Arab drought: An “Oil for water” policy is an option
by Nicolai Sennels
Soon our tankers may not travel empty on their way south, but be filled with water. Soon the West may be able to sell the Arabs water at the same price as we buy their oil.
Maplesoft Water Stress Index calculates “the ratio of domestic, industrial and agricultural water consumption, against renewable supplies of water from precipitation, rivers and groundwater.” The index pinpoints Middle Eastern and North African countries as the ten countries with the world’s greatest water stress:
| 1. | Bahrain | |
| 2. | Qatar | |
| 3. | Kuwait | |
| 4. | Saudi Arabia | |
| 5. | Libya | |
| 6. | Western Sahara | |
| 7. | Yemen | |
| 8. | Israel | |
| 9. | Djibouti | |
| 10. | Jordan |
Overpopulation, a Western-inspired life style, growing industry, climate changes, and a generally dry climate have made lack of water a deadly serious problem in the Middle East and North Africa. Water is needed for industry, food production, and of course for drinking. The water crisis is thus likely to cause a hunger crisis and an economic crisis, and is likely to spark violent conflicts over water resources and land for grazing and farming, which may lead to large streams of refugees heading towards the West.
Hopefully the risk of thirst, hunger and conflicts in these parts of the world will help increase awareness of overpopulation in the affected areas — both among Muslim and Western politicians and organisations. Meanwhile, Western countries should examine the political and economical possibilities that the lack of water in the oil-rich Muslim countries brings forth.
Nicolai Sennels is a psychologist and the author of “Among Criminal Muslims: A Psychologist’s experiences with the Copenhagen Municipality”.
Previous posts by or about Nicolai Sennels:
16 comments:
The MENA (Middle East North Africa) region already imports water from Western countries. They just happen to do it in the form of wheat.
All of this was covered in my 2009 essay, "Blood for Water".
A key fact:
Overall, the MENA (Middle East North Africa) region is the world’s fastest growing importer of foreign-grown wheat. The water required to irrigate domestic grain and other foodstuffs would equal the entire annual flow of the River Nile. Thus, for regions experiencing Water Poverty, importing wheat is the equivalent of importing water. There also exists the issue of how water is utilized. For example, in the case of India, using 1,000 tons of water to raise one ton of wheat brings an Indian farmer only around $200. But that same amount of water can be used to expand industrial capacity by $10,000 or fifty times as much value.
For almost a decade I have been saying:
LET THEM EAT SAND AND DRINK OIL.
Iceland will become very wealthy. Those glaciers are goldmines.
Water for oil - an excellent idea, but of course I can envisage the West claiming that such a trade would be unfair to the oil exporters/water importers.
It would probably be cheaper for them to burn oil, create electricity and desalinate sea water
Vortac: It would probably be cheaper for them to burn oil, create electricity and desalinate sea water
Which is exactly what they are doing, in a way.
The Saudis currently use their natural gas to fire boiler driven electrical generators. The intake water is partially desalinated seawater. This is used on a once-through basis and the condensate diverted as drinking water.
To reduce their own internal oil consumption, the Saudis are also in the process of constructing one of the world's largest reverse osmosis desalination plants.
None of this, regardless of wealth, water supplies or oil reserves, can create arable land. Not even the House of Saud could build enough greenhouses to feed their entire nation.
That is why we need to start trading bushels for barrels.
Remember, if the West were to halt all wheat exportation to the MENA region, mass starvation would begin in just a few short weeks.
Islam is poised on a razor's edge of self-destruction and it is only the overly-kindhearted West that has yet to see fit with respect to bringing it about.
Nuclear weapons and food are things that we Westerners have in abundance. Islam endures a famine of both, much to its peril.
Zenster, your commentaries are very insightful. Thank you very much.
"Remember, if the West were to halt all wheat exportation to the MENA region, mass starvation would begin in just a few short weeks."
...if the West were to halt all wheat exportation to the MENA region, a tsunami of hungry and visa-less emigrants should be started in direction to Europe.
Swedish EU commissioner Cecilia Malmström will have to think out yet another EU refugee policy.., that is if the tsunami is not stopped at the EU-borders with the help of arms.
But what about the poor people, Zen? All the poor people that get some of our food stuffs? If we started trading food for oil, the privileged Arabs would hord all the food and not give it to the poor, so we must give it to the poor... or something...
... oh, wait, they already hoard all our handouts... but, it would be wrong not to help the poor underpriviledged Arabs... so we must give... and they will still hoard...
... agh. It makes no sense, but we won't compromise our principles by with-holding aid...
Vortac: Thank you very much.
You are quite welcome. The pleasure is all mine.
