For over 100 years the world has taken for granted always more cheap energy of oil, coal and natural gas. To gain access and control these energy resources has been a central aspect of many wars in the 20th and 21st century, while the steady global supply has made near continuous economic growth and relative stability possible.
However, whereas a barrel of oil traded for between 10 and 20 US dollars (adjusted for inflation) for most of the 20th century, now it is trading for nearly 100$. This high oil price essentially mean growth and thus stability is no longer possible. Though scandal and corruption can also cause problems, without low energy prices there is nothing to repair the damage as in decades passed. Rather, in this new epoch scandals simply do not go away and instead accumulate one on top the other, especially financial problems from broke banks to broke nations: without cheap energy to drive more growth loans simply cannot mathematically be repaid.
For public policy to be effective, a thorough understanding of the deep currents driving events is essential; the alternative is to be tossed about on the waves.
Though mostly ignored by main stream media, the nature of how the inevitable oil decline (necessary as oil is finite) will interact with the economy and society has been discussed and studied for over 50 years. The body of knowledge is vast but somewhat disorganized as few central authorities have funded comprehensive public studies (comparable to the ICC) and energy data provided by some states is often of debatable quality. So though there are always unpredictable elements, the relationships that form can be understood, general trends outlined and events seen clearly as they unfold, which leads to sound public policy.
Though some view oil decline as an apocalyptic event that will doom us all, history tells us of many profound changes in the past; archeology tells the tale of many a society that have failed to cope and disappeared while others have adapted and survived. There is no reason to believe we must be the former and not the latter. For instance, the case of collapse of Easter Island, whose population cut down every last tree, is often used to represent the ultimate terminus of human endeavor; however, all the other islands societies in the pacific that didn’t cut down all their trees are rarely mentioned. Now that we realize earth itself is an island, there is no reason to assume we will follow the path Easter Island and not other islanders such as Hawaii (which is inhabited by Hawaiians and trees to this day).
However, though there is no reason to despair, there is no reason to be complacent either. As oil declines there are few precious decades to set a sustainable course, which means only moments on the clock of policy. One response is to massively invest in dirtier, harder to extract, more expensive forms of fossil fuels, which are unlikely to offset the decreases in easy to extract gushing oil from mega-fields. The other alternative is to massively invest in sustainable energy.
Since essentially all sustainable forms of energy are derived from solar energy, there is necessarily more solar energy than all these solar derivatives combined. Though investment in solar energy has been high, it has concentrated on electricity and in general western nations (that can afford the long payback periods of solar electricity). However, the easiest gains for decreasing emissions and particulate pollution is by displacing not electricity, but thermal energy used in industry and local crafts in the developing world. Often this coal, oil or wood burned in factories large and small has no scrubbers to reduce sulfur and other particles (which will adversely affect the local environment, which could otherwise capture more carbon, as well as land on glaciers and icecaps leading to faster melting). Much of this energy is used only to heat processes at relatively low temperature.
The solar thermal technology required to displace this fossil fuels use is fairly unsophisticated and cheap, in some cases flat solar water heaters can displace a significant amount of energy. Since the technology is already existing and largely affordable, small government programs can have a disproportionate impact on awareness and adoption.
Though ultimately we need renewable solutions for all our energy needs, today replacing a kilowatt-hour in thermal energy can be far easier than replacing a kilowatt-hour of the same fossil fuel going into electricity production, especially in the developing world where fossil thermal energy is often also accompanied by other pollutions as well. With inexpensive programs of adapting existing technology to processes in the developing world, financing demonstration projects, and creating micro-financing campaigns to lower barriers to the technology, massive amounts of fossil energy can be replaced by solar, decreasing pollution, promoting global energy stability, and lowering pressure to exploit even dirtier fossil fuels.
RSS 2.0