Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Prepare for Peak Oil Now

By Richard Heinberg, AlterNet. Posted November 14, 2005.


Oil is a finite resource -- and the decline of world oil production is predicted to occur anytime within the next 30 years. To avoid the worst-case scenario, we must begin today to reduce our dependence on oil.
Advertisement

Editor’s Note: This paper, exclusively available to AlterNet, was presented at a Reception with Their Royal Highnesses The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, at the California Leaders Round Table Dialogue on Peak Oil, Climate Change and Business Action; November 7, 2005 in San Francisco.

The subject I teach -- human ecology -- is a discipline that largely concerns population and resources. Over the past few years I have chosen to study oil, because it is the most important energy resource of the modern world.

Only 150 years ago, 85 percent of all work being accomplished in the U.S. economy was done by muscle power -- most of that by animal muscle, about a quarter of it by human muscle. Today, that percentage is effectively zero; virtually all of the physical work supporting our economy is done by fuel-fed machines. What caused this transformation? Quite simply, it was oil's comparative cheapness and versatility. Perhaps you have had the experience of running out of gas and having to push your car a few feet to get it off the road. That's hard work. Now imagine pushing your car 20 or 30 miles. That is the service performed for us by a single gallon of gasoline, for which we currently pay $2.65. That gallon of fuel is the energy equivalent of roughly six weeks of hard human labor.

It was inevitable that we would become addicted to this stuff, once we had developed a few tools for using it and for extracting it. Today petroleum provides 97 percent of our transportation fuel, and is also a feedstock for chemicals and plastics.

It is no exaggeration to say that we live in a world that runs on oil.

However, oil is a finite resource. Therefore the peaking and decline of world oil production are inevitable events -- and on that there is scarcely any debate; only the timing is uncertain. Forecast dates for the peak range from this year to 2035.

The peaking phenomenon itself has been observed again and again in individual oil fields and in entire producing nations. One of the first countries to hit its peak was the U.S.. During the 1930s and '40s, half the world’s production of petroleum came from Texas and Oklahoma. However, U.S. production reached its all-time maximum in 1970 and has been declining ever since. Currently the U.S. imports 60 percent of its oil.

Concern over the likelihood of an impending world peak has increased markedly in recent months as global spare production capacity has dwindled and as prices have achieved what seems to be a new baseline of over $50 per barrel.

Evidence that we are approaching peak includes the following:

  • ExxonMobil documents that global oil discoveries peaked in 1964. Declining rates of discovery are therefore a long-established trend.
  • Chevron notes in recent advertisements that 33 of 48 nations are in decline. We have thus seen the peaking of production in a majority of individual nations, including some important producers such as Indonesia, Norway, Great Britain, and Venezuela. Mexico will reach its peak within the next two years.
  • As noted by the International Energy Agency, there is evidence that a substantial amount of "proven reserves" in OPEC countries are illusory, the result of a scramble for market share within a cartel that allocates export quotas based on stated reserves.

With regard to this last point it should be noted that reserves figures, even when accurate, have historically given little warning of peaking. The U.S. instance is once again emblematic: in 1970, U.S. oil reserves were higher than ever; so were production rates. But only a year later, American production began its terminal decline. The study of discovery rates and depletion rates gives us a much better idea of when the global peak is likely to occur.

Optimistic estimates of future discovery and production issued by Cambridge Energy Research Associates and the U.S. Geological Survey have been criticized by several analysts. The optimists have generally failed to anticipate peaks, first in the U.S. and repeatedly in the case of other nations around the world.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Drastic action is required
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 14, 2005 5:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Government control is odious to all, but like environmental policy we can't depend on voluntary compliance to a sensible set of rules. What is needed immediately is gasoline rationing as in WWII. Beside rationing of gasoline to transportation we will need rationing of petroleum products to industries. We need people who can take a long range view of what is important for the next 100 years. The sooner we realize that there is no easy solution and that we'll have to get by on less, and plan for the optimal use of the dwindling supply the better. In the meantime maybe a good alternative energy source will be discovered but we can't count on it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Save plastic?
Posted by: silkreed on Nov 14, 2005 5:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you start saving those big plastic bottles that juice comes in, while it's still profitable for the industry to make them, you might be glad you did. Does anyone know how the different kinds of plastic compare for long-term water storage? (do chemicals leach into the water?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Save plastic? Posted by: aonghus36
» RE: Save plastic? Posted by: birdman
» RE: Save plastic? Posted by: birdman
» RE: Save plastic? Posted by: silkreed
» RE: Save plastic? Posted by: jokuhl
Raise those gas prices!
Posted by: ggmurray on Nov 14, 2005 6:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I keep hoping for gas prices to go up and up and up. Why? Because only then will America get serious about alternate energy. The oil industry and its political henchmen have no interest in changing directions. Only millions of consumers, making individual choices about how to spend our money, will force the issue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: aise those gas prices! Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: aise those gas prices! Posted by: toddboyle
An essential part of the Democratic Platform
Posted by: lb on Nov 14, 2005 6:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although paying attention to the environment stopped being "cool" in the 70s, we need to get back to it. The unbridled capitalism encouraged by Republicans includes the idea that everything on the earth is ours to use, without restraint. There are all kinds of signs that it just won't work, including global warming and the accelerated loss of species. How could we think the supplies of fossil fuels would last forever? This has to be a top priority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

