By: Moderator on Sabato 25 Giugno 2005 12:21
Per chi vuole spaventarsi su petrolio ed energia (tipo squalo3 o film su disastri naturali )incollo da news Yahoo
è una simulazione di impatto sul'economia USA per una diminuzione di 3,5 milioni di barili (potrebbe avvenire per cause imprevedibili di politica internazionale):
160$
( per chi vuole leggere ancora su energia
^qui...#http://64.70.252.93/O82F4693.pdf^
^qui...#http://www.energycommission.org/research/^
^qui...#http://www.secureenergy.org/shockwave_facts.php^ )
Source: Securing America's Future Energy; National Commission on Energy Policy
Oil Dependence Creates Severe National Security and Economic Risks, Top Officials Find at Crisis Simulation Event
Friday June 24, 2:30 pm ET
Oil Shockwave Group Releases Detailed Findings from Global Oil Supply Disruptions
WASHINGTON, June 24 /PRNewswire/ -- The dependence of the U.S. on oil creates serious national security vulnerabilities that, if exploited, could result in widespread economic dislocation and increased global instability, according to former top government officials who gathered today to examine how the nation might manage an oil supply crisis.
The findings of these leading experts comes amid reports of terrorist threats against oil-rich Nigeria, a state-owned Chinese company's bid for a major U.S. oil firm, and as Congress considers energy legislation that does little to curb U.S. oil dependence.
In a scenario confronted by the bipartisan panel of intelligence, military, and energy experts, a series of events over several months -- unrest in Nigeria, an attack on an Alaskan oil facility, and the emergency evacuation of foreign nationals from Saudi Arabia -- drives the price of oil to over $150 per barrel. These events lower expected employment levels by more than 2 million jobs, embolden countries that are major oil producers and consumers to pressure the U.S. on key foreign policy concerns, and cause a variety of other significant economic and security challenges.
The scenario removed only 3.5 million barrels of oil from a global market of more than 83 million barrels, resulting in the following consequences:
* Gasoline prices of $5.74 per gallon;
* Global oil price of $161 per barrel;
* Heating oil prices of $5.14 per gallon;
* Fall of gross domestic product for two consecutive quarters;
* Drop in consumer confidence by 30 percent;
* Spike in the consumer price index to 12.6 percent;
* Ballooning of the current accounts deficit to $1.087 trillion;
* Decline of 28 percent in the S&P 500;
* Aggressive pressure on the U.S. from China to end arm sales to Taiwan,
and;
* Demands from Saudi Arabia for changes to U.S. policy regarding the Mid-
East peace process.
Participants included:
Robert M. Gates, former Director of Central Intelligence;
Richard N. Haass, former Director of Policy Planning at the Department of
State;
General P.X. Kelley, USMC (Ret.), former Commandant of the Marine Corps,
member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff;
Don Nickles, former U.S. Senator;
Carol Browner, former Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency;
Gene B. Sperling, former National Economic Advisor;
Linda Stuntz, former Deputy Secretary of Energy;
Frank Kramer, former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Affairs, and;
R. James Woolsey, former Director of Central Intelligence.
Senators Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT) served as co-chairs of the Oil Shockwave event.
Other key findings:
* Once oil supply disruptions occur, there is little that can be done in
the short term to protect the U.S. economy from its impacts, including
gasoline above $5/gallon and a sharp decline in economic growth
potentially leading into a recession.
* There are a number of supply and demand-side policy options available
that would significantly improve U.S. oil security. Benefits from these
measures will take a decade or more to mature, and thus should be
enacted as soon as possible.
* Supply-side measures include promoting developing of conventional oil
reserves in nations currently off limits to private investment through
enhanced U.S. diplomacy, increase research and development into
environmentally-benign extraction of unconventional oil reserves such as
oil shale and tar sands, and enable siting of new liquid natural gas and
other energy facilities.
* Demand-side measures include promoting energy efficient passenger
vehicles with incentives for hybrid electric vehicles, strengthen fuel
economy standards, and increase research and development into plug-in
hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
* Alternative fuel measures include increased research and development
that enables ethanol production from plant materials, fischer-tropsch
diesel from domestic coal, and hydrogen from coal and eventually from
renewable sources.
While not seeking to reach unanimous conclusions, the following key findings and recommendations were embraced by a majority of participants.
The findings are the product of Oil Shockwave, an oil supply crisis simulation co-sponsored by Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE) and the National Commission on Energy Policy. The event was designed to simulate a decline in world oil production due to regional instability and terrorism and, then, present a mock cabinet-level meeting with the task of advising the president on a national response.
To ensure Oil Shockwave presented participants with a credible and realistic set of circumstances, the scenario included substantial input from former members of the oil industry, oil analysts and traders, former and current military officials, intelligence and national security experts, and other specialists. These individuals include David Frowd, former Head of Royal Dutch/Shell Upstream Strategy and Planning Department; and Rand Beers, former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Combating Terrorism.
"This simulation serves as a clear warning that even relatively small reductions in oil supply will result in tremendous national security and economic problems for the country," said SAFE President Robbie Diamond. "This issue deserves immediate attention."
"We can neither drill nor conserve our way out of this problem -- we must do both," said Jason Grumet the Executive Director of the National Commission on Energy Policy. "The energy bill pending before the U.S. Senate is a significant step in the right direction but we must do much more to protect our economy from the risks of oil supply disruptions."