Good Morning Middle America, Your King of Simple News is on the air.
U.S. News: Oil climbed above $135 this morning and seems to have legs to go further. Is the cause for the spike the high oil company profits that the presidential candidates are screaming about? No, the presidential candidates are world champion fabricators searching for a distraction form the truth.
So if not high profits, is it the shrinking dollar that is driving the oil price skyward? Nah, the devaluation of the dollar has some influence, but not much. So it must be the speculators that Wall Street talks about huh? No, not that either, speculators couldn’t speculate long if no one paid the asking price for oil.
The legendary oil man T. Boone Pickens put it nicely yesterday when he explained that daily demand for crude is more than 2,000,000 barrels higher than production. He also explained that world production has peaked. Uh-oh, it’s that darn economics 101 in play again.
Just a tid-bit of information that you may find useful; King George went to Saudi Arabia and asked them to turn up the juice a little. The Prince for all practical purposes told the King that, “She won’t take no more captain, we’re doing all she’ll stand.” Besides, the U.S. uses more oil per day, than the entire nation of Saudi Arabia produces!
My opinion is that nothing short of a world recession could significantly lower the price of crude. And, should there actually be a deep world recession; the price of crude may be well down on your list of concerns.
What I’m saying is that the world is running out of oil and we have no plan “B” for that coming event. As the imbalance in supply and demand increases…well lets say affordability will become an issue of great concern to motor home drivers.
Not being able to afford oil, is the same as not having oil. And, that will be the fate of many Americans, which fate will follow the standard practice of rising from the bottom up. When our poorest people can’t afford fuel for a motor scooter, our more affluent will be taking shorter trips to Europe on their private jets.
Running out of oil is a terrible thought that I’m thinkin’ few have ever thought. Am I correct?One of those TV lawyers that offer to fight for your rights may influence manmade law, but they don’t have much influence on the “big guy” when it comes to universal law.
I know what some of you are thinking… “Technology will come up with a new fuel, so why worry?” We don’t pave roads and make plastic with technology, we pave roads and make plastic with oil. Technology is simply a tool to make things work better, not a substitute for natural resources. “Well Bill, we’re out of concrete, what say we pour this floor with technology?”
The American geophysicist, Marion King Hubbert had this to say, “We are not in the position we were in 1929-30 with regard to the future. Then the physical system was ready to roll. This time it’s not. We are in a crisis in the evolution of human society. It’s unique to both human and geologic history. It has never happened before and it can’t possibly happen again. You can only use oil once.”
On June 4th, 1974 Hubbert testified before Representative Morris K. Udall’s Subcommittee on the Environment. He stated “during the last two centuries of unbroken industrial growth we have evolved what amounts to an exponential-growth culture. Our institutions, our legal system, our financial system, and our most cherished folkways and beliefs are all based upon the premise of continuing growth, Since physical and biological constraints make it impossible to continue such rates of growth indefinitely, it is inevitable that with the slowing down in the rates of physical growth cultural adjustments must be made.”
So what did Morris K. Udall have to say? ,–”this inflation that we are all so concerned about now may not necessarily be mismanagement of the economy or some temporary problems necessarily, but may be built into this whole problem of exponential growth in terms of the population and use of resources, and so on. Is that what you are saying?”
And the good Dr. Hubbert answered, “It has been going on, the record is unequivocal, since 1910, disregarding the disturbance of World War I.”
So….Congress admittedly knew we had a problem in 1974? Coining the phrase from the good Dr. Hubbert, “the record is unequivocal.”
www.kingofsimple.com
Mike Folkerth is the author of "The Biggest Lie Ever Believed" and is not your run-of-the-mill author of finance and economics.
The former real estate broker, developer, private real estate fund manager, auctioneer, Alaskan bush pilot, restaurateur, U.S. Navy veteran, heavy equipment operator, taxi cab driver, fishing guide, horse packer and few jobs too embarrassing to mention, writes from experience and plain common sense.
