Wishful thinking
Posted by Heading Out on April 30, 2006 - 8:47pm
Topic: Supply/Production
Tags: ethanol, hydrogen, peak oil [list all tags]
We should urgently slow down the depletion rate of North Sea oil and gasand I think it highlights some of the problems that the general public have with the developing issues relating to oil and gas. For obviously the columnist believes that, had we the will, we could just leap in our rowing boat, paddle out there and, by George, increase that production. This is either ignorance of the reality or denial of its existence. When an oilfield starts to deplete then, beyond a certain point, you cannot bring back production, or even change the depletion rate much. In fact it is the result of trying to get as much out as soon as possible that led to the current depletion rates (For those who are not aware of the problem North Sea production is falling at rates of up to 15% per year against a historic general value of around 5%).
The oil and gas that has been removed is gone, and the cupboard is starting to get empty. So it is with the production in the United States and in an increasing number of countries elsewhere. Thus, when you read stories about the steps that politicians are suggesting we make, the first question that should be asked is, will this increase the amount of oil or gas that we can use, or is it providing an alternative source of energy that can replace the amount the we need, but can no longer expect to get from the historic supply. And if the answer is no, then I think it becomes fair to ask, why not?
Updated to include comment on Brazilian ethanol production.
Right now the Congress and the Administration have picked a certain limited number of ideas that they think will provide the answer. These include hybrids, hydrogen, clean coal, and ethanol. If you wander around the funding at DoE you will find, as I have commented earlier, that other programs are being cut. Thus if the programs that are being invested in do not provide a solution in time then we are going to be in the cart.
As came up in the discussion of ethanol, the current administration plan only looks favorably on domestic generation of ethanol, which may be getting close to 5% of our gasoline use (to correct myself - thanks jdeely). It looks less favorably on importing to increase the percentage much further. So that will only get us so far (plus it neglects the fact that Brazil has a domestic demand for what they are making). And, as other countries have found, beyond a certain point food use will conflict with fuel use and we will reach a limit to what can be made available.
UPDATE The Tribune has a story on problems with demand that are showing up in Brazil.
Rising consumption of ethanol had already stretched supplies thin. Prices recently have fallen, but only after the government lowered the required percentage of ethanol mixed with gasoline from 25 to 20 percent, reducing demand. This month's beginning of the sugar cane harvest also boosted ethanol supplies and lowered prices. "This showed ethanol can help but it cannot replace fossil fuels, at least right now," said Jed Bailey, Latin American director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a U.S. consulting firm. "There's a lot more development that's needed." Ethanol has become a staple in Brazil's energy stew. Brazil's refineries pumped out 4.5 billion gallons of the biofuel this past year. All but 14 percent was consumed domestically. . . . . . .But with more than 13 million acres already growing sugar cane, such words worry environmentalists, who fear expansion will come at the cost of rainforests and savannah in Brazil's northern states, where there is little sugar production. Sugar cane production expanded by only 2 percent last year in the country's southern and central states, where most sugar is grown. . . . . .Ethanol churns out about 20 percent fewer miles per gallon than regular gasoline and must be at least that much cheaper at the pump to be cost-effective. Currently, that's about the difference in price here between the two fuels, with ethanol selling for $4.03 a gallon, while regular gasoline costs $4.86 a gallon.(Thanks Leanan).
We currently have a small program going in biodiesel, but the plants that generate on any scale are still measuring in thousands of gallons a year, when we need millions of barrels a day.
Why do I bring this up? Because there aren't that many sources that one can go to that can fund the size of plants that will be needed even at the pilot stage, or to scale operations up to the levels that will be needed. Industrial sources will not be willing to do so without significant proof of concept, and there will need to be a very strong case that if they do invest, that there will be a satisfactory return on their investment. Does that sound like the climate we have at present?
I think that it is worth returning to the editorial that I began with, however, since outside of that one comment, I think it makes considerable sense.
