The Good Oil

[Far Canard]

There are some amongst us that think the world has reached peak oil production. Put another way – we are ½ way through and the oil producing regions are in terminal decay. Of course this might not be so and we may have more time to drive those SUVs and Hummers. The big problem is that the first half of the oil was the easiest to collect. The second half is tied up in oil sands and oil wells that require more effort and therefore cost to extract. There is no doubt that there is still plenty of oil out there but at what price?
I wonder if the cost cutting measures being put forward by most airlines now is the tip of the iceberg. What I fly consumes plenty of fuel and I can only hope for the best. The best would be a major oil discovery larger than the total oil reserves contained in the Middle East.
Some figures for you:
The world uses 23,000,000,000 barrels of oil per year
It currently consumes 4 barrels for every 1 it finds.

[numbskull]

The first oil shock in the 70's proposed a similiar doomsday day scenario which predicted that we would have run out of oil by now.

I don't know what the future hold but there is plenty of other energy sources available such as extremely large gas and coal fields, plenty of uranium, improved batterries and electric motors.Biodiesal and ethanol fuel are virtually inexhaustable to a finite quantity.

Obviously aviation is heavily reliant on oil but there is no reason that other industries (eg motor cars) couldn't convert to another energy source if the cost became prohibitive. I don't believe there is any reason why aircraft engines couldn't be converted to run on biodiesal and motor cars run on electric motors if we ever run out of oil(which won't be for another 50 yrs at least-thats if technology doesn't kick in).

Its really not that big a deal. Sure it will mean quite a few changes but the world will still turn.

[Far Canard]

There are two issues with oil. The first one deals with supply / demand and where the price is going. The futures market for oil has recently hit $100 USD per barrel. The second is what to replace it with. If you do some reading you will find it is not as simple as you think.
Bring on the nukes and coal fired power stations. I want my electric car to do 0-100Km/hr in 5secs and top out at 200Km/hr!!!

[Johhny Utah]

Far Canard - I guess you're looking for this then: A new breed of high performance electric car (http://www.gizmag.com.au/go/3069/2/)
http://www.gizmag.com.au/picture.php?s=20&p=3069_18050552729.jpg

the Tango can accelerate from zero to 150 mph in one gear. It accelerates from zero to 60 mph in four seconds, which makes it faster than most exotica you can buy off the showroom floor such as the Dodge Viper, Porsche Carrera GT or Ferrari F50 and twice as quick over a short distance as most road inhabitants. It will also stop the clocks at 12 seconds dead for a quarter mile so at all legal road-going speeds, the Tango reigns supreme over all four wheelers though it falls short of the fastest sports motorcycles

[Ultralights]

neccessity is the Mother of all invention..

when oil get more and more expensive and prohibitive to use, there will be other sources and technologies developed to replace it. examples given above are a few slowly emerging now, Biodiesel, made from vegetable oil ,fertile farming lands will become very sought after property!!! ethanol, made from Sugar Cane! we have Million of Acres of the stuff growing in Oz. im sure with a relativly small development fund motor companies will produce Ethanol powered vehicles equal to todays performance

i also think that in the medium future, Nuclear energy will see a resurgence now technolgy has improved vastly since the 60's and 70's when most reactors were built. and im sure RR will have plans somewhere for ethanol powered turbines..

the only sufferers from the new fuel economy or renewable fuels from plant products, will be the deserts of the middle east..



and there is no way in hell i would drive something looking like that at speeds above 60Mph! it wouldnt be very efficient at speeds above about 60mph looking like that!

[prussian blue]

Ethanol has fantastic anti-knock properties but a litre of it doesn't go far, intrigued at how many acres of whatever would be needed to replace or supplement 23 billion barrels a year, none of the synthetic stuff (including coal gasification etc.) comes cheap. I dont think we are about to run out but we'd better get used to paying for it.

An old boss once said fuel was the cheapest thing that went into his aircraft, maybe not for much longer.

[Arm out the window]

How about this - nuclear powerplants provide the energy to produce the hydrogen for fuel cells that run the cars and such - would that work?
No more fossil fuels to find, and no more greenhouse gases, just a ****load of radioactive waste to get rid of, I guess.

[oicur12]

Is PO approaching.

US invades several nations on account of oil – Iraq and Afghanistan.
Colombia is now largest recipient of US weapons in order to fight a possible proxy war against oil rich Venezuela.
Royal Dutch Shell downwardly revise their estimates of known reserves 4 times in 12 months.
Oil rich (and OPEC influential) Iran is in the gun sights because of supposed nuke program.
NATO disguises its bombing of The Balkans as humanitarian in order to build military bases to protect one of the worlds largest pipeline projects.
The US funds a rose revolution in Georgia in order to remove a Moscow friendly leader that was lobbying Putin to give management rights for the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline to Russian companies.
The US builds military bases in the Caucusses of Russia within range of Baku
China triples it fleet of submarines in the western pacific and builds military bases in Pakistan to provide influence in the gulf oil states.

I think PO has something to do with it.

[Taildragger67]

Messrs Utah and Canard,

What escapes me is why you need your car to get to 150 in x secs and do a top speed of 200.

I got pinged for doing 83 in lane 4 (ie. right down the centre) over the harbour bridge at 02.30 when the only cars on the whole span were me & PC Plod, then not long after for doing 75 on that nice long hill from Rose Bay down into Double Bay on New South Head Rd, again late at night with sod-all traffic around (and none conflicting). Harsh, I thought, in both cases (as someone who has done advanced driver training and in a pretty well equipped car) but fair cops nonetheless. Learnt my lesson.

So... We're not allowed to do more than the limit, there's usually not much need for doing more than the limit and those of us who aren't fast-jet knucks generally aren't equipped to handle a 1.5T weapon at much over the limit.

So if an electric or biofuel car can get me to 100km in 9 secs (as my 318i used to do) and can cruise happily at 110-115 (with the odd passing burst to 130), then why do I need it to go to 200?

[Far Canard]

"Bring on the nukes and coal fired power stations. I want my electric car to do 0-100Km/hr in 5secs and top out at 200Km/hr!!!"
It was a tongue in cheek comment. An attempt to show just how stupid we are by wasting fossil fuels on things like SUVs and Hummers. To point out that if we go electric then people will still want their extravagant desires. The reality that we will need plenty of nuclear power stations.
The thing about oil is it is very useful when you want to make petro-chemicals, plastics etc. The talk of bio-fuels being the answer does not consider the need for petro-chemical derived fertilisers and insecticides.
Peak oil is coming and nothing is being done to change the terrible wastage of oil. The problem won't get addressed until the wheels fall off the present system. It is most likely going to be a painful transition unless we start seeing some changes to peoples behavior soon.
Bush Junior wants to reduce the oil imports to the US by 75% in the next 20 years. Some geologists say this won't be by choice but by a lack of supply. Interesting times as the time of cheap oil is coming to an end.

[Johhny Utah]

Taildragger - each to their own. e.g why do you drive a 318i when you could drive a hyundai excel/grandeur/sonata...?
To paraphrase you So if a Hyundai Excel can get me to 100km in 9 secs (as my 318i used to do) and can cruise happily at 110-115 (with the odd passing burst to 130), then why do I need it to go to drive a BMW 318i?

Personally I have no desire to drive an electric car, especially that one. As those who know me could readily tell you, I have my heart set on a dirty great aussie muscle car - I don't have to commute everyday, so the price of fuel won't worry me too much at all :)

[the wizard of auz]

If the US and friends stopped wasting all the oil they do by galloping into some sort of armed conflict whenever someone sneezes in one of the oil producing regions, maybe the supply would last longer.
Can you imagine how much oil would get used during the mobilisation and demob of these armed forces?

[3 slips and a gully]

The futures market for oil has recently hit $100 USD per barrel.

I don't think so Tim, Light Sweet is traded at the Nymex and 2012 delivery contracts are in the mid $60s http://www.nymex.com/lsco_fut_psf.aspx

If Iran open its Euro based oil bourse next month as planned (like Saddam tried to) and the US then attack - the straights of Hormuz may be a dodgy place to sail your tanker through and the long awaited $100 spike may be a reality.

Btw the peak or halfway point you refer to is Hubbert's Peak http://www.hubbertpeak.com/summary.htm

[Taildragger67]

Johnny,

Fair point. Problem is that at 6'2" I don't fit into a Hyundai and you'll notice I drove a 318, not a 328 or 540 etc. Anyway these days it's the Northern Line.

I do apologise - I see that F. Canard was making a point, one I agree with. You're Right, Johnny, each their own, but it's like free speech (without wanting to go too far down that route!) - with rights (having a car that theoretically can go at 200kmh) come responsibilities (not using that capability). We all have to take a bit of the latter and if limiting me (and y'all) to 150kmh instead of 200 means that we can go at 150 for a few years more before running out of motion lotion, then maybe it's not such a bad trade-off.

But maybe the problem isn't just us and our 200+ kmh-capable Monaros, it's the number of Hyundais piling onto roads in nearby newly-wealthy lands. Sure, they're entitled to wheels as much as anyone, but that's probably having a bigger impact on oil demand than the size of my donk.

But as for your muscle-car ambition - I have just one thing - the Great Australian Man's Dilemma - to say:

Ford or Holden?

[Johhny Utah]

FORD :)
(one day we'll win Bathurst again.....) :rolleyes:

[Ultralights]

ride a bike and be done with it, 4 Ltrs/100 Km! Just as fugal on fual as a Hybrid, yet still capable of 200 Mph!

just think, everyone on bikes! the road toll will drop, traffic congestion would almost cease to exist, meaning lower emissions still! economies will increase, fuel bills down from $70 per tank in your average car, to just $15.


then again, i cant comment, my other vehicle is a 1.2 ltr, yet consumes the same amount of fuel as a small V8. (but has the same power output, but the car weighs a lot less than your average V8, so its more economical in a sence)

[Far Canard]

3 slips and a gully
I must apologise for stating the futures market was at $100 USD. That contract was for June last year as detailed in the NZ Parliament by the Greens Leader to the Energy Minister.
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS: With reference to that last question, is the Minister aware that Goldman Sachs is predicting a price of over US$100 per barrel shortly and that there has already been a futures trade for US$100 per barrel for June this year?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I am not aware of the Goldman Sachs predictions. I am aware of the futures trade, and I have my bike out.
PETER BROWN (NZ First): Is the Minister aware that Green members are going around this country talking about peak oil; and does the Minister share New Zealand First’s view that there is a difference between high-priced oil and peak oil, and that it does a great disservice to New Zealand as a whole for party members to go scaremongering around the country, as Greens members have been?

[ferris]

The 'cost of production' for oil is not a problem, and is miniscule in terms of the price of a barrel. The premise for this thread is false. Other things drive the cost at the pump. Why do you think arabs are so rich? The stuff used to cost about 80c per barrel in the ME (and may, in the near future, rise as high as 2.40usd p.b. ) to pump out. They (enter names of those involved here- govts, oil co's. etc) don't want you to know this of course, as you may start to ask questions.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Exactly Ferris....anyone old enough to remember the oil crisis of the late 70s has seen all this doom and gloom carryon before...I well remember buying my first car in 77 and seriously wondering whether there would be any oil left in 20 yrs because of all the hoopla at the time.

Here we are nearly 30 yrs later and my 17 yr old wonders the very same thing.

I am sure oil is a reasonably finite commodity...but after being laid down in the deap earh for MILLIONS of years I find it dificult to believe it is all going to used up in 200.

I suspect the current price per barrel is more about the system suddenly deciding that they want to earn a CRAPLOAD more RFN than any real shortages.

Anyone else notice how oil pb has trippled in the last few years but the price per liter of petrol only went up 10% ish...for god sake it was $1/liter 4 years ago, before the latest drama, and is lately about $1.09 around Brissy....yes it went higher for a while but the sky is hardly falling.

Why is it we accept that everything else we spend money on increases over time but when fuel goes up we freak out and some moron claims the world as we know it is ending...and we believe him?

I cannot remember what I was paying for a lt of fuel back in 77...about 30-40 cents probably...now its $1.09 in Brissy (but 53 cents where I live:ok: :E )...so it has trippled in 30 yrs...what hasn't?

There are thousands of years worth of natural gas left...we can run our cars on that and hardly even notice the difference...thousands of years worth of coal left...we can make fuel out of that...we can run our cars and probably aeroplanes on bio diesel until hell freezes over.

It is my personal opinion that with oil at the prices we see now previously discovered oil deposits which were capped by the oil companies for a 'rainy day' will come on line left and right....investment that the oil companies were not making at $20 a barrel will be made and supply will ramp up to meet demand...and slowly we'll see oil pb prices dropping back to lower numbers...not what it was before perhaps but not $60-100 pb.

Many more people will look at alternative fuels for their cars...gas, bio diesel, hybrids etc...and demand will drop a little. Govts will bring on line alternative power generating means...atomic.

