An email to the International Energy Agency

I’ve just sent this message to the following email addresses. I urge anybody reading this to do similar.

ieapressoffice@iea.org; energyindicators@iea.org; energymarketsinfo@iea.org; energypolicyinfo@iea.org; weo@iea.org; epd@iea.org; stats@iea.org

(or you can decide on your own list of IEA contacts)

To Whom It May Concern:

I refer you to a recent report on the Guardian UK website:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/09/peak-oil-international-energy-agency

If these facts are shown to be true then the IEA is an accomplice in the most irresponsible act of withholding information ever recorded in human history. In terms of food production alone, given that roughly 10 calories of hydrocarbon energy go into every calorie of food produced and that the vast majority of that hydrocarbon energy comes from oil, being caught unprepared for a decrease in oil production would be catastrophic to the human race resulting in the annual starvation and eventual deaths of hundreds of millions of people. That is but one severe consequence among many severe consequences.

As Martin Luther King Jr once said ‘a time comes when silence is betrayal.’ If the figures you have been providing are indeed distorted I urge you to consider the outcomes stated above and understand that you yourselves will also have to live in the world that you have helped create. Do not bow to pressure from the US at the great expense of us all.

You can start by halting and revising the new World Energy Outlook publication.

I have posted this message on my blog just to make sure that it is public.

Yours sincerely,
Seth Mowshowitz
London
UK

Peak oil has already begun. Demand accountability and transparency from IEA, the US & UK government NOW

Many respected critics have long speculated that official projections from the International Energy Agency, major world governments and the oil industry of how long oil production can be sustained for are exaggerated. Today this was substantiated:

Key oil figures were distorted by US pressure, says whistleblower

Most people haven’t even gotten their heads around the fact that oil will run out. It will certainly run out, very few people are denying that any longer and they are rapidly losing any credibility. We’re now at the stage of bickering about how many decades of increased oil production we have left. As it turns out, we may have less than one.

Just to recap, our economic system relies on infinite growth in order to be able to sustain itself. When we are reasonably certain that the economy is going to grow it means we can borrow against future income – we can be reasonably certain that there will be increased income in the future. Our entire financial system is based on the ability to borrow against future earnings.

Infinite growth is made possible by fossil fuels, chiefly oil – the energy source behind the vast majority of worldwide manufacturing and transportation of all products – including food. As long as we can keep increasing oil production at fairly predictable rates, we can have infinite growth – we know that our consumer distribution networks will function etc. Once oil production begins to decline the economy will begin to shrink. Banks will stop lending. In case you haven’t noticed, we are already in a deep recession. The recent financial meltdown is not unrelated to peak oil. I believe that the key figures at the helm of the financial system are privvy to the actual projections of oil production. They too have been wilfully negligent.

If we do not deal with our dependency on fossil fuels before oil production begins to decline, we will no longer be able to afford to do so. Replacing the fossil fuel infrastructure will be unimaginably costly, but the cost must be measured in terms of energy. We may not have enough energy to meet that cost. For example, 12-15% of the gasoline a car uses in its lifetime goes into its own manufacturing. How much would it cost to replace the majority of the 750 million+ cars in the world in terms of energy? That is just one example.

Of far greater importance than cars, roughly 10 calories of hydrocarbon energy are used to make 1 calorie of food across the globe. In industrial agriculture oil powered machines are used to till the land, plant the seeds, harvest the crops, transport the raw produce, transport the final products and in all likelihood to transport the consumer to to the supermarket to buy the product. Natural gas, coal or oil are used to make the electricity that powers the irrigation systems, food processing plants and microwaves. Commercial fertilizers largely rely on natural gas to produce a synthetic nitrogen component. Commercial pesticides are also made from oil. Any plastic involved in the process is of course also made from oil.

Feeding a growing world population is therefore also directly dependent on a steady increase in oil production. We are already failing to do that adequately. The result of being caught unprepared for a decrease in oil production would be catastrophic. Many hundreds of millions of people would starve to death.

