Is oil in short supply?
I’ll address that in a second, but first, if oil were more plentiful than we have been led to believe, would that be good news or bad? Would we go wild and pollute ourselves to death? Or would we break the monopoly of oil companies, and spend more time developing alternative energy sources? Today the oil companies are so rich that they can kill any alternative energy sources, if those sources threaten the monopoly.
Hmmm…
Anyway, what about this 'Peak Oil' claim?
Geologists are not certain how oil is formed. In western nations, the reigning theory is that oil is formed from the fossil remains of plants and animals. If that is true, then oil is limited. But what if oil isn’t only fossilized critters? What if some other natural process also creates oil? The universe is full of hydrocarbons. Oil is a hydrocarbon. Is there more oil than the oil companies' propaganda says there is?
One field of geology says oil can also be produced by natural or “abiogenic” processes that do not involve paleo-bio-critters. Russian geologists have studied this approach since the mid-1700s, and kicked into high gear during the 1950s.
With the rise of the oil monopolies (such as Standard Oil, led by the Rothschild-connected Rockefeller) the “biological” theory won out, partly because the theory allows oil monopolies to claim that oil is “scarce.”
Russian scientists, however, don’t buy the western theory. Many of them take the “abiogenic” approach, and have found oil in places where western geologists said there should be no oil. (More on this below.) Thus, perhaps our problem is not 'Peak Oil,' but politics. Or as I call it, artificial scarcity.
Western geologists admit that abiogenic processes create methane and hydrocarbon gases inside the earth, but not in commercially significant quantities. They say there is no direct evidence (yet) of petroleum (liquid crude oil and long-chain hydrocarbon compounds) formed abiogenically within the crust.
Maybe they’re right.
Then again, maybe they’re mistaken. Or maybe they're just plain lying for the oil companies and universities that employ them. Many Russians say they are lying, as we shall see below.
The wikipedia zionists have a very long and technical article about the origins and history of the “abiogenic” approach.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin )
The article says, “Some proponents see a pro-Western bias in the promotion of the biogenic theory. Political and economic considerations often influence discussions of petroleum origins.”
(Yes, and in today’s world, “pro-western” usually means pro-zionist, or pro-bankers, or simply pro-monopoly.)
Some geologists think the abiogenic theory might be valid, but that abiogenic oil is too deep to obtain. (The deepest well so far is the Kola Borehole in the East European Craton, at 12 km, or 7.46 miles.)
Other geologists blast the “abiogenic” approach altogether, saying there is “no free lunch.” (That is, there is no reason to question oil company greed.)
One article disagrees.
(http://www.rense.com/general78/expeak.htm)
Titled “Confessions Of An 'Ex' Peak Oil Believer” its author says that the Russians are on to something big, and that “pro-western” oil interests are worried. The author suspects there’s plenty of oil if we can develop the technology to drill ultra-deep wells and explore the earth's inner regions.
He claims that the Russians are forging ahead with oil-discovery technology. He quotes several Russians who say that western oil companies have a vested interest in the ‘Peak Oil’ scare.
He says the Russians used the “abiogenic” approach to discover oil and gas in the Dnieper-Donets Basin, between Russia and Ukraine, a region previously thought barren.
The article says…
“Around 2004, Pentagon strategists began to wonder if Russian geophysicists were on to something. If Russia had the scientific know-how, and the USA did not, then Russia had a strategic trump card. Therefore the USA focused on Russia’s pipelines. The USA built military bases around Russia, to cut her port links to Western Europe, China and the rest of Eurasia. Ironically, it was US / israeli aggression in the Middle East that created closer cooperation between China and Russia, plus a growing realization in western Europe that the Russians are on to something big.”
