WHATEVER THE TWISTS AND TURNS in global politics, whatever
the ebb of imperial power and the flow of national pride,
one trend in the decades following World War II progressed
in a straight and rapidly ascending line -- the
consumption of oil. If it can be said, in the abstract,
that the sun energized the planet, it was oil that now
powered its human population, both in its familiar forms
as fuel and in the proliferation of new petrochemical
products. Oil emerged triumphant, the undisputed King, a
monarch garbed in a dazzling array of plastics. He was
generous to his loyal subjects, sharing his wealth to, and
even beyond, the point of waste. His reign was a time of
confidence, of growth, of expansion, of astonishing
economic performance. His largesse transformed his
kingdom, ushering in a new drive-in civilization. It was
the Age of Hydrocarbon Man.
-- Daniel Yergin, 1992.
[1] |
What if tomorrow Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat met with
representatives from each of the 19 Muslim
petroleum-exporting countries and proposed an entirely new
organization called the "Alliance of Muslim Petroleum
Exporting Nations" -- "AMPEC" for short?
-- Richard Duncan, 1997 letter to President Clinton.
[2] |
The
genius of our so-called democracy lies in its stability and
predictability. James Madison (1751-1836) is known as "the
father of the U.S. Constitution".
[3]
Madison's primary political concern centered on the
maintenance of social stability by the political and social
control of competing factions; control by government itself
was a secondary consideration. With those objectives in mind,
the framers crafted an elaborate political system:
Where "first object of
government" (highest priority) was "the faculties" of
acquiring property.
[4]
Where the struggle of
classes and passions (e.g., religious conflict) was replaced
with the struggle of interests in the economic sphere.
Where the political
system was extremely resistant to change.
Where political power was
reserved for a white male minority while projecting the
illusion of self-government to the majority. Madison scholar
Richard K. Matthews explains:
"By
consciously denying virtually all but a handful of citizens
any role in a governmental structure that, by design, was to
be run by an elite of superior ability (who nonetheless would
have to check and balance each other), Madison left [economic
struggle] as the prime avenue for humanity to search for
meaning."
[5]
Nowadays, the terms "democracy" and "market economy" are often
used interchangeably. Political decisions in a market economy
are stunningly simple: one dollar, one vote. In short, the
market economy serves as a stealth political system to foster
rational thought, universal values based on calculation, and
world peace based on self-interest. The market economy
succeeds because it satisfies our hunter/gatherer genetic
drives for dominance, sex, food, and material possessions.
One
hundred years ago, fundamentally defective economic theories
led to two world wars with millions killed. Today, the same
defective economic theories are taught to students all over
the world and are leading to a new generation of world wars
with billions killed.
America will soon lose the stability the framers worked so
hard to create because it is becoming wholly dependent upon
inherently unstable (authoritarian) oil-producing Muslim
nations like Indonesia. It happened twenty-five years ago
when OPEC quadrupled world oil prices and plunged America into
"stagflation". Fortunately, the non-OPEC producers still had
a HUGE unexploited oil cushion to fall back on and simply
pumped central bankers out of their economic crisis.
But
that was 1973 and this is 1999 -- twenty-five years later the
oil cushion is gone. Muslim nations will soon control
virtually all of the worldŐs oil exports. Since neither
capital nor labor can create energy, the next round of
energy-shortage-induced stagflation will leave central bankers
helpless and they will seek military solutions to their
economic problems.
It's the best-kept secret
in Washington, Whitehall, Brussels, and
Jerusalem,
but it's just a matter of time until word hits the
street...
ENERGY SOURCES
 |
Energy and Resource Quality Hall, Cleveland, and Kaufmann,
1992 |
By
definition, energy "sources" must produce more energy than
they consume, otherwise they are called "sinks". [6] |
The
market economy burns energy to make money -- there is no
substitute for energy. Although the economy treats energy
just like any other resource, itŐs not like any other
resource. Available energy is the precondition for all
resources -- including energy resources.
The
key to understanding energy issues is to look at the "energy
price" of energy. Energy "sources" that consume more energy
than they produce are called "sinks" and are worthless as
sources of energy. This thermodynamic law applies no matter
how high the "money price" of energy goes.
The
market economy receives almost 80 percent of its energy
subsidies from nonrenewable fossil sources: oil, gas, and
coal. They are called "nonrenewable" because, for all
practical purposes, they're not being made any more. The
reason they are called "fossil" is because they were
"produced" by nature from dead plants and animals over several
hundred million years.
In
the 1950s, oil producers discovered about fifty barrels of oil
for every barrel invested in drilling and pumping. Today, the
figure is only about five for one. Sometime around 2005, that
figure will become one for one. In other words, even
if the price of oil reaches $500 a barrel, it wouldn't make
energy sense to look for new oil in the United States after
2005 because it would consume more energy than it would
recover.
