapse of the U.S. economy, and U.S. troops trying (unsuccessfully) to protect Saudi Arabia's oil pipelines.

    Just how fine a margin are we running? It seems likely that margin is well below 4%. That is a very frightening thought, and there are lots of things that could move us into the danger zone - storms, conflicts, equipment failures, refinery fires ... or a slight increase in demand. This year, global demand increased by 3% - mostly from the United States and China. It would seem likely that 2006 will see a similar (if not larger) increase in demand as U.S. demand will certainly go up, China is still in boom mode followed only slightly by India. However, by all accounts the world is at virtually maximum production. As OPEC continues to tell us, they are nearing capacity. Unfortunately, it is not OPEC that is meeting the burgeoning demand from its heavy crude fields.

    If we have less than a 4% margin of global economic stability, and we have another 3% increase in demand, then that takes us down to a minimum of 1% margin of disaster. Likely, it takes us over it.

    If Simmons is correct in his $100 a barrel prediction, that is an 80% increase in oil prices in a six month period. What kind of "shockwaves" would that send to a global economy, and to a U.S. economy that is far from stable? Likely, the disaster movie version of a peak oil crisis.

    The figures from the U.S. Department of Energy This Week in Petroluem report shows a grim trend.



    This reflects a cost increase in gasoline of 42% in 2005 after an increase of after a 45% increase in 2004 and a 30% increase in 2003. For heating oil the figures are a 46.5% increase in 2005 after a 16% increase in 2003-2004. Since 2005 is not yet over, it seems likely that this year's increases are going to be over 50%. Decreasing supply of sweet crude will drive prices up dramatically - perhaps even to $100 a barrel.

    The implications of this are huge. This crash would happen in the midst of highest heating oil demand for the Northern Hemisphere and we could see tens of thousands of people freezing in their homes. The trucking industry is already teetering from the current cost increases, and the effects of those are slowly starting to show up in consumer prices. Another dramatic increase is likely to see a consumer price escalation much more rapidly. Of particular concern are critical needs - such as fuel and food supply. Farmers in the U.S. are already experiencing impaired production because of shortage of diesel for planting and harvesting, and shortage of fertilizer as oil has been diverted to other needs (or has been too expensive to make fertilizer). These changes will be hitting grocery stores soon, and will only get worse with another dramatic increase.

    If we are looking at an oil and economic crash within the year, there is no time to buffer against it. While the U.S. is increasing its stockpiles, it will not be enough to get through this predicted crisis. Even if it did buffer some of the U.S. domestic effect, the U.S. is in no position to stabilize the world economy - the U.S. is just too far in debt to respond.

    Of course, all the other peak oil consequences such as unemployment, business closures, and escalating prices will come into play. This could be a very bad winter, but if the prices do go through the roof, the resulting global effects are likely to be with us for quite a while.

    If we are really running less than a 4% margin of stability, then a crisis will throw us into an oil debt situation. Bailing out of that will be tremendously expensive - both economically and socially - if it is possible at all.

    I have a strong feeling that we are not looking at a gradual peak situation culminating in 2012 or 2020. It could very well hit this winter.
    The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    #2
    Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

    Wow, yesterday.

    Anyway, this is probably exactly why bush has the alaskan oil reserves, at least if oil prices DID go that high, I'm pretty sure people would get their act together and start demanding oil alternatives.
    Last edited by archerarmored; 07-07-2005, 11:27 AM.
    "Develop your skills wisely...
    youth doesn't last forever" - Rockman Dash 2

    Comment


      #3
      Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

      You the man archer
      XBox Live: Alzar2k
      Playstation Network: Alzar2k

      Comment


        #4
        Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

        Yay!

        ...Anyone see that movie on FX about this very scenario? I missed it.

        Good thing I don't drive, nor ever really plan on it. I think we, as a country, need to ****ing grow up and depend less on our cars and oil. It's ****ing up a lot of stuff for us.

        Why else is this war going on? Because of the demand for oil, so the corporations want in on the profits to made made from supplying this demand.

        Why are we so out of shape and why is this country's obesity rate so high? Because we drive a couple blocks to go get a loaf of bread. It's sad.

        Comment


          #5
          Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

          Yeah but what about those people who drive 20 miles a day to get to work?

          Comment


            #6
            Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

            Or further than that, even. My mother drives 40 miles to work four days a week, and I used to drive 25 to work five days a week.

            This wouldn't be an issue, but the job market is so horrible that people have to go a long way out of their areas to find decent jobs now, and the price of gas doesn't help this scenario, which only further helps to show that something like what Terr just posted about is likely to happen in the near future (perhaps not six months, but in the next couple of years, it does seem a good possibility).
            "Mindless killing doesn't do a lot for me anymore." - Sampson

            Comment


              #7
              Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

              Originally posted by Riotsword
              Because we drive a couple blocks to go get a loaf of bread.
              Yeah okay, around here we call that a big mac.
              "Develop your skills wisely...
              youth doesn't last forever" - Rockman Dash 2

              Comment


                #8
                Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                What about those of us who drive a couple blocks to get like 4 or 5 bags of groceries, ranging from said loaves of bread to a couple gallons of milk?