It turns out that the US is at least partially responsible for these exaggerated figures by putting pressure on the IEA to distort figures. Somewhat ironically, the stated reasons for doing so are to avoid a situation of panic buying of oil and to avoid general panic on the stock market. There will certainly be panic when the public realizes that the negligence of the powers that be will imminently result in the total collapse of the civilized world.

You can bet that a small amount of priveledged and wealthy individuals have been exploiting this situation for some time. Of course these private interests don’t want to cuase panic on the stock market – they are raking in a fortune every second that this system is maintained. Today these interests – consisting at least to some extent of figures within the US government – have been publicly caught out displaying a distinct absence of intent to remedy this situation for the greater good. This is irresponsible on an unprecedented scale.

We need to wake up and demand immediate transparency and accountability from our representatives. Any further waffling about reducing fossil fuel dependency must cease. We need swift, decisive and comprehensive action.

We all need to demand this from our governments immediately.

For those in the UK, I refer you again to the incredibly convenient Write to Them website.

For those in the US you will have to make do with the Contact Elected Officials page on usa.gov.

Letter to Sarah Teather MP of 29 September 2009 | Changes to UK Mental Health Act

Dear Sarah Teather,

I have recently been made aware of proposed temporary changes to the UK Mental Health Act that will allow people ‘with suspected mental health issues to be quickly detained because of fears over staff shortages in any forthcoming swine flu outbreak.’ This includes reducing the number of doctors giving the required psychiatric assessment from two to one. One of the possibilities this opens up is the ability to easily detain or section and subsequently forcibly drug people who refuse to take the swine flu vaccine.

In my opinion these changes smack of Orwellian control tactics and are a very dangerous precedent to set with only one month’s consultation being undertaken. The author of the article from which this news was sourced posed the question ‘Is it right that swine flu should affect health regulations?’ To which a member of the public responded: ‘Absolutely not, especially if these authorities redefine mental illness to include being opposed to the government’s official stories about the swine flu. When governments remove civil rights and arbitrarily change laws so as to deny due process of law, we are automatically living under a dictatorship. Citizens of any nation which allow such nefarious back-door assaults on their freedoms will have their indifference rewarded with tyranny.’

I strongly request that you do whatever you can to prevent these changes from taking place in this manner, even if they are temporary. As of my writing this letter there is not sufficient information available to say how long these measures would be enacted for and what the full extent of the legislation will be.

Yours sincerely,

Seth Mowshowitz

From Mike Ruppert: “CYNTHIA McKINNEY TAKEN INTO CUSTODY”

I am forwarding this blog on behalf of Cynthia McKinney. The words below are those of Mike Ruppert.

CYNTHIA McKINNEY TAKEN INTO CUSTODY, GAZA RELIEF SUPPLY SHIP BOARDED BY ISRAELI NAVY — McKINNEY AND COLLEAGUES DETAINED IN ISRAEL

June 30, 2009, 12:30 PM PDT — This morning at 0915 I received a call from Cynthia McKinney aide David who advised that a ship en route from Cyprus to Gaza filled with relief supplies including medicine and much-needed cement had been fired upon and boarded by naval vessels of the Israeli Defense Forces. On board were dozens of peace activists and aide workers including Nobeal Peace Laureate Maired Maguire. I had last heard from Cynthia on Sunday June 28th when she called me from Cyprus at around 0930 my time to advise that she and her band of international peace activists were finally departing from Cyprus for Gaza after many delays.

David advised that as far as he knew, no one had been hurt in the Israeli attack and that Cynthia was physically OK. However, he added that her safety and whereabouts inside Israel were unknown at this time.

I am encouraging all of my fans and followers to reach out by any means to the White House, to the international media, to the Israeli embassy in Washington and by whatever means they can to protest this attack on a humanitarian relief effort and to ensure the safety of all aboard. The plight of the Gazans is epic and brutal. It is time that voices were heard and all of us who have known and loved Cynthia McKinney for so long need to rally behind her uncompromising courage. We need to make our voices heard on this.

For more information, please visit http://www.FreeGaza.org.

