 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
__________________________________________________________________________________________
- Energy
- Environment
- Transportation
- Health & Fitness
- Sports & Recreation
- Environment
- Transportation
- Health & Fitness
- Sports & Recreation
Eastern Montana Economic
Solutions and Opportunities
Solutions and Opportunities
"If it takes the energy of a barrel of oil to
extract a barrel of oil, then further extraction
is pointless, no matter what the price of oil."
extract a barrel of oil, then further extraction
is pointless, no matter what the price of oil."
Questions and Answers about Peak Oil
Q: What is Peak Oil
A: Peak Oil is the point in time when, on a worldwide basis, we will be extracting the most oil per
day from the ground that we ever will. Before Peak Oil we were not extracting as much, and after
Peak Oil we will not be extracting as much. Peak Oil is the point in time of maximum extraction.
Q: Why should I be concerned about Peak Oil?
A: Peak Oil represents a profound change in the conditions that have allowed economic growth
to proceed over the years. In the past few decades, there has been enough oil to meet demand
because the supply has been growing at the same time demand has been growing. This will
no longer be true after Peak Oil. Demand will not be met as supplies dwindle and oil prices will
rise. Other energy sources will not be able to do for us what oil did.
Q: Will this just mean higher prices at the pump?
A: Higher prices at the pump will certainly be one consequence. But oil is so engrained in the
way we live that the implications will go well beyond higher gasoline prices.
Think about the implications of a higher price at the pump. Factor in that the average distance
food travels in the U.S. from where it is made to where it is consumed is 1,200 miles. When it
costs more for fuel, it will cost more to move food. When it costs more to move food, food prices
will go up. Also, when it costs more for fuel, it will cost more to operate tractors, combines and
other farm machinery. If it costs more to operate farm equipment, the price of food will go up.
Furthermore, if it costs more to manufacture widgets because it is more expensive to deliver the
raw materials to the factory, the price of widgets will go up and people will buy fewer widgets.
The widget factories won't be able to justify having as many workers and will let many go.
People will have lost their jobs at a time when food is more expensive than ever.
This is only scratching the surface of possible implications. Peak Oil will affect every aspect of
global industrial society that uses energy directly or indirectly. The price of gasoline is one small
part of the picture.
Q: Does the arrival of Peak Oil mean we are running out of oil?
A: No. It means we have extracted about half of the oil we ever will – about one trillion barrels out
of a total two trillion barrels that the Earth has provided us. It also means we have extracted
most of the easy-to-get-at stores of oil. It is a warning sign that oil extraction on a large scale
cannot continue forever, and that society will have to get along with less oil in the near future.
Q: If half of the oil that ever existed is still in the ground, and demand for oil is rising now,
why can't we keep increasing oil extraction?
A: The oil that remains will not be as easy to get at as the oil we have taken so far.
Oil reservoirs are not like tanks that can be easily emptied. They are more like sponges. (Picture
using a straw to extract all the water from a sponge!) Extracting oil depends on pressure inside
the reservoir to force the oil out. This works well enough when the reservoir is first tapped, but
as pressure decreases, the pressure needs to be maintained. Sometimes this is done by
injecting seawater or carbon dioxide. However, forcing the oil too much can damage a reservoir
and reduce the overall amount that can be extracted. One can never extract all the oil from a
reservoir (or water from a sponge by using a straw). There always comes a point when more
effort is put into extracting the oil than is economically justifiable.
Here's another way to think about it: Oil production is subject to the law of diminishing returns.
Initial efforts yield a lot of oil easily, but later efforts become more and more inefficient (you get
less output for your effort), until the point arrives when it's not worth putting more effort into it.
Harvesting a jar of peanut butter is also subject to the law of diminishing returns. It's easy to get
it out at first, but as you dig deeper you don't get as much peanut butter with each spoonful.
There comes a point when you're putting in a lot of effort scraping peanut butter off the sides of
the jar and getting very little for your trouble. At some point you discard the jar, even though there
may be a spoonful or two left.
Q: When will Peak Oil occur?
A: According to the extensive reserve and depletion analyses by petroleum geologists and oil
exploration scientists in the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), Peak Oil will
occur around 2008. (www.peakoil.net)
Q: What will the history of oil extraction look like?
A: The history of oil extraction will resemble a bell curve, with its uppermost point occurring in or
near the year 2008.
Q: Why is oil production described by a bell curve and a peak? Why isn't it linear or some
other shape?
