There´s little oil in the Falklands (Malvinas) - or - What about the Fish

In 1982, Argentina and Britain fought a war over the territory of the Falkland Islands (or Malvinas Islands). This event  caused about 1800 dead, many more wounded, several shipwrecks, and the typical destruction caused by violent conflicts.  

HMS Coventry near the Falklands

Today Argentina's government invests a lot of energy to try to regain the islands. Many think that this is due to the economic problems facing the country, which are leading President  Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner to focus the attention of the Argentine people towards an external problem. 

Cristina trying to change the subject 

This is similar to what was done when the military dictatorship invaded the islands, in those times the Argentina economy was in trouble just like it is today (I´m working on a theory which attributes Argentina´s  irrational economic behavior to  El Niño and other climate phenomena, but more about that later).

  

I´m pretty sure the defeat of Argentina in 1982 led to the fall of the military dictatorship. To fight and win that war cost the UK an enormous amount of money, as well as personnel  losses during the war, and after they recovered the islands  they have had  a military base in the islands that costs around £ 75 million a year ($ 114 million , 86 million euros).

Popular opinion seems to be that the struggle between the two countries is due to the presence of oil in huge quantities in the marine territory surrounding  the islands. However I believe that Falkland oil  (or Malvinas oil ) is a fiction. It´s really interesting is to see how this legend was created and has been  used to create problems between people.

We all know that if the islands are not worth much. The climate of these islands is horrible, cold, windy, that land is only fit  to raise sheep. 

Sheep

Moreover, prior to the war the British had considered handing the  islands  to Argentina. This was stopped the political influence wielded by an outfit called  "THE FALKLANDS COMPANY". That company raised sheep and was the largest employer in the colony. The other reason why the UK wanted the islands was pride. I do not think the British were that hot under the collar for Falklands oil.  What drove Iron Lady Thatcher to go to war was pride.

So now let´s talk oil. By pure chance  I had studied the  potential oil fields of the whole region circa 1980 together with some colleagues. Eventually we came to the conclusion that there was oil. But we concluded that to find it  in commercial quantities (that is to exploit it and make some money) would be quite difficult. It seems that other major companies came to the same conclusion, because I haven´t  seen much effort by large multinational companies to drill around the Falklands since  the 1980´s .

But the technology has improved, and the price of oil has increased tremendously. This explains why we hear a lot about the "enormous amounts of oil" around  the Falklands in recent years. Interestingly the noise comes mostly from small businesses which have permits to explore for oil around the islands. Most of what we read is due to propaganda by those companies which need  believers to buy their shares.

I mention a few examples, all articles I believe were  written due to corporate propaganda: 

The BBC in 2007: "The Falklands tell us they have billions of barrels of oil." 

The Telegraph in 2009: "The oil you can find is worth 60 billion pounds." 

Bloomberg in 2012: "Oil to be found by the four wells (that year) would be about 8.3 billion barrels."

Actually the only company which has found something is "Rockhopper Petroleum". It  discovered oil in a reservoir called "Sea Lion". According to its owners, "Sea Lion" can produce 321 million barrels. Overall.

Now I want to show you  a map without getting too technical.

South Atlantic map, showing the 

oil basin in the ancient buried lake

This site is located in a relatively small basin located north of the islands, in water about 450 meters deep. This basin was a lake in a continent that was splitting into pieces. Pieces that would eventually become Africa and South America. And this means that when we consider the oil potential of the Falkland Islands  we must focus on this extinct lake.  Other areas will have some oil and gas, but  do not have the properties to be produced under the conditions seen in  the South Atlantic (it has large waves and strong winds). 

I think that the Argentine government has used the islands to make trouble when they want  the people to look beyond  the problems they already have. 

But from what I see the company Rockhopper  struck oil for real.

Before starting another war over the islands, both peoples, British and Argentine, should consider the following information: Rockhopper has sold a fraction of the site, because it had no money to develop it. I consider this investment  (what they need to invest to develop the field) to be at least $ 5 billion, and eventually   possibly reach $ 10 billion. The development is very expensive because they have to use outer space type technology, a floating vessel connected by hoses to high pressure wells drilled on the seabed in very deep water, something like this:

Floating ship at the surface connected

 with hoses to undersea wells. 

  

Friends, Rockhopper sold 60% of the deposit to the company Devon for about $ 1 billion. And that tells us that Devon thinks that the site as a whole is worth just over $ 1.67 billion (divide 1/0.6).

After distilling all this information, "the huge oil fields of the Malvinas" are worth about $2 billion USD .  Well, that´s what companies wanting  to risk their cash think about it.  

To the government it may be worth a bit more, although I can´t imagine why.  But they ought to consider the cost of maintaining that colony. For example,  the UK  will spend $ 4.4 billion dollars maintaining its military presence on the islands for forty years.  

Eventually they may  find more oil, but it will not be in huge quantities.  A sustainable fishing industry around the islands can be much more valuable. And that is not mentioned nearly as much as the Falklands (Malvinas) oil. 

