from:alt.conspiracy
As, always, Caveat Lector
Om
K
-----
Click Here: <A HREF="aol://5863:126/alt.conspiracy:627427">Oil: The End of
The Road</A>
-----
Subject: Oil: The End of The Road
From: <A HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
Date: Thu, Jul 13, 2000 5:17 PM
Message-id: <8klm6c$av9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



      Oil: The End of The Road
      Author: Mark Graffis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
      Date: 2000/06/21
      Forum: misc.activism.progressive



Twenty-five miles north west of the small town of Kenai Alaska, at the
end of the Kenai Spurr highway, there is a State park. For the
intrepid voyager who is fortunate enough to reach Captain Cook State
Park the views are, to put it mildly, magnificent. To the west, across
the Cook Inlet, the peaks of the Alaska Range rise, seemingly, strait
out of the bay, to lofty purple spires approaching fifteen thousand
feet. A chain of volcanic peaks stretches from horizon to horizon like
a bracelet on the wrist of a giant arm. On the waters of the Cook, a
string of oil platforms dots the surface, their flare stacks glowing
orange from burning of excess natural gas.

Among its other attractions, Captain Cook State Park is quite
literally the end of the road.  It lies as far west on the continent
of North America as it is possible to drive. Beyond the park lies
three thousand miles of trackless wilderness, finally stretching to
the eastern shores of Siberia. Looking off into the endless expanse of
western Alaska one is humbled by the notion that here, civilization
ends. Captain Cook State Park is an extraordinary place, but it is
also a prophetic place.

Standing on the headlands of the park, one can scarcely fail to notice
the erosion has claimed the last several yards of the road. The wind,
tides, and constant earthquakes for which Alaska is justifiably famous
are taking their toll - removing the underpinnings of the road and
reclaiming the materials from which it was constructed. In the thirty
years since the park was built, the forces of nature has devoured an
acre of ground that was once a parking lot. The end of the road is
slowly working its way back toward the provinces of the civilization
that created it, and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. And
while natural forces are slowly erasing the products of humanity at
the end of the road, equally corrosive economic forces are conspiring
with the laws of nature to eradicate the intricate web of
socio-economic structures that the people there have built up over the
past three decades.

If the park is a preview of the future, the City of Kenai is no less.
For centuries this little fishing village was the center of society in
south central Alaska. When oil was discovered in the Cook Inlet, just
west of Kenai it became the focus or attention for the oil industry
world-wide. People came from all around the world to drill for oil,
refine the oil, and ship the oil to other places. More people came to
sell things to the people who came. Like ants drawn to a cookie crumb,
the swarmed toward an irresistible scent, and fought it out with each
other for their share of the scrap. For a time it seemed to the new
residents Kenai that they had found paradise. But like the roads they
built, their economic paradise soon began to crumble. When the
construction was completed, many of the ants were laid off. When the
drilling was completed, many more people left. When oil production
began to decline, the shops closed, the jails filled up, and the
refineries were abandoned.

Now, the winter snows occasionally collapse the roofs of deserted
warehouses; the wind overturns a hastily set mobile home. The ocean
and the ice work steadily to eradicate the forsaken docks and piers
that transgress in a contest for dominion of the shore. Vagrants and
idle youths set fires in the abandoned refineries that issue plumes of
smoke laden with what - God only, knows. Once virile construction
equipment sits, half buried and stripped of its more valuable parts,
like the skeletal remains of some long dead creature perched in a
museum of natural history. The forest wages silent war against
whatever was built of anything less substantial than concrete + those
being left to the winter's ice to deal with. The few people who remain
spend their days calling Juneau or Washington DC to beg for money.
Some devise schemes to "revive"

the paradise they see slipping away. Like Victor Frankenstein, they
vainly contemplate the creation of yet another monster (though they
know not of what sort) in hope of appeasing their former creation.
They threaten and deride anyone opposing their schemes, and go blindly
about the business of prolonging their agony. They can not see that it
is over; There is no revival in the offing. The oil is gone, and when
the oil is gone, "Things fall apart, the center can not hold." (Yeats
134) For Kenai and its people, the end of the road is near, and
getting nearer every day.