The increasing energy
cost of oil sets up a positive feedback loop: since oil is
used directly or indirectly in everything, as the energy costs
of oil increase, the energy costs of everything else increase
too -- including other forms of energy. For example, oil
provides about 50% of the fuel used in coal extraction.[7]
Immutable energy laws tell us that a growing economy must
eventually consume more energy than it can buy. When America
spends more-than-one unit of energy to produce enough goods
and services to buy one unit of energy, it will be physically
impossible to cover the overhead (money is irrelevant). At
that point, America's economic machine is "out of gas".
Forever!
EUR OIL
For
many years, geologists and petroleum engineers have published
estimates of how much oil can be recovered from any given
basin. This is known as "Estimated Ultimately Recoverable"
(or EUR) oil. Remarkably, estimates of total worldwide EUR
oil have varied little over the past half century!
[8]
Forty years ago, geologist M. King Hubbert developed a method
for projecting future oil production and predicted that oil
production in the lower 48 states would peak about 1970. This
prediction has proved to be remarkably accurate. Both total
and peak yields have risen slightly compared to Hubbert's
original estimate, but the timing of the peak and the general
downward trend of production were correct. Hubbert showed
that oil production begins to peak and starts to decline when
approximately half of the EUR oil has been recovered.
IHS
Energy Group (formerly Petroconsultants) is the world's
leading provider of data and analysis for oil exploration and
production. The company maintains its headquarters at a
custom-built communications center in Geneva. It also has
offices in London, Houston, Calgary, Sydney, Perth, Singapore
and Hong Kong and a global information network. The backbone
of the company is a staff of 300, embracing numerous
nationalities, cultures and professions, specializing in
petroleum geology, geophysics, petroleum engineering,
economics, political science, petroleum legislation,
cartography, computer science and information technology.
[9]
In
1995, Petroconsultants published a report for oil industry
insiders ($32,000 per copy) titled WORLD OIL SUPPLY 1930-2050
which concluded that world oil production could peak as soon
as the year 2000 and decline to half that level by 2025.
Large and permanent increases in oil prices are predicted
after the year 2000.
[10]
NO OIL? NO
ECONOMY!
If
one considers the last one hundred years of the U.S.
experience, fuel use and economic output are highly
correlated... Energy quality is by far the dominant
factor.
-- Cleveland, Costanza, Hall, and Kaufmann (Science 225:
890-897) |
One
of the most important aspects of energy is its "quality".
Different kinds of fuel have different qualities. For example,
coal contains more energy per pound than wood, which makes
coal more efficient to store and transport than wood. Oil has
a higher energy content per unit weight and burns at a higher
temperature than coal; it is easier to transport, and can be
used in internal combustion engines. A diesel locomotive uses
only one-fifth the energy of a coal-powered steam engine to
pull the same train.
Oil
is the highest quality energy we use, making up about 38
percent of the world energy supply. No other energy source
equals oilŐs intrinsic qualities of extractability,
transportability, versatility and cost. The qualities that
enabled oil to take over from coal as the front-line energy
source in the industrialized world in the middle of this
century are as relevant today as they were then. Oil's many
advantages provide 1.3 to 2.45 times more economic value per
kilocalorie than coal.
[11]
Studies show that nothing can replace oil: "A recent review
of the future prospects of all alternatives has been
published. The summary conclusion reached is that there is no
known complete substitute for petroleum in its many and varied
uses."[12]
For example, when the oil's gone, food production will drop to
a fraction of todayŐs numbers: "If the fertilizers, partial
irrigation [in part provided by oil energy], and pesticides
were withdrawn, corn yields, for example, would drop from 130
bushels per acre to about 30 bushels."
[13]
RICHARD DUNCAN:
IT'S THE EXPORTS, STUPID!
In
1997, Richard Duncan developed a new model to forecast oil
production called the NUMERATE-EMPIRIC MODEL.[14]
In the course of his research, Duncan discovered that Muslim
nations would soon control market economies because they will
control virtually all of the oil export market. In a 1997
letter to President Clinton and Senator Jessie Helms, Duncan
warned:
"What if
tomorrow Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat met with
representatives from each of the 19 Muslim petroleum exporting
countries and proposed an entirely new organization called the
'Alliance of Muslim Petroleum Exporting Nations' -- 'AMPEC'
for short?
"This
proposal alone could cause World stock markets to fall 50% in
one day. And crucially, it could ignite both (1) a World
Petroleum War, and (2) a World Holy War (called a 'Jihad' by
Muslims). I view an 'AMPEC shock' as looming likely because
powerful Muslim forces are pushing Mr. Arafat (and others)
further every day."
Senator Helms replied that America's oil dependence had become
a threat to national security: "The Commerce Department
recently released a report which found that U.S. dependence on
foreign oil has become a threat to national security. The
government should not have allowed its national security to be
placed in such a vulnerable position."
...President Clinton was apparently too busy to reply...
Duncan is certainly right! Who can forget the headlines of
1979: "Shah flees Iran ... Ayatollah Khomeini returns from
exile ... 63 Americans taken hostage in Iran ... many states
initiate gas rationing programs ... ABC begins nightly report
with 'The Iran Crisis: America Held Hostage' ... OPEC oil
price increase tops 50 percent ..."
Although the names and faces will change, we will certainly
see a rerun of 1979 because all Muslim countries are
"authoritarian" political systems and therefore, inherently
unstable:
"Only a
handful of the more than four dozen predominantly Muslim
countries have made significant strides toward establishing
democratic systems. Among this handful -- including Albania,
Bangladesh, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Mali, Pakistan, and
Turkey -- not one has yet achieved full, stable, or secure
democracy. And the largest single regional bloc holding out
against the global trend toward political pluralism comprises
the Muslim countries of the Middle East and North Africa."
[15]
OIL EXPORT
POTENTIAL
A
nation's oil "export potential" is determined by subtracting
its oil consumption from its oil production. For example, in
1998 Saudi Arabia produced 9,230 Kb/day and consumed 1,240
Kb/day. Thus, the Saudi export potential is 7,999 Kb/day.
(No other country is even close to the Saudi's export
potential!) We can make a very rough estimate of Muslim
exports by considering the exports of Muslim regions for 1998,
as follows:
Region |
Percent
of World |
Middle East |
46% |
North Africa |
7% |
West Africa |
8% |
FSU
Caspian,
Indonesia and Malaysia |
10% |
Est. 1998 Muslim |
71% |
Most
Muslim oil-exporting nations are experiencing serious cash
flow problems and social unrest (e.g., Saudi Arabia) because
of the failing "oil welfare" approach they've taken with their
citizens. However, these nations have a HUGE "savings
account" in the form of oil reserves. The Middle East alone
has 64 percent of the world's proved oil reserves. Add to
that 9 percent (i.e., the FSU Muslim republics, 1.7 percent;
Muslim African nations, 6.7 percent; Indonesia, Malaysia, and
Brunei, 1 percent) and the Muslim nations have roughly 73
percent of the total world's proved oil reserves. (See BP
Amoco 1999. Of note: The data is from the oil industry
itself.) Now that's money in the oily bank account, and the
Muslims hold the checkbook. It's just a matter of time until
domestic unrest forces Muslim nations to coordinate their
efforts and solve their cash flow problems for decades to
come.
By
2010, Muslim nations could control 60 percent of the world's
oil production and, more importantly, 95 percent of the
world's oil exports. In short, the Muslim exporting nations
have Western economies by the throat.
THAT GIANT SUCKING
SOUND
The
United States is physically unable to produce enough oil
domestically to keep its economy alive and is forced to rely
on imports. In 1998, the United States imported 53 percent of
its oil needs. This deficit is growing -- and will continue
to grow until the economy collapses exactly like it did
twenty-five years ago. What's utterly amazing is that even
though these data are available for everyone to see on the BP
Amoco web site -- and in every major library for non-surfers
-- there's nobody in the Oval Office who seems to know how to
search the web (or the library)? Even our "environmentalist
VP" -- who claims to have "invented" the Internet -- is
apparently unable (or unwilling) to access BP's database.
THE LAWS
The
human species may be seen as having evolved in the service of
entropy, and it cannot be expected to outlast the dense
accumulations of energy that have helped define its niche.
Human beings like to believe they are in control of their
destiny, but when the history of life on Earth is seen in
perspective, the evolution of Homo sapiens is merely a
transient episode that acts to redress the planet's energy
balance.
Đ David Price.
[16]
The
first law of thermodynamics (conservation law) states that
there can be no creation of matter/energy. The German
physicist Helmholtz and the British physicist Lord Kelvin had
explained the principle by the middle of the 19th century.
The second law (entropy law) states that spontaneous processes
will increase the disorder (or entropy) of a system;
concentrations of matter tend to disperse, structure tends to
disappear, and order becomes disorder. Moreover, all physical
processes reduce the total available energy.
In
1824, the French physicist N. L. S. Carnot formulated the
second law's concepts while working on "heat engines".
[17]
Lord Kelvin and the German physicist Clausius eventually
formalized Carnot's concepts as the second law of
thermodynamics. Most chemical engineering, all power plant
engineering, internal combustion engineering,
air-conditioning, and low-temperature physics are a few of the
fields that owe their theoretical basis to thermodynamics.
