Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

China locking up OIL for the past 6 months -crisis looming

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-10-06 11:52 PM
Original message
China locking up OIL for the past 6 months -crisis looming
<snip>
The worry in Washington, Tokyo and other major oil importing centers is that competition is helping push prices to potentially destabilizing levels, and raising the risks of conflict over dwindling resources.
<end snip>
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1104AP_Security_in_Asia_Oil.html

China is the 2nd biggest oil consumer. It is getting thirstier as supplies dwindle and world production of everything continues to move there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MikeNY Donating Member (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-10-06 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Iraq oil production has never increased above pre-war levels...
Mission accomplished? If I'm an oil executive making 80 dollars a gallon I'd say so...

The situation is not looking good. Meanwhile we have found a way to power a car with lithium-ion batteries but we have the federal government promoting ethanol (which still requires oil to function)

...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. You mean the same Batteries that I have have in my cell phone
the same batteries I have in my Dewalt Drill, the ones that last forever,, and have more power/ No way...they will stiffel that car till $100 a barrel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-10-06 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Interesting how this article tap dances around the 800 lb gorilla,
But never puts a name to it.

Peak Oil, the very description and essence, right there.

So, now that both the government and media are hinting at this problem, can we start switching to a sane, clean, renewable fuel source like biodiesel? Using biodiesel derived from algae, the US can fulfill all of its fuel needs. I would say now is the time to start making the change over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Peak oil. Life after the oil crash
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeNY Donating Member (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. We could avoid it...
I am of the conviction that if we could get our act together, we could get off of it all together. But as we all know, the human race does not like to solve a problem until total annihalation is absolutely imminent. Nevermind the centralized structure of the oil/energy industry that is basically running our government right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Heading for cliff. Change course when airborn n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. It is an easy problem to solve
Mandate that all new vehicles, motorcycles, lawn mowers, etc. are to have biodiesel compatible diesel engines within ten years. Enough to get the infrastructure(which would little changing really) in place to deal with biodiesel. 15,000 square miles, one tenth of the Sonora desert, is all the water surface needed to grow enough algae to fulfill our petroleum needs. A lot of this could be done at wastewater treatment plants, thus helping ease sewage costs and provide fuel. Sure, it would take another twenty years before we would be completlly free of gas consumption, but our petroleum usage would decrease radically in short order, and would die away to nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. But then bush's oil buddies wouldn't be able to screw us all.........
into the ground! What are you, some kind of communist? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 04:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
15. The link you gave provides an excellent
easy to read ,and understand, summary. Thank you for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. I love Matt Savinar and James Kunstler
Edited on Sun Jun-11-06 09:45 AM by GliderGuider
In a grim, "So now what are we going to do?" sort of way. They are the modern Cassandras, and we need to remember that in the myth Cassandra was right.

On the other side of the coin are the technical guys like Deffeyes and Simmons who do the analysis and let you draw your own conclusions. There is also Peter Tertzakian ("A Thousand Barrels a Second") who does the analysis that says we're screwed, but then does a Pollyanna volte-face to the conclusion that if we just keep working at this insoluble problem, eventually we'll solve it.

IMO the oil problem we are facing is insoluble for two reasons. The first is that we as a species have gotten ourselves into the box of needing too much energy, especially as liquid fuels, for any other source or combination of sources to be viewed realistically as a replacement (not even my personal front-runner, algal biodiesel) . The second is that there are too many forces that oppose large-scale mitigation. These range from fundamental human nature (let someone else go first, I like my luxury, denial is easier than action, everyone I trust is telling me there's no problem, etc.) to commercial and political interests that are increasingly intertwined in all nations, and have no interest whatsoever in rocking the boat and drowning the goose that is laying those golden $70/bbl eggs.

The only short-term mitigation that will work is widespread personal conservation, and the only medium-term helper may be rebuilding all forms of rail infrastructure around electric propulsion. But even these have their limits: the problem is global, personal conservation is slow to develop due to the human nature problem, and re-building rail in North America is a huge capital-intensive project that we may not have the time to implement once the need becomes apparent to the people and accepted by the corporatocracy.

The main thing to keep in mind is that this is a global problem, and solutions that apply mainly to the USA are not likely to help the big picture all that much. There are already fuel shortages showing up in Indonesia and various countries in Africa. The poor oil-importing nations are the canaries in the Peak Oil coal mine (if you'll pardon the mangled metaphor). As they go, so goes the rest of the world, just a little later.

On edit - spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
6. Greg Palast said last night that the entire Iraq war is about supplying
LESS oil. That there is plenty of oil there, but they are not pumping it. on purpose. hence the war. all the killing just to keep the prices up artificially. In fact, that that concept of not exploiting the oil in Iraq has been in play since 1924. It made an awful lot of sense. He also said that if the price of oil goes down, the saudi family loses power immediately and is overthrown. (the saudi-bush family). and just one more tidbit; that hugo Chavez offered oil to the US (and world) at 1/3 lower price than it was at last year, and we said no. and that falwell's "let's murder chavez" speech was within a week of that offer.
Maybe peak oil is not even real. I mean, either way, we should be using electric cars and wind and solar power, no matter what. But think about it, maybe there is plenty of oil. Maybe they really just create a shortage and make billions and billions of dollars. and thousands of people are dead only so we can pay 3.50 at the pump, which we keep on doing....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. YES! restrict supply and oil prices rise
as demand rises. YES!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lectrobyte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
27. To me, the only point of debate seems to be "when" not "if"
peak oil hits as common sense says there is only so much that we can cheaply extract. EROEI gets you every time, be it tar sands, bio-diesel or ethanol. And since our economy is based on growth, and cheap energy has been a given for so long...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. No matter when or if, I'm ready for alternative fuels now.
electric car, windpower, solar all sound good to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
8. canada,usa,venezuela
has close to a hundred years worth of oil..it`s going to cost but it`s there. that`s why big oil isn`t happy with alternate energy sources..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 04:28 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. Canada has oil that has to be extracted -shale
But this link says there is not enough replacement source of oil available;

<snip>
About this time I began teaching an introductory physics/energy course at the college, and the course focuses on the peak oil problem and potential adaptations. During that teaching process, I became convinced that Heinberg and others were absolutely correct in asserting that no combination of alternatives to oil could come anywhere close to replacing oil at present use levels. That includes coal to liquids, natural gas, oil shale, methane hydrates, hydrogen, ethanol, bio-diesel, and nuclear/wind/solar-based electric (including compressed air) cars comparable in size with today's subcompacts.
<end snip>

http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=319
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GliderGuider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
21. A hundred years? At what rate of production, and what environmental cost?
I just posted this over on the Peak Oil board but it deserves re-posting here. It brings a cold breath of realism to the discussion of Canadian oil sands.

Will the Canadian oil sands save us? The boys from Uppsala say no

From the Uppsala Hydrocarbon Depletion Group comes a long and detailed look at the potential for Canadian oil sands to act as a medium term bridge energy source in this paper. The introduction says,

The report "Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management", by Robert L. Hirsch et al., concludes that Peak Oil is going to happen and that worldwide large-scale mitigation efforts are necessary to avoid its possible devastating effects for the world economy. These efforts include accelerated production, referred to as crash program production, from Canada’s oil sands. The objective of this article is to investigate and analyse what production levels that might be reasonable to expect from a crash program for the Canadian oil sands industry, within the time frame 2006-2018 and 2006-2050.


After much detailed analysis, here is the conclusion:

By evaluating the short-term crash program production forecast together with the long-term crash program production forecast, it is possible to make some predictions. Based on the presented assumptions and definitions, a short-term crash program starting at 2006, by 2018 achieves a production of 3.6 mb/d of bitumen, of which 2.9 mb/d is SCO. Of the total production of 3.6 mb/d, upgraded bitumen from mining accounts for 2.3 mb/d, upgraded in situ production for 0.61 mb/d and non upgraded in situ produced bitumen for 0.73 mb/d.

Unfortunately, while the theoretical future oil supply from the oil sands is huge, the potential ability for the Canadian oil sands industry to meet expectations of bridging a future oil supply gap is not based on reality. Even if a Canadian crash program were immediately implemented it may only barely offset the combined declining conventional crude oil production in Canada and the North Sea. The more long-term oil sands production scenario outlined in this report, does not even manage to compensate for the decline by 2030.

(...)

Finally it may be of interest to recapitulate that the International Energy Agency claims that 37 mb/d of unconventional oil must be produced by 2030. Canada has by far the largest unconventional oil reserves. By 2030, in a very optimistic scenario, Canada may produce 5 mb/d. Venezuela may perhaps achieve a production of 6 mb/d. Who will be the producers of the remaining 26 mb/d? It is obvious that the forecast presented by the IEA has no basis in reality.


For this result we Canadians are polluting our air, land and water, and sickening our people? It's worthy of note that one of the significant factors in Canada falling behind its Kyoto commitment is our government's subsidizing the oil sands industry. The more I learn about the negative externalities of oil sands production, the more Fort McMurray appears to be another Upper Silesia in the making.

This is from a Globe and Mail article in late May:

A generation ago, Lake Athabasca was clear and clean enough that Fort Chipewyan residents drew their drinking water straight from it, and thought nothing about dipping a cup over the side of a canoe during hunting trips. Those days are long gone, as industrial development -- particularly the explosive growth of the oil sands -- accelerates along the Athabasca River, the main tributary of Lake Athabasca.

The belief -- only that, for the moment -- in Fort Chipewyan is that something from the oil sands is contaminating the Athabasca and ravaging the health of the people who live downstream.

Nearly four years after the hamlet's only doctor first voiced concern about the cluster of cancer cases, the provincial and federal governments have launched a joint investigation into the illness that seems to be sweeping Fort Chipewyan.

The Athabasca and Mikisew people are waiting for answers from those officials, but in the meantime, they have their own explanations.

"It is speculation to say it's the water. But for me, it's common sense," said Lorraine Mercredi, who bought a water-filtration system after her aunt and a cousin, still in his early thirties, died from cancers of the digestive tract. Other Fort Chipewyan residents, too afraid to drink from their taps at all, are paying to have bottled water flown in.

When Ivy Simpson was diagnosed as having cervical cancer, her doctors did not tell her what had made her ill. But the Fort Chipewyan resident, who now lives about 250 kilometres to the south in Fort McMurray, has no doubt about what caused her cancer.

"It had to have been something from the water, air or land," said the 27-year-old, who was just 17 when she contracted cervical cancer, a disease usually found in much older women.

Her extended family in Fort Chipewyan has been hit hard by cancer. Her mother, Mary Simpson, said a cousin, Warren, got testicular cancer. An aunt died of uterine cancer in the late 1980s, and Ivy Simpson's 41-year-old sister has terminal cervical cancer.

Like many in Fort Chipewyan, the Simpsons began to suspect their surroundings were making them sick after the town's fly-in doctor, John O'Connor, began to push for an official inquiry into what he saw as an astonishingly high number of cancer cases.

A few months after arriving in 2001, Dr. O'Connor noticed a set of disturbing symptoms in a patient: yellowed eyes, fatigue and abdominal discomfort. It was disturbing not only because it pointed to cholangiocarcinoma, a rare and deadly cancer of the bile duct. The symptoms were all too familiar for Dr. O'Connor, whose father died of the cancer 13 years ago in Ireland.

"I know a lot about it, but I never expected to see it again," he said. "Without treatment, you're dead in about a month. My dad lasted six weeks." Dr. O'Connor said at least three residents of Fort Chipewyan, and likely another two, have died of the disease within the past five years. Statistically speaking, there should be only one case for every 100,000 people, and none at all for a community the size of Fort Chipewyan, he said.


The full story is here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
11. Exxon stock up or down with Peak Oil? that decides all politics
if the powers that be see Peak Oil as a profitable thing, then we will see them act to bring peak oil faster.

So, will stock go up or down in Big Oil?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Price-Profit curve.. how can i figure it easily?
Peak oil means hi price, but less gallons sold. Combined result could be

... less profit. Or,

.. more profit.

How can an amateur figure this out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
13. SOLUTIONS ABOUND but they go the way of WARNINGS: UNHEEDED
Bad Counterproductive Forces Rule: We reap the consequences

We have seen the BAD.... Show us the GOOD WAY OUT....Have we tried Peace yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oscar111 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. How Peak Oil can end Big Oil profits....
they have LESS gallons to sell.

so, even with higher prices, selling less can result in profits tanking down to zero.

Big Oil out of business.

Right ? Wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 06:46 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. I believe Wrong...we have not seen what Demand really looks like yet
There are peeps who will pay $200 PER GALLON OF GAS

In the final days 3 to 8 years from now, unless we find something else real quick, prices will go to the highest bidder..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 04:37 AM
Response to Original message
17. I'm sure the neoCONs got a plan all figured out...
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
20. Hey you can all relax...
My fundie brother tells me that oil is a self renewing commodity that replenishes itself even as we speak... far below the earth's surface. And! We don't have to worry about anything as we will all be raptured SOON!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatholicEdHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Won't he be in for a suprise sooner than later
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. Oh I know, and "they" would never let that happen
I mean REALLY -this *is* the USA afterall. We're too big to be bled pale!:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Anti-Neo Con Donating Member (402 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
25. This is why China is aggressively building up their military.
They know oil resources are dwindling, and they know oil wars are going to result. When things get really scarce, I think they are going to try and take control of what oil is left and try to shut us out. They'll use all force necessary...I really don't trust China.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Venezuela is buying arms from China due to US intervention
The US has tried so many dirty tricks to undermine Chavez in Venezuela that we have forced yet another oil state away from our sphere of influence. BushCo has eliminated our future. Mission accomplished.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC