Register for Free
Post comments, receive updates via email, gain access to exclusive content, and more.
Spam Safe!
Peak oil is NOT peak energy
Chris: Thank you for this website and the Crash Course! They are magnificent!
You have, quite correctly, used the bell-shaped curve to illustrate the extraction history of minerals and energy sources that must be dug or pumped out of the ground. But there is more to our environment than the ground beneath our feet; there are the oceans, the atmosphere, and ultimately the sun itself. These energy sources, being essentially inexhaustible, are not subject to a bell-shaped extraction curve over time.
You have asserted that "energy can't grow." Probably true for the conventional energy sources extracted from the ground, but false for many other sources of energy that can grow--indefinitely. Peak oil is not peak energy, simply because oil is an infinitesimally small and relatively inaccessible fraction of the world's total energy resources. (Indeed, oil should not even be used for energy; it should be used as a raw material for the petrochemical industries.) Therefore, I respectfully submit that your masterful exposition of the dire straits in which the human race now finds itself is flawed with respect to energy.
Granted that the technology and the infrastructure to harness the following alternative energy sources are not now fully developed. But there was a time, not so long ago, when the technology and the infrastructure to exploit coal, oil, and natural gas were not fully developed either.
Conventional nuclear energy and the experimental 'hot fusion' technologies are intentionally being ignored in this commentary, because they are lethally polluting, and there is no fail-safe way to dispose of the wastes. (They are typical government-subsidized dead-end technologies that consume valuable resources and leave a miserable mess behind.)
Of the many inexhaustible energy sources, wind, waves, and solar are, of course, available only intermittently; they are not practical as stand-alone energy sources, and must be backed up by other sources and perhaps with energy storage devices on a scale yet to be produced.
But all of the following six sources are always available, if their energy can be technically harnessed and economically transmitted:
Geothermal will be exploitable 'forever.'
The rivers--the Mississippi, the Amazon, the Nile, the Danube, the Volga, the Yangtze, the Rhine and the Rhone, and all the others--will flow 'forever.'
The sea currents--such as the Gulf Stream--will flow 'forever.'
The tides--most notably in the Bay of Fundy and Severn Basin, but also on every seashore throughout the world--will ebb and flow 'forever.'
The temperature differentials between surface and deep oceanic waters--exploitable by 'ocean thermal energy conversion'--will exist 'forever.'
The new 'cold fusion' aka Low Energy Nuclear Reaction technologies will be exploitable 'forever.'
Nine nonpolluting and inexhaustible energy sources have been noted in this brief summary--and there are probably more. Nowhere in any of these energy sources will be found a bell-shaped extraction curve over time.
The implications are obvious: The assertion that energy production is inexorably approaching an insurmountable limit is false; there is no such thing as 'peak energy'; and energy R&D brains and capital MUST be focused on developing these inexhaustible and nonpolluting alternative energy sources, ASAP.
Meanwhile, of course, we have to deal with the implications of Peak Oil exactly as you have indicated.
Thank you again, Chris, for this magnificent website.
Majormoney
Print
But all of the following six sources are always available, if their energy can be technically harnessed and economically transmitted:
Geothermal will be exploitable 'forever.'
The rivers--the Mississippi, the Amazon, the Nile, the Danube, the Volga, the Yangtze, the Rhine and the Rhone, and all the others--will flow 'forever.'
The sea currents--such as the Gulf Stream--will flow 'forever.'
The tides--most notably in the Bay of Fundy and Severn Basin, but also on every seashore throughout the world--will ebb and flow 'forever.'
The temperature differentials between surface and deep oceanic waters--exploitable by 'ocean thermal energy conversion'--will exist 'forever.'
The new 'cold fusion' aka Low Energy Nuclear Reaction technologies will be exploitable 'forever.'
Nine nonpolluting and inexhaustible energy sources have been noted in this brief summary--and there are probably more. Nowhere in any of these energy sources will be found a bell-shaped extraction curve over time.
The implications are obvious: The assertion that energy production is inexorably approaching an insurmountable limit is false; there is no such thing as 'peak energy'; and energy R&D brains and capital MUST be focused on developing these inexhaustible and nonpolluting alternative energy sources, ASAP.
Meanwhile, of course, we have to deal with the implications of Peak Oil exactly as you have indicated.
Thank you again, Chris, for this magnificent website.
You are correct in that all of these energy sources you list are renewable and exploitable "forever". However, what you fail to point out is that none of them alone or in combination (with the exception of cold fusion, which is completely unproven and may never manifest at all) can produce energy anywhere near as dense as oil.
All of the energy sources you mention have been studied extensively and have been found to be lacking in their ability to meet worldwide energy demands for one reason or another. I'll provide three examples:
For example, hydroelectric sources in the US are largely developed. There is little room to increase them. Not one large dam has been approved in the past decade. Hydroelectric dams also pose a range of environmental problems: they often ruin streams, cause waterfalls to dry up, and interfere with marine habitat. Many existing hydro plants are jeopardized by siltation and foreseeable changes in rainfall patterns resulting from climate change. Hydro is already a significant energy resource and will continue to be so throughout the coming century. But in many regions of the world - especially the US - it is already thoroughly exploited.
