Fox News: bad news from Saudi Arabia

20 Comments on "Fox News: bad news from Saudi Arabia"

cusano on Tue, 14th Feb 2012 11:20 pm 



This news might be ‘stunning’ to Fox News, but for those who follow the oil debate it’s old news. Matthew Simmons wrote about it years ago, as well as many others.

Cloud9 on Tue, 14th Feb 2012 11:26 pm 



Peak oil just landed front and center on GOP middle America

dorlomin on Tue, 14th Feb 2012 11:52 pm 



Those cables were part of the wikileaks from last year
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/08/saudi-oil-reserves-overstated-wikileaks

Is this video recent?

dorlomin on Tue, 14th Feb 2012 11:52 pm 



Nope the video itself is a year old.

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 12:02 am 



This one was tweeted minutes ago and was recently uploaded:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elnxUPQf3FM

Serial_Worrier on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 1:16 am 



Oh no doom!!!!

Kenz300 on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 1:24 am 



So what plans are individuals, business and politicians making to deal with future higher oil prices and declining supplies?

The oil companies love when prices spike and they make windfall profits. We are backed into an oil corner will few alternatives.

dsula on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 2:11 am 



It’s 1 year old. No doom so far. Plenty of oil still + nat gas + 7B people.

BillT on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 3:29 am 



dusula…do you work for Big Petro? Sure the oil and NG is there but…do you think events coming up will let it be produced? I don’t. I see riots in the streets and the Saud family toppled from power in the next few years. Just because something has not happened does not mean it will not happen.

SilentRunning on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 4:24 am 



Yep, peak oil is becoming clearer and clearer – and even the right wing mass media is being forced to admit it.

Once the masses actually wake up to the reality, it will be entirely too late for most of them.

Soylent Green – it’s what’s for dinner.

SOS on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 5:13 am 



We should drain them and get the oil from Canada in the new pipeline we have to build. That, combined with huge production increases in the lower 48 will give us energy secruity and a united and wealthy North America.

BillT on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 9:32 am 



Dream on SOS…

We will not ‘drain them’ because China is getting more of their (Saudi) oil than the US. We blew trillions in Iraq and 55% of Iraq’s oil is going to Asia now, with the US getting less than 20%.

That pipeline is likely to never get built. If it even starts, it will go to the West Coast and the oil will go to Asia. After all, it goes to the highest bidder, as does the oil from Alaska.

The tar sands are already bumping against limits to growth and the oil from shale in the US is going to hit the same limits. America lost their energy independence back in the 70s and will NEVER get it back. The US is not a wealthy country, it is the world’s largest debtor nation, struggling to keep from collapsing into a 3rd world country.

This is the Asian Century. The American Century ended a long time ago.

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 9:57 am 



I apologize for overlooking that the vid is one year old. Not that it changes one iota of the message…

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 10:07 am 



I doubt if there is going to be an Asian century, let alone an American or European century. China will have huge trouble in feeding its population. Would not be surprised if China will conquer Australia after the likely balkanization of the US, as Pat Buchanan predicts will happen before 2025. The future is post-globalist, ethno-centric, with local economies. No cars, trains maybe, working from home or office at walking distance from home. The economy will be centered around the internet. Electricity and other sources of energy will be rationed.

BillT on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 10:49 am 



Arthur, perhaps you are correct, but…

China will buy Australia, not ‘conquer’ it. That is already happening. Why do you think that the US is now trying to establish a military presence there?

Yes, globalization is in it’s last years, but that does not mean that global trade will end. It will just mean that only necessities will cross oceans. After all, trade happened using sails at for most of human history.

I followed your “no cars, trains maybe” … then stopped at working from home. Not many jobs will be done at home except gardens and self repairs or home businesses. Many malls and office complexes will become ruins or homes for transients.

The internet will disappear as fast as it appeared. Why? The huge energy and human power needed to keep it operational. Satellites, thousands of cell towers, office buildings with banks and banks of computers, all requiring energy in huge quantities, mostly from oil. All requiring repairs and replacement on a regular basis. How long does a desk PC last if it is used 24/7/365? A year? 2 years? What happens if there are no resources to make the replacement parts?

The higher the technology, the quicker it will fail and disappear.