Britain in all this is the doe-eyed Bambi, bleating its faith in market forces in a world of predators. We should urgently slow down the depletion rate of North Sea oil and gas and establish a British strategic reserve and, with that protection, begin determinedly to build an economy that is not dependent on oil and gas. We should get serious about energy efficiency for solid environmental and strategic reasons. We should tax aviation fuel. We must accelerate our investment in renewable energy. We must research how to burn coal cleanly. And we must commission new nuclear reactors.We have to move on all fronts fast. The case is usually made in terms of climate change, but it is more than that. Unless we confront and change the emerging balance of world power, the consequent oil conflagrations could make the conflicts of the 20th century look tame.
Without a sense of emergency in terms of finding new methods for providing energy (regardless of type) and without a willingness to consider ideas outside the box of existing conventional ideas, we are going to have problems. Of such a nature I fear, that waiting for the law of natural selection to prevail, as Dr Hamilton suggests, is a luxury we can no longer afford the time to allow.
The ultimately correct conclusion to be drawn from Peak Everything is how many of us can become like Ernest Shackleton? How many of us are willing to build sustainable biosolar habitats and labor to become the Heroes for subsequent generations. How many are willing to chart a course through very dangerous conditions in a deperate gambit for survival? Recall that Shackleton left most of his crew in Antarctica, basically sentencing them to death if his sailing half failed to reach civilization.
The crewmembers that stayed behind can be compared to the detritovores: clinging to the rock of a steady, but unforgiving landscape knowing that it is totally unsustainable. Shackleton's arduous survival journey was given very little chance across some of the most dangerous seas on the planet, but he knew he had no choice. I would argue those wanting to Powerdown to a biosolar lifestyle must accept the same odds, but there better than clinging to our present paradigm.
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
yeast don't have nuclear weapons
any way bob I think you need to take a few real deep breaths and try to feel the earth under your feet : )
that said you must be familiar with these folks, they're incredible. their book is better than their web site
http://www.solviva.com/
this stuff is real do able, it just takes money. and we need grants for it. any grant writers out there who can hook up some doers. I could build this stuff tomorrow with some money
Thxs for the solviva.com link--new to me. Looks interesting from my initial glance.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
For composting toilets, the best source is still Joseph Jenkins' The Humanure Handbook (readable online here). He outlines many systems but champions one in particular. It is simple and cheap (but probably not strictly legal). My two years of first hand experience with the same system has consistently agreed with Mr. Jenkins' writing.
For passive solar heating and cooling James Kachadorian's The Passive Solar House is an excellent introduction (although getting dated).
The anology to Shackleton is a powerful one. In other words, the crew he left behind was literally betting their lives that Shackleton would be able to complete a journey that no sane person would willingly undertake. The fact that they had no choice but to take those odds is quite chilling when compared to what our own society may be facing, much sooner than any of us think.
Oil is no longer a 'fungible commodity.' Fossil fuels should be considered a strategic asset, and treated as such. Saudi Arabia knows this. Russia knows this. Hugo Chavez knows this. Unfortunately, we have a political and business elite running out country that are so caught up in the ideology of the free market that to suggest the strict control and careful use of those finite resources is counter to all they hold dear.
The logical course of fossil fuel depletion is to cut down production, conserve and perhaps even ration that resource, with an eye to creating a society that can transition away to other, sustainable sources of energy. This of course includes conservation on a massive scale. You know it. I know it. And probably most of the folks who come to this site know it. It would appear the population of the first world, who have been the benefactors of cheap energy for the past century or so, do not. I suspect their education in this regard will be about as subtle as a baseball bat to the knees. With much the same effect.
Subkommander Dred
The bidding war for declining net export capacity has only begun.
https:/registration.ft.com/registration/barrier?referer=http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=declining+russian+oil+production& ;location=http%3A/news.ft.com/cms/s/1d5dfe3a-d653-11da-8b3a-0000779e2340.html
Venezuela buys Russian oil to avoid defaulting on deals
By Andy Webb-Vidal in Caracas
Published: April 28 2006 03:00 | Last updated: April 28 2006 03:00
Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, has struck a $2bn deal to buy about 100,000 barrels a day of crude oil from Russia until the end of the year.