                Indeed, this does suck. It's bad enough paying $2.15 a gallon (around here, on average I'd say). $4.00 a gallon by the end of the year would be pretty horrible.
                "What if like...there was an exact copy of you somewhere, except they're the opposite gender, like you guys could literally have a freaky friday moment and nothing would change. Imagine the best friendship that could be found there."

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                  Heres a nice article of an oil crash

                  http://www.exitmundi.nl/oilcrash.htm

                  oh yeah, Exit Mundi is an end of the world site, so near the en they throw in something about an ice age, but nevermind that, everything else is good.
                  Last edited by DevilsLittleHelper; 07-07-2005, 01:32 PM.
                  Oil
                  Israel
                  Logistical base necessary or deemed necessary by the so-called Neocons

                  BEST. ACRONYM. EVER.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                    This is precisely why we need better public transit and a need to have our cities built around bikes instead of cars. Now days, at least where I live, bike riding is not an option because it is illegal to ride on the sidewalks, and on the street, cars speed past you going three times faster than you are. I once got clipped by the passenger-side mirror of some asshole in an SUV going 50 or so mph, and they weren't watching where they were going. If I would have been an inch closer, I could have been severely injured, another few inches closer, killed.

                    It's sad how our cities and lifestyles are so car and oil dependent, but need I remind everyone that it was the auto industry that bought out all of the trolley lines in the 1940s, tore them down, all in an effort to make the car a necessity instead of an option. The 'free market' necessitates options and competition, and the auto industry sure helped kill the free market as far as transportation is concerned while they still preach about the 'free market' today. Now they have a virtual monopoly in this country. This same monopoly has also supressed alternatives to gasoline cars that are viable today such as the electric car. We have the technology, they have the performance and range, they can be produced for cheap, they are 100% feasible, yet you can't go into a dealership lot and buy one.

                    On top of that, $100/barrel would make the oil companies a huge ass amount of money, and we're all going to be paying for it, not only with higher prices on everything from food to plastics to gasoline, but greater pollution as we use more coal to meet the growing energy demand that cannot be provided with dwindling oil supplies(If you suggest wind and solar you're a goddamn commie in this government's eyes, and the current industry will not like you), more subsidies to the oil, auto, coal, nuclear, and natural gas industries courtesy of Joe taxpayer, and more wars for oil. All we need is another "terra' 'tack" and it's draft time. Anyone willing to die for oil?
                    The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder." ~ Thomas Jefferson

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                      OG&E (Oklahoma Gas & Electric) has offered the option to use wind-generated electric as partial or full parts of your home's electrical needs, in an attempt to prepare the state for changes into wind and solar power being the majority of the electricity produced rather than natural resources that can potentially run out. I guess my state does have something going for it, after all.
                      Last edited by Big Rick Cook; 07-08-2005, 09:26 AM.
                      "Mindless killing doesn't do a lot for me anymore." - Sampson

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                        Uhhh, wind doesn't create much energy. Sorry. We're all screwed once again.
                        Oil
                        Israel
                        Logistical base necessary or deemed necessary by the so-called Neocons

                        BEST. ACRONYM. EVER.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                          Uhhh, wind doesn't create much energy. Sorry. We're all screwed once again.
                          What do you mean by that statement? Wind can produce plenty of energy and is just as scalable as coal, nuclear, or natural gas. It might take big turbines, but it's doable, especially on farm land so that farmers may pull in some extra money. The lobbyists that don't want it to take hold are the problem.
                          The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder." ~ Thomas Jefferson

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                            Here are a couple parts of the article I've posted, you'll probably say that this guy has no credibility, doesn't know what he's talking about etc. etc. But many scientists can back his facts up.



                            ---Ok, so we'd build lots of wind turbines, right?
                            No, bad idea.

                            As we explained above, windmills are in fact very energy-inefficient. It has been estimated that if you wanted to replace all of the UK's energy for wind, you'd have to build a vast, kilometers wide park of windmills that literally surrounds the island!
                            More technically, the problem is that the power a wind mill generates is proportionate to the third power of the wind speed. That's quite a mouthful, but simply put, it means that when the wind speed halves (say, from 6 Beaufort to 3 Beaufort), the power goes down not by 1/2, but by 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2. That's an amazing 88 percent less power! And you can't simply build a better wind mill. The 'power curve' is a physical property of wind. It is just how wind works!