Lawrence: If we started trading food for oil, the privileged Arabs would hord all the food and not give it to the poor, so we must give it to the poor... or something...
Permit me to suggest an essay by Kenyan economist James Shikwati titled, "For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!".
Huge bureaucracies are financed (with the aid money), corruption and complacency are promoted, Africans are taught to be beggars and not to be independent. In addition, development aid weakens the local markets everywhere and dampens the spirit of entrepreneurship that we so desperately need. As absurd as it may sound: Development aid is one of the reasons for Africa's problems. If the West were to cancel these payments, normal Africans wouldn't even notice. Only the functionaries would be hard hit. Which is why they maintain that the world would stop turning without this development aid.
In the past, I have read your essay and that of Shikwati and find them to be interesting.
My main question revolves around this quotation: "Remember, if the West were to halt all wheat exportation to the MENA region, mass starvation would begin in just a few short weeks."
My question is: Does your idea the also apply to the West? In other words, if the MENA region stops sending oil to the West, would mass Western starvation begin in just a few short weeks (because the West requires oil to harvest, prepare and distribute food to Western masses)?
Is the West vulnerable to food disruption if MENA withholds oil?
To wit, in a standoff of food versus oil, who would starve first: them or us?
If I might try and answer you Egghead, I'd say they would starve first. We have other sources of oil to draw upon, as well as options of electric and hydrogen powered cars which would become exceedingly economical in such a price shock.
By contrast, only trading with China and India would stave off starvation for the MENA, and frankly, those nations would probably not much care to feed other nations before their own are fed.
Egghead: In the past, I have read your essay and that of Shikwati and find them to be interesting.
It is gratifying to have the testimony of a fellow contributor such as yourself. Thank you.
My question is: Does your idea the also apply to the West?
Yes, but to nowhere the same extent.
In other words, if the MENA region stops sending oil to the West, would mass Western starvation begin in just a few short weeks (because the West requires oil to harvest, prepare and distribute food to Western masses)?
Absolutely not. Please recall that some of the world's first industrialized petroleum extraction took place in America. This nation is nowhere near being "tapped out" of oil.
In fact, America's government maintains a "strategic oil reserve" specifically in case of any war that might constrain petroleum imports.
As of 2010, this spare capacity stands at some 726.5 Million (with an "M") barrels of oil split into 292.5 of "sweet" (i.e., easily refined) and 434 of "sour" (i.e., higher sulfur content) stocks that could power a military clash for weeks, if not, months without taxing internal refining capacity.
Consider this; food stocks are far more perishable than oil. Wheat cannot be pumped down into empty underground salt domes to be conveniently extracted at a later date. Without careful climate control and pest mitigation, large volumes of wheat are prone to deterioration well beyond the point of edibility.
Is the West vulnerable to food disruption if MENA withholds oil?
Not really. Moreover, the immensely powerful grip within which we hold the MENA region in thrall is only magnified by the fact that Russia and China are both net food importers and could not easily triangulate against a Western embargo without imperiling food supplies for their own respective populations.
This is the ultimate irony about Islam. It is utterly beholden to modern Western civilization for its food, medicine and other vital advanced technologies like arms, chemical fertilizers and electronic instrumentation.
Face it, if the West had not facilitated industrialized extraction of MME (Muslim Middle East), oil resources, a vast majority of it would still be in the ground.
Yet, somehow, we are supposed to bow down to this barbaric, Neanderthal culture strictly on its own say so that it is, supposedly, the Master Race™. The West needs to challenge this patently false premise and do it in a manner that leaves no room for doubt as to who is the existential threat to whom.
LAW Wells: By contrast, only trading with China and India would stave off starvation for the MENA, and frankly, those nations would probably not much care to feed other nations before their own are fed.
Le bingo!
Hi guys
Thanks a lot for your very interesting and enlightening comments! Interesting to follow.
All the best, from Denmark
Nicolai Sennels
Hi NS -
I'm sure you wouldn't mind expanding a bit on this one:
"Hopefully the risk of thirst, hunger and conflicts in these parts of the world will help increase awareness of overpopulation in the affected areas — both among Muslim and Western politicians and organisations."
As dedicated social engineers, the political establishment is already aware of "overpopulation" i.m.o., as has been demonstrated during the past four decades by one of their favourite redistribution games (besides wealth), i.e. the redistribution of populations. Muslim politicians/leaders, like the king of Morocco, have also been very keenly aware of this Western progressivist hobby and have been exporting their own unwanted lowlifes to EUrabia (non-Arab Berbers e.g., to Holland).
Perhaps you're envisioning another kind of population-awareness among Western and Muslim political leaders?
Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.
Post a Comment