Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008 Change Date

The Scotsman Digital Archive - Special Christmas Offer

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Bush to Arab nations: You're running out of oil



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 19 May 2008
PRESIDENT George Bush yesterday told leaders of the oil-rich states of the Middle East that they must face up to a future without their precious hydrocarbons.
In a stark warning, he said their supplies were running out and urged them to reform and diversify their economies. The outgoing United States president told the World Economic Forum, meeting in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, that it was ti
me to "prepare for the economic changes ahead".

Mr Bush's family name is inextricably linked to the oil industry, and this was his strongest statement yet on the future of global supplies.

He told the conference: "The rising price of oil has brought great wealth to some in this region, but the supply of oil is limited, and nations like mine are aggressively developing alternatives to oil.

"Over time, as the world becomes less dependent on oil, nations in the Middle East will have to build more diverse and more dynamic economies."

Mr Bush also used his speech to call for more investment in people and "extending the reach of freedom", as well as urging other nations to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, and to isolate Syria.

He particularly mentioned women's rights, saying they were key to building powerful economies. He cited Egypt as a model for the development of professional women, girls going to school in Afghanistan and women joining political parties in Iraq and Kuwait.

In an apparent criticism aimed at Saudi Arabia, he told the forum: "This is a matter of morality and of basic math. No nation that cuts off half its population from opportunities will be as productive or prosperous as it could be. Women are a formidable force, as I have seen in my own family and my own administration. As the nations of the Middle East open up their laws and their societies to women, they are learning the same thing."

The president's speech was made only days after he urged Saudi Arabia to increase oil production to ease prices at the pumps, as millions around the globe face increasing costs of filling up and even more grapple with rising food bills.

The future of Scotland's own North Sea oil supply is an issue for both politicians and consumers, who were given a taste of limited fuel shortages during the Grangemouth refinery dispute.

The US has turned dramatically towards biofuels, with Congress raising the federal requirement for using the oil alternative from 6.5 billion gallons last year to nine billion gallons this year. As a consequence, about a quarter of the American corn crop was used for biofuels last year, driving up the price of corn and, hence, also the price of food for millions of families.

Predictions of when the world's oil supplies will fall below global demand range from as early as the next decade, to as late as 2050. Mr Bush has been criticised throughout his term in office for not encouraging more energy alternatives in the US, and for allowing controversial drilling explorations for new fossil-fuel supplies in often environment-ally sensitive areas, such as Alaska.

Analysts warned last night that few in the Middle East, which has two-thirds of the world's oil reserves, are likely to heed Mr Bush. Many have already started diversifying their economies and do not like being preached to by someone so unpopular in the region.

Gerald Butt, editor of the authoritative Middle East Economic Survey, said: "The Gulf states have been trying to diversify their economies away from oil for years, so they'll say, 'This is like teaching your grandmother to suck eggs'.

"Arab states don't like being told what to do by outsiders, and especially by America, whose standing in the region is very low. Bush's comments will be dismissed as unwarranted interference."

Although he praised parts of the Arab world, commentators said Mr Bush had angered many with a speech at the Israel parliament last Thursday, in which he offered unflinching support for the Jewish state but mentioned the Palestinian dream of statehood only once.

Walid Khadduri, a Beirut-based consultant, pointed out that the Gulf states had already been investing windfall profits from high oil prices in major infrastructure projects, including education and housing, and in diversifying their industrial bases.

He said: "Bush's credibility is zero anyway. I really don't know anyone who follows what he says, especially after what has happened in Iraq and then his Knesset speech the other day."

The knock-on effect of rising fuel costs has led to increasing food prices and subsequent riots around the globe, as high prices hit some of the world's poorest.

There is now a desperate attempt to find oil from alternative sources to keep the supply flowing.

Potential sources in Canada would cost almost three times as much to produce as conventional crude oil because they have to be extracted from tar sands. Although the supply, in Alberta, is estimated to be second in size only to Saudi Arabian reserves, the production costs are unlikely to offer much relief for consumers.

While the Bush presidency has tried to reduce its dependence on foreign oil, it has yet to decrease fuel use, say critics.

While the UK produces about 0.3 per cent of the world's supply of oil and uses about 2 per cent, the US produces 2.5 per cent but uses 24 per cent.

Family dynasty is soaked in black gold

BOTH George H Bush and George W Bush will be remembered almost as much for their connections to oil as to the presidency.

Bush Snr owes his fortune to Texas crude, while his son also took posts in the industry before following in his father's footsteps into politics.

Commentators have accused Bush jnr's drive to war in Iraq as merely a quest for oil, with potentially billions of dollars in profit to be made from opening up the country's oil reserves – if Iraq was ever stable.

George Bush Snr, who was president from 1989 to 1993, became a millionaire off the oil industry by the age of 40 in Texas. He started the Bush-Overby Oil Development company in 1951 and co-founded the Zapata Petroleum Corporation two years later. He served as the firm's president from 1954 to 1964. He then entered politics.

After gaining an MBA from Harvard University, Bush Jnr worked in the family oil businesses.

He became a senior partner and chief executive officer of Arbusto Energy, Spectrum 7 and Harken Energy.

Arbusto Energy obtained financing early on from James Bath, a close Bush family friend and in 1979 the sole US business representative of Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi family and brother of Osama bin Laden.

Don't expect high prices and shortages of petrol to improve in the short term

ANALYSIS: George Kerevan


HOW close are we to "peak oil", when the world's oil supplies will start to diminish? Petroleum output has shot up by a nearly third since the early 1990s to around 83 million barrels per day, suggesting we are able to squeeze more production when necessary.

But the International Energy Agency predicts oil demand will double between now and 2030 as a result of rising car use in countries such as China. As no major oil fields – those with over 500 million barrels – have been discovered for a generation, this rising demand will be very difficult to meet.

One source will be in small oil fields of the kind being hunted by Scottish companies such as Cairn Energy. Such fields are expensive to find and costly to tap due to the huge infrastructure required. The fact that oil has shot up to $128 (£65) a barrel – the highest ever even taking account of inflation – might make this possible.

But it is unlikely there will be a serious increase in global output for around a decade given the time it takes to build pipelines and tanker terminals. So expect high petrol prices (and shortages) to remain for the near term. Even then, this is likely to be the last surge in oil output and we will reach peak oil by 2030, if not before.

Another source of oil lies in the vast tar sands of Canada. But extracting useable oil from tar involves a vastly expensive industrial process which also results in big emissions.

It is possible to squeeze extra oil from older fields such as the North Sea. This is done by pumping water (or ) into the wells to blow out more oil. But this destroys the sponge-like membranes which contain the petroleum, meaning you get more oil out in the short term but less in the longer term.

Gordon Brown wants Opec to pump more oil to bring down prices. But experts suspect that the size of Opec reserves (80 years at current consumption) have been greatly exaggerated by local politicians. If so, peak oil could be here sooner than we think – some predict as early as 2012.





The full article contains 1507 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 May 2008 4:52 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

19/05/2008 00:18:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

,

19/05/2008 00:18:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

,

19/05/2008 00:47:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Reader11722,

NY, NY 19/05/2008 01:00:40
Oil prices are rising because the Federal Reserve keeps printing money (aka inflation). Unbacked paper money, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Write in Dr. Ron Paul and save this great country.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0
5

livilion,

livingston 19/05/2008 01:05:27

Actually the US might have to get used to Canada calling the shots. The Canadians have well over 100 years of oil to be tapped.
Now what excuse could they come up with for invading there?
6

Scullion,

Canada 19/05/2008 01:31:40
#7 Canada has already flexed its oily muscles in response to the two Democratic contenders who tried to disingenuously blame NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement)for U.S. manufacturing troubles. Canada stated that if they unilaterally opt out of that, Canada will unilaterally revisit current oil export charges to the U.S. Also, if we are invaded, we expect help from Britain as we helped them during WWI and II.
7

Smilin' Jack,

Mexico 19/05/2008 01:36:52
It is amazing how many swallow the leftist nonsense (including Pres Bush). Fact is there is PLENTY of oil:

-Several hundred billion barrels in the Bakken formation in the upper Midwest, production cost under $20/barrel.

-At least a hundred billion in Alaska, less cost.

-Several hundred billion offshore (Gulf of Mexico) $25/Barrel

-Many hundred billions in oil shale at $30/Barrel

-Many hundred billions in coal gasification at $30/Barrel.

-Microwave recovery technology is ready to recover from old wells another hundred billion at under $25/Barrel.

All of this should supply the US needs, with growth, for many centuries. Why not now? Politics, dirty, dirty politics; the anti-capitalist leftists impede real progress. While they play their self serving power games, there is a massive transfer of wealth from the US to radical, hostile countries.
8

SPCartman44,

USA 19/05/2008 01:40:30
Why do you think this push to form a North American Union is being rushed? Oil from Mexico and Canada, of course. Is it worth it for the U.S. to lose its sovreignty to beoome part of the triumvirate of the 3 countries on the North American continent? Wake up people...I supported Bush...but not anymore...and I always thought his father was a dishonest weasel.
9

Greg Neubeck,

USA 19/05/2008 02:24:56
The average American is appalled at the ever escalating price of gasoline/transportation costs and the impact that these costs are having on the family budget. Further, as we're well aware, transportation costs ripple through the entire American economy on every essential commodity that we're required to purchase such as food. The latter being accentuated by an erroneous emphasis on an inefficient petroleum substitute, ethanol, which actually inhibits our attempts to achieve higher mileage standards. In an America with POTENTIALLY vast energy resources, why have we allowed ourselves to become willing victims of cartel energy piracy from highly unstable, unfriendly fanatical regimes, from whom we now import a substantial segment of our petroleum needs? Imports which continuously drain wealth from America in the form of an unfavorable balance of trade; and, conversely flow petro-dollars into the coffers of Islamofacists and others who would destroy America given the opportunity. Were it not for America's dependence on these Middle-East petroleum imports, we could conveniently extricate ourselves from this cauldron of fanaticism; and, allow the fanatics to wallow in their self imposed misery and virulent hatred for Western culture.

The fundamental question is WHO do we blame for this self-imposed dilemma?

America originated nuclear power; and yet, we produce only 20% of our domestic electrical energy from the nuclear option while countries such as France produce 78%, and have programmed significantly more, dramatically reducing their dependence on fossil fuels. The safety issue on nuclear power is a non-sequitur given the hundreds of thousands of operating hours on U.S. Naval nuclear propulsion systems without incident. But yet, LEFT-WING FRINGE ELEMENTS in our society THAT COMPRISE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE BASE OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY have for 30yrs. managed to bring America's nuclear industry to a standstill.

Our Nation possesses an abundance of untappe
10

Pyeatte,

USA 19/05/2008 03:00:39
I don't think people realize just how fast the US economy will adjust to the oil issue. With the rapid introduction of hybrid vehicles and usable electrics, the use of oil in this country will rapidly decrease from current levels. Ultimately, there will probably be another oil bust where supply will outstrip demand.
11

celtic4,

USA 19/05/2008 03:34:18
I have to agree, there is plenty of oil, but not enough refineries. We need to build the refineries and go after our OWN oil, and let those countries we currently are buying it from do without our millions. I know it will cost money and time, but the USA needs to wake up and smell the coffe/tea.
And former Pres. Bill Clinton, within his first four years of office got our national debt down to zero,and within Bush's first year it went back up into the trillions! Government..get real here! We can't keep this up! Someone(and I don't care which one it is) needs to start paying down our national debt!Geez!
12

Oregon Scot,

Salem 19/05/2008 03:38:02
"I don't think people realize just how fast the US economy will adjust to the oil issue. With the rapid introduction of hybrid vehicles and usable electrics, the use of oil in this country will rapidly decrease from current levels. Ultimately, there will probably be another oil bust where supply will outstrip demand."


I would like to think your are correct, but in reality hybrids and electrics can only do so much. The production of these vehicles cannot replace the amount of regular gas-guzzlers on the American roads.
I think minds are changeing but many including my wife, still love the V-8s, she bought a brand new V8 Dakota this year, she will never buy a small car, me i always prefer small ( still driving my old escort).
13

John Butler,

Essex County, VA, U.S.A. 19/05/2008 04:05:52
Red China is a militarized country that depends entirely on imported oil. I suppose there is no need to worry about them though. We certainly did not worry about the Japanese back in 1941, did we? Everyone has forgotten about Saddam Hussein's refusal to allow nuclear inspectors into his country. Everyone has forgotten Russia borders Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Russia is another militarized country, not quite as dedicated to personal freedom as the U.S.A. Compare what the U.S.A. is trying to give Iraq to what Russia tried to give Afghanistan. Think about what the U.S.A. did with their military after WWII for Europe in general. We gave you our Army and missiles to prevent Stalin from taking your freedom. During and after WWII we helped Europe get back their peace. And now you have all determined we are the evil empire. Please tell me why I should feel bad about my countries history of dying for the freedom of you people. Oh, wait. I get it now. You will spit on us once you have become used to your freedom bought with our blood, and money. You all make me want to puke. I hope I live to see how comfortable you are with Russia when we take our troops home from Europe.
14

celtic4,

USA 19/05/2008 04:18:05
#15, You need to get a life! We also fought for OUR freedom, remember? Oh no, you're too busy puking. Well, you need to eat some strawberry jam and get over your bitterness against whomever you're bitter toward. I cannot figure out just who you don't like, yourself maybe?
As for Canada, they are our neighbors and we would never invade them. What a silly notion that is! Wow. Where do you people come from anyway? Get real.
15

Fred55,

USA 19/05/2008 04:41:22
"Family dynasty soaked in black gold" What a snarky little article. Bush is far from perfect but beats most European pols kow towing to the IslamoFacists. As far as energy, don't cry or write off America just yet. We have probably 5 times the Saudis reserves in shale oil, coal diesel and 100 billion barrels in North Dakota. It can be accessed for $35 a barrel if the leftist politicians would get out of the way. We also have ANWR, offshore reserves and other sourcs of energy. Ford has a Escape SUV plug-in hybrid (PHEV) that is in testing that gets 100 + mpg. We also could build dozens of free energy geothermal power plants to handle the PHEV electricity demands.

If PHEVs take off then oil will plunge. The U.S. also can prodcue more food than any country in the world. I like our chances. As far as Canada, they are a good neighbor and as long as Obama and the Clintons stay out of the White House and don't try to renegotiate NAFTA then Canada should remain happy. America has the energy but development is being blocked by faux environmentalists politicians like Al Gore getting rich off the Global Warming fraud. Gore's family have been big shareholders in Occidental Petroleum for decades and Obama has connections to oil money in the Middle East.
16

Scullion,

Canada 19/05/2008 05:02:34
#16 You must learn what is and what is not kidology in these forums. However, the U.S. isn't shy about protecting its own interests but I agree that they wouldn't invade Canada-they'd just buy it.
17

Oregon Scot,

Salem 19/05/2008 05:04:51
#17
Not so fast bucko!
Yes there are estimated to be upwards of 100 billion barrels of oils in the Bakken Shales of ND, but at present only 4 billion could be recovered, nothing to do with enviromentalists, just technology. Its harder to harvest good quality crude from shale.
ANWAR has an extimated 10 billion barrels total.
Folks may think these are large figures but back in 2004 the total world consumption was 30 billion barrels of which the USA used around 25% thus 7.5 billion barrels so adding the Bakken depeosts now recoverable to the totality of ANWAR we get around 15 billion..only two years use for the USA, hardly cause for boasting.
18

Oregon Scot,

Salem 19/05/2008 05:40:21
#20
He has been busy begging the Saudis to boost production and being slapped down like a impudent lap-dog.
19

postmark54,

Chongqing, China, 19/05/2008 06:01:28
#15 John Butler,
Actually, at present, China is importing only half of the oil it uses, the rest is our own. We're stockpiling it for the future, a smart thing to do. We have huge oil, gas, and coal reserves, as well as mega projects like the Three Gorges Dam, so we are quite self sufficient, just looking to secure our future. Now of course we are dealing with a terrible tragedy due to the earthquake a week ago, so that's first on the agenda, everything else takes a back seat to that now.
20

Pilrig.,

Livingston 19/05/2008 06:02:27
10 a chip off the old block. And you voted to re-elect Dubya ????!!!!????!!!!
21

Alfred E. Neuman,

19/05/2008 06:04:22
And along came a fox, he looked to the top of the vine and watched the crow eating grapes, "I would like to eat grapes too Mr Crow", "But if I come down to give you some you will eat me Mr Fox, I do not trust you", "F**k you Mr Crow, your f***ing grapes are probably all sour anyway, I didn't want any in the f***ing forst place, only losers eat grapes."
22

Pilrig.,

Livingston 19/05/2008 06:05:40
17 - an of course the Bush dynasty has nothing to do with Islamofacists ? he's just visited Saudi for Christs sake !!!
23

El Sabio,

Sibbertoft 19/05/2008 06:53:57
Better harness solar energy before it runs out in 5 billion years time
24

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 19/05/2008 06:58:40
Oil is a finite fuel, not a renewable. As any good economist (like me) will tell you, we should live off income (renewables) not capital (fossil fuels). It's as simple as that.