patching a hole in a crumbling dam
Posted by: crz53 on Nov 14, 2005 6:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I agree completely that some sort of Peak Oil Protocol (POP) for dealing the decline of oil is a necessity, I have my worries about what that plan might look like if we depend on the world's political and econimic establishment to develop it. These people and groups have a very large stake in maintaining the status quo as much as possible. As such, I believe that "their POP" would be about preserving the current political/economic order. This won't work for two reasons:

1. Creativity: If the primary qualification for a POP is that it maintains the world's current power structure, then how many good ideas and plans would be passed over simply because they had the gall to suggest that our government/economy could be run differently. Their bias would limit their ability to creatively deal with these problems.

2. Symptom vs. Sickness: In my humble opinion, the main reason that the "powers that be" can't be relied upon to formulate a solid POP is that they are part of the problem! Our current distribution of political/economic power (and all the theories, beliefs, and assumptions that go along with it) is largely to blame for the position that we now find ourselves in. This is same as expecting big tobacco companies to come up with a serious plan that will ultimately get everyone to stop smoking. It won't happen because people smoking is the source of the tobacco companies' power. They won't voluntarily slit their own throats.

A serious, reliable, realistic POP is going to have to be the product of widespread grassroots input; and the end result will have to include the decentralization of political/economic power. Any thing else will be (to quote someone wiser than myself) "a prelude to a tragedy, a farce, or possibly both".
- Mike Lorenz

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Changing perspectives
Posted by: Colin on Nov 14, 2005 7:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'Oil is a finite resource' the article begins. And right it is, too.

However, it's also interesting to put that resource into context and, from there, you can see exactly what's happening and, to an extent, why. I'm not talking about what's happening in political terms but why it is that oil's so valuable.

Everyone knows that oil is the bi-product of life, mainly plant life, slowly rotting away, trapped underground and turned into the poisenous sludge we've all come to depend on. But - if that's the case, what does it make oil to us?

It makes it not much more than a battery. Basically, in that black goo, you have hundreds of thousands of years of the suns energy, trapped and locked away, waiting for someone to unlock it. Obviously, like a battery, it's energy will dry up. And, from then, all our battery powered toys will dry up too.

Personally speaking, I have an awful lot of battery powered gizmos lying around my house. The funny thing? Because I know the batteries are going to slowly run out, I do what I can to try and extend their lives. The same is true of oil but, unless we're prepared to wait another few hundred millenia for more oil to 're-charge', it could be a looooong time before our toys work properly again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need long term thinking and incentives
Posted by: SDres11 on Nov 14, 2005 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or else you can't expect people to truly care about the long term crisis. That's why even liberals who try to push for gas rebates and go along with the "cheap gas" rhetoric fail. There is no such thing as cheap gas. That's why we need long term progressives/liberals who will reduce costs in the long run by reforming CAFE and pushing for fuel efficiency with courage. That alone would create far more jobs and at the same time keep businesses in checks and balances along with saving the environment from further damage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

peak oil doesn't have to ruin us
Posted by: kwik on Nov 14, 2005 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Winning the Oil Endgame

check out Amory Lovins. He is today's Bucky Fuller. I met him last night. He has it worked out, for real. Very brilliant fellow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How about the demand side?
Posted by: leemiller38 on Nov 14, 2005 10:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was surprised that a human ecology prof didn't mention the fact that this overshoot of global carrying capacity is primarily a result of lack of adequate population growth control as well as over dependence on fossil energy.

It is too bad that enough humans couldn't foresee this and ante up the will to act. There are some like Paul Ehrlich, Garrett Harden, William Vogt, Ken Boulding, Fairfield Osborn, Thomas Malthus and others who warned us about overpopulation for the past 200 years. Apparently, no one paid sufficient attention or accepted their logic. Bush continues to withhold family planning funding and the Popes are consistent fools as are the many humans who continue to build mini mansions to heat and SUV's to drive.

