Like We Need Another Thing To Fight Over

Michael Klare, author of books like Resource Wars and Blood and Oil has long been a proponent of the view that wars are often - or mostly - cause by conflicts over resources. With oil being what it is these days, he's been busy. Anyway, he's got a column which Common Dreams has put up, and it's a pretty good overview of the oil hotspots in the world today.

Since World War II, economic growth around the world has been fueled largely by abundant supplies of hydrocarbons... Since 1950, worldwide oil consumption has grown eightfold, from approximately 10 to 80 million barrels per day; gas consumption, which began from a smaller base, has grown even more dramatically. Hydrocarbons now satisfy 62% of the world's total energy demand, approximately 250 quadrillion BTUs out of a total supply of 404 quads. But no matter how important they may be today, hydrocarbons are sure to prove even more critical in the future....

Klare treats the idea of a near-term Oil Peak rather lightly. But here's a question I've been mulling over: Are things likely to get worse or better if the peak happens sooner? Obviously, if it happens now it would be bad. But wouldn't Peak Oil be even worse if it happened circa 2020, when China and India's thirst for oil will be even greater? As bad as it would be today, mightn't it be worse for the world if oil Peaks after the 3 billion Indians and Chinese are addicted with the rest of us? As much as China needs oil now, would they really be willing to go to war over it now? How about in 20 years, when their defense spending is equal to the US? Something to think about - those "optmistic" estimates from the Department of Energy of an oil peak happening in 2020 might not be so optimistic after all...