If SNP actually does invest our oil wealth into long term production rather than short term consumption, Scotland may indeed have a rosy future. The trouble is it will be tempted to waste the wealth on vote-catching tax reduction, etc, just as Thatcher did.
25

Olden Atwoody,

Upper Darby, UK 19/05/2008 07:26:53
This is stupid: "President George Bush tells leaders of the oil-rich states of the Middle East that they must face up to a future without their precious hydrocarbons, the their supplies were running out and urged them to reform and diversify their economies."

Has he yet publicly stated this in a speech to the Americans that THEY must face up to a future without their precious hydrocarbons, and THEY must reform and diversify their economies?

No, never!

What lunacy!
26

,

19/05/2008 07:53:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
27

Rabhairt,

Cannons Creek Australia 19/05/2008 07:56:05
Persident Brush never ceases to amaze me, he's telling the Arabs what to do for their future, has anybody told him that his country uses 25% of the worlds oil and other resoures and soon he will run out of countries to invade, I don't think Russia owes him any favours and the Canadians are keeping a close watch on things,I remember several years ago at a summit in South America on the energy problems, the US delegate stood up and said quite clearly " the USA's standard of living is not up for discussion.
28

,

19/05/2008 08:06:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
29

Unimpressed one,

19/05/2008 08:30:02
#6, We have suffered most of your list here in the UK, but unlike you Americans we have no constitution.
30

Isonomia,

Lenzie 19/05/2008 08:38:57
Oil is running out, the world economy is about to go into freefall when the west discovers that motor cars don't run on anything else other than oil, and that you can't even deliver coal to a house to light a fire (does any modern house have a fire?) without oil - or at least a horse (how long will it take to breed enough horse?)

And what is the number one priority of the world? A miniscule 0.4C rise is global temperature at the end of the 20th century which has since stopped!

"If we carry on as we are global temperatures might rise by as much as ..... 2C this century". 2C! I looked at the garden thermometers as the DIY store and there was more than 2C difference between them.

The truth is that "if we carry on as we are .... " we are going to run out of oil and global warming will not only be impossible, but a 2C rise will look such as delight compared to the turmoil and wars that will happen as everyone fights over the remaining energy supplies that we will look back with fond memories to the niaivity of this decade!
31

Isonomia,

Lenzie 19/05/2008 09:11:34
#36 Rabhairt: "the USA's standard of living is not up for discussion."

The difference between the US and the UK was apparent in the rational for invading Iraq. We invaded because god told our PM that Sadam was a nasty man. The US invaded because the US needs to keep control of the middle Eastern oil fields.

And, for those who think the impending oil crisis "might be as bad as the 1970s", the truth was the 1970s wasn't an oil crisis, it was a change in attitude by the OPEC countries about the price of oil - as in "we are willing to supply the West Oil but we are setting the price".

What we are facing is not a change in price because the oil producers want a fair price, but a rocketing in price because there isn't any oil left!
32

Ayegudyin,

19/05/2008 09:45:54
How can the Bush baby think that he can preach to the middle east? this part of the world is the sworn enemies of Dubya and his murderous famliy. He sends in his minions, spreads disease and famine, throws in a few cruise missiles for good measure and steals all their Oil. then he says, "Oh! by the way, your gonna run out of oil when iv nicked it all... better find some other way of funding your weapons programs which i still can't find"
33

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/05/2008 09:47:41
Blimey, I had no idea the Scotsman had so many readers in Jesusland. America controlled by "leftists"? Good one!
34

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 19/05/2008 09:52:34
You only THINK you have the clinic on the phone, love. That's a herring you're holding to your ear.
35

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 19/05/2008 09:54:20
Who the hell in their right mind would listen to this looney?
36

William Blake,

Heaven 19/05/2008 10:03:16
Why dont you tribe just vote for independence and get it over with.....PLEASE!
37

William Blake,

19/05/2008 10:23:58
More debate my a%*e do it, do it.....Please.
38

William Blake,

19/05/2008 10:26:49
There is a difference between debate and whinging and whining, old bean.
39

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 19/05/2008 10:35:59
#31 Dave.

You are slipping a bit there, Dave. I'm sorry to think of you sitting in your black house in a puddle of urine. Still, what ever turns you on, as they say.

Now, how about dealing with my comment made back there in #30?
40

E. Smith,

Texas 19/05/2008 11:02:05
1) The Scotsman has lots of readers in "Jesusland" because some very greedy landlords preferred profits over Highland peasants, driving their crofters off the land.
2) Scarcity drives supply and demand. During the 1930s, Germany needed Lebensraum while Japan needed the oil that the US embargoed. Similarly, G. W. Bush saw 9-11 as an excuse to secure the oil reserves of the Middle East. He miscalculated. G. W. Bush is correct in his assessment, but, of course, he doesn't practice what he preaches.
41

Tommy Trout,

Alicante, Spain 19/05/2008 11:08:36
This is a good one coming from the President of a country that capped most of it's oil and stockpiled it 30 years and more past and has been guzzling cheap Middle East oil ever since.  Now the price has gone up GRW, aka the village idiot, is telling them to increase their production, to drop the oils prices and warns them their reserves will not last forever.  Sorry, this is full of contradictions...as per his normal course of conversation.  What he really means is give us, the USA, more cheap oil so we can continue to guzzle it and screw everybody else. 
42

Fairfax,

19/05/2008 11:10:10
Reader 1722 (7): "banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon."

