Tides of the Dollar Moon
A planet to its Star must look
The planet no less needs its moon.
As the Sun is the store of energy, New.
The moon drives and regulates currents,
of the tides, time and the nature of things.
That Golden Orb gives all
That silvery Moon regulates all
Both work together even as the other
Seemingly sleeps and yet currents
of the tides, Time and the nature of things pass.
On the nature of Man-made things
On a standard of gold which
Jennings would not be crucified upon,
That cross Of Gold-alone hard food of Midas.
No tides to complement the Orb
For Silver was its currency,
the Silvery moon to that crosses Golden Sun
which means of exchange fed the common man
The Silver Moon drives and regulates
Currencies of the tides, Time and the nature of things.
Time passed and Man forsakes the Golden Orb
and its silvery moon. No credit he gave
to drivers of Tides, Time and the nature of things
Fiat of imperial rule enforces debts,
new tides in political Economy.
FIAT dictates the new tides of Commerce.
Ephors of debt above and astride the law.
No silvery moon, complementary to the Golden Orb.
There are no tides by means of which the common man
may be fed. Hard food of Midas alone- Starvation.
King Kanute Like those ephors
wave bidding the advancing tide backwards
Still, they advance tides in a tsunami of debt
Tides of a Dollar moon by fiat
Hegemonic Tides of the Dollar Moon.
Roger G Lewis (2016)
Bi-oilism.Petro/CarbonDollar Standard
The PetroDollar Standard, with Saudi oil production being a swing producer to facilitate inflation of the currency.In January 2005, Saudi Arabia increased its operating rig count by 144%, to increase oil production by only 6.5%. This suggests that the market swing producer (as Saudi Arabia was seen) was not able increase production enough to meet increasing demand.
Plateau Oil. A variation on the idea of peak oil. AT Plateaux production no swing capacity in Oil Supply is similar to demonetizing Silver giving a defacto PetroDollar Standard which is inherently deflationary.
QED,
Welcome to the new Oil Shock.
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/5/4/044006
2.1. EIR of oil and petroleum
The EIRp, oil typically lies between 10 and 30, but from 1949 to 2008 it ranges from 7.5 (1981) to 48 (1998) with a value of 8.8 in 2008 marking the year of the highest oil price in history and the beginning of the latest time period of US economic recession. The minimum EIRp, oil of 7.5 in 1981 also coincided with the peak of an economic recession in the US as well as the time of the highest overall cost of petroleum as a percentage of GDP at 8.5% (EIA 2008). EIRe, petro from 1970 to 2006 ranged from 5.3 in 1981 to 15.9 in 1998, the same years for the lowest and highest EIRp, oil. In 1981 EIRp, oil:EIRe, petro was 1.43:1 (minimum) and in 1998 3.05:1 (maximum). The EIRp, oil from 1949 to 1972 gradually increased from 19 to 29 with little volatility in the value. This lack of volatility can possibly be attributed to the Texas Railroad Commission (TRC) acting as an oil cartel by
pro rationing oil production in Texas from 1935 to 1973 to create a price floor for balancing supply and demand (Prindle 1981)
. With Texas as the swing state oil producer until US peak production in 1970, this balancing on the price was possible.
Is economic output constrained by Earth’s boundaries, or limited only by our imaginations?
One would hope that by now such competing economic narratives would have given way to
definitive conclusions, but unfortunately most economists have not even begun to consider
the links between economic activity and energy usage on a finite planet. Carey King’s The
Economic Superorganism convincingly explains how and why economics must be forced
to confront the essential role of energy, fossil or renewable, in industrial civilisation and the
dilemmas that poses for our growth-obsessed social system.
June 7, 2018 at 3:58 am said:
“Solutions for an “abundance economy” aren’t going to help us as we enter an age of scarcity.”
I would like to see the evidence regarding Material scarcity. Regarding Peak Energy, we are still at a high level of output although the expense EROEI for the historically very cheap Oil extraction is clear in the evidence from SEEDS.
On Output generally, I think there is an Abundance but we have a distribution and accounting problem.
These I have suggested can be tackled in the following stages.
The problems in Political Economy as it stands presently and the question of future Political Economy based upon future Energy realities are I think helpfully separated which is something Prof. David MacKay is very successful with, in his presentation of the question.
