August 8th, 2007 by John
There has been mounting speculation that the U.S Vice President has been urging an invasion of Iraq before it can join the nuclear club. Such an invasion would be highly unpopular throughout the world but it is worth remembering what is at stake.
A nuclear armed Iran would be destabilising, dangerous and unpredictable. The world has become largely dependent on oil from the Middle East and expects the U.S. to keep it flowing. If Iran caused the flow to stop or to slow, all the West’s economies would suffer and food production would be very badly hit. The problem for the U.S. administration is whether to risk an highly unpopular invasion now or face greater problems later.
The chances are that after the experience in Iraq, an invasion will not take place. Instead the U.S. will arm it’s allies to try to contain Iran. Time magazine reported this week that $20 billion of new U.S. arms will be going to Saudi Arabia and neighbouring gulf states plus $13 billion worth for Egypt. Israel could get $30 billion worth of weaponry. Only time will tell whether or not all this weaponry will help to keep the peace or make things worse.
A far better way would be for the West to take measures to reduce oil consumption to make us less vulnerable to future events in the Middle East.
Posted in Security of Energy Supply | No Comments »
July 22nd, 2007 by John
Extreme Islamic fundamentalists are now at war with the West in general and the USA in particular. This is acknowledged by Western and Islamic leaders alike. Unfortunately, Muslims are also almost at war with each other. Civil war between Sunni and Shi’ites is a distinct possibility. Mid East conflict is possibly a more immediate threat to Western oil supplies and therefore to food production than Peak Oil. The extreme importance of Mid East oil supplies for the continued functioning of the Western and now Eastern economies and food supplies is very well understood but rarely discussed, probably because the consequences of a large and sustained reduction in supplies from that region are too disastrous to contemplate. Turmoil in the region would also disrupt supplies from the increasingly important Caspian Sea region. In the past, Sunnis have been politically dominant and the Shi’ites were generally underprivileged. Now that there is a Shi’ite government in Iraq as well as in Iran, old hatreds are emerging. Iran is meddling in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine and seems determined to possess nuclear weapons which is causing alarm in Arab areas. Sunni-Shi’ite violence is increasing throughout the area and in to Pakistan.
U.S. presence in the Mid East has been designed to stabilize the region and keep the oil flowing. The removal of Saddam Hussein who had waged war on Iran and then Kuwait was seen as a way of stabilizing the area and giving a warning to other rogue states. Unfortunately it has not worked out that way. Iran has seen its main enemy (Saddam Hussein) removed and is now emboldened to develop nuclear weapons because it is unlikely that an overstretched U.S. would risk invading Iran. U.S. and British public opinion favours an early withdrawal from Iraq never mind a war with Iran. So the U.S. and British policy (backed by most of the Western leaders despite not publicly showing their support) of stopping Mid East countries and sects from destroying each other as well as the oil infrastructure, is now in disarray. If the present last ditch attempt at bringing peace to Iraq fails, any future intervention may be impossible, especially if atomic bombs are obtained by one or more of the Mid East countries.
Posted in Security of Energy Supply | No Comments »
The United States is a land with bountiful resources of all kinds of minerals, oil and gas reserves, agricultural land and best of all, a well educated, innovative and hard working people. In addition, it has the most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen. But, in my opinion, it is in a worse position to deal with the looming threats of climate change, oil and gas shortages, and Jihadist attacks then any developed country.
How can this be?
America has become incredibly wealthy by exploiting its resources, but most of all, by using lots and lots of energy from finite fossil fuels. In agriculture, Americans were way ahead of the rest of the world in turning oil calories in to food calories. While the rest of the world’s farmers were using the muscle power of horses, oxen and humans to till the land and harvest the crops before world war II, U.S. farmers were introducing tractors and harvesters to the huge field of the grain belt, where they were highly suited. This early mechanisation of farming freed up labour to work in industry. In industry too, Americans were leaders at using fossil energy to increase productivity, with highly mechanised factories using production line methods.
This mechanisation of farming, allowing most of the population to work in manufacturing or service industries is the key to prosperity. Even now, the poverty of a nation can usually be discovered by the proportion of it’s workers still employed in farming. In America today, despite being a big food exporter, only about 2% of the population work in agriculture. In many poor countries, over 75% still work in farming.
So why America the vulnerable?
Americans have become so expert at using fossil fuels to raise living standards that they have developed a system that depends on cheap plentiful and reliable supplies of oil and gas. Unreliable, scarce and very expensive oil and gas are no good.
America had massive reserves of oil and gas, and still does, but the system is now so hungry that about 22 million barrels of oil are used each and every day, about 25% of the world total, when domestic production is only about 7.5 million barrels per day and falling. Each American needs about twice as much oil as each European even though Europeans have a high standard of living. This means that the American system will collapse more easily and completely when the big oil shock comes.
Because petrol (gas) is not heavily taxed in the U.S. there has been no incentive to use fuel efficient cars or to live close to work and shopping. Public transport and trains are not preferred to cars and airplanes and cities are built in locations that would be intolerable without air-conditioned cars, homes and offices. In the best American tradition of free competition, food is produced intensively where the soil and climate are best for that crop and it is then trucked all over the U.S.
I have been on several bus tours to the U.S. and was surprised that close to some big cities there were no fields of potatoes or vegetables. In some areas there are no grazing cattle and then suddenly there are thousands all together on a few acres, crowding under sun shelters, in a district that has no obvious cropping to feed them. Plainly, all the feed is trucked in from where it’s cheapest.
The finite nature of oil, Peak Oil, middle east turmoil, terrorist attacks on oil installations, the possible establishment of an extreme Islamic state covering much of the middle east including nuclear Pakistan, are all threats that have been covered by other posts on this site.
America is so dependent on imported oil and gas that it is more vulnerable to collapse, especially in agriculture, when they are no longer easily available. Because of the events in Iraq and the possibility of nuclear weapons in Iran as well as those in a future radical Pakistan, it may not be easy to use U.S. military might to secure supplies.
Let’s hope that the next administration uses legislation and taxation to reduce dependence on imported oil. At the same time that would help in the battle against that other big threat-climate change.
Has anyone any ideas on how America would react to a severe and prolonged shortage of oil? Please leave a comment.
