Antonia Juhasz, author of the new book "The Tyranny of Oil," spent some time recently answering our questions. Juhasz's book chronicles the history of the petroleum industry, from its outlaw beginnings to the modern-day excesses which pervade our culture now. Below is Part One of our Interview

BidForGreen: You compare the oil companies of today to the amazing empire controlled by Standard Oil in the 19th Century. What are the biggest similarities?

Antonia Juhasz: Since 1990, there have been more than 2600 mergers in the U.S. oil industry alone. These mergers have brought mass consolidation and concentration in the U.S. refining and marketing (i.e. gas stations) sectors, and in some states and regions more than others. In California, for example, we have an oligopoly – just a small handful of mega oil companies control production of oil and the refining and marketing and gasoline. Nationally, we have an incredibly concentrated market within which, I argue, there is tremendous collusion among the leading companies. The closest similarity in our history would be the monopoly control exercised by Standard Oil.

While Standard's monopoly control was greater than that of today's giant oil companies (most of which are what I refer to as "the spawn of Standard Oil), the economic heft and political power that the companies exercise over our (and other nations) government(s) truly has just one historical precedent: that of Standard Oil.

A good case in point is the description of a newspaper cartoon from the Standard Oil era (likely around the 1870s), which depicts the U.S. Senate. Towering above the seated senators, three times their individual size, stand grossly obese men representing the corporate trusts. Each man is dressed in top hat and tails. Standard Oil, the most dominant, is the only company depicted by name among the "copper," "iron," "sugar," "tin," "coal," and "paper bag" trusts. Above them a sign is posted: "This is a Senate of the monopolists, by the monopolists, for the monopolists!" Off in the far left corner is a small sign that reads "People's Entrance," below which is a bolted and barred door marked "closed."

A great groundswell of citizen action emerged in response to this political power being exercised by the nation's corporations over our government, with people across the nation coning together in what has since been called the Populist and Progressive movements to bring about change. Some groups sought revolution, but what they got was regulation: the first regulations on corporate activity implemented in the U.S., including new laws on campaign finance, workers' rights and protections, public health, and the first national antitrust laws. The intent of the antitrust laws was to break the power of the trusts over the government. Through organizing at the local, state, and national levels, activists across the United States ultimately succeeded in 1911 when the Supreme Court upheld the breakup of Standard Oil into 34 separate corporate parts.

Well, its taken about 100 years, but those pieces have slowly but surely put themselves back together again, and, together with a few other companies, we now have just a few mega-oil giants dominating the U.S. oil industry, and in many ways, the global industry as well: ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Valero, and Marathon (the largest oil companies operating within the U.S. and those with the greatest influence on U.S. government policy).

BFG: You clearly support the idea of doing some modern-day trust busting. How realistic do you think that is?

AJ: I think its very realistic today, even more realistic then when I began writing the book given the state of the U.S. and global economy and the election of Barack Obama as President. Of course, I spend a good deal of time describing the failures of the Standard Oil breakup and what we can learn from those mistakes to do a better job of it in the present. And, breaking up the companies is just one among many policy prescriptions I make for dealing with the industry and the four interrelated problems of war, global warming, the worsening global economy, and the reclaiming of an American democracy. The entire last chapter of the book is dedicated to "what we can do."

BFG: Similarly, you say on page 280, "Big Oil knows that it is in trouble." Given the enormous political divide in our country and all the inherent governmental support, do you really think they know or care about Al Gore and a few protestors?

AJ: I refer to the fact that, for all of its unequaled financial power (not only the largest profits in world corporate history, but profits which utterly dwarf those of any other U.S. industry) Big Oil is in trouble because the resource on which it makes its money -- "oil" -- is running out, at the same time that public anger against the industry is at all time highs and real and meaningful strategies for moving off of its product altogether are being explored, advocated for, and implemented the world over. The movements against global warming, war, and corporate concentration and power over elected government are far stronger and broader than Al Gore or "a few protestors." That said, never underestimate the power of a few protestors to jump start mass movements for change.

BFG: Your book points out both the galling imperialism of the post-World War I division of oil resources in the Middle East and the injustices still practiced by major companies in places such as Nigeria and Indonesia. How much do you think the actions of the oil companies have led to the world's opinion of America?

AJ: The actions taken by U.S. corporations around that world have and continue to contribute significantly to the negative view of American policy held by far too much of the world. I describe historical actions and the impact of companies such as Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco, Gulf and others around the world, as, following World War I, country by country, region by region, the companies took control of the world's oil. The money from the oil companies supported the governments that in turn supported their work, often some of the most notoriously corrupt governments in the world. Oil production pushed out other forms of economic development, increasing the role of oil in the countries' economies. The companies controlled production levels for each country and determined the value of every barrel of oil sold in the world, effectively dictating to governments how much income they would receive for their oil. Thus, as oil grew in importance and value, the oil companies were determining not only the size of government budgets but also the very growth of national economies. The companies made their production decisions based as much on politics as on economics. Exxon Mideast Coordinator Howard Page told a U.S. Senate commission that the oil companies actively punished uncooperative countries with production cuts while raising production elsewhere to reward good behavior. These decisions radically impacted the economic well-being of the host nations and the power of the host governments. Whether the companies decided to produce from wells in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela determined the federal budget available to those nations. Therefore, it may not be surprising that nations around the world rose up to take back control of this vital resource and nationalized the holdings of the corporate oil giants. But, the memory of the power exercised by the giants over the fate of nations remains strong in countries around the world.

Moreover, the problems continue, as evidenced in the many cases that I draw on in the book, including Chevron in Nigeria and Ecuador, Exxon in Indonesia, and the role of U.S. oil companies in the war in Iraq, a threatened war against Iran, U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia, and that the Bush administration has put in place the largest realignment of the U.S. military since the end of the cold war--expanding the presence of the U.S. military around the world to those places where oil is found and transported -- and that the threat of more wars, be they in the Middle East or Africa, has grown accordingly.