Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse

Home » Posts tagged 'geology'

Tag Archives: geology

How do ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr Husseini's oil price spike predictions of USD 140 by 2016-17 stack up?

How do ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr Husseini’s oil price spike predictions of USD 140 by 2016-17 stack up?.

by Matt Mushalik, originally published by Crude Oil Peak  | TODAY

In an interview with ASPO USA in January 2014 Ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr. Sadad-Al-Husseini predicted oil price spikes of $140 by 2016/17. This post shows some graphs explaining why this could happen.

Husseini: My base oil price forecast in 2012 dollars still ranges between $105 and $120/barrel Brent with a volatility floor of $ 95/barrel and more probable upward spiking to $140/barrel within 2016/2017.

Husseini did not elaborate how he arrived at that time frame but this question and answer give us a hint:
ASPO: “In the larger context, how has your view of future world oil production supply evolved over the last four or five years? As a benchmark, I reference your slides from the 2009 Oil & Money Conference slides”
Husseini: “The realities of the 2009 O&M forecast of a limited plateau of oil supplies have been pretty much vindicated since then. The oil plateau may now be inflated by about 1 – 2 Mbd of high cost unconventional oils but all major forecasters see this as pretty much transitional. The plateau itself remains a reality and unfortunately its duration is still unlikely to extend beyond the end of this decade.”
So how did Husseini’s 2009 plateau look like and how does it compare with actual production data? The slides are contained in a presentation titled “Structural realities that define the oil supply outlook”
This was done continent by continent and country by country. In the following graphs, the grey shaded columns are from Husseini’s 2009 projection and the colored columns represent actual production (data from EIA).
Central and South America

Actual production in 2013 was 1 mb/d less than in the 2009 projection, mainly due to limited Brazilian production.
Europe
Actual production in 2013 was 460 kb/d less than in the 2009 projection, mainly due to higher decline rates in UK.
Former Soviet Union

Actual production in 2013 was slightly less (80 kb/d) than in the 2009 projection due to weaker output in Kazachstan. Note that crude oil production in West Siberian fields peaked in the mid 80s, triggering the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Asia
Actual production in 2013 was 300 Kb/d higher than the 2009 projection mainly as a result of higher production in China.
Africa
The 2009 projection estimated a peak of around 11 mb/d in 2015 but actual production in 2013 was only 8.7 mb/d or 1.9 mb/d less than projected for that year. Production was less in Angola, Algeria, Libya and Sudan.
Middle East

Actual production in 2013 was 1.2 mb/d higher than in the 2009 projection. While there was an actual decrease in Iran, Yemen and Syria (together -850 kb/d), this was more than offset by an increase in all other countries including Iraq (+ 440 kb/d), Kuwait (300 kb/d), Qatar (250 kb/d), Oman (290 kb/d), UAE (220 kb/d) and Saudi Arabia (+ 540 kb/d).
North America 
While in the above all of Husseini’s underlying 2009 graphs relate to crude oil, the North American graph includes NGLs .
First, we need to re-stack the columns to show the impact of shale oil:

For 2013, Husseini’s projection for Mexico was spot on and for Canada slightly over-estimated. The big difference is US shale oil, 3.3 mb/d, but that contains NGLs because shale oil is a very light oil as we have seen in recent fires in oil train accidents.

The uptick in crude was less, around 2.6 mb/d. So Husseini’s North America projection for crude and NGL has to be adjusted by the ratio crude/(crude+NGL).
All together now.

We see that total actual crude production was slightly higher than Husseini’s forecast, 600 kb/d or 0.8% in 2013, a small percentage in view of all the uncertainties. As is usual for estimates there is a lot of plus and minus.
The biggest difference is the unforeseen increase in US shale oil which was, however, cancelled out by too optimistic forecasts for Africa and South America.
So how might Dr. Husseini in his interview have come to oil price spikes in 2016/17?
Let’s adjust his original 2009 projection as follows: + 600 kb/d to bring projected production into line with actual production in 2013, then shift his projection by a further +2 mb/d to add unconventional oil as mentioned in the interview.
On the demand side, let us take the long-term view of the IEA WEO 2013 (p. 501): “Demand for oil grows from 87.4 mb/d in 2012 to 101.4 mb/d in 2035 in the New Policies Scenario, but the pace of growth slows steadily, from an average increase of 1 mb/d per year in the period to 2020 to an average of only 400 kb/d in the subsequent years to 2035”.
So for crude oil this means +800 kb/d pa until 2020 and + 300 kb/d pa thereafter. Let’s put that into a simplified graph:
We see that the intersection point is somewhere in 2016. What is more important than the precise year in which the next oil crunch may happen is the widening gap in the 2nd half of this decade.
Conclusion:
Whether the world wants to follow the New Policies Scenario of the IEA WEO 2013 is another question altogether. It seems governments are rather on a current policies track which increases oil demand and therefore pressure on oil prices.
Oil dollars teaser image via shutterstock. Reproduced at Resilience.org with permission.

