Pentagon Alert From ... 2008: "Towards A "Severe Energy Crisis"
By Matthieu Auzanneau
19 April, 2010
I published a paper on April 6 highlighting a recent report by the Department of Defense ( Joint Operating Environment for 2010 ) which focused on an impending energy crisis -- a lack of oil production sufficient to meet global demand.
Following this paper, backed in particular by the Guardian, an American surfer [Energy Bulletin reader Chris A.] had the good idea to look at the previous report of the United States Joint Forces Command, the Joint Operating Environment for 2008 .
Surprisingly, the report published two years ago already offered the same diagnosis, word for word (p. 17):
By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 MBD.
The authors - anonymous - of the 2008 report specified:
The implications for future conflict are ominous. If the major developed and developing states do not undertake a massive expansion of production and refining capabilities, a severe energy crunch is inevitable.
We find virtually the same analysis in the new report in March 2010.
So far, neither the press nor the specialized sites had seen pass this diagnosis very worrying.
I hope I can soon tell you more about the origin of the data put forward by the Pentagon ...
Translated by me from the French with help from Google Translate.
Original article in French: Le Pentagone alerte depuis… 2008 : vers une “crise énergétique sévère”.
Thanks to EB reader Chris A. who pointed out warning in the 2008 report to us, which we then forwarded to French journalist Matthieu Auzanneau.
Rick Munroe who wrote about the Joint Operating Environment (JOE) report earlier in Energy Bulletin adds:
If we think that other readers have the same impression (that the March review in EB missed the fact that most of the JOE content is re-rerun), then we should clarify things.
The previous JOE (released in Nov. 08, I believe) indeed "has the same warnings nearly word-for-word." But Chris is incorrect in suggesting that our March 18th EB article missed that.
There are numerous references to the similarities between the two versions (paragraphs 1, 2, 7, 8 and 12).
The JOE's reiteration of prior concerns could be viewed as simply "old news" and no longer relevant, or (more appropriately) as reminders that prior concerns have still not been addressed and may be even more pressing than they were 18 months ago.
What may be most significant in the new JOE is the inclusion of the Peak Oil text-box, which is new, and is long-awaited.