Mike's humorous systems of "Mikeronomics" and "Mikemathics" drastically simplify the economic and mathematic formulas commonly used by very smart, but terribly sheltered individuals.
Yes there is the technology to get rid of oil as a fuel
If, twenty years ago when first found to be viable, we had moved towards alternative energy technologies instead of suppressing them, then there would be no problems like this today... And no war in Iraq.
Brown's Gas / HHO (Hydrogen and Oxygen disassociated from water cheaply) is the most promising candidate for an oil substitute in the short term. The hydroxy mixture can be burned in existing internal combustion engines, is created on-demand at low pressures on-board a vehicle from water, and produces zero emissions. With no high-pressure tanks needed, it is as safe as gasoline; and no huge infrastructure to refine and distribute it is required.
Today HHO is mainly used as a "booster" to greatly increase gas mileage, but with more study it could be widely used as a single-fuel for cars; as has been proven by several inventors around the world... Who have been universally suppressed by government and coal & oil cartels to keep this technology from us. Some were bought-out, others threatened, and many died in unusual circumstances. Today, the Open Source Energy movement is working on solving these problems of getting the word out: Inventors, garage tinkerers, and researchers all over the world are working together; forsaking the "quick buck" and trying to save the planet from the deadly grip of oil.
Another suppressed technology is magnetic motors. There have been over a dozen inventors with working magnet-based devices which create much more energy than they consume (yes, breaking that old, flawed rule of Thermodynamics, which DOES NOT take into effect curved space-time). If honestly studied by our universities (which appear to refuse to), these and HHO together could replace our current energy model in only a few years; and oil would soon be used only for lubrication and plastics (...Our domestic sources more than enough for that).
But if that happened, the energy cartels would soon lose billions in easy profits. CO2 released into the atmosphere would no longer be a major issue. Scientists in the mainstream would have to admit they were utterly wrong. The world would be able to feed itself with cheap energy.... And there would be little reason left to war with our fellow human beings.
We must break through the suppression, the sooner the better: Contact our political representitives and demand that they unshackle HHO and magnetic motors from government secret suppression (which is really less about "national security" and more about "energy cartel security"). Make no mistake: Our leaders know all about these technologies (including Hillary & Obama...). They will not do anything about them until we FORCE them to with grass roots pressure... The cartels are too strong and too well entrenched. As long as the majority of Americans remain ignorant of our real choices in energy (as long as MSM's and the mainstream scientific communities' silence continues), little will happen in this regard.
Within 2 years of breaking this suppression, we could see a huge change in our society: A change for the better. Where the only "losers" are those in the oil and coal infrastructure. If America took the lead in this, we could have several years of booming industry in manufacturing the new HHO electrolyzers (of every size, up to power station quantity), and magnetic motors for home, vehicles, and plants. The boon to the economy would offset the losses of the oil and coal industry.... And do wonders for the ecology. What could YOU do with all the money you are now paying for energy...? Send your kids to college, for one...
For those who don't believe in the viability of Brown's Gas / HHO, or magnetic motors: Please find scientific studies that disprove them... You cannot: Because suppressed technology is not studied (openly, by the scientific mainstream, anyway... But there is much evidence that the military and some large corporations have been doing so for years secretly).
I wrote a previous article to debunk your theory of a giant conspiracy in hiding energy technology from America. It just isn't so.
Your simplistic approach to replacing 20,000,000 barrels of oil a day...well simply won't work. The magnitude of the problem that we are facing will soon become evident.
I sat on the board of a large power producer for five years. One of the important duties of my committee was to investigate any viable alternative form of energy that presented itself as a solution to fossil fuels. In other words, if it were there, we wanted to be the first to use it.
Technology such as you speak of, if viable, would attract investors from around the planet. GM, who is losing billions would embrace it. Airlines who are going broke daily, would invest their last dime.
There is no conspiracy, and moving from a world powered by oil would take decades if the solution were trotted out today.
by
Mike Folkerth (104 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 503 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 8:56:30 AM
There is indeed a serious conspiracy, and G.M. is in on it.
Take this for example: A hundred years ago, the Ford Model T got 27 miles to a gallon. That is BETTER than the average mileage of today's new cars.
There has been solid proof for over 70 years that vaporizing gasoline before it reaches the cylinders will increase mileage by AT LEAST a factor of 2 ... 300% is more like it... Up to 600% is possible! THATS JUST USING REGULAR GASOLINE, no HHO added. Using the exhaust to heat the gas is the obvious answer for doing this, and there were many patents for doing so. But there are Federal laws that require catylitic converters and prohibit anyone tampering with exhaust, and this stops the exhaust from being used for this purpose (ironically, if the gasoline was efficiently burned via vaporization, there would be no need for the cat box in the first place). Also, another serious barrier against vaporization is that there is no fixed gasoline formulas, and oil companies change their formulas constantly, even regionally, probably just for the reason of making it harder for people to properly calibrate their car to run on vaporized gas (which is very important for best mileage). Certain additives in the gas make vaporization less effective. There is no question imo that these bariers are put in place to stop the vaporizing of gasoline, and allowing even SUV's to get over 100 MPG. The first patents for vaporizing gas came out in the 1920's: G.M. bought several of them.
HHO/Brown's Gas has also been known about for many years. Proof of it's viability as a new clean, cheap, and home-productable energy source has been shown over and over. Yet there are no University studies on it... WHY? WHY are there no studies on something that could change our entire world being done? Because no studies are done on suppressed technologies. The same thing with magnetic motors. This is proof in itself of a conspiracy.
Like I said above, I challenge you to find an actual scientific study that debunks the viability of HHO/Brown's Gas [...hears the sounds of crickets chirping].
Sorry, just shaking your head "no" doesn't cut it. Show somthing to back up your argument besides naysaying.
We are damn tired of people who think they know best for all of us telling us what we can't have... Poor people need cheap energy, the entire world needs it, and dammit we are going to have it one way or another.... We will just do it ourselves, underground via internet cooperation, and those who insist on claiming (without merit or proof) that it's all just B.S. can do so all they like... As we in the Open Souce Energy movement drive past them waving while they sit in line at the gas pumps ;)
Yes, it may take time to change over from oil: But not as long as you think. Because the beauty of HHO is that existing motors can run on it. And people can make it themselves. And no traitorous oil executive can dictate what it sells for or what we have to do to obtain it.
You see, THATS the real problem with the new cheap and suppressed energy technologies: They loosen the government's control over the population. When a goverment can threaten to shut down the electrical grid and the filling stations unless it gets it's way... Most people will buckle under. But if you supply your own energy.... You can tell them to go to hell... Where they belong.
by
Steve Windisch (jibbguy) (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 131 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 6:34:19 PM
We are damn tired of people who think they know best for all of us telling us what we can't have... Poor people need cheap energy, the entire world needs it, and dammit we are going to have it one way or another.... We will just do it ourselves, underground via internet cooperation, and those who insist on claiming (without merit or proof) that it's all just B.S. can do so all they like... As we in the Open Souce Energy movement drive past them waving while they sit in line at the gas pumps ;)
Amen, ditto, right on, high-five, you go....
by
Amanda Lang (21 articles, 13005 quicklinks, 417 diaries, 506 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 7:57:03 PM
What about Sunrgi, Nanosolar and dye-sensitized solar?
google these, they're all over the technology news
Thinfilm solar/Nanosolar's has the world's largest solar manufacturing plant, they just went online this year, first 18 mo. of production is already sold to a german utility company- .99c/kw- this could be cheaper than coal for making electricity- eventually will be available for residences- charge your electric car
Sunrgi concentrated solar is expected to be on the market in a few years at .05c/kw- this will also eventually be available for residential use.
dye-sensitized solar; new technology, may prove able to make solar even more efficent than nanosolar/thinfilm, maybe as cheap as Sunrgi
What about Ray Kurzweil and the law of accelerating returns?
This Universe began with a Big Bang and has organized itself into human beings who made the network age- what reason is there to believe it's stopping here? Indeed, the pace of technological evolution can be seen to be increasing from decade to decade
by
Better World Order (4 articles, 295 quicklinks, 13 diaries, 748 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 6:51:11 PM
Mike Folkerth illustrates vividly America's dilemma as to energy, money and a bumpy ride on down the road. We stand as a nation in denial, apathy and driving without a map or any understanding of a strategic plan. Our three prez candidates don't have a clue where they're going and we blindly think they know what they're doing. They don't! This country is slicing its own wrists and headed for a sobering future. Any time you keep growing past maturity, it's either obesity or cancer. This country's energy and financial cancer is worse than Teddy Kennedy's brain tumor. FW
by
Frosty Wooldridge (85 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 31 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 9:41:42 AM
"Our three prez candidates don't have a clue where they're going and we blindly think they know what they're doing."
The presidents... i.e., the 'middle management' has been exactly following the strategy of elites. One goal, at least, is to destroy the middle class. Another is the achieve economic, military dominance of the world. Another goal is to eliminate the vast majority of the world's population. Their view is not our view. Their goals are not ours. The very wealthy will not run out of oil. But we will.
by
richard (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 664 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 9:19:33 PM
I find it curious that we have hit "peak oil" in the last seven years while the Bush administration has been in office.....only when the corporations so beloved by this administration have been turning record profits, after meeting with Cheney in secret meetings, and given free rein on unregulated capitalism...before 2000, I never heard the phrase "peak oil"...
by
Susan Nelsen (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 11:00:20 AM
Big Oil is still deeply involved in a scam to keep the world dependent on petroleum motor fuels because for nearly 200 years they sold oil for little more than the value of the dirt and rock that they extracted it from. Now with the commodity commanding never before seen prices, it is in their interest to sell every extractable drop for the big premium.
Most of the alternatives to petroleum are not a simple technological leap down the road. Most are currently available technology and many have been around for a hundred years or more. But, there is no cheap switchover. Infrastucture must be in place for any of these technologies to displace petroleum as our primary fuel. The longer we wait to emplace this infrastructure the longer Big Oil maintains its strangle hold and the more expensive the move to alternatives will be.
There will be some very rich people in the wake of this arising displacement, but if you don't have an operating oil well, it won't be you.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 897 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 11:12:01 AM
You know all those places where these companies are extracting oil from were once owned by families. Where did the families go? Why is some fat-ass old white man rolling in the millions while he watches his starve? They profit from a land he was forced to flee often by a regime backed by the US and British governments. How did so much of the public's wealth and domain end up as multi-national corporate assets? How rich do you think these coffers will grow as the "subprime mortgage crisis" transfer vast amounts of property over to speculators and investors. The ultra-wealthy are going shopping at their version of Wal-Mart.
by
Amanda Lang (21 articles, 13005 quicklinks, 417 diaries, 506 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 8:24:13 PM
Where'd families go, and how'd that wealth get corporatized?
Here's a documentation of either a small piece in a big mystery or a big piece in a small mystery, depending on how your worldview has been programmed.
During the years following the Second World War, the patrician families of the Eastern Anglophile Liberal Establishment sent numbers of their offspring to colonize those geographic regions of the United States which, the families estimated, were likely to prosper in the postwar period. On the surface, this appears as a simple reflex of greed: cadet sons were despatched to those areas of the provinces where their instinctive methods of speculation and usury could be employed to parasitize emerging wealth. ...
by
meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 23 diaries, 438 comments)
on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 12:41:50 AM
I understand it is imperative that we get away from fossil fuel, but are we really running out and how exactly would we know? Who is it we could rely on for a definitive answer?
Has this man, Mark Anderson yet to be debunked? If what he's saying is merely conjecture and hogwash than so be it. And if he is correct?
I personally belive this whole oil fraud debacle is contrived to devalue the dollar and to bring in the North American Union (NAU). Didn't they just locate a huge oil depost in Iraq? That's why we're there, to control the flow and the price of oil.
