USGS Announces Largest Continuous Oil Assessment in Texas and New Mexico

I recently saw a Werner Herzog feature-length interview documentary called "Meeting Gorbachev". In it Gorbachev describes in his own words how and why the USSR dissolves. The USSR was always an unequal political union with Russia as its command centre. The other republics were always jostling either for a more equal union and frequently nationalist sentiment overrode pan-Slavic sentiment. If the USSR had managed its internal economy better and if they weren't cut off from the outside world it could have survived indefinitely. In the end Gorbachev made a series of moves (perestroika and glasnost: anybody who lived through this period knows these terms and what they mean in practice) that brought about the impending dissolution. Garbachev would have been the leader of an independent leader of a now independent Russia but he was politically outflanked.

It is typical US arrogance to think that they have their hands always and every time directly on the levers that make and break nations and political entities. It is a prime example of the mentality of US exceptionalism. Many many factors interweave and interplay in every geopolitical landscape: internal politics, internal economics, internal resource allocation, external pressure, military strength, alliances, the list goes on.

Yes, oil/dollar moves may have had some impact. How much of an impact, that would be difficult to say. But it was in no way as impactful as you make it out to be and in now way as directly instrumental. And besides, when you look at the history of Federal Reserve policy you can see that US economic reasons (recession, interest rates) prompted Volcker's actions.

But isn't that only true if those countries are mostly buying US goods? If russia mainly buys stuff from europe and/or asia, and the US dollar goes up, it's true that absent other factors, oil prices will drop. It's also true that other countries' currencies will also drop, so as long as you're not buying from the US, the two will cancel each other out.

They tried the same playbook in 2014, but shale is too short cycle to be knocked out long term. Further they were able to secure help from Russia so they cut production afterwards.

It's undeniable that Reagan's spending on the Cold War caused the collapse of the USSR.

Total energy extracted over a couple of centuries is dramatically higher with wind. Oil is stored solar energy that eventually runs out; wind is realtime solar energy that never runs out.

[0] https://www.stand.la/history-of-oil-in-los-angeles.html

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Brea_Tar_Pits

They can be built at any scale, from rooftop solar to utility-scale wind power, so they don't require the access to capital involved in building large thermal power plants.

Cheap oil helps everyone, except for the everyone dies part.

There's no doubt that ameliorating climate change has a cost. Most of the plans around paying the cost have been around charging those already suffering the most in a, dare I say it, neoliberal economic regime. Those won't fly as the "yellow vests" demonstrate (literally and metaphorically).

The only way out has to be the rich biting the bullet and paying the costs themselves, because in this world, no one else has the money. I doubt this will happen. The last twenty years has been this not happening. But the alternatives are:

    1 - Mass catastrophe, of extreme to surface-of-venus level
    2 - Rich bite bullet and pay
    3 - World revolution

Of course a micro grid system like I'm talking about might also use some Dino fuels too.

http://microgridnews.com/microgrid-value-propositions/