EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Resource Revolts: The Year of Living Dangerously: Rising Commodity Prices and Extreme Weather Events Threaten Global Stability
Get ready for a rocky year. From now on, rising prices, powerful storms, severe droughts and floods, and other unexpected events are likely to play havoc with the fabric of global society, producing chaos and political unrest. Start with a simple fact: the prices of basic food staples are already approaching or exceeding their 2008 peaks, that year when deadly riots erupted in dozens of countries around the world.
It's not surprising then that food and energy experts are beginning to warn that 2011 could be the year of living dangerously -- and so could 2012, 2013, and on into the future. Add to the soaring cost of the grains that keep so many impoverished people alive a comparable rise in oil prices -- again nearing levels not seen since the peak months of 2008 -- and you can already hear the first rumblings about the tenuous economic recovery being in danger of imminent collapse. Think of those rising energy prices as adding further fuel to global discontent.
Already, combined with staggering levels of youth unemployment and a deep mistrust of autocratic, repressive governments, food prices have sparked riots in Algeria and mass protests in Tunisia that, to the surprise of the world, ousted long-time dictator President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and his corrupt extended family. And many of the social stresses evident in those two countries are present across the Middle East and elsewhere. No one can predict where the next explosion will occur, but with food prices still climbing and other economic pressures mounting, more upheavals appear inevitable. These may be the first resource revolts to catch our attention, but they won't be the last.
Put simply, global consumption patterns are now beginning to challenge the planet's natural resource limits. Populations are still on the rise, and from Brazil to India, Turkey to China, new powers are rising as well. With them goes an urge for a more American-style life. Not surprisingly, the demand for basic commodities is significantly on the rise, even as supplies in many instances are shrinking. At the same time, climate change, itself a product of unbridled energy use, is adding to the pressure on supplies, and speculators are betting on a situation trending progressively worse. Add these together and the road ahead appears increasingly rocky.
Breadbaskets without Bread
Let's begin with food, the most important and volatile of these commodities. Food prices declined in October 2008 after the onset of the global financial crisis, but that seems to have been an anomaly. The December 2010 index of global food prices compiled by the U.N.'s Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) hit a record 215, one point higher than in the spring of 2008. (In that index, based on a "bundle" of food staples, a baseline of 100 represents average prices in 2002-2004.) In fact, some food products, including sugar, cooking oils, and fats, are now trading substantially above their 2008 levels; others, including dairy products, grains, and meat, are inching perilously close to record levels.
As 2011 begins, food experts fear that, within months, prices for key staples will climb above the 2008 threshold and stay there, causing extreme hardship for poor people around the world. "We are at a very high level," said a worried Abdolreza Abbassian, an economist at the FAO. "These levels in the previous episode led to problems and riots across the world."
Of particular concern to Abbassian and his colleagues is the rising cost of corn, rice, and wheat, the staple crops of billions in many of the poorest countries. According to the FAO, by the end of 2010 international corn and wheat prices were already approaching their 2008 peak levels (about $260 and $340 per metric ton, respectively).
Analysts attribute the rise in grain prices to growing demand in both developed and developing nations, along with a number of cataclysmic weather-related events and speculation by investors. An extreme drought and fierce fires last summer destroyed a large percentage of the wheat crop in Russia and Ukraine, while heavy flooding in India and the inundation of 20% of Pakistan damaged significant parts of the grain output of those countries. At the same time, unusually hot and dry weather suppressed production in a number of other key farming areas.
What makes the picture look so worrisome today are indications that the severity and frequency of extreme weather events appear to be on the rise. In the past few weeks alone, several such events point the way to serious supply problems ahead. Most significant has been the unprecedented rainfall and flooding in Australia that put an area more than twice the size of California largely underwater, significantly disrupting wheat cultivation there. Australia is one of the world's leading wheat producers. Unusually dry conditions in the American Midwest and Argentina have also hinted at future problems in grain and corn output. It's still too early to predict the size of this year's grain and corn harvests, but many analysts are warning of a shortfall in supplies, along with sky-high prices.
Mainstream analysts and government officials are loathe to attribute this traffic jam of extreme weather events to global warming. Huge variations in rainfall can be normal, especially in places like Australia that are susceptible to El Niño/La Niña ocean-temperature oscillations, and politicians are fearful of assuming responsibility for a problem as massive as climate change. But climate change theory has long suggested that the warming trend -- 2010 tied 2005 for the warmest year on record and nine of the 10 warmest years have come in the last decade -- will be accompanied by an increase in the frequency and severity of storms. It's hard to escape the conclusion that recent events, including those Australian floods, are tied to rising global temperatures.
The Energy Crisis Returns
Soaring food prices are being driven as well by speculative investments and the rising price of oil. Partly in response to the diminishing value of the dollar, some investors are sinking their money into food futures (along with gold and silver) as a speculative hedge. At the same time, the price of oil is edging toward the $100 mark, making it increasingly profitable for farmers to switch from growing corn for human consumption to growing it for the manufacture of ethanol, which in turn reduces the amount of farm acreage devoted to staples. Oil would have to fall below $50 per barrel to make the cultivation of corn as a food product competitive with ethanol production -- and that's not likely to happen. So even if more corn is produced this year, less will be available for food purposes and the price of what remains is bound to rise.
The precipitous rise in oil prices has startled the experts. Not so long ago, the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) was projecting a price range of $70-$80 per barrel in 2011, but as the year began oil was already trading above $90 a barrel and some analysts predict that it will reach $100 before the year is out. A few are even talking about the $150 barrel and gas prices at the pump of $4 or more. If prices climb above $100, global consumer spending could take another nosedive.
"Oil prices are entering a dangerous zone for the global economy," says Fatih Birol, the chief economist for the International Energy Agency (IEA). "The oil import bills are becoming a threat to the economic recovery."
As with food, the rising cost of oil is a product of growing demand, insufficient supplies, and speculative investments. According to the most recent projections from the IEA, daily global oil consumption in 2011 will average 87.4 million barrels, an increase of about two million barrels from the first quarter of 2010. Much of the extra demand is coming from China, where a newly-minted middle class is buying automobiles at a record clip, as well as from the United States, where previously cautious consumers are slowly returning to pre-2008 driving habits.
At a time when the oil industry is experiencing declining rates of output at many existing oil fields and finding it ever more difficult to add production, even two million extra barrels per day can be a daunting challenge (and greater demand is expected in the coming years). In the United States, for example, much hope was placed in oil exploration in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Alaska, but in the wake of the BP disaster, this seems like a forlorn prospect. Production in Mexico and the North Sea, two bright spots of recent years, is facing a sharp decline, while other key producers, including those in the Middle East, are struggling to maintain current output levels at existing fields.
Many energy analysts believe that the world is at (or will soon reach) peak oil -- the moment when global petroleum output achieves a maximum sustainable daily rate and begins a long-term, irreversible decline. Others contend that higher levels of output are still possible. Whatever the truth of the matter, at this moment the oil industry is finding it increasingly difficult, and ever more costly, to boost output above current levels. This, combined with insatiable demand, is driving prices skyward.
Under these circumstances, speculators are again being drawn into the oil market as a rare sure bet. Such speculators helped push oil prices to a record $147 per barrel back in 2008, but fled the market when prices crashed as the American economy headed to a meltdown. Now, they're coming back. "Hedge funds and private investors are buying up financial instruments tied to the price of crude, and thereby helping push up oil prices," the Wall Street Journal reported in late December.
Most analysts are expecting a price surge this spring or summer when American motorists hit the road. "We will have a spring rally that will take us to between $3.10 and $3.50 a gallon for gasoline at service stations in the United States," predicted Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service.
The rising price of gas will, in turn, hurt consumers just as they show signs of opening their wallets again. No less worrisome, oil-importing countries like the United States, Japan, and many in Europe will face soaring bills for fuel imports, further enfeebling economies already suffering from profound weakness.
According to some calculations, oil prices added another $72 billion to America's mammoth balance-of-payments deficit last year. Europe had to cough up an additional $70 billion for imported oil and Japan $27 billion. "It is a very telling story," says the IEA's Fatih Birol of recent oil-price data. "2010 rang the first alarm bells and 2011 price levels could bring us to the same financial crisis times that we saw in 2008."
Rising food prices leading to riots, protests, and revolts, mounting oil prices, mammoth worldwide unemployment, and a collapsed recovery -- it looks like the perfect set of preconditions for a global tsunami of instability and turmoil. Events in Algeria and Tunisia give us just an inkling of what this maelstrom might look like, but where and how it will next erupt, and in what form, is anyone's guess. A single guarantee: we haven't seen the last of resource revolts which, in the coming years, could reach an intensity we scarcely imagine today.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


26 Comments so far
Show AllFeedback loops accelerate climate and societal destruction exponentially. Collapse can happen in the blink of an eye.
"... and you tell me, over and over and over again my friend, ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction ..."
P. F. Sloan 1965
too often, basic truths suffer from the human tendency to trivialize...
the controversial is made into comfortable cliche...
feedback is real, rapid and, as you say, exponential...
it can still startle, how quickly a small, insignificant sound can mushroom into an unbearable shriek, if not dealt with at the onset...also, a good shot to the ears troubles the entire audience for some time...
humor takes a breather when excruciating pain is around...
I find myself more and more amused, and troubled, by those who continue to discuss the future as if nothing untoward is happening...
so-and-so just got this job, or started going to this school, or is looking at doing, or buying, this or that...
funny how many folks are just getting to the point where they face the fact that they may not be able to sell their house if they chose to try...
that used to be a pretty basic financial precursor to all sorts of options...
not being able to do so severely hobbles...
watch as more jobs and homes are lost...
feedback, indeed...
peace, brother Buck!
dubet, my friend, It's a product/feedback of cultural influence: Carpe diem meaning party hearty. As long as there is a 12er on ice, an overpriced frozen pizza in the freezer, and the cable is connected, they're covered.
"Can't we talk about something else?"
I know many that are underwater and others barely treading. Curtainless empties are scattered about everywhere.
The last ten/fifteen years saw a boom in new apartment buildings and storage lockers, cities, towns, everywhere.
This wasn't an accident.
"The Packers are going to the Super Bowl!"
Peace and goodwill
Buck
I appreciate all of the calls for continuing to critique capitalism. Especially with such a reality that "Hedge funds and private investors are buying up financial instruments tied to the price of crude, and thereby helping push up oil prices."
However, something personally in each person's power is their diet. It is telling to read Mr. Swanson, an agricultural economist at Wells Fargo, who said, in part, "... retail prices of beef and pork might jump as much as 10% this year. Many livestock farmers are losing $ feeding high-priced grain to their herds, which could force them to shrink the size of their operations..."
Veganism is the answer ecologically and economically. According to "The China Study" by T. Colin Campbell, if embraced, it will make heart disease non-existent, and if there is any ? in anyone's mind about this, the empirical data he cites is as irrefutable as it gets in terms of how extensive a study. We will make the future different if we make the present different. Be vegan. It's practical, wise, compassionate, and the moral thing to do.
"We will have a Spring rally that will take gas prices to $3.10 to $3.50 per gallon predicted Tom Kloza."
"PREDICTED" ?
Please let Mr. Kloza out of the closet he is locked in.
Show me a service station on the west coast selling regular unleaded for under $3.00 per gallon today and I will show you a long line of cars waiting to fill up. There are few stations selling for less than $3.10 and plenty of stations that have been charging $3.50 per gallon for at least the past month.
here we go with the population canard again
read: rockefeller eugenics programs - like the kind expoused by the alien lizard prince charles, the nazis (who were funded in their population control programs by the rockefellers right into 1941), th UN - read rockefellers/rothschild banking debt machine, george bernard shaw and of course amerika, among others like henry ford, the carnegies, the dows etc
their concerns were strictly limited to non-whites - racist to the core as these fucks are
the amerikan "food as a weapon" program began in the 70's with henry kissinger advancing NSSM 200 http://www.population-security.org/11-CH3.html#1
the food as a weapon program was not concerned with feeding people but rather was concerned with controlling the growing political powers of the growing countries
"The study conducted by Kissinger was based on royal commission on population which had found that Britain was gravely threatened by population growth in its colonies, since “a populous country has decided advantages over a sparsely populated one for industrial production.”
NSSM 200 concluded that US was threatened by population growth in former colonial sector and enumerated thirteen key countries in which US had political and strategic interest, notable among others were India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The United States believed that population growth in those states was especially worrisome, since it would increase their political, economic and military strength. In order to deal with this threat birth control and related measures were to be adopted. Second measure was curtailing food supplies to targeted states; the policy was to come into effect after twenty five years. The policy laid broader guidelines like mandatory programs for carrying birth control."
and the speculators - unregulated of course - have an unknown unquantied effect - let's say around 75% of food costs are related to specualtion
same applies to oil by the way - so when you are paying 4 bucks for a gallon be happy knowing that banks and hedge funds are taking 3 dolars for their bets that they make with no money at zero interest
the overfed undernourised sheeple in the uk and amerika stuff themselves with gmo's and chemicalized food that destroys their health consuming calories at a rate of 40 times that of a person in say india or china
this all plays into the un plan to kill off 90% of the world's population - its called project 21 - and keep this in mind fellow sheeple - once they have finished them off over there they will come back home and complete the hatchet job they are starting on us
that would be the feeling you feel right now but just can't seem to put your finger on
in the meantime its back to the sports network and keep in mind the economy will soon be turning around
its all just around the corner
hang in there
just a little while longer
hey kids: a related article today here at cd: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/01/23-7
If the US were at all rational we would move heavily toward taxing energy and away from most other taxes (except wealth). It would cut down our debt and balance of payments, reduce climate change, give less of our money to foreign governments who are not overly friendly with us, conserve diminishing supplies, wreak less environmental catastrophe... And one question: should we seek to somehow hold down speculative power in commodities so that China, for instance, can buy up most of the world's supply of grain and soybeans at a low price?
To answer your question, I don't think the US gov't should be interfering in either direction. That is a general principle but, practically, interventions rarely work out as intended. And, we have encouraged the speculation with ridiculously low interest rates.
I agree the US should have general policies to promote clean, renewable energy. The first step of course, would be to stop subsidizing oil, gas and nuclear and to require accountability for damage done to air, land and water. Unfortunately, we can't even do that.
Yes, we have encouraged speculation, but "ridiculously low interest rates" are necessary unless you want greater job losses in the US. Most Americans will say do what it takes to give me a job. No matter if it's the looniest politics or reality, jobs is of utmost concern. This is one reason that trashing the planet is secondary. If people THINK environmental laws will reduce jobs, then it's to hell with the environment (sigh).
Low interest rates will stimulate the economy only if the financial sector is regulated like it was from 1935 until the 1980s.
As long as the Federal Reserve continues to give the financial sector zero interest money with no regulations in place to require that they actually take possession of the commodities they are hedging (like New Deal regulations once required), the result will continue to be commodity price bubbles that accelerate the decline of the "main street economy" and hamper, not help job creation.
In addition, low interest rates combined with commodity inflation results in more baby boomers delaying or cancelling retirement from their family wage jobs, thereby further increasing the unemployment rate among young Americans who are already experiencing higher unemployment rates than any age group.
Look at what happens to the millions of small companies and people interested in starting their own businesses if interest rates were higher. It would get uglier. We would have less jobs. Personally I would love higher interest rates. I've got some cash getting 1.3%. But it's not about me. And remember, commodity inflation will (always has) turn into commodity deflation. Commodity inflation does have a more robust footing than many times in the past, but at some point, the higher we go, the farther we will eventually fall.
I've heard this before in previous years but I don't know what to believe next. The oil prices may go up but will they stay up enough to force us to change from cars to trains and buses or will they go back down and "spoil" us?
Why wait until conditions we know are coming FORCE us to do what we in fact know would make sense to begin doing NOW? Are we waiting for an exact date on this or what?
Whatever you can do NOW, just do it and keep going.
Nobody likes feeling FORCED to do ANYTHING. Nothing wrong with that. However, we DO have a choice and we CAN begin now to acknowledge what is coming and prepare accordingly. Every little step in that direction reinforces the previous step. That's the beauty of overcoming inertia.
:-)
I didn't say wait for the worst. I know I'm not taking anything for granted as this empire nation continues to crumble until it's done for. I guess I'm just a bit critical on the way MK presents the situation. I usually see his writings showing up just when the oil prices go back up and seldom anytime else.
Klare is always fun to read -- makes the future sound quite entertaining.
Of course, financial speculators play a role in driving up prices and engineering shortages in both food & energy. However, burgeoning populations desperately hoping to improve their lives --or often merely survive -- struggle for these resources and also contribute to shortages. Overpopulation offers a wonderful opportunity for speculators to make billions of dollars. It is also part of the reason that ecosystems are dying at a record rate.
There was a reason why the Chinese used autocratic decrees to limit their population expansion to around a billion. Is there anyone seriously suggesting they'd be doing better with 2 billion, 3 billion, 4 billion people? They have already caused horrific environmental damage to their land, water, and ecosystems -- and this does not even measure their expanding contributions to greenhouse gases and global climate change.
This is not to pick on the Chinese. It is the rich Western countries such as the U.S. and little Australia that have the worst greenhouse gas per capita emissions.
Australia -- suffering their current environmental travails is a fascinating study. Most of their wheat production is in the west where they are still suffering drought. A large portion of their wheat production in other regions was damaged by rain and will end up going to livestock rather than exported for human consumption.
But speculators are already excited by the potential for NEXT year's cotton and wheat production.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-19/flood-destruction-in-australia-may-propel-wheat-crop-to-record.html
See, every disaster has a silver lining for capitalism!
Ironically, the gravest impact of the Queensland inundations was on the Australian coal industry.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL3E7CL09V20110121
All that potential greenhouse gas production slowed down by flooding caused (most likely) by greenhouse gas production! Now that's a feedback loop that could give us a little breathing room but, alas, just a blip.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE70B1XF20110112
Do not expect Australia to seriously change any of their economic policies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. After all they need to export that coal to pay for flooding caused by greenhouse gas emissions. It all makes sense.
However, U.S. Inc. -- due to a perverse combination of wealth, power, greed, zealotry, economic influence, and absolute stupidity -- remains the gravest threat to life on the planet.
And a lot of that speculation is fueled by ridiculously low interest rates here.
And the US will be competing with Australia to export as much US coal as possible to meet Obama's recently announced goal to double exports.
Yes, Peak Oil is here, at least for conventional oil. Dirtier shale oils and dangerous very deep sea drills cost much more money and feed back to speed up global climate change; and this generates the same extreme events that destroy the crops needed for food. But the higher costs, and prices of oil, make for greater profits in using those crops for ethanol, biodiesel, etc. So food prices shoot up.
Read: Driving Straight Into Catastrophe by Julio Godoy in todays CD. What a lunatic world system we live in.
Average gasoline prices in San Francisco are already at about $3.40 a gallon.
If they were about $10 we could seriously begin getting some of our priorities straight.
I used to carefully read this type of Serious data-driven purportedly thought-provoking piece with the attention it seemed to deserve. Now, I'm thinking, who doesn't know that:
"...rising prices, powerful storms, severe droughts and floods, and other unexpected events are likely to play havoc with the fabric of global society, producing chaos and political unrest."
- because it's already happening. Certainly, other equally important factors will contribute to "chaos and political unrest", too, like the awakening of the masses due to new information awareness via the internet.
In particular, a lengthy discussion of food shortages and commonidty price increases that does not distinguish agribusiness from sustainable small farm(ing), that does not adequately address faulty distribution systems and the utter evil of futures commodity speculation, and that predictably conflates over-population with food shortages is IMO not helpful.
Of course, 'global stability is threatened'; if the current system worked, it would stand. If flawed, as we well know it is in so many ways, it will fall. The much more interesting question is how we deal with the current and future crashes, "we" being us, not the so-called leaders who have lead us exactly where we are now.
Thank you Dus7. I agree with your criticisms of the article, but the interesting question asking how we're going to deal with catastrophe can only be answered on a case to case level. I get smacked and either fall down or stand up and fight back, but I can't prepare for the smack until I see it coming. Will Amsterdam be flooded? Will the transport of whatever food is produced break down? Will my neighbor show up at my door with a shotgun?
I don't think you meant overpopulation is not part of the problem, did you? There's a case we have seen coming, and the answer has been beyond human intervention.
RE: Rising food prices leading to riots, protests, and revolts, mounting oil prices, mammoth worldwide unemployment, and a collapsed recovery [and let's not forget global warming]
And, Klare didn't mention the driving force behind all of them: the internal contradictions of capitalism.
This article is good example of the limits of the liberal analysis.
Of course nothing is being said of the fact that it is the gamblers at the Wall Street Casino that create the price crises to begin with. A few select profit from the misery and death of millions around the globe. But such is the nature of Capitalism and that's why they are "the best and the brightest"