How do ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr Husseini’s oil price spike predictions of USD 140 by 2016-17 stack up?

How do ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr Husseini’s oil price spike predictions of USD 140 by 2016-17 stack up?.

by Matt Mushalik, originally published by Crude Oil Peak  | TODAY

In an interview with ASPO USA in January 2014 Ex-Saudi Aramco geologist Dr. Sadad-Al-Husseini predicted oil price spikes of $140 by 2016/17. This post shows some graphs explaining why this could happen.

Husseini: My base oil price forecast in 2012 dollars still ranges between $105 and $120/barrel Brent with a volatility floor of $ 95/barrel and more probable upward spiking to $140/barrel within 2016/2017.

Husseini did not elaborate how he arrived at that time frame but this question and answer give us a hint:
ASPO: “In the larger context, how has your view of future world oil production supply evolved over the last four or five years? As a benchmark, I reference your slides from the 2009 Oil & Money Conference slides”
Husseini: “The realities of the 2009 O&M forecast of a limited plateau of oil supplies have been pretty much vindicated since then. The oil plateau may now be inflated by about 1 – 2 Mbd of high cost unconventional oils but all major forecasters see this as pretty much transitional. The plateau itself remains a reality and unfortunately its duration is still unlikely to extend beyond the end of this decade.”
So how did Husseini’s 2009 plateau look like and how does it compare with actual production data? The slides are contained in a presentation titled “Structural realities that define the oil supply outlook”
This was done continent by continent and country by country. In the following graphs, the grey shaded columns are from Husseini’s 2009 projection and the colored columns represent actual production (data from EIA).
Central and South America

Actual production in 2013 was 1 mb/d less than in the 2009 projection, mainly due to limited Brazilian production.
Europe
Actual production in 2013 was 460 kb/d less than in the 2009 projection, mainly due to higher decline rates in UK.
Former Soviet Union

Actual production in 2013 was slightly less (80 kb/d) than in the 2009 projection due to weaker output in Kazachstan. Note that crude oil production in West Siberian fields peaked in the mid 80s, triggering the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Asia
Actual production in 2013 was 300 Kb/d higher than the 2009 projection mainly as a result of higher production in China.
Africa
The 2009 projection estimated a peak of around 11 mb/d in 2015 but actual production in 2013 was only 8.7 mb/d or 1.9 mb/d less than projected for that year. Production was less in Angola, Algeria, Libya and Sudan.
Middle East

Actual production in 2013 was 1.2 mb/d higher than in the 2009 projection. While there was an actual decrease in Iran, Yemen and Syria (together -850 kb/d), this was more than offset by an increase in all other countries including Iraq (+ 440 kb/d), Kuwait (300 kb/d), Qatar (250 kb/d), Oman (290 kb/d), UAE (220 kb/d) and Saudi Arabia (+ 540 kb/d).
North America 
While in the above all of Husseini’s underlying 2009 graphs relate to crude oil, the North American graph includes NGLs .
First, we need to re-stack the columns to show the impact of shale oil:

For 2013, Husseini’s projection for Mexico was spot on and for Canada slightly over-estimated. The big difference is US shale oil, 3.3 mb/d, but that contains NGLs because shale oil is a very light oil as we have seen in recent fires in oil train accidents.

The uptick in crude was less, around 2.6 mb/d. So Husseini’s North America projection for crude and NGL has to be adjusted by the ratio crude/(crude+NGL).
All together now.

We see that total actual crude production was slightly higher than Husseini’s forecast, 600 kb/d or 0.8% in 2013, a small percentage in view of all the uncertainties. As is usual for estimates there is a lot of plus and minus.
The biggest difference is the unforeseen increase in US shale oil which was, however, cancelled out by too optimistic forecasts for Africa and South America.
So how might Dr. Husseini in his interview have come to oil price spikes in 2016/17?
Let’s adjust his original 2009 projection as follows: + 600 kb/d to bring projected production into line with actual production in 2013, then shift his projection by a further +2 mb/d to add unconventional oil as mentioned in the interview.
On the demand side, let us take the long-term view of the IEA WEO 2013 (p. 501): “Demand for oil grows from 87.4 mb/d in 2012 to 101.4 mb/d in 2035 in the New Policies Scenario, but the pace of growth slows steadily, from an average increase of 1 mb/d per year in the period to 2020 to an average of only 400 kb/d in the subsequent years to 2035”.
So for crude oil this means +800 kb/d pa until 2020 and + 300 kb/d pa thereafter. Let’s put that into a simplified graph:
We see that the intersection point is somewhere in 2016. What is more important than the precise year in which the next oil crunch may happen is the widening gap in the 2nd half of this decade.
Conclusion:
Whether the world wants to follow the New Policies Scenario of the IEA WEO 2013 is another question altogether. It seems governments are rather on a current policies track which increases oil demand and therefore pressure on oil prices.
Oil dollars teaser image via shutterstock. Reproduced at Resilience.org with permission.

