« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
A Question -- How much for a great country in decline?
Most of us view the world through dollar glasses. It's perfectly reasonable. Dollars, after all, are the currency we use in daily life. And those lenses, until recently, were distinctly rosy.
When we asked, "How much is that in dollars?," we usually liked the answer.
But it may be time to ask another question: "How much is that in barrels of oil?"
Trust me, others are doing exactly that.
That's when the world starts to look very different. It also looks more than a little scary to the U.S. Today, the net worth of the entire country is equivalent to a mere 400 billion barrels of oil. That's a smidgeon less than the proven reserves of two Middle Eastern countries: Saudi Arabia (264 billion barrels) and Iran (139 billion barrels).
At more than 40 times its 1970 price, oil has outstripped the value created by a full working generation of Americans in a period of dramatic technological change and innovation. During the same time, the value of American business shares, as measured by the S&P 500 Index ($INX), has risen only about 15 times above its 1970 level.
Here is the link
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/HowMuchOilItdTakeToBuyTheUS.aspx?page=all
Comments (2)
But oil is still too cheap.
A shell-shocked Fast Money panel takes time away from Fannie and Freddie to hear the really bad news from Matt Simmons. Simmons tells them that this is not a temporary energy spike and that oil prices are actually too low because of short-selling.
Simmons feels we should have explored the entire continental shelf decades ago, while we had drilling rigs, so we'd know what we really had there.
He advises that we retreat from our addiction to oil, start living in villages again, eliminate long-distance commuting, invest an enormous amount of R&D in ocean energy and geothermal. "Unfortunately, we're not having a wakeup call, we're having a witchhunt - for who got us here."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkzETN8qfzw
July 16, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I saw that, the panel was speechless until they turned it into what every discussion on that show turns into--short term schemes.
I also saw Amory Lovins on Charlie Rose last night and he was refreshingly clear on our energy situation. I don't think the clip is available yet but here is a link to his website. http://www.rmi.org/
Some of the smartest people have been pointing out how dire the situation isn't--or doesn't have to be. And that's why I think it's good to tune into what he and others outside of congress are saying.
Regarding the OCS and ANWR, Lovins doesn't believe there's even a business model that makes any sense to drill in these high-risk areas. High-risk in ANWR especially because that geographic area is so difficult to manage. In fact, Lovins suggested that he doesn't even think it's economically viable for oil companies to drill in the low-risk areas, already leased and that's why there's still no activity.
He doesn't believe nuclear energy is viable either.
Unlike some whose minds revolve entirely around fossil fuels, he suggests that we already have the right technology to get off oil. We just have to make a commitment to deploy it and create a scalable plan.
This country is just sitting on its hands, unable to move forward because we have lifelong oil men running our government.
If you surf around the net, you'll start to see, as I have, how far along other countries are with alternative energy. Check out the commitment Saudi Arabia has made to solar and wind power--google dynamic architecture.
I just read something about the commitment Mercedes is making--their entire line of automobiles will be fossil-fuel free by 2015. They may not make it but that's the kind of thinking that will move us into the 21st century, albeit 10 years late.
July 16, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment