“Were moving from an era of cheap, abundant energy, to an era of scarce, hard to get, expensive energy.” – From A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash.
There isn’t any alternative source of energy developed up to now that can replace oil and natural gas as energy sources. The assumption that we have well and enough coal to last many decades rests on the premise that it will be used at current rates, and not used as a replacement for oil.
It doesn’t have to go dry, to be used up completely, to wreak havoc on the world economy and drop living standards precipitously. It just needs to get very, very expensive.
Because it won’t mean only the end of cheap gasoline for the car, cheap plastic, and cheap heating. It will mean the end of cheap, imported food. It will probably even mean the end of cheap food from out of state. The end of year round lettuce and apples for all, of fresh mangoes in winter in the northern temperate zone.
We’ve been living as if there were no tomorrow. I hope that doesn’t end up being the epitaph of this society.
But, it’s either that, or we’re partying like it’s 1999.
We’ve been living as if there were no tomorrow.
There will come a time, very soon, that some people will look up and say, “Huh?”
And this is precisely why Iran is trying to build a nuclear program for itself – which will free up petroleum for export rather than domestic consumption. That’s why we encouraged and supported their nuclear program:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3983-2005Mar26.html
Iran has made significant investments in hydroelectricity, by opening its largest hydroelectric dam (the Karun-3) and Iran has started investing in geothermal and wind power too.
The US says that Iran doesn’t need nuclear power since it has oil. Independent studies conducted in the National Academy of Science in the US and Foreign Affairs Select Committee of the British Parliament however have since confirmed that Iran has a valid economic basis for its nuclear energy program:
Iran’s nuclear program makes some sense (Reuters)
http://www.dawn.com/2005/03/04/int8.htm
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GH24Ak02.html
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0603903104v
Some developing nations are skeptical of the intentions of the five original nuclear states and are reluctant to give up the option of enriching uranium. Developing nations say they don’t want to give up their rights to uranium enrichment and don’t trust the United States or other nuclear countries to be consistent suppliers of the nuclear material they would need to run their power plants.
http://dissidentnews.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/a-new-global-nuclear-order-los-angeles-times/
I was going to try to do a piece on some of this shortly, that’s a little less hunting for references 🙂
You might want to consider also the price of uranium nowdays – increased 100 fold – and the number of countries which will be relying on nuclear power in the near future. France, for example, already relies on nuclear power for something like 80% of its energy needs. Reliance on nuclear is bound to increase, especially among developing nations, and they’ll need fuel. Nuclear fuel requires enrichment. And guess who is saying that enrichment technology should be limited to a few countries that already have it, and no one else?
A shift to nuclear will be no more than a desperate last-ditch ploy to let the party go on a little longer. Uranium reserves will run out fairly quickly and the ongoing problems of weaponizing, sabotage, and radioactive waste have seen no progress in half a century. Once we’ve made still more portions of the planet permanently uninhabitable we’ll be back in the same dilemmas we face right now. Except this time there won’t be docile masses willing to sacrifice their lives and families so that “first world” inhabitants can keep their private party going.
It is impossible not to fantasize about quick tech fixes, but they detract from the real changes we’ll need to make if we care about survival. Controlled fusion is a dream that’s been “just around the corner” for more than 30 years. Even renewable sources will be insufficient to sustain current levels of consumption and population growth, and will bring environmental threats of their own.
Right now we still have a chance to make the deep changes that might make our species sustainable and still allow us to enjoy a level of wealth far above what our species knew for 98 percent of its history. Changes like phasing out the private car and internal combusion engines, radically lower use of electricity, strong economic redistribution, replacement of auto and airplane transportation by high-speed rail, agreement on negative population growth.
All that would require accepting radical new views of economic, political, geographic, and cultural realities. In societies where we can’t even get rid of the incandescent light bulb, much less the SUV, it’s hard to see any of that change taking place until it’s too late. Perhaps the best hope is that there will be a few places on Earth that are foresighted and isolated enough to serve as a saving remnant.