This small town in Alaska is only among the first to see the end of
the petroleum economy. Kenai, in its oil boomtown iteration, was built
to feed an oil based world economy, and when it could no longer offer
increasing production, it was abandoned in favor of some other more
able place. The worlds' oil economy is particularly intolerant of
people or communities that do not produce. It has no sympathy for (and
no ability to sympathize with) people or places that can not "hold up
their end." The more poignant aspect of this is that the oil, and thus
the oil economy, can not last. Like Kenai, the world will run out of
oil. And like Kenai, the effects of diminishing oil supplies will
begin to take their toll long before the oil run out. Once oil
production peaks, and production begins to decline, the oil economy
will turn on the world as it did on Kenai.

As it happened with the people of this remote Alaskan village, the
problems will begin cropping up sooner than most people think. We have
seen previews of this already. The OPEC embargoes of 1973 and 1979 put
the US economy in to a debt/inflation spiral that took nearly two
decades to recover from. These were temporary, politically contrived,
events; once the embargoes were lifted, the worlds' economy went on
about its business.

While the economic damage was severe, the steadily increasing supply
of cheap energy made it possible for the worlds' economic system to
continue its activities once the political problems were resolved. But
the 21st century's supply disruptions and soaring prices will dwarf
the OPEC induced shortages of 1973 and 1979. Not only will the
shortages be greater in scope, they will have no political solutions -
there will be no return to the former high production levels. These
are "real" shortfalls; they are the product of depleting approximately
the worlds' supply of crude.

Once the midway point in crude oil consumption is reached, production
will begin a steady decline, mirroring the rise in production during
the consumption of the first half of earth's crude. Explaining why
this is true requires technical understanding that is beyond the scope
of this paper but a simplistic explanation is that; the more oil that
is pumped out of a field, the harder it is to pump out what remains.
This is compounded by the fact that aging oil fields are drying up
faster than new ones can be developed.

Moreover, the "cheap and easy" oil is gone. New discoveries are more
remote, deeper, and contained in less inviting geologic formations. A
comparison of Middle East, and Alaskan North Slope fields illustrates
this problem in monetary terms. The Middle East fields were discovered
in the late forties and early fifties. Production costs from those
fields are approximately six dollars per barrel, in 1999 dollars.
However, the Alaskan North Slope fields, discovered in 1970 require a
wholesale price ten dollars, fifty-cents per barrel to meet the cost
of production.

Production costs for North Sea oil deposits are roughly the same as
those for the North Slope. Some of the smaller, and more recently
discovered fields have production costs of fifteen dollars per barrel.
(Ivanovich) A common view among economists is that the price of oil
has a limited effect on the economies of western nations. Their
contention is that during the past thirty years increases in
industrial efficiency, and increased productivity, have made these
economies less susceptible to oil price shocks such as those that
occurred in the past. While this contention may be technically
correct, the practical effects of increased efficiency, and
productivity are far less certain. According to Federal Reserve Board
Chairman Allen Greenspan, "An increase in the overall rate of
inflation in 1999 was mainly a result of higher energy prices." (U.S.
House) This assertion seems to have been borne out over the past year.

During the period from March 1999 to March 2000 the price of crude oil
on the world markets rose from a low of just under ten dollars per
barrel to a high of just over thirty-four dollars per barrel. During
that same time, the Dow Jones Industrial Average went ostensibly flat;
it was at just over eleven thousand at the end of March, 1999 and just
over eleven thousand at the end of at the beginning of April, 2000.
The increases in cost of crude oil put an end to seven straight years
of ten percent, or higher, annual growth in this critical economic
index.

Oil price fluctuations of the March 1999 - March 2000 period signaled
a significant event in the history of the worlds' oil based economies.
These historic low prices were the first tangible signal of the peak
in world production. One of the fundamental tenets of economics is the
Law of Supply and Demand. According to this dictum, the cost of a good
is at its lowest when the supply of the good is at its peak. The low
prices of spring 1999 were as low as oil prices can go. If prices had
fallen any further, production from the North Sea, and the Alaskan
North Slope would have become economically untenable, causing a
cessation of production from those fields. The North Sea and North
Slope account for approximately twenty percent of the worlds' total
production. If those fields had been shut down, the resulting
shortages would have quickly forced prices back up. From this we can
infer that world price peaked economically in 1999. This economic peak
is the beginning of a period of relatively wild fluctuations brought
on by the world's economic system struggling to balance the competing
demands of high production, and increasing costs. It is a struggle
that the system will ultimately lose.

Once the physical peak happens and physical production begins to
decline, there will be no way to maintain any form of price stability.
Prices will begin to spiral upward - out of sight.

