← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · il ragno
Thread ID: 3881 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2002-12-06
2002-12-06 14:40 | User Profile
WASHINGTON (Dec. 6) - In the worst case, a war with Iraq could cost the United States almost as much as the government spent in the last budget year - nearly $2 trillion, according to new projections.
Researchers concluded in a study released Thursday that war with Iraq could cost the United States from $99 billion to more than $1.9 trillion over a decade.
The lower figure assumes a successful military, diplomatic and nation-building campaign; the higher figure assumes a prolonged war with a disruption of oil markets and a U.S. recession, the authors say in a study by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Both figures assume a U.S. involvement in the country for 10 years.
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said it was premature to comment on cost estimates.
War is the last resort,'' he said.We're hoping for a peaceful solution.''
The 1991 Persian Gulf War cost America an estimated $61 billion, but allies reimbursed all but about $7 billion. By some accounting methods, the United States may have even made a profit.
Direct military spending could range from $50 billion in a short campaign to $140 billion in a prolonged war with Iraq, said the study titled, ``War With Iraq: Costs, Consequences and Alternatives.'' The study was done by the academy's Committee on International Security Studies.
The report cautioned that aside from the estimates of direct military costs, all the numbers should be ``regarded as informed conjecture.''
Occupation and peacekeeping costs could be $75 billion in the best case to $500 billion in the worst, the study said. Reconstruction and nation-building costs are estimated at $30 billion to $105 billion, and humanitarian aid at $1 billion to $10 billion.
Economic ripples of war with Iraq are likely to spread beyond budgetary costs, with the prospect of raising the cost of imported oil, slowing productivity growth and possibly triggering a recession, the report said.
A prolonged disruption of world oil markets could cost the U.S. economy up to $778 billion, the researchers estimated. On the other hand, Iraq's huge oil resources could satisfy U.S. needs for imported oil at current levels for almost a century and otherwise benefit the economy by $40 billion.
A short war could actually benefit the United States in terms of its macroeconomic impact, which includes employment, by $17 billion. A long war, in contrast, could have a $391 billion negative effect.
The American Academy of Arts and Sciences, founded in 1780 and based in Cambridge, Mass., is an international society of scientists, scholars, artists, business people and political leaders.
12/06/02 03:02 EST
Copyright 2002 The Associated Press.
2002-12-06 22:52 | User Profile
*On the other hand, Iraq's huge oil resources could satisfy U.S. needs for imported oil at current levels for almost a century *
I don't know where nonsense like the above keeps coming from. The end of the age of oil is upon us regardless of what happens with Iraq.
[url=http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Hell.htm]http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Hell.htm[/url]
Finally, the Biggie: Officially ignored by all U.S. politicians is what is variously called "peak oil," "The Big Rollover," "Hubbert's Peak," or simply "the end of cheap oil." This is the point at which the world price of oil (i.e., gasoline/petrol/Benzin) will transition permanently from a buyer's to a seller's market. Then will begin a never-ending, serious rise in prices of all sorts and in real (not merely inflationary) costs. This will occur because world demand will outstrip supply. A graph of world oil production shows that we are now nearing the top of the "bell curve":
[img]http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Deutsch/Rollover.gif[/img]
[url=http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Hell.htm]http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/hive/Hell.htm[/url]
2002-12-06 23:56 | User Profile
White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said it was premature to comment on cost estimates.
Gordon Johndroe?
I went out with his sister a few times!
Nice link to the discussion of Tainter. Who was that oil exec who wrote such an excellent analysis of the oil "peak" recently?
2002-12-07 00:06 | User Profile
Here it is -- "Colin Campbell on Oil"
[url=http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php?act=ST&f=12&t=4017&hl=british+petroleum]http://forum.originaldissent.com/index.php...itish+petroleum[/url]
excerpt:
*All oil production follows a bell curve, whether in an individual field or on the planet as a whole. On the upslope of the curve production costs are significantly lower than on the downslope when extra effort (expense) is required to extract oil from reservoirs that are emptying out. The best and easiest to produce oil is always extracted first to maximize profits. In 100 years mankind has used half of all the oil on the planet, oil that took billions of years to produce and is the result of climactic conditions that have existed at only one time in the earth's 4.5 billion- year history. Oil is a non-renewable resource.
The key event in the Petroleum Era is not when the oil runs out, but when oil production peaks, especially as demand and population are rising. World per capita oil production peaked in 1979 and has been in decline since. The peak in volume of total world oil production is upon us right now, even as the demand or better said -- the need -- for oil is increasing rapidly.
Several things are a given. First the total remaining conventional oil on the planet is estimated to be around 1 trillion barrels. Second, at present rates (not those of five or 10 years from now), the world is using close to 80 million barrels per day. At the current rate there would be only enough oil to sustain the planet for another 35 years under the best of scenarios. But the oil that remains is going to be increasingly expensive to produce and it will tend to be of a lesser quality, necessitating higher refining costs, than what has already been used. All of those costs will have to be passed on in the form of price hikes or -- in some cases -- spikes. Oil price spikes invariably lead to recession. The world's economy is based upon the sale of products that are either made from oil or which need hydrocarbon energy (including natural gas) to operate, either via internal combustion or via electricity.
Different regions of the world peak in oil production at different times. The U.S. peaked in the early-1970s. Europe, Russia and the North Sea have also peaked. However the OPEC nations of the Middle East peak last. Within a few years they -- or whoever controls them -- will be in effective control of the world oil economy, and, in essence, of human civilization as a whole. Two of the nations that will peak last are Saudi Arabia and Iraq, both of which will not peak until the middle of the next decade. Saudi Arabia contains 25 percent of all the oil on the planet. Iraq contains 11 percent of all the oil on the planet.
Science and the oil industry have confirmed that there is very little oil left to be found, certainly not enough to make a difference in this grim picture, a picture which goes a long way toward explaining the events of 9-11 and since.*