A: The bell curve is a common shape for the extraction of many resources. Production started
out in the late nineteenth century when the first discoveries of oil led to a few wells being drilled.
Interest in oil extraction increased as people realized how useful it was and as economies
around the world began to feed off of oil and grow. More and more oil was discovered and the
rate of extraction increased.
After a point in the mid-1960s, oil discoveries started slowing down. (The year 1964 was a peak
– not in production, but in discovery.) This wasn't because people stopped looking, but because
the oil that was left was harder to find – even with the use of advanced technology. All of the
largest, easiest-to-exploit oil fields had already been discovered. Every year we discover less
than the year before. Since discoveries came to a maximum point and have dwindled and we
have been actively harvesting those discoveries, oil production must also come to a maximum
point and dwindle.
Because we can still squeeze more oil out of existing reservoirs, and we do still discover tiny
additional reservoirs, oil production will not fall off a cliff and stop all of a sudden. It will gradually
slow down when the easier-to-get oil has been extracted and the smaller oil fields and the
harder-to-get oil become the supplies we are exploiting.
Q: Aren't we discovering more oil all the time?
A: Yes, but not enough to keep up with what we're using. Worldwide discovery peaked in 1964.
Every year after that, we have discovered less than the year before. We are now using about five
barrels of oil for every one barrel we discover.
Think of the oil we have discovered as a savings account, or better yet, an inheritance, but we're
not earning any interest on it (the amount of oil that is actually in the reservoirs does not
increase). We have a certain amount of money (oil) available to use, say $100,000. We spend
$5,000 per month, and earn $1,000 per month (new discoveries add more oil to our "account").
This obviously can't go on forever. We have a net deficit of $4,000 per month. At this rate, the
$100,000 will only last for 25 months. We have another problem, however. We’re not using the
money (oil) at a constant rate. As the population grows and people try to emulate the lifestyle of
the United States, the demand for oil is increasing rather than staying constant.
Q: What is the difference between extraction and production?
A: Extraction refers to the removal of the oil from the ground. Production refers to the entire
process of extracting, refining, and using the oil.
Q: What are some of the consequences of Peak Oil?
A: Countries will likely experience conflict internally and externally. There is a strong chance that
wars will take place to decide who will control the remaining oil.
As long distance transportation for food and other important goods becomes too expensive and
energy intensive with declining oil supplies, local communities will have to become more self-
reliant and self-sustaining. In effect, the process of globalization will reverse as a massive
economic re-localization effort begins out of necessity.
Peak Oil will call into question our growth-based economic system. Thus the rising standards
of living to which we have become accustomed may actually begin to decline after the peak. At
the same time we believe that our quality the life may actually rise as people become more
interdependent and cooperative within their local communities.
Q: What will happen as Peak Oil occurs?
A: Oil prices will start to go up. Any goods that are produced with the help of oil will become
more expensive.
Q: What will happen after Peak Oil occurs?
A: As the global supply of oil begins to fall below the world's rising demands, there will be a
shortage. Oil prices will go up exponentially. For example, just a few years ago in California a
5% shortage in natural gas led to a 400% price increase.
Because oil is used to transport the goods of our consumer society from all over the nation and
globe, the price of most products will also go up. Food prices will be the most evident as food
spending as a percentage of income rises.
Furthermore, because energy prices and the economy are so closely linked, an economic
recession will be the most likely consequence. Rising national and consumer debt, increased
unemployment, and increased social unrest will all follow.
As we acclimate ourselves to a world of scarce oil, the use of oil for non-essential purposes will
decrease dramatically. Miles driven will decrease and people will drive more fuel efficient
vehicles. People will use less oil directly and indirectly because they cannot afford it. Living in a
suburb will become more difficult since cars won't be able to be used as much to get around.
Families will likely spend more time with each other. There will be an increasing interest in
organic farming out of necessity as food prices continue to escalate.
Oil production will decrease steadily each year until it is all gone in about 40 years. There will
still be oil left but it will be too costly to get it out– that is, it may take more energy to get it out than
it contains. The oil interval in human history will be over.
Q: We have enough oil to last 40 or 50 years. What's the problem?
A: Though we will still be extracting oil for another 40-50 years, every year after the peak our oil
production and consumption will decline further. Keep in mind too that the quality of the
remaining oil is not as good as the first half of the oil we extracted. Peak Oil will bring
tremendous changes to a world that is not only dependent upon oil but is dependent upon ever
increasing amounts of oil. Peak Oil represents the onset of a fundamental change in our way of
life. At the point when oil is basically gone, industrial society as we know it will be gone.
Also keep in mind that even if oil production could be maintained at current levels for 40-50
years, that is not a long time to come up with alternative arrangements!
Q: What is per capita oil production and what significance does it have?
A: The amount of oil available per person is per capita oil production. The amount of oil
produced per person began declining in the late 1970s. If world population had remained
constant, we would now have more oil available per person. But because the world population
is rapidly increasing, there is less oil available per person today than there was in the early
1970s.
This leads to the observation that some populations, such as that of the United States, use
more than their fair share of oil on a per capita basis. U.S. citizens use twenty times the oil of the
average world citizen; Europeans use fifteen times the oil of the average world citizen.
Q: What is "energy returned on energy invested" (EROEI)?
A: When considering the use of any energy source to replace oil, an important concept is that of
energy return on energy invested (EROEI). Energy resources are exploited at a cost. In other
words, one needs to use energy to get energy. EROEI is the ratio that measures this. If the ratio
is less than one – that is, if it takes more energy to get an energy source (such as oil from the
ground) than is in the energy source, there is no benefit to extracting it.
People exploit the resources that are easiest to access first, and only exploit the resources that
are hard to get at later on. Thus, as the age of cheap oil draws to a close, the remaining energy
resources available to exploit are naturally the ones that are not as easy to access and use. Any
substitution for oil will involve using a fuel of lower energy density and/or lesser convenience.
Q: I heard that the U.S. has 200 years of coal left, so why can't we just replace the oil with
coal?
A: It is not meaningful to speak of a certain number of years left regarding coal because that
assumes a constant demand between now and then. If coal were to replace oil then it would
last closer to 50 years than 200. Importantly, while coal can be used for some applications that
oil is currently used for, oil is the best fuel for transportation. It would be impractical to power
cars with coal.
Since coal has less energy stored in the same amount of mass than oil, more coal (by weight)
is needed than oil to provide the same amount of power. Indeed, the railroad industry moved
away from coal-fired steam engines to diesel-electric locomotives because an engine that uses
petroleum-based diesel fuel is inherently more efficient.
Because the energy density of coal, roughly speaking, is about half that of oil, one would need
coal weighing approximately twice as much as the equivalent amount of gasoline in order to
power the car. That would be equivalent to about 12 pounds of coal for every one gallon of
gasoline, which weighs about 6 pounds. And even then, while twice as much coal contains
about the same amount of energy as gasoline, it does not burn as hot as gasoline does, so the
equivalent amount of coal would not provide the equivalent horsepower to gasoline burned in a
car's engine.
Concerns continue to mount over the sulfur and carbon oxides that are released when coal is
burned. These chemicals fall back to the earth as "acid rain" and accumulate in bodies of water
often killing all plant and animal life. The acidification of lakes and rivers in the Northeastern U.
S. from Midwestern coal plants is well-documented.
Over the past decade a scientific consensus has developed on the issue of global climate
change. Carbon dioxide released from coal plants is a major contributor to the accumulation of
"greenhouse gases" in the atmosphere. These gases trap additional heat that usually escapes
from the earth. An overall heating trend can cause irradic temperature changes and extreme
weather events.
Q: What about hydrogen?
A: There are no reserves of hydrogen gas that can be pumped. Hydrogen has to be
manufactured. Manufacturing hydrogen, like manufacturing anything else, takes energy.
Think of hydrogen like electricity. You cannot mine electricity from the ground – you have to
create it. To create it, you have to convert a source of energy into electricity.
Oil, natural gas, solar radiation, and coal are examples of energy sources. They can be mined
or collected and used directly. Electricity, hydrogen, and disposable batteries are examples of
energy carriers. They cannot be mined. They have to be created by using energy sources.
Whenever energy is converted from a source to a carrier, energy is lost. (This phenomenon is
described by the second law of thermodynamics.) This means that more energy goes into
making electricity than is delivered on the other end of the transmission line. More energy goes
into making batteries than is collected from the battery. The same is true of hydrogen.
It is always more efficient to use oil, natural gas, solar radiation, or coal directly than to turn it
into electricity. But it is not always more convenient or useful.
Most hydrogen produced today is made by stripping the hydrogen from natural gas molecules
(they have one carbon atom and four hydrogen atoms) in a process called steam reformation.
High temperature steam reacts with the natural gas in the presence of a catalyst. In addition to
supplying the hydrogen, natural gas is often burned in order to create the high temperature
steam. Increasing use of natural gas at a time when natural gas demand is increasing and
natural gas is on its way to peaking just like oil is foolhardy.
Because of its limitations, hydrogen cannot live up to the high hopes politicians hold for it.
Talking about the "hydrogen economy" will keep people from dealing with the real issues. The
boom associated with oil and natural gas will soon be over.
Q: What about using ethanol made from corn as a substitute for gasoline?
A: In order to consider the potential benefit from the production of ethanol, one needs to
consider how much energy went into creating the ethanol. The farming of today uses a great
deal of energy from oil to grow the crops we have. If we use just as much or more energy to
make the ethanol than we get out of the ethanol, then there is no benefit to making it. This turns
out to be the case. Plus, one must consider how much farmland it would take to grow the crops.
Q: We'll simply develop alternative sources of energy to keep the economy going. This won't
be so difficult, will it?
A: Oil is the most concentrated and convenient source of energy available to us. It is high quality
energy that burns hotter than coal and wood. Energy from oil and other fossil fuels is not
susceptible to the vagaries of weather in the way that energy generated from wind and
photovoltaic panels is.
Alternative sources of energy are often used to make electricity, and the energy density of
batteries to store the energy does not compare with the energy density of oil. (Batteries provide
hundreds of watt-hours per kilogram at best compared to 13,500 Wh/kg for gasoline.) This
means that it will take more weight in batteries to do the same work as a certain amount of oil.
Alternatives can provide energy, but not in the amount it takes to satisfy the growing
consumption of global industrial society. This means that it will be impossible to maintain the
same level of energy use we currently have.
Q: How will we know when we've arrived at the peak?
A: It won't be possible to tell for sure when the peak occurs until after it actually happens. There
are warning signs we can look for, however. If OPEC announces that they have no spare
capacity, it is a good indication that they can no longer control world oil prices.
Q: Surely we'll find a technological fix to get ourselves out of this bind, don't you think?
A: There is a difference between technology and energy sources. Technology has never
invented a new material (except in bubble chambers). Technology is machines that use energy.
New energy technology is an oxymoron. Energy comes from the earth in the form of wood, coal,
oil, gas, uranium. Technology has only invented ways to use energy. A nuclear power plant is a
container for uranium reacting. Also new technology normally takes more energy
Q: What is Peak Oil
A: Peak Oil is the point in time when, on a worldwide basis, we will be extracting the most oil per
day from the ground that we ever will. Before Peak Oil we were not extracting as much, and after
Peak Oil we will not be extracting as much. Peak Oil is the point in time of maximum extraction.
Q: Why should I be concerned about Peak Oil?
A: Peak Oil represents a profound change in the conditions that have allowed economic growth
to proceed over the years. In the past few decades, there has been enough oil to meet demand
because the supply has been growing at the same time demand has been growing. This will
no longer be true after Peak Oil. Demand will not be met as supplies dwindle and oil prices will
rise. Other energy sources will not be able to do for us what oil did.
Q: Will this just mean higher prices at the pump?
A: Higher prices at the pump will certainly be one consequence. But oil is so engrained in the
way we live that the implications will go well beyond higher gasoline prices.
Think about the implications of a higher price at the pump. Factor in that the average distance
food travels in the U.S. from where it is made to where it is consumed is 1,200 miles. When it
costs more for fuel, it will cost more to move food. When it costs more to move food, food prices
will go up. Also, when it costs more for fuel, it will cost more to operate tractors, combines and
other farm machinery. If it costs more to operate farm equipment, the price of food will go up.
Furthermore, if it costs more to manufacture widgets because it is more expensive to deliver the
raw materials to the factory, the price of widgets will go up and people will buy fewer widgets.
The widget factories won't be able to justify having as many workers and will let many go.
People will have lost their jobs at a time when food is more expensive than ever.
This is only scratching the surface of possible implications. Peak Oil will affect every aspect of
global industrial society that uses energy directly or indirectly. The price of gasoline is one small
part of the picture.
Q: Does the arrival of Peak Oil mean we are running out of oil?
A: No. It means we have extracted about half of the oil we ever will – about one trillion barrels out
of a total two trillion barrels that the Earth has provided us. It also means we have extracted
most of the easy-to-get-at stores of oil. It is a warning sign that oil extraction on a large scale
cannot continue forever, and that society will have to get along with less oil in the near future.
Q: If half of the oil that ever existed is still in the ground, and demand for oil is rising now,
why can't we keep increasing oil extraction?
A: The oil that remains will not be as easy to get at as the oil we have taken so far.
Oil reservoirs are not like tanks that can be easily emptied. They are more like sponges. (Picture
using a straw to extract all the water from a sponge!) Extracting oil depends on pressure inside
the reservoir to force the oil out. This works well enough when the reservoir is first tapped, but
as pressure decreases, the pressure needs to be maintained. Sometimes this is done by
injecting seawater or carbon dioxide. However, forcing the oil too much can damage a reservoir
and reduce the overall amount that can be extracted. One can never extract all the oil from a
reservoir (or water from a sponge by using a straw). There always comes a point when more
effort is put into extracting the oil than is economically justifiable.
Here's another way to think about it: Oil production is subject to the law of diminishing returns.
Initial efforts yield a lot of oil easily, but later efforts become more and more inefficient (you get
less output for your effort), until the point arrives when it's not worth putting more effort into it.
Harvesting a jar of peanut butter is also subject to the law of diminishing returns. It's easy to get
it out at first, but as you dig deeper you don't get as much peanut butter with each spoonful.
There comes a point when you're putting in a lot of effort scraping peanut butter off the sides of
the jar and getting very little for your trouble. At some point you discard the jar, even though there
may be a spoonful or two left.
Q: When will Peak Oil occur?
A: According to the extensive reserve and depletion analyses by petroleum geologists and oil
exploration scientists in the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), Peak Oil will
occur around 2008. (www.peakoil.net)
Q: What will the history of oil extraction look like?
A: The history of oil extraction will resemble a bell curve, with its uppermost point occurring in or
near the year 2008.
Q: Why is oil production described by a bell curve and a peak? Why isn't it linear or some
other shape?
A: The bell curve is a common shape for the extraction of many resources. Production started
out in the late nineteenth century when the first discoveries of oil led to a few wells being drilled.
Interest in oil extraction increased as people realized how useful it was and as economies
around the world began to feed off of oil and grow. More and more oil was discovered and the
rate of extraction increased.
After a point in the mid-1960s, oil discoveries started slowing down. (The year 1964 was a peak
– not in production, but in discovery.) This wasn't because people stopped looking, but because
the oil that was left was harder to find – even with the use of advanced technology. All of the
largest, easiest-to-exploit oil fields had already been discovered. Every year we discover less
than the year before. Since discoveries came to a maximum point and have dwindled and we
have been actively harvesting those discoveries, oil production must also come to a maximum
point and dwindle.
Because we can still squeeze more oil out of existing reservoirs, and we do still discover tiny
additional reservoirs, oil production will not fall off a cliff and stop all of a sudden. It will gradually
slow down when the easier-to-get oil has been extracted and the smaller oil fields and the
harder-to-get oil become the supplies we are exploiting.
Q: Aren't we discovering more oil all the time?
A: Yes, but not enough to keep up with what we're using. Worldwide discovery peaked in 1964.
Every year after that, we have discovered less than the year before. We are now using about five
barrels of oil for every one barrel we discover.
Think of the oil we have discovered as a savings account, or better yet, an inheritance, but we're
not earning any interest on it (the amount of oil that is actually in the reservoirs does not
increase). We have a certain amount of money (oil) available to use, say $100,000. We spend
$5,000 per month, and earn $1,000 per month (new discoveries add more oil to our "account").
This obviously can't go on forever. We have a net deficit of $4,000 per month. At this rate, the
$100,000 will only last for 25 months. We have another problem, however. We’re not using the
money (oil) at a constant rate. As the population grows and people try to emulate the lifestyle of
the United States, the demand for oil is increasing rather than staying constant.
Q: What is the difference between extraction and production?
A: Extraction refers to the removal of the oil from the ground. Production refers to the entire
process of extracting, refining, and using the oil.
Q: What are some of the consequences of Peak Oil?
A: Countries will likely experience conflict internally and externally. There is a strong chance that
wars will take place to decide who will control the remaining oil.
As long distance transportation for food and other important goods becomes too expensive and
energy intensive with declining oil supplies, local communities will have to become more self-
reliant and self-sustaining. In effect, the process of globalization will reverse as a massive
economic re-localization effort begins out of necessity.
Peak Oil will call into question our growth-based economic system. Thus the rising standards
of living to which we have become accustomed may actually begin to decline after the peak. At
the same time we believe that our quality the life may actually rise as people become more
interdependent and cooperative within their local communities.
Q: What will happen as Peak Oil occurs?
A: Oil prices will start to go up. Any goods that are produced with the help of oil will become
more expensive.
Q: What will happen after Peak Oil occurs?
A: As the global supply of oil begins to fall below the world's rising demands, there will be a
shortage. Oil prices will go up exponentially. For example, just a few years ago in California a
5% shortage in natural gas led to a 400% price increase.
Because oil is used to transport the goods of our consumer society from all over the nation and
globe, the price of most products will also go up. Food prices will be the most evident as food
spending as a percentage of income rises.
Furthermore, because energy prices and the economy are so closely linked, an economic
recession will be the most likely consequence. Rising national and consumer debt, increased
unemployment, and increased social unrest will all follow.
As we acclimate ourselves to a world of scarce oil, the use of oil for non-essential purposes will
decrease dramatically. Miles driven will decrease and people will drive more fuel efficient
vehicles. People will use less oil directly and indirectly because they cannot afford it. Living in a
suburb will become more difficult since cars won't be able to be used as much to get around.
Families will likely spend more time with each other. There will be an increasing interest in
organic farming out of necessity as food prices continue to escalate.
Oil production will decrease steadily each year until it is all gone in about 40 years. There will
still be oil left but it will be too costly to get it out– that is, it may take more energy to get it out than
it contains. The oil interval in human history will be over.
Q: We have enough oil to last 40 or 50 years. What's the problem?
A: Though we will still be extracting oil for another 40-50 years, every year after the peak our oil
production and consumption will decline further. Keep in mind too that the quality of the
remaining oil is not as good as the first half of the oil we extracted. Peak Oil will bring
tremendous changes to a world that is not only dependent upon oil but is dependent upon ever
increasing amounts of oil. Peak Oil represents the onset of a fundamental change in our way of
life. At the point when oil is basically gone, industrial society as we know it will be gone.
Also keep in mind that even if oil production could be maintained at current levels for 40-50
years, that is not a long time to come up with alternative arrangements!
Q: What is per capita oil production and what significance does it have?
A: The amount of oil available per person is per capita oil production. The amount of oil
produced per person began declining in the late 1970s. If world population had remained
constant, we would now have more oil available per person. But because the world population
is rapidly increasing, there is less oil available per person today than there was in the early
1970s.
This leads to the observation that some populations, such as that of the United States, use
more than their fair share of oil on a per capita basis. U.S. citizens use twenty times the oil of the
average world citizen; Europeans use fifteen times the oil of the average world citizen.
Q: What is "energy returned on energy invested" (EROEI)?
A: When considering the use of any energy source to replace oil, an important concept is that of
energy return on energy invested (EROEI). Energy resources are exploited at a cost. In other
words, one needs to use energy to get energy. EROEI is the ratio that measures this. If the ratio
is less than one – that is, if it takes more energy to get an energy source (such as oil from the
ground) than is in the energy source, there is no benefit to extracting it.
People exploit the resources that are easiest to access first, and only exploit the resources that
are hard to get at later on. Thus, as the age of cheap oil draws to a close, the remaining energy
resources available to exploit are naturally the ones that are not as easy to access and use. Any
substitution for oil will involve using a fuel of lower energy density and/or lesser convenience.
Q: I heard that the U.S. has 200 years of coal left, so why can't we just replace the oil with
coal?
A: It is not meaningful to speak of a certain number of years left regarding coal because that
assumes a constant demand between now and then. If coal were to replace oil then it would
last closer to 50 years than 200. Importantly, while coal can be used for some applications that
oil is currently used for, oil is the best fuel for transportation. It would be impractical to power
cars with coal.
Since coal has less energy stored in the same amount of mass than oil, more coal (by weight)
is needed than oil to provide the same amount of power. Indeed, the railroad industry moved
away from coal-fired steam engines to diesel-electric locomotives because an engine that uses
petroleum-based diesel fuel is inherently more efficient.
Because the energy density of coal, roughly speaking, is about half that of oil, one would need
coal weighing approximately twice as much as the equivalent amount of gasoline in order to
power the car. That would be equivalent to about 12 pounds of coal for every one gallon of
gasoline, which weighs about 6 pounds. And even then, while twice as much coal contains
about the same amount of energy as gasoline, it does not burn as hot as gasoline does, so the
equivalent amount of coal would not provide the equivalent horsepower to gasoline burned in a
car's engine.
Concerns continue to mount over the sulfur and carbon oxides that are released when coal is
burned. These chemicals fall back to the earth as "acid rain" and accumulate in bodies of water
often killing all plant and animal life. The acidification of lakes and rivers in the Northeastern U.
S. from Midwestern coal plants is well-documented.
Over the past decade a scientific consensus has developed on the issue of global climate
change. Carbon dioxide released from coal plants is a major contributor to the accumulation of
"greenhouse gases" in the atmosphere. These gases trap additional heat that usually escapes
from the earth. An overall heating trend can cause irradic temperature changes and extreme
weather events.
Q: What about hydrogen?
A: There are no reserves of hydrogen gas that can be pumped. Hydrogen has to be
manufactured. Manufacturing hydrogen, like manufacturing anything else, takes energy.
Think of hydrogen like electricity. You cannot mine electricity from the ground – you have to
create it. To create it, you have to convert a source of energy into electricity.
Oil, natural gas, solar radiation, and coal are examples of energy sources. They can be mined
or collected and used directly. Electricity, hydrogen, and disposable batteries are examples of
energy carriers. They cannot be mined. They have to be created by using energy sources.
Whenever energy is converted from a source to a carrier, energy is lost. (This phenomenon is
described by the second law of thermodynamics.) This means that more energy goes into
making electricity than is delivered on the other end of the transmission line. More energy goes
into making batteries than is collected from the battery. The same is true of hydrogen.
It is always more efficient to use oil, natural gas, solar radiation, or coal directly than to turn it
into electricity. But it is not always more convenient or useful.
Most hydrogen produced today is made by stripping the hydrogen from natural gas molecules
(they have one carbon atom and four hydrogen atoms) in a process called steam reformation.
High temperature steam reacts with the natural gas in the presence of a catalyst. In addition to
supplying the hydrogen, natural gas is often burned in order to create the high temperature
steam. Increasing use of natural gas at a time when natural gas demand is increasing and
natural gas is on its way to peaking just like oil is foolhardy.
Because of its limitations, hydrogen cannot live up to the high hopes politicians hold for it.
Talking about the "hydrogen economy" will keep people from dealing with the real issues. The
boom associated with oil and natural gas will soon be over.
Q: What about using ethanol made from corn as a substitute for gasoline?
A: In order to consider the potential benefit from the production of ethanol, one needs to
consider how much energy went into creating the ethanol. The farming of today uses a great
deal of energy from oil to grow the crops we have. If we use just as much or more energy to
make the ethanol than we get out of the ethanol, then there is no benefit to making it. This turns
out to be the case. Plus, one must consider how much farmland it would take to grow the crops.
Q: We'll simply develop alternative sources of energy to keep the economy going. This won't
be so difficult, will it?
A: Oil is the most concentrated and convenient source of energy available to us. It is high quality
energy that burns hotter than coal and wood. Energy from oil and other fossil fuels is not
susceptible to the vagaries of weather in the way that energy generated from wind and
photovoltaic panels is.
Alternative sources of energy are often used to make electricity, and the energy density of
batteries to store the energy does not compare with the energy density of oil. (Batteries provide
hundreds of watt-hours per kilogram at best compared to 13,500 Wh/kg for gasoline.) This
means that it will take more weight in batteries to do the same work as a certain amount of oil.
Alternatives can provide energy, but not in the amount it takes to satisfy the growing
consumption of global industrial society. This means that it will be impossible to maintain the
same level of energy use we currently have.
Q: How will we know when we've arrived at the peak?
A: It won't be possible to tell for sure when the peak occurs until after it actually happens. There
are warning signs we can look for, however. If OPEC announces that they have no spare
capacity, it is a good indication that they can no longer control world oil prices.
Q: Surely we'll find a technological fix to get ourselves out of this bind, don't you think?
A: There is a difference between technology and energy sources. Technology has never
invented a new material (except in bubble chambers). Technology is machines that use energy.
New energy technology is an oxymoron. Energy comes from the earth in the form of wood, coal,
oil, gas, uranium. Technology has only invented ways to use energy. A nuclear power plant is a
container for uranium reacting. Also new technology normally takes more energy
- -- Courtesy of The Community Solution
Peak Oil is a theory proposed by geophysicist M. King
Hubbert, hence the theory is also referred to as Hubbert's
Peak.
Hubbert correctly predicted the peak of U.S. oil production 15 years
before it occurred, predicting it to within a span of a year or two.
Basically he asserted that the U.S. would reach the halfway point of the
available cheap oil in the early 1970s; after that point the oil supply would
decline, it would not be able to meet demand, and it would be more
expensive to extract. The OPEC oil embargo of 1973 coincides with the
peak oil of U.S oil.
His model was found to be sound and was applied to global oil production, with
bodies like the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas locating that peak around
2007. The price of oil per barrel - around $60 (when this article was released,
however, as of November 6, 2007, it's nearly $96) compared to $20 less than five
years ago - is one indication that we're near that peak, as is our continued presence in
the Middle East. Whatever the year for the actual peak, it's the after-effects, or
empending crisis is what have people worried.
Crisis?
"The crisis will come not when we pump the last drop of oil but rather when the rate at
which oil can be pumped out of the ground starts to diminish." (Andrew Goodstein, Out
of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil)
The results of such a crisis? Savage competition among nations for oil supplies.
Increasing transportation costs. Cutbacks in economic activity. High inflation. Global
depression. Reduced food supplies (because agriculture today depends on oil for
truck and tractor fuel as well as for pesticides and herbicides), which could lead to
widespread starvation.
"Civilization as we know it is coming to an end soon."
Some people agree with this steep slide into a post-oil future, most notably James
Howard Kunstler - who chronicles the impending crisis in his Clusterf*ck Nation blog -
and Matt Savinar, who predicts that, "Civilization as we know it is coming to an end
soon.
After reading that, does living in rural America seem like a smart
choice to you?
Hubbert, hence the theory is also referred to as Hubbert's
Peak.
Hubbert correctly predicted the peak of U.S. oil production 15 years
before it occurred, predicting it to within a span of a year or two.
Basically he asserted that the U.S. would reach the halfway point of the
available cheap oil in the early 1970s; after that point the oil supply would
decline, it would not be able to meet demand, and it would be more
expensive to extract. The OPEC oil embargo of 1973 coincides with the
peak oil of U.S oil.
His model was found to be sound and was applied to global oil production, with
bodies like the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas locating that peak around
2007. The price of oil per barrel - around $60 (when this article was released,
however, as of November 6, 2007, it's nearly $96) compared to $20 less than five
years ago - is one indication that we're near that peak, as is our continued presence in
the Middle East. Whatever the year for the actual peak, it's the after-effects, or
empending crisis is what have people worried.
Crisis?
"The crisis will come not when we pump the last drop of oil but rather when the rate at
which oil can be pumped out of the ground starts to diminish." (Andrew Goodstein, Out
of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil)
The results of such a crisis? Savage competition among nations for oil supplies.
Increasing transportation costs. Cutbacks in economic activity. High inflation. Global
depression. Reduced food supplies (because agriculture today depends on oil for
truck and tractor fuel as well as for pesticides and herbicides), which could lead to
widespread starvation.
"Civilization as we know it is coming to an end soon."
Some people agree with this steep slide into a post-oil future, most notably James
Howard Kunstler - who chronicles the impending crisis in his Clusterf*ck Nation blog -
and Matt Savinar, who predicts that, "Civilization as we know it is coming to an end
soon.
- " I find it hard to argue that, but it can be read in a multitude of ways, so my
reading is different than someone else's or even the author's original
intentions. I see that the U.S.'s selfish, gas-guzzling, suburban, long-
commuting, NASCAR, SUV ways are going to change whether we like it or not.
The degree to which that happens and how is what people and corporations
like Chevron are trying to figure out.
Pardon my naivete and cynicism, but I think we should do more ourselves
rather than sit back and let the government and corporations take care of
everything, because we know who they'll take care of. Drive less. Walk to the
store, the library, the movies. Live near where you work. Grow your own
vegetables and herbs. Build with local materials. There's a multitude of things
we can do ourselves that won't change the world but will at least make us less
susceptible to the impacts of Peak Oil, while maybe even making our lives
better."
After reading that, does living in rural America seem like a smart
choice to you?
Hubbert's theory uses a bell curve to
illustrate the supply of cheap oil,
showing a steep drop - or cliff. Click
on chart for larger view.
illustrate the supply of cheap oil,
showing a steep drop - or cliff. Click
on chart for larger view.
Rise of oil to it's peak of $95.75 a
barrel, November 6, 2007
barrel, November 6, 2007