If the dollars and cents of oil production were the only problem, the
world economy might be able to struggle on for thirty or forty years
more or less as it is, but there is a more fundamental problem
associated with new oil discoveries. While there is a generally
obvious economic cost associated with oil production, there is a less
obvious thermodynamic cost that accrues from the production of oil.
Economists predict that that when oil prices rise sufficiently, the
less efficient fields will become viable. This is only partly true +
true to the extent that some fields are, at present, only inefficient
in economic terms. But thermodynamic limits of oil production don't
allow for that kind of ideological reasoning; when an oil field is
beyond the thermodynamic pale, no amount of money will allow for
production from that field. The thermodynamic limit relates to the
energy cost of producing oil, not the monetary cost.

It reflects the energy value of the oil produced minus the energy cost
of producing the oil. The noted British geologist Ted Trainer says,
"Beyond 2005, the energy required to find and extract a barrel of oil
will exceed the energy contained in the barrel."(Trainer 34) If it
takes more energy to produce a barrel of oil than the energy contained
in that barrel of oil + that barrel of oil can not be produced. This
is an issue that economists do not understand, and consequently, never
address. However, it is a defining aspect of the roll that oil will
play from now on; the thermodynamic laws apply no matter how high the
"dollar price" of energy goes.

Even if the economic and thermodynamic problems could be magically
overcome, there is one last issue for which there is no solution at
all + absent the passage of a two or three hundred million years.
There is not much oil left to find. The geology of earth's lithosphere
has, over the past forty years, become reasonably well-defined. Only
particular geologic structures are capable of bearing oil deposits and
the vast majority of those structures have been thoroughly explored;
only a few extremely remote regions have escaped examination. The
highly regarded geophysicist L.F Ivanhoe recently explained, "It is
commonly overlooked by economists and the general public that crude
oil must be discovered before it can be produced." (Ivanhoe ) Also,
during the last ten years new oil discoveries have become increasingly
rare.

Many people are of the opinion that technical advances will enable the
oil industry to postpone the looming peak in oil production for
decades. This notion not only drives the current economic, but it also
sets a political tone that prevents the development of projects that
could lessen the impact of declining oil production. This
shortsightedness is related by author, and geophysicist R. A.Kerr,
Optimists see at least several decades more of unfettered world oil
production--but a growing number of realists conclude that world oil
production is nearing its all-time peak, perhaps within 10 years. The
optimists, mostly economists, believe that new oil discoveries and
enhanced recovery from old fields will delay the world peak beyond
2040.

The opposition, mostly geologists, argue otherwise. (Kerr 1129) A
general consensus is developing among geologists that oil production
at current levels can not be maintained beyond 2010. Even if new oil
fields are developed, they will serve at best to delay briefly, the
decline in production. According to Richard C., Duncan, author of The
World Petroleum Life-cycle:

"Can new oil production delay the world oil peak?" Our answer is,
"Yes, new production brought on-stream well before the 2006 base-line
peak can delay it, but only by a few days per billion barrels of new
production. However, even large increments of new production brought
on-stream after the peak are not likely to have any effect whatsoever
on delaying the base-line world oil peak." (Duncan) With perhaps
twenty billion barrels left to be discovered, it is easy to see why
the production will soon peak. To be sure, there is oil that has been
discovered, and that can be produced, but even that amounts perhaps
another sixty billion barrels. By fully developing all remaining
sources (something that is probably not politically feasible) the peak
of production might be extended by as much as a few years.

Even a cursory survey of the economic developments of the past century
and a half reveal the strong connection between oil, and economic
growth. The complexity and sophistication of the western economic
system was built on a foundation of oil and it requires a huge leap of
faith to believe that it can be maintained in the face of a
substantial and prolonged decrease in the dimensions of that
foundation. Assuming that a suitable replacement for oil were
available, and assuming that western economies implemented full-force
efforts to employ such alternatives, the chances for success would be
slim, given the lead-times required. But alternatives are not up to
the task. Most experts agree that a comprehensive exploitation of all
forms of alternative energy would result in the production of only one
third of the energy currently consumed in the US. Only thirteen
percent of the US landmass is suitable for the development of wind
turbines. Perhaps forty percent is usable by solar arrays and the
rivers have been damned nearly to their total capacity.

Wind energy is dependant, obviously, on the sporadic nature of the
resource, an while advances have been made in the field, the ability
of wind to provide consistent, wide-spread energy is still very
limited.

