* Global Warming Solved, Results Automatic

Updated 9/19/09

According to the Sept. 16th edition of Bloomberg, " the average world ocean temperature from June through August was the warmest since 1880 for any Northern Hemisphere summer, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration."

"In June, the U.S. Global Change Research Program said global warming is causing drought, rising sea levels and flooding from heavy rainfall in the U.S., threatening agriculture, coastal regions, water resources and public health. This group said in 2007 global emissions need to be cut by 50 percent to 85 percent by 2050 to stand a chance of keeping the global temperature increase to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit since industrialization in the 1800s, which might be enough to prevent the worst case scenarios of rising sea levels and collapse of established agriculture. The U.S. Congress is debating legislation to create a cap- and-trade program that would set an overall carbon dioxide limit. UN-sponsored talks among 192 nations aim to draft a new treaty to fight climate change in December in Copenhagen. "

Somebody really needs to introduce the global warming scientists to the oil industry’s geologists. Perhaps these folks could all drive over the Starbucks for a coffee, since they really should chat a bit.

If one knows anything about the well established concept of “Peak Oil,” and we’re talking about a concept that’s been around and proven correct many times on less-than-global-scale since it was introduced in the late 1950’s by Shell’s Dr. M. K. Hubbart, all of this global warming planning is, at best, silly and at worst, a borderline-criminal diversion of resources and capital.

Global Warming - caused by man's burning of fossil fuels, if that's what causes it - is a self-healing wound, thanks to already-declining global oil production.

Since oil was first produced commercially 150 years ago, the planet’s oil reserves have been developed along an exponential rate along the growth side of a standard bell curve. (Exponential, until one reaches the top, or peak, of the bell, that is.) Most petroleum geologists and senior oil executives agree that Dr. Hubbert was correct in his calculations back in the 1950's, and that humanity has reached the top of oil’s global production curve. This is called "peak oil." All it means is that from this point on, we'll discover and produce less than we already have.

According to the International Energy Agency (AEI) and now, the US government's equivalent oil watchdog, global production has recently turned around and is now declining globally at a rate of 6.7% annually. This obviously means there will be about 7% less oil burned per year from now on, until this resource, petroleum, is totally depleted at some point in the not too distant future.

Global Warming, ostensibly caused by carbon emissions from ships, planes, automobiles, trucks and diesel trains ­- the planet's engines of commerce -­ and by the burning of coal (and gas) to produce electricity - requires no complex cap and trade marketplace or conservation efforts to solve.

Conservation - lowered carbon emissions - from now on will be automatic, whether we humans like it or not.

Civilization will pollute less, since we’re now producing less petroleum each year. We’ll burn less coal, since the entire modern pollution economy starts with and is maintained by oil. It cannot grow - or even survive on a mass scale - with less of the stuff coming out of the ground every year.

If the goal is to reduce carbon emission by 85% by 2050 and oil production is declining at about 7% a year now ­ as we roll over the top of a bell curve, which means production decline will increase even more as we slide down the other side - simple arithmetic indicates that this significant conservation goal by the Global Wamers will be no problem to achieve. We'll exceed the goal substantially, since they're actually planning to burn more oil than there is in the pipeline with a 2050 deadline.

Here's the math: At today's rates of decline, the people of the planet can only burn 93% of the oil this year that we did a year ago. If the total oil burned last year is assigned a value of 100%, in only 10 years, by 2020, the global oil production capability will have declined to only about 40% of last year’s total capability (assuming a nice 7% annual decline and not a more accelerated slope). That’s a 60% decline in just 10 years.

By 2030, global oil production capability will be less than 25% of today’s levels, a 75% decline in only 20 years.

Reduce consumption by 85% by 2050? No Problem. There simply will not be an oil based energy supply available by that time. Perhaps whatever military powers remain may still be fighting over the remaining crude, using “strategic petroleum reserves.” This is not to say the people living under these regimes will have access to oil or a modern economy; strategic oil will be reserved for the military (and ultra elite class, if such a class remains outside of the military and paramilitary class by then.)

Global Warming is a self healing wound. These are, therefore, the good old days. The best of old days. There’s no reason to spend any time or money on “conservation” when supplies are limited by nature. Why further enrich the non-oil-producing elite class through cap and trade schemes that simply shovel what's left of the world's wealth into their coffers? Somebody tell Al Gore to pipe down. If he really cared about the state of civilization, he'd be talking about life after peak energy. Post-Peak-Oil .. is forever. At this point, it’s probably wiser to enjoy the amazing mass luxury we have available and let the planet take care of itself.

Perhaps civilized humanity has a place on the planet after 2030 or so, perhaps not.With our future as a civilization for now still based on cheap, reliable oil energy, the future we have expected all our lives simply won't happen as we've been led to believe it would.

Given this reality; that these days are the best of the good old days, we probably should do exactly what the ultra-elite has been doing - accumulating as much of everything as we can, while we can, and damn the debt service, since there will never be more ease in most people's lives - ever - as time marches on into an oil starved future.

When conservation is automatic, like it is now that we're "over the top," what's the point of voluntary cutting back? To leave more for the rich people, who'll be able to afford it long after we can't?

Life is Good, as they say, and it will never be materially richer for more people than it is today. After all, when the financial class figures out nobody's going to be able to repay a 30 year mortgage, the credit squeeze of the past year will seem no worse than a teenage zit on a long-forgotten date night.

Nothing can be done about peak oil, but it does eliminate having to worry about the Global Warming problem.

Finally. Some good news.

This is the last time I'm going to write about this topic, unless someone comes up with some facts that change the situation. Frankly, I'm pleased to have been able to sort this out, primarily for myself (so I can construct my own thoughts with a bit more of a quality standard than writing them in a personal diary requires) and be able to end the monologue on a positive note for now :-) sunny