I think this analysis is over the target with respect to Hydrocarbons production but plateau oil is a better description or even Plateau hydro carbons. The price of oil and access to oil are of curse key but controlling the medium term price and who has the currency to purchase it is the bigger play in my opinion. Controlling access to energy through carbon credits issued for renewables is a way of enforcing a deflationary Carbon currency standard.
The peak oil started in the 70s only because it was deemed so. And if it's a problem of cost, why did the globalists push for the keystone pipeline to take expensive tar sands oil?
I'm thinking peak oil is an excuse to cull population, not the other way around.
Add to that, how the US military uses more fuel than most nations combined and climate change based on carbon is fraudulent (IPCC only recently started to consider more variables that they ignored).
Ehh, power games is the deal. These elites know that they could have reduced population growth merely by having good societies that provide, which give women the power to do their own thing, instead of be coerced to marry and have kids to survive. This is evident in Scandinavia, where birth rates are down.
But like the medical fraud of viruses was used to not solve the real causes of disease, peak oil will be used to not solve the real causes of population : an unstable world that makes people feel the need to have kids as "retirement"
Well, US conventional petroleum production peaked back in 1970.
Following that, in 1971, the US unilaterally terminated the convertibility of its currency to gold, instead arranging for a standardization of oil prices in dollars as a fiat currency with the Saudis and OPEC through 1974-75. This basically meant that oil from then on had to be purchased using dollars, implying that everyone was forced to hold dollars in order to access petroleum.
This is key to the economic history of the last half-century, but in context, the situation generates a surplus of "petrodollars" in reserve, which through a series of mechanisms enables the US economy to indirectly expropriate both capital and energy resources, allowing nominal GDP growth even as domestic energy production is flat or declining.
"And if it's a problem of cost, why did the globalists push for the keystone pipeline to take expensive tar sands oil?"
Well, it's not really a problem of cost, it's a problem of available net energy. Canadian tar sands have a poor EROI (https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/5/614/htm) compared to conventional petroleum, but it's net positive, and then the nominal costs are basically irrelevant.
A growth-based economy with abundant energy and no significant resource bottlenecks would have no reason to limit the population.
Great analysis.
Thanks! Your work is much appreciated as well
I think this analysis is over the target with respect to Hydrocarbons production but plateau oil is a better description or even Plateau hydro carbons. The price of oil and access to oil are of curse key but controlling the medium term price and who has the currency to purchase it is the bigger play in my opinion. Controlling access to energy through carbon credits issued for renewables is a way of enforcing a deflationary Carbon currency standard.
The key ratio is 16:1
https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2022/02/06/the-six-ways-on-sunday-carbon-currency-end-game-16-to-1-on-what-are-the-odds-of-that/
https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2022/01/10/peak-prometheus-noting-to-see-here-dont-look-up-bruce-charlton-distracted-obiedience-its-got-electrolytes/
Excellent points, thanks!
The peak oil started in the 70s only because it was deemed so. And if it's a problem of cost, why did the globalists push for the keystone pipeline to take expensive tar sands oil?
I'm thinking peak oil is an excuse to cull population, not the other way around.
Add to that, how the US military uses more fuel than most nations combined and climate change based on carbon is fraudulent (IPCC only recently started to consider more variables that they ignored).
Ehh, power games is the deal. These elites know that they could have reduced population growth merely by having good societies that provide, which give women the power to do their own thing, instead of be coerced to marry and have kids to survive. This is evident in Scandinavia, where birth rates are down.
But like the medical fraud of viruses was used to not solve the real causes of disease, peak oil will be used to not solve the real causes of population : an unstable world that makes people feel the need to have kids as "retirement"
Well, US conventional petroleum production peaked back in 1970.
Following that, in 1971, the US unilaterally terminated the convertibility of its currency to gold, instead arranging for a standardization of oil prices in dollars as a fiat currency with the Saudis and OPEC through 1974-75. This basically meant that oil from then on had to be purchased using dollars, implying that everyone was forced to hold dollars in order to access petroleum.
This is key to the economic history of the last half-century, but in context, the situation generates a surplus of "petrodollars" in reserve, which through a series of mechanisms enables the US economy to indirectly expropriate both capital and energy resources, allowing nominal GDP growth even as domestic energy production is flat or declining.
"And if it's a problem of cost, why did the globalists push for the keystone pipeline to take expensive tar sands oil?"
Well, it's not really a problem of cost, it's a problem of available net energy. Canadian tar sands have a poor EROI (https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/10/5/614/htm) compared to conventional petroleum, but it's net positive, and then the nominal costs are basically irrelevant.
A growth-based economy with abundant energy and no significant resource bottlenecks would have no reason to limit the population.