Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Why We Won't See Relief from the Oil Shock Any Time Soon

By Dilip Hiro, Tomdispatch.com. Posted July 17, 2008.


The current oil shock, the fourth in the past 30-plus years and the deadliest so far, shows every sign of continuing for a long, long stretch.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Dilip Hiro

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Last week, after hitting $146 a barrel, the price of crude oil took a sudden, two-day, $9 plunge, based in part on comments by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that an attack on Iran was unlikely and on a mid-Atlantic turn north by Bertha, the season's first significant hurricane, away from the oil-rig- and refinery-rich Gulf of Mexico. It was just long enough for pundits to wonder, hesitantly and somewhat wistfully, whether the global economic bad weather had finally hit the oil market, and whether lowered demand meant that a new (downward) trend was on the way. That was, of course, before the Iranians started lobbing missiles, and traders got edgy about a promised weeklong strike at Brazil's state-run oil giant Petrobras, and the kidnapping of at least one foreign oil worker in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. By Friday, the "trend" was toast, and the price of a barrel of crude had briefly crested above $147.

Get used to it. As Middle Eastern (which means "oil") expert Dilip Hiro indicates, we've definitively entered the era of "no relief in sight," and there's no turning back now. The author of a vivid history of oil in our world, Blood of the Earth: The Battle for the World's Vanishing Oil Resources, Hiro considers why the present oil shock can't be compared to the three shocks that preceded it and then explores just where the planet is likely to look in the medium term for energy (and global warming) relief.

Energy is obviously going to remain fiercely at the heart of our problems, locally and globally, indefinitely. TomDispatch plans to respond to this essential reality with a range of different perspectives on energy in the coming year.

-- Intro by TomDispatch editor Tom Engelhardt

The Current Oil Shock -- No Relief in Sight

By Dilip Hiro

When will it end, this crushing rise in the price of gasoline, now averaging $4.10 a gallon at the pump? The question is uppermost in the minds of American motorists as they plan vacations or simply review their daily journeys. The short answer is simple as well: "Not soon."

As yet there is no sign of a reversal in oil's upward price thrust, which has more than doubled in a year, cresting recently above $146 a barrel. The current oil shock, the fourth of its kind in the past 3½ decades and the deadliest so far, shows every sign of continuing for a long, long stretch.

The previous oil shocks -- in 1973-'74, 1980 and 1990-'91 -- stemmed from specific interruptions of energy supplies from the Middle East due, respectively, to an Arab-Israeli war, the Iranian revolution, and Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Once peace was restored, a post-revolutionary order established, or the invader expelled, vital Middle Eastern energy supplies returned to normal. The fourth oil shock, however, belongs in a different category altogether.

Nothing Like It Before

Unlike in the past, the present price spurt has been caused mainly by global demand for energy outstripping available supply. Alarmingly, there is no short-term prospect that supply will match demand. For a commodity like petroleum that underwrites and permeates every aspect of modern life -- from fuel to fertilizers, paints to plastics, resins to rubber -- "balance" requires a 5 percent safety factor on the supply side.

At present, however, spare capacity in the oil industry is less than 2 percent, down from more than 6 percent in 2002. As a result, the price of oil responds instantly to negative news of any sort: a threat against Iran by an Israeli Cabinet minister, a fire on a Norwegian offshore drilling rig, or an attack on an oil facility by armed rebels in Nigeria.

Behind the present price surge, other factors are also at work. Take the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States. It flared almost a year ago, drastically lowering the market value of the stocks of banks and allied companies. The concomitant downturn in other equities led investment fund managers and speculators to direct their cash into more productive markets, especially commodities such as gold and oil, driving up their prices. The continued weakening of the U.S. dollar -- the denomination used in oil trading -- has also encouraged investment in commodities as a hedge against this depreciating currency.