Global riot epidemic due to demise of cheap fossil fuels | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | theguardian.com

Global riot epidemic due to demise of cheap fossil fuels | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | theguardian.com.

From South America to South Asia, a new age of unrest is in full swing as industrial civilisation transitions to post-carbon reality
A pro-European protester swings a metal chain during riots in Kiev

A protester in Ukraine swings a metal chain during clashes – a taste of things to come? Photograph: Gleb Garanich/Reuters

If anyone had hoped that the Arab Spring and Occupy protests a few years back were one-off episodes that would soon give way to more stability, they have another thing coming. The hope was that ongoing economic recovery would return to pre-crash levels of growth, alleviating the grievances fueling the fires of civil unrest, stoked by years of recession.

But this hasn’t happened. And it won’t.

Instead the post-2008 crash era, including 2013 and early 2014, has seen a persistence and proliferation of civil unrest on a scale that has never been seen before in human history. This month alone has seen riots kick-off in VenezuelaBosniaUkraineIceland, and Thailand.

This is not a coincidence. The riots are of course rooted in common, regressive economic forces playing out across every continent of the planet – but those forces themselves are symptomatic of a deeper, protracted process of global system failure as we transition from the old industrial era of dirty fossil fuels, towards something else.

Even before the Arab Spring erupted in Tunisia in December 2010, analysts at the New England Complex Systems Institute warned of thedanger of civil unrest due to escalating food prices. If the Food & Agricultural Organisation (FAO) food price index rises above 210, they warned, it could trigger riots across large areas of the world.

Hunger games

The pattern is clear. Food price spikes in 2008 coincided with the eruption of social unrest in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Somalia, Cameroon, Mozambique, Sudan, Haiti, and India, among others.

In 2011, the price spikes preceded social unrest across the Middle East and North Africa – Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Libya, Uganda, Mauritania, Algeria, and so on.

Last year saw food prices reach their third highest year on record, corresponding to the latest outbreaks of street violence and protests in Argentina, Brazil, Bangladesh, China, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey and elsewhere.

Since about a decade ago, the FAO food price index has more than doubled from 91.1 in 2000 to an average of 209.8 in 2013. As Prof Yaneer Bar-Yam, founding president of the Complex Systems Institute, told Vice magazine last week:

“Our analysis says that 210 on the FAO index is the boiling point and we have been hovering there for the past 18 months… In some of the cases the link is more explicit, in others, given that we are at the boiling point, anything will trigger unrest.”

But Bar-Yam’s analysis of the causes of the global food crisis don’t go deep enough – he focuses on the impact of farmland being used for biofuels, and excessive financial speculation on food commodities. But these factors barely scratch the surface.

It’s a gas

The recent cases illustrate not just an explicit link between civil unrest and an increasingly volatile global food system, but also the root of this problem in the increasing unsustainability of our chronic civilisational addiction to fossil fuels.

In Ukraine, previous food price shocks have impacted negatively on the country’s grain exports, contributing to intensifying urban poverty in particular. Accelerating levels of domestic inflation are underestimated inofficial statistics – Ukrainians spend on average as much as 75% on household bills, and more than half their incomes on necessities such as food and non-alcoholic drinks, and as75% on household bills. Similarly, for most of last year, Venezuela suffered from ongoing food shortagesdriven by policy mismanagement along with 17 year record-high inflation due mostly to rising food prices.

While dependence on increasingly expensive food imports plays a role here, at the heart of both countries is a deepening energy crisis. Ukraine is a net energy importer, having peaked in oil and gas production way back in 1976. Despite excitement about domestic shale potential, Ukraine’s oil production has declined by over 60% over the last twenty years driven by both geological challenges and dearth of investment.

Currently, about 80% of Ukraine’s oil, and 80% of its gas, is imported from Russia. But over half of Ukraine’s energy consumption is sustained by gas. Russian natural gas prices have nearly quadrupled since 2004. The rocketing energy prices underpin the inflation that is driving excruciating poverty rates for average Ukranians, exacerbating social, ethnic, political and class divisions.

The Ukrainian government’s recent decision to dramatically slash Russian gas imports will likely worsen this as alternative cheaper energy sources are in short supply. Hopes that domestic energy sources might save the day are slim – apart from the fact that shale cannot solve the prospect of expensive liquid fuels, nuclear will not help either. A leakedEuropean Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) reportreveals that proposals to loan 300 million Euros to renovate Ukraine’s ageing infrastructure of 15 state-owned nuclear reactors will gradually double already debilitating electricity prices by 2020.

“Socialism” or Soc-oil-ism?