And the fact that Iran has stopped trading oil in dollars is the reson for the incresed bellicosity. Saddam tried to do the same and look at what happened. Or was it the WMD's ? This nefarious administration doesn't do diplomacy, it is that simple. Middle East hegemony is the name of the game whether you like it or not. No one is going to stop them. Perhaps maybe if the credulous American people find the time to put down the remotes and get off of their couches and take to the streets. Then again that's why they''re building the detention camps.
George Orwell is rolling in his grave.
by
Munich (0 articles, 47 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 676 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 11:56:50 AM
Marion King Hubbert, the American Geophysicist predicted peak oil in 1956. He predicted peak oil in the U.S. at that time and declared the date of 1970. He was correct to the year. Today the U.S. produces 40% less oil than we did in 1970.
Dr. Hubbert predicted (in 1956) a global peak in the year 2000. He testified in Congress regarding peak oil in 1974, as my article states.
My former partner is an engineer with Aleyeska, one of my best friends owns Cabeza oil and gas and I have several acquaintances who work in oil shale research. One of my tenants is a natural gas exploration and production company and finally, I was a regional manager for a company who dealt entirely with large energy and mining concerns. I'm no stranger to this subject.
The U.S. uses 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day, but produces only 5,000,000 and our current fields are in decline. We represent 4.8% of the people on earth, but use 25% of all global oil production and 30% of all world material production.
This is not a conspiracy, this is the result of believing that a finite resource can provide infinite gluttonous consumption.
Please Google Marion King Hubbert for a more informative picture of peak oil.
by
Mike Folkerth (104 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 503 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 1:11:50 PM
While oil is not infinite, there are PLENTY of sources for oil in our nation. We just have problems going to get it, because of other people, in our nation complaining about disturbing nature.
Again, we need an energy policy that makes sense. Get the oil NOW... Build refineries NOW... Build power plants NOW... Fix the short term problems NOW!
But while all of this is going on, explore alternate energy sources... NOW! not in 5 years, not in 10 years... Sure, there is enough oil off of the coast of Alaska to last us 150 years... Even if we sell off half! However, we absolutely SHOULD be building better sources for power.
Wind energy is not necessarily a viable option given the fact that the way the technology currently stands, it would require hundreds of thousands of acres of windmills to generate 10-15% of our nation's power, assuming we could get the infrastructure together, within 50-60 years or so, maybe...
But seriously, we need to look into all options, just don't stop the world while we do so...
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 434 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 1:40:12 PM
I do believe that in the 1970's when we were going through similar times, Jimmy Carter had us conserve oil. We were told to turn down the heat, wear warmer clothes, get smaller cars, and drive slower.
I'm a social worker and in and out of alot of homes. People keep their homes hot in the winter and cold in the summer. We are now driving big SUV's and trucks that get less per gallon then the cars did in the 1970's. As I was going down the highway today I saw all the people going up north on vacation.
Maybe what we need to do is bring Carter back to help us clean up this mess. Even if we didn't hear of Peak oil before 2000 it doesn't mean that we have to hurry up and use as much as we can. It seems that for our national security we need to come up with situtions to this very dangerous problem.
by
beccy (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 87 comments)
on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 7:41:27 PM
John Hofmeister said it better than I can on his interview with Charlie Rose
He said some of the same things when he testified before the condescending politicians, most of whom, are responsible for the lack of an energy policy.
Bringing up the issues like...
1. no power plants built in over 30 years
2. No refineries built in over 30 years
3. Keeping land off limits for oil exploration OR, through massive regulations, Making said exploration impossible in 90% of the government or privately owned land in the US.
4. decreasing the capacity of the oil refineries by half through regulations over the past 30 years.
5. regardless of whatever new technology is out there, currently, it will take at least 50 YEARS for it to come on line and be a viable resource.
MEANWHILE, the politicians keep bringing up the money these guys are making being brokers for the cartels....
Here is a thought.... Should there ever be a point, in time, where the US were to actually adopt a legitimate energy policy THAT MAKES SENSE, it would take over a year for the new refineries to come on line, several years, assuming everything goes well, and the people building said refineries are not taken to court to stop them from committing crimes against our environment... (Boy it is nice to live in a country where one has the freedom to stick it to the "man" like that....