The earlier oil shocks led non-OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) nations to accelerate oil exploration and extraction to increase supplies. Their collective reserves, however, represent but a third of OPEC's 75 percent of the global total. By the turn of the century, these countries had pumped so much crude oil that their collective output went into an irreversible decline.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iran, iraq, oil, energy, gas prices, petroleum, oil prices

Dilip Hiro's forthcoming book is The Iranian Labyrinth: Journeys Through Theocratic Iran and Its Furies. (Nation Books).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oil for electricity production?
Posted by: rrk70 on Jul 17, 2008 4:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had no problem with this article until I got to this statement.

"Besides powering transport, oil is a major source of fuel for electricity-generating plants. With even Royal Dutch Shell CEO Jeroen van der Veer conceding publicly that we are nearing peak oil production (after which oil reserves will decline irretrievably), attention is increasingly turning, in the West, to coal and nuclear power as medium-term solutions."

Just exactly where is oil used as a "major source of fuel electricity-generating plants?" Not in the US. Not in Western Europe. There are virtually no oil fired generating stations of any consequence in the US. The island of Nantucket, year around population 10,000, has one, and there are a few other isolated small plants in the northeast, but to make such a brazenly false statement calls into question the credibility of the whole article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A $9 drop...
Posted by: Marlena on Jul 17, 2008 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in the price of a barrel of $146 oil is not a "plunge" or any of the other words being used to describe a minuscule price fluctuation..now if it had dropped $100 THAT would be a plunge. Quit grasping for straws!! You are drowning

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome to the next ice age
Posted by: solrev on Jul 17, 2008 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article is correct about one thing; there is no magic energy wand. So do not get your hopes up. The biggest problem we face is the political money distribution system. Ethanol was a good welfare program for agriculture, however as an energy source it is a government boondoggle. There is a lot of money being dumped out there for researching alternative energy. This piecemeal approach is not going to bear fruit for another 20 or 30 years. We need a DOE that is not run by politicians. If one would set down assume the best possible outcome for any research path, list the pros and cons, and assess the probability of best outcome, then make decisions we could get more bang for our buck. For instance the DOE put up 130 million for hydrogen and fuel cell research. There are two places to get hydrogen, water or hydrocarbons, so you can see why a good oil boy like Bush sees a new oil market. The laws of physic state that it will take more energy to get the hydrogen than the hydrogen contains. While the pollution benefits of fuel cell vehicles is with out question do you really want our concrete jungles producing water vapor. Talk about messing with mother weather. The immediate problem in the US is coal and you are not going to stop China from going down the path of least resistance. Rule one, no coal fired emissions released into the atmosphere. How do you make that happen in the US and China at a cost China will buy? We need to stop take a look around, see what’s going down, and then solve the biggest problem first. This is not going to happen with our political money distribution system. So most of you are going to get your wish, when the next ice age comes half or more of you will be history. Maybe the next interglacial people will do better than us. I know it will not happen in your lifetime, but we mystics believe the sins of the father are visited upon the son. For you rational people the interpretation is; the future always pays for the past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It ain't an oil shock. Oil prices have been rising this entire decade for the most part.
Posted by: maxpayne on Jul 17, 2008 7:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This author is a complete DUMBASS to think that this is a mere “oil shock” when in fact, gas prices have been rising this entire decade unlike any other. Back in 1980, after the 1970s energy crisis, if Mr. Hiro had actually gotten his facts straight, he would have been smart enough to point out that all America did was simply “borrow” oil from the MidEast and try to procrastinate. The so-called “oil glut” of the 1980s and even the 1990s was nothing more than a bloopity blob of BORROWED OIL called “Oil Capital”. When that was coming home to roost, BIG GOVERNMENT propped up lies to wage a war on Iraq for its 3rd largest oil reserves to AGAIN procrastinate. And of course, it went out of its ways to allow Big Business to manufacture fuel INefficient technologies and promote wasteful consumer spending with all those “goody tooshy points for every dollar spent” crap just like the Orwellian 1980s and 1990s. Except this time, it’s all failing big time. In the mean time, not only has America written off solar and wind for the most part by buying into the lies of it not meeting them high energy demands most of which could be corrected by rewarding conservation and make technologies more fuel efficient, they’re even willing to DROWN themselves into more desperate ideas such as offshore drilling based on incorrect numbers on the amount of oil, regardless of quality, that can possibly be tapped or even going nuclear which is just as dangerous and resource hungry. On the other hand, neither the far right or even the progressives and liberals want to come to grips with the fact that a harmless plant such as hemp can completely replace petroleum and that instead of engaging in more expensive and dangerous oil drilling which could prove even more costly now that crude oil, the good type, is getting harder to find, why not give hemp a chance to be grown and put to 26000 environmentally friendly industrial uses for a change?