Last night I took advantage of a local ‘Climate Change’ lecture series that came to my small community. The crowd was large for us, perhaps 50, all attentive, leaning forward in their seats types. The first portion was a slide show given by a UW professor. Excellent 40 minutes of sheer info. 2nd portion was given by one of Gore’s chosen corps of 1,000 who had gone through his training. She isn’t a scientist so had taken the time to translate or distill all the larger figures and concepts into a more localized version of global warming. Local. That was the key to everything and it worked like a charm. Initiatives were personalized, one person can make a difference, one community reaching out to help each other.
Again I see that people are hungry to start putting the wheels of the solution into motion. They are fed up with standing on the sidelines, impatient with naysayers and the bonus is that this is truly a grassroots wave which will make it all the more formidable to anyone standing in the way.
It’s the veriest charity to describe most of the people holding office in this country as ‘leaders.’
Nuclear technology will very likely turn out to be a lucrative business. That might be why other countries, including Iran, want in, and why the self-appointed caretakers of the technology want to keep out as many countries as possible. They’re worried about nuclear military violence? Well, maybe. They could also see the lucrative possibility of supplying nuclear reactors and equipment to the rest of the world, a nuclear club like the G8 everyone else will be dependent on. Nice work if you can get it.
In addition to peak oil, there’s been talk recently that we’re only 10-20 years away from “peak coal.” For example, here.
From an environmental viewpoint I find this comforting news – we’ll never get to the point of turning the planet into Venus Redux.
From an economic viewpoint, I’m reasonably comfortable that we might squeak by into a future of renewable resources. Solar and wind energy technologies are maturing rapidly and approaching economic viability.
Will there be changes to our lifestyles? Absolutely. But we did just fine as a civilization before global trade brought us a cornucopia of the world’s produce at “low, low WalMart prices.” There will be a boom in local crop production, even of some botanical exotica, in local greenhouses. (As global trade collapses, greenhouse manufacturers would be a good investment.) Locally grown produce is healthier, better for the environment, and tastes better. Plus it doesn’t use pesticides banned here, unlike imported stuff. The “eat local” movement is already gathering steam, and folks will decide to make a virtue out of necessity as the global economy collapses, expanding the idea into “buy local.”
The old Boomer phrase “voluntary simplicity” will again gain in popularity, as for the vast majority of people “voluntary simplicity” wasn’t (and isn’t) something you did voluntarily, it was (and remains) a mental fig leaf used to cover the fact that money is getting tight and luxuries are no longer affordable. It’s the old Aesop tale of the fox and the grapes, but with a more positive spin.
Solar and wind energy technologies are maturing rapidly and approaching economic viability.
See, for instance, here for a detailed discussion of solar power coming of age. If the US won’t do it, others are ready to (Germany, Japan), leaving us in the position of the old USSR in yet another way…
“Were moving from an era of cheap, abundant energy, to an era of scarce, hard to get, expensive energy.”
Well, personally I think it’s the other way around. We are moving from an era of scarce and expensive energy, dependent on a few non-renewable resources, to one of cheap, virtually unlimited energy based on endlessly renewable sources.
I can’t believe that people are still denying that solar, wind and the other myriad forms of alternative energy aren’t viable and don’t work. This technology is available today and millions of people are using it as we speak. On top of existing technology, there is much technological progress to come. There are plenty of things to worry about, but running out of energy simply isn’t one of them.
You may not believe that, but just wait and see. Of course, it’s just one man’s opinion, and no one knows the future.
While I am sympathetic to environmental concerns, we have to learn to get facts straight. Ocean shipping is extremely energy efficient, even compared to rail. I don’t know the exact numbers, but I would suspect that shipping mangoes and apples half way around the world from island countries, uses less energy than shipping apples a thousand miles by land from Washington state.