Communities will, as the Dutch (or is it Norway?) are doing, move to regain control of their electricity supply with wind farms, solar etc etc and be less dependant on big business for their power needs...and sell excess back into the grid....it is happening right now!

And in 10 yrs we'll be wondering what all the hoopla was about.

In time I reckon the biggest benefit of the current oil scare will be less dependance on oil because options are more widely embraced and that will be good for the environment.

We've probably got 100s of years worth of oil left...as more people use alternatives that will stretch out further and further...imagine what would happen if 1/2 the worlds cars were powered by gas, bio diesel and hybrid?

All of a sudden the demand for oil would be so low the price would drop and the stuff would last for ever.

At $60 pb the 'heavy oil' under the east side of South America is practical...trillions of barrels! The fact that it is 'heavy' probably means you can get 2 or 3 times as much petrol out of a barrel as they do out of the runny stuff they get out of the current oil wells.

I point blank refuse to panic....the doom and gloom merchants can kiss my ass!

[Hugh Jarse]

I cannot remember what I was paying for a lt of fuel back in 77...about 30-40 cents probably

Chuckie, I was paying 13.9cpl back then:cool: in SY. I could fill my bike for just under a dollar :E A dollar 10 if I pushed the reserves :}

So I imagine Brizvegas was somewhat cheaper:suspect:

Old farts aren't we, eh? :}

[Chimbu chuckles]

Holly Crap!!...I was in Sydney too in those days...I don't remember paying 14 cents a liter...OK everything I said in my previous post is rubbish....TIME TO PANIC:E :ok:

[gaunty]

FIRST WOOMERA:
Aye, very passable, that, very passable bit of risotto.
SECOND WOOMERA:
Nothing like a good glass of Château de Chasselas, eh, Josiah?
THIRD WOOMERA:
You're right there, Obadiah.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Who'd have thought thirty year ago we'd all be sittin' here drinking Château de Chasselas, eh?
FIRST WOOMERA:
In them days we was glad to have the price of a cup o' tea.
SECOND WOOMERA:
A cup o' cold tea.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Without milk or sugar.
THIRD WOOMERA:
Or tea.
FIRST WOOMERA:
In a cracked cup, an' all.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Oh, we never had a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled up newspaper.
SECOND WOOMERA:
The best we could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth.
THIRD WOOMERA:
But you know, we were happy in those days, though we were poor.
FIRST WOOMERA:
Because we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, "Money doesn't buy you happiness, son".
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Aye, 'e was right.
FIRST WOOMERA:
Aye, 'e was.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
I was happier then and I had nothin'. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof.
SECOND WOOMERA:
House! You were lucky to live in a house! We used to live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, 'alf the floor was missing, and we were all 'uddled together in one corner for fear of falling.
THIRD WOOMERA:
Eh, you were lucky to have a room! We used to have to live in t' corridor!
FIRST WOOMERA:
Oh, we used to dream of livin' in a corridor! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House? Huh.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Well, when I say 'house' it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us.
SECOND WOOMERA:
We were evicted from our 'ole in the ground; we 'ad to go and live in a lake.
THIRD WOOMERA:
You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us living in t' shoebox in t' middle o' road.
FIRST WOOMERA:
Cardboard box?
THIRD WOOMERA:
Aye.
FIRST WOOMERA:
You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt.
SECOND WOOMERA:
Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!
THIRD WOOMERA:
Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife.
FOURTH WOOMERA:
Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.
FIRST WOOMERA:
And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you.
ALL:
They won't! :p


with apologies to the Monty Python Crew

[Chimbu chuckles]

I was telling my daughter about those days just recently...bigbastard engines and no-one had ever heard the expression 'fuel economy'.

I first had a motor bike too in early 77 then as soon as I was old enough for a car licence got one...bigbastard Valiant Charger with Hemi 265...truly bullet proof engine and gearbox but the body was just crap...fecking thing just rusted away in front of you...especially behind the rear wheel arches and around the door hinges...remember those huge doors:}

My one was white like the one herehttp://members.optusnet.com.au/iroc-z/oz/oz1.html

But way cool as you rounded a corner and some long haired 70s beauty with 70s style boob tube and Levis would give you the peace sign and mouth the words "Hey Charger!"...ok more often than not it was some pimply faced 14 yr old brat:{ You would then plant it and 'smoke the bags' with nary a care in the world for the price of tyres or petrol.

My Brother hand a Sandman with about 3 different horns and whistles and teardrop tinted windows in rear...blue printed hugemongous engine...:hmm: Ya right....we are getting old:ugh:

And ya tell youngans these days and they just don't believe you:E

[Far Canard]

In 1956 M. King Hubbert predicted US oil production would peak in 1969. The people at the time scoffed, labeling him a doom and gloom merchant. The actual year of peak production in the US was 1970. If you apply the same methods to world oil production then the time falls in the decade 2000-2010.
The oil crisis of the 1970s was caused by the tap being turned off and not a lack of supply. Only an idiot at that time would have thought the world was running out of oil (media types I guess).
Heavy crude does not produce more gasoline than light crude. It is less valuable and needs modification with natural gas. As for the world having thousands of years supply of natural gas - you are on your own with that prediction.
Do some reading about replacing the energy contained in 23 billion barrels of oil (annual world consumption) with another source and you will realise that this energy consumption level will be hard to continue.
Peak Oil - time to scoff and place ones head in the sand

[oicur12]

The oil shocks of the 70’s were as a result of political forces applying pressure on western governments, not as a result of supply problems.

The current situation is a combination of both. Some observers believe that KSR will eventually fall to non western compliant extremist (Bedouins) that would not hesitate to turn the taps off to western consumers. Unfortunately, the “war on terror”could easily accelerate such a process. Obviously, the government of Venezuela will not step in to assist with fulfilling the energy demands of the US, unlike during the last great oil fiasco.

Also, there is huge concern that choke points such as the Straits of Hormuz and the Malacca Straits will be blocked by terrorist activity making it nearly impossible to feed energy dependant markets such as China, Japan and the US.

Far Canard is correct – the downstream costs of heavy oil are far greater than lighter oil such as light sweet crude from the ME. The US and EU are clearly shaping foreign policies to ensure greater access to light sweet crude. Nearly every battlefield on the planet (now and in the future) is linked in some way to the fact that oil consumers are fully aware that oil is running out and natural gas will not fully satisfy our current demands. The “war on terror” is little more than a smoke screen for a different agenda as key players such as Britain, America, Germany, France and Japan scramble to annex or control geopolitically important countries such as Russia, China, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, India, Iraq, Israel, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Colombia and others in order to soften the impact of the eventual decline of the oil age.

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Peak Oil has nothing to do with politics. It has nothing to do with alternative energy sources. It is not the result of futures trading. It is not the result of global military strategies.

Peak oil is simply geology.

All those other things are the result of the simple science of the geology.

Peak oil is a fact - what we do about it however is the great unknown.

[Duff Man]

http://www.chaser.com.au/files/tims_4wd_stickers_all.jpg

[Tex37]

Sadly the problem stems from short sighted people such as Mr Bush/Blair and co. There are many ways of reducing oil consumption. How many times are you stuck in traffic going crazy with everyone else, wondering why all these people have a car to themselves, blocking the road and they do it everyday?

Mr Bush seems not to want to join the world in CO2 emissions reduction as it is not in the interests of the country, public transport could be made affordable (have you ever taken a train in the uk?). There are many solutions to the problem, but the problem is simple: The governments make far too much money from oil!

Why do we invade 3rd world countries? Simple, the ones we invade have oil, screw the others that "need help in the name of humanity and freedom" why else would they spend billions of dolars in a country that doesn't affect us?

It's this attitude, with people driving arround in xx litre cars all day for no reason that keeps economies going. True a/c are not the best thing in the world for oil supplies, but if we kept oil for the things there is no feasible substitute for then we would be ok. Oh except for the oil revenue!

Who dares to argue?

[Shitsu_Tonka]

You can't argue - because what you are arguing against is the viability of the whole system of western economic growth.

That will just get you branded a scaremongerer or crazy by those who have a vested interest in the continuation of what is effectively an unsustainable path - which in many ways is all of us. We all have an interest in the continual growth of our economies. Our sharemarket depends on it, therefore our governments and their taxation revenue depend on it, our trade balance depends on it, our superannuation funds depend on it.

Growth comes from 'improving our quality of life'. i.e. buying more and more stuff, much of which we dont really need.

Problem is - the whole system relies on oil. Cheap oil.

The issue really is the fact that oil is far too cheap, not too expensive. One litre of high end refined petroleum sells for about $1.20. But has the energy equivalent to 25 hours of manual labour. We don't pay our workers 5c and hour, so why do we think $1.20 is expensive?

We dont have an easy cost effective replacement for the oil we mine - we dont produce oil, we mine it.

Biofuels sound good - and they are. The reality is, that to grow enough crop to produce fuel just to supply the current consumption in private motor vehicle in the US only, would require an arable area the size of Africa. And, you need to take into account the energy required to plant, harvest and produce the biofuel, including the cost of the additives.

An example of the poor use of this valuable resource is the free trade agreement between the US and China. Scrap Metal, Scrap Paper, Coal, Iron Ore and Resins gets shipped across the world to China, where cheap labour (more and more of whom work for US companies with their manufacturing bases in China) convert these materials in to consumer goods like TV's, Toys, Appliances and Tools and are then shipped back to the US.

What this really demonstrates is that the low transport cost makes this viable - i.e. Globalisation, or globalised trade, depends on more than any one other thing, the availability of cheap oil.

Closer to home, have you ever thought about how much of the air travel we see is essential?

What about all the military use - how much of it is indeed shoring up present and future oil supplies?

[prussian blue]

Dont blame Blair, the U.K.s' oil use hasn't increased in a big way in decades, its a bit rich blaming Bush also, if we had a 300 million population our emissions would be just as bad as theirs. We are at least as oil dependant as anyone else and given that our own production has fallen off a cliff in recent years, we're going to be queuing up with all the other net importers.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Don't blame Blair (and Bush etc)?

Read this and tell me Iraq wasn't about oil!

http://www.carbonweb.org/documents/crude_designs_web.pdf

And this;

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=%20SC20050730&articleId=762

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Iraq War about Oil?

WMD's wasnt it? Must have been. Otherwise the the public of US, UK & AU knowingly re-elected three war criminals.

Now somehow the US link it to the War on Terror - which of course has become a self fulfilling prophecy, as the Coalition of the Drilling have now fostered the greatest recruiting campaign for al-Qaeda.
Look, this is a magnet for any young man, who, like in Afghanistan, like Osama bin Laden himself in the '80s, you want to serve the cause, you pack up, and you go. It's the same with the money. If you want to give money for the jihad, then you want it to go where it's needed most and where it's sexiest. ... And Iraq is the hot place to be. It's the hot place to give your money, and if you want to serve anywhere in jihad, then this is the place to come. This is where you can fight the infidel, the great Satan himself, face to face.

Now, when you go home from your tour of duty, and you sit around the mosque or the teahouse, and you can say, "I was there; I fought in Iraq," that silences a room. And what we're now seeing is not only the physical building of this generation, [but] through the boundless promise that the Internet has offered the jihad world, there's a whole generation that's been inspired. Look how much has now been done in the name of Iraq and in retribution: from the London bombings to Bali and estranged involvement here in Iraq.

It's re-enlivened the entire organization and the cause and the idea. [For Abu Musab] al- Zarqawi and his immediate organization, [and] more broadly [for] Al Qaeda, they are the main beneficiaries of this war. The very thing George Bush says he came here to prevent, he is actually fostering and giving life to. It has to be the greatest irony of this whole experience. - Michael Ware - TIME Magazine Baghdad Bureau Chief (An Aussie)


Interesting to read that KBR (part of Halliburton) lost the Iraq US DOD fuel supply contract after overcharging - by $1.2bn! Good to have Dead-Eye Dick looking after things isn't it!

[halas]

This is a professional pilots forum.

Why then do people get on their high horse about others driving an SUV, hummer, green house affect, Co2 emmissions........

After a seven hour flight in a 777, we have left just over 50 tonnes of hydro-carbons in the atmosphere (And that is considered economical!).

Then the cabin is cleaned out with about XX dozen kilos of more hydro-carbons and landfill.

The toilets are emptied and l don't even want to go there....

The chain just goes on an on.

And this is one aeroplane in one airline of the thousands flying around the globe every day.

Exploration of further oil fields has been slow over the last twenty years as the price has not made it worth the oil companies time to do so. This is changing now, as is the consideration of nuclear power.

My thoughts of bio-fuels is that it takes a lot of hectares to make a few litres. Not very eco-friendly in my eyes. Looking at how much prime coastal land in QLD is taken up by the sugar industry and it's Mafia mills is very sad indeed, with regards to how much they contribute to the Australian GDP - not much!

two bob's worth over

halas