“Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.”
-St. Augustine

I don’t think the problem is so much overpopulation as much as distribution of population and organization of economy. The supercapitalism/freemarket ideology across the globe assumes, by it’s very nature, unlimited growth and unlimited resources. Obviously not a possible economics in a real and finite world but it serves the elites at the top of the socioeconomic “foodchain”.

Oil is the lifeblood, enabler and root cause of the “non-negotiable” way of life we in North America have and others envy and seek. Yes oil companies are making record profits and a good portion of that is due to subsidies. However, the root cause of the run up in oil is one of the natural limits that supercapitalism does not account for: Peak Oil. A quick skim of the facts tells the tale. Mexico’s annual output has decreased due to the fact that the output of it’s Cantarell field, the second largest in the world, declined 15% last year. Russia’s output for last month was the lowest in 18 months. Both VP Dick Cheney and Sec State Rice have visited Riyadh recently and that usually means they’re asking/ordering more oil output. The problem is the Ghawar (the largest in the world) oil field is like Cantarell and in decline. The Saudis are already producing as much as they can to take advantage of record prices. That covers 3 of the world’s top oil exporters. So like some sort of desperate junkie we will be foregoing meals to feed our addiction. Lucky for us North Americans most of those meals belong to other people on the otherside of the world. The solution is perfect for the politicians. It makes the farm lobby/agribusiness corporations happy. They can sell it to the public as a step to reducing climate change(even in the face of the fact that more CO2 is released) and they can point to job creation. Also totally ignoring the fact that the corn to ethanol process results in a negative energy returned on energy invested. This sort of senseless false economics is only possible under the politico-corporate oligopoly that has resulted in a White House administration that is comprised in good part by former oil executives.

The Amish had it right. Small communities living self sufficiently in relative harmony with nature and using resources sustainably is the best way all around. This sort of small holder farming was and still is how much of the world lives. However in many places policies of the World Bank, IMF and WTO have devastated the small holder farming communities. In other cases, small holders have been forced to adopt the GMOs of a few monstrous agribusinesses. Many times these species are maladapted to the particular climates that they’re forced into. These policies, the speculators of course, bans on rice exports by net producers, corn ethanol/biofuels mandates and to a lesser extent climate change are responsible for the current food crisis. Even though grain stockpiles are at 30 year lows; supply is not the primary problem in this case.

Unfortunately the climate change genie is out of the bottle. With half of all available oil burnt and the portion of CO2 in the atmosphere increased by approximately 25 percent since before the Industrial Revolution; the inertia of current changes and systemic feedback are far beyond anything we could have predicted or imagined. Oil will become economically unfeasible long before we actually run out. Global problems call for global solutions. Maybe through some semblance of a world government. Some of our most prominent thinkers including Albert Einstein have foreseen this as humanity’s most possible, likely, peaceful outcome. Not that we want the world singing Internationale but that we need more cooperation and action then our governments are doing. We need true capitalism and true free trade and the fairest, most efficient way that can be accomplished is locally. More transparent and osmotic borders would allow for people from resource poor to resource rich areas, from stagnant, unsustainable urban centres to sustainable small communities. A revolution starts from the bottom up. The handful of countries striving for energy independent economies, Transition Towns, local currencies and the 100km diet are all manifestations of this local future. Humanity will eventually be forced back to these smaller economies and communities because the fuel that enables the global transport system will eventually run out. It would be prudent and prescient if we could pull together as humankind and make the transition to a post oil world in a peaceful and organized manner. Unfortunately another truth about revolutions is that they are, messy and tend to result, from, extreme natural and/or economic catastrophe. Hope was all that was left at the bottom of Pandora’s box and without hope we drown in a sea of bitterness.

Correction: Didn’t Miller say, instead,

‘ejaculate the world with delusions’?

Friday 02 May 2008

Just as the need for renewables becomes critical, the oil giants signal an alarming retreat.
This week the shape of the global energy crisis came into its sharpest focus yet. The world needs renewable energy fast, but as BP and Shell announced record profits, they also demonstrated that they are in essence retreating from renewables, perhaps with the exception of biofuels. They intend to focus their record billions on expanding production of what remains of traditional oil and gas, plus tar sands and liquid fuels from coal - ruinous in their effect on the climate.

The oil giants are recarbonising, wilfully choosing to forget both global warming imperatives and the need for renewables in national security terms. Shell pulled out of the biggest offshore UK windfarm yesterday and BP is losing interest in solar and investing in the tar sands - having once refused to do so on ethical grounds because of the greenhouse gas emitted in processing.

The European oil giants are behaving in this way in part because ExxonMobil became the most profitable of the big players while turning its back on the climate issue and pouring scorn on renewables investment. BP and Shell can no longer resist the calls of investors who demand short-term Exxon-type performance, whatever the final cost.

Others think differently. In New York, members of the Rockefeller clan - descendants of Exxon’s founder - called yesterday for radical reform of the company because they can no longer stomach its irresponsible attitude towards the climate. They want a board that will invest in renewables. Meanwhile, in London, a big asset management house took out newspaper ads spoofing a death announcement for fossil fuels and one for the birth of renewables, in which its alternative energy fund will invest.