http://www.votehemp.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exactly why should the retail price drop?
Posted by: billwald on Jul 17, 2008 8:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Econ 101: price increases 50%, sales drop 8%. Ergo, price to low.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need to get OFF oil...
Posted by: Pirate1 on Jul 17, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not find ways to get it cheap again so we can return to our comfortable patterns. Burning the stuff is altering the atmosphere and oceans of the only planet we have, or have you all forgotten? In order for life as we know it continue, and remember, that includes us, we need to be a lot more brave about the changes and stop whining about things not being like they were any more. I hope oil prices double! Maybe that will light the fire under our collective asses to demand from our government that they stop their hootchie cootch with big oil and coal and start funding some of the brilliant new technologies that await funding in order to be viable for mass use... that don't require maintaining the mechanisms of empire to "defend our interests" in other countries that have the nerve to be living on top of "our oil".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PIPEDREAMS
Posted by: edgeofnowhere on Jul 17, 2008 10:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Erroneously seeking some magic technological solution that will replace petroleum in order to continue our wasteful lifestyle is not going to happen. Read THE LONG EMERGENCY by Kunstler and THE PARTY'S OVER by Heinberg to understand what is happening. No matter how much money you throw at alternatives, nuclear, "clean" coal, hydrogen etc, they cannot provide the energy necessary for the increasing growth of the planet's population. We WILL face decreasing supply and increasing consumption in the near future, and the results are not going to be pretty. Iraq is just a preview of our future, as nation-states desperately attempt to secure the remaining carbon-based fuel supplies at any and all costs. The reality is that this planet cannot sustain 6 billion inhabitants dependent on fossil fuels. Individually, we can endeavor to realign our lifestyles with the inevitable reality and hope to survive. Collectively, the governments of the planet will squander what is left and fight wars to control dwindling supplies. Batten down the hatches, mates --- storms be coming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Fine Product.....
Posted by: Jenny73 on Jul 17, 2008 1:11 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The middle and working class are starving and big oil is profiting. Bush's New Economy.....

Just found an interesting video diary on the economy and gas prices.

http://www.shootandrunproductions.com/rsrt2gallery4.htm



If McCain gets elected this country is going to look like Argentina.... :(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Fine Product..... Posted by: edith
» RE: A Fine Product..... Posted by: macdon1
Why are the Green complaining, their wet dream has come true?
Posted by: Libertarian Paternalist on Jul 17, 2008 1:22 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not understand the Ecologists, fundamentalist Green. They have since i was a teenager in 1973 told me and us that we have to have higher prices on oil so that we stop consume oil. they have always wanted the growth economy, capitalist economy to completely collapse.

Their wish has now come true. And instead of rejoicing they are complaining even more.

It is the same socialist or ecologists, they are against all kinds of societies. Even there own, its not pure enough, not radical enough.

Look on Mao and his Great Leap and his Cultural Revolution.

Greens and socialist want to start with chaos. In fact I think somebody Naomi Klein's idea about Shock Doctrine, disaster Economics was correct. She however choose the pragmatic and slowly evolving economic theory and called i Shock when it is in fact socialism and Ecologist that need a revolution, total upheaval and disaster to come to place.

