Food Price Riots Popping Up Around The World

[gam197]

I am not sure if this was posted or not.

Bush release $200 million in emergency food aid.

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080414/pl_nm/usa_food_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Monday ordered the release of $200 million in U.S. emergency food aid to help alleviate food shortages in developing countries in Africa and elsewhere, the White House said.

 

[ricmat]

Are you familiar with abstinence?

Yes. I talk about it all the time in the CCD classes I teach. Do you teach it in your classes?

If that doesn’t work, time and the horsemen of the Apocalypse will do their gruesome work. Regrettably, I don’t have faith that humanity can live with abstinence, and I foresee periodic spasms of famine. epidemic and genocide. How I wish that weren’t likely to happen, but when food drops to a quarter of the present production without fossil fuel based fertilizers, and without petroleum to fuel the machines that cultivate, plant, harvest, transport, process and deliver the food, I doubt people will stand by peacefully watching while their children starve and supermarket shelves empty out.

Of course, if we commence a rational planning process now, we might forestall the worst of these spasms, at least in the US, but that takes political will that I don’t see on either side of the aisle. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md) is a lone voice in Congress who understands how serious this situation is.

Petrus

On the basis of the same type of incorrect speculation which has been around for thousands of years, you propose (or propose to allow) pre-emptive killing of human beings now on the basis of some sky-is-falling speculation that it will do someone in the future some good. One may not do evil in order that a good may come from it. That’s from the Catechism. And there’s no footnote that says “except if overpopulation is involved.”

I get the clear impression that you would support (or at least not oppose) artificial contraception as a part of the education and methods needed to achieve your goal of ZPG. Paul VI made it very clear that the outcome of artificial contraception would be abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, and other anti-life programs.

In contrast to the wild but ever recurring speculation of overpopulation, Paul VI’s analysis was correct and indeed we have paid the price. But then if you believe in overpopulation then you also believe that the overpopulation situation would be even worse today if these anti-life programs had not been so wildly successful. Rah rah for abortion.

God told us to go forth and multiply, at least twice (Adam & Noah).

God also told us to subdue the earth, again telling us at least twice. Perhaps this is part of his answer as to how we continue to go forth and multiply.

And I notice that your list of methods does not include prayer. Just a bit of God’s help can solve a lot of what we see as problems.

 

[ribozyme]

Yes. I talk about it all the time in the CCD classes I teach. Do you teach it in your classes?

On the basis of the same type of incorrect speculation which has been around for thousands of years, you propose (or propose to allow) pre-emptive killing of human beings now on the basis of some sky-is-falling speculation that it will do someone in the future some good. One may not do evil in order that a good may come from it. That’s from the Catechism. And there’s no footnote that says “except if overpopulation is involved.”

I get the clear impression that you would support (or at least not oppose) artificial contraception as a part of the education and methods needed to achieve your goal of ZPG. Paul VI made it very clear that the outcome of artificial contraception would be abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, and other anti-life programs.

In contrast to the wild but ever recurring speculation of overpopulation, Paul VI’s analysis was correct and indeed we have paid the price. But then if you believe in overpopulation then you also believe that the overpopulation situation would be even worse today if these anti-life programs had not been so wildly successful. Rah rah for abortion.

God told us to go forth and multiply, at least twice (Adam & Noah).

God also told us to subdue the earth, again telling us at least twice. Perhaps this is part of his answer as to how we continue to go forth and multiply.

And I notice that your list of methods does not include prayer. Just a bit of God’s help can solve a lot of what we see as problems.

And God didn’t read the chapters about ecology in Reece, Campbell, and Mitchell’s* Biology*.

 

[Abitreckless]

We need to pray for the hungry people of the world, and also realize that it could happen in our country to some extent.

I am gradually stockpiling some extra canned goods.

Some people are growing a vegetable garden. I have sandy soil, but zuccini spelling? grows well anywhere, and corn and potatoes are easy to grow, too, I have heard.

 

[Doug50]

You hear calls for ethanol. What’s wrong with that? EROEI (energy return on energy invested). At one time for every barrel of oil equivolent energy put in an estimated 100 barrels oil was recovered that went to run economic GDP. Now it’s estimated to be 20 to 1.

Why is oil so impotant to population and food? A picture is worth a 1000 words


what happens to population when petroleum supplies truns south?

Leaving the petrochemicals out for now, are we going to use hydrogen for transportation? We mine oil and gas so, unlike hydrogen, we don’t have to use some energy source to make petroleum. Unlike oil were is was 100-1 net postive EROEI, hydrogen will always be a negative EROEI. So to use hydrogen we have to use someother source of energy to make it. What are we going to use? Coal? Nuclear? Wind? Solar? Hydro?

We have 100s of years of coal just here in the US don’t we? Or do we? What you always hear is that we have that much at “current rates of consumption.” But consumption never stays at current rates. On average consumption grows every year. For example: in 1991 the USGS estimated the US had 500 years of coal reserves. But from 1971 to 1991 the US rate of growth in coal usages grew on average only 2.86% per year. If you put $100 in the savings at 7% interest this compound rate will grow to $200 in 10 years (70/rate%) and $400 by 20 years. So at a 2.86% compound use of coal, hypothitically, how long would that 500 year supply (at the then 1991 current usage) last? 70-96 years.

As oil depletes are we going to do what WWII Germany did and make liquid fuel from coal? Are we going to use coal to generate electricity for plug-in cars? Are we going to use it to generate electricity to crack hydrogen from water? If we do, what will the annual rate of consumption growth be? We are already using coal at a rate of 100 railcars every 5 minutes. At some point new railroad lines would have to be built just for logistics.

Nuclear: IIRC (trusting my memory) there are about 439 nuclear prower plants worldwide. Both Professors David Goodstein of Caltech and Richard Smalley of Rice argued that the world will need at least 10 terrawatts of energy by 2050. 10 terawatts is equal to 10,000 nuclear power plants generating 1 gigawatt each. But as Goodstein points out 10,000 nuclear plants, using lightwater reaction, would use up the estimated uranium supply in about “two decades.” We going to use breeder reactors? That give us more time. Of course you have the added problem of weapons grade material to go with it. And when are we going to start on this project?

As Samlley said in the above link: If he could put his pro growth, repulican right hand and flip a switch to turn on a gigawatt of power, he’d have to flip that switch everyday for 27 years to get to 10 terawatts.

So when is this peak oil petroleum cruch going to happen? Some say it already has. Technically, worldwide oil production has been flat sind 2005. Will we see average production declining soon, or will it stay flat for 10 to 15 years as former head of Saudi ARAMCO’s production and exploration (and Brown Universtiy Ph.D), Dr Sadad Al-Husseini, now believes, or will production grow to 112 million barrels by 2017 as Dan Yergin (author of the “Prize”), chairman of CERA, believes?

CERA look at 811 large fields worldwide and came up with an estimated decline rate of 4.5% on existing fields. But at the Neil King, reporter for the Wall Street Journal, pointed out: a 4.5% decline is 4 million barrels per day loss. And it just so happens that Iran produces 4 million barrels per day. So, to keep annual production flat at 85-86 million per day a new Iran needs to be brought on line every year. CERA believes the oil industry is doing twice that amount. It needs to, because…to get to 112 million barrels per day by 2017 (nine years) the oil industry needs to bring on line the equivolent of 9 new Saudi Arabias. Will the industry be able to do this? Will geo politics hamper the logistics of doing so? Since people tend to believe whatever they want to I’ll leave that up to you.

 

[Doug50]

I’ll throw another kink in this: Not only is oil consumption growing in first world nations, it’s growing worldwide…even in export countries. OPEC countries subsidies there own citicizens’ gasoline consumption so that internal demand is growing fast. At what point will they begin cutting back exports to say…the US of A?

For example, Mexico (not an OPEC member, but) has been the US’s second largest exporter behind Canada. Mexico has the second largest oilfield in the world (Cantarell). Their production is falling while at the same time consumer demand in Mexico is rising. At these rates of decline and consumption it’s estimated Mexico could end exports within 5-6 years. A similar thing happend with Great Britain. Because of demand increases, exports decline faster than field declines. England is now a net importer of oil. What about the Middle East?

OPEC’s Growing Call on Itself
research.cibcwm.com/economic_public/download/occrept62.pdf “The call on OPEC has long been referred to as a measure of pressure on world supply, being the difference between world demand and non-cartel production. But increasingly, what bears watching is OPEC’s growing call on itself, which is simply the difference between what OPEC produces and what it consumes. Not only is the cartel, along with other key producers like Russia and Mexico, struggling to grow production, but at the same time their own internal consumption rates of oil are soaring. So much so that crude exports from the group as a whole, accounting for roughly 60% of current world oil production, are likely to fall by as much as 2.5 million barrels per day by the end of the decade—resulting in significantly higher oil prices…”

 

[Abitreckless]

I’ll throw another kink in this: Not only is oil consumption growing in first world nations, it’s growing worldwide…even in export countries. OPEC countries subsidies there own citicizens’ gasoline consumption so that internal demand is growing fast. At what point will they begin cutting back exports to say…the US of A?

For example, Mexico (not an OPEC member, but) has been the US’s second largest exporter behind Canada. Mexico has the second largest oilfield in the world (Cantarell). Their production is falling while at the same time consumer demand in Mexico is rising. At these rates of decline and consumption it’s estimated Mexico could end exports within 5-6 years. A similar thing happend with Great Britain. Because of demand increases, exports decline faster than field declines. England is now a net importer of oil. What about the Middle East?

OPEC’s Growing Call on Itself
research.cibcwm.com/economic_public/download/occrept62.pdf “The call on OPEC has long been referred to as a measure of pressure on world supply, being the difference between world demand and non-cartel production. But increasingly, what bears watching is OPEC’s growing call on itself, which is simply the difference between what OPEC produces and what it consumes. Not only is the cartel, along with other key producers like Russia and Mexico, struggling to grow production, but at the same time their own internal consumption rates of oil are soaring. So much so that crude exports from the group as a whole, accounting for roughly 60% of current world oil production, are likely to fall by as much as 2.5 million barrels per day by the end of the decade—resulting in significantly higher oil prices…”

So why aren’t we drilling for oil in our UNTAPPED oil-rich country like the Gulf of Mexico, California, ND, SD, ANWR, offshore of Florida (MEANWHILE Red China is digging offshore of Florida).

 

[Doug50]

Yes. I talk about it all the time in the CCD classes I teach. Do you teach it in your classes?

On the basis of the same type of incorrect speculation which has been around for thousands of years, you propose (or propose to allow) pre-emptive killing of human beings now on the basis of some sky-is-falling speculation that it will do someone in the future some good. One may not do evil in order that a good may come from it. That’s from the Catechism. And there’s no footnote that says “except if overpopulation is involved.”

I get the clear impression that you would support (or at least not oppose) artificial contraception as a part of the education and methods needed to achieve your goal of ZPG. Paul VI made it very clear that the outcome of artificial contraception would be abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, and other anti-life programs.

In contrast to the wild but ever recurring speculation of overpopulation, Paul VI’s analysis was correct and indeed we have paid the price. But then if you believe in overpopulation then you also believe that the overpopulation situation would be even worse today if these anti-life programs had not been so wildly successful. Rah rah for abortion.

God told us to go forth and multiply, at least twice (Adam & Noah).

God also told us to subdue the earth, again telling us at least twice. Perhaps this is part of his answer as to how we continue to go forth and multiply.

And I notice that your list of methods does not include prayer. Just a bit of God’s help can solve a lot of what we see as problems.

This argumentive approach was already tried in the Petroleum thread. Nobody advocated abortion. That’s an incorrect assumption on your part. It a reality that Catholic families would routinely have 10 (I’ve seen 14) kids. Today 2-4 seems to be the norm. What changed? Are all these Catholic families having abortions?

 

[Doug50]

So why aren’t we drilling for oil in our UNTAPPED oil-rich country like the Gulf of Mexico, California, ND, SD, ANWR, offshore of Florida (MEANWHILE Red China is digging offshore of Florida).

You’ll have to ask your Congressman that. But I believe that when people start having to wait in line at the pumps like I had to in the 70’s, those places will be opened up…but realize with the volumes of flow needed into the market those will only buy a little time or flatten out the decline into the predicted undulating plateau that some are predicting. Anyway, it takes years just to bring those types of projects to the drilling stage.

 

[Doug50]

So why aren’t we drilling for oil in our UNTAPPED oil-rich country like the Gulf of Mexico, California, ND, SD, ANWR, offshore of Florida (MEANWHILE Red China is digging offshore of Florida).

I just saw you have ND. That’s the Bakken Shale. It’s not off limits and never has been. If the near 4 billion barrels are extractable I’m thinking it’s going to take a lot of years and a lot of money to get it out of the ground. The US uses 7 billion barrels per year.

BTW I am an oil and gas producer so when I hear reports like the Bakken (which has been know about for 50 years) I don’t get too excide, as these two producers did not.
thedickinsonpress.com/articles/index.cfm?id=14912§ion=Opinion&freebie_check&CFID=26106113&CFTOKEN=14378470&jsessionid=8830b4b09aa16c416c37

 

[rlg94086]

Why is oil so impotant to population and food? A picture is worth a 1000 words
http://www.321energy.com/editorials/chefurka/chefurka02.gif

Okay…no offense, Doug50, but this chart is a joke. You can play with data quite a lot if you adjust the scales, and that is just what is done in this chart. Rather than going with an x-axis from 0 AD to 2000+AD at 200 year increments, try changing it to an 1800AD to 2000+AD axis…not so dramatic.

While there is a link between oil production and population, there is a stronger link between medical advances and population. We are living longer. Does oil help? Sure. But, it just makes your argument ridiculous to use a chart like that.

 

[drpmjhess]

On the basis of the same type of incorrect speculation which has been around for thousands of years, you propose (or propose to allow) pre-emptive killing of human beings now on the basis of some sky-is-falling speculation that it will do someone in the future some good.

I get the clear impression that you would support (or at least not oppose) artificial contraception as a part of the education and methods needed to achieve your goal of ZPG.

In contrast to the wild but ever recurring speculation of overpopulation, Paul VI’s analysis was correct and indeed we have paid the price.

God told us to go forth and multiply, at least twice (Adam & Noah).

God also told us to subdue the earth, again telling us at least twice. Perhaps this is part of his answer as to how we continue to go forth and multiply.
.

(1) Who said anything about preemptive killing?

(2) Three times today I’d told you “abstention” and “self-control” – you’re the one who keeps mentioning contraception, not me.

(3) Overpopulation is not wild speculation. Wake up and smell the coffee; check out the websites Doug and others have mentioned. Check out <www.oilcrash.com>.

(4) The Hebrew scribes wrote about multiplying and subduing the earth at a time when humans had no realistic control over their environment. Now we control virtually every aspect of it; our dominion is nearly complete (except for the multi-drug-resistant bacteria that are coming back with a vengeance).

(5) Yes, prayer is important, and we should pray constantly. However, prayers did not prevent the Titanic from sinking, or the Black Death from killing 1/3 of Europeans, or the Nazi Shoah from grinding horrifically on. God cooperates, but does not always work miracles when we want them. I doubt he will miraculously set the “oil clock” back to 1859, replenishing all those fields.

God helps those who help themselves by waking up to the reality of an over-consuming human population crowding out every ecosystem on the globe. Saving remnants of the project of civilization will take a huge effort on many fronts, and population is only one of them, albeit a crucial one.

 

[drpmjhess]

Okay…no offense, Doug50, but this chart is a joke.

While there is a link between oil production and population, there is a stronger link between medical advances and population. We are living longer. Does oil help? Sure. But, it just makes your argument ridiculous to use a chart like that.

No, Robert,m Doug’s chart is quite correct. There is a direct link between oil production and population growth. Modern medicine has been assisted by cheap petroleum, decreasing the mortality rate and raising the infant survival rate. Take away the oil and famines result, bringing population back into line with solar sustainability (the amount of solar energy received annually).

Petrus

 

[ribozyme]

Okay…no offense, Doug50, but this chart is a joke. You can play with data quite a lot if you adjust the scales, and that is just what is done in this chart. Rather than going with an x-axis from 0 AD to 2000+AD at 200 year increments, try changing it to an 1800AD to 2000+AD axis…not so dramatic.

While there is a link between oil production and population, there is a stronger link between medical advances and population. We are living longer. Does oil help? Sure. But, it just makes your argument ridiculous to use a chart like that.

“Define medical advances…”

One could contribute increased life expectancy to better sanitation (halts the spread of disease) than to things called erlotinib and bevacizumab.

 

[rlg94086]

No, Robert,m Doug’s chart is quite correct. There is a direct link between oil production and population growth. Modern medicine has been assisted by cheap petroleum, decreasing the mortality rate and raising the infant survival rate. Take away the oil and famines result, bringing population back into line with solar sustainability (the amount of solar energy received annually).

Petrus

I’m sorry Petrus. If you don’t see why that chart is useless to this argument, then you are statistically illiterate. Show me a chart with the scale from 1800AD to today, and we can discuss a real link between oil and population. I didn’t say there is no link - just that the chart is a poor argument for it.

 

[rlg94086]

“Define medical advances…”

One could contribute increased life expectancy to better sanitation (halts the spread of disease) than to things called erlotinib and bevacizumab.

Absolutely. Better sanitation is definitley a factor. And, that is due to petroleum primarily?

 

[drpmjhess]

Show me a chart with the scale from 1800AD to today, and we can discuss a real link between oil and population. I didn’t say there is no link - just that the chart is a poor argument for it.

No, the chart accurately shows the relationship between a very slowly growing human population to 1859, and a meteoric rise in tandem with oil after that. I know that doesn’t suit your argument against the need to work for ZPG…

 

[rlg94086]

No, the chart accurately shows the relationship between a very slowly growing human population to 1859, and a meteoric rise in tandem with oil after that. I know that doesn’t suit your argument against the need to work for ZPG…

And that proves causation??? Please! Waste your poor reasoning and charts on someone that doesn’t understand how to link evidence to reality.

 

[Ridgerunner]

With world birth rates dropping and some populations seemingly fated to massive decline by mid-century, a person has to wonder about the desperation expressed in some of these posts.

Oil is not only used for fuel. When I was a kid, I enjoyed going through some of the rooms in my grandmother’s house that had undergone little change for decades. Even then it was fascinating to see the products people used long ago; products of utility equal or superior to ours, but without a scrap of petroleum based plastic in any of them. The stuff was made of metal, wood, glass, celluloid, bone, shell, horn. Relative cost was likely higher, but they were very, very sturdy items. Lifetime and beyond stuff.

The gargantuan landfills we now see do not date back to that era. It strikes me as possible that perhaps an early effect of the higher cost of oil might be production of better products and less waste.

On the other hand, older construction practices make it obvious that people were once far more careless of energy in heat production than now. Solid masonry buildings, huge single-pane windows without any attention paid to conduction. No insulation anywhere. Construction even now is nowhere near as energy-conserving as it easily could be.

If one looks at old magazines, though, it is obvious that people once used mass transit a lot, lots of rail, and used low-powered personal vehicles almost exclusively for local transportation. Sell your airline stock. Buy Burlington Northern.

I suspect people will adapt to changes in the availability of raw materials much the same way people have for a long time.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

No, the chart accurately shows the relationship between a very slowly growing human population to 1859, and a meteoric rise in tandem with oil after that. I know that doesn’t suit your argument against the need to work for ZPG…

This is a thread about food price riots. To bring up population growth in such a thread, are you suggesting that the earth simply can not provide enough food for world’s population?

I think we both know that where people are hungry it is because the earth’s resources aren’t being fairly distributed. To bring up population control in this discussion just gives an excuse to those who want to continue wasting fuel and eating huge amounts of meat and other foods, way beyond what they need.

Why not talk about the future consequences of population growth in another thread?