Home > Articles + Blog > Is the US Overplaying Its Energy Hand?

Is the US Overplaying Its Energy Hand?

February 25, 2015

In the grand poker game of geopolitics, energy is often the wild card. That’s why the Middle East is such a mess: Great Powers (first Britain, more recently the United States) have been installing, propping up, toppling, threatening, or bribing regimes in that region — almost always to the detriment of indigenous populations — ever since the first oil discovery there prior to World War I.

Oil and natural gas interests are clearly implicated in current turmoil in or around Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Iran—and also Ukraine. In each instance it requires some historical context to understand the peculiarities of the situation; let’s focus for a moment on the last of these countries.

Ukraine has long been a transit route for Russian gas destined for Europe. The fact that Russia is an energy superpower is frustrating to Anglo-American geopolitical strategists, who see Eurasia as the key square on the “grand chessboard” (to use Zbigniew Brzezinski’s phrase) for maintaining global dominance. Hence their strategy of hemming Russia’s western flank with NATO bases, and their more recent tactic of subverting the constitutional (although thoroughly corrupt) Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych (via injections of CIA cash to foment violent demonstrations) and immediately legitimizing the coup that overthrew him. Washington evidently would like either to control or to destabilize and weaken Russia; this, after all, is the way the West has dealt for decades with energy exporters in the Middle East. If Moscow won’t be the next Riyadh or Kuwait City, then let it become the next Tehran. This strategy makes many people in Europe nervous: they don’t much like dependency on Russia for energy imports, but they positively dread the prospect of being somehow cut off from needed supplies of natural gas.

This is clearly a dangerous game. Russia still has a formidable nuclear arsenal, and Europe’s economy is too important to toy with. However, American geopolitical strategists evidently think they have grounds for strategic boldness. In the last few years, the United States has begun hinting broadly that Europeans have nothing to fear from joining enthusiastically in an anti-Russia campaign: if push comes to shove, America could fill pipelines extending all the way from Bulgaria to Ireland with natural gas originating in the fracked shales of Pennsylvania, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana. Indeed, there’s supposedly so much of the stuff that customers in Japan and South Korea might as well start preparing to luxuriate in liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the good ol’ USA, too. Some boosters of the American domestic energy industry even suggest the country might become such a significant oil exporter that it supplants the global roles of OPEC and Russia. (Here’s Jeb Bush, exhibiting his family’s famously elegant syntax in a Chicago speech last week: “As we grow our presence by growing our ability to produce oil and gas, we also make it possible to lessen the dependency that Russia now has on top of Europe.”)

There’s just one flaw in this plan: there probably isn’t and won’t be enough natural gas to enable US exports of any significant magnitude. And certainly not enough oil.

USS Montebello, a U.S. oil tanker sunk by the Japanese in 1941. Source: NOAA

USS Montebello, a U.S. oil tanker sunk by the Japanese in 1941. Source: NOAA

On the surface, there seems to be evidence to support the claim of resource abundance. According to projections from The Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical arm of the United States Department of Energy, shale gas production in 2040 will be 40 percent higher than it is currently, while tight oil production will declined only moderately from its current 4 million barrels per day to 3.2 million barrels per day.

However, these projections are disputed by many veteran analysts, notably including a prestigious team of geoscientists from the University of Texas,  independent petroleum geologist Art Berman, and David Hughes, who is associated with my organization, Post Carbon Institute, and has spent most of his career studying the energy resources of Canada. These skeptics point out that shale gas and tight oil wells typically decline rapidly (with production dropping roughly 70 percent in the first year), and that production tends to be profitable only within core areas (“sweet spots”) within much larger fuel-bearing geological formations. As these sweet spots are drilled out, each “play” will enter production decline (as has already occurred in the Haynesville and Barnett shale gas regions).

Further, horizontal drilling and hydrofracturing—techniques used to wring oil and gas from shale and tight reservoirs—are expensive, so oil and gas prices need to be at historically high levels to justify them. During the last decade, the depletion of conventional oil and gas in North America and elsewhere around the world forced oil and gas prices up to economy-crushing levels. With a barrel of crude selling for $100 or so, the application of extreme extraction technologies to produce oil from low-quality reservoirs began to make sense. But the business also entailed a lot of risk and required staggering levels of debt. Historically rock-bottom-low interest rates plus boatloads of hype made it possible for small, risk-friendly companies to raise the needed capital.

