Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


The EU talks as Russia flexes energy muscles

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 October 2006
AS EUROPEAN Union leaders yesterday met to discuss the need to wean their economies off oil and gas imported from potentially unstable states such as Russia, the Kremlin delivered a blunt reminder: you need us more than we need you.
Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, and the heads of the 25 EU states were last night meeting over dinner at a summit in Finland, where European leaders were hoping to win new assurances from Moscow. Yet even before the dinner began, Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's ambassador to the EU, coldly warned: "Dependence on Russian energy supplies is an objective fact."

And while Russia was the focus of European concerns over energy yesterday, there are wider fears over other major energy suppliers, especially in the Middle East. EU nations import more than half of their energy needs - a rising trend. They bought in 56 per cent of total energy consumption last year, up from 54 per cent in 2004 and 44 per cent in 1995.

On current trends, 70 per cent of the EU's energy supplies will be imported by 2030. With North Sea supplies of natural gas dwindling, Britain might be forced to import 90 per cent of its needs by 2020 - from some of the most unstable and unpredictable countries.

"The problem is, we will get more and more dependent on imported fossil fuels from politically unstable regions," said Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister. The answer, EU leaders agree, is to use less energy and to get more from non-imported sources: renewables such as wind and solar power, and nuclear plants.

As EU leaders assembled for the summit in Lahti, Finland, Tony Blair yesterday gave his support for a European Commission plan to cut Europe's energy use by 20 per cent by 2020.

"We have a window of only ten to 15 years to take the steps we need to avoid catastrophic tipping points," the Prime Minister said in letter to fellow leaders. "These would have serious consequences for our economic growth, the safety of our people and the supply of resources, most notably energy."

Europe gets more than a quarter of all its oil and gas from Russia, which has some of the largest energy reserves in the world. But European politicians and executives are increasingly worried that Russia cannot be relied upon to respect either foreign investments in its energy sector, or agreements to supply other nations.

Earlier this year, Russia stopped all gas supplies to Ukrraine as part of a political power-struggle. More than 80 per cent of Russia's gas supplies to Europe flow through Ukrainian pipelines and the move triggered shortages and price hikes across western Europe.

Russia's actions at home are also causing concern. Shell is spending more than $12 billion (£6.4 billion) constructing a pipeline from Siberia to Sakhalin, a small Pacific island off the east coast of Russia, and then onto Japan and China.

But Russia is threatening to revoke its permission for the project, part of what the oil industry fears is a wider attempt to exert political control over the energy sector; Shell is now in negotiations to give a stake in the pipeline to Gazprom, the Russian state energy company.

Earlier this week, Mr Chizhov further unnerved international investors by predicting that Russia will not allow any more joint agreements with international energy companies to exploit Russian reserves.

Russia has signed an international treaty guaranteeing that energy contracts and investments are respected. But European leaders do not believe that treaty is being honoured.

"Russia has signed up, but we need to see that put into effect," said Mr Blair's spokesman.

Mr Chizhov flatly rejected Downing Street's version of events. "I cannot accept that," he said. "I don't know of any single international obligation which my country has not honoured."

Concerns about Russia's democratic credentials are growing, with diplomats concerned about recent developments, including the murder of Anna Politkovskaya, a campaigning journalist, and Moscow's increasingly heavy-handed attempts to intervene in Georgia's politics.

EU countries including Sweden were keen to raise such human rights with Mr Putin, but it was clear last night that Europe would not let such issues stand in the way of the need for secure and reliable access to Russian energy.

Resources



• The world's crude oil reserves are estimated at between 2,050 and 2,390 gigabarrels or 380km³ of oil. (A gigabarrel is one billion barrels.)

• 70%: The highest estimate for the proportion of world supplies that we have consumed. 45 per cent is the lowest.

• 200 gigabarrels (200 billion barrels, or 31 km³) of oil were consumed on the planet between 1859 and 1968.

• 258 bn: The estimated number of barrels of oil supplied by Saudi Arabia, which has the largest reserves in the world. In the 1970s the number was 170 billion.

• Russia is estimated to have between 60 and 72.4 billion barrels, while Kazakhstan could have 39.6 billion barrels.

• 4 bn: The number of barrels of recoverable reserves held by the North Sea - this could rise with technological improvements.

• The UK became a net importer of gas last year, and gets most imported gas from Norway via the Langeled pipeline.

• 28 million: The number of barrels of oil produced by OPEC countries, including Saudi Arabia, each day. Other OPEC countries and their estimated oil reserves in billions of barrels include Iran, 93, Iraq, 100, The United Arab Emirates,92 and Kuwait,92.

• Six oil "supermajors" dominate the world market, of which Exxon Mobil Corporation based in Dallas, Texas is the largest.

Consumption


• The UK consumes around 1.7 million barrels of oil per day.

• In 1970, ten per cent of homes were centrally heated by gas and nine per cent by solid fuel. By 2000, 71 per cent used gas to fuel central heating while just three per cent used solid fuel. According to the Department for Trade and Industry (DTI), in 1970 less than one third of homes in the UK had central heating, but 30 years later 89 per cent did.

• China - the world's fastest growing economy - is expected to be responsible for nearly 15 per cent of world energy consumption by 2025.

• Cars in the United States alone account for a tenth of world petroleum consumption. As the popularity of large SUV-style vehicles rises, fuel efficiency rates are falling.

• In 2003, the biologist Jeffrey Dukes calculated the fossil fuels we burn in one year were made from organic matter "containing 44×10 to the 18 grams of carbon, which is more than 400 times the net primary productivity of the planet's current biota". This means each year we use 400 years' worth of carbon plants and animals.

• According to the DTI, domestic consumers in Scotland used 30,299 gigawatts/hour of electricity in 2004.

• The growth in worldwide air travel is also increasing demands for oil. In 2005, the 80 per cent of British airlines registered with the British Air Transport Association used 11 billion litres of fuel, up 3.5 per cent on the previous year.

• The DTI estimates the amount of oil it takes to generate £1 million in economic output fell from 279.4 tonnes in 1994 to 234.7 tonnes in 2004.

• The majority of energy used in British homes (58 per cent) is for heating. Between 1970 and 2000, consumption of energy for lighting and appliances rose by 157 per cent.

Politics


• Saudi Arabia is the world's No 1 oil producer. But there are no elections in the country and freedom of speech is extremely limited. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers on 11 September were Saudis and so is Osama bin Laden. Intelligence agencies in the west suspect rich Saudis of giving covert financial support to extremist groups.

Western states support the ruling royal family and supply the regime with military equipment.

• Massive natural gas reserves in Turkmenistan have allowed one of the world's harshest - and strangest - dictators to remain in power in the central Asian republic.

Saparmurat Niyazov is officially "Turkmenbashi," the Father of the Turkmen. There are no elections and dissent is ruthlessly supressed. But energy reserves mean he can provide people with free gas and electricity, and he has amassed a personal fortune worth $3 billion.

• With 35.9 billion barrels of oil beneath its Delta region, Nigeria has the 10th biggest reserves in the world. But it remains impoverished and indebted, with per capita income of $1,400. Oil has attracted international investors and corruption. The World Bank estimates more than $300 billion of oil wealth has been stolen from the Nigerian people in the last 40 years.

• The Centre for Public Integrity, a Washington thinktank, estimates that the oil industry has spent $420 million over the past six years on US politicians, political parties and lobbyists.

• According to the UK Offshore Operators Association, there are 365,000, jobs in the UK sustained by the offshore oil and gas industry.

• The 19.2-million acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska supports 45 species of land and marine mammals, ranging from the pygmy shrew to the bowhead whale. It also has between 5.9 billion and 13.2 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 39 trillion to 83 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The Bush Administration wants to allow drilling to recover it .

