Greer's 2016 predictions - should we get worried?

Forum for general discussion of Peak Oil / Oil depletion; also covering related subjects

Moderator: Peak Moderation

User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Greer's 2016 predictions - should we get worried?

Post by Lord Beria3 »

http://www.resilience.org/stories/2016- ... the-future
At this point, though, little though I like to say this, the most likely outcome of the 2016 election is the inauguration of Donald Trump as President in January 2017. That’s specific prediction #3.

he Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a fine example of a phemomenon all too familiar to students of history: a crumbling, clueless despotism which never got the memo warning that it couldn’t get away any longer with acting like a major power. The steady decline in the price of oil has left the kingdom in ghastly financial condition, forced to borrow money on international credit markets to pay its bills, while slashing the lavish subsidies that keep its citizens compliant. A prudent ruling class in that position would avoid foreign adventures and cultivate the kind of good relationships with neighboring powers that would give it room to maneuver in a crisis. As so often happens in such cases, though, the rulers of Saudi Arabia are anything but prudent, and they’ve plunged openly into a shooting war just over its southern borders in Yemen, and covertly but massively into the ongoing mess in Syria and Iraq.
The war in Yemen is not going well—Yemeni forces have crossed the Saudi border repeatedly in raids on southern military bases—and the war in Syria and Iraq is turning out even worse. At this point, the kingdom can’t effectively withdraw from either struggle, nor can it win either one; its internal affairs are becoming more and more troubled, and the treasury is running low. It’s a familiar recipe, and one that has an even more familiar outcome: the abrupt collapse of the monarchy, followed by prolonged chaos until one or more new governments consolidate their power. (Those of my readers who know about the collapse of the Russian, Austro-Hungarian, and Ottoman Empires at the end of the First World War have a heads-up on tomorrow’s news.) When that happens—and at this point, it’s a matter of when rather than if—the impact on the world’s petroleum markets, investment markets, and politics will be jarring and profound, and almost impossible to predict in detail in advance.
The timing of political collapse is not much easier to predict, but here again, I’m going to plop for a date and say that the Saudi regime will be gone by the end of 2016. That’s specific prediction #4.
If Greer is right and the Saudi Arabian regime collapses this year, this could lead to a severe crunch in global oil supplies (as despite the low prices there is very little spare capacity).

I have always thought that a collapse of the Saudi state would be a key 'prepping' signal. What do you think? How realistic is Greer's predictions.

On the matter of a likely Trump presidency, that is something for another discussion.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10574
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Re: Greer's 2016 predictions - should we get worried?

Post by clv101 »

Lord Beria3 wrote:I have always thought that a collapse of the Saudi state would be a key 'prepping' signal.
Anyone waiting for the collapse of SA before 'prepping' is complacent IMO.
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

Agreed - but any hint of serious trouble in SA would be a signal to prep anything you don't already have!

I have been a bit complacent on prepping (mainly due to lack of funds tbh) but a Saudi Arabian state collapse is in my opinion the only realistic trigger of a systemic crisis of the kind we used to discuss on this forum a lot many years ago.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
PS_RalphW
Posts: 6974
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Cambridge

Post by PS_RalphW »

I don't see the SA state collapsing that quickly. They still have hundreds of billions in the bank, and literally hundreds of royal princes to chose between. They all have a vested interest in keeping the gravy rolling and they control every political and military job worth having. They have a very effective secret police and a very pampered populace. All the real work is done by low status immigrant labour that is kept firmly in the dust. No chance of revolution there.

Yes they are cutting back a bit on the free handouts, but I don't see the Shia raising effective trouble, nor is ISIS popular enough. Maybe in 3-5 years, if oil stays low.
raspberry-blower
Posts: 1868
Joined: 14 Mar 2009, 11:26

Post by raspberry-blower »

Lord Beria3 wrote:Agreed - but any hint of serious trouble in SA would be a signal to prep anything you don't already have!
There is more than just a hint that KSA is in serious trouble as this article from Pepe Escobar and this from Finian Cunningham highlight.

The war in Yemen is turning into a quagmire.

The Wahabbist thugs in Iraq and Syria - that have received copious amounts of weaponry and financial support from KSA - have suffered a string of military defeats recently.

KSA's financial system is under strain following the oil price collapse

King Salman is suffering from Alzheimer's,

I strongly suspect we will see a palace coup in KSA - quite possibly in the coming months
:shock:
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools - Douglas Adams.
User avatar
emordnilap
Posts: 14814
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 16:36
Location: here

Re: Greer's 2016 predictions - should we get worried?

Post by emordnilap »

Lord Beria3 wrote:http://www.resilience.org/stories/2016- ... the-future
At this point, though, little though I like to say this, the most likely outcome of the 2016 election is the inauguration of Donald Trump as President in January 2017. That’s specific prediction #3
On the matter of a likely Trump presidency, that is something for another discussion.
It is. And yes, it should worry everyone.
I experience pleasure and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same - Steven Pinker
User avatar
adam2
Site Admin
Posts: 10939
Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis

Re: Greer's 2016 predictions - should we get worried?

Post by adam2 »

clv101 wrote:
Lord Beria3 wrote:I have always thought that a collapse of the Saudi state would be a key 'prepping' signal.
Anyone waiting for the collapse of SA before 'prepping' is complacent IMO.
Agree, not only are there many other non SA disasters for which prepping is prudent, but also a SA collapse could happen very suddenly indeed, with no chance for last minute preps.
And "last minute preps" is only a polite term for panic buying. In times of war or other emergency it is morally wrong to purchase extra supplies since others are thereby deprived. Hoarding and thereby depriving others, may be a serious crime under martial law.

To prudently stock up whilst times are normal merely provides a little welcome extra trade for retailers.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

Agree up to a point.

Any collapse of SA would happen over weeks and the follow on effectives on the global oil market would again be for weeks even months before a very serious global crisis happened.

in practise you would still have approximately a month to stock up on supplies before world spare capacity in oil run out and the system collapses from that started happening in earnest.

But yes, I agree with you on your main point - it is wise to stock up during the good times.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

http://observer.com/2016/01/obamas-pers ... -the-gulf/
Moreover, if Mr. Obama expected lifting sanctions on Tehran would encourage more conciliatory behavior from the mullahs, he was sadly mistaken. Iranian relations with Saudi Arabia have taken a dramatic turn for the worse in recent weeks. The Islamic Cold War that has dragged on between Riyadh and Tehran since 1979, when the revolutionary regime took power, is melting down and may get hot, based on current indications. The breaking of diplomatic relations between them is an unmistakably bad sign. A major regional war is a distinct possibility, given rising tensions on many fronts: Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and across the Gulf, where Saudis, Iranians, and their various proxies wage war increasingly openly

Just how bad things have gotten in the Gulf is made plain by Pakistan’s recent statement that it would back the Saudis militarily if things get out of hand with Iran, their mutual foe. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, both majority-Sunni, have their disagreements but are united in their fear of Iranian – that is, Shia – dominance in the Gulf region. Particularly worrying is the view of many in the spy business that Pakistan would quickly send a nuclear weapon to Riyadh if needed to deter Tehran.

It’s a poorly guarded secret that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, which came to fruition in 1998 with a successful nuclear bomb test, was partly funded by the Saudis, who wanted a Sunni Bomb. In exchange, Islamabad will come to Riyadh’s aid, even nuclear aid, in an hour of crisis. “If Tehran announces on a Monday that it has a nuke, the Saudis will ‘suddenly’ have one by Wednesday,” explained a Pentagon nuclear expert.
http://www.mintpressnews.com/analysis-t ... se/206420/

http://www.cityam.com/232262/oil-prices ... udi-arabia
A leading academic has warned a full scale war between Middle Eastern rivals Iran and Saudi Arabia could send oil prices as high as $500 per barrel.

The two countries' long-running regional rivalry is borne out in a series of proxy wars across the Middle East, such as the one which is being waged in Yemen.

But relations soured recently when Iran stormed Saudi Arabia's embassy, following the latter's execution of a prominent Shi'ite cleric. Riyadh cut diplomatic ties with Iran, and it's been joined by Opec members such as Bahrain, the UAE and Sudan.

But Dr. Hossein Askari, the Iran Professor of International Business and International Affairs at The George Washington University, told Oil & Gas 360 that a full scale war between the two powers risks sending oil prices into the triple figures.

"If there is a war confronting Iran and Saudi Arabia, oil could overnight go to above $250, but decline [back] down to the $100 level," he said.

"If they attack each other's loading facilities, then we could see oil spike to over $500 and stay around there for some time depending on the extent of the damage."

Oil prices are typically sensitive to geopolitical developments in the Middle East, where the bulk of the world's oil is produced.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
Lord Beria3
Posts: 5066
Joined: 25 Feb 2009, 20:57
Location: Moscow Russia
Contact:

Post by Lord Beria3 »

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... ud/304215/
The Saudi system seemed—and still seems—frighteningly vulnerable to attack. Although Saudi Arabia has more than eighty active oil and natural-gas fields, and more than a thousand working wells, half its proven oil reserves are contained in only eight fields—including Ghawar, the world's largest onshore oil field, and Safaniya, the world's largest offshore oil field. Various confidential scenarios have suggested that if terrorists were simultaneously to hit only a few sensitive points "downstream" in the oil system from these eight fields—points that control more than 10,000 miles of pipe, both onshore and offshore, in which oil moves from wells to refineries and from refineries to ports, within the kingdom and without—they could effectively put the Saudis out of the oil business for about two years. And it just would not be that hard to do.