The Problems are only weakly related with respect to future solutions and breaking the process into 3 parts is useful rather than lumping them all together. It is clear that the existing Form of Market economy and political economy is not able to solve the problem at stage 3 ( I.E Post 2050 post-Oil Economy)
Stage 1 requires a reform of the existing paradigm which involves facing up to the broken debt-based money system. Pension provision, the sovereign debt crisis, and Public debt crisis are all addressable and will see improvements even within the deteriorating Cost of energy inputs as a share of output. We could call this stage let’s fix what we know is not working.
Stage 2 covers the Post Financialised ( Big Bang Experiment) period to the oil running out in 2050.
This requires a much more long-term investment horizon and complicating the energy mix by overstating the ”Climate Change question** seems to be counterproductive, again I like the way Prof David Mackay dealt with the question including stating the necessities of **Clean Coal and Nuclear”. In this stage, we will be implementing ideas previously barred due to the denial inherent in clinging to a failing system.
Stage 3 Post 2050, This part is much easier than Stage 2 and stage 1, in my opinion, the myth-busting and leveling out inherent in solving the political problems at stage 1 and the challenge to vested interests in stage 2 are by far and away, the largest obstacles to getting down to Brass tacks in my opinion.
#85. Perfect Storm gets nearer
Eclipse Now on January 12, 2017 at 7:21 am said:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but this article seems predicated upon a ‘peak energy’ belief system? Peak energy is a myth. Breeder reactors can provide all the abundant, reliable, clean electricity we could need, and that can revolutionise the transport system as well.
Breeder reactors burn the actinides in nuclear waste. For laypeople like myself, that sounds like gobbledegook. But when it’s broken down into English, it’s a startling fact that I wish I had known decades ago. Put simply, the longer lived radioactive stuff in nuclear waste can be burned to supply abundant clean electricity, and the final waste only has to be stored for about 300 to 500 years. Easy!
Before you scoff, China will mass produce breeders cheaper than coal in just 8 years!
But there’s already a history of them.
There are 2 main types of breeder reactor.
1. Fast Neutron reactors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-neutron_reactor
A famous prototype Fast reactor was the American EBR2, an Integral Fast Reactor prototype that reprocesses all its waste on site.
“Costing more than US$32 million, it achieved first criticality in 1965 and ran for 30 years. It was designed to produce about 62.5 megawatts of heat and 20 megawatts of electricity, which was achieved in September 1969 and continued for most of its lifetime. Over its lifetime it has generated over two billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, providing a majority of the electricity and also heat to the facilities of the Argonne National Laboratory-West.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Breeder_Reactor_II#Integral_Fast_Reactor
Russia had the old BN-350, and then built the Bn-600. Note: the Japanese paid Russia a billion for the technical specs on their old BN-600, and “The operation of the reactor is an international study in progress; Russia, France, Japan, and the United Kingdom currently participate.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-600_reactor
They have now build the BN-800, and have exported the plans to China who will be building their own soon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-800_reactor
Russia are building the BN-1200 soon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-1200_reactor
The French had the massive 1200MW Superphenix until ignorant activists shot RPG’s onto the site and Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt closed it down again. What a waste! The French could be breeding up all their own nuclear ‘waste’ into fuel again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superph%C3%A9nix#Closure
- Thermal (slow neutron) reactors run hotter
My favourite thermal reactor is the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor which CANNOT ‘melt down’, as it is already a liquid. China has an enormous LFTR project.
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/542526/china-details-next-gen-nuclear-reactor-program/
Thorium is currently a massive and expensive waste problem from mining all those rare earth that wind and solar rely on. But if we can burn thorium, wind and solar and nuclear can all be friends. We can have the best of both worlds. Various future breed
rogerglewis on September 5, 2017 at 6:16 pm said:
The Reasoning here about Fake growth that is predicated upon borrowed money is slightly confusing in that Almost all Money is Borrowed, That some money is spent on Production or Investment for future consumption and some is spent on Current Consumption is a distinction I can follow both for Money ( Debt Based Money) but would also hold true for Energy-Based Metrics, That is if we are spending or investing energy budgets we can Spend available energy on investment or on Current consumption.
If one did a Stocktake of all potential production with existing energy resources, how would that Look? Prosperity for a Single Income minimum Wage Single Parent in Detroit looks a lot different to An Upper Middle-Class Graduate from Connecticut? If Money is reinvented around Energy Realities rather than the realities of Debt Based Money where would we choose to head, and whose measure of prosperity would we adopt?
If we look at The Petro Dollar and its problems based on the old Free lunch ( exorbitant privilege paradigm) Mr. Trump or any US president is faced with the same problems, On EROI measures if Energy is invested on Infrastructure both Transport and Energy surely there is a way out of the current quagmire?