It is not only that we are about to be short on fossil fuels, the problem is we are way long on population! We also appear short on foresight and wisdom. Nature will take care of the problem rather ruthlessly as nature always does. A crash is likely coming to the planet nearest you. Intelligent design as applied to humans is obviously invalid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Baghdad Bob
Posted by: MT512 on Nov 14, 2005 10:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember "Baghdad Bob?" He was Saddam's propaganda minister or whatever who was airing TV reports from the streets during the US invasion in 2003. He was a broken record, assuring the viewer that the Yankees were being beaten back and running in fear and Iraqi victory was just around the corner... until he just stopped airing.

The oil companies and their wholly-owned subsidiaries (like Bush and most of our politicians) are the Baghdad Bob of peak oil.

If our leaders tell us to, in effect, run for our lives, then they will not be able to hoard as much of what matters for themselves. And most of us little folks eagerly accept their good news that there is nothing to worry about. Our hypnotic ignorance will continue until the wheels fall off.

We should all be preparing for this end-of-oil. The oil barons are doing exactly that by making as much money as they possibly can while they still can. That way, you and I will be trying to grow food in backyards, and they will have their own farms and vast fuel reserves and private armies to protect it all. If we're lucky, they'll pay us food to farm their land or to shoot the hungry people who dig up carrots in the moonlight.

They know it's coming. They smell what they're shoveling. They're doing everything they can to ensure that when it all goes to hell, they win and you lose.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Personal actions
Posted by: ScottP on Nov 14, 2005 11:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with the majority of the readers and writers here that government initiated policies would be the most efficient and direct approach to addressing the peak oil problem. However, given the state of affairs we should not expect that to happen in time. For example, everyone cheered that here in California we defeated the group of nasty and destructive initiatives last week. But my review of the election results leads me to believe that election fraud is alive and well, and that the initiates were probably not nearly as close as claimed. Take a look at the turnouts in counties that supported them versus those that opposed them. In almost all cases the few counties that supported them had ridiculously high turnouts (electronic ballot stuffing).

That said, I think we've got to take the actions ourselves and hope others will follow our lead. I'll suggest a few to start it off, please add your own ideas!

- ride a bike to work and errands (not only saves your gas, gets you in the habit, but provides an important example for others)

- make fuel economy a top issue in your next car purchase (and don't even look at an SUV, even hybrid ones suffer from horrible aerodynamics)

- repair things first, don't just replace them

- do it yourself in general. If you're the one doing the painting you'll probably be more thoughtful about waste, and the self suffiency skills could be important when the unemployment peak follows the oil peak.

- pay off all your debts, and your home loan. The first ones to suffer will be those with the most debt, the banks won't be cutting any slack or giving any new loans when the economy tanks. My recollection of the stories of the Great Depression were that a lot of people who owned things outright got through it OK, people who lived paycheck to paycheck spent their days on bread lines or begging. You can bet the robber barons are busy planning their strategy for snatching up bargains in the coming depression.

- your idea goes here!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Personal actions Posted by: sclamont
We Need Grassroots AND the POPs
Posted by: birdman on Nov 14, 2005 1:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I basically agree with crz53 that our current corrupt leaders will not give us the POP we want and need, I still think they should be encouraged to do so anyway. Even a half-baked POP will buy the grassroots a little more time -- and that small increment may be the difference between a reasonable transition and total chaos.

As we go through what chaos scientists call a catastrophe bifurcation, a portion of our world is splitting off from the conventional, dying world, and we're trying to birth a newer, better world. (I'm not predicting that the birth will be successful; I'm only describing an on-going event.) This coming world is seen as a "catastrophe" by those with a vested interest in the old regime, and they are resisting it. It's the nature of this split that the whole of America will never embrace conservation, POPs, or any other sensible program. Ain't gonna happen.

One of the interesting things about the world we are trying to birth is that things like energy will be MUCH more decentralized than is currently the case. So while we get the politicians and the oil/auto/electricity industries to establish some kind of POP, the grassroots will be building a new, decentralized infrastructure that will ultimately have little to do with said industries. The form this can take will be up to us. There are numerous books and websites out there with some terrific ideas. But the bottom line (to use that phrase) is that MobilExxon, et al should not be allowed to rule our lives, buy our political servants, and essentially decide if we live or die. The only way to take power away from the elite is to bankrupt these bastards. And the best way to do that is to do without them. "Another world is possible."

Incidentally, about Amory Lovins: While I personally like the guy and agree that he an interesting thinker, Lovins is basically a guy who is happy to see the current power relations remain. His plans have always had the major powers still in place, except they will now be purveyors of hydrogen and solar panels instead of oil. Lovins is a high-tech, corporation-loving capitalist through and through. If you are satisfied with continuing to be a wage slave for a privileged elite, then Lovins is your man. If you'd like a better and/or a more spiritually grounded social order, then I suggest you take his core technology ideas and apply them in a different way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Perhaps the wheels will come off sooner then you think
Posted by: rwy on Nov 14, 2005 1:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It appears that the second largest oil field has quietly slipped into decline....far short of its published capacity.

http://www.ameinfo.com/71519.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Scribbler recs
Posted by: Rob the Scribbler on Nov 14, 2005 6:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Enact Tax on oil revenue by majors
2. Enact Tax on oil products used for transportation
3. Use funds to:
a. subsidize renewable energy infrastructure
1a. Home Photovoltiac units (ala California)
2a. Wind Turbine generation capacity
3a. Solar generation capacity
4a. Nuclear breeder reactors with a closed fuel cycle
5a. Cold ocean water temperature inversion generators
(in favorable regions)
4. Tax moratorium on renewable energy revenue
5. Re-enact agressive CAFE standards
6. Tax moratorium on Hybrid car sales
7. Require all Hybrid vehicles to have a plug in option.
8. Require all Hybrids to be capable of running 'electric only' for 50 miles (scale up with time).
9. Nationally fund research and development for non-fossil fuel based hydrogen fuel cells.
10. Nationally fund research and development for efficient electrolysis of water to hydrogen.
11. Department of Energy is enacting arm
12. Set a goal for all new car sales to be electric and/or hydrogen (non-fossil fuel based) in 20 years.
13. Develop home electric vehicle recharge stations (gov't subsidies to developers).
14. Develop a national stockpile of critical petroleum feedstocks for raw materials (chemicals, plastics, and fertilizer)
15. Funding for coal gasification for feedstocks only
16. Funding for gas to oil tech for feedstocks only
17. Funding for oil shale extraction for feedstocks only
18. Funding for thermal depolymerization to develop petroleum from biomass and waste for feedstocks
19. Funding for non-petroleum based synthetics
20. Subsidies and campaigning for energy efficiency in all aspects of technology and society.
20. Overall goal should be increased energy supply, versatilaty of the fuel chain (numerous sources -- non fossil), immediate and sustained action, short term progress (5 year), medium term (20 year), non reliance on fossil fuels for transportation, and long term (30-50 year) non reliance on fossil fuels for chemical, raw material, and fertilizer feedstock.
21. Secondary goal should be increasingly available, inexpensive and abundant energy for the U.S. economy. Excess energy can be sold as a natural resource.

The crisis can be mitigated. It requires political will and vision.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Is An Opportunity
Posted by: birdman on Nov 15, 2005 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As creative as are all the plans that will emerge for replacing oil with other alternatives, be careful of just rushing in to keep the rest of our current lifestyle the same. I mean, do you really want to continue your two hour, bumper-to-bumper commute? Do you really want a car-dominated landscape.

Peak Oil is not only a potential calamity, it's also a unique opportunity to revision how we might live our lives, free of the tyranny of automobiles. Given a choice between pissing away my life (or even losing it) in my eco-friendly, hydrogen-hybrid, soy-bodied wonder car versus walking or riding my bike a short distance along a car-free, tree-shaded path to the local food coop and general store, I know which one I'd choose. And just imagine your neighborhood where the streets are off-limits to cars (except maybe for a few designated hours a week, for store deliveries and such) and the whole street becomes a park for you and your kids and your neighbors. (For cities with subways, I've read about a great scheme wherein special subway cars are used for commercial deliveries, eliminating most truck traffic!)

Let's dream the life we want to live, not just scheme ways to keep the current party going.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Raise the gas tax!
Posted by: Wells on Nov 15, 2005 12:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In addition to raising the gas tax, state and federal statutes should be revised to address inequitable use of those funds, currently directed mostly to road construction. Hint: urban/suburban transportation consists of 4 modes: walking, bicycling, mass transit, cars/trucks. Automobiles, their road infrastructure and cities designed solely for the automaton motorist, present a severe impediment to the other means of travel. It is thus a Constitutional Inequity that gas taxes go solely for roads. Cities designed to accommodate walking, bicycling and mass transit are economically positioned to survive the coming oil depletion. Bushco has no intention for non-millionaires to survive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oil is finite, He3 is infinite
Posted by: mozkill on Jun 2, 2006 5:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even when oil runs out, there will be nuclear fusion. problem solved.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oil is finite, He3 is infinite Posted by: danzigstorer