Three items: first two are commentary, the third an update on The Great Game, directing attention to a strategic remote location. kwc

 

Lundberg admits he has a rather ‘’fire and brimstone’ quality, which may make some ignore his message, that we are on an unsustainable path, and need to act urgently. Lundberg offers no optimism, however.

 

Lundberg: The main lesson from Katrina for our petrosociety: Pollution is constant. When the millions of gallons of gasoline, diesel, pesticides and other chemicals are suddenly and accidentally loosed upon New Orleans and surrounding areas, it is indeed a disaster. However, the result is all the same for the ecosystem and the Earth in the long run if those toxic substances were to be put into the environment gradually as intended.
In other words, the current, much lamented toxic disaster is actually an illusion when it amounted to almost nothing additional in the long run. People forget or are even unaware that land fills and sewage treatment do not really remove anything from the environment; instead, poisons and trash are separated and contained for a time such as by plastic liners.
The problem with this approach is that the Earth is a closed system. When we "throw away" something, there is really no “away”. There are technological processes to neutralize pollutants, and these are going to be necessary as long as poisons are made. But a century or so of technological amelioration of pollution has brought the Earth to its knees with eco-collapse already begun.
Rather than debate whether Katrina caused a hugely additional environmental disaster in the long run, we must grasp the main reality that the normal operation of the economy is an unmitigated environmental disaster and is a permanent waste of much of the whole planet's resources. An example to help understand this concept is that there cannot be peace with cars. When the materials are mined and manufactured for the cars, and the cars then do their damage before they conk out and pollute still further, these processes of entropy cannot be reversed. Such is the economy today.  http://culturechange.org/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=25&Itemid=2

 

Monbiot plays the devil’s advocate for the most part…

Monbiot: Energy Intelligence? Are global oil supplies about to peak? Are they, in other words, about to reach their maximum and then go into decline? There is a simple answer to this question: No one has the faintest idea.  Consider these two statements: 1. "Last year Saudi Aramco made credible claims that as much as 500 billion to 700 billion barrels remain to be discovered in the kingdom." 2. "Saudi Arabia clearly seems to be nearing or at its peak output and cannot materially grow its oil production."

The first comes from a report by Energy Intelligence, a consultancy used by the major oil companies. The second comes from a book by Matthew Simmons, an energy investor who advises the Bush administration. Whom should we believe?

In 1985, Kuwait announced that it possessed 50 percent more oil than it had previously declared. Had it just discovered a new field? Had it developed a new technology that could extract more oil from the old fields? No. OPEC, the price-fixing cartel to which it belongs, had decided to allocate production quotas to its members based on the size of their reserves. The bigger your stated reserve, the more you were allowed to produce. The other states soon followed Kuwait, adding a total of 300 billion barrels to their reserves: enough, if it existed, to supply the world for 10 years. And their magic oil never runs out. Though extraction has long outstripped discovery, Kuwait posts the same reserves today as it claimed in 1985.

So we turn to the U.S. Geological Survey for an answer, and find that its estimates of global oil supply are as reliable as the Pentagon's assessments of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. In 1981, it said we possessed 1,719 billion barrels of oil. In 2000, the number was 2,659 billion. Yet the discovery of major oilfields peaked in 1964. Where has it come from? 

In February this year, the Dept of Energy released a report called Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management . I say "released," for it was never properly published. For several months the only publicly available copy was lodged on the website of the Hilltop High School in Chula Vista, Calif. The report’s lead consultant, energy analyst Robert L Hirsch, concluded that "without timely mitigation, the economic, social and political costs will be unprecedented." It is possible to reduce demand and to start developing alternatives, but this would take "10 to 20 years" and "trillions of dollars." "Waiting until world oil production peaks before taking crash programme action leaves the world with a significant liquid fuel deficit for more than two decades," which would cause problems "unlike any yet faced by modern industrial society."  Bottom line: Better to cry wolf, than be bleating sheep later…

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050928/energy_intelligence.php

 

So it’s better to plan and act with precautionary principles in mind, like buying insurance just in case you need it.  We can’t wait for technology to improve extraction, and if the geology isn’t there, it’s all over. Paraphrasing Michael Klare referring to our oil-based foreign policy, it’s cheaper to conserve energy than wage war for it. And an energy consultant on the NewsHour last night said if we had enacted conservation measures and increased CAFÉ standards post-9/11, we would be saving the equivalent of what we’ve spent in Iraq now – without loss of life, political turmoil and a radicalized terrorist network.  This realization alone has converted many political conservatives away from the Bush Doctrine and its fossil fuel economy addiction.