The most vulnerable point and the most spectacular target in the Saudi oil system is the Abqaiq complex—the world's largest oil-processing facility, which sits about twenty-four miles inland from the northern end of the Gulf of Bahrain. All petroleum originating in the south is pumped to Abqaiq for processing. For the first two months after a moderate to severe attack on Abqaiq, production there would slow from an average of 6.8 million barrels a day to one million barrels, a loss equivalent to one third of America's daily consumption of crude oil. For seven months following the attack, daily production would remain as much as four million barrels below normal—a reduction roughly equal to what all of the opec partners were able to effect during their 1973 embargo.

Oil is pumped from Abqaiq to loading terminals at Ras Tanura and Ju'aymah, both on Saudi Arabia's east coast. Ras Tanura moves only slightly more oil than Ju'aymah does (4.5 million barrels per day as opposed to 4.3 million barrels), but it offers a greater variety of targets and more avenues of attack. Nearly all of Ras Tanura's export oil is handled by an offshore facility known as The Sea Island, and the facility's Platform No. 4 handles half of that. A commando attack on Platform 4 by surface boat or even by a Kilo-class submarine—available in the global arms bazaar—would be devastating. Such an attack would also be easy, as was made abundantly clear in 2000 by the attack on the USS Cole, carried out with lethal effectiveness by suicide bombers piloting nothing more than a Zodiac loaded with plastic explosives.

Another point of vulnerability is Pump Station No. 1, the station closest to Abqaiq, which sends oil uphill, into the Aramah Mountains, so that it can begin its long journey across the peninsula to the Red Sea port of Yanbu. If Pump No. 1 were taken out, the 900,000 barrels of Arabian light and superlight crude that are pumped daily to Yanbu would suddenly stop arriving, and Yanbu would be out of business.

Saudi Arabia has the world's only important surplus production capacity—two million barrels a day. This keeps the world market liquid. Not only that, but because the Saudis more or less determine the price of oil globally by deciding how much oil to produce, even countries that don't buy Saudi oil would be vulnerable if the flow of that oil were disrupted.
http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... -the-risks
Abstract: The 2010 Heritage Energy Game demonstrated that there are significant vulnerabilities in the domestic and international energy network. Coordinated attacks by terrorists and other violent nonstate actors could cause a massive drop in oil production and price spikes that would seriously harm the U.S. and the global economies. The reality may be even harsher: wide, prolonged instability in the Middle East may threaten Saudi Arabian and other Persian Gulf oil production, including spare capacity. Careful implementation of select policies could limit the economic damage, but implementation of misguided policies could easily make such a crisis even worse. The United States and its allies would need to exercise decisive and effective leadership to deal with the crisis, but this requires the U.S. to develop an assertive international energy policy, preferably before such a crisis.
I don't think that severe oil prices would lead to total collapse, but certainly I could see major economic chaos from rationed imports of oil to our economy.

Certainly, disruption of food supplies can be expected but how extensive or severe would they be? That is a interesting question. A sudden and massive drop of oil production would materially impact global food production and distribution and would lead to a spike in food prices.

I suspect that governments would take measures to ensure that food security was prioritised over 'day-to-day' oil usage and a total collapse of food distribution would be avoided.

It would be sensible to stock up on food supplies in the event of short term disruption/panic buying or just extremely high food prices.
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
User avatar
RenewableCandy
Posts: 12777
Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
Location: York

Post by RenewableCandy »

I always associated food production with gas rather than oil.

How much gas do we get from KSA?
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
Stories
The Price of Time
User avatar
adam2
Site Admin
Posts: 10939
Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis

Post by adam2 »

RenewableCandy wrote:I always associated food production with gas rather than oil.

How much gas do we get from KSA?
Natural gas, rather than oil is the preferred feedstock for the production of chemical fertilisers and other agrochemicals.

Diesel fuel is used on a huge scale for planting, cultivating, and harvesting, and also of course for transport of food to the consumer.

AFAIK, we obtain little if any gas from KSA, however any interruption to natural gas exports from KSA would have a serious knock on effect by decreasing the total global supply.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Little John

Post by Little John »

Also, if oil supplies were hit, this would have a knock on effect on the supply of gas since countries around the world would have to turn up their gas-based electricity generation to compensate for the lack of oil.
User avatar
RenewableCandy
Posts: 12777
Joined: 12 Sep 2007, 12:13
Location: York

Post by RenewableCandy »

Thanks Adam!

Getting back to predictions: in a short story sent to the very same Archdruid,

I called Oregon!! :D
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
Stories
The Price of Time
User avatar
adam2
Site Admin
Posts: 10939
Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis

Post by adam2 »

Little John wrote:Also, if oil supplies were hit, this would have a knock on effect on the supply of gas since countries around the world would have to turn up their gas-based electricity generation to compensate for the lack of oil.
Yes, very little oil is used in the UK for electricity production, but some countries have significant oil burning generating capacity, and would of course substitute natural gas so far as possible if oil was in short supply.

Many energy intensive industries can use oil or gas interchangeably according to price and availability.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Post Reply