In a business as usual scenario, War seems to be the present Answer from those stuck in the Old Paradigm, and President Trump seems to have been co-opted into that course of action. Should President trump manage to free himself from the PENAC ( Project for a New American Century) Crowd What is the realistic view for an energy-based economy?
I thought this Roger Pelke Talk was very good, It would be disastrous to see a marginalisation and Polarisation of the Energy Based Economy debate, in the same way as the Climate Question became so poisoned.
Climate Politics as Manichean Paranoia – Roger Pielke Jr @ The GWPF, July 2017
David Korten is an economist, author, and former Professor of the Harvard Business School. His political activism has made him a prominent critic of corporate globalization. His 2006 book “The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community” argues that the development of empires about 5,000 years ago initiated unequal distribution of power and social benefits to a small portion of the population.
I think an Energy-Based View from a Main Street and not Wall Street Perspective could see the #MAGA project gain traction, the Hawkish view which seems to have prevailed will see a great deal of Energy Wasted in all senses of the word Energy.
The American Dream, Main Street Versus Wall Street. The Final Showdown! #MAGA #Love #Peace
drtimmorgan
on September 5, 2017 at 6:35 pm said:
Thanks. You raise a large number of issues, some of which I’ll need to follow up before I can comment.
Yes, money is ‘loaned into existence’. But, however, created, it is still a “claim” on real economic output. If that claim can’t be met then, by definition, it has to be destroyed. This makes its owner – or the creditor to whom it belongs – poorer.
Part of the problem is that money is accepted as a “store of value” – so, if someone owes me $1, I count that as an asset. If he cannot pay me, then I’m $1 ‘poorer’. No one has yet demonstrated how we can ‘let off’ debtors without leaving creditors short-changed – and these creditors are often debtors to others.
Some engineering solutions might be possible – but we seem unable to find them. For instance, the WEF report on pension shortfalls couldn’t suggest much more than higher savings ratios, which aren’t practicable, as they would need to be far too high to be affordable. Getting returns on investment higher would “solve” the problem, but only by raising interest rates. And so on……..
rogerglewis
on September 6, 2017 at 4:35 pm said:
Hello Tim, Thanks for the reply.
If we are talking about the existing System the problem is one of Assymetric Risk and lack of moral hazard, Taleb has fully examined these questions and This Interview of his I found very useful.
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/09/taleb_on_skin_i.html#.VaZCuLFowo4.blogger
On Skin in the Game. An interesting question Talebs claim 5 Trillion of losses = total wipeout?
I was looking at your Seeds report for Greece earlier and the Curves certainly do not point to the huge disaster that has unfolded there in the last 7 years Which is more properly expressed by the curves in this blog
The Stocktaking point I make is a serious question that needs addressing Both in terms of the existing system and, any proposed energy-based alternative. Energy Investment Decisions I would argue are better made in local scale up to regional scale levels and not from Supra National down to national levels. It really boils down to a question of Scale and Democracy.
Whether it is Energy Based Exchange Tokens or debt-based debt tokens the political question remains the basic one of what is the balance between Subsidiarity and Centralisation a Balance the EU and ECB has badly wrong and which the Fed and US Federal Government have badly wrong and which has also been got badly wrong in the UK,
I live in Sweden where subsidiarity in Local Government is very real it is also true that subsidiarity remains at the core of the Success of Germany. This Interview with Prof Richard Werner is very good on the lessons from the German Model.
https://www.rt.com/shows/renegade-inc/379579-uk-finance-curse-suffer/
A number of responses I have made, 2 to be precise on this discussion, have not made it past the Filters on the Blog, whether it is human or Algorithmic I do not know?
Anyway, I do place my responses held in moderation on my own blog.
https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2019/10/04/an-exchange-with-the-climate-church-of-armageddon-continues-a-letter-to-greta-from-freinds-of-science-cool-it-and-so-comes-the-wrong-think-police-climatefraud-climatecult-greta-extinctiondistin/comment-page-1/#comment-5635
@LoupaLoupa
@StevenKurtz
@DrMorgan
The Iconoclasm and Venality of Assange’s Persecution. End of Cash, End of freedom #Aadhaar
Austerity, Enlargement and Monetary Union. The End of European Democracy. Not Waving But Drowning.
11 thoughts on “It Don’t mean a thing if it ain’t got that Swing . Tides of the Petrodollar Moon.”