This fund, and others like it, are investing in renewables because they enjoy some of the fastest growing markets in the world. This growth is driven in large measure by feed-in tariffs - to encourage the use of renewables. Thirty-three Labour MPs rebelled this week against the government’s energy bill because it ignores the feed-in mechanism. The UK government persists with its discredited renewables obligation, a measure that has seen the renewables mix in UK primary energy sit for several years now at just 2%.

Meanwhile, North Sea oil and gas are depleting rapidly. BP and Shell know there are no more rich oilfields to be discovered there. They are being forced to invest much further afield in the search for the huge fields they so badly need.

As domestic oil and gas production collapses, the UK will be forced to look increasingly to imports. Britain imports only 5% of its energy now, but that is likely to rise to 50% in five years, much of it gas. The government appears to think this is fine, pointing to the growth of domestic infrastructure for liquefied natural gas and pipelines from Norway and the Netherlands. But this week we learned that the UK is the last priority for Norwegian exports. As the Grangemouth strikers wonder what to do next, we smell in that drama just how fragile the whole energy edifice is.

Those who hoped Opec would come to the rescue also received a blow this week. The cartel said it wouldn’t lift production, even if oil rises to $200 a barrel. Meanwhile, fuelled by $120 oil, the economies of the producers are booming, sucking up ever more of the oil and gas we will need. As for nuclear, it cannot produce a single unit of electricity for at least 10 years - far too late to help with a gas shortfall and largely irrelevant to oil, anyway.

We need renewables today like we needed tanks and planes in 1929. Those who ignore this may soon face accusations of betrayal from a population staring energy famine in the face.
Drill, drill drill No, No, No. Rapid development of energy alternatives and focus on the rapid part.
Tuff times ahead there is still time.

Centre for Climate Law and Policy associate director Andrew McIntosh says that there is going to be a significant reduction in south-east Australian rainfall.

“There’s going to be change in the rainfall patterns that Australia is going to experience in general, but I suppose the main point is that these sorts of changes have occurred with a 0.8 degree increase in temperatures,” he said.

“Now we’ve got to speculate about what is going to occur with increases of two degrees and more, so triple what we’re currently experiencing, and I would imagine that that’s going to cause quite severe changes in rainfall.”

That is Australia and what about China in just two years? The States drought is already a problem. I did hear one man say today hope we have good weather for crops this summer. Anyway have you noticed all the planing in just this country for the coming years, you haven’t that is because there are no plans. I did hear our President talk and he was explaining how free trade works in that down home way, just different. I still think a good idea to have some people in charge, thinkers would be good. Thinkers who can make hard choices. Drill, drill drill No, No, No. Rapid development of energy alternatives and focus on the rapid part.

Nader is perfectly acceptable, or could be, to 90% of Americans. He easily could be, with a little national and international ‘good press’ via TV and print. Positive coverage. Repeated over and over and over and over and over. Like they do for the miscreants in power now.
The rub, the matter, the crux of the apostrophe is the 10% who run the presses and the TVs.
The manipulative mind control and outright systematic lying, combined with the endless repetition, has been tweaked and perfected to a level approaching magic.

Why else do you have all that junk in your garage, in your house, bristling with electronics, a half dozen ‘medical prescriptions,’ thousands of dollars of debt, all the while believing lies which are scientifically, philosophically and mathematically impossible to be true?

The battle, opportunity, chance is already over if a person or a nation refuses to see and hear the truth which is right before their eyes every lying hour of every lying day. A lie by omission is still a lie, especially in this society of cheaters and the cheated.
Want some good news?
Turn on the TV..

Hoo ha. Using that frame of reference GWB must be trying to tell me the truth b/c I so detest the little twerp.

Obviously, it’s hard for some to admit that Nader simply evokes nothing from most folks. Ralph’s biggest obstacle is himself. He’s like an unmanned drone flying with F-18 Hornets.

I am sure you do, Bill. It’s been pretty rewarding for you. Hopelessness is the thing that keeps on giving — for some.

And then you mention Nader in the latter category. Maybe he told the truth 40 years ago. I know that he lies and shamelessly, for the same reason the others do. The reason I know is when he talks about things I know a thing or two about, like energy choices and others. Pure demagoguery, pure fear mongering. But it’s easy with the americans and esp. leftists — neither can find their own ass on the map of the world, and feeling good is paramount to both.

But never mind the facts, let’s have the Ralph love fest, he’s the messiah. He’ll deliver us. This is part of a piece that’s supposed to enlighten us on something.

And yes, good catch Chris — circular logic to prove one’s point. Anything to win, that’s the amurikan way.

So, what do you propose in lieu of commodity exchanges for setting the prices and quantities of food commodities, like grain, corn, etc.? We are talking zillions of tons. Should a farmer from Texas drive his wheat to a supermarket or a bread-maker in New York City, to see what price it will fetch there? Or maybe you have in mind the Soviet style planning and price setting. That worked out pretty well, didn’t it — famine in the Ukraine, the bread basket of the USSR, importing millions of tons of grain from the US every year, where we had the commodity exchanges.

Just love it when people dream of things they know nothing about.