The Coming Energy Wars

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: flyhigh2525 @ 06/01/2008 9:13:37 PM

    It may become a reality, but this and other articles on others' websites to this nature seem to be a form of fearmongering. I know the question has to be brought up since the West is not ready and oil has hit 135/bbl, maybe getting up to 150/bbl soon, but seriously, every day you can see an article like this and it's getting old already. It will stink (an understatement I know) for a while, but there are a lot of smart people in this world that will be able to figure something out to solve this (alternatives). Our government (and other governments) are so deep in red tape and each politician is deep in their own agendas that nothing will happen soon, but there is someone in this world that has figured something out. Look at Brazil, they are using their sugar cane to create ethanol; our goverment is failing us on this issue (and on many others).

  • Posted By: C. MacLean @ 06/01/2008 5:55:06 PM

    "...oil is a finite resource, more people want more of it, and the profligacy with which we've used it is going to change..."

    Gee, that sounds familiar. Didn't Jimmy Carter warn us about this back in the 1970's? The Aytollah knew exactly who his enemy was back then - and it sure wasn't Reagan.

    Our chickens are coming home to roost, and we have only ourselves and our greed to blame.

    And did we really think starting a war with an oil-producing nation WASN'T going to destabilize oil markets? Come on. We put a Texas oilman in the White House - this was completely and totally predictable.

    IT'S THE OIL, STUPID!!!

    • Posted By: careyman @ 06/01/2008 8:45:48 PM

      Not much to say except - there is plenty of oil if we were allowed to find it. The only finite resource in the world is people that say dumb things - like 'it's the oil, stupid' and 'the sky is falling'.

  • Posted By: careyman @ 06/01/2008 8:42:29 PM

    Irresponsible journalism. What a way to make headlines.
    Try encouraging the US government to quit the independence on oil through conservation, building a few more refineries, some nuclear energy, open up new oil fields (they are out there you know!) - we could solve our own problems at home if we would all get together and work on it.

  • Posted By: stumblein @ 06/01/2008 8:40:38 PM

    Oil companies are not grilled about the high price of oil, they are grilled about their rediculous profits. Big difference!

  • Posted By: fedupwiththenews @ 06/01/2008 8:27:28 PM

    Another case of some pinhead in the media trying to cause panic. Why can't there be some honest reporting somewhere? I realize MSNBC is the wrong place to ask this but come on!

  • Posted By: jlane @ 06/01/2008 3:57:37 PM

    What a bunch of far left junk!,! 25%, with conservation? Not in the real world. What fuel are you smoking. Get out of the way and let us drill to energy independance. That is progress. Ask your self, what do we do after we conserve the last drop? Answer Freeze, don't drive, don't progress.

  • Posted By: Crimsonbladefighter @ 06/01/2008 2:57:19 PM

    I love American media.

    "Oooooh scary oil autocrats! Look at all the conflicts that happen in oil countries! Oooooh scary!"

    Of course they don't have any intellectual honesty to make the comments that US interests have been playing in all three of those parts of the world, and they make the laughable comment that "they often give rise to corruption."

    Corruption?? You mean like how the United States and BP have been raping Venezuela for 98 cents of every oil dollar that comes out of there? Please. Newsweek could do much better to either have some honesty in their reporting to concede that American interests have been chasing oil and exacerbating most of the so called "conflicts" in oil rich nations.

    Also, they mention the "specter of inflation". If you can waste the time to go and speak to the sheep economists, you could at least ask one more who would explain to you that we already are experiencing inflation as the dollar is still sitting near its all time low, and the value of the dollar in world terms is miniscule. A weak dollar leads to increased prices increases in commodities. That's the textbook definition of inflation.

    You could go one step further and ask why the dollar is weak, and you could see that our massive deficit spending for military bases around the world, as well as a war in an oil-rich country, which although the massive public opinion of the populace is that our presence there is destabilizing, we refuse to leave.

    So if you want oil to slow its increase and help stabilize the dollar, stop our deficit spending, and clamp down on the Federal Reserve's bailout of the financial sector. Pretty simple really.

  • Posted By: Crimsonbladefighter @ 06/01/2008 2:56:37 PM

    I love American media.

    "Oooooh scary oil autocrats! Look at all the conflicts that happen in oil countries! Oooooh scary!"

