Why Do NATO States Commit “Energy Hara Kiri”? Green Zero Carbon Madness. Industrial Collapse?
Global Coal Consumption at Record High – Coal Prices High – China Leads the Way – IEA is established under a United Nations Treaty under Belgian Law Gerry Brady Gerry Brady Publisher and Editor BOOM F
Hi Gerry, It is a curious two speed approach at its best another view one could take is why are western Governments acquiesing to the sabotage of their own energy security policies. I did a long blog tieing together some of my own reading into the metrics of Energy returned on energy invested EROI. And was left wondering why in 2009 the EIA stopped publishing the levelised cost of Oil production "lifting costs" (XLS)Lifting costs (U.S. & foreign) https://www.eia.gov/finance/archive/frsdata/T-18.xlsx Tim Morgans Seeds Falsified? Peak Oil Falsified. The Peak Oil theory refuses to die, it is contradicted by the evidence.
Redistribution of What to who and by which means? Energy is Ubiquitous, yet Value is an abstract concept and there are experiential values which exceed their Energy input where an abstract value, such as a monetary unit is allowed to reflect the Market determined price. The fact is that there are different levels of needs and wants and over an above fundamental survival requirements, Say 2500 Calories a day including embodied energy for Shelter and dietary requirements. What are the absolute bands of energy requirements, how much energy is Wasted and how much-embodied energy can be re-cycled that is currently wasted all have to factor into any ongoing Energy Based Distribution system and energy-based system for determining and energy-based into of account?
What is the problem with having a different type of Currency, why does Destruction of the existing unfit for purpose system have to be taken as read?
There have been successive efforts since the Nixon shock to replace the current international FInance model, that we are moving to a Multi-Polar world seems an inescapable conclusion, with all the potential problems this represents for the Dollar centric hegemony.
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it is always a good maxim but if a new design is called for to replace an obsolete system then everything is on the table.
I personally reject your four-point example and the inevitability of your conclusion Tim.
The world has tremendous potential as does the industrial capacity and also cultural and technological potentials of current technology. Of course, there are fundamental changes which need to be made The single biggest problem is the mispricing inherent in the financialised late-stage capitalism which has morphed already into Fascism, otherwise known as Neo-Liberalism.
Pierre Joseph Proudhon proposed a reform to banking which was quite simply to abolish the private monopoly on the creation of Currency as debt at interest. Peter Kropotkin describes Prouhdond Simple idea and its effect as follows,
https://archive.org/details/PeterKropotkinEntryOnanarchismFromTheEncyclopdiaBritannica/page/n1/mode/2up Now Proudhon advocated a society without government, and used the word Anarchy to describe it. Proudhon repudiated, as is known, all schemes of Communism, according to which mankind would be driven into communistic monasteries or barracks, as also all the schemes of state or state-aided socialism which were advocated by Louis Blanc and the Collectivists. When he proclaimed in his first memoir on property that ” Property is theft,” he meant only property in its present, Roman-law, sense of ” right of use and abuse ” ; in property-rights, on the other hand, understood in the limited sense of possession, he saw the best protection against the encroachments of the state. At the same time he did not want violently to dispossess the present owners of land, dwelling-houses, mines, factories and so on. He preferred to attain the same end by rendering capital incapable of earning interest; and this he proposed to obtain by means of a national bank, based on the mutual confidence of all those who are engaged in production, who would agree to exchange among themselves their produces at cost-value, by means of labour cheques representing the hours of labour required to produce every given commodity. Under such a system, which Proudhon described as ” Mutuellisme,” all the exchanges of services would be strictly equivalent. Besides, such a bank would be enabled to lend money without interest, levying only something like 1 %, or even less, for covering the cost of administration. Every one being thus enabled to borrow the money that would be required to buy a house, nobody would agree to pay any more a yearly rent for the use of it. A general ” social liquidation ” would thus be rendered easy, without violent expropriation. The same applied to mines, railways, factories and so on.
In a society of this type the state would be useless. The chief relations between citizens would be based on free agreement and regulated by mere account keeping. The contests might be settled by arbitration. A penetrating criticism of the state and all possible forms of government, and a deep insight into all economic problems, were well-known characteristics of Proudhon’s work.