But socialist and ecologist have always been Orwellian, uses New speak. With peace they mean war, with progress they mean destruction and disaster is fulfillment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ba
Posted by: mnstra on Jul 17, 2008 1:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article Tom, but is there any reason why you don't propose reducing national speed limits.?
Trucks 55mph. cars 60mph and 55mph around all cities on interstate highways.
It can save gas right away reduce consumption which reduces greenhouse gases and demand , that will bring oil prices down, It amazes me how all the writers on this subject overlook that amazing immediate amelioration to the current energy crisis.I have lived through the 1970s and experienced that reduced demand result.
The enforced 55mph limit helped immensely back then.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ba Posted by: donl51
» Of course, Officer Posted by: edith
Gas prices...
Posted by: pizzmoe on Jul 17, 2008 3:28 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will not come down. The precedent has been set, and the oil companies are making record profits, so why lower prices? i do not believe this has anything to do with supply and demand.
I would still like to know what took place in Darth Cheney's secret energy meetings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gas prices... Posted by: edith
High prices?
Posted by: evilhobz on Jul 17, 2008 5:48 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sick of listening to how Americans are now suffering from high prices of gasoline. We pay over $7 American a gallon in Australia, and yet you winge at $4. It's about time America feels the costs most of the world pays. Maybe they'll stop using 25% of the world's oil when they are only 5% of the worl population. But it just shows again the belief of America being the "best" - regardless of what political spectrum you're on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: High prices? Posted by: HelperMonkey
» RE: High prices? Posted by: Asses of Evil
No nuclear accidents in France?
Posted by: Quincytree on Jul 18, 2008 2:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did you say no nuclear accidents in France??? There have been two within a week. In no country has the problem of disposing of nucleear waste been solved!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL
Posted by: powerguy555 on Jul 19, 2008 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I see some negative assumptions about hydrogen here. I believe hydrogen is the right way to go. I would like to provide some cut-and-paste of some well-known postings of others, on the internet, which counter some of the points against H2:

“Hydrogen beats batteries, biofuel and all other vehicle power solutions:

A. Hydrogen can be made at home and requires NO NEW INFRASTRUCTURE. Anybody who says it can’t be made at home or work is either a shill or completely out of touch with reality and technology. You can make it for free, at home, all day long and all night long. The production can be powered by solar, wind, microbes and other free sources. The volume of H2 produced “IS” enough to charge solid state H2 containers. The metrics quoted by the anti-hydrogen crowd are just lies to protect their competing business interests.

B. It now costs less to make hydrogen from water than any known way to make gasoline and it continues to get cheaper every month: The GE Noryl system, The R4 processor and over a hundred different systems can do this NOW; with many more expected next year. The “battery shill” spin has worn thin and has been supplanted by facts. Hydrogen is made from WATER via solar energy, wind energy, microbes, radio waves, sunlight and salt, and other FREE sources of energy. Hydrogen can also be made from any organic garbage, waste, plants or ANYTHING organic via lasers, plasma beams or dozens of other powered exotics which can be run off of EITHER the grid or the free hydrogen made from solar energy, wind energy, microbes, radio waves, sunlight and salt, and other FREE sources of energy OR the grid. There is no oil that needs to be involved anywhere in the production of hydrogen. These systems trickle charge hydrogen into storage containers, either tanks or solid state cassettes, 24/7. GE, ITM Power, QSI, U of Korea and 30 others have this year announced technologies that make H2 hundreds of times more efficiently than any other energy solution.

C. Tens of millions of dollars are being spent by battery companies like A123, Cobasys, AltairNano, etc. in order to discredit hydrogen because hydrogen works better than batteries. A large number of “pundits” who act as “writers”, “bloggers”, “authors” and “non-profit evangelist group founders” are actually supported by financial gain from battery companies who are terrified of hydrogen displacing their revenue streams. They include:

Ulf Bossel of the European Fuel Cell Forum,

Alec Brooks

James Woolsey

EV World

Sam Thurber

Cal Cars

Felix Kramer



Lets go over the battery and bio-fuel shills lies:

Lie # 1:
“But critics say the process of producing hydrogen requires three to four times more energy than the hydrogen later generates in the fuel cell.”
RESPONSE: This is data from the 60’s. It is now more efficient to make hydrogen than it is to make gasoline, build or use batteries or process bio-fuel. The technology has beat everything else.

