Good morning, Ed. From what I know the operative word in your last paragraph is "some". Harry is always pointing out the few dissenting scientists on global warming (Bless him. Someone must always speak up for the minority) while the preponderance of evidence says otherwise. While there may be more hidden reserves down there, the geopolitical issues with extraction and time issues with development make relying on what's left an almost moot point anyway. That's my layman's shoot from the hip POV - and I'm sure that Keith will set me straight when he's waded through his emails once home from riding camels.
There is new technology that allows the Indiana Jones' of the energy business to see rivers of natural gas beneath the rock much better than ever before, so that pinpoint drilling is now much less a hit and miss financial investment. So there is proportionately more to extract based on efficiency, but not based on availability. Has anyone else had the awful question run through their mind that the Bush regime decided to put Iraq on the front burner after the failed ANWR vote in the Senate last year? The evidence is pretty clear that people who were not in power in 1998 had the agenda to go after Saddam but their ties to the oil world make it circumstantial evidence that oil was at least a secondary motive. Today those same people have the authority to make their agenda happen. This by itself causes suspicion among the jury of the public on the foreign "policy" of the Bush administration. So when events conspire to change the focus and importance of policy interests, those in positions to do so, will take advantage of the situation. They'd have to be political eunuchs not to. So it becomes the job of the public to weigh the evidence and decide, as a jury does, whether the plaintiff is guilty of conspiracy to commit xxxx or whether there is insufficient evidence. In the meantime, keeping the jury awake is the responsibility of the clamoring class. I mean, consider GDubya on Affirmative Action. This is the very last man in America today who needs to go on record raising questions about the validity and constitutionality of quotas in education. A Texas student who was rejected by two colleges in his home and birth state and accepted into Harvard based on their quotas for out of state students and legacy from his grandfather and father? Would Clinton the husband have credibility discussing fidelity? Hillary has credibility on forgiveness, but not Bill on what IS fidelity. I hope I make my point that Dubya should be mute here. It is an important public issue and shouldn't be contaminated by people noted for hypocrisy and conflict of interest. But they will, as Bill Keller writes this weekend, not because they will practice a thoughtful foreign and domestic policy, but because their minds were already made up and listening isn't important anymore. What else should we expect from regime advisors who quote Machiavelli? Might makes right. As noted in earlier pieces this week regarding the impact of the internet on communication, that means that we all are journalists, as we discuss and share information and opinions among ourselves and then others. It becomes more essential than any other time during events like this week in 2003 Q1, that alert and motivated people with skills and contacts need to carefully eye the landscape, take stock and provide balanced commentary. Regardless of what happens, we will respect ourselves in the morning if we have paid attention, spoken up and shared information that matters so that the Wide Awake outnumber the Fast Asleep. (end of sermon) Hope everyone has the energy to stay warm and connected, meaning heat and electricity. Don't forget that many don't and won't. Karen [KWC] Ed wrote: Just one more motive: global hegemony. The nation that controls the oil over the next three or four decades until alternative sources of energy become practicable is in a position to exert tremendous control over global affairs (I don't know how else to put it). To continue to grow and/or function China, Europe, Japan, Russia and of course America will all need oil and gas. A very large proportion of the globe's remaining discovered (and probably undiscovered) reserves lie in the Middle East and the various "stans" to the north of the Middle East. Exercise hegemonic control over that region and you are very powerful indeed. Some petro-geolists have argued that the world's discovered reserves are only a small proportion of the world's total reserves. That doesn't change the picture because it'll take a couple of decades to discover those reserves, if they exist. _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
