What If He's Right? (James Howard Kunstler)

[Tace]

James Howard Kunstler -- World News Trust

July 19, 2010 -- Just when America was celebrating the provisional end of BP's Macondo oil blowout, and getting back to important issues like Kim Kardashian's body-suit collection, along comes Matthew Simmons with a rather strange and alarming outcry on doings in the Gulf of Mexico that contradicts the mood of renewed festivity, as well as just about every shred of reportage from any media outlet, mainstream or otherwise.

Matt Simmons' Houston-based company has been the leading investment bank to the U.S. oil industry for a long time, financing exploration and drilling in places like the Gulf of Mexico. Simmons, 68, recently retired from day-to-day management of the company. For much of the decade he has been what may be described as a peak oil activist. His 2005 book, Twilight in the Desert, warned the public that Saudi Arabia's oil production had reached its limits and, more generally, that an oil-dependent world was entering a zone of serious trouble over its primary resource. He took this aggressive stance despite risking the ire of the people he did business with.

Matt Simmons is a sober individual and a very nice man (I've met him twice over the years), a button-downed corporate executive who's been around the oil business for 40 years. His knowledge is deep and comprehensive. From the beginning of the BP Macondo blowout incident in April, he's taken the far out position that the well-bore is fatally compromised and that BP has been consistently lying about their operations to stop the flow of oil. Perhaps most radically, Simmons claims that an oil "gusher" is pouring into the Gulf some distance from the drilling site itself.

Last week, Simmons came on Dylan Ratigan's MSNBC financial show, but he did a longer interview over at the King World News website. (click here for Eric King's interview with Simmons). Simmons' current warning about the situation focuses on the gigantic "lake" of crude oil that is pooling under great pressure 4,000-5,000 feet down in the "basement" of the Gulf's waters. More particularly, he is concerned that a tropical storm will bring this oil up -- as tropical storms and hurricanes usually do with deeper cold water -- and with it clouds of methane gas that will move toward the Gulf shore and kill a lot of people. (I really don't know the science on this and welcome any reader to correct me, but I suppose that the oil "lake" deep under the Gulf waters contains a lot of methane gas dissolved at pressure, and that as the oil rises toward the ocean's surface, and lower pressures, the gas will bubble out of solution.)

more

http://worldnewstrust.com/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=items&cid=149:all-edited-content&id=8078:what-if-hes-right-james-howard-kunstler

[eilen]

1. Wow. I read that post and listened to the interview

and I stand with Kunstler-- agnostic-- not sure what to believe. He sounds very sincere but I really don't want to believe it, mostly because of it's severity and what it means to the Gulf; I think it means the Gulf will die and the oil will spread farther than we can possibly imagine. Also, it makes me wonder why the government hasn't sent exploratory missions undersea to determine the extent of the damage. If they have, why they are hiding information?

Is our government as inept and powerless as they claim to be that we are forced to rely on BP to provide us with the "facts"? I think we are in for a really bad year. I think that the US has been lucky so far to avoid civil unrest. I don't know if it is testament to the faith we have in our government leadership or our laziness.

[n2doc]

2. Fearmongering and scientific hogwash

The bit about "methane clouds killing people" us utter crap. I am directly involved in work in this region. What these idiots don't understand are the relative scales involved. The DH blowout, while big on our scale of leaks, is small compared to the volume of the Gulf. The Gulf contains 6.4x 10e17 gallons of water (642 quadrillion gallons). Latest spill estimates are 145 million gallons. That means there are 100,000,000,000 gallons of seawater per gallon of oil. The well is 5000 feet under the surface. Most of the oil plumes are thousands of feet down. The most powerful storms can mix to perhaps 600 feet down. So no, the "entire plume" won't come up and degas in some cataclysmic eruption. Even if it were to somehow do so (and it would take the energy of an H bomb detonated at the wellhead to do this) the amount of gas involved is tiny compared to the volume of atmosphere above the Gulf. Tens of thousands of cubic miles.


The other thing these folks won't say- there is a constant leak 1/2 as large as the DH spill, coming from old wells and natural seeps. This is every year. And yes, it causes problems. But the world hasn't died from it, not even the Gulf. The acute nature of the DH spill is what is causing the big problems, because the oil is concentrated at the surface and around the well. There, things are bad. Just don't believe these folks who want to sell fear of ridiculous impossible events.

