Site search
sponsored by
News
Serious questions about our energy future have taken a lead role lately, capturing the spotlight in economic and political debates. How do we separate hype from reality?
Recently, three board members of Alliance for a Post-Petroleum Local Economy of Nevada County (www.apple-nc.org) attended the fourth annual conference of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO-USA) in Sacramento.
This column is an attempt to summarize over thirty presentations. Visit www.apple-nc.org for more conference details and copies of presentations.
Oil
"Peak oil" - the point when we reach the highest rate of oil extraction from the ground globally - was the main focus of the conference. The peak of U.S. oil production, in 1970, was easily remedied by cheap abundant oil imports. Global peak oil, on the other hand (we cannot yet import oil from Mars), will have crippling implications for the worldwide economy and for our daily lives.
Most projections for global peak are centered on 2013. Think about all the ways that oil and liquid fuels enable your daily actions, and you will quickly see the problem.
Unconventional oil (tar sands, oil shale, etc.)
While these sources have large potential reserves, the flow rates are tiny: Currently, all Canadian tar sands projects combined produce about one million barrels per day (1M bbl/d), compared to current world consumption of about 85M bbl/d, and U.S. consumption of about 22M bbl/d.
Both tar sands and oil shale require huge inputs of water and energy, along with massive land disturbance, resulting in an extremely dirty product with very low "Energy Returned On Energy Invested" (EROEI).
Natural gas
Natural gas prices for the next few years look favorable. The U.S., and the rest of the world, has been building immense new natural gas infrastructure and power plants, especially in the form of massively expensive LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) terminals.
Beyond three or four years, the supply outlook is much more bleak, leading to higher prices and likely shortages. We are painting ourselves into a treacherous corner with rapid expansion of natural gas infrastructure.
Coal
Coal reserve estimates vary tremendously, to the point of uselessness, especially with prospects of massive coal-to-liquids expansion. "Clean coal" is a misleading term, used irresponsibly by politicians on both sides to garner votes. "Carbon Capture and Sequestration" (CCS) is experimental, doubtful, and would decrease the net efficiency of any coal-burning power plant by 25 percent. Plans to incorporate CCS at a modern coal-burning power plant (under the name "FutureGen") have been scrapped.
Nuclear
Full-speed nuclear development, starting immediately, would not have a large effect on the makeup of the national power grid for a decade or more, due to cost and construction time.
The proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage facility has seen enormous recent budget increases, and its safety remains in serious doubt. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is plagued by corruption and cannot currently handle large growth.
Alternatives and Renewables
For the foreseeable future, petroleum is our only option for large-scale industrial and commercial transportation. In that sense, we are mainly dealing with a liquid fuels crisis: Biofuels and coal-to-liquids will not "bridge the gap." Large hydroelectric has limited growth potential in the U.S., and comes with environmental baggage. Solar, wind, and geothermal, even at current prodigious growth rates, will not make up the fabled 20 to 30 percent of our grid for decades.
Energy independence
Energy independence as a country is an absolute myth: We hold about 3 percent of the world's liquid fuel reserves (that includes all domestic offshore reserves) but we are responsible for 25 percent of the world's total consumption. Using the term "energy independence" as political leverage, by both major parties, is an insult to American voters and an irresponsible distraction from the real problems at hand.
Conclusions
No combination of investment, technology, new oil discoveries, alternatives, voluntary conservation, or market forces can preserve our globalized economy in its current state. It's possible to keep functioning in the world of today, while still doing what you can to be ready for the localized world of tomorrow.
Think about oil and energy inputs to everything you do during your day, and encourage those around you to do the same: When we are forced to step out of our cars, we will be reminded of the strength of community. Join APPLE's efforts at www.apple-nc.org or info@apple-nc.org.
Tom Grundy is president of the solutions-oriented community network APPLE-NC.
Recently, three board members of Alliance for a Post-Petroleum Local Economy of Nevada County (www.apple-nc.org) attended the fourth annual conference of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO-USA) in Sacramento.
This column is an attempt to summarize over thirty presentations. Visit www.apple-nc.org for more conference details and copies of presentations.
Oil
"Peak oil" - the point when we reach the highest rate of oil extraction from the ground globally - was the main focus of the conference. The peak of U.S. oil production, in 1970, was easily remedied by cheap abundant oil imports. Global peak oil, on the other hand (we cannot yet import oil from Mars), will have crippling implications for the worldwide economy and for our daily lives.
Most projections for global peak are centered on 2013. Think about all the ways that oil and liquid fuels enable your daily actions, and you will quickly see the problem.
Unconventional oil (tar sands, oil shale, etc.)
While these sources have large potential reserves, the flow rates are tiny: Currently, all Canadian tar sands projects combined produce about one million barrels per day (1M bbl/d), compared to current world consumption of about 85M bbl/d, and U.S. consumption of about 22M bbl/d.
Both tar sands and oil shale require huge inputs of water and energy, along with massive land disturbance, resulting in an extremely dirty product with very low "Energy Returned On Energy Invested" (EROEI).
Natural gas
Natural gas prices for the next few years look favorable. The U.S., and the rest of the world, has been building immense new natural gas infrastructure and power plants, especially in the form of massively expensive LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) terminals.
Beyond three or four years, the supply outlook is much more bleak, leading to higher prices and likely shortages. We are painting ourselves into a treacherous corner with rapid expansion of natural gas infrastructure.
Coal
Coal reserve estimates vary tremendously, to the point of uselessness, especially with prospects of massive coal-to-liquids expansion. "Clean coal" is a misleading term, used irresponsibly by politicians on both sides to garner votes. "Carbon Capture and Sequestration" (CCS) is experimental, doubtful, and would decrease the net efficiency of any coal-burning power plant by 25 percent. Plans to incorporate CCS at a modern coal-burning power plant (under the name "FutureGen") have been scrapped.
Nuclear
Full-speed nuclear development, starting immediately, would not have a large effect on the makeup of the national power grid for a decade or more, due to cost and construction time.
The proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage facility has seen enormous recent budget increases, and its safety remains in serious doubt. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is plagued by corruption and cannot currently handle large growth.
Alternatives and Renewables
For the foreseeable future, petroleum is our only option for large-scale industrial and commercial transportation. In that sense, we are mainly dealing with a liquid fuels crisis: Biofuels and coal-to-liquids will not "bridge the gap." Large hydroelectric has limited growth potential in the U.S., and comes with environmental baggage. Solar, wind, and geothermal, even at current prodigious growth rates, will not make up the fabled 20 to 30 percent of our grid for decades.
Energy independence
Energy independence as a country is an absolute myth: We hold about 3 percent of the world's liquid fuel reserves (that includes all domestic offshore reserves) but we are responsible for 25 percent of the world's total consumption. Using the term "energy independence" as political leverage, by both major parties, is an insult to American voters and an irresponsible distraction from the real problems at hand.
Conclusions
No combination of investment, technology, new oil discoveries, alternatives, voluntary conservation, or market forces can preserve our globalized economy in its current state. It's possible to keep functioning in the world of today, while still doing what you can to be ready for the localized world of tomorrow.
Think about oil and energy inputs to everything you do during your day, and encourage those around you to do the same: When we are forced to step out of our cars, we will be reminded of the strength of community. Join APPLE's efforts at www.apple-nc.org or info@apple-nc.org.
Tom Grundy is president of the solutions-oriented community network APPLE-NC.
