«-- Letter Re: Walking Blood Banks and Interceptor Body Armor | Main | Jim's Quote of the Day: --»
Rethinking Global Oil Reserves by Michael Z. Williamson
Ah, oil. It's close in everyone's minds because we rely on it absolutely.
It fuels our vehicles, some houses, provides lubricants, is used
for all our plastics and in many industrial applications.
The first major factor in the chain is surveying and drilling of crude.
As recently made the news, a massive reserve in the Gulf of Mexico
has increased our domestic supply by 50%. There are also newer technologies
coming on board for extracting oil from tougher resources (Shales,
sands, deep wells, from under permafrost) and also manufacturing oil
from organic waste, in a process called Thermodepolymerization (TDP).
The TDP process also adds support to newer theories that oil and other
hydrocarbons are produced in an ongoing process, and are not just fossil.
Certainly we're all aware of methane production in compost and the
slimy, tarry "oil" that results from rotting animal carcasses.
The fact is that most of the oil fields that had a "20 year supply" in
1970 still have a "20 year supply" today. Of course, that
only addresses the current demand and does not account for future increases
in demand.
I have extracted the following info and summarized, from the
US Energy Information Administration. I should also credit
an article by Dr. Robert Metzger, a fellow science fiction writer and
PhD in Electrical Engineering from UCLA, who has worked for both Georgia
Tech
and Hughes
Labs.
Of the 400 million barrels of crude used in March 2006, 240 million
barrels, 40%, were domestic production. Other sources were:
Canada, 70 million barrels
Mexico 56 million barrels
Venezuela 47 million barrels
Saudi Arabia 42 million barrels
Nigeria 37 million barrels
Angola 16 million barrels
Iraq 15 million barrels
Algeria 13 million barrels
UK 9 million barrels
Kuwait, Qatar, UAE (combined) 3 million barrels
First, this gives lie to the claims that the Iraq War is about oil.
Only 9% of our oil comes from the Middle East, and 2/3 of that is Saudi
oil. If it was really about oil, we'd be better off invading Nigeria
(or annexing Mexico as a state, but I digress.) Chavez in Venezuela,
however, can have great impact over one of our closer and larger suppliers.
Europe and Asia depend much more on Middle Eastern oil than we do,
and a shift of that small percentage can indeed affect prices at our
end--again, reference the Gulf find, which will not be in production
for months or years, created a public perception of relief that has
brought pump prices down by 35% around here.
Once the oil is here, we run into the first critical issue--refinery
capacity. Increasing government standards have made oil refining one
of the most complex and least profitable businesses in the US. We are
chronically and acutely short of refineries, and they are a prime target
for terrorism or military attack. It didn't help that there are large
terminals and refineries near the Louisiana and the Texas coast, subject
to further hurricanes and civil unrest.
Then we come to one of the key factors in chaotic price changes--formulation
standards set in place in the late 1990s. In an effort to reduce vapor
and exhaust emissions, precise formulation standards were put in place
that are based on climate and altitude. If San Francisco runs short
of gas, they can't just transfer from suppliers in the Central Valley--it's
illegal to use that fuel in that fashion. Obviously, this can result
in massive regional jumps, which affect public perception elsewhere,
and do allow local stations to feed on panic. Around here, I've seen
a 25 cent difference per gallon in a ten mile radius. (One advantage
of a 35 gallon tank is being able to wait for a price drop.)
Obviously, in the wake of a massive disaster, it is reasonable, practical
and obvious that such standards should be tossed and gasoline taken
where needed. This was done somewhat after Katrina. But will it be
reasonable, practical and obvious to a future government, particularly
one with "green" leanings? A healthy dose of cynicism is
the survivalist's friend here.
Electricity by and large is produced by coal, and coal is something
we possess in almost ludicrous quantities by comparison to most nations.
But coal, tremendously more energy-efficient than oil, cannot fuel
vehicles, and is much harder to convert to lubricants and plastics.
That latter is one of our biggest uses of oil. Everything from vinyl
siding to blister packs for medication is made from oil. Expect that
to change (as fast food containers are now cardboard instead of styrofoam)
because of both landfill considerations and materials cost. Most people
don't even think of the fact that their new computer cable is plastic
insulation and fittings in a plastic package with oil-derived inks
on the slip of paper inside. Plastic, nylon and other polymers were
a large part of the fuel bunker in the World Trade Center fires. Like
any other petroleum product (or ANY organic product), heat it up and
it
burns.
We depend
on plastic as much as fuel oil, and anything that affects the oil supply
also affects the cost of plastics, paints, packaging as well as transport.
This has to be taken into consideration when planning for economic
disasters.
Obviously, trite as it sounds, we can "all do our part" by
recycling anything we can. It's cheaper to reuse materials than refine
new ones, and a good survival minded person should not be throwing
out steel, aluminum, brass that can be used for generating income or
as raw materials, or plastic bags and such that can be used for storage,
waterproofing or recycled to reduce the burden. Long term, however,
alternatives will have to be found to keep our society working. How
many of us would find it harder to survive without plastic trash bags,
duct tape, spray lubricant in a can and solvents?
Most of Europe is already paying $6 a gallon for gas, and their governments
have turned a deaf ear to complaints in wake of the profit made in
taxes. While it won't destroy our society to pay that much, I'm sure
we can all see what effect it would have on travel, disposable income
and other aspects of the economy. Creeping socialism attacks both supply
and demand with taxes and controls that hinder business and reduce
efficiency. A heck of a lot to think about when filling the tank, isn't
it?
