[Cross-posted at
BOPnews.com]
Ever since I read parts of Jeremy Rifkin's book, The Hydrogen Economy, I've been intrigued by the possibility of true energy freedom - not just from wars in carbon-producing countries or from Big Oil, but energy independence for individuals. Rifkin outlines a possible future where most, or all of us are responsible for generating our own renewable sources of energy, and selling the excess to the grid where others can purchase it. Your location - sunny Arizona or windy Chicago or the coast of Rhode Island - would dictate what type of renewable energy you produced, and you would store it in the form of water split into one of its components, hydrogen. When you need power, say, at night when your solar panels aren't useful, your hydrogen battery kicks in, producing water from the hydrogen - and electricity. You would probably fill your car at your own individual pump, right at home, with that hydrogen as well.
This idealized world would, of course, come at a price - the destruction of our ties with centralized power sources like oil companies and power plants.
You can imagine they are not sitting still and wait for this to happen.
I've lately been reading Greg Palast, Armed Madhouse. This book covers a whole range of things pertaining to the Iraq war. In doing so, Palast illuminates many things about the oil industry, because oil is so intricately intertwined with our Iraqi war of choice. If you haven't read it, you must.
All of this said, there are several things Palast has helped me to realize, ideas that I guess I've been aware of but not in full detail. The first one is, that oil companies rule the world.
When I say rule, I mean overlords of earth. The power they wield is dictatorial, albeit commodities-based. I should have seen it a long time ago. I mean, who else could have so completely clouded the waters for so long on global climate change despite overwhelming scientific evidence? Only an industry with enough money to buy God.
Their strength is never more apparent, however, then in the history of Iraq. Up to and including our oilmen-in-chiefs' decision to invade the hapless country. I won't go into every detail the book does (there is too much to go over), but suffice to say we didn't go into Iraq to steal their oil. We did it to suppress their oil. Well, all right, the neo-cons wanted to steal the oil (and break OPEC, which if they'd read recent history books they might have learned was a suicidal idea), but their side got beaten back by none other than the incredible power of the oil companies, before the neo-cons had a chance to see history repeat itself. Even Dick Cheney, a neo-con to the core, in the end wouldn't turn his back on the teat upon which he sucked.
It's not coincidence that the oil companies are making record profits after we took over the supposed second largest oil reserve in the world.
Another testament to the power of Big Oil is how established a conventional wisdom the Hubbert Peak became since the 1950s. Palast has a rock-solid argument as to why peak oil is a complete myth; one that was started by big oil itself, by its own Shell employee - Hubbert. If Palast is right, progressives have been helping Big Oil make big money by repeating this myth.
There is no doubt that someday, maybe even in our lifetimes, oil will run out, especially if we keep accelerating its use. Of course it will - it's a finite resource! However, the convenient "peak" theory came out at about the time, the 1950s, that the oil companies were looking at a depressed oil commodity market, one in which oil was plentiful and laying around to be sucked up. It was cheap. Too cheap. And in the commodities market, rarity brings up price. So, they had their scientist come up with the Peak theory, which every pundit and progressive utters. I even heard it on John Stewart the other day - "running out of fossil fuels" as part of a joke he was making. It's pervasive, but that doesn't mean it's right - just like the falsehood that there's a conflict between many scientists over global warming.
Speaking of that environmental catastrophe which is already killing people, what does a shift in "peak oil" thinking do to our fight to stop using carbon-based fuels? It could hurt it. First, if people knew how plentiful future oil stocks would be for the near future, the price would drop, and people would once again buy SUVs instead of Priuses. It also means that if the oil companies get their way, they will continue to deceive the public, falsely crying "rarity! peak!" for decades, then pump out oil for our consumption at ridiculous prices, with no end in sight. By the time we really see the effects of climate change, it'll be far too late to reverse its major effects.
On the other hand, if it becomes evident that prices are too high and people start to turn to alternatives (by people, I mean the polluting US of A primarily), Big Oil and its cartel, OPEC, will lower prices to a breezy $50 per barrel by increasing production, just to keep the party going for a while longer. The $80/barrel oil so far has not panicked people too much (why, I don't know!), but it might begin to spook some governments (at least ones without oil barons in charge). Price too high? No problem. Big Oil will state that its reserves aren't really that low and procure us some more of that slick black drug. In other words, we're gonna get the lower prices (probably), and the subsequent problems, anyway. It is in the oil companies' best interest to create a balance between scarcity and abundance, getting the highest price they can without causing an upset to the energy usage which gives them their best profit.
If there is no peak, we are better off knowing that. What the oil companies don't want you to know is hurting you. What we need to understand is, regardless of peak or not peak, the rest of the carbon-rich oil needs to stay locked in the ground. We must switch to renewable carbonless energy, and a decentralized grid. And arrayed against us is the oil cartel which has controlled the geo-political landscape for decades. It's hard to be hopeful that we'll win out against these giants, who slapped Venezuela and Russia down for trying to break the cartel, who can crash economies or save the flagging reelection bids of their allies across the globe.
It is fallen to the current crop of spineless Democrats to stand up to Big Oil (on occasion in history, we actually have - like JFK!). People are already suspicious of Oil's record profits; time to make political hay from it. It's not immoral to use this issue to fight the Republicans. Because the people are right. They are being bamboozled. And here's the kicker: if we don't grab hold of this issue with all our might, we will kill our planet.
I have a winning issue for Democrats to use this fall, every fall from here on out. It's not new. It's been said before so many times it hurts my head, by people much smarter than me.
Attack Republicans on energy. I know, energy doesn't seem to get too much excitement in the polls. Know why? Because BP is out there with some very innovative ads lying through their teeth about their intentions.
There is no excitement in politics without creating it yourself. The global warming issue is sexy. Criticizing high gas prices and oil cartels does resound. And talking about our opportunity, our need, to wean ourselves off of our addition - one which has cost countless lives, unnecessary wads of cash, and hurt economies - will win at the polls.
This fight is impossible. It's against all the odds, history shows us it's an uphill battle. The stakes? Only humanity's right to live, thrive, and progress.