Available energy is the prerequisite for any economic
activity. For example, lifting 15 kg of rock 5 meters out of
the ground requires 735 joules of energy just to overcome
gravity -- and the higher the lift, the greater the minimum
energy requirements.[18]
The second law of thermodynamics places absolute limits the
efficiency of the heat engines that power the global economy.
[19]
A typical auto,
bulldozer, truck, or power plant wastes more than 50 percent
of the energy contained in its fuel!
By a
hundred years ago, physics had incorporated the laws of
thermodynamics. Obviously, energy laws that govern the
physical world also govern the economic world. Physical
scientists attempted to point out this crucial fact to
economists:
"It is,
in fact, the fate of all kinds of energy of position to be
ultimately converted into energy of motion. The former may be
compared to money in a bank, or capital, the latter to money
which we are in the act of spending ... If we pursue the
analogy a step further, we shall see that the great capitalist
is respected because he has the disposal of a great quantity
of energy; and that whether he be nobleman or sovereign, or a
general in command, he is powerful only from having something
which enables him to make use of the services of others. When
a man of wealth pays a laboring man to work for him, he is in
truth converting so much of his energy of position into actual
energy...The world of mechanism is not a manufactory, in which
energy is created, but rather a mart, into which we may bring
energy of one kind and change or barter it for an equivalent
of another kind, that suits us better -- but if we come with
nothing in hand, with nothing we will most assuredly return."
[Balfour Stewart, 1883]
[20]
But
economists never understood the laws of thermodynamics because
they evolved to worship the Market God instead.
THE MARKET GOD
No
discipline [ except economics ] attempts to make the world act
as it thinks the world should act. But of course what Homo
sapiens does and what Homo economicus should do are
often quite different. That, however, does not make the basic
model wrong, as it would in every other discipline. It just
means that actions must be taken to bend Homo sapiens
into conformity with Homo economicus. So, instead of
adjusting theory to reality, reality is adjusted to theory.
-- Lester Thurow.
[21]
The
human mind evolved to believe in gods... Acceptance of the
supernatural conveyed a great advantage throughout prehistory,
when the brain was evolving. Thus it is in sharp contrast to
[science] which was developed as a product of the modern age
and is not underwritten by genetic algorithms.
-- E.O. Wilson.
[22]
A
zoologist from Outer Space would immediately classify us as
just a third species of chimpanzee, along with pygmy chimp of
Zaire and the common chimp of the rest of tropical Africa.
Molecular genetic studies of the last half-dozen years have
shown that we continue to share over 98 percent of our genetic
program with the other two chimps.
-- Jared Diamond.
[23]
Genes are simply chemicals that direct the combination of more
chemicals. Edward Tatum and George Wells Beadle investigated
the transmission of hereditary characteristics of genes and
proved that particular genes are responsible for particular
enzymes, and therefore all biochemical processes are regulated
by genes. For their work on genetics, they shared the 1958
Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine with Joshua Lederberg.
For over 400 years, we've known that genes drive behavior:
"Dogs
provide a dramatic yet familiar example of genetic variability
within species. Despite their great variability in size and
physical appearance, they are all members of the same
species. Dogs also illustrate within-species genetic effects
on behavior. Although physical differences are most obvious,
dogs have been bred for centuries as much for their behavior
as for their looks. In 1576, the earliest English-language
book on dogs classified breeds primarily on the basis of
behavior. For example, terriers (from terra, which is Latin
for "earth") were bred to creep into burrows to drive out
small animals. Another book, published in 1686, described the
behavior for which spaniels were originally selected. They
were bred to creep up on birds and then spring to frighten the
birds into the hunter's net. With the advent of the shotgun,
different spaniels were bred to point rather than to spring.
The author of the 1686 work was especially interested in
temperament: 'Spaniels by Nature are very loving, surpassing
all other Creatures, for in Heat and Cold, Wet and Dry, Day
and Night, they will not forsake their Master'.
"Behavioral classification of dogs continues today. Sheepdogs
herd, retrievers retrieve, trackers track, and pointers point
with minimal training. Breeds also differ strikingly in
intelligence and in temperamental traits such as emotionality,
activity, and aggressiveness. The selection process can be
quite fine tuned. For example, in France, where dogs are used
chiefly for farm work, there are 17 breeds of shepherd and
stock dogs specializing in aspects of this work. In England,
dogs have been bred primarily for hunting, and there are 26
recognized breeds of hunting dogs. Dogs are not unusual in
their genetic diversity, although they are unusual in the
extent to which different breeds have been intentionally bred
to accentuate genetic differences."
[24]
Animal behavior can be deduced by careful observation and
explained by evolution theory. By carefully observing
terriers, we can deduce that they were selected to creep into
burrows. By carefully observing people, we can deduce they
were selected to believe in virtually anything:
"Precisely what we believe is immaterial; what matters is the
kind of behavior it generates. This is why humanity is
characterized by such astonishing diversity in its belief
systems. As far as our genes are concerned, we can believe
that the universe is driven by an overweight fairy on a green
cheese bicycle provided that such belief effectively coerces
us into adopting genetically advantageous behavior in all
matters of evolutionary consequence, such as feeding, mating,
nurturing, bonding, and protecting family, tribe, and
territory."
[25]
Even
though scientists pointed out over a hundred years ago that
energy -- not money -- was the source of the capitalists'
wealth, economists just didn't have the genes to give up their
beliefs and face the real world. In other words, two
million years of evolution produced an animal that was ideally
suited to worship the Market God.
[26]
Adam
Smith believed that God's divine plan was revealed in a free
market: "the divine being ... contrived and conducted the
immense machine of the universe, so as at all times to produce
the greatest possible quantity of happiness." Economic
historian Deborah Redman explains: "Because the order of
nature is providential, the free market that reflects natural
order also reflects the workings of providence. In this way
the spheres of morality, theology, jurisprudence, and
economics become hostages to nature, so to speak."
[27]
The
first commandment of the Market God (as revealed by Adam
Smith): "Every man, as long as he does not violate the laws
of justice, is left perfectly free to pursue his own interests
in his own way, and to bring both his industry and capital
into competition with those of any other man, or order of
men."
The
economists didn't have the genes to understand the physics
they were struggling to impersonate:
"[ With
the development of modern physics ] it became possible to see
orthodox economic theory for what it really was: a bowdlerized
imitation of nineteenth-century physics...It was not the
methods of science that were appropriated by the early
neoclassicals as it was the appearances of science, for the
early neoclassicals possessed a singularly inept understanding
of the physics they so admired... [ Neoclassical economists
attempt ] to reduce all social institutions such as money,
property rights, and the market itself to epiphenomena of
individual constrained optimization calculation. All these
attempts have failed, despite their supposed dependence upon
mathematical rigor, because they always inadvertently assume
what they aim to deduce... Conservation principles are the
key to the understanding of a mathematical formulation of any
phenomenon, and it has been there that the neoclassicals have
been woefully negligent."
[28]
"Once
one gets the scorecard straight, then it will become apparent
that twentieth-century neoclassical theory resembles nothing
so much as the childŐs game of Mr. Potatohead -- the fun comes
in mixing and matching components with little or no concern
for the coherence of the final profile."
[29]
Had
economists evolved to understand the first and second laws of
thermodynamics, they would have realized it was just a matter
of time until global society entered a period of chronic
energy shortage. Since neither capital nor labor can create
energy, central bankers will soon have no way to manipulate
the economy:
"Increases or decreases in the level of money supply are
thought to influence the level of production in the economy.
However, this is true only if the 'externals' to the economy
-- i.e., sources of energy from outside of the money circle --
are constant. When the availability of energy changes, the
economy changes in ways not correctable by manipulations of
the money supply."
[30]
If
central bankers try to stimulate the economy under conditions
of chronic energy shortage, they will create "stagflation"
instead:
"High inflation rates can be explained by the linkages between
fuel use and money supply. If the money supply is increased,
stimulating demand beyond levels that can be satisfied by
existing fuel supplies, then prices will rise. This implies
that when the costs of obtaining fuel are high, fiscal and
monetary policies may not be successful in stimulating
economic growth."
[31]
The
next round of energy-shortage-induced stagflation will leave
central bankers helpless and they will seek military solutions
to their economic problems. This certainly isn't the first
time that faith in the Market God has led to military
solutions.
SAME BELIEF = SAME
RESULT
The
true nature of the highly artificial economic organization on
which peace rested becomes of utmost significance to the
historian.
-- Karl Polanyi
In late
1973 the first OPEC oil shock struck, as oil prices quadrupled
and the general inflation indexes shot up to 11 percent. More
important, gasoline lines appeared. Waiting in line to buy a
basic commodity like gasoline is something that no American
had ever experienced. Shock and irritation were high, but
those lines were like the first small heart attack -- an
indication of mortality... What was worse, economists could
pose no solution to the energy problem. Influential
professionals, such as Milton Friedman, predicted that the oil
cartel would quickly fall apart. It didn't.
-- Lester Thurow.
[32]
In
the 19th century, economist Hermann Gossen
proclaimed: "It would only frustrate totally or in part the
purpose of the Creator were we to attempt to neutralize [the
free market] in total or in part, as is the intention of some
moral codes promulgated by men." And he asks with moral
indignation: "How can a creature be so arrogant as to
frustrate totally or partly the purpose of his creator?"
[33]
The economists' faith in the Market God led to two world wars
and sent millions to their deaths.
No
other historian has explained the human suffering caused by
failed economic theories as well as Karl Polanyi:
"The
origins of the cataclysm lay in the utopian endeavor of
economic liberalism to set up a self-regulating market
system." [p. 29]
"By the
fourth quarter of the nineteenth century, world commodity
prices were the central reality in the lives of millions of
Continental peasants; the repercussions of the London money
market were daily noted by businessmen all over the world; and
governments discussed plans for the future in light of the
situation on the world capital markets. Only a madman would
have doubted that the international economic system was the
axis of the material existence of the race. Because this
system needed peace in order to function, the balance of power
was made to serve it. Take this economic system away and the
peace interest would disappear from politics." [p. 18]
"By the
end of the seventies the free trade episode (1846-79) was at
an end; the actual use of the gold standard by Germany marked
the beginnings of an era of protectionism and colonial
expansion... the symptoms of the dissolution of the existing
forms of world economy -- colonial rivalry and competition for
exotic markets -- became acute. The ability of haute finance
to avert the spread of wars was diminishing rapidly. For
another seven years peace dragged on but it was only a
question of time before the dissolution of nineteenth century
economic organization would bring the Hundred Years' Peace to
a close." [p. 19]
"The
breakdown of the international gold standard was the invisible
link between the disintegration of world economy since the
turn of the century and the transformation of a whole
civilization in the thirties. Unless the vital importance of
this factor is realized, it is not possible to see rightly
either the mechanism which railroaded Europe to its doom, or
the circumstances which accounted for the astounding fact that
the forms and contents of a civilization should rest on so
precarious foundations.
"The
true nature of the international system under which we were
living was not realized until it failed. Hardly anyone
understood the political function of the international
monetary system; the awful suddenness of the transformation
thus took the world completely by surprise... To liberal
economists the gold standard was purely an economic
institution; they refused even to consider it as a part of a
social mechanism. Thus it happened that the democratic
countries were the last to realize the true nature of the
catastrophe and the slowest to counter its effects. Not even
when the cataclysm was already upon them did their leaders see
that behind the collapse of the international system there
stood a long development within the most advanced countries
which made that system anachronistic; in other words, the
failure of market economy itself still escaped them." [p. 20]
"The
transformation came on even more abruptly than is usually
realized. World War I and the postwar revolutions still formed
part of the nineteenth century. The conflict of 1914-18
merely precipitated and immeasurably aggravated a crisis that
it did not create. But the roots of the dilemma could not be
discerned at the time...The dissolution of the system of world
economy which had been in progress since 1900 was responsible
for the political tension that exploded in 1914." [p. 21]
[34]
Exactly like the economists of one hundred years ago, and
despite millions killed in two world wars by their mistakes,
economists still worship the Market God. Moreover, economists
still haven't changed their inherently defective methodology.
Economists first abstract all commodities to money -- which of
course, obliterates all qualitative differences between the
commodities themselves, and leaves economists uniquely
unqualified to know anything about the commodities they
purport to study.
Although economists treat energy just like any other resource,
itŐs not like any other resource. Available energy is the
precondition for all resources -- including more available
energy! Because of their total dependence on the measure
of "money", today's most prominent economists are unable to
know the difference between "libraries" and "oil":
"Should
we be taking steps to limit the use of these most precious
stocks of society's capital so that they will still be
available for our grandchildren? ... Economists ask, Would
future generations benefit more from larger stocks of natural
capital such as oil, gas, and coal or from more produced
capital such as additional scientists, better laboratories,
and libraries linked together by information superhighways?
... in the long run, oil and gas are not essential." [Nobel
Laureate Paul Samuelson and William Nordhaus]
[35]
Talk about an evolutionary cul-de-sac!
The economists' devotion
to the Market God coupled with their innate inability to know
the difference between libraries and oil will lead to a new
generation of wars and send billions to their deaths.
The
next cycle of death will begin when the world experiences a
severe oil crunch in less than ten years (probably less than
five, perhaps much less). The crunch will be triggered by a
political upheaval in one or more of the major oil-producing
nations, a Muslim backlash against America's friendship with
Israel, OPEC reducing production to make more profit, or
simply the natural -- and inevitable -- "peak" in global oil
production.
Once
the crunch is here, it's too late. The global economy will go
to hell and rational planning will be replaced by crisis
management. With the oil gone, there is nothing left to
work with anyway.
The coming oil crunch is
the best-kept secret in Washington, Whitehall, Brussels, and
Jerusalem, but
it's just a matter of time until word hits the street...
End
Notes:
[1]
THE PRIZE:
The Epic Quest for Oil, Money, and Power, by Daniel Yergin,
Joseph Stanislaw (Contributor); Touchstone, 1993
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671799320/brainfood.a
[2]
Richard Duncan's letter to President Clinton is archived at
http://dieoff.com/page172.htm
[3]
James Madison was the fourth President of the United States
(1809-1817). A member of the Continental Congress (1780-1783)
and the Constitutional Convention (1787), he strongly
supported ratification of the Constitution and was a
contributor to The Federalist Papers (1787-1788), which argued
the effectiveness of the proposed constitution. Madison has
been described by political historian Richard K. Matthews as
the "ideal Machiavellian Prince", the "father of the
Constitution", the "father of the Bill of Rights", the "father
of political parties", and the "father of preferred freedoms".
[4] p. 79,
IF MEN WERE ANGELS: James Madison & the
Heartless Empire of Reason, by Richard K. Matthews; Kansas,
1995;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0700608079/brianfood.a
[5]
ibid. p. 84.
[6]
The net energy curve was
found empirically by Hall, Cleveland and Kaufmann working
with Louisiana oil and gas wells. A very rough estimate is
that the last 5% of production from a field might be at an
energy loss (it doesn't say how much loss, the authors stopped
computing when net energy reached .5).
Recent research suggests perverse subsidies total about $1.5
trillion per year worldwide. This is twice as large as global
military spending each year and three times as much as the
international narcotics industry. [ see
http://www.websiteworld.co.uk/hot.htm ]
Production at financial profit but energy loss is partially
due to economic subsidies.
[7]
p. 314, GETTING DOWN TO EARTH, by Robert Costanza et
al., Eds.; Island Press, 1996;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1559635037/brainfood.a
[8]
OIL AS A FINITE RESOURCE: When Is Global Production
Likely to Peak? by James J. MacKenzie; World Resources
Institute, 1996;
http://www.wri.org/wri/climate/finitoil/eur-oil.html
[9]
see
http://www.petroconsultants.com
[10]
THE DEATH OF THE OIL ECONOMY, by Ted Trainer; Earth
Island Journal, Spring 1997;
http://dieoff.com/page116.htm
[11]
p. 87, BEYOND OIL, by John Gever et al., Univ. Pr.
Colorado, 1991;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0870812424/brainfood.a
[12]
THE POST-PETROLEUM PARADIGM -- AND POPULATION, by
Walter Youngquist; Population and Environment: A Journal of
Interdisciplinary Studies Volume 20, Number 4, March 1999;
http://www.dieoff.com/page171.htm
[13]
ibid. Pimentel, D. (1998a).
[14]
THE WORLD PETROLEUM
LIFE-CYCLE: Encircling
the Production Peak, by Richard Duncan, Institute on Energy
and Man, Seattle, WA. 1997;
http://dieoff.com/page133.htm
[15]
ISLAM AND LIBERAL DEMOCRACY: Two Visions Of
Reformation, by Robin Wright; Journal of Democracy 7.2 (1996)
64-75;
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/rwright.htm
One can make a rough
estimate of the stability of Muslim nations by using Freedom
House's list of "free" countries as a proxy for democracy, and
the following list of Muslim countries:
Algeria, Azerbaijan,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Brunei, Cameroon, Comoros,
Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Gambia, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq,
Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives,
Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, UAE,
Uzbekistan, Yemen. (Of course, not all were involved in
wars.)
In the last thirty years,
Muslim countries (which total 37) were involved in roughly 27
wars while "free" countries (which total 88) were involved in
about 20 wars (including wars with Muslim countries).
http://freedomhouse.org/survey99/country/
http://www.gn.apc.org/peacepledge/wars/war_index.html
[16]
ENERGY AND HUMAN EVOLUTION, by David Price,
1995;
http://dieoff.com/page137.htm
[17]
Internal combustion, steam, or gas turbines are called "heat
engines" because they convert fuel into heat, then into
mechanical motion.
[18]
For a vertical lift: joules = meters X kg X 9.8
[19]
A typical gasoline engine with a compression ratio of 8:1
cannot exceed a theoretical 45 percent efficiency, in practice
might be about 35 percent; for a diesel with 20:1 it's 55
percent, 45 percent; for a turbine with 30:1 it's 60 percent,
50 percent.
[20]
p. 132, MORE HEAT THAN LIGHT, by Philip
Mirowski; Cambridge, 1989;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521426898/brainfood.a
[21]
DANGEROUS CURRENTS:
The State of Economics, by Lester C. Thurow; Random,
1983;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0394723686/brainfood.a
;
http://dieoff.com/page162.htm
[22]
The Biological Basis of Morality, E.O. Wilson
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/98apr/bio2.htm
[23]
p. 2, THE THIRD CHIMPANZEE, by Jared Diamond;
Harperperennial, 1992;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060984031/brainfood.a
[24]
pp. 58-59. BEHAVIORAL GENETICS: Third Edition, Plomin
et al; Freeman, 1997;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716728249/brainfood.a
[25]
p. 186, THE SPIRIT IN THE GENE: Humanity's Proud
Illusion and the Laws of Nature, by Reg Morrison, Lynn
Margulis; Cornell, 1999;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801436516/brainfood.a
[26]
Scientists search for truth by forming statements that can be
tested. If a statement cannot be tested, then it is not
"scientific". Testable statements are known as "hypotheses"
and take the general form "IF [I do this], THEN [this will
occur] ". For example, the hypothesis "IF I drop a rock, THEN
it will fall to the ground" it can be tested to see if it is
"false".
In 1934, Sir Karl Popper
proposed a criterion of testability, or falsifiability, for
scientific validity. Scientific theories are hypotheses from
which can be deduced statements testable by observation; if
the appropriate experimental observations falsify these
statements, the hypothesis is refuted. If a hypothesis
survives efforts to falsify it, it may be tentatively
accepted. No scientific theory, however, can be conclusively
established.
Popper's mode of thought
-- the habit of attempting to prove oneself wrong -- is the
only path to knowledge about the real world.
Evolutionary
psychologists have found that humans evolved to naturally use
a "falsification strategy" with respect to the social world,
but use a "confirmation strategy" with respect to the physical
world. Our innate social-world "falsification strategy"
causes us to instinctively reject social anomalies and attempt
to "falsify" claims about the real world that might jeopardize
social beliefs (e.g., the claim that global oil production
will "peak" soon).
On the other hand, our
innate physical-world "confirmation strategy" allows us to
defend social constructions of reality (e.g., the "free
market") to the death, even if the ideals they represent are
far from physical reality. The most notorious example of this
"confirmation strategy" was Julian Simon.
"Consider first a
phenomenon I call the deontic effect in human reasoning
(Cummins, 1996b, 1996c). Deontic reasoning is reasoning about
rights and obligations; that is, reasoning about what one is
permitted, obligated, or forbidden to do (Hilpinen, 1981;
Manktelow & Over, 1991). Deontic reasoning contrasts with
indicative reasoning, which is reasoning about what is true or
false. When reasoning about deontic rules (social norms),
humans spontaneously adopt a violation-detection strategy:
They look for cheaters or rule-breakers. In contrast, when
reasoning about the truth status of statements about the
world, they spontaneously adopt a confirmation-seeking
strategy. This effect is apparent in the reasoning of
children as young as three years of age (Cummins, 1996a;
Harris & Nu–ez, 1996) and has been observed in literally
hundreds of experiments on adult reasoning over the course of
nearly thirty years, making it one of the most reliable
effects in the psychological literature (see Cummins, 1996b,
1996c, and Oaksford & Chapter, 1996 for reviews of this
literature)." [pp. 39, 40] THE EVOLUTION OF MIND, by
Denise D. Cummins (Editor), Colin Allen (Editor), Oxford,
1998
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0195110536/brainfood.a
[27]
p. 237, THE RISE OF POLITICAL ECONOMY AS A SCIENCE,
Deborah Redman; MIT, 1997
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262181797/brainfood.a
[28]
p. 6, AGAINST MECHANISM: Protecting Economics from
Science, by Philip Mirowski; Rowman and Littlefield, 1988;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0847676951/brainfood.a
[29]
p. 294, Mirowski, 1989
[30]
H.T. Odum in pp. 204-206, A SURVEY OF ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS,
Krishnan, Harris, and Goodwin, eds., Island Press, 1995;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1559634111/brainfood.a
[31]
SUMMARY OF ENERGY
AND THE US ECONOMY:
A Biophysical
Perspective by Cutler J. Cleveland, Robert Costanza, Charles
A.S. Hall, and Robert Kaufmann; Science 225 (31 August 1984):
890-897.
http://dieoff.com/page17.htm#energy
[32]
DANGEROUS CURRENTS:
The State of Economics, by Lester C. Thurow; Random,
1983;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0394723686/brainfood.a
;
http://dieoff.com/page162.htm
[33]
p. 45, HUMANIST ECONOMICS: The New Challenge, by Mark
Lutz and Kenneth Lux; Bootstrap Press, 1988;
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0942850068/brainfood.a
Soure:
www.dieoff.org