CT: You discuss the need for states to ensure consent: the need to pacify, hypnotize and align populations for continued globalization; more precisely, the need to divert attention from the structural violence of economic policies and the actual violence of militarism. Can you say something about how the issue of global warming relates to this?
Hello Peter, I do not dismiss Tims Work I am a passionate advocate both for it and of it. I have a few minor quibbles with Tim regarding presenting of the underlying axioms of Seeds. Economic Prosperity and Surplus energy are Axiomatic my contention is that the Calculus of the Axioms should be calibrated in energy units and not monetary units. Dennis Rancourt is an academic whose work is widely quoted in the WikiSpooks Blog. I know the WikiSpooks people and their Work and that of Dennis is of a very high quality and from very able people, some in surprisingly influential positions others hailing from such establishment backgrounds, now retired. The Interview with Dennis is as set out on the page or screen Peter, the Source is irrelevant, the arguments are what one addresses and not the Per packaged prejudices of where they are published. Colin Todd Hunter ( The Interviewer) is a regular contributor to
Ah Yes Roger, thank you, I did link that but didn’t connect it. My position is clear as I am a supporter of much of Austrian economics as a solution to our present out-of-control fiat system. Although Austrians advocate ‘sound money’ systems I am not a supporter of a return to the gold standard as I think we have moved on in our economic models.
As a knowledgeable commentator I would value your feedback. I am not entirely convinced of Gerry’s solution but I have included it in my book as the best I have to date.
The “Democrats” are tied to global finance and push for a global carbon economy, and global “development”, in the image of their malicious interest. Their deep-state base is the CIA and they excel in media and entertainment-industry control.
The “Republicans” are more tied to the USA domestic-energy sector (such as the exploded shale-oil economy), to the army, and to the armament industry. They are more nationalist in their power centre, more into the extraction and wage-slave-production industries in Latin America and Africa, via USA corporations, and have less use for the UN in their manipulations.
http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/
Heres a starter for ten, Dennis’s second tectonic shift is in my own opinion off-target, As he raises the question My response is to seek out what he puts forward as evidence to support that view. Fast-forward to today: Two global tectonic shifts have and are occurring, which fundamentally threaten the USA/Western ruling elite, in that USA hegemony itself is challenged.
The first global tectonic shift is the continuous rise of Eurasia, economically led by China, with strategic, diplomatic and organizational support from Russia. This coincides with Russian emergence in protecting its national interests in Syria and Venezuela, while offering military technology (S-400 air-defence missile system) that neutralizes USA air dominance, to Turkey and others.
The second global tectonic shift is the increased global abundance of easily extractable fossil-fuel reserves. It turns out that shale-oil is everywhere, as is natural gas; and Chinese coal, not counting secure imports,[8] is plentiful enough to power China, using modern centralized generation and transformation stations, for decades. There is oil and gas in Venezuela, Russia, Syria, Iran… Canada, USA… more places than can easily be controlled to starve competitors, to ensure high prices for preferred producers, and to keep the petro-dollar alive.[6]
Hi Peter, Austrian Economics has several sub-schools, For instance, Schumpeter and Mises have differences not only of degree but of kind, Also Hayek is accepted by some but not all Austrians? What kind of Austrian are you? Wasn’t Adolph Hitler also Austrian? Yes of course he was, so Schact and Fitcsh should also factor into any debate on Austrian Economics which I contest as a School of Economics is widely misunderstood and misrepresented by those who adoipt it as a Political Stance absent the requirement of evidence as much as other Schools of Thought that morph into dogmatism. MMT has its factions also, I like Hudson but think Bill Mitchell is a Zealot hiding in Academic Clothes of pretended Objectivity. https://mises.org/library/mises-and-schumpeter-friendly-rivals This Narrative on The Schumpeter Mises difference of opinion is I contend polish on an actual turd.
Thanks for the link, Roger, and I concur about the ruling elite becoming desperate as their globalist plans are being frustrated. But they are extremely patient having waited a century for their plans of centralised global control to come to fruition.
I equate Sound Money with Austerity and I equate Honest Money with Free markets. WIthout Honest Money, I contend there can not be Free Markets. I do not equate Liberty with sound money but I do equate it with Honest Money, Honest Money as described by John Tomlinson I think gives a good grounding to the principles of money as a Token. Regarding Energy Economics and the inevitability of Boom or Bust when there are positive Interest rates, ( this is the Proudhon Point) I contend that Interest if it is not created when the credit is issued at Interest, will result in the Exponential Armageddon inherent in the exponential function. Proudhon makes his case in this argument with Frederich Bastiat, It repays the reading even though it is quite long. http://praxeology.net/FB-PJP-DOI.htm
15. Taxation comprises three fundamental economic parts:
l Creation of the medium of taxation and issue into the economy
l Distribution of the medium of taxation through the economy
l Collection of the medium of taxation
17. Modern taxation systems are still based around the creation, distribution and collection of tokens, but the tokens now take electronic rather than physical form. These tokens are bookkeeping entries in the banking system. The structure of the taxation system and the economy it controls is determined by the rules under which these electronic bookkeeping tokens are created, distributed and collected. Coins and notes are still issued in small quantity but are subsidiary to the banking system’s bookkeeping entries.
19. “Contemporary governments grant the exclusive power to issue the medium of taxation to a state-sanctioned banking cartel. The banking cartel comprises a central bank and private member banks. The central bank is responsible for price-fixing, information sharing, promoting member interests and preventing member defaults. Serving the public interest is not a primary goal of a central bank. The cartel holds the exclusive power to set the price of and issue the medium of taxation. Governments generally prohibit the issue of alternative media for exchange and mandate payments of taxes only in the cartel-issued medium.”
Conclusion
52. Development of the tax system has been constrained by political reality and driven by the demands of vested interests in finance and real estate. The fundamental principles of tax policy should explicitly incorporate the money system and the welfare system. The tax system is not fit for purpose and is beyond repair. It should be replaced by an efficient, neutral and distortion-free system based around clearly defined recurrent payments from owners of land, immovable property and natural resources based on contract law. Means-tested welfare should be replaced by a Citizens’ Dividend distributing the financial surpluses of government arising from such reforms.
53. The transition to a new, principled tax system should be on an “opt-in” basis where people can choose to permanently leave the old system when they can benefit from so doing. The effect of such a transition would be an rapid and dramatic revival in economic performance without battling political headwinds.
54. The principles outlined here fully meet all the objectives of the OECD tax report and the Mirrlees Review. They meet Smith’s canons of taxation and adhere to orthodox and common heterodox academic analysis. They are comprehensible and achievable.
It seems to me that The importance of Taxing Carbon is being treated as an elephant in the room. Fossil Fuels are hugely important and will remain so for at least the next 50 years or so.
The debate is hampered by the political cowardice of our Elite owned political Class who are incapåable of calling a spade a spade, so much easier to talk in the Semi Religious riddles of Global warming.
Regardless of Global Warming and Environmental issues, it is it seems to be important to be honest about what resources there are and how they are applied
Hi Tim, Conflation is a problem in any complex system, catching the dynamics is very tricky especially the Unknown unknowns. Steve Keen has written a fair bit on Jubilees and helicopter money, worth checking it out. Regarding the IBS, World Bank and IMF etc again a huge subject and much depends on one’s analytic viewpoint, Leitaers Integral Money Paper is well worth looking at in the respect of whose problems exactly we are trying to Solve. Bail Outs, Bail Ins, and SOvereign v Corporate v Private debt. The Growth comes from the Uncreated Interest Bit, Magrit Kennedy and others including Leitaer and Kreutz have all demonstrated this as has Grigon. Embodied energy is a key part of any stock-taking exercise as is the Circular economy, these are resource realities which Seeds needs to factor into its analysis of any future paradigms going forwards as things presently stand Tim, I think seeds, whilst being one of the better approaches in the wild is far to invested in the current FInancial Systems mindset, it will come as no surprise to you that that is my opinion, unusually for me, it is an opinion that has hardened rather than softened in the couple of years I have been reading your work here.
SEEDS has to present its conclusions in financial terms (rather than in energy units) to be relevant to the debate. I believe that it presents a view that is totally different from, and far more meaningful than, the plethora of models based on the ‘flat earth’, false paradigm of ‘the economy is money’.
SEEDS tells us that Western prosperity has long been in decline, and that the same is now about to happen to those EMs (such as China and India) where it hasn’t happened yet. It further indicates that the financial system as we know it now is unlikely to survive efforts at denial over this.
Let’s see which version is right! I’d back SEEDS, which has already predicted Trump, the “Brexit” vote and the ending of growth in China…
@Johndoyle. “Debt is claim,no? You can call it lots of other things, like IOU’s, tokens etc, but it all comes back to there first being a debt.” https://archive.org/stream/AlexanderDelMar/AlexanderDelMar-TheScienceOfMoney1896#page/n7/mode/2up Actually no it does not all come back at first there is a debt. What there is and the condition precedent for trade is a double coincidence of wants, more precisely The requirement to exchange. Money is a rain check which allows delayed consideration if the Money token is created so that it comes from Skin in the Game it does not give rise to the asymmetric risk problems inherent in the Creation of Money with the Debt mentality.
This is not even a semantic point it is a logical point.
The existing system is such that the Debt = Money axiom holds but that is by no means the only way to do Money.
This from Alexander DelMar , who correctly showed that Money as an expression of value was an abstract “Convenient posit” ( See Quine two dogmas). And what its true substantive function is and was back then and has been recognised by people down the ages from Aristotle onwards is a Mere numerical ratio. To express a numerical ratio there is absolutely no reason to insist that any component of debt necessarily exists.
I think you are complicating the fact of money enormously. I cannot decipher the book as its all too small and dark. But I doubt there are many truths there we need to know in this blog. I’ve never heard of the author, not that is germane, but it might be. That there is a desire first is just nit picking. The debt comes into being by virtue of opportunity.It precedes the exchange part of the equation. A double entry book keeping event. ties it all up.
John, I think maybe Stephen Zarlengas the lost science of money might be an easier read although DelMar is one of the Numastatist greats, Zarlenga is a modern counterpart, who develops the work of DelMar into the late 20th and early 21st-century context. https://archive.org/details/StephenZarlengaTheLostScienceOfMoneyScan44Mb/mode/2up
It is true that Money as a phenomenon and its close relations Value and Price are hard to pin down confusing an accounting identity with the function of money in an economy and the special relationship of some forms of money to Debt actually gives a much more complicated story in my own opinion.
WIth SEEDs I think there is a hope to give the Unit of account a dimensionless but immutable metric which will make the measure function of money less corruptable.
The third Writer I have found very good at scraping away the patena of obfuscation surrounding the debt-based money construct is Kreutz.
“He lucidly explains the economic terms and functions that surround money and shows his factual findings in numerous diagrams and graphs, using the example of Germany’s economy since World War II. He then shows the various effects of our monetary system on a vast range of fields including agriculture, social instability, the degradation of the environment, the over-indebtedness of the Third World and a trend toward triggering wars.”
I also highly recommend Carol Quiggleys Tragedy and Hope for the full Geo Political aspects of Money in exchange outside of National or Kinship groups.
Damon Vrabels series from some time back is a very astute description of the present system. The present system of debt bondage is a very good way to excercise authoritarian control over populations whilst scolding them for their own profligacy and imprudence.
I made this reading list for Prof. Richard Murphys Blog, before he banned me for arguing against his position on the Positive Money proposals which he was misrepresenting even though there is a direct dialogue between him and Ben Dyson the founder of Positive money extant on the web in several places.
What I have found in the ten plus years I have been studying this seriously is that the questions have become sharper I started really with Tomlinson and the Michael Journal
https://www.michaeljournal.org/
There are some great documentary films as well I have embedded many of them on this web page.
Cullen Roache’s web site is an excellent critique of MMT, a critique is a subtle analysis of questions arising from a body of knowledge, information or a book. It is not a counter proof or proof against the claims made necessarily but always helps in sharpening questions and defining boundary conditions
This is a massive subject John no one school of thought has all of the answers for all of the use cases, defining the Unit of account in itself is what DelMar is getting at in chapter 2 of the linked book. A last word for Alexander DelMar. ” VALUE IS A NUMERICAL RELATION.
Legał use of the words “ unit of value ”—Their importance—They are not defined in the law—Unit a synonym for measure—Evolution of the word “ value ”—Its classical meaning related to the power of numbers— During the Dark Ages it became associated with labour—In the Renaissance it acquired the meaning of an attribute of matter— Fallacy of this last view—The correct naturę of value rediscovered by Montesquieu and Bastiat—Yalue shown to be a numerical ratio between all exchanged things—Yalue measurable by the whole numbers of money —The existing mint laws practically make the whole numbers of money (or the unit or measure of value) to consist of an indefinite sum, whose only limits fluctuate between illimitable demand and uncertain supply.
The laws of certain States ordain that either one of several different coins weighing so many grains, or of pieces of paper of such a size, each called a pound, a dollar or franc, shall be “ the unit of value Important as they are, neither of these words, “ unit,” or “ value,” is defined in the law. Reasoning from its use in analogous cases, “ unit ” is a synonym for measure; but the meaning of “ value ” is not to be determined by analogy, for there is no analogous use of it in the statutes. When it is remembered that the ablest logicians of all countries, from Aristotle to Mili, have vainly endeavoured to give it form, it will begin to be seen how complex and obscure the naturę of value must be, and therefore in what great uncertainty the statutes have involved all commercial relations, by using, without defining, this intricate term.”
John, I think maybe Stephen Zarlengas the lost science of money might be an easier read although DelMar is one of the Numastatist greats, Zarlenga is a modern counterpart, who develops the work of DelMar into the late 20th and early 21st-century context. https://archive.org/details/StephenZarlengaTheLostScienceOfMoneyScan44Mb/mode/2up
A thoughtful summary of much of the discussion occurring on this site. Also introduces, to me at least, the useful term “apocaloptimism” – a view which I guess I share, that everything is going to hell, but things might yet turn out ok.
This is a complex topic, to put it mildly. But what we are facing is an energy viability crisis, and it links directly to ECoE.
OIl production has for some years been carried by US shale, itself, being non-viable, carried by investors and lenders. I made the (admittedly radical) case here last year that the US has a national interest case for subsidizing shale, from which production could otherwise slump rapidly, because the “drilling treadmill” and ultra-rapid decline rates from individual wells. Similar arguments could be made for oil production more broadly.
On the other hand, RE needs subsidy as well. In the past, wind, solar and other REs have been subsidized. This has ceased to be affordable as take-up has increased. This is why, in 2018, capacity additions were unchanged from 2017, whilst capex was lower in real terms than it had been back in 2011.
These are threats to energy supply, and I would remind you that the IEA and EIA central case numbers show the world needing about 11% more oil and about 32% more gas in 2040 than in 2018, with coal use roughly the same.
So it seems that, unless we subsidize energy supply, there are going to be large and worsening shortfalls. Ultimately, subsidy comes from ‘us’.
An existing example is the UK, where every electricity customer has to pay about £185 annually in a ‘climate change levy’ used to subsidise RE (I believe it pays for just over half of all RE investment in Britain). Because this number is expected to increase, there are debates about transferring it from electricity bills to general taxation.
In this example, the customer is left with £185 less to spend on everything else. This would remain the case if it was funded from taxation instead. This, in microcosm, is ECoE at work. With ECoE at 2%, we have 98% of output to spend on other things, but with ECoE at 8%, that falls to 92%.
Now let me take you back to some SEEDS analysis. Western countries’ prosperity starts falling once ECoE hits 3.5% to 5%. The threshold for less complex EM economies is 8-10%. As ECoE rises, we have to do without other things in order to maintain energy supply – and ‘have to do without other things’ equates to having less prosperity.
.1. Economic cost of energyThe ratio of the monetary cost of energy compared to the GDPgenerated for the same year gives a quantitative index of how muchmoney is invested in energy on average to generate a unit of wealth.This can be calculated by dividing the money required to buy energyby the total gross domestic product. When this ratio is low, typicallyaroundfive percent, economies grow strongly (Hall and Klitgaard,2012). When this ratio is high, about ten percent (and, historically, upto fourteen percent), recessions tend to occur. A sudden climb(followed by a subsequent decline) in the proportion of the GDPspent for energy occurred during the two 1970s and the mid-2008“oil price shocks”(Hall and Cleveland, 1981; Hamilton, 2009; Hall andKlitgaard, 2012). Rapid increases in the economic cost of energy (e.g.fromfive to ten percent) result in the diversion of funds from what istypically devoted to discretionary spending to energy acquisition(Hall and Klitgaard, 2012). Consequently, large changes in energyprices influence economies strongly.