In Venezuela, the story is familiar. Previously, the Oil and Gas Journal reported the country’s oil reserves were 99.4 billion barrels. As of 2011, this was revised upwards to a mammoth 211 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, and more recently by the US Geological Survey to a whopping 513 billion barrels. The massive boost came from the discovery of reserves of extra heavy oil in the Orinoco belt.

The huge associated costs of production and refining this heavy oil compared to cheaper conventional oil, however, mean the new finds have contributed little to Venezuela’s escalating energy and economic challenges. Venezuela’s oil production peaked around 1999, and has declined by a quarter since then. Its gas production peaked around 2001, and has declined by about a third.

Simultaneously, as domestic oil consumption has steadily increased – in fact almost doubling since 1990 – this has eaten further into declining production, resulting in net oil exports plummeting by nearly half since 1996. As oil represents 95% of export earnings and about half of budget revenues, this decline has massively reduced the scope to sustain government social programmes, including critical subsidies.

Looming pandemic?

These local conditions are being exacerbated by global structural realities. Record high global food prices impinge on these local conditions and push them over the edge. But the food price hikes, in turn, are symptomatic of a range of overlapping problems. Globalagriculture‘s excessive dependence on fossil fuel inputs means food prices are invariably linked to oil price spikes. Naturally, biofuels and food commodity speculation pushes prices up even further – elite financiers alone benefit from this while working people from middle to lower classes bear the brunt.

Of course, the elephant in the room is climate change. According to Japanese media, a leaked draft of the UN Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change‘s (IPCC) second major report warned that while demand for food will rise by 14%, global crop production will drop by 2% per decade due to current levels of global warming, and wreak $1.45 trillion of economic damage by the end of the century. The scenario is based on a projected rise of 2.5 degrees Celsius.

This is likely to be a very conservative estimate. Considering that the current trajectory of industrial agriculture is already seeing yield plateausin major food basket regions, the interaction of environmental, energy, and economic crises suggests that business-as-usual won’t work.

The epidemic of global riots is symptomatic of global system failure – a civilisational form that has outlasted its usefulness. We need a new paradigm.

Unfortunately, simply taking to the streets isn’t the answer. What is needed is a meaningful vision for civilisational transition – backed up with people power and ethical consistence.

It’s time that governments, corporations and the public alike woke up to the fact that we are fast entering a new post-carbon era, and that the quicker we adapt to it, the far better our chances of successfully redefining a new form of civilisation – a new form of prosperity – that is capable of living in harmony with the Earth system.

But if we continue to make like ostriches, we’ll only have ourselves to blame when the epidemic becomes a pandemic at our doorsteps.

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books. Follow him on Twitter @nafeezahmed

Global riot epidemic due to demise of cheap fossil fuels | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | theguardian.com

Global riot epidemic due to demise of cheap fossil fuels | Nafeez Ahmed | Environment | theguardian.com.

From South America to South Asia, a new age of unrest is in full swing as industrial civilisation transitions to post-carbon reality
A pro-European protester swings a metal chain during riots in Kiev

A protester in Ukraine swings a metal chain during clashes – a taste of things to come? Photograph: Gleb Garanich/Reuters

If anyone had hoped that the Arab Spring and Occupy protests a few years back were one-off episodes that would soon give way to more stability, they have another thing coming. The hope was that ongoing economic recovery would return to pre-crash levels of growth, alleviating the grievances fueling the fires of civil unrest, stoked by years of recession.

But this hasn’t happened. And it won’t.

Instead the post-2008 crash era, including 2013 and early 2014, has seen a persistence and proliferation of civil unrest on a scale that has never been seen before in human history. This month alone has seen riots kick-off in VenezuelaBosniaUkraineIceland, and Thailand.

This is not a coincidence. The riots are of course rooted in common, regressive economic forces playing out across every continent of the planet – but those forces themselves are symptomatic of a deeper, protracted process of global system failure as we transition from the old industrial era of dirty fossil fuels, towards something else.

Even before the Arab Spring erupted in Tunisia in December 2010, analysts at the New England Complex Systems Institute warned of thedanger of civil unrest due to escalating food prices. If the Food & Agricultural Organisation (FAO) food price index rises above 210, they warned, it could trigger riots across large areas of the world.

Hunger games

The pattern is clear. Food price spikes in 2008 coincided with the eruption of social unrest in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Somalia, Cameroon, Mozambique, Sudan, Haiti, and India, among others.

In 2011, the price spikes preceded social unrest across the Middle East and North Africa – Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Libya, Uganda, Mauritania, Algeria, and so on.

Last year saw food prices reach their third highest year on record, corresponding to the latest outbreaks of street violence and protests in Argentina, Brazil, Bangladesh, China, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey and elsewhere.

