An analysis from a Marxist/libertarian communist perspective of the situation in Palestine, particularly in regard to its historical roots.
US, Israel, Christian Zionism, British colonialism, Arab collectives, E. P. Thompson (w P.Linebaugh), India and Global Left, 6/22/25.
"In this video we have discussed the Musha' lands (مشاع) - the agricultural common lands in Ottoman Palestine owned jointly by the community and loosely taxed by the state. Prof. Linebaugh [U of Michigan] presents his thesis that at the heart of the Israel-Arab conflict is the question of Zionist settler colonialism attempting to destroy the rural Arab communal life. [And, i will add, the historical aspect, the growing imposition of capitalist social relations in this region in the late 19th Century] He has also argued that the roots of Zionism go back to Christianity, especially the 17th-century transformation in England that set colonialism in motion. We also asked Prof. Linebaugh about what the Palestinian struggle has taught the rest of the world. Finally, he discussed what socialism means for us at this moment in history.
Link to the article [by Linebaugh],
Palestine & the Commons: Or, Marx & the Musha’a, Peter Linebaugh, 3/1/24. "
My comments. Linebaugh, whom i saw at Berkeley City College in April 2007, who’s associated with the autonomist/libertarian communist milieu, can sound tentative because he weighs his words carefully, but he is well worth being patient with, as he’s got so much to say. He locates The Enclosures at the very center of capitalism and of its imposition upon the world, something which has been happening since the capitalist mode’s emergence in late medieval England. The Enclosures process is both physical legal, involving both the actual physical enclosure of land via fences or other means. and legal instruments establishing plots of land as private exclusive property. This has also involved the destruction of collective forms of culture, and the general elimination of the commons, the word which provides the root for “communism."
The process took place over centuries in England, over just a couple f centuries in the US/North America, several generations in Palestine, and over just a generation in the Soviet Union under Stalin (yes, he goes there!). And since the 19th Century, it has been taking place in the land called Palestine, first in slow fashion under the Ottoman Empire, and then ramped up, first under the British Mandate, and then even more by the Zionist state. And the Musha’ has been the form in which the indigenous people have resisted it, primarily in rural settings, but more recently also in urban areas. LInebaugh does an excellent job locating the roots of Zionism in the religious aspect of the Oliver Cromwell forces during the mid 17th Century English Civil War, forces which represented the most militant wing of the rising capitalist class. At this point in time, The Enclosures was also beginning to be imposed in Ireland as well as North America (Massachusetts). The religious aspect involved an enunciation of Christianity which stated the Second Coming would require the re-establishment of the Biblical-era Kingdom of Israel. Christian Zionism, a key element of US right wing policies, remains the key ideological factor behind the support of the US for the Zionist Entity, not “rich Jews” or “the Israel lobby.”
Good concluding remarks about E.P. (Edward) Thompson, whom Linebaugh was a student of. Thompson’s, whose book “The Making of the English Working Class” is a key work in understanding The Enclosures. It was amply used by Ellen Meiksins Wood, my favorite author in regard to this topic, including her outstanding book “The Agrarian Origins of Capitalism,” the key chapter of which (under the same name) is available online. July 1, 1998. https://monthlyreview.org/1998/07/01/the-agrarian-origins-of-capitalism/ Linebaugh links all this to recent events on US and other campuses, the movement of solidarity with Palestine demanding divestment from Israeli interests.
And, in the latest news, this item from Lebanon’s leading media outlet, as tensions between Israel’s government and Hezbollah keep growing.
Netanyahu warns Lebanon war could be next, Naharnet News Desk, sourced from AP, 6/24/24.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that the current phase of fighting against Hamas in Gaza is winding down, setting the stage for Israel to send more troops to its northern border to confront the Lebanese Hezbollah. The comments Sunday threatened to further heighten the tensions between Israel and Hezbollah at a time when they appear to be moving closer to war. Netanyahu also signaled that there is no end in sight for the grinding war in Gaza.
The Israeli leader said in a lengthy TV interview that while the army is close to completing its current ground offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah, that would not mean the war against Hamas is over. But he said fewer troops would be needed in Gaza, freeing up forces to battle Hezbollah. "We will have the possibility of transferring some of our forces north, and we will do that," he told Israel's Channel 14, a pro-Netanyahu TV channel, in an interview that was frequently interrupted by applause from the studio audience. "First and foremost, for defense," he added, but also to allow tens of thousands of displaced Israelis to return home.
The Iranian-backed Hezbollah began striking Israel almost immediately after Hamas' Oct. 7 cross-border attack that triggered the Gaza war. Israel and Hezbollah have been exchanging fire nearly every day since then, but the fighting has escalated in recent weeks, raising fears of a full-blown war. Hezbollah is much stronger than Hamas, and opening a new front would raise the risk of a larger, region-wide war involving other Iranian proxies and perhaps Iran itself that could cause heavy damage and mass casualties on both sides of the border.
White House envoy Amos Hochstein was in the region last week meeting with officials in Israel and Lebanon in an effort to lower tensions. But the fighting has continued. Netanyahu said he hoped a diplomatic solution to the crisis could be found but vowed to solve the problem "in a different way" if needed. "We can fight on several fronts and we are prepared to do that," he said. He said any deal would not just be "an agreement on paper." He said it would require Hezbollah to be far from the border, an enforcement mechanism and the return of Israelis back to their homes. Tens of thousands of people were evacuated shortly after the fighting erupted and have not been able to go home.
Hezbollah has said it will continue battling Israel until a cease-fire is reached in Gaza. The group's leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, warned Israel last week against launching a war, saying Hezbollah has new weapons and intelligence capabilities that could help it target more critical positions deeper inside Israel. Hezbollah already has unveiled new weapons during the low-level fighting, including hard-to-defend attack drones that strike with little warning. An Israeli soldier was badly wounded Sunday in a drone strike.
But Israel says it too has shown Hezbollah only a small part of its full capabilities, and that Lebanon will be turned into a second Gaza if there is a war. Israel's army last week said it had "approved and validated" a new plan for a Lebanon offensive. In the interview, Netanyahu said that Israel's offensive in Gaza is winding down. The Israeli army has been operating in the southern border town of Rafah since early May. It says it has inflicted heavy damage on Hamas in Rafah, which it has identified as the last remaining Hamas stronghold after a brutal war stretching nearly nine months. But he said Israel would have to continue "mowing" operations — targeted strikes aimed at preventing Hamas from regrouping.
Israel launched its air and ground invasion of Gaza immediately after Hamas' Oct. 7 attack, which killed some 1,200 people and took about 250 others hostage. The Israeli offensive has killed over 37,000 Palestinians, unleashed a humanitarian crisis and triggered war crimes and genocide cases at the world's top courts in The Hague. It also has raised tensions with the United States, with President Joe Biden and Netanyahu clashing publicly over the course of the war. Earlier on Sunday, Netanyahu again repeated his claim that there has been a "dramatic drop" in arms shipments from the U.S., Israel's closest ally, hindering the war effort.
Biden has delayed delivering certain heavy bombs since May over concerns of heavy civilian casualties, but his administration fought back last week against Netanyahu's charges that other shipments had also been affected. Although the U.S. and other mediators are pushing a cease-fire plan, Netanyahu has ruled out an end to the war until Israel frees all hostages held by Hamas and until it destroys Hamas' military and governing capabilities. The current phase of the war "is about to end," Netanyahu said. "That doesn't mean the war is about to end."
Netanyahu spoke as his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, was in Washington for talks with American officials about the war and tensions with Lebanon. And next month, Netanyahu has been invited to address Congress for a speech that already is dividing Washington along partisan lines. Some Democrats, angry at Netanyahu's public fighting with Biden, say they will not attend.
American officials also have been pressing Netanyahu to spell out a clear post-war plan for Gaza. The U.S. has said it will not accept a long-term Israeli occupation of the territory. Netanyahu spelled out a very different vision. He said the only way to guarantee Israel's security is for Israel to maintain military control over the territory. "There is no one else" capable of doing that, he said. But he said he is seeking a way to create a Palestinian "civilian administration" to manage day-to-day affairs in Gaza, hopefully with backing from moderate Arab countries. He ruled out any role for the internationally recognized Palestinian Authority, which was ousted from Gaza by Hamas in a violent 2007 takeover.
Netanyahu said the Israeli army several months ago looked into working with prominent Palestinian families in Gaza, but that Hamas immediately "destroyed them." He said Israel is now looking at other options. Netanyahu ruled out one option favored by some of his ultranationalist governing partners — re-settling Israelis in Gaza. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, ending a 38-year presence. "The issue of settlement is not realistic," he said. "I'm realistic.”
And, while most musicians and artists of all endeavors have been silent on the matter of the Genocide, the very well-known musician, composer and producer Brian Eno, active in the realm ever since his days as a member of Roxie Music from 1971 to 1973, speaks out. He is really articulate
BRIAN ENO, an artist AGAINST GENOCIDE, Frank Barat, 6/22/24, 34 minutes.
"Love to chat with Brian Eno. Today, most of our focus was on the genocide in Gaza and the actions of our governments and the role of artists in times of struggle"
And, new from Alison McDowell. A quote, plus my comments.
Steam Punk Squirrel Steganography – Information Theory, Art, and Discovery On A Walk In The Woods, Alison McDowell, 6/22/24.
""Can you summarize your recent research into a single sentence?” - That was the emailed request.
[Her response]“Tagged archetypal cybernetic avatars team up to forage for contextualized information (qualia) in interdimensional “space” and bring it back to be collectively processed (composted?) in a globally-networked “gut brain.” This novel “brain,” managed through precision nutrition, uses quorum sensing and token-engineered consensus (Ethereum’s Consensys) to adjust a shared topological game board, which in turn performs some collective calculation or puzzle solving task that appears to have been delegated to us, as a highly-evolved distributed intelligence, from a source outside our shared layer of space/time.”
Ok, I ended up breaking into into two sentences, because the first run-on attempt was just too tricky. The requestor didn’t understand my response. I cannot insert the knowledge of my unique lived experience into any person’s consciousness, nor would I want that. Everyone has a road of discovery to walk. I’m not done with my journey yet, so don’t pressure me to commit to one final theory of what is happening."
My comments. Basically what she says is, , from here on society will increasingly involve all humans, via their digital twins, being plugged into a global Blockchain-based digital data bank managed for total efficiency by an AI functioning as a hive brain of which we all become extensions of, just like an anti colony. Some interesting ideas ideas here. But she shows zero understanding of the actual functioning of capitalism, which she apparently thinks can be ditched by.. the capitalist class almost at will in favor os this architecture. Furthermore, she shows zero understanding of the planet as an actually existing physical entity with material limits imposed by energy and resources supplies and the requirements of the ecosystem. limits which she apparently believes can be transcended because this or that ruling class think tank puts forth certain ideas and concepts in this wine-and-brie symposiums which assume, mostly by omission, that all these problems have been solved. Some stuff follows below regarding some of these material realities.
And, former oil/gas industry analyst and now a frequent writer/speaker about the coming energy criss Art Berman speaks out. Limited within capitalist thinking, but nevertheless articulating well the growing material limits.
Metacrisis: Getting Honest About the Human Predicament, Art Berman, 6/23/24. LOTS of graphs and images.
The world is in metacrisis. That means that many crises are occurring simultaneously and affecting one another. This calls for rethinking the nature of problem-solving. Root causes should be identified rather than merely treating their symptoms. Traditionally, problems have been tackled in isolation. That approach has led to the metacrisis.
Although the exact origin of the term metacrisis is unclear, thinkers like Daniel Schmachtenberger, Jonathan Rowson, and Michael Every have discussed it extensively and brought it into wider attention. The word crisis comes from the ancient Greek krisis meaning a turning point in a disease that leads either to recovery or death. The Greek prefix meta- means over or across. Metacrisis, therefore, means an ensemble of life-or-death situations that overlap and influence each other.
Figure 1 illustrates the overwhelming complexity of the world’s metacrisis. It is a web of systemic, interconnected, compounding processes. Broad categories including energy, environment, population growth and financial overshoot. All of the processes are interconnected, and changes to one inevitably affect the others. Changing things without thinking about its cascading effects can lead to disastrous outcomes yet piecemeal changes have been the norm so far in society’s approach to problem-solving.
We want solutions but do we understand the problems we are trying to solve? “How can we begin to fathom the future if we don’t understand the present? And that’s the point. We need to understand how the world works right now. And that means understanding the basics. And I just don’t think we understand the basics before we even get to the complex stuff.”-Edmund Conway
Attention must be placed first on the whole, not on the parts. That includes the natural world. It is the source of the resources including food that support human survival and prosperity. Disregarding the effects of our actions on nature is among the principal reasons for the metacrisis. Climate change activism is a prime example of focusing on parts rather than the whole. Figure 2 shows an activist fixated on carbon emissions, which is just one aspect of climate change. Surrounding the circle are other issues like biodiversity loss, air pollution, and overconsumption.
Climate change is only a part of the larger environmental and ecological crisis. Focusing mainly or solely on carbon emissions overlooks the broader context which includes energy, the economy, society, and human behavior shown in Figure 1. A holistic approach is needed that moves from the whole to the parts and back again. Otherwise, we are merely shifting problems from one area to another and probably making everything worse.
.
Even in the narrow case that only considers emissions, there is no evidence that the renewable energy transition has changed their upward trajectory despite thirty-six international climate conferences and trillions of dollars of investment over the last forty years. Global CO₂ emissions have increased +18 gigatons (+93%) since the first World Climate Conference in 1979 and +15 gigatons (+61%) since COP 1 in 1995 (Figure 3).
In fact, there is no evidence that an energy transition exists. Energy consumption and population continue to increase every year. Historical data on world energy consumption from 1800 reveals an additive rather than a subtractive pattern (Figure 4). This means that new energy sources are layered on top of old ones, rather than replacing them. Today, both biomass and coal consumption exceed their 1800 levels, with renewable energy sources like wind and solar barely making a statistical impact. This underlines that, despite the estimated investment of about $10 trillion in renewables over the last twenty years, they are just a small addition to our ongoing conventional energy usage.
The popular idea that fossil fuels can be, and are being, replaced by renewable energy is false. There is no energy transition or green revolution. Wind and solar accounted for 2.4% of world energy consumption in 2022 – a zero-rounding error. There has never been replacement of one energy source by another. No energy source has ever been substantially reduced. Population was 2.5 billion when I was born in 1950. It has more than tripled in my lifetime to more than 8 billion in 2023. Total energy consumption has increased more than 60-fold in that same period. Half of all historical oil consumption has been since 2000.
Growth is the problem. Carbon emissions are a consequence of the growth in energy consumption that has enabled the growth in human population and economic activity. A barrel of crude oil contains the energy equivalent of about four-and-a-half years of human work (Figure 5). In 2023, the world used 84 billion barrels of oil equivalent from coal, natural gas and oil. At four-and-a-half years of work per barrel, that means that society has 378 billion fossil energy slaves working for us all the time.
The work value of a barrel of oil is approximately $337,000 using the 2022 U.S. median income of $75,000. That explains the high levels of productivity that have improved global living standards over the last century. Half of all historical oil consumption has been since 2000. No other energy source can remotely compete. It is delusional to imagine that humans will voluntarily trade fossil fuel prosperity for a much poorer renewable energy world.
The current world strategy to reduce carbon emissions is to substitute renewable for fossil fuel sources of energy. That approach is not having much effect in terms of absolute volumes of energy supplied or consumed. Figure 6 shows that there has been average annual addition of 11 billion worker equivalents of energy consumption since 2020. This is included in a total level of that has increased from 163 billion worker equivalents in 1975 to 363 billion worker equivalents in 2023. I am describing reality. I am not suggesting that using fossil fuels is good nor do I minimize the risks of climate change and global heating. As long as energy use continues to increase, efforts to limit carbon emissions will be negligible, and temperature will rise.
Figure 7 shows that global mean temperatures are at the highest level in 24,000 years. Global heating is real. It is a problem. It is because of growth. Carbon emissions are a consequence—not the cause—of temperature increase. Ending fossil fuel use is simply not a practical idea in the medium term. Growth—not fossil fuels—is the root cause that must be understood.
Growth is also the root cause of the ongoing crisis of the natural world. Populations of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and fish have declined by an average of 69% since 1970 (Figure 8). Expansion of the human enterprise through deforestation, urbanization, and pollution have led to the destruction and fragmentation of natural habitats, making it difficult for species to survive and thrive.
In the first part of this century, geopolitical conflicts centered mainly around terrorism and Middle Eastern conflicts. Since 2020, tensions have been broader and have more directly involved major powers. Strengthening of alliances between Russia, China, Iran, and the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) have been particularly significant.
A fragmentation of the old world order is occurring. The United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union challenged the unity of the EU and led to renewed discussions on sovereignty and regionalism within Europe. The [A:LLEGED DISEASE} COVID-19 [ALLEGED] Pandemic exposed and exacerbated existing geopolitical tensions. Nations turned inward, prioritizing national interests over global cooperation. [Except they all enforced WHO dictates]
Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine marked a significant shift in European security dynamics. This conflict has led to a reassertion of NATO’s relevance, increased defense spending in Europe, and a push for energy independence from Russia. It has also deepened the divide between Western nations and Russia, and renewed alliances between Russia, China and Iran.
The strategic competition between the US and China has intensified, affecting global trade, technology, and military affairs. The US has taken measures to limit China’s access to advanced technology, while China has expanded its influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative. The conflicts over Taiwan and the South China Sea continue to be flashpoints. Both countries have been engaged in a trade tariff war since 2018.
Populist and nationalist movements have gained traction in many countries, challenging traditional political establishments and international institutions. This trend has been evident in countries like the US, Brazil, India, and parts of Europe, where leaders have prioritized national sovereignty over multilateral cooperation. The US and NATO’s withdrawal from Afghanistan after two decades marked the end of a significant chapter in international military intervention. The rapid takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban has led to questions about the efficacy and future of international nation-building efforts and military interventions.
The Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, might have potentially reshaped Middle Eastern alliances. The recent Hamas attacks on Israel were likely aimed at undermining those new alliances. Meanwhile, ongoing conflicts in Syria and Yemen, along with the enduring tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia, continue to destabilize the region.[Totally a US-centered perspective]
Drone and missile attacks by Yemen’s Houthi militants [Actual name is Ansar Allah] on cargo ships in the Red Sea and the Bab el-Mandeb—the vital link between Europe and Asia through which 9% of world shipping passes daily—are causing chaos (Figure 9). Most ships now detour around South Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, driving up shipping costs. This surge complicates efforts by European and US central banks to control inflation. Fitch Ratings predicted in February that these Red Sea disruptions could boost prices of US imports by 3.5% by the end of 2024.
Ocean freight rates from the Far East to the U.S. are up 36%-41% month over month, while air freight has risen 9% this year. DHL reports that high ocean freight rates might persist until early 2025, potentially hitting $20,000-$30,000. Longer Red Sea transits, container shortages, and canceled Asian sailings are driving up spot rates. Notably, demand isn’t the sole factor; ocean freight orders are down 48% month over month. About 20 million barrels oil pass through the Strait of Hormuz daily and more than 6 million barrels per day move through the Bab el-Mandeb.
The push for renewable energy and the transition away from fossil fuels is creating new geopolitical tensions. Countries rich in renewable resources or critical minerals for technology (e.g., lithium, cobalt) are gaining strategic importance, while traditional oil and gas exporters face new challenges. The global financial system is increasingly fragile, primarily stemming from massive debt levels, geopolitical risks, increasing interconnectedness, and market volatility. High levels of public and private debt in many countries pose a risk to financial stability. Global debt averaged 220 percent of GDP in 2022 (Figure 10).
The global financial system is highly interconnected, meaning a crisis in one region can quickly spread to others. Financial institutions and markets are increasingly reliant on digital infrastructure, making them vulnerable to cyber-attacks. Markets are increasingly driven by high-frequency trading and algorithmic trading, which can exacerbate market volatility. Flash crashes and significant market swings can occur with little warning, as seen in events like the 2010 Flash Crash and the 2020 market turmoil caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
Geopolitical tensions and trade wars, like those between the US and China, create uncertainty in global markets. Sanctions, political instability, and conflicts can disrupt financial markets and trade flows, affecting global economic stability. US tariffs on China are likely to increase inflation and consumer costs, aggravate supply chain issues, and further push the Global South further into China’s orbit.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict and subsequent sanctions on Russia have affected global energy prices and financial markets. Higher energy and commodity prices put strain on an already fragile European economic recovery from Covid economic closures. Europe’s energy prices are moderating as alternate sources of natural gas and oil were hastily substituted but the true cost of this transition is considerable.
The metacrisis has inevitably affected the global economy. Since 2020, the global economy is arguably weaker primarily because of higher energy costs, geopolitical conflicts, inflation, and the costs associated with the energy transition and climate change. Higher energy costs have raised operational expenses for industries worldwide, affecting everything from manufacturing to transportation. This has contributed to increased costs for goods and services, slowing economic growth.
Real world oil prices averaged only $42 per barrel from 1986 to 2003 but have averaged more than twice that for the last 20 years. Lower oil prices because of shale plays were an anomaly that ended after 2020 (Figure 11). A secular period of relative oil scarcity is underway, and is likely to get progressively more acute in coming decades unless the global economy weakens substantially affecting demand.
.
Inflation rates have surged globally due to supply chain disruptions, increased demand post-COVID-19, and rising energy costs. [Let’s not talk about central banks like the Fed flooding world markets with trillions of “money” created out of thin air] Many economists ignore or dismiss effect of oil prices on inflation rates but the correlation is undeniable (Figure 12). Central banks have had to hike interest rates to combat inflation, which in turn slows down economic growth and increases borrowing costs. Higher inflation erodes purchasing power, leading to reduced consumer spending, which is a key driver of economic growth.
The shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources involves substantial investment in new technologies and infrastructure. These costs can be significant for both governments and businesses, affecting economic stability in the short term. Increasingly frequent and severe climate-related disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, and wildfires, cause direct economic damage and disrupt global supply chains. The costs of rebuilding and mitigation efforts further strain economic resources.
Despite clear evidence that the world’s efforts to decarbonize are failing, there is a constant chorus of enthusiastic pronouncements about the superiority of renewables over fossil fuels. These offer only false hope and trivialize the serious, complex challenge of genuinely reducing carbon emissions. Those who believe that a renewable energy transition is possible seem to ignore that carbon emissions, GDP, population and society’s ecological footprint all correlate with energy consumption (Figure 13). That means that there is a cost for lower emissions.
Unless the future is somehow completely different from the past and present, the only solution to climate change and overshooting our planetary boundaries is a radical reduction in energy consumption. Lower economic growth and a lower population will be unavoidable components of a renewable energy future. That’s not part of the transition narrative, and is a non-starter for most people and political leaders. [It is a non-starter for capitalism as a system, as it requires continuous exponential growth to avoid collapsing]
.
The essence of the metacrisis is that everything is connected. Tinkering with one piece without considering the ripple effects can lead to disaster. Yet, this piecemeal approach is how society tries to solve its problems. We crave solutions, but do we truly grasp the problems at hand? War, financial collapse, failing supply chains, and the collapse of governance threaten civilization (Figure 14). Global heating and the destruction of the natural world are more serious planetary threats.
Our focus must first be on the whole, not just the fragments. This means acknowledging the natural world as the foundation of our resources and prosperity. Ignoring how our actions affect nature is a core reason for the metacrisis we’re facing. Climate change is just a piece of a much larger puzzle of environmental and ecological breakdown. Focusing solely on carbon emissions misses the broader context—energy, the economy, society, and human behavior.
We need a holistic approach, one that moves fluidly from the whole to the parts and back again. Otherwise, we’re simply shifting problems around, likely making everything worse in the process.
Ending this edition, a shredding of the notion that warming in the Arctic will open up new oil and gas resources and help mitigate the growing energy crisis for a good while.
Permafrost & lack of gravel will limit arctic natural gas, oil, and coal extraction, Alice Friedemann, 6/11/24.
Preface. For many people, it’s comforting to know that about 25% of remaining oil and gas reserves (we have the know-how and economics to get it) and resources (beyond our technical and monetary capability) are in the arctic. They assume we’ll get this oil and gas when we need to, and delay oil shortages for a decade or more. But they haven’t considered the difficulties of trying to drill for oil and gas or mine coal in permafrost. It buckles roads, airports, buildings, pipelines, and any other structures placed on top.
And [there] are so few rocks on the North Slope that the gravel for building projects, roads, runways, housing, and other major infrastructure can’t be built on top of the permafrost to even be wrecked by it. Climate change is increasing the demand for gravel to stabilize existing infrastructure when the frozen ground thaws. It will be needed for seawalls to protect oil drilling projects and native villages from coastal erosion.
The cost of gravel for North Slope projects is as high as $800 a cubic yard, enough to cover about 50 square feet. In Anchorage the cost is just $15. Gravel can be barged in, but that is very expensive. A Greenpeace report published in 2009 said thawing soil in Russia’s permafrost zones caused buildings, bridges and pipelines to deform and collapse, costing up to 1.3 billion euros (nearly $1.5 billion) a year in repairs in western Siberia.
Although there are ways to build roads that can withstand melting and freezing permafrost for a while, it is terribly expensive, and it is why we haven’t developed much oil or natural gas in Alaska besides Prudhoe Bay, as far north as you can get, with fewer permafrost issues.
The cost and energy of production in permafrost may mean that reserves are much less than estimated. Especially if they are developed when oil production begins to decline, since the price and declining availability of oil will mean there’s less energy to build roads, towns, platforms for drilling rigs and oil pipelines. And for agriculture, transportation supply chains, and all the other myriad ways oil and gas keep us alive.
As it is, climate change continues to exceed past engineering standards, and every year Alaska and Canada spend millions of dollars trying to fix roads, bridges, and other infrastructure.[Links for Friedemann and her projects]
Schwing E (2024) Alaska is short on gravel and long on development projects. The Atlantic.[Link]
Alaska’s North Slope is rich in oil, gas, minerals. But one important thing is lacking: Rocks. “Yes, gravel is a precious commodity on the North Slope,” said Jeff Currey, an engineer with the state’s Department of Transportation and Public Facilities who works in the agency’s Northern Region Materials Section. For decades, Currey said, the state has been searching for gravel all over the North Slope, with limited success.
Gravel is essential for all kinds of long-term development: building projects, road construction, runways and other major infrastructure.
Lee, J. 2019. Why Vladimir Putin Suddenly Believes in Global Warming. Russia was happy that global warming opened up Arctic oil, but the melting of permafrost poses a huge threat to its hydrocarbon heartlands. Bloomberg.
Until now, climate change has been seen as a “good thing” for Russia — at least in part. Warming waters have opened up the Northern Sea Route across the top of the country and made it practical, if not necessarily economic, to search for and exploit oil and gas resources beneath the Arctic seas. Who remembers the Shtokman gas project? Yet the warming that is opening up the Arctic seas may be starting to have a less beneficial effect on the frozen landmass of northern Russia, the heartland of the country’s oil and gas development and production.
Areas of discontinuous permafrost could see a 50-75% drop in load bearing capacity by 2015-25 compared with 1965-75 {my comment: which can damage or destroy existing pipelines and other infrastructure}. “Permafrost is undergoing rapid change,” says the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate report adopted by the IPCC last week. The changes threaten the “structural stability and functional capacities” of oil industry infrastructure, the authors warn. The greatest risks occur in areas with high ground-ice content and frost-susceptible sediments. Russia’s Yamal Peninsula — home to two of Russia’s biggest new gas projects (Bovanenkovo and Yamal LNG) and the Novy Port oil development — fits that bill.
The problem is bigger than those three projects, though. Some “45% of the oil and natural gas production fields in the Russian Arctic are located in the highest hazard zone,” according to the IPCC report. The top few meters of the permafrost, the so-called active layer, freezes and thaws as the seasons change, becoming unstable during warmer months. Developers account for this by making sure their foundations are deep enough to support their infrastructure: including roads, railways, houses, processing plants and pipelines. But climate change is causing that active layer to deepen, which means the ground loses its ability to support the things built upon it. The loss of bearing capacity is dramatic and it’s already well under way.[SNIP]….