• China has repeatedly blocked moves for the United Nations to intervene in the humanitarian crisis in Darfur in western Sudan, where government-backed militias are accused of genocide. China has struck an agreement with the same Sudanese government to buy Sudanese oil.

• On 1 January this year, Gordon Brown doubled to 20 per cent the tax levied on North Sea oil operators. Total tax revenues from the North Sea last year exceeded £7 billion.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

Richardinho,

21/10/2006 02:16:09

All rather concerning. Though who's to say that we'll still even be using oil in fifty years time?

2

Betsy,

21/10/2006 03:11:32

The sooner we start using other means of energy the less we will be reliant on unstable countries. When you think of it we are absolutely crazy getting ourselves in the situation we are in - we are at the mercy of these suppliers - they can, in fact, dictate what our country's foreign policies are and this is most likely already happening.

3

Pendragon,

Canada 21/10/2006 04:15:17

How come Jim Kirkup did not use one paragraph, one sentance, one word, nay, one syllable, or even an iota about the Canada's Alberta oilsands? There are recoverable oil deposits in the sands which are greater than the reserves in Saudi Arabia. Shell, British Petroleum and other "Seven Sister" companies are feverishly building multi-billiion Euro projects to extract, upgrade and export the oil to international markets. Canada is one of the few countries on the "third rock" with sizeable energy supples AND a stable government.
Jimmy, tell you what you do - con(vince) your pulisher to send you to Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, where you contact Syncrude Canada to show you the oilsands projects up near Fort McMurray. Spend some time to meet ALL the people involved: the natives, the working persons, the developers and the politicians, (federal and provincial). It would be a very enlightening trip!

4

williamx,

Delta, Canada 21/10/2006 04:36:31

Bring on the nuks

5

Sarah Ann,

Canada 21/10/2006 05:07:34

Yes, I notice Canada didn't get a mention ... we should be noisier so they can hear us.

Mr. Kirkup would be very lucky to find a motel room if he came to Alberta because of the oil 'boom' there. We crossed through Alberta on our way back to B.C. and couldn't get a room anywhere and ended up in a 'dive' in Banff. I hadn't a clue until then exactly how big the 'boom' was.

Isn't a pipeline being laid from Alberta out to the West Coast so oil can be shipped to China? I believe also production has been stepped up to supply more to the U.S.

6

Malky,

21/10/2006 05:12:28

Pendragon - if his publisher sent him to (D)Edmonton, he'd have a claim against them for constructive dismissal.

I wouldn't wish a trip to "the city of champions" on my worst enemy.

7

scottwebb,

21/10/2006 05:31:04

When over-unity is being shown to be a reality by more these days our dependency on others for energy will become far less over time

8

Jeremy,

21/10/2006 05:55:48

Scott, 7 - that sentence sense did not completely make and to understand it I able was not.

9

Jock McStrapp,

21/10/2006 06:47:48

#7 - ZPE?

10

Hagop,

Edinburgh 21/10/2006 07:01:33

With oil reserves in the hands of Muslim fundemnetatlists (theocracies) or dictators, we can forget about democracy in the Middle-East (ME) apart from Lebanon and Israel. The latter's influence, and at worst survival, may even be at stake as the West seeks further and further compromises with the expanding theocracies in the ME.

11

Hagop,

Edinburgh 21/10/2006 07:05:30

With oil reserves in the hands of Muslim fundemnetatlists (theocracies) or dictators, we can forget about democracy in the Middle-East, as the West seeks further and further compromises with these expanding theocracies

12

Hagop,

Edinburgh 21/10/2006 07:07:27

With oil reserves in the hands of theocracies or dictators, we can forget about democracy in the Middle-East, as the West seeks further and further compromises with these expanding theocracies

13

Hagop,

Edinburgh 21/10/2006 07:14:23

The sad reality is that Human Rights and democracy, especially int Middle-East, would be the casualty of our dependence on oil

14

Craig Munro,

21/10/2006 07:37:31

Of course Scotland has no need to import oil from anybody. There are substantial oil and gas supplies left in the North Sea and off Shetland and we export more energy than we consume. That said, at some point, we will have to wean ourselves off these sources and we are already in number one position to become the renewables capital of Europe - whats to debate?

15

scottwebb,

21/10/2006 08:21:28

Comment@8 Johnny. OVER-UNITY or how about ZERO POINT . Type it into a browser mate. Maybe i should have said more PEOPLE dude.

16

billengland,

england 21/10/2006 08:24:19

Craig 14

It may have escaped your attention that it is not Scotland's oil, as you are not independent.

It is not the UK's oil, as the UK is not independent.

It is the EU's oil, as our sovereignty was given to them.

The oil will be taken by them, in the same way that our other resources and primary industries have been impoverished by their laws and the utter stupidity of our government.

17

Douglas,

Bathgate 21/10/2006 08:54:54

Sarah#5: Canada is a great place but don't make too much noise or the crazies from over the border will come and get you and your oil.

18

Denis,

21/10/2006 09:54:59

Bill, if you mean British sovereignty, it hasn't been given to anyone. The British Crown in Parliament is the supreme legal authority for the United Kingdom, and that has not been not altered just because our politicians have idiotically agreed to delegate much of the work of government to Brussels - a decision which could be reversed in the few hours it would take to pass a Bill repealing the European Communities Act 1972 through all its Parliamentary stages, and turn it into an Act of Parliament through the final step of Royal Assent.

In any case, as I understand the EU still has a long way to go before it would achieve the same kind of control over energy policy as it already has over, say, fisheries policy - see eg:

http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s14000.htm

19

Eurinco,

21/10/2006 10:12:12

Don't assume Alberta's oilsands will enable us - or even North America, to remain dependent on oil without suffering the consequences. Production is unlikely to exceed 3 million barrels a day at peak, and will come at a cost, in terms of large volumes of water and natural gas needed to extract the oil, probably 70% of the energy value.

See for instance CNN report at http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/04/news/economy/oil_sands/in...

Don't let this distract us from the need to develop renewables if we're to avoid becoming dependent on Russia for oil - even if you have yet to be convinced of the need to reduce fresh emissions of CO2 because of the impact on climate change

20

billengland,

england 21/10/2006 10:19:25

Denis 18

You have given me new hope!

I was under the impression that British Law was now subservient to European Law, and that we have lost the sole right to impose taxes.

The damage has been done to all our primary industries by virtue of our close association with continental Europe, and, if we can indeed get out as you say, we should get out now while we still can.

21

PETER C.,

Glasgow 21/10/2006 11:23:16

Russia is awakening us to the harsher realities of INTERdependence.

The tiger's got out of the tank and into our back yard. We're at the mercy of a bunch of bandits...

That would be one way of looking at it. More dispassionately, those who rule Russia are using the only leverage they have to force the world to finance the renewal of their huge, needy country.

But in the long run, the idea that we need them more than they need us is plain stupid. (As is the converse). In truth, whether we like it or not, or whether we like each other or not, WE NEED EACH OTHER.

Hundreds of years after Genghis Khan, the Russians are still conditioned by ancient Mongol notions of how to run a country and relate to neighbours.

So, now, we're tied to them and they to us Westerners. A disaster? Perhaps. But also and above all a tremendous opportunity. For them. For us. To learn at last to live together.

Benjamin Franklin put it succinctly:

WE MUST, INDEED, ALL HANG TOGETHER OR, MOST ASSUREDLY, WE SHALL ALL HANG SEPARATELY.

22

Neil,

9% GROWTH Party 21/10/2006 11:28:24

"Mr Chizhov flatly rejected Downing Street's version of events. "I cannot accept that," he said. "I don't know of any single international obligation which my country has not honoured."

Good point - Russia honoured the Helsinki Treaty whereby they & we are absolutely committed "take no action against the territorial integrity & unity" of other signatories such as Yugoslavia.

Is there anybody who thinks that the sworn word of Blair or any other NATO politician is 1,000th as trustworthy as Putin's?

23

martin , surrey,

godalming, surrey 21/10/2006 11:48:02

Great answers by Bill and Dennis !

24

sandy,

USA 21/10/2006 12:39:37

#21--your absolutely correct with every point you made, & i suspect that Russia's neighbors will remind them of this from time to time in the future.

25

Night Owl,

Edinburgh Scotland 21/10/2006 12:53:25

After reading through the article, the position is that Russia is again ascerting her weight on the world stage, this time over oil and her other abundant natural resources, and using those resources to gain political leverage with the EU and other countries outside the EU.

This political positioning was known about years ago, when we took it upon ourselves to engage with Russia on joint Oil and Gas projects.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see where this was going to lead, and now we have arrived, more fool to the EU to take this on in the first place.

We had at that time when we were dealing with the Russians, the technology to begin weaning ourselves off this dependency on oil, but we failed to grasp that initiative and go with it, so here were are being blackmailed by a country that I would have to think long and hard before I did any form of contract dealing, especially with an ex KGB boss.

Regarding Canada's oil, the Canadians from their natural mineral and oil reserves have it all, but they are very wise at looking themselves at alternatives and not using so much of their own natural resources and rightly so.

The time has arrived now by shedding this dependency on oil, and by so doing the Russians and the rest of these unstable states that we depend on for oil can take a running jump.

The EU better take a tougher stance with the Russians, and the games that the Russians are playing works both ways, (the chess game is only beginning Putin)

I repeat, how we ever signed up for these deals with the Russians in the first place and thinking we were going to benifit by those deals is totally amazing.

26

Jock McStrapp,

21/10/2006 13:32:06

Russia could have the whip hand for some time to come - because all the Russians needed was for the permafrost to melt (or soften) sufficiently to get at what they knew lay beneath it. Global Warming has taken care of that problem for them - and will continue to do so until a rise in sea levels puts most of Russias 'new' customers out of business. What price Russian hegemony then?

The time for applying serious engineering skill and effort to alternative energy production was the 1950s - the time of Suez, in fact - but no-one saw the writing on the wall as a result of that event. Instead, that same style of engineering skill has been used to produce ever more fearsome weapons, and to polish-up the polluting t*rd that the internal combustion engine is and continues to be.

As far as NL are concerned (and their various political predecessors too), I'd have to say that the ones who really need to be watched are their collective advisors. Politicians are salesmen. They don't have any ideas of their own, by and large; they simply do as they're told (or advised), generally without questioning what they hear until their conscience tell them that it's time to go (that is, if they're equipped with such an organ).

Getting rid of NL might help the present problem, provided someone with sufficient backbone could take over and ram through the legislation required to repeal the Euro-crap that we love to laugh at - but not otherwise. My personal choice would be to force our leaders to admit they'd got it wrong - and then oblige them to stay in office - on no salary, and with 100% oversight of everything that they do - until they've sorted out the mess they made. I'd vote for that approach ....

27

Ramona,

USA 21/10/2006 13:58:39

All of you may be interested in a new book by Mike Byron that is available online, "Infinity's Rainbow: The Politics of Energy, Climate and Globalization." This book makes clear the links between peak oil, political corruption, endless wars, creeping global fascism, religious fundamentalism, and global warming. It succinctly lays out the reasons that we continue on a path that is suicidal for civilization. It is a wake-up call for the human race. His website is: http://www.michaelpbyron.com/

28

Cara,

Glasgow 21/10/2006 14:19:33

The time for applying serious engineering skill and effort to alternative energy production was the 1950s - the time of Suez.

29

Godric,

Ayrshire 21/10/2006 14:22:43

you reep what you sow

Scotland produces more electricity than we require we still have massive oil reserves, we have even greater potential with renewables ie wind, hydro and wave generating projects ...... time for Scots to stand up and take their destiny in their own hands and reclaim our country from the hands of those who want to take OUR country's natural resources as their own and wouldn't be slow to discard us like a empty can of Irn Bru when they have stolen/wasted all our fossil fuels

time for Independance and wash our hands of Britian

30

Giltedged,

London 21/10/2006 15:11:30

Cheap energy contributed more to America's wealth than "hard work" and "efficient organisation" Putin aims to pass on income derived from Russia's immense mineral wealth to Russians. After Russia's lurch to democracy their GNP declined by 50% and its assets were grabbed by about 30 persons paying token amounts of tax (Eg Yukos owned 4% of the world's oil reserves for $135 million equivalent to getting thousands of million pound houses and paying £20,000 per house). Russia never went to war based on a lie, the US did and the most recent resulted in 600,000 deaths as per the Lancet. The EU should work honestly with Russia and avoid American manouvres to grab Russian oil eg in Georgia and Ukraine

31

Night Owl,

Edinburgh Scotland 21/10/2006 15:35:27

In support to Philip No 26, I agree with what you have written, but to get a politician to admit to a totally lack of judgement on their part is another matter, and to sort out this stupid mess that they have got us all into is again something else.

The writing is clearly on the wall in regards to now move more rapidly into renewables. Politicians have to learn to take charge over such important issues and stop relying on lobbyists and other interested parties who at times tend not have our national interests at heart.

Our own government are very well aware that we have the resources now to shed this oil dependency, but have to stand up now and say this is what we have to do(taking aside this nuclear issue which is really a non starter) as we have the alternatives at hand and the technology and production capabilities now to move those technologies ahead.

The day is coming very shortly that these politically unstable states that we deal with in regards to our energy needs, will shortly have to look else where to gain political leverage, so keep it up Russia, and stop your game playing, as it is not in your long term interest to proceed with this type of logic.

This is the type of rhetoric should be used when confronting these countries and mean it.

The point still remains we have engaged with these oil rich countries and to some extent some of our wheeling and dealing in the past has worked, but there is a limit to all of this wheeling and dealing and we have now reached that limit, as the Russians are now placing their cards on the table, after playing the waiting game.

Remembering that our Western oil companies had to go in and sort out their production problems and infrastructure, which were in a total mess, and corruption rampant, probably still ongoing.

That should tell you right there who you are dealing with, so why did we go ahead with all of this, better to bring Russia on board than have her stirring up proble

32

Neil,

9% GROWTH Party 21/10/2006 16:13:42

Naturally James we will disagree about nuclear, which is proven cheaper, safer &/or more reliable than the alternatives, being, for undisclosed reasons, a "non starter".

33

Night Owl,

Edinburgh Scotland 21/10/2006 16:43:57

Neil 31,

I would look at Nuclear again providing they sort out out the technology in getting rid of the waste in a safe manner and not have it being stored underground still in a very dangerous and toxic state.

Renewables although at the moment are still a bit more expensive than nuclear, but much safer, and one has got to look at the long term benefits, including reducing carbon emissions, and the more people you have using these renewables the cheaper they become, makes sense long term, after all we are going to be moved into that position sooner than later, if this current upheaval on oil dependency continues, especially with countries that are unstable politically, really who needs the agravation.

34

Prinzowhales,

North Carolina 21/10/2006 17:08:30

Good points Neil and Mario!

I noticed that Mr. Kirkup could not resist bringing up the gunned down reporter as a cause for "concern" among diplomats. Of course, there is no concern expressed for the 'suicided' reporter in the States, Gary Webb...two gun shots to the head...quite a suicide. We need not mention the brace of dead reporters brought down by the freedom lovers in Iraq....or the arms expert suicided in England. Nothing to see there, is there, Mr. Kirkup? Not even the least bit of concern about the state of democracy in HM's realm?

While Putin is no prize, neither is Blair or Bush. Personally, I don't blame Putin for redressing some of the rank thievings committed while Russia was governed by the drunken pig Yeltsin. Much of the corrupt deals will have to be undone that were carried out by America's dry-drunk, coke-headed, bi-sexual cheerleading, male-prostitute cavorting, AWOL, mass- murdering, lying, thieving president and his cabal of Neo-Scum accomplices.