This poor piece of conspiracy theory is NOT banned on Amazon: here's its page:

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/059538523/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?_encoding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R1OQQ9W14D6IMM

43

William Blake,

19/05/2008 11:10:52
E smith Texas, I assume you mean the scottish landlords.
44

E. Smith,

Texas 19/05/2008 11:25:23
Re #68: Of course.
45

Alfred E. Neuman,

19/05/2008 11:25:36
69 Bring them blah

Anyone who openly doesn't believe in freedom to express an opinion should be shot and their writings burned.
46

Stirling Sentinel,

Stirling 19/05/2008 11:34:11
It is very interesting to see that the early postings put in between Midnight and 6.00am British time invariably contain well balanced argument and sensible comment on issues, mainly from readers in USA. After 6.00am we get ludicrous,vulgar, and facetious comment from the natives here in Scotland. The educational gap is only too visible. Quite embarrassing !!
47

David T.,

Polworth 19/05/2008 11:42:58
The Bush family didn't just make their fortune from oil!!!

http://www.rense.com/general26/dutch.htm
48

kimba,

19/05/2008 11:44:54
usually don't have time for bush and his rhetoric,this time though he's spot on.
49

ladyluck,

USA 19/05/2008 11:57:25
I really could care less how people get rich, including the Bushes,so long as it is done legally. The fact is that GW is right about the future of the oil industry. Of course, the world has known for decades that they must diversify away from oil and the time has come.
50

Alfred E. Neuman,

19/05/2008 11:59:49
77 Kimba

As usual your postings are void of reason or intellect.

The Iraqi government under Saddam Husien had more women than either of the UK or US governments that overthrew it.

So what exactly is spot on about bush's rhetoric on women? They already were using women in society.

Bush preaches freedom must extend, and then defines freedom as American, they are/were already free in the middle east. It was the UK that overthrew the progressive socialists on behalf of BP's oil interests in Iran in the 50s/60s, so we have the west to blame for the tyrrants we installed.

Can you not see what bush really means? He means some of the best energy engineers in the world are based in the middle east, he wants them to invent a technology for the west. Do you think he is going to divert money from the bankers, owners, administrators, actors, playwrites, military budgets in the US to fund a new technology, hell no.
51

Alfred E. Neuman,

19/05/2008 12:02:11
79 ladyluck

Mining on the moon can provide Helium 3 which will help create circumstances for colder fusion on Earth. The middle-east are famed for space exploration, eh?

Another red-herring while the yanks, ruskies and China race for the moon leaving the UK and other thickos to play with their wind wills.
52

Alfred E. Neuman,

19/05/2008 12:18:17
82

Aye, the technology is nearly in place. Lockheed Martin already have machines that can turn dust into water, and remote control robots to do the mining yesterday's technology. So keeping a working colony up there is getting close.

But the UK doesn't care much for space, let's play with solar energy technology is being so close to the equator and all. FFS.

Although maybe we'll get another few decades of oil from the Falklands, assuming Scotland isn't sitting looking at it's own empty wells after Salmond cons the thick proles to believe in his eutpian la-la energy land.
53

CLX,

ABZ 19/05/2008 13:39:14
As far as oilfields are concerned, there have been at least 3 discovered off Brazil within the last year.
One of the fields is estimated to contain 300billion barrels (conservative est) and the other 2 around the same combined.
With the US pumping oil back into dried up wells they make sure they'll be fine and s0d everyone else...

God bless the US of As**oles
54

David T.,

Polworth 19/05/2008 13:51:57
#79 Lady Luck

If you go to the link I put up you'll see that the Bush family fortune was made in ways that were far from legal.

Allegedly.
55

JCA REID,

Annan 19/05/2008 13:55:45
Typical USofA!! Only 3% of the world's population but consuming 25% of the world's oil production annually.
& England/Westminster say that Scotland would be impoverishedelying on oil. Recently released state papers confirm that for for the past 30years England/UK has relied on North Sea production. It is they that WOULD BE IMPOVERISHED!
56

georgia,

somewhere outside chicago 19/05/2008 14:24:34
There are two ways to look at the Shrub's words:

Either he is higher up on the world totem pole than we think he is (i.e., he can actually lecture Arabs on their crass denial of the benefits of hybridization, etc.) (!) or

He is, as one or two have already mentioned, just spouting off so that his legacy won't all be lines like "It looks like a budget. It has a lot of numbers in it." This from an Master in Business Administration from Harvard! As I have previously suggested, he should return his degree in disgrace!

The Bush family is actually revered in Kuwait, for whom Bush Daddy did the early Iraqi attacking. The jewelled goblets and necklaces and other precious knicknacks took a couple of clerical people several weeks to catalogue, it is said. They also have a name for Bush Daddy, something like "Imperial Savior" or other such rubbish. (When Israel's turn comes to be protected by us, if there is much left of the world, whomever fights for them will also probably get a lot of loot as well. For now, all-expense-paid vacations to the Middle East resorts will just have to do for congressmen and First Family members.

By the way, has anyone in London or Edinburgh seen Jen and Hen, the newlywed couple? We have heard they are going to Europe for their honeymoon, and I thought maybe someone would spot them on Princes Street or in the Portabello Road market, mixing with the mere mortals.....
57

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 19/05/2008 14:31:32
Oils well that ends well!!!
58

celtic4,

USA 19/05/2008 14:35:23
I don't get why a lot of you trash Pres. Bush. So he's a nerd! Everyone knows that. But you don't like him, you didn't like Tony Blair, you don't like your city council or down "south"....so WHO DO you "like"? I don't see the point.
The USA did not "steal" oil from anyone. We buy it. And as for buying it, we have enough here of our own to last 200 years. I don't plan on being alive then, do you? So why worry?
59

charles t. sherwin,

pittsboro nc usa 19/05/2008 14:50:15
Let's see: Col Drake, Oil City, Pa, around 1854, "Look, Smedley, that stuff coming out of the ground, I say, what is that?" Smedley: "I don't know, sir, the Indians use it to rub on their red tummies to cure warts and burn it to keep warm in winter...EUREKA, sir, what if we could use this to replace whale oil, or the lard we get from the swine?" Drake: "Smedley, you boob you, that will never work as the world will not accept 'alternative fuel' so long as there are abundant wood supplies and whales to boot...why there are millions of them out there, and what to do with the whalers, why their families will starve, Smedley...good grief, the children, the wives having to go to Dublin on Montgomery Street to feed the little beggers." Smedley: "But sir, we must start sometime, somewhere. This country could lead the way, and build a standard of living unsurpassed by no other nation...we could build an Oil Industry, sir, and sell stock, and give everybody in the world a chance to keep warm and use this 'goo' for plastics, medicine..." Drake: "OK, Smedley, you boob you, we shall press on, but every other country is going to hate us for doing this, and they will be envious of our foresight...your foresight actually, as I consider you a boob, sir, and prefer whale blubber and pig fat for my utility, so there, Smedley...I have to change my trousers, Smedley...I have this stinking, smelley black crap on them, do we have any Naptha to clean them...wait, that's a byproduct of what?" Silly me.
60

georgia,

outside chicago 19/05/2008 14:58:54
#91

So I guess you're satisfied with eggs that cost almost 5 pounds a dozen, gasoline that has quadrupled since 2000, and a president who has made a laughingstock of the presidency by his total lack of civilized thinking...a buffoon, if you will, and proud of it!!

However, he is a trained buffoon, lapdog to Cheney and John Yoo and others who have been busily using the Bush name to further their imperialistic ambitions. While he isn't the sharpest pencil in the box, he certainly has the most lead, and so has been a useful buffoon....

Come to think of it, in a world obsessed with the comings and goings of inane celebrities (fueled, oddly enough, by Fox and other Rupert Murdoch-backed enterprises and a bunch of other right-wingers who decry American obsession with "Hollywood"), Bush is the perfect president for our times. He is uncouth, loud, thoughtless, and cunning. His children are silly and his wife's public pasted-on smile is reminiscent of one painted on a mannequin. There is no warmth, compassion, or "milk of human kindness" apparent anywhere in that whole family. In a country where one's neighbor's feelings and sensitivities have no value or seeming consequence, I can understand someone saying (#91) that if one is not alive in 200 years, who gives a rat's *ss what happens then....or even now, really, as long as one has one's own little crust of bread and a hovel to call home...Even Bush has said this. He is indeed the right president for our times.
61

Grumalg,

Los Angeles 19/05/2008 15:10:24
81

Mining he3 from the moon is a fantasy. We can trivially make all the he3 we want here on earth at a cost 10's of thousands of times smaller than it would cost to mine it on the moon. The reason we don't make it now is we have no practical use for it.

None of the approaches to fusion that use he3 has ever come remotely close to 'break even' where you get back as much energy as it takes to make the reaction happen. This includes all the 'cold fusion' approaches as well as the tokamak and laser designs.
Since no one will ever build a commercial fusion plant until you can get back 10 to 100 times the energy it takes to run the machine he3 is a moot point.

Even if a breakthrough occurs and 'break even' is exceeded, fusion isn't 'clean'. Most every fusion process releases large quantities of neutrons which gradually make the fusion machine more and more radioactive. This is especially true of all the tokamak type designs and laser designs. This means multi megaton machines will become multi megatons of radioactive waste once they become too 'hot' to allow maintainence of the machine.

The cleanest fusion cycle we know of is the p-B11 (proton/boron11) cycle which won't produce free neutrons. But none of the tokamak or laser designs can run that cycle as it takes much higher temperatures and confinement forces.

The only fusion approach I'm aware of that can run the p-B11 cycle is the polywell IECF design. While the polywell approach looks very promiseing, it hasn't yet been throughly verified. It's currently in the process of being verified and we may know by august if it's gonna pan out.
62

georgia,

outside of chicago 19/05/2008 15:24:31
#96

Actually, when a comma is called for, I do insert one. You have too many in your reply...

What does your first sentence even MEAN?

If I am ranting it is because I represent millions more like me, who have been tired of all this b.s. for the last eight years....spare me your judgment (although you have the right to make it, since it is supposedly still a free country). If a person such as myself can make the money I make, have modest expenses, and STILL not have enough to vacation in Britain but once every two years, what good is life???
63

Silence of the Yams,

19/05/2008 15:48:09
Nae oil, nae nothin! That's yir Middle East Islamic World!
64

Panther51,

Swansboro, NC, USA 19/05/2008 15:58:06
Bush just went to Saudi and begged them to INCREASE their output (because we refuse to produce our own)! And then he turns around and warns them that they are running out of oil after they refuse? - Good reason for them to say "Okay, let's slow production and increase prices even more to make it last then..." The man is an idiot (sadly though a better choice than Gore or Kerry) and our next Presidential crop looks worse yet!! Can I have a choice to vote for "None of the Above" or "Stop the Planet I want to get off?" in November ha.
65

Arrow,

ediburgh 19/05/2008 16:04:41
my grandfather had his own economic theory whereby all the money in the UK would be collected in and re-distributed with everyone in the UK getting the same amount. then, after he had spent his allowance it would be all gathered in again and re-distributed. that way he would never be short. simple when you think of it.
as for Bush and the "running out of oil" it is the US that is running out of everyone elses oil while keeping their strategic reserves capped. there is always the Canadian tar sands where there are deposits to rival the Middle East but expensive to process (at least they were but maybe its getting marginal. never know, the USA might find an excuse to invade Canada to get hold of that resource!
66

SquareNickel,

USA 19/05/2008 16:05:35
The United States has enough coal in such mass quantities as to exceed all of the oil in the world. Coal to gasoline is a reality! Now if Congress would stop playing politics and get off their backsides!
67

SquareNickel,

USA 19/05/2008 16:12:32
By the way, most of the media is reporting that when President Bush asked the Saudis to increase oil production they refused. This is not true! The Washington Post reported that the Saudis agreed to increase production by 300,000 barrels of oil per day! That's an increase of an additional 25 million barrels per year! The media is so biased!
68

okanaganguy,

kelowna, b.c. canada 19/05/2008 16:50:36
Several years ago, there was a big push to run cars on propane gas. Thus seemed to work quite well and was a cleaner burning fuel. Just a few years ago, there was considerable talk about using liquified natural gas. One would have expected to see natural gas pumps at the petrol stations but then again, that idea would be in conflict with the oil companies. Why do you think that the oil companies are not building more refineries to meet the increased demand for gasoline? And why do you think that the oil companies continue to post record profits even with the price of a barrel of oil skyrocketing? Something is amiss here, regards
69

Alex, Young Laird d' Drumchapel,

Madrid 19/05/2008 16:53:26
Eh, should Bush not be warning Israel?

I mean Israel will have no strategic significance to the US once the oil runs out, no? No shiney new tanks paid from US budgets which they call 'international aid' to slaughter Palestinians with..

They may have to use those nukes they say they don't have after all.
70

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 19/05/2008 17:02:48
#111 okanaganguy

LNG is pretty popular in some parts of the world. Most of the busses and tuk-tuks in Delhi run on LNG, also popular in Pakistan. It is still an oil/ gas product, though it can make car-crashes much more spectacular.
71

charles t. sherwin,

pittsboro nc usa 19/05/2008 17:07:34
This is not a supply problem, all who care, its a profit-motivated speculation issue that the investors have cooked-up by running up the price. Buy low, sell high, or hedge it, like the Clintons did with Cattle Futures. This too will end, and these greedy MF'rs will take a good bath, eventually, as did those f'rs did with Sugar Futures back in the 1970's. We did "save" our deposits back when oil was holding the world hostage (oil was less than $5 a barrel from the OPEC and our domestic was hovering around $20. We used to fill a tank for under $10 but only got about eight MPG, never more than twelve MPG, which a fill-up cost $40 until early '07 and it was hovering around $2, avg MPG around 25 MPG) and the Arabs WHOLE economy was oil production with American investment and technology, period. BP had some, as well as Phillips, but majority of capital was US. That had to change in order for world to have any sort of shared wealth and benefits of "the good life" (as far as I know we only have one chance at life, and should strive to make it as pleasant as possible for as many as possible) and if you think it has not worked, look at the way Europe has prospered after the War's, etc., and how it has prospered even since the 1970's. It is easy to blame the Yanks, but at least we take it in stride and "press-on" and Bush is a good guy, much smarter than given the credit--he just doen't care what the media says, but pushs on in spite of all the bad press; he has an MBA from Harvard and all the Dems here hate him because he is not a lawyer, and cannot lie like they can. Harvard is a good school, indeed, and they do not just pass those degrees out. GWB is also a pilot of jet aircraft--you have to have some intelligence for that task. History will judge GWB as a great president, who after 17 useless resolutions from the UN, removed that killer and his two idiot sons and "freed" 25 millions from their plight, as well as putting on notice that if you mess with the bull,
72

W Smith,

Middle East 19/05/2008 17:08:05
"Family dynasty is soaked in black gold"

Great little headline.

1) Maybe tomorrow we can have an article about multi-millionaire Democrat John Kerry that reads "FAMILY DYNASTY IS SOAKED IN OPIUM".

John Kerry's mother was Scottish (Forbes) and her family made their millions in the Hong Kong opium trade.

2) Another headline about Democrat multi-millionaire Ted Kennedy could read "FAMILY DYNASTY IS SOAKED IN ILLEGAL BOOZE".

The pious catholic Kennedys made much of their family fortune during Prohibition selling illegal booze.

'Unpopular' George Bush got re-elected along with 'unpopular' Tony Blair and 'unpopular' John Howard.

END OF STORY.

BTW
The muslim Kurds have yet to demonstrate AGAINST the Iraq war unlike Salmond and his followers who didn't have to live under UNELECTED Saddam's rule but insist that life under Saddam was good.

LIKE THEY WOULD KNOW.

The Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) has already signed conracts with american, EU and South Korean oil firms - BUT DON'T LET THE FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD RANT!

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/11/F16830F7-274A-4A7A-848B-EC48ECDE7C5F.html
73

Pump-It-Up,

Storrs CT, USA 19/05/2008 17:33:40
I Did not know grandmothers like to "suck eggs." And if they really don't like sucking eggs, then maybe they or SOMEONE might appreciate learning that recipe sometime! Bush did NOT say his "truth" merely for grandmothers! Nor did Bush address the problem of limited oil supplies to meet skyrocketing demand (demand from such as China & India too!) MERELY for Saudi Arabia to hear this painfully obvious truth. Or, does the "Scotsman" believe this world leader is being merely SPITEFUL to Saudis over their spurning his request to pump more of their own oil? And DOES the "Scotsman" perhaps also advocate tossing Isreal "over the side," by this article raising severe Arab criticizisms of Bush's speech strongly supporting that state when in the region? Such would certainly be an especially COWARDLY position to take in the face of Arabs twisting their oil spigot, not to mention their past intentions/attempts to chuck Israel into the sea (with NO "two-state" solution about it for them!)! I guess the "Scotsman" does NOT need Bush's lesson in "limited oil supply" though (and, not surprisingly, seems to generally HATE George Bush anyway), what with North Sea Crude being in the "pickle" that it is now: dwindling. BUT his own US citizens who may still buy an SUV certainly do need to hear this truth about "supply & demand," just as do India and China! Last night, CNN broadcast one full hour called "running out of gas." THAT is the first such TV documentary in a long time. Though MOST Americans otherwise have some "ignorant" clue about this supply problem, via prices at the pump rising rapidly within recent years. The "Scotsman" is just being plain SILLY to presume America's vast, dynamic economy can or should simply "reduce" fuel USE alone, or because of anything George Bush may say (yet another "ha/ha" criticism of Bush from the article). Reducing US dependence on foreign oil certainly has been "in order," just as the article grudgingly admits Bush has "tried" to accompl
74

Pump-It-Up,

Storrs, CT USA 19/05/2008 17:36:37
The "Scotsman" is just being plain SILLY to presume America's vast, dynamic economy can or should simply "reduce" fuel USE alone, or because of anything George Bush may say (yet another "ha/ha" criticism of Bush from the article). Reducing US dependence on foreign oil certainly has been "in order," just as the article grudgingly admits Bush has "tried" to accomplish but failed to, given US leftist attempts to thwart virtually ALL reasonable attempts to exploit any further, very significant domestic US supplies...So, let's ALL now "get going" on finding & using alternative fuels, & since US conservation alone cannot stop the slide into the dark. THIS is a global economic problem afterall, even in Scotland, instead of merely scapegoating the USA or its "lameduck" president, George Bush...That seems too easy, and even "cowardly!"

75

tonyloaf,

NY 19/05/2008 17:42:27
Based on the the charts provided in this article and the relative populations of the US and GB, Great Britain uses four times as much oil per capita as does the US.
76

voltaire's janny,

19/05/2008 17:46:47
116 Charles t Parochial

Oh my. You are quite right about W being the best educated pres you've had. Harvard MBA is first post-grad qualification ever by a Chief. As for "good guy", we'll see but I think not.

9/11 and Afghanistan were connected. Iraq was not. The 3000 dead in WTC are dwarfed by the 4000+ coalition dead and the 100,000 civilians. So why Iraq and not, say, Zimbabwe, North Korea or any other brutal regime?

O-I-L perhaps?

The fact that gas is politically subsidised in the States (i.e. taxed less than just about any other commodity) directly contributes to the poor gas mileage and extraordinary wastefulness of the US motorist. Most folk would simply be too embarassed to drive a 3 ton SUV on their own and leave the engine running to keep it cool while popping in a store for 10 minutes. But not y'all.

Dubya with his shiny MBA will know, as you do not sir, that supply and demand are linked and this immutable relationship is only modified by imperfections is the market including regulation, protection and, oh yes, w-a-r.

The price increases we see now are due to the increasing demand from India and China. As an oil man George knows that the ramp rate of exploitation of known reserves is now outstripped by that demand.

I expect this to cause a doubling of today's price in three years. For us that'll be the 2 pound litre. For you? Hope you enjoy the 5 dollar gallon. At least relish the fact that we'll be on 10 pounds an imperial gallon or about 16 dollars a US gallon.

If the population of China and India ever aspire to the wanton cosumerism of the west and the US in particular something will give. Today with one twentieth of the world's people the US consumes a quarter of ts resource. Nature moves to even out gradients; maybe in mysterious ways.



77

voltaire's janny,

19/05/2008 17:48:38
typo:imperfections IN the market... sorry
78

Oregon Scot,

Salem 19/05/2008 17:52:44
#91
According to this article/entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

The US has only 12 years of reserves at present consumption. Canda by comparison has over 180 years.

Were do people get their information?
79

Bemused in the US,

Pine Barrens of NC - where you sent all the paroll 19/05/2008 17:56:11
It amazes me the level of anti-US misinformation and misinterpretation prevalent across the Globe. I guess a bizarre succession of decline, apathy, envy and now animosity has developed - especially in old Europa. A total failure to grasp global economics and denial of the fact that your survival is intertwined with ours seems to rule the day. Dubious “facts” such as "The fat US gobbles XX% of the World's Oil...” or “The warmongering US invaded Iraq and support Israel because of Oil and War profiteering..” are bandied about by nitwits with little or no situational awareness or real FACTUAL context. Folks - not only does our economic machine buy the World's export crap to keep a "chicken in every pot" across the Globe, but we also help feed the World through massive grain exports. FACT: "in fiscal 2008 total US bulk food commodity exports will rise to 5 million tons - near-record levels, mostly on gains by wheat and corn." Do you know what the UK’s #1 “food” export is?? - Distilled Spirits! “Sorry you starvin’ lil’ begga’ no bread today – caar for some Juice O’ the Barley?” Lest we also not forget amount of US military, economic and political effort committed to keeping countries and national zealots off each others throats from Korea, to Kosovo. A responsibility most of “The West” and all of "The East" has comfortably abdicated over last 40 years! All of this takes energy, and in a Nation as large in population (both legal and ill-legal) and land mass as the US – just a little bit more than the per capita average in the "efficient" EU. Should we in the US curb consumption some through more efficiencies and alternatives – yes, and we are. But to keep the