Since about a decade ago, the FAO food price index has more than doubled from 91.1 in 2000 to an average of 209.8 in 2013. As Prof Yaneer Bar-Yam, founding president of the Complex Systems Institute, told Vice magazine last week:

“Our analysis says that 210 on the FAO index is the boiling point and we have been hovering there for the past 18 months… In some of the cases the link is more explicit, in others, given that we are at the boiling point, anything will trigger unrest.”

But Bar-Yam’s analysis of the causes of the global food crisis don’t go deep enough – he focuses on the impact of farmland being used for biofuels, and excessive financial speculation on food commodities. But these factors barely scratch the surface.

It’s a gas

The recent cases illustrate not just an explicit link between civil unrest and an increasingly volatile global food system, but also the root of this problem in the increasing unsustainability of our chronic civilisational addiction to fossil fuels.

In Ukraine, previous food price shocks have impacted negatively on the country’s grain exports, contributing to intensifying urban poverty in particular. Accelerating levels of domestic inflation are underestimated inofficial statistics – Ukrainians spend on average as much as 75% on household bills, and more than half their incomes on necessities such as food and non-alcoholic drinks, and as75% on household bills. Similarly, for most of last year, Venezuela suffered from ongoing food shortagesdriven by policy mismanagement along with 17 year record-high inflation due mostly to rising food prices.

While dependence on increasingly expensive food imports plays a role here, at the heart of both countries is a deepening energy crisis. Ukraine is a net energy importer, having peaked in oil and gas production way back in 1976. Despite excitement about domestic shale potential, Ukraine’s oil production has declined by over 60% over the last twenty years driven by both geological challenges and dearth of investment.

Currently, about 80% of Ukraine’s oil, and 80% of its gas, is imported from Russia. But over half of Ukraine’s energy consumption is sustained by gas. Russian natural gas prices have nearly quadrupled since 2004. The rocketing energy prices underpin the inflation that is driving excruciating poverty rates for average Ukranians, exacerbating social, ethnic, political and class divisions.

The Ukrainian government’s recent decision to dramatically slash Russian gas imports will likely worsen this as alternative cheaper energy sources are in short supply. Hopes that domestic energy sources might save the day are slim – apart from the fact that shale cannot solve the prospect of expensive liquid fuels, nuclear will not help either. A leakedEuropean Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) reportreveals that proposals to loan 300 million Euros to renovate Ukraine’s ageing infrastructure of 15 state-owned nuclear reactors will gradually double already debilitating electricity prices by 2020.

“Socialism” or Soc-oil-ism?

In Venezuela, the story is familiar. Previously, the Oil and Gas Journal reported the country’s oil reserves were 99.4 billion barrels. As of 2011, this was revised upwards to a mammoth 211 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, and more recently by the US Geological Survey to a whopping 513 billion barrels. The massive boost came from the discovery of reserves of extra heavy oil in the Orinoco belt.

The huge associated costs of production and refining this heavy oil compared to cheaper conventional oil, however, mean the new finds have contributed little to Venezuela’s escalating energy and economic challenges. Venezuela’s oil production peaked around 1999, and has declined by a quarter since then. Its gas production peaked around 2001, and has declined by about a third.

Simultaneously, as domestic oil consumption has steadily increased – in fact almost doubling since 1990 – this has eaten further into declining production, resulting in net oil exports plummeting by nearly half since 1996. As oil represents 95% of export earnings and about half of budget revenues, this decline has massively reduced the scope to sustain government social programmes, including critical subsidies.

Looming pandemic?

These local conditions are being exacerbated by global structural realities. Record high global food prices impinge on these local conditions and push them over the edge. But the food price hikes, in turn, are symptomatic of a range of overlapping problems. Globalagriculture‘s excessive dependence on fossil fuel inputs means food prices are invariably linked to oil price spikes. Naturally, biofuels and food commodity speculation pushes prices up even further – elite financiers alone benefit from this while working people from middle to lower classes bear the brunt.

Of course, the elephant in the room is climate change. According to Japanese media, a leaked draft of the UN Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change‘s (IPCC) second major report warned that while demand for food will rise by 14%, global crop production will drop by 2% per decade due to current levels of global warming, and wreak $1.45 trillion of economic damage by the end of the century. The scenario is based on a projected rise of 2.5 degrees Celsius.

This is likely to be a very conservative estimate. Considering that the current trajectory of industrial agriculture is already seeing yield plateausin major food basket regions, the interaction of environmental, energy, and economic crises suggests that business-as-usual won’t work.

The epidemic of global riots is symptomatic of global system failure – a civilisational form that has outlasted its usefulness. We need a new paradigm.

Unfortunately, simply taking to the streets isn’t the answer. What is needed is a meaningful vision for civilisational transition – backed up with people power and ethical consistence.

It’s time that governments, corporations and the public alike woke up to the fact that we are fast entering a new post-carbon era, and that the quicker we adapt to it, the far better our chances of successfully redefining a new form of civilisation – a new form of prosperity – that is capable of living in harmony with the Earth system.