If you really want to be scared, read the climate change literature. That is real, and happening now. But slowly, so it doesn't get the same band for the buck.

[RussBLib]

3. If he's right, we're dead.

I live only 50 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. If Kunstler is right, and a major hurricane comes this way, we, and perhaps millions of others, will be dead.

But we simply cannot uproot our lives on the chance that he is right. Where would we evacuate to? How far inland is safe? What about the jobs we currently have? Would my employer keep them open for us, until we return? How long would we be gone? If he is right, Houston may be inhabitable. If that's the case, and I have evacuated to Colorado, there is nothing to return to.

So we will simply stay put. If he is wrong, we proceed as normal. If he is right, then we'll be dead, and maybe it will take the death of millions to wake us up to the real dangers of what we're doing in the Gulf. Maybe millions will have to be sacrificed to get us to finally do the right thing. If that's the case, my death would be well-served.

My wife said, maybe we should get a gas mask. Why? If we have to use them, then devastation will be ensuing. I don't really want to be around if millions of people are killed in a methane wave. Fuck it.

[TheWraith]

4. He's not right.

First off, this is pseudo-scientific horseshit.

Second, both Kunstler and Simmons make their living the same way--by making loud, scary predictions, then moving on to the next one before anyone calls them on the fact that they were wrong. Kunstler predicted that Y2K would be the end of human civilization. Six weeks ago, Simmons predicted that BP would be bankrupt by the end of June. He also predicted that the average price of oil over 2010 would be $200 a barrel. And he claimed that there was a giant mile-wide hole in the earth a few miles from the wellhead that was gushing oil which nobody but him knew about, apparently.

He's a self-promoter, the 21st century version of the preacher who claims the end times are upon us and that Jesus is coming back on Tuesday, only to move back the date each week.

[4dsc]

7. Both are correct about peak oil

To bad both are correct about the coming oil shortage that is going to rock this world and not in a good way.

[northernlights]

5. Simmons is an investment banker with an MBA

not a geologist or physicist or geophysicist.

His knowledge of the business side may be deep, but that does not make him a geologist nor a physicist nor a geophysicist.

He keeps making claims about this distant lake of oil -- what is his evidence? What is his proof? Has he seen data from seismic tests? Has he hired somebody to perform such tests? Has he seen underwater video of said leaks? Has he sent a robot down with video?

Sorry, I'm not buying his crapola. Do I believe peak oil is a problem? Yes. Obviously it is a finite resource, and we are using it to pollute our finite planet.

[Hawkowl]

6. 40 years of experience

He has 40 years of experience in oil drilling. Don't discount someone just cause they don't have a newly minted piece of paper certifying x amounts of credits listening to blowhards in a classroom.

Seriously, though, I have heard some scientists with the same concerns. Worse, I feel in my bones that this is not over by a long shot.

And proof can be calculated. Some scientists have been saying that the rate of flow from the televised leaks is much too small to produce the amount of oil observed on the surface, let alone the oil forced just below the surface by dispersants. There is also the measurement of the pressure at the now contained oil well and it is too low. Implying there is a leak somewhere else. So, there may be no definitive public proof, but the government should be breaking BP's balls about providing access to information and data.

[northernlights]

8. 40 years experience as an investment banking officer

gives you a sky-high view of what you're investing in, and translates into 40 years experience glad-handing. It does NOT a scientist make.

Proof can be calculated. But exactly where does Simmons offer *any* proof? Any calculations? Anything other than his "40 years experience?"

And education in science has a lot less to do with "listening to blowhards in the classroom" as with learning those calculations you're talking about, learning to apply those calculations, as well as hands on experience performing experiments in the laboratory (which may or may not be in a building, since ecological science laboratories include being out in the field).

That does not mean I trust the government or BP on this. But Simmons is the blowhard, not science professors. And I'll listen to the scientists on the scene, doing the science, taking the measurements, doing the math -- with education in science plus 40 years experience doing science -- before I'll listen to an investment banker/gladhander blowhard any day of the week.

Seriously. My father always claimed to be an expert on everything based on "40 years experience." He had 40 years experience betting on horses at the race track. That did NOT give him ONE IOTA OF KNOWLEDGE on how to train horse, how to care for horses, horses' day to day needs, how they think, how to ride, how to teach horseback riding...or any real-world, hand-on knowledge of anything other than looking at forms and placing bets. He had "40 years experience" at being a father. That doesn't mean he knew a fucking thing about relationships, children, teaching, being a companion, being a leader, etc. 2 of his 3 children don't speak to him. What does that say about 40 years experience as a father? Oh, lately he has "40 years experience as a children's advocate." Right. Whatever. My father had 40 years experience selling electronics. That make him a salesman, and that is really all.

Simmon's 40 years experience as an investment banker does NOT EQUATE to being a scientist in any way, shape or form. Spare us the nonsense, really. :eyes:

[Joe Chi Minh]

9. You don't get it, do you? It's the scientists, the engineering experts, he's been

listening to. Unless it's me who's misunderstood his article.

Although I don't think so. What's in it for him and his current pristine reputation? Why peddle rumours on the basis of the balance of probablility as he assesses it, unless that balance clearly seems mightily skewed in the direction he indicates? He really is an almighty fool, if it's nonsense.

But if it turns out that you and your pals are talking bilge, then anything you write on here in future under your current names will, at best, just invite monumental ridicule.

Let's see how it pans out. 'Time will tell' is the only answer, isn't it?

[northernlights]

10. Oh, I get it. He has provided one iota of evidence beyond his claims

nor have you. Not one piece of evidence, not one link to actual measurements, calculations, data or anything other than his claim to be talking to unnamed experts and scientists. If there is a leak 6 miles away and an underground oil lake, PROVE IT. Again -- where is the seismological data? Video evidence? WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

He also has recommended nuking it as the only option. Is he now also an expert on nuclear bombs, not to mention what would happen to nearby wells?

As far as I can see from what I've read of his article and postings elsewhere, he's a crackpot. A lot of people find themselves seeking attention after they've retired, trying to remain important.

And as to your threat "if it turns out that you and your pals are talking bilge, then anything you write on here in future under your current names will, at best, just invite monumental ridicule." spare me the silliness :eyes:

If his nonsense proves true, we'll all be dead anyway. :shrug:

[Joe Chi Minh]

11. Yes, the worse case scenario. But his words coud still be largely vindicated, and you exposed

as a fool of the first water.

Most people marvel at his cavalier attitude in proposing the use of a nuclear bomb, since it was only performed on land by the Russians - and that with a questionable outcome. But who gives tuppence about your demand for evidence, for specific data from him? He wasn't giving a scientific paper, you nut. He wasn't even saying it would happen. Just relaying anecdotally the assertions of engineers and scientists, allegedly 'au fait' with the reality on the ground (however deeply immersed), a broad spectrum of whom he apparently came to know quite well, in his finance office(!); and expressing his own fears on that basis.

[northernlights]

12. Simmons has been saying the worst case is happening in a number of places

and claims he recommended to the government nuking it in an article in our local paper. Yes, he lives within half an hour of me. This isn't the first place I've seen it. :eyes:

"you could be exposed as a fool in the first water"...oh my. I'm shaking in my boots. :eyes: some anonymous cyberspace stranger might think I'm a fool....and....of the first water :cry: :cry: :cry: what shall I do?!? :rofl:

[Joe Chi Minh]

13. Unusual reaction. Most people would simply ruefully question their reasoning.

[northernlights]

15. um, get out from in front of the mirror and show some evidence

Simmons has not presented one piece of evidence of his claims. Not one.

I ask again -- where is the evidence? Where is the data? Where are videos?

Show me a video of the lake of oil. Something...

[Joe Chi Minh]

16. Ah..... I hadn't realised English isn't your first language.

As he stressed, what he says is anecdotal, but, due to the absolutely dire nature of its import, he could ultimately be exposed as a clown for giving voice to it on what would have been patently spurious authority. His judgement would be rather harshly called into question. If he's right, of course, you would be exposed as the clown, because of your constant rabbiting on about evidence.

On balance, sticking my own head above the parapet somewhat, if I had to plump for one or other, with little hesitation, I would plump for his judgement being superior to yours. We shall see.

[northernlights]

17. I ask for evidence

I get personal attacks and insults.

Oh, and "anecdotal."

Simmons makes wild claims, recommends to the government that we nuke the well shut based on "anecdotal evidence"...and...whatever.

Welcome to ignore, Mr. Minh. I have better things to do with my time.

[ShamelessHussy]

14. he's like the president... he has those folks on the payroll

and at the dinner table... i trust his opinions a hellva lot more than the M$M, the Oil Industry, and the Gov. put together.