Anyway, we could have nuclear power plants, AGAIN, assuming they can be unmolested from the courts after establishing approval.
As things stand, we do not have the infrastructure for any sort of new power plant to come on line, which was UNBELIEVABLY short sighted by members of our government.
OVER 30 YEARS... We have done nothing.... Now, we are wondering why we have high energy prices...
It is a ludicrous situation made even more laughable by our congress demanding that we file a law suit against a cartel! They are a complete joke... Right now, the only thing the US has to negotiate is money, because we have no real products that those countries can't trade for with other nations, so our options are so limited regarding what we could do to those nations of OPEC, that we really can do nothing.
Now, were we able to drill off the shore of Alaska, 10 years ago, when the request was denied, we would now have access to that oil. If we took action to build power plants in the 1990's, we would already have be en establishing the infrastructure to support them, and, given that fact, we would have more of what we need.
As it is, the poor people who everyone cares so much about are being crushed by high energy prices.... So are those middle class folks who are trying, DESPERATELY to make their mortgage payments…However, the politicians, in an effort to save their phony-baloney jobs, are trying desperately to blame the oil companies for their policies… Truly amazing how that works out, eh?
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 434 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 1:26:38 PM
Also respectfully, there is not 150 or 200 years of reserves in Alaska, these estimates are simply a myth. As far as Gull Island, it is no secret and is proposed for drilling. All Gull Island reserves are figured into the totals of the remaining North Slope reserves.
Let's do some math just for grins. The U.S. uses 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day or 7.3 billion barrels per year. The total production of the Alaskan Pipeline from 1977 to date has been 15 billion barrels. In other words, we use more oil in two years at our current consumption than the Alaskan Pipeline has produced in 31 years of continuous operation.
To expand on that, the needs of the U.S. for another 200 years at our current consumption, would be 1.46 Trillion barrels of oil or 97.33 times more than the total 31 years of operation. And, the current fields are in serious decline.
Myths are great as long as no one does the math. As far as the remainder of your comments such as not building refineries and never having a viable energy plan...you're spot on.
by
Mike Folkerth (104 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 503 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 4:03:04 PM
I really don't know what I was thinking saying that without verifying that particular source...
Anyway, I am not ready to give up everything though, because it is my understanding, correct me if I am flat wrong, that there are other alternatives that are worth exploring... In Alberta, they suggest that 10% of the oil reserves or 170 billion barrels are economically feasible to recover at this particular point in time...
there is also oil shale deposits that could be dug up in Montana and North Dakota, should we ever have a mind to do so, we could pull 200 billion from North Dakota alone... This could give us some breathing room until some better energy sources are developed...
I don't believe it is up for debate that it would take at least 50 years for really solid alternative forms of energy to become sustainable with the performance levels we are interested in maintaining...
In the mean time, we NEED oil, coal, as well as natural gas, because we have no mining capabilities for Uranium at the moment, at least not at the level required to bring the number of reactors on line that would enable us to drop some of the dirtier energy sources...
Ciao, CZ
by
steve scheetz (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 434 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 9:55:33 PM
Yes, I can debunk Anderson. Gull Island is not a secret, never has been. I worked on the original project for RCA putting in the communications. Anderson says that in 1977 the find was made. It was impossible to reach what is today Kaparuk and the outreaches, including Gull island until much later, therefore no drilling was possible at the time that Anderson reports it took place.
I have two friends who still work on the pipe, one at Kaparuk one an engineer at terminal and both assure me that all Gull Island reserves are accouted for in the North Slope totals.
Please see my answer to Steve for further discussion.
The research and theory of M. King Hubbert is no longer theory but proven science and the possibility of another massive find anywhere on earth is very slim.
What we have is the same thing that the Roman's had...damn poor planning by our leaders and a complacent public.
by
Mike Folkerth (104 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 503 comments)
on Thursday, May 22, 2008 at 4:32:27 PM
