On April 27/28, 2009 the Europe Forum Lucerne organized a workshop entitled Energy - A Conflict Area: Trends and Horizons.

In the tradition of a townhouse meeting, the Swiss public was invited to Lucerne to listen to an impressive number of high-caliber politicians, scientists, and journalists discussing issues of energy security that Switzerland and the world will be facing in the coming years.

The author of this report attended the conference and wishes to report to the readers of The Oil Drum what he heard at the meeting … and also what he didn't hear.

It is certainly a laudable goal to get the public involved in discussions concerning energy security issues as these undoubtedly affect all of us directly. We need to be informed in order to be able to contribute to the solution of the problems facing us and in order to reach the best decisions for ourselves.

Yet this conference once again missed an opportunity to inform in an unbiased way. The discussions were dominated by political interest groups, and the people attending the meeting were sent home with assurances that there is nothing to be worried about. We were told that we still have oil and gas for decades to come.

In his second blog entry, Andris Piebalgs moves the focus to European energy security. A few choice excerpts for those who want to have a more spontaneous debate:

Europe is currently importing half of their energy needs, and according to most of the studies, our dependency may grow to 70%. We are running out of fossil fuels and our energy needs grow. This makes Europe terribly vulnerable. As Commissioner responsible for security of supply I often wondered, where are we going to get all that energy from? (my emphasis)

The EU is already a leader in renewable energy sources and we have taken a commitment to go further with a mandatory target of 20% of our final consumption by 2020......

This is a guest post by Mike Pepler. Mike lives in Rye, UK, and works from home for the Ashden Awards for Sustainable Energy (www.ashdenawards.org). He is also one of the founding members of PowerSwitch (www.powerswitch.org.uk), and together with his wife Tracy manages eight acres of coppice woodland near Rye.

On 25th September 2007, the BIEE, the UKERC and the Energy Institute held a seminar in London where they invited academics to critique the 2007 Energy White Paper.

Background

In 2003 the UK government released the Energy White Paper 2003: Our Energy Future - Creating a Low Carbon Economy. As we all know, events in the energy world have moved fast since 2003, and faced by falling gas supplies from the North Sea and ageing nuclear power stations, the government launched another energy consultation in 2006, details of which are available online here. The result was another Energy White Paper, published in May 2007, this time with the subtitle Meeting the Energy Challenge. It seems to me that the change in the energy world over the intervening years can be seen from the change in the tone of the titles from 2003 to 2007!

The purpose of the seminar was to bring together a range of academics to give a critique of the Energy White Paper – and they certainly were critical! So, without further ado, here are the key points form the speakers, with comments from me in italics where appropriate.

The slides are available on the BIEE website here: www.biee.org/downloads.php

Gordon Laxer, Professor of political economy at the University of Alberta and Director of the Parklands Institute, created a political storm with his testimony before the International Trade Committee on Thursday. He was conducting a presentation on the energy and climate change implications of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), an agreement on greater integration between Canada, the US and Mexico. Professor Laxer pointed out that the deal, which refers to North American "energy security" as a priority, commits Canada to maintaining energy exports to the US, in the absence of a national plan or strategic reserve to protect its own security of supply.