But if we continue to make like ostriches, we’ll only have ourselves to blame when the epidemic becomes a pandemic at our doorsteps.

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books. Follow him on Twitter @nafeezahmed

How Many Will Die in the New Madrid Earthquake?

How Many Will Die in the New Madrid Earthquake?.

Editor’s Note: As you read the following detailed report from Holly Deyo of the Millennium Ark and DareToPrepare.com keep in mind that nearly twenty years ago the government and their scientific propaganda mechanism made it a point to tell Americans that the New Madrid Seismic zone was safe – that there was no threat to the population whatsoever. Now, a couple of decades on, new research proves that they clearly fabricated their results and analysis, putting millions of unassuming Americans at risk. Today, the governments of Japan and the United States are saying the same thing about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, which begs the question: How much do you trust your government? Given the details shared by Holly below, the answer should be crystal clear.


Almost two decades ago, I wrote in Dare To Prepare about dire consequences from mega-quakes in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. After Dare To Prepare’s 1st Ed. was published, scientists retracted their worries and pronounced the New Madrid area ‘dead’. It was safe. What a different tune they’re singing now.

“Previous studies have suggested that it may be shutting down, based on GPS readings that showed little strain accumulation at the surface. Other research came to the same conclusion by blaming ongoing quake activity on aftershocks from the 1800s, which would essentially relieve strain on the fault.

“The latest study suggests otherwise. Hough and USGS geophysicist Morgan Page in Pasadena, Calif., analyzed past quakes in the New Madrid region and used computer modeling to determine that the continuing tremors are not related to the big quakes two centuries ago.

” ‘Our new results tell us that something is going on there, and therefore a repeat of the 1811-1812 sequence is possible, Hough said.’ “ 1

140125.New.Madrid.EQs

Now, 16 years later they admit – in a 180º retraction – this whole area of the Midwest is not only active, but quakes here can have potentially catastrophic results.

Image above right: The New Madrid Seismic Zone encompasses the thicker red ring on the right. However, looking at the pattern of quakes over the past 6 months, a megaquake could also take in portions of Oklahoma and maybe Texas.

LIES AND HALF-TRUTHS

Anyone who follows government pressers, which passes as news, knows we are at risk because of their tight lips, subterfuge, nuance and frankly stated, back-side kissing. Their urging is to conceal truth lest everyone panic. No one wants to be held accountable for killing economies (it’s better to kill people), let alone spark riots. The latest edition of Prudent Places USA shows the New Madrid quake area is a bomb waiting for its fuse to be lit.

140125.New.Madrid.sign

ImageNo one should live with 200 miles either side of this fault zone including all up and down the Mississippi River from Illinois to Mississippi and from Arkansas and Missouri to Ohio and Tennessee, and regions in between(see map below).

Though these previous 5 mega-quakes damaged property and land primarily from Arkansas north into Illinois, America has built up massively and continuously over the intervening 200 years. It puts many more Americans at risk than in the early 1800′s. In the mega-quake’s aftermath, people in outlying areas will be run over by those seeking shelter and medical aid in addition to food, water and all other life-saving necessities. Sum it up in one word: pandemonium.

Denial is a comfortable pipe to smoke. We think it will never happen to us: whether it’s hurricanes, cancer, riots, tornadoes, market crashes or bone-crushing, unsurvivable weather. It’s human nature to be complacent. Yet some people have listened and moved to safer places.

Let the author state at this point, there is no safe place without Christ, yet there are more intelligent, less life-threatening places to live. God doesn’t expect us to stay stupid… especially if we have knowledge and do nothing.

ALL of our Countrymen in this beautiful Nation are being sacrificed for everything P.C. Where else are more people trying to tune in, yearning to learn, yet stymied by MSM (mum-stream media)?

map-newmadrid

PIECING TOGETHER PUZZLE PARTS

It’s easy to forget imperative, yet quietly-stated news bulletins. It’s not your fault. Not really. There is a conscious effort of drip-drip-drip media to say it, yet not say it. News in dribs and drabs has little punch. It sticks nowhere between the ears. But once you have the seeds of knowledge, it is yours to pursue. It is incumbent on you to act, to protect you and your family. No one in mainstream wants to be accused of blowing Draino at us and scald our fear sensors unnecessarily. Media must, and does, openly support Obama and prints little information of value in order to maintain White House access.

It’s not just Obama, but it’s worse with O. This includes both Bushes, Billy Boy Clinton, and certainly the silly peanut farmer, clear back to at least Warren Harding. That was nearly 100 years ago. Whatever happened to Obama’s statement that he will have the most transparent government ever? What rubbish! Obama is interested in one thing – his legacy, which was to be ObamaCare, but even the dullest cretin can see this is a screw-up of magnificent proportions. It’s all status, recognition – and of course, a paycheck. News agencies want to be ALL THAT without exposure, without consequence, while puckering their toady lips on Obama’s backside. So they feed us pro-Obama garbage and pabulum ‘news’.

