Peak Oil

Juan Cole is presiding over an interesting discussion of "Peak Oil theory"--whether, and to what extent, and how, the matter of oil is motivating the current uproar. It's somewhat open-ended and there is an inevitable thread of wingnuttery in the comments. But it is refreshing in the extent to which it is not committed to any tight conspiracy theory. Here's an side from Cole himself that caught my eye:

Since it is already coming up in the comments, I should note that the "fungibility" (easy exchange) of oil is less important in the new environment than it used to be. US petroleum companies would like to go back to actually owning fields in the Middle East, since there are big profits to be made if you get to decide when you take it out of the ground. As Chinese and Indian competition for the increasingly scarce resource heats up, exclusive contracts will be struck. When I floated the fungibility of petroleum as a reason for which the Iraq War could not be only about oil, at a talk at Columbia's Earth Institute last year, Jeffrey Sachs surprised me by disagreeing with me. In our new environment, oil is becoming a commodity over which it really does make sense to fight for control.

Cole adds a comment from “an informed reader” (Cole’s label):

Jeffrey Sachs is right. Oil is fungible only after its out of the ground. The name of today's game is control of reserves, not markets. Example: china's deals in Latin America, US development of non-Nigerian African resource, etc.

A full review of the Cole thread will take patience and tolerance, but it’s worth the effort.