Lie # 2:
“the cars are too expensive.”
RESPONSE: The production of hydrogen cars is at an early stage while battery cars have been around for almost a hundred years and the battery cars are still expensive for what you get. The Moore’s law on hydrogen cars shows a clear price decline to low cost in market volume. A Fuel Cell car that goes 500 miles without a charge costs half as much TODAY as a battery car that goes 500 miles without a charge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL Posted by: powerguy555
» RE: HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL Posted by: powerguy555
» RE: HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL Posted by: powerguy555
» RE: HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL Posted by: powerguy555
» RE: HYDROGEN SOLVES IT ALL Posted by: powerguy555
Taking the not so easy way out
Posted by: macdon1 on Jul 20, 2008 5:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's what America is all about...instant easy solutions and throwing money at the problem. Sorry folks, no easy solution this time and richies, your money can't buy you out of this one. Our oil dependency has to end, period. In fact our dependency on fossil fuels has to go away and fast. Unfortunately, our public policies are going in the opposite direction. Here in California there should be solar panels everywhere but there aren't. Germany most likely has more solar than we do. A few months ago a new plant making flexible solar panels opened in San Jose but their product wasn't for local use, oh no, their first 100,000 panels were being shipped to Germany to be used in a solar generating plant there. I've been to Germany and it's no California, believe me. It's time to stop pussy-footing around and develop a national policy to get off fossil fuels. Maybe we could use some of the money the government gives away to big oil...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

SORRY. I'M FROM OKLAHOMA. THERE ARE THINGS THAT I KNOW ABOUT THE OIL
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Jul 21, 2008 4:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
business that you just don't. About 40 years ago I visited a "wildcat" well being promoted by a family member. There were two 'professional' oil persons present. Eventually I realized that not a single word of truth had been spoken in my presence. They are all that way.

My first wife (bless her soul, now deceased) was working for Sohio Petroleum. They had one floor filled with file cabinets. There were no computers, yet. A dry hole is written off of their taxes. The files were of all of the "dry holes". They had been written off of their taxes. Naturally they weren't all dry holes. Some were listed as "not commercially viable". That translates to mean that it wouldn't make enough money to interest them. They know where the oil is.

I pass deep high producing wells daily that are siting idle. Why? Over production would destroy the price of oil.

Do you know what the first building east of the governors mansion is? The Interstate Oil and Gas Compact building. Therein agreements are made to insure that overproduction does not happen. There is a good deal of bull crap being spread around about us having reached "peak oil".

Do you want to know how we will know when we really have reached "peak oil" production. When the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact building 'accidentally' catches fire and they collect the insurance on it, you will know peak oil has been reached. It may catch fire for another reason entirely.

Because of global warming we are going to change our ways. All of the carbon we can't sequester we must cease to use. When the rich realize that George Bush was actually bad for them and their Palm Beach home is going to be underwater things will change. Probably we will just move the poor to Palm Beach.

Yes, for once, briefly, I agree with Boone Pickens somewhat. We can not do this forever. We will be bankrupt. Rather than go to Boone's compressed natural gas, not necessarily a bad idea, we should follow the European model. As we speak, 1 of every 20 gallons of diesel sold by Shell Europe is produced from natural gas.

I was told several years ago, perhaps by a oil company liar, that we had enough natural gas in the U.S. to do us for 10,000 years. Frivilously, I suggest that we diddle off a thousand years of this to free us from the foreigners. With the money we save by making ourselves self sufficient, we can then try anything that we can make work. That means solar, that means wind, that means gasified, sequestered, coal, and if NASA were to be able to figure out how to dispose of the waste safely in solar orbit or deep space, we might reconsider fissonables. Sadly, fusion seems elusive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]