“Peak Oil theory is based on a 1956 paper done by the late Marion King Hubbert, a Texas geologist employed by Shell Oil. (Just as Thomas Malthus came up with his "scientific" theories of economics while he was employed by the awful East India Company. --AZ) Hubbert argued that oil wells produced in a bell curve manner. Once their ‘peak’ was hit, inevitable decline followed. Hubbert predicted the United States oil production would peak in 1970. When US oil output began to decline in around 1970, Hubbert became famous. Of course, oil did not peak because of resource depletion in the US fields. It "peaked" because Shell, Mobil, Texaco and the other partners of Saudi Aramco flooded the US market with cheap Middle East imports, tariff free. This was a Wal Mart-style approach that forced small domestic producers to sell their wells to the oil giants, since the small guys could not compete, price-wise.”
Meanwhile the Russians began drilling in a "barren" region of Siberia. They developed eleven major oil fields and one giant field based on their deep 'abiogenic’ geological estimates. They drilled into crystalline basement rock and hit oil on a scale comparable to Alaska's North Slope.
Next, the Russians went to Vietnam in the 1980s and offered to finance drilling costs to show that their geological theory worked. The Russian company Petrosov drilled in Vietnam's White Tiger oilfield offshore (into basalt rock some 17,000 feet down) and extracted 6,000 barrels a day of oil to feed the energy-starved Vietnam economy.
The article continues…
“In the USSR, abiogenic-trained Russian geologists perfected their knowledge. By the mid-1980's, the USSR emerged as one of the world's largest oil producers. Few in the West understood why, or bothered to ask.”
The author interviewed Dr. J. F. Kenney, a geophysicist who worked in Russia. Kenney says the Dnieper-Donets Basin has produced as much oil as Arabia’s Ghawar field. If all that oil came only from fossilized critters, there would have to be a pool 19 miles wide, 19 miles deep, and 19 miles high. No such pool exists anywhere. Thus, it can’t all be fossilized critters.
“Western geologists do not bother to offer hard scientific proof of fossil origins. They merely assert it as a holy truth. The Russians produced volumes of scientific papers, mostly in Russian, but the dominant Western journals have no interest in publishing this material. After all, careers and academic professions are at stake.”
When Bush invaded Iraq, the Russians stopped sharing any of their technology. The author notes that zionist Jew gangster Mikhail Khodorkovsky (of Yukos Oil) was arrested in 2003, after Khodorkovsky had held a private meeting with Cheney. Khodorkovsky was about to sell a dominant stake in Yukos to ExxonMobil. Cheney’s Halliburton Corp is the world's largest oil geophysical services company. Had Exxon got the stake, Exxon would have controlled the world's largest resource of geologists and engineers trained in abiogenic techniques of deep drilling.
Meanwhile the western oil companies want the cheap easy oil of the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere, and they’ll kill to get it. The only potential threat to their control is inside Russia, whose energy companies are no longer zionist-controlled (they are now state controlled).
Western geologists (employed by oil companies) says the Russian abiogenic theory is ridiculous. However, western scientists also said that German scientist Alfred Wegener was wrong about Continental Drift, which Wegener first explained in 1915. Up to the 1960's, US “scientists” -- such as Dr Frank Press, White House science advisor -- called Wegener a "lunatic." Western geologists finally admitted that Wegener was correct when his theory of Continental Drift allowed the discovery of vast oil resources in the North Sea.
Today, Western “scientists” still say Wegener is a “lunatic” regarding abiogenic oil. However the Russians have used Wegener’s “lunatic” theories since the 1950s.
Conclusion
I don’t know if the abiogenic theory is correct. This stuff is too technical for me. I do know that all monopolies lie by nature.
Which nations have the most oil? We don’t know, since our figures come from highly questionable sources such as the Oil & Gas Journal published by the Energy Information Administration, which is overseen by Cheney’s Department of Energy.
Here’s where they say the largest reserves are...
1. Arabia
2. Canada
3. Iran
4. Iraq
5. Kuwait
6. United Arab Emirates
7. Venezuela
8. Russia
9. Libya
10. Nigeria
11. USA
12. China
13. Qatar
14. Mexico
15. Algeria
16. Brazil
17. Kazakhstan
18. Norway
19. Azerbaijan
20. India
Are Cheney and his followers correct about ‘Peak Oil’?
