Crash o. 44 Years After 79

Banker & pulp fiction writer Paul Erdman wrote several novels about economic/politcal catastropes in the latter 20th Century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdman

Probablly the best. Written in the mid 1970s it revolved around the Shah of Iran attempting to seize the oil of Saudi Arabia. This end badly with the Saudi oilfields badly contaminated by radioactive fallout (a long lasting Cobalt isotope) & the Shahs command bunker also becoming a radio active hole in the ground. At the end of the story oil prices had rocketed up to over (gasp $100 a barrel), the global stock markets collapsed, and general woe & lamentations everywhere.

http://archive.org/details/crashof7900erdm

So, using Erdmanns novel 'The Crash of 79 as the PoD. What would the world look like now 44 years after?

Obviously one long term effect would be the difficulty in getting at the east Saudi oil fields. Would the dusting of hyper hot Cobalt isotopes be as large a problem as Erdman susposed?

The use of nukes, against both Saudi & Iranian territory would have long running political consequences.

Erdmans novel written some years before the Islamic revolution came to a head in Iran assumes it did not occur. I strongly suspect killing the Shah & auxillary attacks on the Iranian military/government would open the way for a fundamentalist revolution.

Third world nations would redouble effort to obtain nuclear weapons after the example of Erdmans Iran.

Accelerated exploration, exploitation of previously unprofitable oil fields, and development of laternatives like natural gas, coal, and nuclear power would eventually stabilize crude oil prices. ...but the acceleration of oil prices to the 21st Century levels we know would not be reveresed. Development of fringe technologies like wing turbines, or solar power would receive more investment money.

Floor is open to others ideas.
 
Glad to see another fan of Erdman's novels...
;)

Not that great a fan. He knew a lot about banking and writing, but a lot less about social trends, the larger economic picture, history and politics. At least those things dont show well in his novels alongside his knowledge of banking and some other aspects of business. '79' stands out from the others a bit in my mind, but I've not really all of his work.

Getting back to the subject; this large a run up in oil demand & prices would benefit the USSR. In the short run this helps the Communist Party or nomenklatura to retain control. Over the longer run, beyond five years, I'd not dismiss negative effects.
 
I read the book in english, so its possible that i misinterpret some thing, but I seem to remember the Narrator talks about the Soviets as "our new friends", so it seems that the USA lost the Cold War. The USA for sure went throug a Hyperinflation and a new Great Depression. Maybe the USA was for some time dependent on soviet oil-export (propably as a wheat for oil deal) and Western Europe became finnlandisised.

Me would also interest the future of Erdmanns: "The last days of America!".
Bundeskanler Strauß and german Nukes.
 

abc123

Banned
Not that great a fan. He knew a lot about banking and writing, but a lot less about social trends, the larger economic picture, history and politics. At least those things dont show well in his novels alongside his knowledge of banking and some other aspects of business. '79' stands out from the others a bit in my mind, but I've not really all of his work.

Getting back to the subject; this large a run up in oil demand & prices would benefit the USSR. In the short run this helps the Communist Party or nomenklatura to retain control. Over the longer run, beyond five years, I'd not dismiss negative effects.

You have to be aware that he's a writer, he has to write INTRESTING novels, plausability goes second...
Also, most of his readers knows even less than he does, so it's good enough...
:D
 

abc123

Banned
But, it's true that he handwaves things like social and political situation in Iran, accelerates some things ( Iran having ex-US aircraft carrier ) etc.
;)
 
Actually that is similar to idea floated back then. US planned to seize Gulf oil fields in response to oil embargo. Shah was supposed to help and Iran would be used as staging area for some forces. I guess Iran would demand some reward for this.
 
I read the book in english, so its possible that i misinterpret some thing, but I seem to remember the Narrator talks about the Soviets as "our new friends", so it seems that the USA lost the Cold War. The USA for sure went throug a Hyperinflation and a new Great Depression. Maybe the USA was for some time dependent on soviet oil-export (propably as a wheat for oil deal) and Western Europe became finnlandisised.

Me would also interest the future of Erdmanns: "The last days of America!".
Bundeskanler Strauß and german Nukes.

Possiblly, I'd have to read those passages again. The book was written in the early years of Detante. There was a fair size group in the US who thought the USSR should be more of a friend of the US, or at least less of a enemy. In Erdmanns novels there is a secondary theme of the uselessness & untrustworthyness of the Western Europeans. Another point behind the 'Soviet friend' remark is it was known then the USSR had large oil/gas reserves, so perhaps Erdmann was saying the US was uncomfortablly dependant on Soviet oil. In this case Erdmann may have been sarcastic refering to the Soviets as "out friends"

After sleeping on this my take is the US would not have allowed its nuclear power industry to stagnate with oil prices so high in the early 1980s. With the cost of oil so high the extra costs in assuring nuclear power safety could have been bourne, as well as the capitol costs of starting up a lot of new nuclear powered electric generators. The exploitation of natural gas reserves would have accelerated given the ability to recoup costs out of higher energy prices.

What the abcense of Saudi oil might do to Asian industrial development is a important question. The foundations of this had already been laid. Given the mother of all oil price shocks it is possible the sort of industrial growth we saw in Asia in the 1980s would have been much more uneven and much slower.
 
Possiblly, I'd have to read those passages again. The book was written in the early years of Detante. There was a fair size group in the US who thought the USSR should be more of a friend of the US, or at least less of a enemy. In Erdmanns novels there is a secondary theme of the uselessness & untrustworthyness of the Western Europeans. Another point behind the 'Soviet friend' remark is it was known then the USSR had large oil/gas reserves, so perhaps Erdmann was saying the US was uncomfortablly dependant on Soviet oil. In this case Erdmann may have been sarcastic refering to the Soviets as "out friends"

.

I´m quite sure the narrotor is meaned to sound sarcastic. It should be more a slight hint, how bad the U.S. situation has become after the crash. After all the book déal not just with the situation in the Middle East but also with the problems and instabilities of the U.S. economy like Erdmann saw them at this time. We see like the 4-days war cause a run of the U.S. banks and like the U.S. goverment make things worse through printing money.
 
An second severe oil price shock like Erdman describes would have its short & middle term effects, much as Erdman describes. Under those circumstances the 1980s would have worse than I remember, perhaps like Erdman describes. Conversely Erdman did not seem to be thinking of long term business or investment cycles. The steady growth of the 1990s derived from fresh investment in new communication/computer technology that had already developed & established in the 1970s. Such investment and growth may have been set back a few years by the Crash of 79', but I suspect it would not have been delayed even a decade.
 
An second severe oil price shock like Erdman describes would have its short & middle term effects, much as Erdman describes. Under those circumstances the 1980s would have worse than I remember, perhaps like Erdman describes. Conversely Erdman did not seem to be thinking of long term business or investment cycles. The steady growth of the 1990s derived from fresh investment in new communication/computer technology that had already developed & established in the 1970s. Such investment and growth may have been set back a few years by the Crash of 79', but I suspect it would not have been delayed even a decade.

Still he talk here about a crisis on the level of the great Depression. And we are still in the middle of the Cold war.
 
Top