The Peak Oil Crisis: 2012 -- Apocalypse Now?

[happyslug]

17. I agree with the saw tooth decline AND that conflicts will occur

The problem is the problem of Peak Oil can NOT be resolved militarily, but many countries will try to do so. It will be more one country taking over another country's oil supply for internal use then some outside country moving in (i.e. Iran taking over Iraq and the North eastern part of Saudi Arabia for control of its oil for use IN IRAN.

The problem is the countries in most need of oil, are to far away to really take the fields AND HOLD THEM (The later is more important then the former, it is harder to hold something then to take it). Iran is the best example I can come up with, more do to the fact all three areas are Shiite and thus have a lot of connections with each other. Iran is historically the strongest of the three and thus in the best position to take over the oil fields of the others.

Another example of that type of take over would be if the US moved into Mexico and Cuba to take over the oil fields off the coasts of all three nations. Both Mexico and Cuba have few things in common with the US (Thus the proablity of the US making them part of the US AND both Mexico and Cuba accepting that annexation is extremely low). Thus NOT as possible as Iran taking over Iraq and Eastern Saudi Arabia. The main thing Cuba and Mexico has with the US is the nearest of both nations to the US (and US oil supplies are more extensive then Mexico's and Cuba's, thus the take over would be more an attempt to steal that oil for US use NOT to share it with Cuba and Mexico).


The second set of conflicts involves countruies that share a common oil field (mostly off shore). These POTENTIAL hot-spots can explode as Peak Oil hits the world hard. Here are some example of this second type of potential conflict:

1. Britain and Argentina may end up re-fighting the Falkland's war, but this time over the potential of oil being off the coast between the Argentina mainland and the Falkland islands.

2. Vietnam vs the Philippines vs China. All claim control over the Potential oil fields off their coasts, can lead to actual fighting, but no attack on any of the land parts of any of the three countries (Except as part of a plan to control the off shore oil fields between them).

3. In theory this can occur between Germany, Denmark England, Scotland and Norway (I mention Scotland separately from England in case the Scots do achieve independence). All border the North Sea and may fight over who gets what part of the remaining oil (Please note the North Sea has suffered severe drop in production, Britain for example has had to import oil for the first time since the North Sea oil field opened).

I give the above as examples of what CAN happen as oppose to what will happen. Other potential conflicts exists, most will be resolved without fighting as the parties accept that they can NOT have most of the oil, but what they can get by being agreeable is more then they can get by fighting. i.e. using a million barrels of oil to take an oil field with only one million barrels of oil is NOT worth the investment, an agreement for just 1/3 of the field without having to use any oil to get that 1/3 will be more profitable. Sooner or later most countries will accept this fact and come to a deal. Through some fighting will occur, most of it bravado, but after that phase has worked its way through, then a deal dividing the oil will be agreed to (Not necessary signed, the agreement may be "I know where your pumps are, you know where my pumps are, I will NOT attack your pumps if you do not attack my pumps" understanding or other crooked deal).