Geothermal power is necessarily dependent upon geography: plants must be located close to hot springs, geysers and fumaroles. Most geothermal resources are located around the edges of tectonic plates. The US currently has 44 percent of the world's developed geothermal-electric capacity, but the American geothermal industry is stagnant. Less than one percent of the world's electricity production comes from geothermal sources. It is extremely unlikely that the generation of electricity from geothermal sources can be increased sufficiently to offset much of the net-energy decline from petroleum depletion.
Tidal energy is renewable, clean, and efficient. Unfortunately, there are fewer than two dozen optimal sites for tidal power in the world, and most of those are in remote areas like northwest Russia or Nova Scotia. A comprehensive survey of wave-energy research by David Ross suggests that tidal power can provide only limited power for industrial societies for the foreseeable future.
I could go on but I'll stop there. I would also like to bring up some relevant conclusions of the Hirsch report, which a report on peak oil and its implications commissioned by the US Department of Energy. The Hirsch report concludes:
1. A minimum of ten years, and preferably twenty years, of intensive mitigation efforts prior to peak oil production would be required in order to avoid a worldwide energy shortage.
2. If no such efforts have been undertaken prior to peak oil, there will be a global energy shortage of at least twenty years.
3. A global energy shortage of this magnitude and length would have unprecedented economic, social and political impacts.
On an absolute level, I agree with you that peak oil does not necessarily mean peak energy. However, on a practical level it almost certainly does unless we have a major technological and as yet unforeseen technological breakthrough.
Another very relevant question is, presuming a worldwide energy shortage and resulting economic depression, where will the money come from to invest in such technology? And, even if we do find some renewable way of replacing the amount of energy oil provides us, where will the money come from to reconfigure our existing infrastructure - which is entirely set up for liquid fuel - to run on electricity?
I cannot claim that such a confluence of events is not possible. I will say, that if I were a betting man, I would not put my money there.
I haven't read your massive entry above yet, Switters, (though surely I will) but just a quick thought in response to the original post.
Since when don't rivers run dry? Rivers last forever. I've never encountered this claim before.
The Colorado's having difficulties right now.
Chris: Thank you for this website and the Crash Course! They are magnificent!
You have, quite correctly, used the bell-shaped curve to illustrate the extraction history of minerals and energy sources that must be dug or pumped out of the ground. But there is more to our environment than the ground beneath our feet; there are the oceans, the atmosphere, and ultimately the sun itself. These energy sources, being essentially inexhaustible, are not subject to a bell-shaped extraction curve over time.
........The implications are obvious: The assertion that energy production is inexorably approaching an insurmountable limit is false; there is no such thing as 'peak energy'; and energy R&D brains and capital MUST be focused on developing these inexhaustible and nonpolluting alternative energy sources, ASAP.
Meanwhile, of course, we have to deal with the implications of Peak Oil exactly as you have indicated.
Thank you again, Chris, for this magnificent website.
I seem to remember that Chris states that he believes the challenge MAY become insurmountable.
The big problem with many renewable energy sources is that they are mainly electrical, and it is transport energy shortages that will bite the worst.
It is possible to convert/supersede the existing transport fleet to run on renewable sourced energy, but if it is not started soon enough, the capacity to do so on a massive scale may be lost amongst social breakdowns caused by such a simple thing as being unable to move enough food.
Sadly the "fuel from corn" attempt is a lost cause, as the ERoEI is to low, but as so many politicians are unable to grasp this it may stagger on for a while yet.
Such misdirected efforts only serve to increase the risk that it will be insurmountable.
Sadly the green movement seems to lack the guidance of hard core engineering expertise and end up backing "sustainable" energy sources that have poor or negative returns.
Hamish
Many years ago when whaling was a major industry, people lighted their houses with whale oil. But the whale population started to decline and whale oil went up in price enough that people started looking for alternatives. This was when it was discovered that kerosene could be obtained from crude oil, and the oil industry was born. Many major scientific advances have come from the "necessity is the mother of invention" school. It is too bad that it has taken this long for necessity to become so great that finally the inventors are at work, and it is just possible that something is out there on the horizon that nobody thought of before which will come to the forefront.
Government subsidies have almost never brought about solutions to problems, it has nearly always been someone or some group that had an idea that was subsequently developed into a new industry, much as the invention of the transistor has led to our massive computer and electronic industries. Lets just hope that someone out there gets a good idea before declining oil production makes intensive research and new product development harder. An example of something that might be a possibility is using algae to create alcohol, and a new algae crop can be harvested every 2-3 weeks instead of annually like corn. I have my fingers crossed and I am chanting "go researchers go"!
pwoody82
It will be for the next two decades no matter how fast and furious alternatives are persued. Read the Hirsch Report which Switters mentions. It is available here: Hirsch Report (PDF download from the Dept. of Energy website - 91 pages).
Crossing fingers doesn't sound like a plan to bet our lives on.
i would suggest reading some amory lovins. our greatest energy supply is conservation. we simply have to use what we have left more efficiently.
amory thru rmi has saved tremendous amounts of money(energy)for corporations like dupont and ibm.
he is currently working with walmart to double to triple their mileage for their delivery fleet.
conservation will buy us the time we need to move to the next energy age.
technology is not a fuel it is a means to use the fuels we have in the most efficient manner.
btw the rivers do not run forever .....the yangtze does not make it to the sea.
there are many demands made on our river systems from agriculture to industry.
due to climate change there is reason to believe the gulf stream may stop flowing.
all our energy comes from the sun. the closer we get to utilizing solar energy the more we will have. in the past civilization has developed where the low hanging fruit was ( fertile land. ample water, amenable climate etc.) we may see massive shifts in populations in response to where our new energy sources are found. ex. algae has great potential as a fuel and source for plastic feedstock. best places would be warm areas with lots of water.
we have been living for the last 150 years off of ancient sunlight. we will in large part have to move to current sunlight. if we wish to approximate our current mode of life.
the real tragedy of the sellout and the wars in the middle east is that the very monetary resources we could be using for developing the next energy economy is being pissed away saving arrogant 30 somethings driving maseratis around wall street. that is a waste of "energy"
Indeed,
Peak Oil is NOT PEAK ENERGY....
If the good sheeple proles continue to exponentially breed, as they have in the past, then they shall provide an excellent RENEWABLE SOURCE OF FAT-ENERGY FOR THE OVENS, and NON-STOP SOURCE OF
ARBEID MAAK FREI......
I guess exponential-yewgenics.co.nr would be an accurate tiny url description, if the exponential function ain't quickly used to educate the sheeple proles about the importance of zero or negative population growth.....
Let's hope the sheeple awake before the exponential function reaches the point of no return in terms of its consequences on geopolitics decisions of our planetary Lily Pond... Omaha vs Texas Holdem Geo Poker Players....
JMCSwan
Defining $lavery Exchange Ponzi Eugenics for the Feebleminded: In 1920 an Italian immigrant Charles Ponzi introduced an investment scheme in Boston that amounts to an expanding game of musical chairs, in which one must buy a chair for someone else in order to join the game, the price of a chair is ever rising (so that eventually, it will be unaffordable), the last people to join the game never get a chair, the number of players always far exceeds the number chairs, and none of the players create anything of worth by way of participation. ~~ exponential-yewgenics.co.nr ** on the ** armigideon-titanic.co.nr ~~
Major Money,
Clearly you have a very poor understanding of net energy. None of those sources have a net energy large enough to support the societal complexity we currently enjoy. Additionally, you may be right that the tides will always rise and fall, those energy sources CANNOT grow (thats why they are always around) and our current economic system requires growth.
Also, what we are talking about is the next twenty years, in which we will be faced with major oil shortages, which will severely restrict our ability to do things like grow, develop technology, goof around, etc. In fifty or one hundred years we will probably pick up some of the peices and start rebuilding stuff and create new energy industries, but they will be nothing like what we currently have. Nothing else combines oil's abundance, accessability, transportability, density, ease of use, and applications. Some energy sources have a few of those traits, but NONE have all. Those traits combined into one resource are sole reason for why we are where we are today (i dare you to disagree), and everything else is just not as good. If there was something better, we would use it. Oil was the silver bullet, and now we must shoot eachother with lead again.
Peace,
Ashton
Ashton--
"Clearly you have a very poor understanding" of what I did and did not say.
Did I say (or imply) that any of the alternative energy sources I listed were 'equivalent' to oil (re energy density, etc.)? Clearly I did not. Did I say (or imply) that when the best source is gone, we have no choice but to fall back on other sources? Clearly I did.
When the best source/solution/option/whatever is no longer available, then some of the others become the best. The fact that the other sources are not as ideal doesn't matter. The density doesn't matter. We have to use whatever there is to use.
As another post noted: We have been using the energy of ancient sunlight. That source is rapidly being depleted. Now we have to start using the sun's energy--directly or indirectly--in real time. Now we have to start using the best of the 'inferior' alternatives that are available to us.
Unless you are proposing that we go back to living in caves as did our ancestors, WE HAVE NO CHOICE: we MUST embrace some of these alternative albeit inferior energy sources--and soon.
MAJORMONEY
Majormoney
I agree with the nuances presented in your post. I've even seen people claim that peak oil and peak energy are interchangeable terms -- now, obviously that's foolish.
However, given the dogma of growth and the the large slice of the pie oil represents, for the world as we know it, peak oil might as well be peak energy.
All of this stuff is math, pure and simple. The globe's current trajectory cannot continue without oil and nothing can step into the void to fill it. That's not the end of the world, but simply the end of our current bender.