Scripture warns, you can’t have 2 feet planted in different fields. You’re either for Christ or against him. You either serve mammon (money) or God. You either serve liars, or have courage so speak truth. There is no half-pregnant scenario here. So consider where media lies.

REMINDERS

Now flashback to vital news items from the last several years to see a disturbing picture.

Remember the extraordinary number of dead body or cremation containers stored in Atlanta? Trainloads of these were filmed. After exposure by alternative media, where did they go? Check here. In the picture below, I counted at least 6,800 containers – 5 rows, 17 high and at least 80 in each row. (I went blind at this point… <sigh>, maybe there were more. This was just one location.

coffins

(Image credit Before It’s News and Sherry Questioning All)

Now factor in an astonishing 140 million food packets and body bags purchased by FEMA in early 2011.

Homeland Security Act of 2002 Bill HR6566 requiring FEMA to prepare for mass death is documented here.

Bullets bought by government agencies number in the hundreds of millions – no, in the Billions. FEMA, Social SecurityICE,TSAUSDANOAA, (what does food and weather have to do with this?), Dept. of Homeland Security and here and here – all jumped into the purchasing frenzy. This is nonsense.

Last year FEMA requisitioned millions of meals for areas bordering the New Madrid, where people will likely flee when there is no food, no water, no services and no help.

There is an agenda here that doesn’t bode well for Americans. The picture is unmistakable. We are being quietly led to slaughter and unless we wake from our collective deep sleep and refuse to be willing participants in our destruction.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Holly Drennan Deyo is the author of three books: bestseller Dare To Prepare (5th ed.), Prudent Places USA (4th ed.) and Garden Gold (2nd ed.) Please visit she and her husband’s website: standeyo.com and their FREE Preparedness site: DareToPrepare.com.

Shale gas, peak oil and our future

Shale gas, peak oil and our future.

The following interview with Richard Heinberg was originally published in Flemish at the Belgian website De Wereld Morgen. The interview was given in conjunction with the release of the Dutch translation of Richard’s Book Snake Oil: How Fracking’s False Promise of Plenty Imperils Our Future. The Dutch title is Schaliegas, piekolie & onze toekomst.