"False Hope" by Michael Mann

An article by Dr. Michael Mann about  global warming has been a hot blogosphere topic. Dr. Mann has been involved  in a couple of libel cases, so I am not about to say anything about the author.  Global warming is pretty controversial, lately we even read articles about all sorts of hurricanes, flooding,  locust plagues, and the California drought  being caused by this scourge.

Photograph: Two men not fishing

 in California (from time.com)

However, I think I can avoid legal hassles if I only discuss the article, and Scientific American´s Editorial Policy. 

I think the debate may have started when some bloggers, for example Watts, at  http://wattsupwiththat.com/  pointed out the article had a funny looking temperature graph.

The “trick” appears to be the use by Mann of Northern Hemisphere temperatures in an article discussing a global problem.   As it turns out, the Northern Hemisphere is experiencing more warming, mostly due to exceptional warming poleward of 60 degrees latitude North.  This means folks living in Alaska, Northen Siberia, the Northwest Territories in Canada, and Scandinavia are experiencing  much warmer weather (or climate, if you will).

Great Britain used to have hippos swimming in the Thames, so it´s possible if the planet keeps warming we may see hippos in Cook Inlet, the Thames, and the Ob River in Siberia.

Photograph: Large hippos not swimming 

in Cook Inlet  (from ibtimes.co.uk)

If you want to see how these controversies go, try this at Wattshupwiththat:  

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/24/hide-the-decline-deja-vu-manns-little-white-line-as-false-hope-may-actually-be-false-hype/

where you can read a post  about Mann´s article.

For the other side of the story (one could call it a response) try this

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/anthony-watts-and-the-bottom-of-the-barrel/

This site is called “Openmind”.

Photograph: Open brain surgery from Mirror UK

My bottom line? I think Mann´s  article,  "False Hope", is a load of crap. It  doesn´t amount to much as a scientific article. However, it is a masterpiece of propaganda. The article shows a graph of Northern hemisphere temperature, then it moves on to claim the world will cross a danger threshold (about one degree C above today´s temperature) in 2036.

The famous graph and claims  from 

“False Hope”at Scientific American.

So, this is the way it works: 

First I show you a graph using the Northern Hemisphere temperature trend. Then I clutter it with a bunch of lines taken from my computer model. I shade in the 2 degree C “catastrophic warming” line, wave my arms and “demonstrate” using this visual aid how the Northern Hemisphere will hit the fan in 22 years. Then I switch tracks and state the world will cross the 2 degree boundary (remember this boundary is set versus the temperature back in 1750, it´s about ONE degree C versus today´s average temperature). Hell, to put it bluntly, the article manages to scare you into thinking the world´s temperature will go up 1 degree C in 22 years! Neat, isn´t it?

My collage from the False Hope article, showing  the 

key sentences which initially scared  the hell out of me

 (taken from Scientific American). 

Did I get it wrong? That´s an interesting question. Reading through that article one comes out with the impression the world temperature will increase at least 1 degree C in 22 years. Some readers may even think it´s 2 degrees C in 22 years. And most of them will be sure the prediction applies to the whole planet....Huh? 

Instead we may ask: was the article,  and in particular the graphic, prepared to confuse the audience into thinking the world is likely to cross a 2 degree C threshold in 22 years? Or was it simply a case of a scientist writing stuff he thought a normal reader could descifer?

That´s something you guys will have to trash out, because I´m too old to get into a fight cage with a bunch of youngsters to fight over “he said no he said” in a politically charged atmosphere where both sides can use lawyers as shock troops.  

You see, my  large caliber  bullets are being used up in the fight for human rights, trying to save Venezuelans and Cubans from communist dictatorships, and this global warming topic is just a hobby.

Venezuelans protesting Maduro´s  communist 

dictatorship.   Most people don´t care. 

Now the question moves on to Scientific American´s editorial policy. What the hell are they doing to that magazine? If  Scientific American is turning into a political propaganda organ, is it possible the magazine´s  owner is also using “science propaganda” in its other publications?  Let´s skip over the corporate mumbo jumbo: these guys publish Nature and Nature Climate Change.  

Article about carbon tax at "Nature Climate Change" 

The chief editor is a highly educated (and somewhat controversial) gentleman named David Campbell (see Reference below). And this makes me wonder, does David Campbell have a certain  agenda he wants  to plug at Nature and other magazines he controls?

References 

Businessweek description of Nature America, Inc.

Guardian article about David Campbell, Nature´s chief editor

Berkeley Earth Comparison of Climate Models versus Data

If you are interested in the original Scientific American  picture, as shown in the "Open Mind" blog, go here

https://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/falsehope.jpg

The US blockade of communist Cuba

When I was young and lived in Cuba I used to hear a lot about the “blockade”. The way the government put it, the blockade was real for me. I saw it as a bunch of US ships hovering just over the horizon, trying to stop the flow of products we hard working Cubans were trying to export.

So, as life in Fidel´s worker´s paradise became more unbearable, I decided to leave. Being young and innocent, I felt I could swim all the way to one of those yankee imperialist ships I just knew had to be somewhere out there.

Yankee Imperialist Ships (Wikipedia) 

Imagine my disappointment when my dad explained my US fleet was imaginary, because there was no real blockade. He explained what the US had used was called an embargo, the damn yankee imperialists had refused to trade with us…. and there were no ships.

I had already learned the government was both repressive and stupid. But I hadn´t realized much of what the government said was plain and simple lies. After I escaped, I got educated, and I had the opportunity to discuss Cuba with communists elsewhere. The funny thing is these guys seem to believe the imaginary US fleet is still sitting out there, hovering over the horizon, and waiting to stop all those goods hard working Cubans can produce in such large quantities.

Hard working Cubans producing export goods (Boston.com)

Written as a follow up comment to a post by Yoani you can read below: 

Carlito´s Body Language

A Cuban government supporter made the usual comment about the "yankee imperialist blockade", and I couldn´t help writing a quick answer. 

Even communists are running scared

Are we moving towards a Stalinist dictatorship? 

by Edgar Perdomo at aporrea

"There are few people sane enough to prefer profitable criticism over treacherous praise." 

François de la Rochefoucauld 

I consider myself a man with sole discretion in issuing my opinions but I sense some serious concerns in the Venezuelan people, over the high Bolivarian government´s and the PSUV attitude when they try to impose on Navarro and Giordani an aberrant something known as censorship (at the same time I´m making it clear that I do not sympathize with either of these gentlemen).

Obviously I'm referring to the two punishments which occurred   these last few  days, one over Giordani´s political statements, and the other, Navarro,  because he defended Giordani,  Hugo Chavez´  planning minister. But  there are other things that I find very suspicious,  and they make me think this goes beyond political ideology.

The government is trying to censor and punish those who deviate from the centerline of the Bolivarian nomenklatura:  They criticize  www.aporrea.org, they seem to want to punish  this digital portal  for publishing too much written by these two former senior officials. I mean, it seems we are facing a government   attack that should  make us worry.

Henceforth,  dissenting from the official line of high government, whether in favor or not of the nomenklatura, shall be punished harshly, and I think the most convincing example is Giordani and Navarro.  This is a political line lacking in logic, and  I dare say that Nicolas Maduro will be severely attacked by those who want to maintain a libertarian system which goes beyond what Maduro´s party system is willing to allow.

Punishment against those who don´t toe the government line will be harsh. They want to use a  kind of Stalinist dictatorship, where there is no right to criticize, to think, to be a citizen of free thought. What I'm seeing terrifies me, and I worry.

 Soviet Gulag Camp Perm 36 (from Wikipedia)

In addition, the nomenklatura has a majority in the National Assembly, this means they can  do what they want. Militant supporters of the Bolivarian process should be aware of the risk involved with this state of affairs.

Nicolás Maduro has a majority because people chose to elect him in April 2013, but we have seen that inflation and the  food shortages  have created  thousands of disillusioned voters who are suffering the brunt of the high cost of living.

So we do not want a  PRI style dictatorship as they had  in Mexico, where they ruled at will for over 70 years, transforming the country into the world's most corrupt. And  at least in terms of corruption, we are nearing the Mexico of the PRI. We are learning to copy the Mexicans very fast, and I sure hope we don´t  get to 2019 to see  Nicolás point his finger  and designate his successor, as Hugo Chávez did when he designated Nicolás.

Giordani paid a high cost for criticizing Maduro. This is called a dictatorship, a regime in  which only praise and butt kissing are allowed.

It's amazing to see  there are governments that think they are the  "owners of socialism" and prove to be less socialist than other governments. Where is freedom of opinion in their scheme?

I insist as a militant, that this decision to censure  is wrong, you can not hide your head in the sand , and let a pack of corrupt individuals take bites out of the public treasury, to abuse their power while the naive citizens, made numb with impossible promises, are expected  to comply and support a populism that in recent years has reached new heights. And this goes on while many bureaucrats and their families get rich with total impudence.

It is very easy to talk without arguments, and it is difficult to say anything to  certain people using  serious political thoughts , but  the good news is that there's plenty of such thoughts. And I completely agree that all acts of corruption should be investigated and punished.

By: Edgar Perdomo Arzola

Source: Aporrea.org

Original article, in Spanish, by Edgar Perdomo is here

My Comment: Lately I have seen many Venezuelan Communists who write with disenchantment  about the collapse of the Bolivarian Revolution. For me it is very clear that one who  supports  Chavez and Maduro, is either a corrupt super sell out  and thief, or a runt who is happy with his red shirt and his PSUV card while the people run out of food,  get no water and electricity,  have no decent job, and live  without peace because there are damn thugs harassing everyone 24 hours a day.

And if anyone knows comrade   Edgar Perdomo Arzola, tell him I say not  to be so naive.  All, every one of these socialist revolutions, Lenin´s, Mao's, Fidel´s, ended in dictatorship,  which gradually evolved to be fascist and military rather than anything else. 

The only exception was North Korea, which became  a dictatorship that has no name and can´t  be described. Exactly what the heck do  I have to show you, Edgar, so you see that the fate of the system that you have been  supporting is to be the dictatorship you dread, because it concentrates too much power in the center?

North Korean prison camp (Daily Mail UK)