One of the biggest risks of this business model was that oil prices would fall, which is exactly what has happened during the past six months. Despite all the recent talk of “cheap oil,” current prices (at about $50 a barrel) actually align with the long-term inflation-adjusted historic average—but that’s too low a price to make fracking for tight oil profitable, and drilling rigs are falling idle.

The oil price collapse has also wrecked prospects for profits from American LNG exports. In much of the world, natural gas prices are tied to oil prices. When oil prices were stratospheric, gas prices in Europe and Asia were so high, relative to North American prices, that spending money on building export terminals and tankers, and on cooling and pressurizing trillions of cubic feet of methane, seemed to make economic sense. Now that world oil prices have fallen by half, the difference between US and rest-of-world gas prices is not large enough to justify such investments.

The skeptics say the EIA has not taken these problems seriously and doesn’t integrate them properly into its forecasts. In his landmark report Drilling Deeper, Hughes notes that “The EIA, which is viewed as perhaps the most authoritative source of US energy production forecasts, has consistently overestimated future production.” (Others have made the same observation.) He continues:

“The EIA’s forecast strains credibility, given the known decline rates, well quality by area, available drilling locations, and the number of wells that would need to be drilled to make that [forecast rate of production] happen.”

Most Likely Drilling Rate Gas Production from Major Shale Plays through 2040 compared to EIA Shale Gas Forecast. Source: Drilling Deeper

Most Likely Drilling Rate Gas Production from Major Shale Plays through 2040 compared to EIA Shale Gas Forecast. Source: Drilling Deeper

While the EIA sees US shale gas production growing through 2040, Hughes forecasts: “Production from these plays peaks in 2016 at nearly 34 Bcf/d and declines to below 16 Bcf/d by 2040, or [by] more than 50%.” This is an enormous difference: if the EIA estimate is accurate, there is indeed the possibility of gas exports—though that would require the oil/gas price differential to increase; and even then there would not be nearly enough gas to supply all of Europe’s needs, in addition to those of American customers. But if Hughes is right, natural gas exports are laughably unlikely and the United States is probably headed into a gas supply crisis in the next decade.

Hughes sees US tight oil production rates topping out around the same time as those of shale gas (i.e., before 2020), and declining much further and faster than the EIA estimates.

Most Likely scenario projections of oil production for the Bakken and Eagle Ford plays with the remaining amount of production that would be required from other plays to meet the EIA’s total reference case forecast. Source: Drilling Deeper

Most Likely scenario projections of oil production for the Bakken and Eagle Ford plays with the remaining amount of production that would be required from other plays to meet the EIA’s total reference case forecast. Source: Drilling Deeper

Why should we believe David Hughes rather than the EIA? Read his report for yourself: it’s thorough, transparent, and logical—something that cannot be said for the forecasts in the EIA’s latest Annual Energy Outlook.  And while EIA has been wrong in its production forecasts more often than it has been right, Hughes is building an impressive track record. In 2011, the EIA published a report estimating the size of the oil reserves in California’s Monterey shale basin at over 15 billion barrels; surely high rates of production would soon boost the Golden State’s economy. With help from PCI, Hughes prepared a thorough geological review of the basin and concluded that the EIA estimate was dramatically overstated. The EIA subsequently downgraded its estimate by 96 percent, to 0.6 billion barrels.  And the promised Monterey shale production boom has not materialized.

Even normally insightful energy commentator Michael Klare seems to have bought into to the new narrative of US resource abundance. In a recent article he critiques Republican plans to create “a North American power bloc capable of aggressively taking on Russia, China, and other foreign challengers,” and implicitly accepts that it is physically possible for such plans to work. It would have been useful to his argument against US energy imperialism and continued fossil-fuel energy dominance to point to evidence that North America simply doesn’t have sufficient resources to support oil or gas exports, but nowhere does he hint at this.

Commentators and politicians believe the EIA because they assume it is the highest authority on the matter. That’s understandable. But do the current policy makers in Washington — in the State Department, Pentagon, and CIA — also privately stand behind official production forecasts? Or is all the talk about the US using oil and gas exports to neutralize Russia’s influence just a bluff?

If they do believe their own talking points, they have embarked on a game they cannot win by making promises they probably cannot even begin to fulfill.

If they don’t believe the hype — that is, if this is all a bluff — then it is a deeply cynical strategy (in the very worst sense of the word). Instead of helping prepare America, Europe, and the rest of the world for an inevitable post-hydrocarbon future, these policy makers are using exaggerated resource estimates merely to score points in a game, while the global arena in which that game is being played is about to be engulfed by economic and ecological catastrophe.