“This relation among oil supplies, prices and the political winds is not new and works both ways. Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter were in office during the economically disastrous increase in the price of oil from less than $4 a barrel in 1972 to more than $35 in 1979. Both lost in their reelection bids.
In 1980 and 1984, Ronald Reagan ran on a platform of “Let’s make America Great again” and “It’s morning again in America,” which coincided with the decline in oil prices during the 1980s. In the U.K., Margaret Thatcher was floundering in popularity in 1980, but then received most of the credit for the remarkable recovery of the U.K. economy. Was it her conservative management style, or the development of the North Sea oil, which occurred on her watch? Now that the North Sea oil boom is over, the U.K. economy is struggling again.
So again the U.S. economy is booming, continuing to grow since the large economic contraction of 2008, which in turn followed the brief but dramatic oil price spike to $140 a barrel that had occurred earlier in that year. There is a significant correlation between energy prices and presidential popularity. While oil price is not the only predictor, it is too often ignored in our personality- and social media-driven world (which, of course, is underwritten by fossil fuels).
Ironically, President Trump’s prospects there are tied in part to American investors being willing to continue to lose money seeking shale oil.”
From the first Hall and Lambert Paper again.
(4)Societal EROI(EROISOC): Societal EROI is the overall EROI that might be derived for all of a nation’s or society’s fuels by summing all gains from fuels and all costs of obtaining them. To our knowledge this calculation has yet to be undertaken because it is difficult, if not impossible, to include all the variables necessary to generate an all-encompassing societal EROI value (Hall et al., 2009). We develop a preliminary method for deriving EROISOCat the national level in another paper in this series (Lambert et al., 2013). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513006447#bib29
Energy, EROI and quality of life Author links open overlay panelJessica G.LambertCharles A.S.HallStephenBaloghAjayGuptaMichelleArnold Abstract The near- and long-term societal effects of declining EROI are uncertain, but probably adverse. A major obstacle to examining social implications of declining EROI is that we do not have adequate empirical understanding of how EROI is linked, directly or indirectly, to an average citizen′s ability to achieve well-being. To evaluate the possible linkages between societal well-being and net energy availability, we compare these preliminary estimates of energy availability: (1) EROI at a societal level, (2) energy use per capita, (3) multiple regression analyses and (4) a new composite energy index (Lambert Energy Index), to select indicators of quality of life (HDI, percent children under weight, health expenditures, Gender Inequality Index, literacy rate and access to improved water). Our results suggest that energy indices are highly correlated with a higher standard of living. We also find a saturation point at which increases in per capita energy availability (greater than 150 GJ) or EROI (above 20:1) are not associated with further improvement to society.
“Our results suggest that energy indices are highly correlated with a higher standard of living. We also find a saturation point at which increases in per capita energy availability (greater than 150 GJ) or EROI (above 20:1) are not associated with further improvement to society.”
We begin our analysis with Kaufmann (in Hall et al., 1986), who derived an explicit method to assess quantitatively the EROI of imported oil (see Eq. (1)). The concept is that the EROI for imported oil depends upon what proportion of the energy content of an imported dollar′s worth of oil is needed to generate a dollar from the export of commodities generated domestically. King (2010) developed a metric similar to Kaufmann′s EROIIO called the energy intensity ratio (EIR) and calculated it for various industrial fuels in the US over time. The results of his 2010 study support his contention that the EIR is able to act as a proxy for the EROI for individual fuels.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/5/4/044006 2.1. EIR of oil and petroleum The EIRp, oil typically lies between 10 and 30, but from 1949 to 2008 it ranges from 7.5 (1981) to 48 (1998) with a value of 8.8 in 2008 marking the year of the highest oil price in history and the beginning of the latest time period of US economic recession. The minimum EIRp, oil of 7.5 in 1981 also coincided with the peak of an economic recession in the US as well as the time of the highest overall cost of petroleum as a percentage of GDP at 8.5% (EIA 2008). EIRe, petro from 1970 to 2006 ranged from 5.3 in 1981 to 15.9 in 1998, the same years for the lowest and highest EIRp, oil. In 1981 EIRp, oil:EIRe, petro was 1.43:1 (minimum) and in 1998 3.05:1 (maximum). The EIRp, oil from 1949 to 1972 gradually increased from 19 to 29 with little volatility in the value. This lack of volatility can possibly be attributed to the Texas Railroad Commission (TRC) acting as an oil cartel by prorationing oil production in Texas from 1935 to 1973 to create a price floor for balancing supply and demand (Prindle 1981). With Texas as the swing state oil producer until US peak production in 1970, this balancing on the price was possible.
Our key findings are 1. Increasing oil production leads to increasing debt.There is a strong and positive relationship between oil production and debt burdens. The more oil a country produces, regardless of oil’s share of the country’s total economy, the more debt it tends to generate. 2. Increasing oil exports leads to increasing debt. There is a strong and positive relationship between oil export dependence and debt burdens. The more dependent on oil exports a country is, the deeper in debt it tends to be. 3. Increasing oil exports improves the ability of developing countries to service their debts. There is a strong and positive relationship between oil exports and debt service. The global oil economy improves the ability of countries to make debt payments, while at the same time increasing their total debt. 4. Increases in oil production predict increases in debt size. Doubling a country’s annual production of crude oil is predicted to increase the size of its total external debt as a share of GDP by 43.2 per cent. Likewise, the same change is predicted to increase a country’s debt service burden by 31per cent. For example, the Nigerian government currently plans to increase oil production by 160% by 2010. Past trends indicate that Nigeria’s debt can thus be expected to increase by 69%, or $21 billion over the next six years. 5. World Bank programs designed to increase Northern private investment in Southern oil production have instead drastically increased debt. Northern multilateral and bilateral “aid” for oil exporting projects in the South has exacerbated, rather than alleviated debt. Specifically, an examination of those countries where the World Bank Group conducted “Petroleum Exploration Promotion Programs” (PEPPs) reveals debt levels (debt-GDP ratios) in those countries that are 19% higher than those countries that did not undergo this form of structural adjustment. 6. The relationship between debt & oil is most likely caused by the interplay in between three factors: a. Structural incentives for and direct investments in the oil industry by multilateral and bilateral institutions, such as the World Bank Group and export credit agencies. b. Oil fueled fiscal folly – both in the North by creditors over eager to lend to nations perceived as oil rich, and in the South by unwise fiscal policies. c. The volatility of the oil market.
Which are the dominant variables in the societal outcomes we observe and which Societal outcomes are we most concerned with?
These are the dynamics which require to be properly understood so that the prosperity potential going forward, with the Energy resources and materials resources which are available and will become available properly audited into out Stocks, the flow of stocks and also where those stocks and flows are directed.
This JP Morgan report is rather good Mountains and Molehills. The Green New Deal mandates zero net emissions for the US by 2030 for the entire energy sector (not just from electricity generation), and does so while phasing out nuclear power and relying heavily on carbon sequestration by forests. This sets a goal that cannot be achieved. At best, the Green New Deal is a slogan to galvanize support for change; at worst, it’s a sign of how little work its proponents have done. This year’s paper gets into the details of where energy comes from, how it’s used, and the de-carbonization challenges facing the world’s industrialized and emerging economies. Additional topics include the latest research on wildfi res, and Trump’s War on Science.
There is every reason to doubt the BBC’äs report on the new report, The BBC and Roger Harribin are alarmist extremists, there’s no sugar-coating that pill or indeed the same conclusion of Mr Monbiot at the Guardian. Jamie Dimons Report last Spring (2019)
Mark Carney and Michael Bloomberg are photographed at the top of the news page of The Producers of the report the BBC are dishonestly referring to as JPMorgan, the group is independent of JPM apparently. That the Central Banking cartel is pushing carbon credits and a carbon-based taxation/Debt system to replace the current Broken system is undoubted, This is Green Washing, Clive Spash is the go-to on the impossible contradictions engendered in this new elitist fix to keep the rest of humanity in debt bondage.
My understanding – though I’d welcome correction or further information – is that trees don’t start absorbing carbon until they are 30 years old. So a tree planted now won’t do this until 2050. Yet tree-planting seems to be every industry’s “get out of gaol free” card.
