Customer Reviews

The Oil Depletion Protocol: A Plan to Avert Oil Wars, Terrorism and Economic Collapse

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

All of the non-fiction reading that I have done supports this author's presenation of both the consequences of doing nothing, and practical bottom line: a 3% reduction per year for the next ten to twenty years, of gross consumption (per capita is meaningless when the number of people are growing rapidly) of oil is the only way to transition gracefully.

Amazon visiters need to be aware that the oil industry, and Exxon in particularly, is applying considerable funds to pay for disinformation and misrepresentation. As Al Gore stated in his briefing to 10,000 Republicans in the Taco Bell Arena of Boise State University, the oil companies (less BP and Chevron) are adopting the precise strategy of the tobacco industry, seeking to turn facts into "theories" that are "in dispute."

Reality is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the ethics of the Exxon CEO, among others, who choose to lie to the American people and others and take credit for improving gas mileage when what is really needed is a massive turning away from the use of both oil and water.

This book is a great companion to "Peak Oil Survival," and discusses at the macro levels the implications of oil depletion.

I also like this book because at the back I found a page that informed me that the publisher, New Society Publishers, is both committed to books helpful to society, but that its use of recycled paper as a directly measureable benefit in saving 25 trees, 2,281 gallons of solid waste, 2,512 gallons of water, 3,276 kilowatt hours of electricity, 4,150 lbs of greenhouse gases, 18 lbs of HAPs, VOCs, and AOX combined, and 6 cubic yards of landfill space.

WOW. See my growing list on "true cost" information. Above is the "true cost" for books that do NOT use recycled paper.

This book is a continuation of the theme of Heinberg's earlier books on peak oil - "The Party's Over", and "Powerdown". A big difference however, is the air of optimism the book has compared to the doomsday tone of the previous two. Not that we are not facing serious times and soon (he documents very well how petroleum dominates all of modern society), this book presents a plan to deal with it beyond the unrealistic rescue scenarios such as oil sands, wind-for-all, and the notion that Sun can supply 5,000 times the energy we need, etc. The idea that nations will control and also decrease their use of oil through international agreements seems at first blush preposterous. However, in chapter 3 he shows how a depletion protocol can mesh with a Kyoto -type protocol for decreasing greenhouse gas emissions. The result is as two-fer; adjusting to decreasing supplies of petroleum while at the same time decreasing emissions through an international treaty. The fact that the U.S. has not agreed to Kyoto does not mean it is dead in the water; well over 100 nations are on board. Coordination of a depletion treaty with an emissions treaty makes solid sense and is I hope, inevitable.

I am amazed and bemused that, after all this time and wanton bloodshed in Iraq, the question of Peak Oil has not come front and center to legislative notice and public policy debate. What is the real reason for the prolonged occupation of Iraq? What has been accomplished, at unparalleled expense and terrible loss of life, over these past six years? Basically, two phenomena:

1) The establishment of a circuit of American military bases and military presence surrounding the major oil reserves in Saudi Arabia and Iraq (the vastly greater part of the world's remaing easily accessible oil reserves).

2) The complete shutdown of Iraq's oil production.

Why??

When we think about political motives, certainly Bush would have found himself a much more popular figure without the Iraq war. From another perspective - the so-called war on terrorism salvaged a failing Presidency - but, then again, there is the plethora of questions surrounding the stated plans of PNAC before Bush's ascendency to the Presidency under highly questionable conditions, and then the ever thining government explanation for what appear to be more rightly perceived as the demolitions and mass-murders of 9/11 - the exposed lies re: Sadaam's missing WMD's, and on and on ...

But Why?? Why would this multi-millionaire's son and wealthy cohorts risk the charges of treason which now regularly echo in our streets? Why commit to this policy of unending bloodletting in Iraq, to which our government policy has, unabated (12 years of sanctions and no-fly zones since 1991, for a total of 15 years straight?? For regime change??? To bring democracy to the Middle-East? To lower the price of oil?

When I think that 9/11 may actually be an inside job in the face of stunning and plentiful evidence - not the least of which is Bush's stalling an investigation for over 400 days. . . THERE MUST BE AN EXPLANATION.

Something must be really scaring our nation's leaders, driving them to desperate measures - and I believe, with Heinberg, that SOMETHING is PEAK OIL. The current policy in the corporate owned media has been to dismiss Peak Oil as a myth, or a 'flawed' theory. You can verify this by simply entering "peak oil" in on Google. Otherwise, no one in power in the US is talking about it, though hardly is such a threat, I would say the main threat, to national security off the table. After all, how is your typical politician going to inform you that with the radically increased oil consumption in China - oil supplies could begin to effectively diminish as early as 2010 and maybe disappear by 2020? How could our leaders publicly announce such a bewildering situation without a viable solution?

Their solution (a temporary fix at best) seems to be the occupation of Iraq - really the first resource war - with all attendant costs. Apparently, the oil depletion crisis is scary enough to warrant the billions in debt merely to keep Iraqi oil safe in the ground, on reserve for when WE NEED it, behind OUR guns. Will we leave Iraq, like Vietnam? I doubt it. The two situations are actually, at the root, quite different. We have come to the end of the age of oil, and non-renewable energy.

Heinberg for years has been the most dependable and articulate source for information about this most crucial issue. After 9/11, he was one of the sanest voices - explaining this incredible state of affairs to many of us who had never really considered the situation in depth.

In this new, very important work, we are provided with a way out - like Buddha's 4th Noble Truth - Heinberg details a concrete solution - by which we can actually change direction (like the Dems are currently promising to do - but may have no idea of how to). This ultimate 'how to' book should be at the top of the bestseller's lists - but as you see it is not - which is as great an indicator as any - that the way out may be long and hard, at best -

We need to cooperatively, methodically, reduce our dependence on oil. The foundations of such a plan are found here in Heinberg's always precise and comprehensive approach. Required reading for all who want to help, need help, or who wish to serve humanity at this, perhaps terminal, turning point.

Oil is the primary fuel of the world - and thus, vulnerable to terrorist efforts. THE OIL DEPLETION PROTOCOL: A PLAN TO AVERT OIL WARS, TERRORISM AND ECONOMIC COLLAPSE does more than the usual charting of a known problem: it offers up solutions, reviewing data on peak oil production and describing an accord where nations would voluntarily reduce their production and imparts by an agreed-upon formula to enable energy transition planning and ultimately more stable prices. A unique concept that deserves thought and which is well planned, here!

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

Of the many books now available that review peak oil, Richard Heinberg's "The Oil Depletion Protocol" is unique in that it outlines a practical solution to survival the upcoming energy crunch.

After reading a few books about the upcoming energy collapse, read this book to energize yourself with hopeful solutions. We should all read this book, think deeply, and get to work soon.

This book gives a good overview of peak oil. It's main thrust is the assumption that economics will not carry us through this turmoil, and only an early adoption of a "protocol" will save human from much crisis.
The logic behind this assumption is still lost on me, and I continue to seek a clearer picture of the future.

I liked this book by Mr. Heinberg. But I have to say I don't believe in world government, I don't believe in the U.N. and I don't think countries will ever get together and manage a global problem and share. Liberals love this idea of sharing. When has the world ever worked this way? I don't believe in a global currency issued by the U.N.....this idea is nutty. I admire the work of Dr Colin J. Campbell. I took his ideas a step further and decided to write a Oil Depletion Protocol for my family. Sometime I think Mr. Heinberg is a closet communist. He's still admiring the Cubans for growing vegetables. Mr. Heinberg, my father and grandfather lived most of their lives on the farm. They didn't have a car or a tractor and plowed with a mule. They didn't have natural gas, didn't have electricity and produced almost everything they ate. Yet, you admire the Cubans for growing vegetables? Yes, I agree the Cubans did a great job, but Please, they just decided that helping each other grow food was better than starving to death. It's not that difficult to grow food in a tropical climate. Overall, I enjoyed the book and it was informative. Regards, Keith Renick, Peachtree City, Ga.

The two biggest assumptions discussed in this book are: 1) The world is running out of oil and 2) World governments can cooperate to bring peace and stability.

Let's start with the first assumption and look at some hilarious historical quotes:

1885, U.S. Geologic Society, "Almost no chance of finding oil in California."

1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines, "At most, the U.S. will run out of oil in 10 years."

1939, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, "US oil reserves will be exhausted in 13 years."

1951, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, "US oil reserves can only last 13 more years."

1970, the peak in U.S. oil production as environmental concerns limit any expansion.

1991, U.S. Geological Survey, "Texas and California are running out of oil."

And here we have the reality...
November 2005: 1.28 trillion barrels of proven oil reserves in the world, the highest level that has ever been recorded. A crude oil price over $40 makes it financially viable to use many extraction methods to recover even more oil out of old wells that were "depleted" using older methods.

It is an entertaining hobby to predict the end of oil, but they are always wrong.

Now assumption number 2: governments will cooperate. I don't even know where to begin but I'll try; 70% of the world's oil is controlled by dictators; OPEC has never been able to control its own member states (let alone influence other countries); when money is involved - none of the 8 most influential countries in the world have agreed on anything; since Ghandi was assassinated, I haven't found a single politician interested in much beyond their own career, celebrity, or wallet; how are you going to get nations to cooperate when even the U.N. couldn't administer a little oil-for-food program without corruption and oil cheating amongst countries, politicians, individuals and companies - even the U.N. Secretary General's son profited!


These authors are living in a fantasy world so far from reality I don't know why you'd waste your time with their spin of facts.