My guess is that the Washington power brokers really believe what they are saying. The level of energy literacy among policy makers is abysmal. And with the EIA feeding them misinformation, what else are they to do but try to use it to their advantage? After all, the message of resource abundance is what they want to hear and believe.

This is how empires crash: the folks in charge pay their information ministries to come up with only good news; rulers act on the basis of unrealistic assumptions; reality bites; and when it does, no one is prepared.

The evidence suggests the United States is playing energy poker with a pair of jacks in its hand, but betting as if it had four aces. Washington can only hope the rest of the world is populated with terrible and unlucky poker players; otherwise, this game could end in bitter feelings at best, gunfire at worst.

feature image credit: Shutterstock

  • Rick Larson

    Prepare for the worst.

  • guest53

    Thank you for an interesting article. Based on my own personal experience with anti-terrorist agenc(ies) (I spoke out (in private conversations with two people) on our involvement in the Iraq War and have been harassed ever since) (over 15 years now), and so I suspect the real power people (not the politicians) know what’s coming our way and is preparing by militarizing the police and entrapping or attempting to entrap whoever they suspect will disagree with them or stand in their way. Our democracy is gone. Perhaps it never was, perhaps it was an illusive dream, but it certainly is gone now. I’m sorry to say that and I think things will get much, much worse. It’s heartbreaking because with the anti-terrorists watching anyone who disagrees I see no way, and I mean none, how we can come together to organize and impact our government. American security (and likely it’s equal in other countries), will stamp us out by infiltrating our families, our organizations, our relationships. All that the warriors have learned from our incessant fighting for hundreds of years, all the weapons and the psychology will be used to destroy the mainstay of our species: our families. Our families are our habitat. Once the government entraps the head of our hierarchy (the mother or father, the grandparent, aunt or uncle) that family member can control and corrupt and lead into harm their entire family. I have already seen it attempted and unfortunately, I am writing the truth. I pray for us because I’m afraid our species is going down, and we’re doing it to ourselves.

  • James Eastman

    I wouldn’t say the United States is trying to destabilise Russia, I’d say Putin is trying to destabilise the whole of Europe for his personal gain. The United States is doing the right thing and trying to prevent a corrupt oligarchy led by a tyrant walking over the free people of the World. Putin needs to swing off a rope.

  • EVHappy

    All you have to do is put up a chart of all previous EIA forecasts and put reality on the same chart. Look how far off they are! Look at how many times they had to adjust downward their own numbers! They were not even close!

    The reality of the situation is humanity is not prepared to live in a sustainable way. Simple as that. We have evolved to grow and expand into an infinite world. Now that we have filled the globe with our body mass, we have no idea what to do next. Unfortunately, we have to learn this the hard way – ride down the back side of the fossil fuel bell curve and deal with all that decline in net energy production. It will not be as much fun as the ride up the bell curve.

    Perhaps that is why most humans believe we can grow forever, regardless of what the math tells us. The reality is just too depressing to accept.

  • tdanylak

    Mr. Heinberg,

    I am very disappointed that such an intelligent individual as yourself falls so easily under the overreaching hand of Russian propaganda. I understand that Russia Today is the probably the only news outlet that lets you get on the front news, but you have to be careful with this offer. You have become easily influenced by them.

    First, Viktor Yanukovych president came to power illegitimately, through bribery and extortion.
    Second, Viktor Yanukovych was and is an agent of Russia and a well controlled puppet of a regime hell bent on destroy Ukraine and its people, just like Russia’s previous regimes
    Third, It was a people’s revolution that over threw the corrupt and criminal government of Viktor Yanukovych. He was the one ordering to shoot people in the streets.
    Fourth, Ukraine is fighting for it’s independence against Russia, while Western governments are trying hard not to see the real situation there, forcing Ukrainian president to accept one humiliating peace treaty after another
    Fifth, Everyone who thinks that US is the only covert sponsor of revolutions is delusional. Russia is probably the best equipped to sponsor such revolutions or governments. Ukraine alone still has thousands of undercover FSB agents working to destabalize the country.

    And finally, worst of all, people in the US who are screaming bloody murder against their own government and the CIA, use Russia’s propaganda as justification for it.

    Russia Today is not an independent media outlet. It is state-owned, state-controlled and state-directed propaganda machine. Stop watching them or believing their news reports. They are 1000 times worse then Fox or CNN.

