In my more purely optimistic moments, I come close to agreeing with Marshall Brain (founder of HowStuffWorks):
As oil gets more expensive, we will replace it with less-expensive technologies in a completely natural way. Therefore, peak oil will be a non-event.
But I can't quite get there.
I share a great deal of faith in the power of markets, unlike some of my fellow-travelers, but this seems naive and flat-footed to me. Here's why:
- Oil's current market dominance in the transportation and agricultural sectors is not "completely natural." It's propped up by innumerable subsidies, tax breaks, favorable trade deals, etc., etc. -- all secured as a result of its unprecedented entanglement with the ruling class. It maybe that its unnatural market position has been propped up -- or will be propped up -- past the point when a "natural" transition will be possible.
- Brain acknowledges that, in today's market, "supply and demand for oil are almost perfectly balanced," and that any disruption on either side could cause a spike in the price of oil, but seems to brush that possibility off. Peak oil, though, will not happen in a vacuum. It will happen in a context wherein the U.S.'s general financial situation is execrable, with spiraling deficits and an aging population, propped up by Chinese bond purchases. The housing market could tank. The airline industry could go belly-up. Another terrorist attack could happen. China could bomb Taiwan. India could invade Pakistan. Point being, the oil market is not the only fragile system we rely on -- lots of them are pretty fragile right now. A few disruptions could cause a mutually reinforcing cycle of ... crap.
- We live in a global marketplace. "Natural" market transitions involve winners and losers, and there's no guarantee that we might not "naturally" lose out to, say, Japan, or China.
But regardless, let's hope Brain is right.
Comments
View as Flat
odograph Posted 10:15 am
23 Jun 2005
I trust people more when they aren't quite so sure of what is going to happen next. I think it is true that if oil/energy prices rise slowly we will have plenty of time to adjust. I think it is also true that if hard oil shocks come, we will suffer dire economic consequences.
Until we live that future, the prudent thing is to make the simple productive steps which will prepare us for change. Do what we can.
But anyone who knows the future is running on religion.
Permalink
Bart Anderson Posted 4:01 pm
23 Jun 2005
Petroleum is not just energy, but energy in a spectacularly convenient form. It's concentrated (as compared with solar energy or biomass); it's easily transportable (vs LNG or coal); it's uniquely suited for fueling transportation (e.g. air travel).
Cheap energy is an intrinsic part of our civilization; it's so basic and vital that we are unaware how critical it is. With cheap energy, we can do almost anything. Without it, we are much more constrained. It will be hard to develop alternative energy sources after petroleum, raw materials and transport have shot up in price.
Consider earlier periods of history. If it is so easy to generate cheap energy, why didn't our ancestors do it? They had wind and biomass... there were smart people... but for most of history, cheap energy didn't happen. The classic strategy for generating an energy surplus was exploitation -- slavery and feudalism.
Industrialization, modern capitalism and the population explosion only began with the adoption of coal in the 1600-1700s. In the 20th century, petroleum put our civilization in overdrive.
We are like a trust baby who has been given a huge (but finite) inheritance in fossil fuels. We've been spending it at an exponentially increasing rate. The greybeards tell us that we're going to run out of money someday, but we aren't worried. Things have always come easily to us; something will turn up.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 12:18 am
24 Jun 2005
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 12:52 am
24 Jun 2005
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com
Permalink
jimbeyer Posted 3:28 am
24 Jun 2005
So when oil runs out, they will burn more coal, which produces MORE CO2 per unit of energy produced than oil. So, barring some external restriction, the climate change problem will get worse, not better. Oil is also much more convenient than coal to move around, so we will have more energy costs in our energy infrastructure itself.
Electric vehicles are not a clear win, due to the cost of batteries. And hydrogen is a clear loser.
The "answer" (to paraphrase Thomas Edison) is that we need to produce electricity so cheaply that only rich will be able to afford to burn coal. That includes rich Chinese.....
A bunch of mirrors in Texas ain't gonna do it....
Build plugin hybrids that run on renewable methane. That's all that's needed.
Permalink
profgoose Posted 6:29 am
24 Jun 2005
I just don't think it's going to happen without a lot of activism and norm changing. Petroleum is too fundamental...and until we wean ourselves off it and find something scaleable that will replace it, I feel like I gotta scream about it.
(though I think we/TOD scream about it less than we could...)
profgoose, The Oil Drum
Permalink