Skip to content

Peak Oil Matters

A fresh perspective on the concept of peak oil and the challenges we face

Archive

Archive for June, 2013

 

 

 

 

 

An observation worth noting … and pondering, from Jen Alic.

Overall, Americans are being misled about the nature of their dependency. Too much focus on removing the ‘foreign’ element in the foreign oil dependence equation is skewing the larger picture: Independence can only be achieved by tackling dependency on oil itself, not on the origins of oil.

For all the euphoria about the United States being poised to become the world’s leading oil producer in just a few years, the occasional harshness of reality suggests it might be wise to ponder at least a few considerations.

The tight oil/tar sands prospects sound good, play well to an audience eager for some signs that future energy woes have now been consigned to the trash heaps, and are an appealing story for the media to sell. Who doesn’t want good news about our energy future, given that any semblance of prosperity going forward will happen only if we first have supplies in place to make it all happen?

Any legitimate authority studying energy supplies and coming down on the side of “Problems Ahead” would love to be wrong! Who wants major transitions in lifestyles–especially if they’re forced upon us all? Not an appealing story to tell.

But if we are going to properly prepare ourselves for the future—personally, economically, politically, and commercially—we need to have the correct information.

And so for all that hype about our “vast” unconventional fossil fuel resources just waiting to be unleashed on consumers everywhere, we need to recognize that those supplies will be available to us only if oil prices remain high—which creates its own set of problems. Furthermore, unconventional resources and the Magic Technology Fairy are unfortunately subject to the same laws of physics as every other resource. Unconventional resources cost more to extract and refine; they are more difficult to access; they are generally of inferior quality; the wells drilled have an annoying habit of depleting quite rapidly, and drilling wells in the first instance isn’t cheap … and guess who pays?

Planning for a very long future extending well beyond your lifetime and mine requires a bit of foresight, understanding, and more than a bit of reflection to take into account facts and reality. If that future is assumed to be one fueled by the same energy sources we’ve relied upon for a century or two, we’re going to be creating a whole new set of problems for ourselves and our children.

Probably not the wisest strategy….We still have choices.

~ My Photo: Santa Barbara, CA Feb. 2007

 Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

 Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

 

080411 042

 

 

 

 

 

I began the first post in this series with this observation: “Some day (soon, I hope) audiences for whom peak oil denial nonsense is intended will ask themselves: what are the reasons—and supporting evidence—for these kinds of assertions?

Contributors to Forbes in particular seem intent on peddling a sliver of truth wrapped with a generous supply of disingenuous propositions.* Why they do so remains the puzzle, and I still don’t know which is worse: that they write about issues which they truly do not understand; or they do understand but aren’t particularly interested in sharing information that conflicts with ideology—truth, facts, or consequences to the public be damned….

I’ll point out a few examples in this post. More to follow, unfortunately.

This Is Important … Why?

With U.S. oil imports hitting a 17-year low, the mainstream media has awoken to the fact that, as I pointed out three years ago, peak oil is not happening anytime soon.  Charles Mann’s excellent cover story in this month’s Atlantic, “What If We Never Run Out Of Oil [citation in original]” focuses on an obscure, though potentially vast source of energy: methane hydrates, or crystalline natural gas trapped below the seabed. If early exploration ventures by Japan and other countries, succeed, this gas ‘could free not just Japan but much of the world from the dependence on Middle Eastern oil that has bedeviled politicians since Churchill’s day.’ [1]

Nothing like counting on a healthy dose of if-could-might-perhaps-possibly-someday.

This assertion would be true, of course, because the transition to the use of “obscure, though potentially vast” methane hydrates shouldn’t take much more than what … 7 – 10 days? No doubt this same Forbes contributor intended the observations to be supported by his subsequent comment: “Often, as in the case of the 21st century oil and gas boom, imaginative tinkering can be more fruitful than reinvention or laboratory R&D.”

Tinkering Our Way To Salvation

After all, who needs knowledge or science when we have the possibility that engineers might perhaps tinker successfully? I’m sure they’ll have the whole methane hydrate extraction, conversion, utilization, delivery, testing, affordability, expertise, infrastructure re-engineering inconveniences successfully tinkered in full by late afternoon, or tomorrow morning at the latest. Did I mention financing?