The same EU that buys oil and gas from Libya and Saudi Arabia is having scruples about democracy in Russia? Give me a break.

The same EU that farts when Israel has gas, has little or nothing to say (but at least more than America) about the Palestinian Gulag that has continued in plain sight for nearly forty years. Perhaps, the diplomats are concerned....how much longer will Europe be dependent on Israeli oranges?

35

sandy,

USA 21/10/2006 18:36:58

#25-30-32--what an understanding of this whole mess you have! well done!
#33--must you always inject your hate filled comments in every post??

36

wattie>x 1,

21/10/2006 18:43:08

When is the so called *western democracies* going to wake up and realise, they no longer possess the trump cards. They have held the world to ransom for over two centuries; murdered countless millions of innocent people in the process when plundering the resources off their weaker victims. Their political, economic and military superiority is rapidly coming to a close, unless they choose the retrograde step of mass suicide off the global population by the use of nuclear weapons.
They have assisted and helped to build some of the most despotic regimes world wide, and when they became obselete to their requirement and had no further use for them, stirred up internal violence within to cause division.
We have few stark choices left to prevent world chaos and destruction. We either rid the world of the vast stock off nuclear weapons which the West possess a massive superiority - in fact more than enough - to end the existence of our planet many times over and over again or we genuinely co-operate world wide to build a just and egalitarian society.If the resources wasted on weapons of destruction were transferred to wiping out poverty and hunger, the world would immediately become a far safer and friendlier place overnight for rearing happier and healthier families. Many Third World Countries are no longer prepared to remain passive and give the selfish and greedy West carte blanche to plunder their rescources, while their own people are compelled to exist in such inhuman and
miserable conditions. The Uk should immediately cease in believing they are in the super power class domain, and begin to realise, we are one of the smallest populated islands in the world and one off the most densely populated. We, like most countries of similar status, should behave like them. These countries don't have military commitments all over the globe and leave most international problems to be solved by the larger countries. Russsia, China, India, Pakistan and possibly

37

Jock McStrapp,

21/10/2006 19:03:49

James #30 & #32:-

1) The main problem with politicians is that it doesn't seem to be possible to hold them accountable for their actions. Time and again, we've seen them screw things up and then slope off to profitable 'retirement-in-place'-type directorships or positions on oil company boards (which is what I suspect Blair is angling for). We need to see a fundamental change in the way that this country is run, and how its 'servants' are controlled, disciplined and made to do what they're been paid to do. Since Bills can only become Acts in law with the Royal Assent, I'd have thought that the controlling authority in such matters ought to be the Crown.

2) Nuclear - 'delicious cold, seriously dangerous hot'. First off - it's far too much technology to apply, simply to boil kettles serially (one at the reactor, the other in our kitchens - a ridiculous situation). Secondly: those responsible for setting up the nuclear power generation programme in the 1950s were warned about the future issue of nuclear waste - that a situation would arise eventually where the industry would create materials that couldn't be dealt with, and that would be toxic at the genetic level for thousands of years - but they still went ahead with it. The central difficulty is one of 'half-life' - and until someone develops a way to accelerate (controllably) the natural nuclear process, the human race will continue to play Russian roulette (how appropriate) - except with five loaded chambers instead of one.

3) Russia's political position is still exactly the same as Islam's religious position - i.e. world hegemony. We must not lose sight of that fact - everyone wants to own and rule the world; but no-one wants to dust or paint it, or nurse it when it's sick.

4) IMHO, the only solutions to energy problems will be found at the personal level. Some aspects are not negotiable at the moment - vehicle fuel being one of them, notwithstanding applications of Brown's Gas - bu

38

Echelon_Dr.Jekyll,

Osama's Bistro 21/10/2006 20:04:36

Well, you Canadians should let the US absorb all your oil like we Scots have let the English do. Has nobody noticed that the new gas pipeline from Norway goes direct and bypasses Scotland altogether?

"Thank you very much and f*** off" springs to mind, as anyone who has even sniffed the industry knows that the first big find after Scottish independence will be "ENGLAND'S OIL" found off the south east of guess where.

Gas sits on top of oil and where there is coal there is oil. (In case anyone wanted to know how hi-tech the information is)

39

The Strategist,

21/10/2006 20:20:09

The issue with the Canadian oil sands is that current technology requires heating it up using steam in order to allow the oil to flow and so be separated from the sand. They use gas to do that and lots of it..... So - oil sands are only competitive when the oil price is really high..

Xavier....... it isn't true that where there is coal there is oil..... You can of course produce oil from coal but it's very energy intensive... You can also derive gas from coal..... That's what we used before natural gas was discovered in the N Sea.

40

Getonwithitscot.,

Australia 21/10/2006 22:32:04

What is this life if full of care?

41

Rebel,

USA 21/10/2006 23:15:05

Looks like Europe needs more nuke plants, more coal usage and lots of solar, wind, tidal, water, geothermal, etc.

42

Prinzowhales,

North Carolina 21/10/2006 23:25:07

Sandy #34, If you are referring to my description of Georgie as being "hate filled", then yes, it is very necessary.

Are you aware that Jeff Gannon, male whore and proprietor of Talon News--a shining beacon of Neo-Con probity--also rented himself out on another web site, but always as the 'spoon' never the teacup, if you catch my drift. He tossed softball questions to the Moron-in-Chief at White House Press Conferences until uncovered. The White House logs showed that he spent the night on many, many, many occassions. I don't imagine he was curled up next to the fireplace with Barney, do you?

By-the-by, have you seen the picture of Georgie and Senator "Kissing Joe" Liebermann. Georgie is planting a big wet one right on Joe's Mafiosi lips.

Georgie intimated that one was 'either with him or with the terrorist'. I took umbrage at that and unlike your fearless leader, I don't bend over for anyone. What is it with you Neo-Cons...twisted sex and massive blood-lettings...

43

Rabhairt,

Cannons Creek Australia 22/10/2006 00:30:50

I feel the whole issue is a laughable,governments around the world talk of alternative energy sources but do very little ,why, because of the massive taxes they collect on fossil fuels, the oil/petro chemical companies are the real rulers, the war in Iraq is to ensure the flow of oil not to free or give the people a decent standard of living, here in australia the Greens demand alternative energy and then protest because the wind farms look ugly,one solution is growing hemp,so many products can be made from it and it is not the smokeable vatiety, but politicions are proffessional liars and the solution lies with the people , we are the only creatures on this planet that "mess' in their own nest and it is high time we had a good look at what we have done to our true mother ,the Earth.

44

Anthony,

Ottawa 22/10/2006 15:17:45

As a former resident of Alberta I should like to contribute to the debate about the Alberta oil sands deposits.
a)for every barrel of oil extracted the process uses five barrels of fresh water badly needed by ranchers (beef and sheep) and farmers (wheat, corn and canola/rapeseed).
b) The process of extraction creates air pollution eqivalent to over one million car exhausts for the equivalent length of time.
c) The oil rights to exploitation are owned by foreign firms, not the Canadian government.
d)Most of the oil goes to the United States. Imports from Canada exceed those from Saudi Arabia.

45

Danepiper,

New Mexico, USA. 23/10/2006 15:15:46

The sad and improvident situation we have now is that everywhere in the world we burn up precious hydrocarbon reserves for transport and energy.
Given the world's population, there isn't now and can never be enough natural organic production to meet our needs for fiber and energy. We are bumping the Malthusian wall.

Our world has made it's transition to synthetics. There is no going back. Fision, Solar, Wind and Tidal energy will be a stopgap until someone makes the breakthrough to Fusion.

We will never reach the stars if we can't solve our technological shortcomings and problems of societal and social interaction.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.