  • RichardHeinberg

    Are my views on Russia and the US colored by Russian propaganda? I try to be skeptical of both sides’ accounts of what’s happening in Ukraine. Here in the United States, virtually the entire mainstream media is lined up behind the view expressed by Tdanylak, so I hardly think it has escaped most readers’ attention (my own included). Mr. Putin is a poker player too, and certainly has no compunction about using misinformation, or about jailing domestic critics. It is really hard to describe events in Ukraine without appearing biased in one direction or the other. But it’s important to hold one’s own government to a high standard of veracity, and, as Robert Parry has documented in many recent articles, the official US version of events (endlessly parroted by the New York Times, among other outlets) is highly questionable. I think everything I said about Ukraine in my article is accurate, if characterized by a hopefully useful balancing slant toward critique of official American actions.

  • tdanylak

    Mr. Heinberg,

    I am not American nor do I live in the United States. I don’t watch Fox or CNN. I live in Canada and I am Ukrainian by birth. So my views might have some bias. But this bias comes from knowing and studying history of Ukraine and Russia and it’s a history of betrayal and death perpetrated by Russia over centuries.

    I agree that the major media in US provides a distorted view of the world, yet when you need a different point of view you look to alternative sources for information. Shouldn’t the same rule be applied in Russia media outlet’s case. Russia Today is the mainstream media, most importantly they are state owned and state financed and state directed news source. When looking for news from Russia, shouldn’t you and everyone apply the same rules, look at the alternative news (Dozhd’ channel for example), find that grain of truth in the see of propaganda.

    I base my views based on Ukrainian and independent Russian news outlets, as well as numerous videos from the front lines. These videos show both sides of the conflict and when I hear “Allah Akbar” shouted as the Russian backed Chechen militants fire rockets on Ukrainian cities, it leaves me no doubt that Putin wants to destroy independent Ukraine.

    As for the US media being so bad, at least in the US you have the right to expressing an opinion and making it heard by others. In the Russian occupied territories there is no such right. As one of the former residents put it. “In DNR and LNR (Russian backed separatists groups) there is no more corruption, government’s misappropriations or illicit activities because there are no people in those territories willing or brave enough to report these things to the public. Any attempt to do so is met with deadly force.”

    Ukraine is not perfect, but it is fighting for it’s independence. Russia has over the centuries been an aggressor and an occupier of Ukraine. History might night repeat itself but it most definitely rhymes. If Putin is not stopped he will recreate the old Soviet Union.

    One more thing, The scariest thing is that Putin and Russia might be fully aware the coming oil, gas and minerals shortages and they are trying to be one step ahead of the rest by taking on US and Europe. Putin’s goal might be to become the dominant power in the world so that he can dictate energy and resource policy to the rest of the world. If Putin understands that and US doesn’t, we are in for a hell of a war in the future.

    I respect you Mr. Heinberg and your work. I fully agree with your Peak Oil and Peak everything theories and I do my part to spread this knowledge amongst my family and friends, however, my message gets misunderstood and dismissed when you appear Russia’s main western propaganda channel.

  • ashermiller

    We appreciate your comments and feedback. We’re also aware of concerns about RT. We’ve found over the years that our message draws strange bedfellows at times. For instance, when Richard wrote Blackout (about limits of coal supplies and clean coal) a Chesapeake Energy-funded media group was interested in having Richard on to talk about the book because they saw it serving their pro-natural gas agenda. Likewise, the Saudi national bank put our recent reports about the shale bubble on their recommended reading list.

    But just because we don’t always agree with the views of these outlets doesn’t mean we don’t take advantage of opportunities — as long as they aren’t censored or distorted — to communicate our views and findings. We do draw the line, however, when it comes to funding or other efforts to influence our independence.

  • EVHappy

    Richard, don’t feed the trolls. 😉

  • EVHappy

    The facts the Post Carbon Institute produce sound just as sweet, regardless of the media outlet that delivers it. Most of us found out just how biased RT was when Putin and Russia came under US media attack. It was like watching the dichotomy between Fox News and The Daily Show (and other left wing news channels). Putin could do no wrong on RT. You wonder how two groups can have such an opposed view of the world. This is where numbers, charts and science come to the rescue. Keep up the great work, even if most of humanity cannot accept reality.

  • EVHappy

    I would say humans fight hard for their own gain, using all the power they can gather. Doesn’t that make more sense than claiming one group is good and the other is evil? In most cases, it is about perspective and what group you side with.