Chris Nelder, whose work I’ve frequently cited, is one of those annoying people holding the ridiculous notion that facts and evidence actually matter! Context is apparently important to people like Chris. Can you imagine? He is almost never satisfied with just accepting exuberant statements about fossil fuel supply from the likes of Forbes contributors.

A Shock Wave Of Arithmetic

No, Chris has to get all “reality” on us, and it really ruins a lot of uplifting work by those who see no reason to waste time with facts. Here’s his take on the above-referenced Charles Mann article:

If Mann’s data on methane hydrates is correct, then Japan’s experiment so far has taken 10 years and $700 million to produce four million cubic feet of gas, which is worth about $16,000 at today’s U.S. gas prices, or about $50,000 at today’s prices for imported LNG in Japan. At this point, it is an enormously expensive experimental pilot project, and nothing more. We do not yet know when it might be able to recover commercial volumes of gas, or at what rate, or at what price. We have no reason to believe that if commercial quantities are recoverable by 2018 as Japan hopes–which seems incredibly optimistic–that the price of that gas will be competitive with imported LNG. [2]

I’ll admit to being curious as to how another Forbes contributor, diligently ridiculing a thoughtful discussion on related topics, squares Chris’s math with this comment:

The utter lack of logic, context, or knowledge about how decisions about capital allocation are made within these companies, as we detailed in this piece [citation in original] a few weeks ago, is almost breathtaking. [3]

My math skills haven’t improved since my last post, but ten years; $700 million; maximum return of $50,000 = about seven one-hundred-thousandths of a percent return. Retirement fund, here we come! Perhaps my handy-dandy calculator isn’t working properly, but spending $700 million over ten years to get $50,000 seems to suggest an utter lack of logic, context, or knowledge about how decisions about capital allocation are made.

Breathtaking….

* A noteable exception is this terrific piece by Stephen Leeb

~ My Photo: Sunset at Eastern Point, Gloucester, MA – 08.04.11

Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

Sources:

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/pikeresearch/2013/05/12/old-technology-fuels-new-energy-boom/; Old Technology Fuels New Energy Boom by Richard Martin – 05.12.13
[2] http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/print/2013/05/are-methane-hydrates-really-going-to-change-geopolitics/275275/; Are Methane Hydrates Really Going to Change Geopolitics? by Chris Nelder – May 2013
[3] http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/05/13/the-illogic-and-folly-of-peak-oil-or-is-it-peak-gas-alarmism/; The Illogic And Folly Of Peak Oil (Or Is It Peak Gas?) Alarmism by David Blackmon – 05.13.13

 

 

 

 

An observation worth noting … and pondering, from Chris Nelder.

[T]here is no intellectually honest way to believe that the world can continue its
near-total reliance on fossil fuels for much more than another decade — a paltry window of opportunity. We also know that we cannot wait until they go into decline before reaching for renewables and efficiency, simply because the scale of the challenge is so vast, and the alternatives are starting from such a low level that they will need decades of investment before they are ready to assume the load. The data is clear, and the mathematics are really quite straightforward.
The hard truth is that there are no good fuel substitutes anymore. Throughout human history, we have always been able to find not just a substitute fuel, but a better one: a cheaper, denser, more abundant one. That is simply no longer the case. One may hope for some miraculous technological breakthrough, and one may simply have faith that the invisible hand will solve our problems, but such thin threads are hardly a reasonable basis for policymaking and forecasting.

The truth about alternative sources—and especially the great wonders of tight oil and the tar sands and oil shale out West—continues to be much different than the fanciful “might possibly,” “could potentially,” and their half-truth, disingenuous brethren touted by those with a vested interest in keeping oil production first in line at the profit trough.

What’s being developed, admirable as the technology and ingenuity are, simply will not be enough. The message can be no simpler or straightforward. It’s the Peak Oil bottom line.

We’re just about at the end of the (relatively) easily accessible, (tolerably) affordable, and energy-dense supplies of the conventional oil resources which have powered us all for more than 150 years. What’s “available” does not share those important attributes. They are inferior by almost any measure, and in a world where billions seek to join us in sharing the magnificent technological marvels of modern-day living, we just are not going to have enough of what we all need and/or demand.

Worse still, every day that our nitwit leaders decide that investments in public transportation, education, smart growth, and renewable energy sources should be relegated to the sidelines in favor of their one-note energy policy of Drill More, Everywhere is one less day we’ll all have to plan for and implement what we can only hope will be an efficient transition away from our dependency on the marvelous but finite conventional oil resources.

Still trying to figure out why shooting ourselves in the foot is such a good idea.

~ My Photo: Niebaum-Coppola Winery, Napa Valley, CA – 09.03.04

 Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

 Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

01330035

 

 

 

 

 

Tiresome….

Some day (soon, I hope) audiences for whom peak oil denial nonsense is intended will ask themselves: what are the reasons—and supporting evidence—for these kinds of assertions?

Good to have dreams, I say.

(While they’re at it, audiences can also ask the same re: NRA-paranoid crazy statements and the idiotic pronouncements on a wide range of topics routinely offered by a growing number of painfully clueless right-wing pols—all of whom are diligently competing with one another for the title of Congressional Moron of the Year. Issa and Gohmert are running neck and neck. But I digress.)

Browsing through some recent articles by those for whom facts and context continue to remain elusive concepts, I came across some creative variations on the theme of denying we have any problems with our fossil fuel supplies. It’s nice to have something different to dismantle.

But fact-and context-free nonsense is still nonsense. This first post in the series offers up a sampling. There’s so much more, sad to say.

Shock Wave

It was of course comforting to see some old friends like the unquantifiable but really cool-sounding “awash in hydrocarbons” and the ever-optimistic-let-no-facts-get-in-the-way “potentially vast” (which some spoil-sports will surely contradict with their opposing assessment: “probably not very much” and then add evidence in support—damn them), but this was my favorite: “a shock wave of new oil supply.”

I have no idea what that means or how one quantifies a shock wave of oil, but I’m guessing it’s gotta be at least a few hundred barrels. Minimum!

As often seems the case, we apparently still have the possibility of potential new possibilities which may possibly happen at some point in the future. This is so even if nothing within a country mile of a fact is part of the prediction. The good news is brought to us by deniers who have added clairvoyance to their arsenal (my comments within the bold/italic [[ ]] ):

Oil Supply Nostradamus

[T]he next phase of technology will almost certainly focus on how to better store, transport, and distribute the abundant supplies of natural gas now becoming available [1]

[[ Almost certainly! Let’s not trouble ourselves with any understanding about accessing “abundant supplies,” either—the kind where fact is used to dispute or support. ]]

The reality is that, in just a few years, we may live in a world where fresh water is no longer widely used in hydraulic fracturing operations. [2]

[[ How about even a hint of a fact suggesting this is even a remote possibility? “We may live….” Seriously? And just how are we measuring/defining “widely used?” ]]

Squeezing oil out of shale is expensive business. If the global price drops below the high cost of producing shale oil, then drillers stop squeezing and go out of business. Overall, though, happy days will be here again for the oil industry. [3]

[[ Sure hope he didn’t tear his ACL on that pivot from a brief visit to Factville back to “Happy-Days-Are-Here-Again Land” ]]

I’m just getting warmed up, but I’ll leave you with this:

Oil Industry Cheerleading

Defending to the high heavens the goodness of the fracking industry’s heart and how deeply committed all participants are to disclosing the chemical contents used in fracking, the same author offered these comments:

In addition, the ‘shale-gas industry’ funded and worked with the Groundwater Protection Council to establish FracFocus.org, the voluntary disclosure website where, as of this writing, the chemical content of 42,709 hydraulic frac jobs has been disclosed. Third, the author talks about hydraulic fracturing as if it is something new, when in fact it has been in use by the oil and natural gas industry since 1949, encompassing well over 1.2 million frac jobs in the intervening 64 years.  (I’ll address FracFocus.org in an upcoming post, along with the 60-plus years claim.)

Cheerleading Meets Math

I suck at math, but my handy-dandy calculator tells me that disclosing the chemical content of 42,709 frac jobs from a pool of 1.2 million means the industry has demonstrated its deep, deep concerns three-hundredths of one per cent of the time. No need to worry, citizens of the world, so let’s party! [Let’s not forget that the industry’s version/definition tends to differ from the one used by rest of us.]

If the commentary described in this series is any indication (discussed in many other posts of mine—see the “Denial” category in the Sidebar—and those offered by others), three-hundredths of one per cent appears to be the going rate for truthful, fact-filled, context-supplied statements by the fossil fuel industry’s media shills.

Good thing energy supply doesn’t matter all that much.