Photo-voltaic energy is still nothing more than a dream. While it does
work, the energy required to product a photovoltaic cell exceeds the
energy that the cell can recover over any reasonable amount (dozens of
years) of time. Hydro-electric energy is clean and relatively cheap,
but most of the usable dam sites have been used. The tar sands and oil
shales of the US mid west are often touted as a plentiful future,
"once the price is high enough," but a critical review of the physics
leads to a different conclusion. Walter Youngquist, of the Colorado
School of Mines writes:

Perhaps oil shale will eventually find a place in the world economy,
but energy demands of blasting, transport, crushing, heating, adding
hydrogen, and the safe disposal of huge quantities of waste material
are large. There appears to be a positive net energy recovery from oil
shale processing (Penner and Icerman, 1984), but it is low and does
not compare with net energy from conventional oil well drilling.

(Youngquist 243) While these "near oil" sources do exist, and may be
usable, they do not offer the advantage of the high net energy that
more traditional sources provide. Oil may indeed be available for
alternative sources but not in the quantities, or prices necessary to
keep the world economy function at more than a fraction of its present
level.

Further, for an alternative energy source to replace oil in a way that
would guarantee a continuation of the present economic systems, it
would have to share substantially all of the qualities of oil.

Alternative forms of energy would need to be inexpensive to exploit,
both is financial and thermodynamic terms; They would need to be
easily stored, and transported, and they would need to have the
ability to be easily converted to many types of products. These are
all properties of oil that western economies not only exploit, but
also rely on to a degree that is not commonly appreciated by the
general public. A tank of wind in one's car is not particularly
useful, and about the only other energy form that wind can be
converted in to is electricity. Electric vehicles are feasible, but
not yet practical (and absent huge advances in battery technology may
never be) and the cost of converting the worlds' auto fleet to
electricity would be immense. This single cost could be enough to
bring western economize to their knees. And that conversion is only
hundreds that will have to be made.

Our relationship with oil is intricate beyond the intuition of most
people. At this juncture in history it is all but impossible to judge
clearly what is an oil effect and what is an oil affect.  As USDA
archeologists Joseph Tainter states, "Energy has always been the basis
of cultural complexity and it always will be. [T]he past clarifies
potential paths to the future." (Taintner 34) Ultimately, it matters
little what is the specific case; the important issue is the degree to
which society has specialized its functions in favor of the
consumption of oil. The very health of the economy depends on our
finding, producing and consuming ever-greater measures of oil. The
average American has at their disposal every day, the amount of energy
comparable to the energy available to a Roman who owned two hundred
slaves. (Price 301) Short of the vast windfall that oil provides us,
the worlds' economy would look today very much as it did in the
pre-industrial past, and we would be forced to like as people of those
ages lived. Maintaining current lifestyles with only a small reduction
in available energy would be difficult for most and impossible for
some. Living with the thirty percent reduction in energy that we are
likely to see over the next twenty years will be impossible for most.
The people of Kenai have done their best to alter the local economic
and social mechanisms in a way that would allow them to continue to
function as they had before the oil began to run out. In the process
they have created more problems than they had to begin with. Despite
their best efforts, nothing was able to replace oil. The Kenai that
they knew was built on oil; it ran on oil and making it stand on some
other social foundation and run on some other economic fuel proved
more than they could manage. Vain blandishments notwithstanding,
nature will yield no more oil that it has, and no variety of
self-flattery will produce any more than hot air.

The longer people hold on to the empty hope that "somebody will think
of something," the more disastrous the drive off the end will be.

But science may not be able to think of something, especially given
the extraordinary complexity of oils' relationship to the world
economy.

Politicians continue to dismiss the possibility of a permanently
declining resource. Their training, experience, and philosophy leave
them critically short of the insights necessary to provide effective
leadership where the future of energy is concerned. Clarifying this
point, Jay Hanson recently wrote, in ENERGY Magazine: Although
economists are trained to treat energy just like any other resource
when it comes to "supply and demand", it is manifestly not like any
other resource. Net energy is the pre-condition for all other
resources.  The coming peak in global oil production signals the end
of the consumer economy because nothing can replace conventional oil.
(Hanson 62) The experience of Kenai is a version of the future writ
small.

The world's oil based economic and social systems are nearing the end
of the road. There is little chance that either can survive even
modest declines in oil production, and no chance that they can exist
in a world where energy supplies are decreasing at an increasing rate.
There is only so much oil in the world. We have found ninety percent
of the world's oil, and used half of what we have found. "Well before
2010 the world will be vulnerable to 1970s-style oil shocks." (Banks
87) Sometime in the next few years oil production worldwide will begin
to decline. The exact date can not be predicted with any socially
acceptable degree of accuracy, and probably isn't overly important in
any case.

Unlike the case of Kenai, where most of the people simply left for
better economic climes, there won't be any better place to go. The
world at large did not suffer at Kenais' distress because it was able
to get its oil elsewhere. But when "elsewhere" is out of oil as well,
the world will have to face the same problems that Kenai faced.

Changing personal habits is never easy. Changing the conduct of an
entire society is an even more imposing task, but change we must. The
very nature of petroleum based economics, and the political order that
it has occasioned prohibits any preemptory conduct. Any attempt to
change basic practices provokes the "economic oil monster" and
frightens its constituents. And that no other architecture will afford
them similar levels of comfort all the more convinces them of the
imprudence of undertaking such drastic alterations. But the oil
monster is a transitory affectation and the truly more imprudent
process lies in continuing to follow, blindly, the course that it has
set for us. We do not have the option of choosing not to change, for
to the extent that we oppose change, nature itself will find us in
default and make the changes in spite of us.

We must change, but change as we now reckon it will not suffice.

Past notions of change relied on our ability to simply "move on to
greener pastures," but like Victor Frankenstein, we will find no
respite in flight. In this world we can always find more of anything
if we go far enough, look hard enough and dig deep enough. But the
world at the end of the oil road is a place where oil, and other
resources, will barely be available in amounts that keep pace with
life's demands, let alone its luxuries. We will need a philosophy that
tells us, not how to do more with less, but how to live with less.  We
are facing a new paradigm in human existence, and there is no basis
for making informed predictions about the results of the end of the
oil economy. But as noted petroleum geologists Colin J., Campbell and
Jean H. Laherre put it; "The world is not running out of oil, at least
not yet. What our society does face, and soon, is the end of the
abundant and cheap oil on which all industrial nations depend."

(Campbell, Laherre 94) The end of the oil-road will not be the end of
the world - it will just be the end of the world as we know it.


Works Cited

Banks, Howard, Cheap Oil – Enjoy It While It Lasts: Forbes Magazine,
15 June, 1998 , 87-88

Campbell , Colin J., Laherre Jean , H., The End Of Cheap Oil:
Scientific American, March 1998, 91-97

Duncan, Richard C., The World Petroleum Life-cycle: Encircling the
Production Peak: Proceedings of the Thirteenth SSI/Princeton
Conference on Space Manufacturing, Space Studies Institute, Princeton,
NJ, 1997

Hanson, Jay, Energetic Limits To Growth: ENERGY Magazine, Spring, 1999
Ivanhoe, L. F., Updated Hubbert Curves Analyze World Oil Supply: World
Oil, Vol. 217, No. 11; November 1996.

Ivanovich, David, World May Learn To Wean Itself From Oil: Houston
Chronicle Oct. 23, 1999

Kerr, R. A., The Next Oil Crisis Looms Large -- and Perhaps Close:
Science, August 1998, , 1128-1131.

Price, David, Energy and Human Evolution: Population and Environment:
A Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Volume 16, Number 4, March
1995, , Human Sciences Press, Inc. 199, 301

Tainter, Joseph A., Getting Down To Earth: Practical Applications of
Ecological Economics, Island Press, 1996

Trainer , Ted , The Death of the Oil Economy: Earth Island Journal,
Spring 1997, 34-37

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Banking and Financial
Services, The Federal Reserve's Semiannual Report On The Economy And
Monetary Policy, Testimony of Chairman Alan Greenspan, February 17,
2000,
<A
HREF="http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/hh/2000/february/testimony.htm">
http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/hh/2000/february/testimony.htm</A>

Yeats, William Butler, The Collected Poems of William Butler Yeats,
New York, Macmillan, 1967 [c1956]

Youngquist, Walter The Elusive Energy: Shale Oil -- Colorado School of
Mines, Hubbert Center Newsletter. 98/4 1998 N. pag.
<A HREF="http://hubbert.mines.edu/news/v98n4/Youngquist.html">http://hubbert.m
ines.edu/news/v98n4/Youngquist.html</A>



Sent via Deja.com <A HREF="http://www.deja.com/">http://www.deja.com/</A>
Before you buy.



-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
All My Relations.
Omnia Bona Bonis,
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to