“Experts say the sharp growth, if it continues, means several of the world’s most important suppliers may need to start importing oil within a decade to power all the new cars, houses and businesses they are buying and creating with their oil wealth.”

According to this NYTimes.com article,  the economies of oil rich countries are growing so fast that they are becoming their own fastest growing markets. This increases the squeeze on countries like the US as more and more global demand will keep the price of oil rising. If we’re in Peak Oil (using the last 50% of supplies) then this feedback loop will only speed up the rate at which we run out of fossil fuels. Given that our entire economy requires access to cheap fuel to operate, we’re in serious trouble. Yet our representatives in Bali this week are obfuscating and generally refusing to accept any kind of mandated carbon caps.

The Wall Street Journal, which has had some of the best reporting on climate change issues weirdly offset by their insanely unscientific (ignorant) editorial stance, has a story today on the Peak Oil theory. Unfortunately it’s locked behind their paid sub firewall (another quandary- I support Rupert Murdoch in his plans to open up the WSJ online).

Peak Oil theory says that there is a point where we have taken 50% of the available oil out of the earth and consumed it. At this point the supply diminishes until none remains. The oil industry has consistently claimed they can pull 120 million barrels/day through 2050 even though others were sceptical. This has changed. The WSJ article quotes OPEC officials and oil executives who now say we may hit Peak Oil as soon as 2010-2015. The reality is that our current demand exceeds 180 million barrels per day so we’re already overstrained for capacity. This is a major call to action by those who have had a vested interest in keeping the oil economy in place.

The problem is the inherent problems with the way oil consumption and mining works. In the first 50% we’ve been skimming the low hanging fruit, taking out the most profitable and easily accessed half of the supply. The remaining 50% will get increasingly more difficult and costly to acquire. This means can’t blithely assume we have say another 50 years to fix the problem. What we can assume is an economy crippled by major increases in fuel costs in just a few years. In other words this is it- we have to stop pretending that conservation is a choice rather than a necessity. The oil people have done the math and realized that they better start preparing us for dire circumstances…

BTW, that theory of usage is way out of whack- with India, China and other countries becoming huge consumers of oil our total global needs are skyrocketing far beyond our ability to refine. This is another acceleration factor. $8/gallon anyone?

“Water rationing has hit the capital. Car washing and lawn watering are prohibited within city limits. Harvests in the region have dropped by 15-30%. By the end of summer, local reservoirs and dams were holding 5% of their capacity.

Oops, that’s not Atlanta, or even the southeastern U.S. That’s Ankara, Turkey, hit by a fierce drought and high temperatures that also have had southern and southwestern Europe in their grip.”

“Based on the record of the last seven years, we can take it for granted that the Bush administration hasn’t the slightest desire to glance down; that no one in FEMA who matters has given the situation the thought it deserves; and that, on this subject, as on so many others, top administration officials are just hoping to make it to January 2009 without too many more scar marks. But, if not the federal government, shouldn’t somebody be asking? Shouldn’t somebody check out what’s actually down there?”

“To find even tentative answers to such questions you have to leave the mainstream. Amy Goodman of Democracy Now!, for example, interviewed paleontologist and author of The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change, Tim Flannery recently on the topic of a “world on fire.” Flannery offered the following observation:

“It’s not just the Southeast of the United States. Europe has had its great droughts and water shortages. Australia is in the grip of a drought that’s almost unbelievable in its ferocity. Again, this is a global picture. We’re just getting much less usable water than we did a decade or two or three decades ago. It’s a sort of thing again that the climate models are predicting. In terms of the floods, again we see the same thing. You know, a warmer atmosphere is just a more energetic atmosphere. So if you ask me about a single flood event or a single fire event, it’s really hard to make the connection, but take the bigger picture and you can see very clearly what’s happening.”

Great comprehensive post from Tom Engelhardt on the reality of water issues. These are just a few of the many quotable facts in his post.

A huge storm in the North Atlantic brought storm surges as high as 20 feet yesterday to Europe and the UK. Barriers on the Thames were closed to protect London. This is the biggest surge since 1953. Fortunately no one was hurt and damage was minimal.

The issue here is that climate change doesn’t simply mean higher ocean levels. Even a slight rise in levels, combined with more violent weather due to warming, will mean more and more of these storms in regions where they have been very rare in the past. Because there was no historical record of major storm surges, these coastal areas are highly developed and support dense populations. The potential for future destruction is much higher because of this.

This is a classic environmental feedback loop. Warming generates storms, higher ocean levels mean higher surges. Interestingly, the same storm caused unstable snowpack conditions in Switzerland, creating dangerous avalanche conditions.