  • Theedrich

    This is how empires crash:  the folks in charge pay their information ministries to come up with only good news;  rulers act on the basis of unrealistic assumptions;  reality bites;  and when it does, no one is prepared.

    It is hard to believe that our topmost rulership does not know what is going on.  The situation is reminiscent of the days in the 1930s when FDR and Co. pretended to believe that Stalinist Communism was the answer to all of mankind’s problems and Hitler was the devil.  FDR then took us into a horrendous war (cf. R. Stinnett’s Day of Deceit) to save the USSR which culminated in the delivery of the eastern half of Europe to Stalin and, shortly thereafter, in the Communist takeover of China by Uncle Joe’s fellow megamurderer, Mao Tze-Tung.  That was followed by wars in Korea and Vietnam, among smaller savageries.

    FDR knew quite well that Stalin was killing millions well before WW II.  But the former’s own megalomania led him to tear the world apart forever.  So likewise today, in the matter of oil, the deranged idiots savants in control of the U.S. and its vassals intend to use agitprop about “Saudi America” (as well as various, now popular, “false-flag” incidents) to further their agenda to conquer the globe.  Reality may have other ideas, however, and the consequences of such political hoodwinking may put an end to all higher civilization once and for all.

  • Theedrich

    I forgot to mention that I agree completely with Tdanylak.  If the U.S. is facing its own demise due to its own “stupidity” (as Jonathan Gruber called it), then while we are at it we might as well take down that bastard nation of Russia.  It is the source of countless millions of deaths, not to say suffering.  Professor emeritus Rudy J. Rummel estimates that by spreading Communism the Russkis killed about 148,000,000 people.  Stalin alone murdered around 61,000,000.  Putin wants to resurrect this monster from the grave.

  • mickstep

    Oh please, Russia has a corrupt oligarchy because that is the way the US set it up after the fall of the Soviet Union, that way all its assets could be sold off to western corporate interests. Look at US favoured opposition, people like Mikhail Khodorsky who is no doubt an absolute crook. The reason Putin is hated in the west is because he has not allowed the west to asset strip Russia, and the US is unable to use its usual tactics of assassinating him, and using death squads against his supporters as is the usual drill used against Latin America and Indochina. Read a bit about the “school of the americas” and its alumni, it’s a terrorist training camp ran out of Fort Benning, Georgia, with the purpose of bringing right wing terror on any group of peasants in Latin America that might want to say, benefit from their own labour rather than export it (e.g. cash crops) abroad and make the pittance needed to purchase just enough carbohydrates to live.

    Russia in the 90’s was an absolutely dismal place to live, despite all those western “values” being imposed upon it. On Sakhalin island they could not afford to heat their houses using fossil fuels, despite being a major fossil fuel producer in the region, because all the profits were being siphoned off by western asset stripping vultures who left nothing for the Russian people.

    Putin’s great crime in the eyes of the west is that he put an end to the looting and reigned in the oligarchs, for all the media bullshit about Russian oligarchs, it is the oligarchs who the west and it’s media are allied to in Russia.

  • James Eastman

    Wait Putin isn’t an Oligarch? He stole 200 billion dollars of assets from his own people. If that isn’t an oligarch, tell me what is. Putin is an animal.

  • James Eastman

    If we in the west had followed that argument 300 years ago, we would still be living in feudal dictatorships like modern-day Russia. I’d rather side with the group whose leaders rule by the consent of the majority than the group whose leader(s) rule through suppressing the majority to enrich themselves at the majority’s expense. In 100 years, Putin and his goons will be gone from the face of the Earth, like Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin before him. But the US Constitution will still be there.

  • mickstep

    Putin was no oligarch when he came into power he was a civil servant, he may well have made himself a healthy nest egg, but there is bugger all in the way of evidence to support it other than western bullshit propaganda, which in every case is always proven to be vastly overblown horseshit once all the evidence is in. Usually once that target had been skewered threw his anus in the street by the bunch of thugs the US told us were freedom fighters and threw money and weapons at.

    Putin may well be capable of many things, like ordering assassinations etc, but if you take into account the blood on the hands of every US president, the lies and propaganda, the mass imprisonment of black people, the support of and training right wing fascist psychopaths to kill and terrorise any group of poor people in the carribean and Latin America that decide to organise. You realise that all the things you accuse Putin of are really irrelevant because the US is the far bigger monster.

    In terms of domestically Putin has done Russia a grey service by not allowing America to own all it’s industry and siphon all its wealth away from the Russian people, and that is why he is so popular over there.