Somehow I doubt anything that Cheney says.
‘Peak Oil’ is only an undisputed ‘fact’ if you buy what western oil companies say.
I think there’s a much bigger picture involved, as is the case with ALL claims made by monopolies.
Submitted by Abdul-Alhazred on Fri, 2007-09-28 11:11
- Abdul-Alhazred's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 809 reads
-
Peak Oil may be a real worry - for the oil companies!
Scarcity in quantitative terms will be a short term problem. There is an abundance of fossil fuels to be produced if only prices could be kept above USD 40-50 per barrel!
That is the situation for Venezuela, which sits on an abundance of untouched, very heavy crude which involves higher costs of refining, and it is the situation for production of fuel based on coal (a process used by the Germans during world war II).
But what will make the oil "peak" is first and foremost the fact that within the next 10 years we shall have solar energy which can compete cost wise with any other alternative. When solar energy has become mainstream nobody in his right mind would dream of burning oil, it will be reserved for production of chemicals, and even in that respect the demand will be falling rather than increasing.
Thank you for your comment.
I agree with you, but I should add that solar energy is not practical (yet) for vehicles. Indeed, gasoline and diesel fuel pack more energy than almost any other source that can be easily carried in a car.
However, we have not devoted much time exploring alternatives.
We CAN meet our energy needs through solar, wind and other means. These do not pollute, and they use energy that is free. There are vast fields of wind turbines in Europe located far out to sea, where they’re not visible from land.
Of course, the oil and noo-kyu-ler companies like their monopoly.
Therefore you can be sure they are as full of b.s. as the warmongers and zionists when statements are made about Iran.
I remain skeptical about 'Peak Oil.'
We all know that the stone age did not come to and end when they ran out of stones!
Same with the oil age: It will be over when competitive alternatives have won over oil.
In my first comment I indicated 10 years, and according to California's initiatives to promote development of competitive solar energy solar will compare favorably with fossil fuels in about five years, so give it ten and we shall have the new technologies disseminated.
Then the conventional family home will be able to harvest solar energy on its roof, not only to cover its own energy needs pertaining to heating/ cooling etc. it will also be able to charge batteries, which can be used to power the family car.
Have a look at this article: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/08/the_hybrid_mini.php
This is the future direction of the car industry. Volvo will market its first car based on these principles in around 2010.
Oil will indeed have peaked by then!
Thank you for your comments. I express my condolences for what happened to you.
"This crap has been floating around since dirt was young. It's mostly a subset of the 'perptual motion machine' fantasy. 100 MPG carbs... killed by 'big oil'. Burn water for gasoline... killed by 'big oil'."
I’m sorry you find yourself imprisoned in a dream world, but you put yourself in it. You assert that oil companies do not use their wealth to stifle challenges to their monopoly. Again, you put yourself into this delusion. Don’t try to blame others for it.
"If you have an 'alternative energy source,' you could make MILLIONS. You won't because there isn't."
There are no alternatives? Well, I'm sorry for your eyesight problems, but again, don't blame your personal defects on everyone else.
"You went to school and I'm sure you did quite well but you NEVER LEARNED TO THINK! If oil isn't only 'fossilized criter' (sic) and some other 'natural process' creates oil IT IS STILL LIMITED."
Calm down, little one. The post makes no assertion that abiogenic oil means that oil is "unlimited." The post suggests that oil companies and their shills and wannabe shills (such as you) are mistaken, or exaggerating, or simply lying when they make ‘Peak Oil’ claims. The post also says, “Maybe they are right.” If these ideas upset you so badly, I recommend that you go play with your little dolls, or whatever you do to relieve tension. Leave serious matters to the adults.
"Tempting though it is, it seems pointless to go through the rest of the diatribe. (Hint: The scarcity or cornucopia of oil below the surface of the Earth CANNOT possibly be related to Zionism.)"
Perhaps you are new to this site. I have written before on the structural analogies between zionism and the innate workings of a monopoly —any monopoly. Also, oil company maneuvers are intertwined with the monopoly known as private central banking, and with zionist-inspired militarism. Again, since you are perhaps new here, and seem to have a learning disability, I will not delve into these points.
"Peak oil is fact. It has nothing to do with dinosaurs or Russian journeys to the center of the Earth. It is an empircally (sic) observed fact. It's also (no big surprise) misunderstood."
Perhaps you also think that oil has nothing to do with things like the famine in Darfur either (to take one of many examples). If it comforts you to swallow western oil company propaganda, that’s okay. Repeat... it's OKAY. If someone questions your fairy tales, it does not necessarily mean they hate you, or think you’re ugly. Calm down my child. The post merely asserts that oil monopolies use ‘Peak Oil’ rhetoric to justify their rapaciousness.
"One would almost get the idea that humans are TOO FUCKING STUPID TO UNDERSTAND that peak oil is NOT "out of oil". All it means is that production has reached a peak and it's all downhill from here."
Nowhere in the entire post is there any assertion that “Peak Oil” means “out of oil.” You really must learn to control your tantrums. They make you see things that don’t really exist.
Oh..and the next time you make a threat, you might consider not doing it to zionist way. Don’t threaten to have my legs broken. Threaten to do it yourself, if you think you're big enough not to get stomped. Just don't do it on this web site. We're monitored.
Thank you again for your comments.
Yes, petrochemicals are involved in every aspect of our lives. Our society is founded on them. Even the food we eat requires nitrate fertilizers, which largely come from the natural gas industry. This all happened because oil was (relatively) affordable until Cheney seized power.
The main intention of the post was to give another example of how monopolies twist science to support their propaganda. I also wanted to suggest that when we hear about crises, there is usually more to the picture, and we are not told all the information.
If anyone wants to use 'Peak Oil' rghetoric to say we must explore alternatives to petrochemicals, then I'm all for that. However, I oppose any use of 'Peak Oil' rhetoric to justify war and imperialism.
We must have plastic from hydrocarbons (like the plastic in our computer keyboard) but petrochemicals are not the only possible source of hydrocarbons. (Ordinary sugar is a hydrocarbon.)
I'm merely saying that oil companies issue propaganda that helps support their monopoly, that's all.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. :)
I first learned about Russia and the fantastic success of using different technologies from the late, great Joe Vialls several years ago. I think the staggering implications are way too unpleasant for widespread dissemination in the west, so they're trying desperately to smother all this with their peak oil lies. This is what Vialls said some years ago:
"So these shills [peak oil alarmists] were carefully positioned to deflect your attention away from the obvious greed and incompetence of the United States Government and its Wall Street masters, and focus it elsewhere instead. Then, hopefully, a few years later down the track when prices start to bounce through the roof, and America has no Euros to buy crude oil, you will blame gasoline prices of $5.00+ per gallon at the pumps on an 'inevitable decline' in world oil production, rather than march furiously on Washington DC with locked and loaded firearms."
Prescient, and note he said Euros.
quote:
The cat's getting out of the bag
I first learned about Russia and the fantastic success of using different technologies from the late, great Joe Vialls several years ago. I think the staggering implications are way too unpleasant for widespread dissemination in the west, so they're trying desperately to smother all this with their peak oil lies. This is what Vialls said some years ago:
"So these shills [peak oil alarmists] were carefully positioned to deflect your attention away from the obvious greed and incompetence of the United States Government and its Wall Street masters, and focus it elsewhere instead. Then, hopefully, a few years later down the track when prices start to bounce through the roof, and America has no Euros to buy crude oil, you will blame gasoline prices of $5.00+ per gallon at the pumps on an 'inevitable decline' in world oil production, rather than march furiously on Washington DC with locked and loaded firearms."
Prescient, and note he said Euros.
nolocontendere | Sat, 2007-09-29 03:15
==============================
I also heard some rumors (true or false????) that Joe Vials was either:
1) Really Assassinated by MOSSAD/JEWS, or
2) He "pretended" to "die off" as he himself was a undercover Zionist agent.
Those who have been spreading the 2) rumor, appears to be Zionist agents themselves, since what JOSEPH VIALLS said have so far been 'RELIABLE'.
That and what he mentioned about the "ASIAN TSUNAMI" of which is a result of JEWISH SETTING OFF A THERMONUCLEAR BOMB ON THE SEA FLOOR.
I haven't had the chance to INVESTIGATE 'COMPLETELY' this as I wanted to (my scientific and forensic background makes me the ideal investigator).... even so, this would take CONSIDERABLE time and 'connections'.....
The peak oil scam was part of the program to raise the profits of the oil companies by reducing available supply by causing wars and disruptions that would stop sectors of production, bottle neck supply chains by limiting refining and pipeline capacity, propping the price with hedged futures contracts large enough to move markets by force of trade volume, and deflecting public anger with the peak oil scare.
The problem they face is how to panic the public into accepting higher prices without having them go full bore into alternative energy. One way is they have bottle necked the wind generator market with patents. They have encouraged corn ethanol, which is a net energy loser, but keeps big land corporations smiling, over the feasible bio-diesel market. And they have kept the nuclear fear factor high as a by product of this phony "war on terrer" and our Chimpanzee in Chief calls it.
Joe Vialls had a lot of interesting stuff and time is proving him correct. His exposure of the Kirkuk-Haifa pipeline was pure prophecy.
I don't believe he was really Ben Menashe.
"The problem they face is how to panic the public into accepting higher prices without having them go full bore into alternative energy."
Bingo! Bullseye! Give that man a cigar.
Remember the old "Mister Magoo" TV cartoon? "Oh Magoo, you've done it again...
Oh McClaymore, you've done it again. :)
I'm glad to see you are back updating your blog - It was some of my favorite stuff! It was ahead of it's time for sure.
Thanks, but I'm not updating it. I don't know how to embed images directly into WUFYS, so I embed images in the old blog, and then copy and paste those images to here.
I have occasionally thought of starting up the old blog, but with satirical pieces only. This zio-nightmare is so awful that we'll go mad unless we have some humor.
If you'd consider contributing satirical texts and images to that blog with me, I might do it.
It would be like onion.com, but with an emphasis on the stuff we talk about here.
There were a couple of satires on that old blog that people believed (like they believed the one in WUFYS about israel demanding U.S. aid in euros.) After that, I made sure to include "satire" in the title of each post. I want word about zio-venom to spread, but I don't want to mislead anyone.
I think the zio-monster is best approached in three ways.
1. Analysis / news / commentary
2. Art (images, music, videos, etc)
3. Humor
Yea sure, I'm in. Grab the Foreign aid in euros and the ziobees for starters. I'm working on another right now about a mohel.
Good satire should be so close to truth that it's totally believable.
We could call it the ZIONION!
I don't believe he was really Ben Menashe.
Claymoremind | Sat, 2007-09-29 04:32
Likewise, the similarities are as 'good' as the REAL Osama Bin Laden and the FAKE OBL....
hahaha
”Good satire should be so close to truth that it's totally believable.”
Yes, the more plausible, the better. I have a few satires in mind right now.
Shall we simply use that old blog? If so, you might e-mail me, and I will give you instructions on using it. Very simple, and it’s free.
richardwilson000@yahoo.com
If you do e-mail, I will respond later today (Saturday 29 Sept 07).
I see "Brendon O'Connell" has left me a message. Probably a nastygram. I won't even click it. I presume he / she / it developed its online name from the actor Brendon Fraser, plus the last name of Fraser's character (O'Connell) in the "Mummy" movies.
(Yawn.)