Electricity WILL be scarce and rationed and probably eventually also gone.

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 12:50 pm 



“then stopped at working from home.”

In Holland 60% of the work force sits behind a computer all day and commute 37 km on average in cars of 1000+ kg. I worked for a big Telco in the recent past. The working group was dispersed over Holland, Belgium, Germany and Canada, with two people working from home. The standard pattern of group communication was with head sets and electronic writing board in front of you. In the beginning it is a bit akward but you get used to it. Meaning every brain worker can stay at home. In Holland you can go to the police online. The postman is being outsourced. Yesterday all major Dutch banks start sending bills electronically as a default. All major newspaper have now iPad versions –> no trees, no paper, no delivery boy, just a journalist writing from his home. The future is virtual. One delivery van can service 100 households in an optimized way (travelling salesman problem in action) rather than 100 cars moving to the supermarket. Korean monitor producers can deliver 18 inch monitors consuming merely 6 watts. A kindle consumes 0 watt during static display of text. The internet is a gift from God since it makes the market totally transparent, so no need to physically look for things. The only physical forms of labor left are harvesting and production work. Once your abolish the car (because you have to) an enormous work load becomes superfluous with loads of free times available as long as you stay home and learn to be satisfied with a home, a cafe around the corner, a chess board, a violin and your (electronic) book shelf.

– car commuting –> 3 liter of fuel (in Holland on avg)
– laptop at home 8 hr –> 0.1 liter of fuel

Even Richard Heinberg is not pessimistic about the future of civilization as such, but ‘progress’, economic growth, are over. Fields of expansion left are: architecture, but not plane travels, no Geneva car shows, no Maldives, no new nikes air, no 600$ smart phone every year, etc.

There will never be a moment of ‘no resources’ available, just less resources. Holland uses something like 15,000 MW electricity, that’s 3,000 5MW Vestas giant windturbines. That’s doable, if necessary off-shore. It is the amount of steel necessary for oil pipeline projects like Nabucco or Northstream (built in a few years time). Just like the Eifel tower, the mast of the turbine will last at least 2 centuries (there are still hundreds of wooden/stone centuries old windmills left here).

BillT on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 1:19 pm 



“There will never be a moment of ‘no resources’ available,”

Really? When we are already measuring those resources in years to depletion, how can you say that they will ‘always’ be available? Holland in 2012 is not the world in 2030. Not even close. Nor will Holland be anything like Holland today by 2030.

You do not take into account the huge computer banks that reside at the home offices of the big internet corporations like Google or Microsoft or any other web info source. They all require a small city’s worth of electric to power 24/7/365. That means that hundreds of people have to be there on site to maintain and repair those systems 24/7/365. We have not even mentioned cell tower electric or the cost of satellites.

You are probably under 30 and have never known a world without the internet. Too bad. I think you will see it before you die.

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 3:23 pm 



Wind and solar energy are going to be available in the future. In no way can they replace the fossil fuels of today indeed. I am fully aware the Holland 2030 will be vastly different from 2012. Google indeed needs ‘a city worth of electricity’ but Google and a few others have global reach and they are an exception. A big bank does not need this amount of electricity. And as hundreds of people are available now for maintenance, they will be in the future. The problem is energy, not people. And there is still huge potential for energy saving in the IT-realm. With this gadget alone you can fuel your future laptop if you have to:

http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/gadgets/0,1518,814483,00.html

This 24 inch compaq monitor uses merely 2 watt:
http://www.comcom.nl/p/hp/touch_screen_monitoren/nl773aa_abb/la2405wg/

As I wrote earlier I am in my fifties and thus have known the world before the internet.

Arthur on Wed, 15th Feb 2012 6:04 pm 



Bill, I looked it up for you, the energy consumption of google.
Using google :))

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/09/technology/google-details-and-defends-its-use-of-electricity.html

260 MW world wide.
200,000 homes.
On a global scale, that is nothing.
52 of these 5 MW turbines:

http://www.reuk.co.uk/OtherImages/repower-5mw-wind-turbine.jpg

That is 260 million euro investment (340 million $), a fraction of google’s current profit.

MrEnergyCzar on Thu, 16th Feb 2012 4:27 am 



Twilight in the Desert. Great book.

MrEnergyCzar