Selma Franssen: Considering the shale gas and oil reserves in Europe, is there any sense in fracking here, all other objections aside?
Richard Heinberg: Until test wells are drilled, it’s very difficult to know what the actual shale gas and oil production potential is for Europe. All sorts of numbers have been cited, but they are simply guesses. Back in 2011, the US Energy Information Administration estimated that Poland’s shale gas reserves were 187 trillion cubic feet, but a little on-the-ground exploration led the Polish Geological Institute to downgrade that figure to a mere 27 TCF—a number that may still be overly optimistic. My institute’s research suggests that US future production of shale oil and gas has been wildly over-estimated too. So, without attempting to put a specific number to it, I think it would be wise to assume that Europe’s actual reserves are much, much smaller than the drilling companies are saying. We do know that the geology in Europe is not as favorable as it is in some of the US formations, so even in cases where gas or oil is present, production potential may be low—that is, it may not be possible to get much of that resource out of the ground profitably. That being the case, governments should undertake a realistic cost-risk-benefit analysis using very conservative assumptions about likely production potential.
One argument often heard in Europe is that fracking companies have gained knowledge and experience from extraction in the US and will cause less pollution and leaks when they start operating in Europe. Is there such a thing as safe fracking?
The petroleum industry has certainly been trying to clean up its act, and it’s true that progress has been made in improving operational safety. However it’s also true that the industry has systematically hidden evidence of pollution, and of environmental and human health impacts. The industry has often claimed that there are no documented instances of such impacts, and that’s arrant nonsense. Where environmental and health harms are clear, the industry typically offers a cash payment to the parties affected, but that is tied to a non-disclosure agreement, so that no one else will ever find out what happened. The industry also points to studies showing low methane emissions and no groundwater contamination. These studies tend to describe operations where everything is working perfectly, with no mistakes or malfunctions. But of course in the real world well casings fail, equipment breaks, pipes leak, and operators cut corners or make simple human errors. Take a look at regions of the US where fracking is happening right now, presumably with state-of-the-art equipment: have all the bugs really been worked out? Evidently not, because there is still a steady stream of reports of bad water and bad air.
Are unconventional gas and oil, as ‘transition fuels’, buying us extra time in the face of peak oil, or actually halting investments in renewables?
Unconventional oil and gas require enormous financial investments. The petroleum industry as a whole has doubled its rate of investment in exploration and production in the past decade. That’s because companies have run out of conventional production prospects—onshore fields of oil or gas that is easy and cheap to extract. The trend is clear: if we continue increasing our dependence on oil and gas, the levels of required investment will grow exponentially. Where will the money come from to develop renewable energy sources? Available energy investment capital will all have been spoken for. This is not hypothetical: it is exactly what we see in the US. A few years ago, it was understood that the nation had to transition away from fossil fuels, and there was a nascent effort to divert energy investment capital away from coal, oil, and gas and toward the renewables sector. But as shale gas and tight oil came into view, that effort largely stalled as private investors piled onto the shale bubble and government renewable energy programs were sidelined. Once the brief current shale boom is over (well before the end of this decade), America will be in a fix—it will have lost a decade in which it could have pursued the energy transition vigorously and insulated itself against a fossil energy supply crisis that is inevitable and entirely predictable.
Josh Fox, director of the Gasland documentaries, recently said that the fossil fuel industry is so powerful that “democracy in the 21st century is impossible as long as we rely on fossil fuels”. What are your thoughts?
I think there is some sense to Fox’s comment, though I would have to add that there are plenty of other threats to democracy in this century. It’s true that the fossil fuel industry represents an enormous concentration of capital, and money is power. The industry buys political advantage, tax breaks, advertising, public relations, foreign policy, and more. But at a more basic level it controls all of society. That’s because everything we do requires energy. No exceptions. Fossil fuels supply roughly 85 percent of the energy we use, so whoever controls those energy sources exerts a subtle but very real influence on nearly everything that happens in society. That’s why America is a nation of highways, a country designed and built for the convenience of petroleum-fueled automobiles. If, hypothetically, the US had spent the last century getting most of its energy from sunlight, you can bet it would be a very different place today.
Is it possible that fracking has a silver lining to it, in the sense that it is highly visible, comes very close to home and causes a lot of debate among locals, engaging more people in the energy debate and raising awareness around peak oil and the need to transition to renewables?
Possibly so, especially in Europe. There are at least three important factors that might limit fracking socially and politically in the European context. First is the number of wells needed. Because production rates in shale gas and tight oil wells tend to decline very rapidly, petroleum companies have to drill many wells in order to keep overall production levels up. In the US, the current total is over 80,000 horizontal wells drilled and fracked. If Europe says yes to shale gas, prepare for an onslaught of drilling.
The second factor is population density: Europe, of course, has a much higher population density than the US. So taking these first two factors into account, Europeans face a significant likelihood of living in close proximity to one of these future shale gas or oil wells.
The third factor is the legal status of ownership of subsurface mineral rights. In most of the US, landowners control mineral rights; therefore if a company wants to drill on your land, it must obtain your agreement, pay you an initial fee, and also pay a subsequent royalty for the oil or gas actually extracted. (Gas and oil companies actually avoid paying royalties in many instances, but that’s another story.) As a result, citizens have a financial stake in resource extraction, and they therefore have an incentive to overlook or even help cover up environmental and health impacts from fracking. This is especially true in poor communities, where a little lease or royalty money can go a long way. In Europe, national governments control mineral rights. Therefore there is no incentive for local citizens to take the industry’s side if there are disputes over pollution. There has been a strong citizen backlash to fracking in the US; in Europe it is likely to be overwhelming.
The message ‘peakists’ bring, namely that the party’s over, as you put it, is not popular with corporate backed media, for obvious reasons. Is there a media blackout on peak oil?
There is no formal blackout, but there is indeed an informal one. Peak oil is one of the defining issues of our time, yet it is treated as if it were either an esoteric controversy among petroleum engineers, or a conspiracy theory. This much is axiomatic: fossil fuels are finite resources, and we are extracting them using the “best-first” principle. We have bet our future on the continued availability of cheap oil, gas, and coal, but that is quite obviously a very bad bet. So where are the in-depth television, radio, and newspaper discussions of this? Very few programs and articles appear. I think that’s partly because commercial media outlets depend on the fossil fuel industry for advertising, and partly because the peak oil message is threatening to people’s sense of social equilibrium—it makes them start to question the basic premises of consumerism, among other things.
In Snake Oil, you write that we must reduce our dependency on fossil fuels as quickly as possible. Which steps should be taken in this ‘project of the century’ and on what time scale? 
We really need a wartime level of mobilization, prioritization, and implementation. Obviously, one of the priorities must be to build renewable energy generation capacity. But we must also completely rethink transportation, agriculture, and building construction/maintenance. This isn’t just about how we get energy; it is also about how we use it. We have built entire societies to take advantage of the unique properties of energy sources that have no future. For example, oil is energy-dense and portable, making it a perfect transport fuel. Without oil, we will not have an airline industry in any recognizable form. Altogether, society will be less mobile. That means we have to start thinking about how to re-localize production of food and other basic necessities. We also need to redesign our cities so that people do not need cars in order to live. These are enormous projects, and we must accomplish them by mid-century. There is absolutely no time to waste.
%d bloggers like this: