Saturday, July 30, 2005
THE FALLACY OF PEAK OIL
* * * * * * * * * *
From The Center for an Informed America we read:
Steve
ourfutureworld.blogspot.com
* * * * * * * * * *
From The Center for an Informed America we read:
On June 21, the Los Angeles Times ran a story that the ever-growing 'Peak Oil' crowd seems to have missed. The article concerned the Shell oil refinery in Bakersfield, California that is scheduled to be shut down on October 1 -- despite the fact that the state of California (and the nation as a whole) is already woefully lacking in refinery capacity.
Now why do you suppose that Shell would want to close a perfectly good oil refinery? It can't be because there is no market for the goods produced there, since that obviously isn't the case. And it isn't due to a lack of raw materials, since the refinery sits, as the Times noted, atop "prolific oil fields." The Scotsman recently explained just how prolific those fields are:
The best estimates in 1942 indicated that the Kern River field in California had just 54 million barrels of remaining oil. By 1986, the field had produced 736 million barrels, and estimates put the remaining reserves at 970 million barrels. (http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=578462004)
Of course, just because there is a strong demand for a product, and a ready source of raw materials with which to produce that product, does not mean that any corporate entity is obligated to bring that product to market. In the corporate world, the only thing that ever matters is the "bottom line," because corporations exist for one purpose only: to generate profits. So the only question, I suppose, that really matters, is: can the refining of gasoline and diesel fuel at this particular facility generate profits for the corporation?
One would naturally assume, given Shell's decision to close the refinery, that the answer to that question is "no." But that would be an entirely wrong assumption, since the truth is, as L.A. Times reporters discovered when they got their hands on internal company documents, that the refinery is wildly profitable. How wildly profitable? The Bakersfield plant's "profit of $11 million in May [2004] was 57 times what the company projected and more than double what it made in all of 2003." (Elizabeth Douglas "Shell to Cut Summer Output at Bakersfield Refinery, Papers Say," Los Angeles Times, June 21, 2004)
Go ahead and read that again: "more than double what it made in all of 2003." In a single month! And 2003 wasn't exactly what you would call a slow year at the Bakersfield refinery. According to Shell documents obtained by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, "Bakersfield's refining margin at $23.01 per barrel, or about 55 cents profit per gallon, topped all of Shell's refineries in the nation."
(http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=114-04062004)
Let's pause briefly here to review the situation, shall we? There is a product (gasoline) that is in great demand, and that will always be in great demand, since the product has what economists like to call an "inelastic" demand curve; for many months now, that product has been selling for record-breaking prices, especially in the state of California, and there is no indication that that situation will change anytime soon; there are abundant local resources with which to produce that coveted product; and, finally, there is a ridiculously profitable facility that is ideally located to manufacture and market that product.
Given that situation, what response would we normally expect from that facility's parent corporation? Sit back and let the good times roll? Attempt to increase production at the facility and rake in even greater profits? Sell the facility and make a windfall profit? Or, tossing logic and rationality to the wind, shut the facility down and walk away?
That last one, of course, is what Shell has chosen to do. And this story, believe it or not, gets even better:
The internal documents obtained by the Times, including a refinery output forecast, indicate that Bakersfield will soon be producing far less than its capacity. After relatively high output rates in May and early June, Shell plans to cut crude oil processing about 6% in July and another 6% in August, according to the forecast. Those two months are when California's fuel demand reaches annual peak levels.
Aamir Farid, the general manager of the Bakersfield refinery, was asked the reason for the plan to reduce output at the time of peak demand. Farid claimed that he was not aware of any such plan, but he added that if there was such a plan, "there is a good reason for it." However, he also added that, "off the top of my head, I don't know what that good reason is."
And why would he? Certainly the manager of the refinery can't be expected to know why his facility is planning to dramatically reduce output, can he? The best explanation that Farid could come up with was to speculate that there "could be maintenance planned or projections for a shortfall of crude." Neither of those scenarios are very plausible, however.
Bakersfield, whose suburbs include Oildale and Oil Junction, won't likely be facing a shortfall of crude anytime soon. And as for the notion of planned maintenance, I doubt that anyone actually believes that Shell plans to perform two months worth of maintenance work on a facility that will be permanently shuttered just one month after that work is completed.
To be fair, I suppose it could be the case that Shell, being the benevolent giant that it is, wants to get the place in tip-top shape for the new owners -- except that there are no new owners, primarily because "Shell didn't search out potential buyers for the refinery once it decided to shutter it." Indeed, Shell actively avoided finding a buyer for the plant (which became a fully-owned Shell asset just three short years ago), since any new owner would probably object to the bulldozers and wrecking balls that Shell plans to bring in just as soon as the refinery's doors have closed. ("FTCR uncovered a timetable showing decommissioning and demolition are set to begin immediately after the refinery's shut down date." http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=114-04062004)
Can any of you 'Peak Oil' boosters out there think of any legitimate reason why a purely profit-driven corporation would acquire an outrageously profitable asset and then proceed to deliberately destroy that asset? ... because I have to tell you, I have been struggling to come up with an explanation on my own and the only one that I've got so far is that the corporation might be involved in some kind of conspiracy to manufacture an artificial shortage of a crucial commodity. I know that 'Peak Oil' theory holds that we don't need the refinery capacity because, you know, we're running out of oil and all, but that doesn't explain why a tremendously profitable refinery isn't being kept in operation at least until all the local wells have run dry, does it?
Shell will, by the way, continue to operate its Martinez, California refinery -- for now at least. The Martinez facility is also wildly profitable, showing a "net profit of $34 million in May." That tidy profit was, as it turns out, "just shy of Shell's profit expectations at Martinez for all of 2004." Strangely enough, the Martinez facility, like the one in Bakersfield, "cut crude processing in July, by nearly 10%, a reduction attributed to planned heavy maintenance."
It's always a good idea, I suppose, to schedule heavy maintenance work during times of peak energy demand. That's the kind of intelligent business decision we would expect from a corporate giant with decades of experience in the energy business.
On July 8, the LA Times, armed with yet more internal company documents and an unnamed company whistleblower, revisited the story of the Bakersfield refinery. As of July 1, it was discovered, Shell had "reduced crude oil processing at the refinery to levels 19% below capacity" -- more than triple the unexplained reduction that had been planned for the facility.
(Elizabeth Douglas "FTC Probing Shell's Plan to Shut Refinery," Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2004)
According to both company documents and the unnamed employee, "there were no problems with the plant's equipment," and no other explanation was offered for the radical reduction in processing -- undoubtedly because there is no legitimate reason for the decreased output. So obvious is the company's intent to artificially tighten gasoline and diesel supplies that the FTC was obliged, for the sake of appearances, to step in and pretend to launch an investigation. Shell's response to the investigation has been to delay the closing of the refinery for a few months while it goes through the motions of pretending to find a buyer.
In completely unrelated news, a July 31 LA Times report announced that "profit at ChevronTexaco Corp. more than doubled during the second quarter ... echo[ing] the strong quarterly results reported by other major U.S. oil refiners this week." ChevronTexaco's profit jumped from $1.6 billion to $4.1 billion. Not too shabby. Three days later, the Times reported that Unocal's earnings for that same quarter had nearly doubled, from $177 million to $341 million.
(Debora Vrana "Chevron Profit Soars," Los Angeles Times, July 31, 2004, and Julie Tamaki "Unocal's Earnings Nearly Double," Los Angeles Times, August 3, 2004)
Nobody should conclude from any of this, of course, that inflated fuel prices are attributable to rampant greed and the quest for obscene profits. No, clearly rising fuel prices are a sign of 'Peak Oil.' Just ask Mike Ruppert and Mark Robinowitz. Or better yet, bypass the flunkies and go directly to the scriptwriters at Halliburton and the Club of Rome.
Steve
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
WHO BENEFITS?
The burning of the German Reichstag facilitated Hitler's rise to power, while Roosevelt's conscious efforts to bring about the bombing of Pearl Harbor made it possible for him to overcome public opposition to entering World War II.
Just as 9/11 in New York galvanized public opinion to support the invasion of Afghanistan which the administration had planned two years earlier, the London subway bombing will remove public opposition to the new British national ID card.
These are examples of the Hegelian Dialectic put to use to benefit the state at the expense of personal liberty and property rights.
The Problem Reaction Solution Paradigm (The Hegelian Dialectic)
1) The government creates or exploits a problem blaming it on others.
2) The people react by asking the government for help willing to give up their rights.
3) The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.
Similarities
Steve
EPILOGUE
"Then I wanted to know the true meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others and most terrifying, with its iron teeth and bronze claws-the beast that crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. I also wanted to know about the ten horns on its head and about the other horn that came up, before which three of them fell-the horn that looked more imposing than the others and that had eyes and a mouth that spoke boastfully. As I watched, this horn was waging war against the saints and defeating them, until the
Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom." Daniel 7:19-22 NIV.
"He gave me this explanation: 'The fourth beast is the fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws. The saints will be handed over to him for a time, times and a half time. (Or for a year, two years and a half year). But the court will sit and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever.'" Daniel 7:23-26 NIV.
"In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and soveriegn power; all peoples, nations, and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed." Daniel 7: 13-15 NIV.
May our Lord keep you in the palm of his hand.
"Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you," declares the Lord. Jeremiah 1:8 NIV(2).
This article may be reproduced WITHOUT CHANGE and in its entirety for non-commercial and non-political purposes.ourfutureworld.blogspot.com
END NOTES
(1)NAZI GERMANYS WAR ON TERRORISM,
Cloak & Dagger(http://www.declarepeace.org.uk/captain/
murder_inc/Reichstag.htm)
(2)Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers.
The burning of the German Reichstag facilitated Hitler's rise to power, while Roosevelt's conscious efforts to bring about the bombing of Pearl Harbor made it possible for him to overcome public opposition to entering World War II.
Just as 9/11 in New York galvanized public opinion to support the invasion of Afghanistan which the administration had planned two years earlier, the London subway bombing will remove public opposition to the new British national ID card.
These are examples of the Hegelian Dialectic put to use to benefit the state at the expense of personal liberty and property rights.
The Problem Reaction Solution Paradigm (The Hegelian Dialectic)
1) The government creates or exploits a problem blaming it on others.
2) The people react by asking the government for help willing to give up their rights.
3) The government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.
Hitler used the 1933 burning of the Reichstag (Parliament) building by a deranged Dutchman to declare a "war on terrorism," and establish his legitimacy as a leader (even though he hadn't won a majority in the previous election).
"You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in history," he proclaimed, standing in front of the burned-out building, surrounded by national media. "This fire," he said, his voice trembling with emotion, "is the beginning." He used the occasion "a sign from God," he called it to declare an all-out war on terrorism and its ideological sponsors, a people, he said, who traced their origins to the Middle East and found motivation for their "evil" deeds in their religion.
Two weeks later, the first prison for terrorists was built in Oranianberg, holding the first suspected allies of the infamous terrorist. In a national outburst of patriotism, the nations flag was everywhere, even printed in newspapers suitable for display.
Within four weeks of the terrorist attack, the nations now-popular leader had pushed through legislation, in the name of combating terrorism and fighting the philosophy he said spawned it, that suspended constitutional guarantees of free speech, privacy, and habeas corpus. Police could now intercept mail and wiretap phones; suspected terrorists could be imprisoned without specific charges and without access to their lawyers; police could sneak into peoples homes without warrants if the cases involved terrorism.
To get his patriotic "Decree on the Protection of People and State" passed over the objections of concerned legislators and civil libertarians, he agreed to put a 4-year sunset provision on it: if the national emergency provoked by the terrorist attack on the Reichstag building was over by then, the freedoms and rights would be returned to the people, and the police agencies would be re-restrained.
Within the first months after that terrorist attack, at the suggestion of a political advisor, he brought a formerly obscure word into common usage. Instead of referring to the nation by its name, he began to refer to it as The Fatherland. As hoped, peoples hearts swelled with pride, and the beginning of an us-versus-them mentality was sewn. Our land was "the" homeland, citizens thought: all others were simply foreign lands.
Within a year of the terrorist attack, Hitlers advisors determined that the various local police and federal agencies around the nation were lacking the clear communication and overall coordinated administration necessary to deal with the terrorist threat facing the nation, including those citizens who were of Middle Eastern ancestry and thus probably terrorist sympathizers. He proposed a single new national agency to protect the security of the Fatherland, consolidating the actions of dozens of previously independent police, border, and investigative agencies under a single powerful leader.
Most Americans remember his Office of Fatherland Security, known as the Reichssicherheitshauptamt and Schutzstaffel, simply by its most famous agency's initials: the SS.(1)
Steve
"Then I wanted to know the true meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others and most terrifying, with its iron teeth and bronze claws-the beast that crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. I also wanted to know about the ten horns on its head and about the other horn that came up, before which three of them fell-the horn that looked more imposing than the others and that had eyes and a mouth that spoke boastfully. As I watched, this horn was waging war against the saints and defeating them, until the
Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom." Daniel 7:19-22 NIV.
"He gave me this explanation: 'The fourth beast is the fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws. The saints will be handed over to him for a time, times and a half time. (Or for a year, two years and a half year). But the court will sit and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever.'" Daniel 7:23-26 NIV.
"In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and soveriegn power; all peoples, nations, and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed." Daniel 7: 13-15 NIV.
May our Lord keep you in the palm of his hand.
"Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you," declares the Lord. Jeremiah 1:8 NIV(2).
This article may be reproduced WITHOUT CHANGE and in its entirety for non-commercial and non-political purposes.ourfutureworld.blogspot.com
(1)NAZI GERMANYS WAR ON TERRORISM,
Cloak & Dagger(http://www.declarepeace.org.uk/captain/
murder_inc/Reichstag.htm)
(2)Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Bible Publishers.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
A few links to get you started.
Intel analyst: Attack on U.S. imminent
Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S.
Terrorists, bombs smuggled across Mexico border by MS-13 gangsters
ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE EXPECTS ALL-OUT REGIONAL WAR IN 2006 WHILE KEY KABBALIST PRIESTS ARE ANNOUNCING THEIR EXPECTATIONS OF THE JEWISH MESSIAH IN 2006
What's Behind the London Attacks?
The bombing of the London Underground was a false-flag operation designed to keep the West mired in war. Don't believe otherwise
Steve
A few links to get you started.
Intel analyst: Attack on U.S. imminent
Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S.
Terrorists, bombs smuggled across Mexico border by MS-13 gangsters
ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE EXPECTS ALL-OUT REGIONAL WAR IN 2006 WHILE KEY KABBALIST PRIESTS ARE ANNOUNCING THEIR EXPECTATIONS OF THE JEWISH MESSIAH IN 2006
What's Behind the London Attacks?
The bombing of the London Underground was a false-flag operation designed to keep the West mired in war. Don't believe otherwise
Steve
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Public statements by the major news broadcast networks in the United States claimed throughout the day that the British police had not been aware of any threats to London. However two original news stories tell quite a different tale.
Netanyahu Changed Plans Due to Warning
"JERUSALEM - British police told the Israeli Embassy in London minutes before Thursday's explosions that they had received warnings of possible terror attacks in the city, a senior Israeli official said.
Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had planned to attend an economic conference in a hotel over the subway stop where one of the blasts occurred, and the warning prompted him to stay in his hotel room instead, government officials said."(1)
Another source:
"(IsraelNN.com) Army Radio quoting unconfirmed reliable sources reported a short time ago that Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred.
The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address and economic summit."(2)
Of course even as we have been bombarded by total news media coverage all day these early reports detailing warnings of the attacks are being scrubbed from wire services, while security agencies are going into safe mode.
That this could be a "false flag operation", ie an operation conducted by a government against it's own population perpetrated by unco-opted forces unpenetrated by British Intelligence is not given the light of day by the major news media.
It has been done before. Witness the German Reichstag fire Hitler blamed on the Communists to justify a cause for consolidating his power.
Does the London incident fit into the neoconservatives rule-by-spiraling chaos theory?
"The Secret Organization of al Qaeda in Europe" has claimed responsibility, yet another "previously unknown" group. The forbidden knowledge that al Qaeda was subcontracted by Britain's MI6 and paid £100,000 in 1996 for an assassination attempt upon Muammar Qaddafi is unlikely to be heard now over Blair's statement "They hate us for our freedoms."
Now let's look at the date since it may give us a few clues as did 911.
The Date: 07/07/2005. If we add the 2 in 2005 to the 5 in 2005 we obtain a triple 7 ie 7/7/7. What is it's significance? To the average Joe numbers may not mean much but to the occultist every event is staged "by the numbers". 777 is the title of Aleister Crowley's celebrated volume of Qabalistic teachings.
Here's a few more numbers of interest:
It has been 1394 days since 911 occurred. 483 days since the Madrid bombing. 1394 -483= 911.
Some time ago a crazy dream came to me.
I dreamt I was walkin' into World War Three - Bob Dylan
From Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State:
"Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will pledge with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government."(3)
Steve
This article may be reproduced WITHOUT CHANGE and in its entirety for non-commercial and non-political purposes.ourfutureworld.blogspot.com
(1) Amy Teibel, Associated Press, Netanyahu Changed Plans Due to Warning, July 7, 2005. (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050707/ap_on_re_mi_ea/
israel_britain_explosions_1)
(2) Arutz Sheva-IsraelNationalNews.com, Report: Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast, July 7, 2005. (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=85346)
(3)Henry Kissinger in an address to the Bilderberg Group at Evian, France, May 21, 1992. in Black Helicopters II, The Endgame Strategy, by Jim Keith, IllumiNet Press, Lilburn, GA, 1997, Foreward.