Venezuela has been forced to turn to an outside source to avoid defaulting on contracts with "clients" and "third parties" as it faces a shortfall in production, according to a person familiar with the deal. Venezuela could incur penalties if it fails to meet its supply contracts.
(Registration required for full story.)
Morales Nationalizes Natural Gas Industry
There's also this:
Venezuela buys Russian oil to avoid defaults
This military action obviously shows the amputation of the free-market invisible hand, which leaves the remaining hand--will it be a militaristic fist, or will it seek the biosolar lifestyle of actual planting something worth the later harvesting? Will parents actually send their children to foreign war to gain those resources for futile wants? How many redneck racefans recognize the energetic link between NASCAR and NO CAR? Will the NASCAR owners spraypaint the racing asphalt with the names of US military dead-- as the cars hurtled around the track over the names of these Heroes would the crowd suddenly realize the sad 'reality' and beg and cry for the race to be stopped? Or would the cheers of denial be even louder as the Circus Maximus raced to it crashing Dieoff crescendo?
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
"Bolivia nationalizes petroleum industry"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060501/ap_on_bi_ge/bolivia_gas
Absolutely correct. If the leaders of exporting countries are far-sighted, they would immediately curtail exports to the extent that the quantity retained is used to dramatically shift to building sustainable biosolar habitats. An exporting country that achieves 'first mover' status to biosolar sustainabilty will have an insurmountable advantage because they can slowly trickle out the oil to further enlarge these habitats.
Chavez, and the SA princes, among other exporters, are making a terrible mistake by not internally pricing their fossil fuels at world levels to encourage conservation and shifting to building a new paradigm.
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
The idealogues will undoubtedly cry and whine asking, "What do you propose to substitute for capitalism? What could possibly be more efficient? Look at all the wonderful things that capitalism had wrought."
Indeed. Look at it. No national health care. A gutted environment. A nation of sterile ugly cities. Mass transit ignored. The list is seemingly endless. The irony is that all of these things would have added to the quality of life for everyone and would have been every bit as profitable as the screwed up alternatives that industry chose. This means that the elites are essentially evil thoughtless thugs who would rather see the world go up in flames than do what must be done to ease us through this physics problem.
Oh well.
i was reading a magazine in the dr.'s office and learned that Chinese workers have lost universal health care (that right?), and now need to find a "good job" that comes with health insurance
i personally feel the US had a pretty good compromise in the 80's between our gov and non-gov institutions, but i think the fall of communism left folks here with a warped idea of what exactly worked for the last half century.
it was (to borrow from another thread) the accodation between John Kenneth Galbraith and William F. BVuckley Jr. that worked, and not the polarization/demonization that some demanded even then.
When you say 'trend' perhaps you mean that that is how financial institutions have been structured/organised with the encouragement of some very powerful organisations - eg IMF.
I saw that John Ralston-Saul has a new(ish) book out in which he argues that globalisation is over - it's just that most people don't realise it yet. He cites India and more especially China as examples of a more pragmatic approach to development - and whereas western commentators suggest that the adoption of 'western' practices has led to 'success' he argues that it is the non laisser faire policies (eg currency controls) that are responsible.
(Vale - JK Galbraith)
Also, when HO says "We currently have a small program going in biodiesel, but the plants that generate on any scale are still measuring in thousands of gallons a year, when we need millions of barrels a day." Isn't this 'need' more realistically a 'want'. Let's face it, biodiesel is not going to be able to replace current consumption - ever (or is that what you meant/mean?). It can replace some of our needs but not all of our wants and the approach should be to identify the needs that can (could/might?) be met thru biodiesel.
Historically, what worked for the US was a liberal trend with a strong dose of conservatism reigning its wilder impulses back into line. What we have now is dog-eat-dog capitalism of the worst sort, which is just as bad as the social apathy of tried and true communism. This is why I discount the Democrats as being worth anything if elected to office. What are they offering? Harry Reid for gosh sakes? Demagogue Chuckie Schumer? Such are just as bad in their own way as BushCo. Look at the years wasted under Clinton, a brilliant man but a moron of a politician who let his gonads do his thinking for him.
However, I doubt that we can successfully re-establish the balance between liberalism and conservatism. It's dead and while we can admire the corpse, we can't revive it. So we need to replace it. Any solution that does not automatically exclude the Demopublican/Republicrat mess is doomed to fail and any solution that is going to succeed needs to "throw the rascals out" on both sides of the aisle.
CENTCOM's budget should be funded from the gas tax, since protecting oil has become the primary mission since 1988
The strategy of the original plan called for five and two-thirds divisions to march from the Arabian Gulf to the Zagros Mountains and prevent the Red Army from seizing the oil fields of Iran. Instead, Gen. Schwarzkopf began to plan for what he thought was a far more likely situation: Iraq, emerging from eight years of war against Iran with the world's fourth-largest and most battle-hardened army, moving south to capture the rich oil fields whose output was essential to the industrial world.
Thxs for responding. The detritovores, like those abandoned men in Antarctica, were entropically hanging by a thread of Wishful Thinking, they had nothing else. 100% of the survival power set sail for distant shores-- the biosolars must do no less. The new paradigm is where the future hopes lie.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I would argue that Shackelton is a poor choice. He doggedly pursued an old paradigm. He definitely did not come up with a new survival paradigm. And, the Shackelton approach is what we are seeing to day - keep doing what we have been doing albeit with different starting materials.
I posted on another thread that what is lacking today is a philosophical basis for letting go of the old consumer paradigm. And, further, that people need to see demonstration projects showing how this new paradigm works in practice.
Someone needs to at least write a post-oil Ecotopia.
Thxs for responding. Have you read Jeff Vails's EnergyBulletin article for his version of a postPeak Ecotopia? This is possibly where we should be headed, but I am amenable to any workable alternative as well thought out. Remember, postPeak detritus entropy means NEVERMORE, ALWAYS LESS--any new paradigm must seek to optimize biosolar energy, which is unlimited.
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
Bob Shaw in Phx,Az
Don't recall whether I asked you about this yet, but have you looked into Arcosanti? Up north of you a piece, designing a 'Habitat/City' that can survive in essentially 'wastelands', with careful designs for energy and water-reclamation, etc.??
Some appeared a little grandiose, but other levels of it were already built into their 'test model'..
Also heard about Sundance or Cannes success for the film 'Who killed the Electric Car?', about the EV-1.. there's a little sub-culture for you!
Bob in Maine
"Are people faster than Blackflies?"
No I hadn't seen that article. I'll check it out.
Thanks,
Todd; Are ticks more tenacious than humans? (may as well keep it going :-)
Is it a perfect concept? No. But, without efforts like his, society is going to waste time just when time is of the essence. However, I do have to say that I believe more people would be led to read it were it in the form of a novel or like Jan Lundberg's recent two part essay at Culture Change. I'd look up the URL but I need to get back outside to put in my first planting of corn.
I fear we may indeed be entering a new historical paradigm, I call it the move from "expansion" (which was made possible by cheap and abundent energy) to "contraction" (which results from constrained energy supplies.)
Recently I've been thinking about what it may have felt like to live in Britain when the Roman Army and administration left, and the province was no longer part of the Empire. Ostensibly everything was pretty much the same on the surface. Civilization didn't just switch-off overnight. All the trappings of Roman civilization were still there and worked; only slowly, very slowly things began to fall apart. The economic, social, political, financial, military, trade, and cultural bonds, began to breakdown. More and more links in the chain of civilization, rusted and then broke, one by one.
This was especially true of the Roman road network and the harbours and shipping routes. These things iterally held Roman society and civilization together.
It must have been strange, frustrating, and un-nerving, watching civilization slowly crumbling and not being able to do anything to reverse the process. At a local level individuals must have worked frantically to preserve as much of civilization as they could for as long as possible. But slowly these islands of civilization must have got smaller and smaller and increasingly isolated from one another. All over economic activity and wealth just kept on going down and down. Perhaps the rate of collapse was so gradual one didn't even really notice the decline? In other areas it was probably dramatic, one slipped-off civilization rapidly and forever.
I have another really big problem with the change-over from one historical paradigm to another; aren't such events usually connected to massive social disruption and usually war?
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue (published 1981 - and undoubtedly one of the reasons why the new Pope chose his name)
The way out of our problem is spiritual, not technical.
"Think of late antiquity," Ratzinger once told an interviewer. "Where St Benedict probably wasn't noted at all. He was also a dropout who came from noble Roman society and did something bizarre, something that later turned out to be the 'ark on which the West survived'. "
In so far as my thoughts on this have got at all specific, they can be found here.
Your blog at the end of your link is the most hopeful thing that I have read in a long time. Thank you.
Jeff CC
I think your probably correct about the need for increased spirituality in relation to the problems we face. But it's not as if there's a shortage of it at the moment, is it? Aren't we almost drowning in "cod" spirituality, and "cod" religion? I hope I'm not treading on your toes here. I don't mean to appear disrepectful in any way I assure you. It's odd how many of my friends are priests, considering I have a lot of issues with the supernatural basis of religion!
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "spiritual." But I think I agree with you most of the way. Defining "spiritual" precisely is rather difficult. I think I would prefer at this jucture to opt for the word "organizational" if that isn't too "technical" for you? I think we need to develop new was to organize society. I suppose this will probably need an "ideological" or if you prefer a "spiritual" foundation. If we restrict ourselves, just because its more practical, to our part of the world, then I imagine basing our spiritual values on "Christianity" is probably a reasonable starting point. We then get into all sorts of problems as to which type of "Christianity" we plump for, there are enough to choose between!
I was the person who dubbed TOD the "cyber monastery", and increasingly, at least intellectually and "spiritually", I find this an apt metaphor. I sort of wish this wasn't the case.
How we understand each others' meaning around the word 'spirituality' is key, albeit paradoxical.
"The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao" , and prohibitions in various religions about naming or taking the names of God too seriously, help to point out the limitation of language and definitions in getting Heaven properly pinned down..
That said, I think our spirits are in pretty rough shape in the wealthy western world, and under plenty of duress everywhere else, and certainly it is an area we must address in order to Heal the World, or 'Tikkun Olam' a Jewish admonishment to its people, I believe.
As far as the Moral Values of Christianity AS Spirituality is concerned, I think you run into a contradiction. Not that Christianity is inherently IMmoral, in my sight, but that 'Christian Morality', which is a code of social conduct, has been sort of equated with 'Spirituality', which I see as a person's deep connection and peacefulness with their own heart, with their people, the World, or with God, if you will.
The growth of fundamentalist cultures within the 3 great western religions has been a reaction to a long chain of historical forces (See 'The Battle for God', Karen Armstrong -Knopf), with the intention of deepening the connection of these groups with their God and their Faith Traditions, but as we have seen, has often resulted in very unreligious actions as well, whether in the direction of self-righteous violence or extreme idolatry and superstitiousness. Results I see as being as UNspiritual as you get, while there are agnostics, atheists, deists, orthodox and also pure secularists who show great examples of a people living life with a rich, healthy spirit, real love for their neighbors, and compassion for the world, in thought and in action. Isn't that Spirituality?
I wouldn't start with Christianity, either as an example or a home-base, nor would I exclude it. The American experiment has left us with many cities that function with truly great diversities of faiths and other forms of human spirit, and I simply expect that out of this, people will form new syntheses of religion and expression, which need new and flexible growth to work with new and flexible people, and the practises that get old and stiff will ultimately break-up and break down, as more helpful ways come about.
"Blessed are the Doomers, cause you just KNOW they actually do have hope.."
"In wildness is the preservation of the world"
Thoreau