AT: Oil Dependence (Terrorism Impact)
Stopping oil dependence does not solve terrorism
Washington Post 08 (“Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit”, Robert Bryce, January 13, LexisNexis)
But the hype doesn't match reality. Remember, the two largest suppliers of crude to the U.S. market are Canada and Mexico -- neither exactly known as a belligerent terrorist haven. Moreover, terrorism is an ancient tactic that predates the oil era. It does not depend on petrodollars. And even small amounts of money can underwrite spectacular plots; as the 9/11 Commission Report noted, "The 9/11 plotters eventually spent somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 to plan and conduct their attack." G.I. Wilson, a retired Marine Corps colonel who has fought in Iraq and written extensively on terrorism and asymmetric warfare, calls the conflation of oil and terrorism a "contrivance." Support for terrorism "doesn't come from oil," he says. "It comes from drugs, crime, human trafficking and the weapons trade."
US Energy Independence doesn’t stop funding terrorists; the oil will just be sold elsewhere
Washington Post 08 (“Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit”, Robert Bryce, January 13, LexisNexis)
Fans of energy independence argue that if the United States stops buying foreign energy, it will deny funds to petro-states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Hugo Chávez's Venezuela. But the world marketplace doesn't work like that. Oil is a global commodity. Its price is set globally, not locally. Oil buyers are always seeking the lowest-cost supplier. So any Saudi crude being loaded at the Red Sea port of Yanbu that doesn't get purchased by a refinery in Corpus Christi or Houston will instead wind up in Singapore or Shanghai.
AT: Oil Peak
1. No oil peak coming - Oil producers vastly understate the amount of oil reserves – for economic reasons
Belfast Telegraph June 10, 2008: “Oil shortage is a myth, says insider” Belfast Telegraph
Explaining why the published estimates of proven global reserves are less than half the true amount, Dr Pike said there was anecdotal evidence that big oil producers were glad to go along with under-reporting of proven reserves to help maintain oil's high price. "Part of the oil industry is perfectly familiar with the way oil reserves are underestimated, but the decision makers in both the companies and the countries are not exposed to the reasons why proven oil reserves are bigger than they are said to be," he said.
Dr Pike's assessment does not include unexplored oilfields, those yet to be discovered or those deemed too uneconomic to exploit.
The environmental implications of his analysis, based on more than 30 years inside the industry, will alarm environmentalists who have exploited the concept of peak oil to press the urgency of the need to find greener alternatives.
"The bad news is that by underestimating proven oil reserves we have been lulled into a false sense of security in terms of environmental issues, because it suggests we will have to find alternatives to fossil fuels in a few decades," said Dr Pike. "We should not be surprised if oil dominates well into the twenty-second century. It highlights a major error in energy and environmental planning – we are dramatically underestimating the challenge facing us," he said.
Proven oil reserves are likely to be far larger than reported because of the way the capacity of oilfields is estimated and how those estimates are added to form the proven reserves of a company or a country. Companies add the estimated capacity of oil fields in a simple arithmetic manner to get proven oil reserves. This gives a deliberately conservative total deemed suitable for shareholders who do not want proven reserves hyped, Dr Pike said.
2. Their arguments about spare capacity are wrong, we don’t know how much oil is left in the ground
United States Government Accountability Office. Highlights, a report to congressional requesters, February 2007
Studies that predict the timing of a peak use different estimates of how much oil remains in the ground, and these differences explain some of the wide ranges of these predictions. Estimates of how much oil remains in the ground are highly uncertain because much of these data are self- reported and unverified by independent auditors; many parts of the world have yet to be fully explored for oil; and there is no comprehensive assessment of oil reserves from nonconventional sources.
3. Peak won’t happen- 50 years
John Wood (Energy Analyst for Department of Energy) 8/18/2004 http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/feature_articles/2004/worldoilsupply/oilsupply04.html
In any event, the world production peak for conventionally reservoired crude is unlikely to be "right around the corner" as so many other estimators have been predicting. Our analysis shows that it will be closer to the middle of the 21st century than to its beginning. Given the long lead times required for significant mass-market penetration of new energy technologies, this result in no way justifies complacency about both supply-side and demand-side research and development
4. No peak oil, we have enormous reserves.
Ebeling, 2008 (Richard M., June 18, American Institute for Economic Research, “The Global Oil Crisis: The Supply Problem is a Government Problem”)
The recent and continuing surge in gasoline prices has raised concerns and fears about the future of oil-based energy in the coming years. Are we reaching the end of global petroleum supplies in the face of increasing demand that supply seems unable to keep up with? In fact, oil reserves around the world are plentiful, and can keep growing consumption and industrial uses humming for many decades to come. During the ten-year period, 1997-2007, global production of oil increased by 12.9 percent. Over this same time frame, global oil consumption rose by 15.8 percent, suggesting that demand is outstripping world oil supply. But oil actually extracted from the earth must be compared with proven oil reserves that represent the known quantities that remain under the earth’s surface, and serve as the basis for future years’ production. The table below shows that proven reserves have increased from 1,069.3 billion barrels of extractable oil in 1997 to 1,237.9 billion barrels in 2007, or a 15.8 percent increase. The knowledge of proven reserves available for extraction has increased, in other words, at the same percentage rate over the last ten years as global consumption has gone up. In 2007, global oil consumption was 31.13 billion barrels. At this current level of consumption, proven reserves in 2007 are sufficient to supply almost 40 years of annual production. Even if we were to assume that growing demand were to rise to 40 billion barrels a year by 2017 before, perhaps, leveling off, these proven reserves would still be enough to supply over 30 years of oil production.
But there is every reason to believe that further geological exploration and advances in oil extracting technologies will assure that even as existing proven reserves are used up to feed current use they will be at least partly if not completely replenished through new discoveries over the years and decades ahead. This was certainly the case during the last ten years when world consumption and proven reserves increased at the same rate. (And this completely sets aside the vast global known reserves of other energy-providing resources such as shale oil and coal, for example.) The current oil “crisis” therefore has not been caused by the world “running out of oil.” What has lagged behind global consumption is world-wide extracting and refining of oil into usable energy-supplying forms.
Share with your friends: |