    Of course they don't have any intellectual honesty to make the comments that US interests have been playing in all three of those parts of the world, and they make the laughable comment that "they often give rise to corruption."

    Corruption?? You mean like how the United States and BP have been raping Venezuela for 98 cents of every oil dollar that comes out of there? Please. Newsweek could do much better to either have some honesty in their reporting to concede that American interests have been chasing oil and exacerbating most of the so called "conflicts" in oil rich nations.

    Also, they mention the "specter of inflation". If you can waste the time to go and speak to the sheep economists, you could at least ask one more who would explain to you that we already are experiencing inflation as the dollar is still sitting near its all time low, and the value of the dollar in world terms is miniscule. A weak dollar leads to increased prices increases in commodities. That's the textbook definition of inflation.

    You could go one step further and ask why the dollar is weak, and you could see that our massive deficit spending for military bases around the world, as well as a war in an oil-rich country, which although the massive public opinion of the populace is that our presence there is destabilizing, we refuse to leave.

    So if you want oil to slow its increase and help stabilize the dollar, stop our deficit spending, and clamp down on the Federal Reserve's bailout of the financial sector. Pretty simple really.

  • Posted By: funkdome @ 06/01/2008 1:43:17 PM

    "There's a fuel that's cheap, clean and readily available, and it's called conservation," says West.

    ------------------

    Most inane statement of the year.

  • Posted By: james_cannon @ 06/01/2008 12:37:06 PM

    If countries are subsidizing their oil consumption, we should do the same, by imposing a 100% import tariff to subsidize our oil consumption. Free trade does not work in an unequal playing field. Is equality an American value, if yes, we need to have form follow function. Why are we subsidizing the oil consumption of other countries at the expense of the American consumer?

  • Posted By: james_cannon @ 06/01/2008 12:35:16 PM

    If countries are subsidizing their oil consumption, we should do the same, by imposing a 100% import tariff to subsidize our oil consumption. Free trade does not work in an unequal playing field. Is equality an American value, if yes, we need to have form follow function. Why are we subsidizing the oil consumption of other countries at the expense of the American consumer?

  • Posted By: Vincenzo @ 06/01/2008 12:23:14 PM

    Is there a relation between oil prices and agricultural aids? Is reconcile time?

  • Posted By: wylieman101 @ 06/01/2008 12:05:06 PM

    This piece was well written. This is why we need a big change in Washington. This oil criss we are in is more inportant then our space program. We must set a bold strategice GOAL of reducing our dependence on oil NOW. We need new leaders not only in Washington but in our corporations as well. Doing business as usual is no longer acceptable.

  • Posted By: craino @ 06/01/2008 12:04:14 PM

    (While some optimists believe the windfall could bring the Middle East into the modern world if it's smartly invested, that's a big if). ACTUALLY No if,me as Saudi man, and my country is is one of largest oil producer, i know for sure all this wealth will go back to US and western countries by weapons deals full with corruption as our usual.we are suffering in here by imported inflation caused by high oil price.

  • Posted By: hawkg @ 06/01/2008 10:39:37 AM

    What if we took all the money spent in Iraq and invested it in mass transportation for every major city in this country? Not only would we *not* need the oil required from Iraw but we would have produced thousands of those highly needed blue collar construction jobs we're losing every day!

    • Posted By: Braes @ 06/01/2008 11:54:44 AM

      Yes, and other transportation changes. We got hosed on the war. To abuse Lincoln, it seems you can't steal all of the people's oil all the time either.

  • Posted By: randel101 @ 06/01/2008 11:00:44 AM

    I have seen gas prices at $0.18 a gallon at the local corner gas station in the U.S. At that time you would get your car swept out, the tires checked, the oil and radiator checked, and the windows cleaned while your tank was being filled. When your drove out of the station your aslo had a glass, coffee cup, or dish given to you for your patronage. At that time (Circa 1961) I was making $0.75 an hour working in one of those service stations. My used car (5 yrs. old) cost me $300.00 when I bought it, it was a 1956 Oldsmobile that got 18 MPG and burned leaded hi-octane gasoline. With an 18 gallon fuel tank it would cost me about $3.25 for a complete fill up. That cost per week equaled about 11% of my total income. Needless to say there were times then when I walked rather than drove because I just didn't have enough money to put gas in my car.
    Now I'm living on a social security income due to age and physical limitations. I own a diesel truck that gets 17 MPG on a good day and the fuel for that is now around $4.65 a gallon. It now costs me about 48% of my income to operate that vehicle at the same level as it did in 1960. Beleive me when I say I feel the difference. However, to keep things in relative perspective prior to my relying on a social security income the adjusted fuel to income cost to operate my vehicle had actually decreased to less than 5%.
    Why has there not been an attempt to put the actual cost of a gallon of gas in the proper prospective. The real question is what percentage of your income does it take to operate your vehicle, provide power to your home, and pay for the transportation costs of the goods you consume compared to yesterday, last week, last year, or even 10, 20, or even 30 years ago. Only armed with that kind of information will we be able to sort out the hype and B.S. from the reality of things.

    • Posted By: Braes @ 06/01/2008 11:49:10 AM

      I remember price wars too. I learned to drive in a 62 Cutlass. Two door hardtop, two tone. Bias-Ply tires that squeal when looked at. No handling, awesome power, lap belts and a dashboard St. Christopher.
      We had it good.

  • Posted By: josh-levin @ 06/01/2008 11:47:25 AM

    Here is a quote from a friend of President Kennedy's\:
    "It would indeed be a tragedy if the history of the human race proved to be nothing more than the story of an ape playing with a box of matches on a petrol dump."
    ??? William David Ormsby-Gore, 5th Baron Harlech, British diplomat (1918???1985)

  • Posted By: Jastor00 @ 06/01/2008 11:37:16 AM

    I am flabbergasted at the utter stupidity of this comment in the article: "There's a fuel that's cheap, clean and readily available, and it's called conservation"

    Is he for real? "Conservation" is not scalable, does not grow with global demand, and doesn't actually PRODUCE anything. Demand will inevitably, and probably very quickly, out-pace any gains realized by conservation efforts. One shiny spot in the article is the concept of a retrenching from globalization. I'd like to add one more thing policy makers could start to do, and that's ignore the environmentalist agenda and open ANWR, allow more drilling offshore in the Gulf, build more refineries, build more nuclear plants, and protect the interests of the American people.

  • Posted By: solar max @ 06/01/2008 10:23:55 AM

    Lets not forget to blame GW and Cheney and the neo cons for some of this coming struggle. Unjust war in Iraq helped to shut off a major spigot to the world and keeps Middle East tensions sky high. Its all been calculated to make the rich & powerful oil barons in the USA richer, but has hurt so many innocent people world wide. Just the kind of thing NAZI supporting Prescott Bush would heve been proud of. Seems to be backfiring in any sustainable way. The NeoCons will never keep the White House this fall, thanks to Bush/Cheney's well known record of corruption. No one wants McCain to give us more "Bush Lite". I think the US political system favors the corrupt and wealthy more than fair play and is getting worse. DC is a deception riddled cesspool crawling with PAC influence peddling and many Karl Rove types. We are all paying for their dropping the collective ball iof responsible government. I don't think God wants us to destroy our own environment to get cheap and plentiful energy. That thinking is foolish and short sighted. We are to be responsible stewards of this planet and that means using our brains wisely. Greed should never figure into any government's policies. Dishonesty should always be punished. But politics is a lot like poker.
    All Christian Conservatives should realize that God created the Spotted Owl, too. Shouldn't it be HIS decision to nurture these owls or allow them to go extinct? Mankind should not be an instrument of wanton destruction of Nature for its own greedy selfish ends. Nothing seems to go to waste in Mother Nature and nature's been humming along just fine for millions of years. Maybe mankind should follow Nature's example, which always seems to be a wise step. Going GREEN is good. Oil is bad. Solar, wind, smart engineering are GOOD. Perhaps education should be America's top five priority. We could all stand to be smarter. Maybe we'll pick better, more trustworthy leaders, then.......

  • Posted By: Chuck M @ 06/01/2008 9:45:39 AM

    One must wonder if the sudden extreme price in oil is a result of the upcoming elections, either to influence them or to take advantage prior? But if the greed of the past prevails the barons are not foolish, and prices will come down as the threat of alternatives becomes more prevalent, i.e. hybrids. Ultimately I beleive the money makers want to maintain control and rediculous prices over the long term will threaten that.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse