As climate change issues dominated the mainstream media last year, the Internet has been used to call attention to another predicted disaster that has adverse consequences for all of humanity.

The caution that the finite supply of oil on Earth is slowly but surely running out, implies that the days of affordable oil are over.

Popularising this view is “Oil, Smoke and Mirrors” (www.oilsmokeandmirrors.com), a 50-minute film produced and directed by independent film-maker Ronan Doyle. It has been released on Google Video since October 2006.

The main theory discussed in the film is the “peak oil” hypothesis. It theorises the time that global petroleum production faces a terminal decline after its maximum production rate has been reached.

 This represents a permanent condition of higher costs as the remaining oil resources become more difficult to locate and extract.

At the heart of this crisis is the dilemma caused by the unsustainable economic growth in the developing and developed nations.

As all countries are oil-dependent, one likely outcome of unsustainable growth is the emergence of a critical period in time when demand severely outstrips supply. The recent hike in oil prices is probably an emergent characteristic of peak oil.

Although those interviewed in the film are proponents of peak oil, they do not claim to know the exact period that it occurs. However, this theory is made no less credible owing to the reputation of those interviewed.

Talking candidly about the state of global oil supply are the former UK environment minister, an ex-intelligence officer, several leading authors and academics considered as experts studying this phenomenon.

But credibility of the issue and reputation of the theory’s proponents are no guarantee that peak oil receives widespread publicity.

While American ex-vice president Al Gore’s efforts to create awareness of global warming and climate change became a media bonanza that eventually won him a Nobel Peace Prize last year, talk of peak oil in the media pales in comparison.

Media attention to peak oil is arguably less substantial than climate change, even before the days leading up to the recent spike in oil prices.

Perhaps in anticipation of this fact, a segment of the film addresses the issue of public ignorance.

Richard Heinberg, one of the interviewees and author of “The Oil Depletion Protocol,” provided one of the most scathing criticisms of the mainstream media.

Blaming the skewed and lack of media coverage, he said, “The mainstream media, I think, have done an abysmal job of reporting on the events of 9/11, on peak oil, and other things that really impact our lives.

“The average person knows much more about the personal habits of Brad Pitt, than they know about peak oil.”

The other target for criticism is governments averse to addressing the peak oil issue publicly because they do not know how to respond to such a scenario.

Paul Roberts, a journalist and author of “The End of Oil,” said, “You can’t raise a problem unless you have a solution at hand. I mean, that’s kind of the rule of politics, unless you are criticising your opponent, you know.

“And so no one really wants to raise the notion of depletion.”


Oil a cause for war

The severity of such an oil crisis has also become a source of speculative and ominous theories suggesting that not all government intervention is unfeasible.

One of the suggestions made in the film is that the U.S. government orchestrated the events of 9/11 to justify the militarisation of foreign policy. The main purpose of the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq was to control the region and its oil.

The evidence presented to support this view points to a much more sinister ploy of treason and fabricated lies than an act of terrorism committed by men of Middle Eastern origin.

Philip J. Berg, an attorney and a member of the academic group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, said, “Well, ladies and gentlemen, wake up. If you didn’t have 9/11, you wouldn’t have the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

As grotesque as this claim may sound, it is backed by documented evidence of strange coincidences and inconsistencies surrounding the 9/11 attacks, and the failure of the media and government to set the record straight.

Furthermore, the invasion of sovereign nations to set up military bases to control the distribution of oil is becoming increasingly obvious, as previous justifications for war do not hold up to the facts.

No weapons of mass destruction were discovered in Iraq and no formal links between Afghanistan and Iraq was ever established.

Michael Meacher, former UK environment minister, said, “What they (the U.S.) have decided to do, pretty clearly from invading Iraq, and trying to control oil from the Caspian basin…is to try and monopolise for themselves the supply of this oil, because oil is power.”

In order not to take these credible and well-established opinions at face value, the responsibility of the viewer is to maintain a healthy scepticism and research for more information.

However, the ultimate difficulty with approaching this film is to not take it seriously and relegating it to be only fit for conspiracy theory buffs.

At the same time, to be convinced of the implications of the claims made in under an hour would not require a leap of faith.

Based on the film’s methodical approach in establishing its theories, the public that accepted the climate change message would probably also be inclined to believe in peak oil soon.