    Calling him an oligarch just doesn’t wash, oligarchs made their money by taking advantage of the hobbies ian anarchy left after the fall of the Soviet Union, he was busy being a civil servant during those times, there is no evidence he was busy running the mob, unlike the US darling Khodorkovsky, who most certainly was.

  • mickstep

    Hahaha you really dont read anything outside the bullshit you are spoon fed by your government do you?

  • mickstep

    I side with the poor people of the world, the ones who the US has seen as their biggest threat and have slaughtered in their tens of millions world wide in pursuit of global hegemony.

  • sethdayal

    “why most humans believe we can grow forever, regardless of what the math tells us.”

    Er , the math tells we can grow forever at a fraction of the cost of today’s filthy fossil energy, with nuke power. Unfortunately the corrupt ghouls that we elect to murder millions annually with fossil air pollution, are well paid to sidetrack nukes.

  • EVHappy

    Thank you for making my point.

  • EVHappy

    Poor people are just power hungry dictators who lack resources. Notice how the more power and resources people get, the more control they want over their surroundings?

    Let us use China as an example. When they were poor they couldn’t do anything in terms of forcing their will on the International community. Now, it is a whole different situation. Same people, more resources. Humans are humans and have similar programming.

  • EVHappy

    I am laughing with mickstep on this one. The US is now fully controlled by the top 1%. If you cannot see that just look into the unlimited spending for our “politicians”. It is said the US is no longer a Republic, it is an Oligarchy. It is hard to argue that when you know the facts.

  • EVHappy

    Don’t worry, war is coming. The Great Resource Wars are coming as we ride down the back side of the fossil fuel bell curve. Humans will fight very hard for the ever shrinking pie of resources.

    In about 150 years, after the last of the fossil fuels are being burned for energy, the human population should be down to less than 1 billion people, from the current 7 billion. These wars are going to make WW I and WW II look like police actions.

    Ever hear the phrase, “Follow the money”. Well, there is even a more fundamental way of putting it, “follow the net energy”.

  • EVHappy

    I hope everyone understands that the first thing that is going to be thrown out the window as resource scarcity hits hard is civility. We are going to see far worse from nations that we have ever seen before. There is not going to be enough resources to feed the citizens of the world. It will be like starving rats fighting for a piece of stale bread.

  • James Eastman

    I’d still rather live in America than Russia. In America, 1% of people have a disproportionate amount of power and control, In Russia 0.001% of people control the entire country. Also in America your right to freedom of speech is guaranteed by the constitution, even if it means criticising those in power. Case in point; if this was Russia and the lot of you were criticising the administration there, you’d all be in jail.

  • James Eastman

    I’d rather read that than the soviet propaganda you obviously consume from Mother Russia comrade.

  • EVHappy

    Ever hear the saying, “the lesser of two evils”? I guess, you bought the propaganda that this is all for your own safety.

  • mickstep

    Ooooh Buurrrne.

  • NoFanOfChomsky

    Wow! I feel I’m in the EIA club with respect to estimating. This is the first time I have run across this website. I have been wondering how peak oil / peak energy people were rationalizing the changes in energy markets resulting from oil and gas fracking. I seriously underestimated, as usual, people’s ability to rationalize their self-interests. Combined with a healthy dollop of paranoia and a sense of intellectual superiority leavened with love for poor, beleaguered Russia, this echo chamber is fascinating. Unfortunately, it’s also a waste of time. Maybe it and it’s contributors will chance upon relevance someday, but it will take some amazing twists in reality.

  • http://marshmallow-digital.com/cz/bfsu Brittany

    I discovered your Is the US Overplaying Its Energy Hand? Post Carbon Institute page and noticed you could have a lot more visitors. I have found that the key to running a popular website is making sure the visitors you are getting are interested in your niche. There is a company that you can get visitors from and they let you try their service for free. I managed to get over 300 targeted visitors to day to my site. Visit them here: http://pixz.nu/1LPS

  • Jack

    No,Sir,2.333 billion people,to be exact, Almighty God Allah Jehovah works in an extremly accurate way, Zechariah Chapter 13: 8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
    9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.
    Allah bless you.

  • Jack

    Sir, Russia Putin is antichrist, watch him with Israel.

  • Jack

    Sir, Ukraine is Tarshish in Bible whilst Russia is Javan! Putin is antichrist.

  • Jack

    The only difference there are also MSM in US which are opposite of Fox, but RT & the likes are almost monopoly in Russia.