~ My Photo: Crystal Cove State Park, CA – Sept 2008

Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
– Look for my new website coming soon

Sources:

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/pikeresearch/2013/05/12/old-technology-fuels-new-energy-boom/; Old Technology Fuels New Energy Boom by Richard Martin – 05.12.13
[2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/05/13/the-illogic-and-folly-of-peak-oil-or-is-it-peak-gas-alarmism/; The Illogic And Folly Of Peak Oil (Or Is It Peak Gas?) Alarmism by David Blackmon – 05.13.13
[3] http://www.green-energy-news.com/arch/nrgs2013/20130047.html; THE COMING DELUGE OF OIL by Bruce Mulliken – 05.20.13

IMGP3092

 

 

 

 

 

An observation worth noting … and pondering, from James Greenberger:

The real energy crisis is neither a geologic crisis nor a strategic crisis.  The real energy crisis is a slow growth crisis.  Although the oil industry has figured out a way technologically to recover large quantities of unconventional oil, the cost of doing so will be staggering.  Conventional oil, which may cost $4-6 per barrel to lift out of a Saudi Arabian well, may cost more than $100 per barrel to lift out deep water deposits off the coast of Brazil.  And the lift costs will only go up, as each barrel of oil becomes progressively more difficult and expensive to recover.
The result is a hyper-inflation of energy costs, as the fixed, structural cost of petroleum spirals ever higher.  As more and more resources must be invested in petroleum production, fewer and fewer resources will be available for other productive parts of the economy.
In ordinary markets, the market self-corrects by incenting substitution for a high priced commodity.  But the petroleum market is no ordinary market.  The energy needs of the transportation sector are almost entirely dependent upon petroleum; no easy substitutes are available.  As a consequence, as petroleum costs hyper inflate, the economy will slow as consumers compensate by using less energy.  This lowers demand for oil, which depresses its price, which in turn slows investment in alternate fuel technologies.

It seems fairly obvious, doesn’t it? The “surge” in oil production and the imminent arrival of “energy independence” touted by industry spokespeople rarely includes any discussion of this vital component to energy production and what that means for all of us.

For all the benefits of magic technology and human ingenuity as repeated endlessly from Page One of the denier’s playbook, we don’t have the surge in production from tight oil and in shale gas if prices aren’t high enough to justify the investments by fossil fuel industry. If there aren’t reasonable expectations of profits, no company out of the goodness of its corporate heart is going to be fracking anything or anywhere.

There is another end to that same stick: high prices justifying increased investments are also high prices to consumers. Sliding past that explanation serves the industry’s purposes, but the same comprehensive explanation of all factors lacking in other aspects of this great production increase seems MIA here as well.

At some point, we’re going to have to collectively make some determinations about where we allocate financial and production resources as we decide what kind of energy policy we will need this century and beyond. In order to do so, citizens need all facts and a better understanding of what’s involved and what is at stake.

As I have insisted in numerous posts, the public bears responsibility for educating themselves. But if key sources of information conveniently omit important parts of the story, citizens cannot make informed decisions. That only leads to more problems down the road.

I still think there are better strategies to pursue.

~ My Photo: The Florida Everglades – 03.02.12

 Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

 Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

111_1189

 

 

 

 

 

An observation worth noting … and pondering, from the International Energy Agency:

…pre-planning is essential in order for transport demand restraint measures to succeed during an emergency. It is not enough for countries to have a list of measures to use; they must be ready to implement those measures on very short notice. To do this, they generally must develop detailed plans and make certain investments ahead of time. Communicating this plan to the public also appears very important; if the public is not well informed of plans ahead of time, and supportive of them, they may be less likely to cooperate and do their part to help the plans succeed during an emergency. Strong support and cooperation from the business community is also essential. In general, providing clear information to the public – that the public can trust – seems to be an important element of any plan. [1]

It’s been a consistent theme of mine that the impacts of Peak Oil will extend to all segments of our society—social and industrial.

Peak Oil is not an event that’s going to happen at a designated yet undetermined point in time. It will become the foundational energy aspect of our lives. Given how much we depend on fossil fuels—crude oil in particular—it borders on the insane to ignore the many facts suggesting an endless change in the energy source we’ve collectively relied upon for well over a century. Oil plays a prominent role in the supply, manufacture, distribution, and transportation of almost every product or service we rely upon at home, at work, in our communities, in our industries, and in the technologically astounding lifestyles we’ve created for ourselves.

The easily accessible, reasonably affordable, high-quality crude oil we’ve utilized in countless ways through the magnificent displays of our technological prowess and ingenuity has been on a plateau of production since the middle of the last decade. We’re now resorting to costlier, more energy-sucking, inferior quality, harder to access substitutes.

For all the Happy Talk about the vast this or that potential, the numbers do not add up. We’re not going to be able to seamlessly transition everything from crude oil to unconventional substitutes.

The public continues to be underserved by fanciful claims which artfully skate around the facts which cast a long shadow over their exuberant claims of energy independence and a worry-free energy future.

Business leaders don’t blindly open themselves to new markets; professional coaches don’t just show up for the next game; and families don’t wake up every morning and just wing it from start to finish. Each of them and countless others making plans for whatever endeavors they are about to undertake—consequential or not—do not succeed without first relying on facts at hand. Plans are meaningless without them.

Peak Oil will be high on the list of “Consequential” undertakings, given the wide swath it will carve through all our lives. Not having accurate and complete information makes it a wee bit difficult for individuals, companies, teams, local governments, state officials, national organizations, and our federal government to consider viable—any—options. That’s not a strategy. But so far, that’s all we’ve got.

We’re better than that.

~ My Photo: Newport Beach, CA – 02.12.06

 Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

 Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

Source:

[1] www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/savingoil.pdf; Saving Oil in a Hurry, 2005 report – p. 15

IMGP3731

 

 

 

 

 

An observation worth noting … and pondering, from Richard Embleton:

We don’t like bad news, particularly when it has very long term implications. Individually and collectively we tend to slip into denial mode, focus on diversions, become numbed to the reality of the situation, cling to anyone willing to assure us it just ain’t so, that things are going to get better. You can’t live your life in crisis mode.
We have, in recent decades, turned this into a political institution; the denial industry. The primary objective of the denial industry is not clarity but rather to create confusion and conflict in the minds of the public by creating the impression that there are legitimate differences of opinion between experts and scientists. It is a strategy honed and perfected around the issue of smoking, a strategy they have continued to use, often with the same players, on issue after issue and now dominating the debate over global warming and peak oil.

Why?

When more than ninety-five percent of the world’s climate scientists in their various fields tell us that climate change is going to be an overwhelming problem, and that our own actions—blameless or otherwise—are the primary causes, why do some nonetheless insist on sowing misinformation, half-truths, or worse?

Why is a question that continues to fascinate me. Political conversations exhibiting this sad phenomenon abound. Climate change may be worse, if that’s possible. Peak Oil provides even more examples of the high art of cherry-picking some approximation of partial truths in order to protect a narrative serving only the few at the expense of the many.

Why? What happened to integrity? What happened to reliance on facts, truth, reality? It’s as if we’ve become so invested in making sure that the reality we contend with is laden with nothing but positive messages that we’ve abandoned our gifts of rationale contemplation. Ten doctors tell us we have a broken arm and must get proper treatment immediately, a plumber wanders in to tell us it’s a hang nail best cured by drinking a glass of tomato juice, and we can’t run to the grocery store fast enough! Hello!

As Mr. Embleton added: “With the growth in accessible information through the media, the internet, cell phones and more, people have abandoned seeking answers to their questions through independent thought and instead turn to various media for those answers. They have abdicated to others the right to tell them how and what they should think, to define truth.”

Can we take a collective breath, look at what the great preponderance of pleasant and unpleasant facts are telling us about climate and energy supplies, and then assume some greater level of responsibility for speaking up and taking charge of our own well-being rather than continuing to rely on leaders whose vested interests diverge sharply from our own? Who benefits when industry officials tell us all is well with our supplies of oil despite a mountain of evidence suggesting otherwise—evidence they curiously neglect to discuss with us?

When we’ve exhausted our ability to ignore simple truths and are left to contend with some rather daunting challenges to Life as We’ve Known It, what will we do?

Wouldn’t it make more sense to invest at least a small measure of time and an equally undemanding portion of our great talents and capabilities to start making some plans and engaging in meaningful conversations? It’s not that difficult to get all the facts, not just a select few which sound good and which only a few seconds of contemplation tell us that only a few are being served.

~ My Photo: Good Harbor Beach sunset at low tide – 09.16.12

Looking Left and Right:
Inspiring Different Ideas,
Envisioning Better Tomorrows

Peak Oil Matters is dedicated to informing others about the significance and impact of Peak Oil—while adding observations about politics, ideology, transportation, and smart growth. (Sarcasm at no charge).
            – Look for my new website coming soon

I’m passing along some useful/informative Peak Oil-related articles of note [and some political ones, too, which in one way or another will have considerable bearing on what we do and don’t do as Peak Oil makes its presence felt], all of which crossed my desk during the prior month … in case you missed them!

Enjoy.

~ ~ ~

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/02/the-morning-plum-the-one-quote-that-says-it-all-about-obama-and-the-gop/

Greg Sargent
05.02.13
The Morning Plum: The one quote that says it all about Obama and the GOP

~ ~ ~

http://earlywarn.blogspot.com/2013/04/oil-supply-and-demand-to-2025.html

Stuart Staniford
04.30.13
Oil Supply and Demand to 2025

~ ~ ~

http://ourfiniteworld.com/2013/04/30/reaching-oil-limits-new-paradigms-are-needed/

Gail Tverberg
04.30.13
Reaching Oil Limits – New Paradigms Are Needed

~ ~ ~

http://truth-out.org/news/item/16111-sand-land-fracking-industry-mining-iowas-iconic-sand-bluffs-in-new-form-of-mountaintop-removal

Steve Horn & Trisha Marczak
05.01.13
Sand Land: Fracking Industry Mining Iowa’s Iconic Sand Bluffs in New Form of Mountaintop Removal

~ ~ ~

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175695/tomgram%3A_ellen_cantarow%2C_big_energy_means_big_pollution

Ellen Cantarow
05.02.13
Big Energy Means Big Pollution
and
The Downwinders: Fracking Ourselves to Death in Pennsylvania

~ ~ ~

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/02/why-its-difficult-for-obama-to-beat-the-gop/

Jamelle Bouie
05.02.13
Why it’s difficult for Obama to “beat” the GOP

~ ~ ~

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/01/rise_of_the_conservative_revolutionaries

David Sirota
05.01.13
Rise of the conservative recvolutionaries

~ ~ ~

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/10/gop_boycott_of_epa_head_reaffirms_senate_is_archaic_embarrassment/

Alex Pareene
05.10.13
GOP Cabinet boycott reaffirms Senate is archaic embarrassment

~ ~ ~

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/print/2013/05/are-methane-hydrates-really-going-to-change-geopolitics/275275/

Chris Nelder
May 2013
Are Methane Hydrates Really Going to Change Geopolitics?

~ ~ ~

http://patzek-lifeitself.blogspot.co.uk

Tad Patzek
05.12.13
What If There Is Peak Oil?

~ ~ ~

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/is-the-n-r-a-un-american/

Stanley Fish
05.13.13
Is the N.R.A. Un-American?

~ ~ ~

http://www.peakprosperity.com/blog/81839/obama-administrations-natural-gas-policy-tragically-misguided

Chris Martenson
05.09.13
The Obama Administration’s Natural Gas Policy Is Tragically Misguided

~ ~ ~

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/05/28-3

Jacob Chamberlain
05.28.13
Think Fracking Is Bad? Wait Until You Hear about the Gas Industry’s “Acid Jobs”

~ ~ ~

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/05/30/2076751/exxon-ceo-what-good-is-it-to-save-the-planet-if-humanity-suffers/

Ryan Koronowski & Joe Romm
05.30.13
Exxon CEO: ‘What Good Is It To Save The Planet If Humanity Suffers?’

~ ~ ~

http://blogs.law.widener.edu/climate/2013/05/30/the-agenda-21-disinformation-campaign-in-the-united-states-an-ethical-critique-of-an-attack-on-sustainability/

Donald A. Brown
05.30.13
The Agenda 21 Disinformation Campaign in the United States: An Ethical Critique of an Attack on Sustainability

~ ~ ~

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/16688-too-juvenile-to-govern

Eugene Robinson
05.31.13
Too Juvenile to Govern

~ ~ ~

http://thetyee.ca/News/2013/05/22/Difficult-Oil/

Andrew Nikiforuk
05.22.13
Difficult Truths about ‘Difficult Oil’

~ ~ ~