 

Off the top of my head, it’s 5-6 weeks from ports in Saudi Arabia, 2 weeks from the west coast of Africa, and less time from Venezuela, so the 2 weeks shipping time from this “New Kuwait” to the North American West Coast is a critical factor in The Great Game. That the biggest customers so far are ASEAN partners suggests some market stabilization, of sorts, though Indonesia is already in meltdown.   kwc

 

Texas Tea From a Russian Sea

By James Brooke, NYT, September 28, 2005

YUZHNO-SAKHALINSK, Russia - Just north of Japan and across the Pacific from California, a long-forbidden Siberian island is about to join the global energy map. On Oct. 1, three decades after vast pools of oil and gas were discovered off the lonely shores of this former Soviet-era prison colony, a consortium led by Exxon Mobil is to start pumping up to 250,000 barrels of oil a day, its first oil and gas from seven wells drilled deep in the Sea of Okhotsk.

That will be the start of major production from Sakhalin's offshore reserves, a rich energy island province that some geologists call, with a bit of swagger, this decade's Alaska North Slope. Noting the string of ministers flying here from Moscow in September to inspect the newest riches in oil, Galina N. Pavlova, Sakhalin's top energy official, boasted: "They believe Sakhalin is the second Kuwait."

Mapped since the 1970's, the recoverable offshore reserves of Russia's easternmost major island now total 14 billion barrels of oil - or just over 1 percent of global reserves - and 96 trillion cubic feet of gas. In 2004 terms, this is the equivalent of four years of United States oil imports. It would yield about 28 years of American gas imports, which account for a relatively small share of consumption. Some of the energy will be headed to American shores.

After decades of debate, this long, spindly island eight time zones from Moscow is getting the largest inflow of foreign investment in Russian history. Analysts hope the Sakhalin projects will help increase Russia's output and bring much needed oil and gas supplies to energy-hungry world markets in coming decades.

The recent slowdown in Russian output and the Kremlin's tighter grip on its energy sector have raised concerns over the investment climate in Russia. But with much of the Middle East shut off to foreign oil companies, Russia still offers some of the best prospects for growth in oil supplies.

The Exxon-led consortium is doling out $12.8 billion, and a second group, led by Royal Dutch Shell, is spending $20 billion to produce oil and gas and to build Russia's first liquefied natural gas plant.

"This is the largest integrated gas project in the world," said Ate Visser, commercial director for the Sakhalin Energy Investment Company, the Shell-led group that has an army of 17,000 workers on Sakhalin.

BP is exploring a third section for energy resources. Nine additional offshore sections remain virtually untouched.

Sakhalin promises to be a cash cow that will loom large in calculations of Russian economic might. By 2050, the companies project it will have filled Moscow's coffers with $85 billion in oil revenues, royalties and taxes - $45 billion from the Shell project and $40 billion from the Exxon project.

Twelve days by tanker across the North Pacific from California, Sakhalin may also prompt Americans to start looking to Russia for oil and gas. Until now, Russia, with 6 percent of the world's known oil and 27 percent of its known gas, largely produced in western Russia to sell to Western Europe.

Much of Sakhalin's energy will power China, Japan and South Korea. But recently, work started on a terminal in northern Mexico that is intended to receive liquefied natural gas shipments from Sakhalin in the summer of 2008. This gas will then head by pipeline to California.

By 2008, Shell and Exxon should also be pumping a total of 550,000 barrels of oil a day into tankers, placing 10 percent of Russia's overall oil production onto Pacific waters and the international spot market.