                            The consequences of this are dramatic. A good, modern wind turbine only really generates electricity between wind forces 4 and 7/8. Less wind, and the mill will hardly generate any power at all (because of the power curve). Go above it, and the power will get so big, the wind turbine will have to shut down, to prevent damage.

                            The bottom line is this. On average, a wind mill only generates something like 16 percent of the power it should produce! So when you see a wind mill that has a tag "One megaWatt" on it, it only does so under ideal circumstances. On average, it only produces 160 thousand Watt. (Source: Dutch research, in: J.J. Halkema, "Windmolens, feiten en fictie")---

                            ---So if it’s all that bad, we’d just turn to some other kind of energy, right? We’ll have wind mills, and solar cells, and everything will be cool again, you say. Well -- actually, that won’t work. The problem is that at the moment, there just are no real alternatives!

                            Take wind energy. Wind is obviously stuff that doesn’t contain a lot of energy -- just compare slamming your head into a bit of wind with slamming it into a concrete wall. And what’s more: to build wind mills, you’ll have to weld steel, drive all kinds of stuff and engineers around in trucks and cars, build factories and make thousands of components. In the end, it costs more energy (oil) to actually build a windmill, than a windmill will ever generate during its entire lifetime!---
                            Oil
                            Israel
                            Logistical base necessary or deemed necessary by the so-called Neocons

                            BEST. ACRONYM. EVER.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Re: $100/barrel oil possible this winter. Could mean economic collapse.

                              ---Ok, so we'd build lots of wind turbines, right?
                              No, bad idea.

                              As we explained above, windmills are in fact very energy-inefficient. It has been estimated that if you wanted to replace all of the UK's energy for wind, you'd have to build a vast, kilometers wide park of windmills that literally surrounds the island!
                              BS. The DoE has done a study that the state of North Dakota has enough wind real-estate to power over 30% of the U.S.'s electricity demand even when accounting for the fact that turbines aren't always producing their max output.

                              http://www.cfra.org/freshpromises_environment.htm

                              The U.S. Department of Energy found that North Dakota has the largest “reserves” of wind of any state. North Dakota alone has the wind capacity to provide 36 percent of the electricity demand for the 48 contiguous states. The three “windiest” states – North Dakota, Kansas and Texas – could provide enough wind power generation for most of the nation’s electricity needs.


                              That's quite a mouthful, but simply put, it means that when the wind speed halves (say, from 6 Beaufort to 3 Beaufort), the power goes down not by 1/2, but by 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2. That's an amazing 88 percent less power! And you can't simply build a better wind mill. The 'power curve' is a physical property of wind. It is just how wind works!
                              This is true.

                              The consequences of this are dramatic. A good, modern wind turbine only really generates electricity between wind forces 4 and 7/8. Less wind, and the mill will hardly generate any power at all (because of the power curve). Go above it, and the power will get so big, the wind turbine will have to shut down, to prevent damage.
                              Hardly. Wind generators are built to be optimized within the area they are placed. There is no one size fits all wind turbine. Some are built to thrive in lower wind speeds, others higher. You're not going to put a low speed wind turbine in a high speed wind area, or it will be mostly useless.

                              The bottom line is this. On average, a wind mill only generates something like 16 percent of the power it should produce! So when you see a wind mill that has a tag "One megaWatt" on it, it only does so under ideal circumstances. On average, it only produces 160 thousand Watt. (Source: Dutch research, in: J.J. Halkema, "Windmolens, feiten en fictie")---
                              So? With wind generators spread out over a large area, other generators can pick up the slack of the ones with lagging output. This is not a problem unless you have one single generator at one single point.

                              Take wind energy. Wind is obviously stuff that doesn’t contain a lot of energy -- just compare slamming your head into a bit of wind with slamming it into a concrete wall. And what’s more: to build wind mills, you’ll have to weld steel, drive all kinds of stuff and engineers around in trucks and cars, build factories and make thousands of components. In the end, it costs more energy (oil) to actually build a windmill, than a windmill will ever generate during its entire lifetime!---
                              This is entirely false. There is a statistic you should know called energy return of investment. This is how much energy will get returned from what you put into its manufacture. Put one unit of energy in, and from outside environmental factors be it sun for crops or solar panels or wind for turbines, and it will produce X units of energy back after you harness it for energy. Ethanol from corn is a negative EROI, biodiesel from hemp has an EROI of about 10. Guess what the EROI over the 30+ year lifespan of wind turbines is? About 35 for this one particular turbine linked, which is about average.

                              http://www.vestas.com/uk/news/press/..._UK.asp?ID=140

                              A V90-3.0 MW offshore wind turbine has to produce electricity for just 6.8 months, before it has produced as much energy as used throughout its design lifetime. In other words this turbine model earns its own worth more than 35 times during its design lifetime.
                              The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder." ~ Thomas Jefferson

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X