The new weekly Fuck You, this week: Barclays

The time has come to stop mincing words. It would be wrong to single out any of the world’s sociopathic ‘bad apples’ for verbal castigation, so I’ve decided to instantiate The weekly Fuck You.

My first Fuck You goes out to Barclays Bank.

Fuck you Barclays!

Your behavior this week has not been good. Two people from within your own ranks have finally come forward with the proof of your anti-social tax avoidance schemes. It was bound to happen sooner or later. Instead of owning up to it, even though the information has already been leaked, you issued a gag order forcing the Guardian to remove the first lot of proof from their website. You have been exposed for what you are and now you attempt to backpeddle,  deny and obstruct. How is that supposed to help public relations?

For those of you reading this blog that are not familiar with the situation I refer you to:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/19/barclays-tax-guardian-injunction

As one of the other articles on the Guardian website within this series of events has indicated, it seems that neither the Guardian nor the government have the financial resources to match those of Barclays’ legal team in order to fight them on this or any other issue, without passing and enforcing radical new legislation. Barclays are applying for massive amounts of bailout money from us, the taxpayers, in order to protect them from potential losses while happily perpetrating tax avoidance for massive profits. They intend to steal from us on two simultaneous fronts. This is beyond unacceptable. If you bank with Barclays I urge you to hit them where it counts: switch to another bank. It is both the most powerful form of protest and, moreoever, direct and positive action. Smile (an online bank) make it easy to do all this – they’ll help you switch over all of your standing orders, direct debits etc. Having been through it myself once it was a lot easier than I thought it would be:

http://www.smile.co.uk/servlet/Satellite?pagename=Smile/Page/smView&c=Page&cid=971606262122

If you switch to an ethical bank your impact is doubled because you are not only withdrawing funds from a sociopathic institution but you are also investing in those who are doing good things for the world.

For more ethical internet banking options please refer to the following:

http://www.ethiscore.org/reports/free/banks_internet_banking.aspx

You will notice that there is some controversy surrounding the ethical rating of Smile on ethiscore. This is explained on the Ethical Consumer website:

Smile (08708 432265) is the only internet bank with a credible ethical policy stating where it will lend your money. The bank receives a poor rating on the table because of the activities of the Co-operative’s supermarket group, its parent company.

source: Ethical Consumer

We must all make an effort if we are to effect change on a relevant scale. This is something you can do with relative ease that can have a major and immediate impact on the world.

Sarah Teather MP has signed EDM 665 (Guardian newspaper’s Tax Gap series)

As a follow up on the two posts below I have received confirmation that Sarah Teather MP has indeed signed EDM 665 as promised.

Check to see if your MP has signed EDM 665.

Response from Sarah Teather MP to my letter of 4 February, 2009

12 February 2009

Dear Mr Mowshowitz,

Thank you for your email on corporate tax evasion, which I received on the 4th of February.

I share your views on this matter. As I am sure you are aware the Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor Vince Cable has repeatedly spoke out on this issue, calling on the tax authorities to apply the general principle that if companies deliberately seek to avoid taxation they should be penalised and charged.

You asked me to sign Early Day Motion 665 and I am happy to do so. I will add my signature later today, although please be aware that it sometimes takes a couple of days for my name to appear on the online record. I am pleased to note that 9 of my Liberal Democrat colleagues have also supported the motion, and hope that many more will do so over the coming weeks.

I hope this has been helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact me again should you require further assistance, on this or any other issue.

Yours sincerely,
Sarah Teather MP

Liberal Democrat MP for Kilburn, Willesden Green, Welsh Harp, Dollis Hill, Dudden Hill, Mapesbury, Queen’s Park, Brondesbury and Kensal Rise

Letter to Sarah Teather MP: 4 February, 2009

Dear Sarah Teather,

Thank you for your response re: The conflict in Gaza and the actions described therein, you have more than demonstrated your commitment to those in need.

You may be aware of the ongoing Guardian series entitled The tax gap concerning corporate tax evasion in the UK to the tune of up to £12 billion per year. If not, I draw your attention to it now and urge you to sign EDM 665.  I have known about this for some time (the BBC published an article entitled ‘Call for corporate tax clampdown‘ on October 21, 2008) and I am shocked that these facts have not drawn more attention until now. The fact of the matter is that corporation tax exists because corporations benefit from the infrastructure of countries in which they operate – from the roads used by the trucks that distribute their products to the biosphere that absorbs the pollutants generated by their factories. Corporations benefit far more than the salaried taxpayer as they use the same infrastructure to generate enormous profits. The corporation tax that is in place now, were it actually paid out in full, is less than adequate at returning the true cost accrued by the use of our collective infrastructure (according to EF Schumacher and others). If HM Revenue & Customs won’t even collect that tax then what chance did the financial system ever give us as a society?

One of EF Schumacher’s suggestions was that 50% of any company sized above roughly 350 employees should be owned by the public. This is the kind of legislation we need to be considering if we are to salvage a truly equitable society from the wreckage of the current financial system. If you haven’t read EF Schumacher’s book Small Is Beautiful, I humbly request that you take the time to do so.

Thank you again for your time and all of the responses to my letters so far. I remain proud to have you as my MP.

Sincerely,

Seth Mowshowitz

Letter to Gordon Brown concerning the 3rd runway at Heathrow

As a beneficial owner of land on the third runway site administered by the Airplot campaign I stand fervently in opposition to the building plans.

Quite apart from the socially irresponsible environmental implications, the idea that this runway will boost the UK economy in the short or long term is preposterous. First of all, despite the current downward trend in oil prices, the cost and scarcity of energy will only be increasing. Many people understand this now and the government can no longer avoid talking about it. What happens when, in a matter of years, aviation fuel costs put more and more airlines out of business and significantly raise the cost of air travel? This runway will not only become superfluous, it will become a colossal embarrassment to those who approved its construction. It smacks of short term gain to those involved in its development.

That said I must also point out that the approval of these plans demonstrates a sincere lack of commitment to environmental concerns. These are global concerns – they literally effect every man, woman and child on the planet (including yourselves). Relegating environmental concerns to secondary or tertiary considerations above economic growth and profit is totally unacceptable to me and to a growing number of the population. Pawning off the emissions problem by ‘off-setting’ emissions with electric cars is not adequate by any stretch either. There need to be fewer emissions in both aviation and road transport, not more in one and less in the other.

If these plans go ahead now there is not a shred of a chance left that I will vote labour in the next election.

Sincerely,

Seth Mowshowitz

Quote of the day

Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

The Picture of Dorian Gray – Chapter III (by Oscar Wilde)

Oscar Wilde’s observation of the decline of moral values in late nineteenth century Victorian English society resonates with even more force today. This aphorism is behind more of the world’s ills than one might initially suspect. Food is a prime example. How many of us make decisions in the supermarket based solely on cost? The truth is that monetary cost is a fairly one-dimensional abstraction of value and does not reflect in a broad sense the true, holistic cost of anything. Produce from industrial agriculture, for example, may be monetarily cheaper on the supermarket shelves but is in fact more expensive in a holistic sense when taking into account the cost to the environment of pesticides and artificial fertilizers along with the cost of long-term dependence on non-renewable resources (oil) to produce them. These costs are conveniently hidden from view when decisions are made in the supermarket.

As things stand today it is, alas, the responsibility of the consumer to keep the aforementioned costs in mind when purchasing. This extends to all forms of consumption on a daily basis. It creates a lot of extra work and requires a good deal more thought. In order for these true costs to be effectively represented the responsibility ought to be shared between producer, distributor and consumer. It should not fall solely on one or the other. We are all subject to the consequences of not taking these hidden costs into account, particularly with respect to the environment. To willfully inflict damage upon one’s own environment for the sake of monetary profit is sheer stupidity and should not be tolerated at any level.

Until we all make a genuine effort to trace and understand the true value of anything with a price tag we will continue to live out a colossal and costly lie.