Starting with two huge offshore drilling platforms now in place up north, the Shell project is building two 400-mile pipelines, one for oil and one for gas. These will end at Aniva, where 7,250 workers, one third of them foreigners, are building a $2.5 billion liquefied gas plant and deepwater loading terminals on a bay 90 miles northeast of Japan.

To Shell's chagrin, its gas-field-to-carrier project has become the largest in the world, partly because the overall 10-year project cost estimate doubled in July, to $20 billion. The overruns seem to stem from the difficulties of doing business in Russia and from rosy calculations made in 2003 to win final project approval by the Russian government, the ultimate owner of most oil and gas produced after constructions bills have been paid.

Shell, which owns 55 percent of the project, says the cost overrun resulted from the dollar's 25 percent fall against the euro, the rising cost of Russian labor in the boomtown atmosphere here, rising costs of pipeline steel and oil, and expenses incurred to minimize disturbances to an endangered population of 100 western gray whales that feed every summer in Shell's production area.

"We will insist on a very meticulous audit of this," Ms. Pavlova, director of oil and gas for Sakhalin's regional government, said of the swelling cost. "We will be meeting with Shell through the winter."

Last July, Shell disclosed the $10 billion cost overrun only one week after Shell and Gazprom, Russia's state oil monopoly, announced an asset swap. The swap was intended to bring a powerful Russian partner into an all-foreign project here. But now, the two companies are embroiled in what are to be yearlong talks to calculate a price difference that Shell needs to pay Gazprom to even the deal.

"It has been a hard swallow for our shareholders," Mr. Visser said of Japan's minority shareholders, Mitsui & Company, with 25 percent, and the Mitsubishi Corporation, with 20 percent. "But it also has been a hard swallow for Shell. But people only see one side of the story, that costs have doubled, but not that the price of oil has also doubled."

Increasingly nationalistic, Russia restricts foreign investment to the most technically challenging energy developments, largely offshore and in the Arctic. Russian state companies, for example, have pumped oil from onshore wells here since the 1930's. But after production dwindled, Russia sought foreign expertise for offshore work.

"Originally, Russia needed foreign companies for technology and for the money," said William Dinty Miller, senior vice president of BP Sakhalin. Referring to Russia's soaring foreign currency reserves in the era of $70-a-barrel oil, he added: "Now the money argument has gone by the wayside."

Despite the controversy, work is on track at the liquefied gas plant here. From a window of a commercial flight one recent morning, a chalk-yellow trench for two pipelines, one for gas, the other for oil, could be seen coursing south from this island capital.

At present, two gas-processing "trains" are under construction, giving the plant an annual capacity of 9.6 million tons. Around the world, the plant here is rivaled in size only by Qatargas-2, a plant in Qatar that is to produce 15.6 million tons of liquefied gas by the end of 2007. On Sakhalin, room has been left to expand the project by a third. One future supply source would be the fields Exxon is to start tapping on Oct. 1. Exxon's oil and gas, from fields with recoverable reserves estimated at 2.3 billion barrels of oil and 17.1 trillion cubic feet of gas, will flow into an existing Russian-owned pipeline network, drawn from seven wells drilled by the Yastreb rig of Exxon.

The land-based rig allows for wells to be drilled to points seven miles offshore, a strategy to minimize the environmental impact and to minimize the number of offshore platforms in a harsh region known for Arctic cold fronts that blow down from Siberia.

Stephen Terni, the president of Exxon-Neftegas Ltd., summed it up for Russian and American executives here on Sept. 12, echoing typical Texas-style talk of the past, now translated to Russia's energy frontier: "The shore-based rig, the Yastreb, is the largest and the most powerful land rig ever built."

Jad Mouawad, in New York, contributed reporting for this article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/28/business/worldbusiness/28sakhalin.html

 

Energy Information Administration ; World Proved1 Reserves of Oil and Natural Gas, Most Recent Estimates: June 22 , 2005

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

 

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to