As well as tree-planting, airlines seem to think that biofuels will help save their bacon – which might make sense if we didn’t (a) have 7.5 billion mouths to feed, and (b) already face water shortages.
I suspect that, long before 2050, the only “frequent fliers” will be birds.
John, Money represents an IOU. When I refer to Debt-based money I refer to money created at interest without the Interest component, this story and my use of the phrase Debt-based money is told in letters parable of the 11th round.
A credit-based money of commerce is very different to a Debt based money of commerce and the use of Tims all money is a claim is a good starting point.
The second question that arises is that of asymmetric risk or skin in the game.
It’s arguable that there is also something that we might call “notional money”.
For instance, “the US stock market is valued at $xxxx trillion”. Well, it isn’t, in the sense that it could somehow be sold for that sum. Apple, Amazon, etc is “worth” X amount – fine, but does anyone actually have the X amount (in money) to buy the company?
Likewise, “the UK housing stock is worth £8 trillion” – again, meaningless, especially since the only people to whom it could be sold are the same people to whom it already belongs (and, even if so minded, they couldn’t lay their hands on £8 trillion).
A lost century in economics: Three theories of banking and the conclusive evidence
How do banks operate and where does the money supply come from? The financial crisis has heightened awareness that these questions have been unduly ne…
This thread on Twitter has Professor Richard Werner, In my opinion, the leading expert on Money and Finance in the world and Author of the Prices of the Yen.
My understanding – though I’d welcome correction or further information – is that trees don’t start absorbing carbon until they are 30 years old. So a tree planted now won’t do this until 2050. Yet tree-planting seems to be every industry’s “get out of gaol free” card.
Where did you get this idea from Tim, It makes no sense. Trees Synthesise many minerals from the ground but also Carbon from the air, the more Carbon there is in the Air the less water plants need in general.
Thanks – I still find it hard to imagine saplings absorbing much carbon. Fortunately, I have a family member who recently took an honours First in environmental sciences, so I’ll ask his views.
What constitutes happiness is pretty much a constant, as it is rooted in our biological nature: good shelter, appropriate clothing, abundant food, satisfying status and lots of mating opportunities.
There is not much more to human beings than that – we should not delude ourselves – as creatures within the eco-system, and this is the base once short-lived mass consumerism, and industrialism, have died.
A better, wiser, more far-sighted, human race is simply not going to emerge from all of this.
This may seem pessimistic: I at least do not see it as such, merely transparent reality.
But, on the whole, humans do nor care to see themselves as they really are: we have daily proof of that, and the whole of history and pre-history to show it.
“Much of this can be difficult to come to terms with. The idea that money is simply created out of thin air is alien to our way of thinking. I doubt this is accidental. My feeling is we’re schooled this way deliberately so our thoughts won’t stray towards grasping the true nature of the society imposed upon us. I have read the suggestion from (Professor Henry C. K. Liu) that when this gets properly understood it’ll be as significant as grasping that the Earth isn’t flat or that it goes around the sun.
I agree. I think the true dark ages are those we’re living in now.
Hi Tim, A reader has asked me this question: “……For instance, why do you assume the energy cost for china to mine its coals energy resources is increasing?”
There are challenges transitioning from Oil to other fuels and also rather a lot of work to do on fuel cells. That said Materials Technology has transformed production capabilities and also many old Technologies have also been repurposed using 21st Century Materials. Take Stirling engines just for starters. Take Heat Batteries and Heat pumps as another example. Seeds Tim is based upon one variable and that is the Energy cost of Energy as per the experience of the past 100 years. It is a massive assumption on the part of anyone to take the past 100 years as an indication of what the next 100 years has in store. The Transition to the future, I am in the agreement, will take place over the next 50 years How it will look I have no idea I also know that it is not all bad news. Bjorn Lomberg on the other perspective.
Yes,totally agree. The firepower of petrol is epic.I recall a Tv program 30 years ago that used a mortar to compare gunpowder with petrol The teaspoon of gunpowder shot a coke can just out the barrel onto the ground. The teaspoon of petrol sent the can off out of sight something like 200 metres. away!!! It was actually hilarious to see.
That really shows what our future will be like without the embodied energy of petroleum to serve us as it does today.
