Stanford Initiative on the Environment and Sustainability

This is a link to an ambitious project from Stanford University seeking to understand the environmental ramifications of sustainability. The site is divided into four sections dealing with energy and the climate, land use, oceans and fresh water. I dont' know whether they will produce any useful answers to those powerful questions but if the following excerpt from the site is any indication, they are certainly heading in the right direction.

Researchers and scholars at Stanford are asking the key question: Can we adequately meet current human needs while protecting and restoring planetary life support systems for the welfare of people today and generations yet to come?

[Link: Stanford Initiative on the Environment and Sustainability ]

U.N. climate pact unlikely until after Bush

The world is trying to solve a very pressing climate problem. As a major user of fossil fuels the United States should be in the forefront of this process. Here is what one of the experts at a recent climate conference had to say.

"Everyone is waiting for the United States. I think the whole process will be on ice until 2009," when Bush's second term expires, said Paal Prestrud, head of the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo.

Is anyone embarrassed for the United States. I am. We cannot be part of a solution to global warming if we don't participate. But as the major contributor to the greenhouse gases that cause global warming we sure are a real part of the problem. If we don't participate not only does nothing get done but we will be blamed for all of the perceived problems that global warming might bring. We have to get this thing off dead center somehow.
[Link: U.N. climate pact unlikely until after Bush - Yahoo News]

Peddling PetroProzac: CERA ignores 10 warning signposts of peak oil

A recent comment by Daniel Yergin of Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA)to the effect that there really isn't an oil problem and we will have plenty for many years to come encouraged this response by ASPO-USA. I like their lead paragraphs.

As Yergin well knows, peak oil does not mean we are “running out.” This is a red herring. To be fair, some peak oil commentators have been equally obtuse and shrill. It sometimes seems to us that both sides in the debate are shouting down a well. The public interest would be better served by a more intelligent discussion.
Peak oil is not the end, nor even the beginning of the end of the Oil Age. Indeed, at peak the world will have more oil available than it ever had before; to the casual observer all will appear well. No one can predict how rapidly oil production will fall once it peaks, plateaus, and begins to decline. Because heroic, expensive efforts will be made to reduce demand and expand supply, the plateau could last for some years, and the backside of the global production curve is likely to be shallower that the ascent. On this we agree with CERA. Eventually, however, production will fall, even as human numbers continue to climb. On a Btu basis, even a 2% annual reduction in global oil supply is equivalent to losing the energy provided by 80 nuclear power plants. The prospect of such reductions recurring year after year is most sobering.

Trying to keep the discussion civil the authors clearly lay out the problems with Yergin's argument. The the heart of the article includes ten warning signposts that herald the arrival of Peak Oil.
[Link: Peddling PetroProzac: CERA ignores 10 warning signposts of peak oil]

Update (11/18/06): This link is to a an article [Countdown to $100 oil (35) - peak oil: the last skeptics capitulate (CERA)] by Daily Kos contributor Jerome a Paris. He reaches the conclusion, and I must agree, that Yergin is really just predicting a different Peak Oil rather than no Peak Oil. I see Yergin's argument being entirely dependent on the feasibility of exploiting hard to reach deposits (very deep sea) and difficult to produce sources (tar sands). Extraction of these resources will cost a lot money and energy. EROEI and $$$ profits will be difficult. I vote for something in between the two definitions of Peak Oil. Nobody is really voting for no Peak Oil.

Some more thoughts on the Future

Some more thoughts about the past, present and the future. A couple of posts ago I wrote about my recent realization that we are living in a present that is totally unique relative to our past and our future. The reason that I believe that, is because the reality that defines a culture's existence is completely tied to its vision of the future. Since we started using hydrocarbons we have built a reality that depends not only on those hydrocarbons but on all of the things that are made possible by having hydrocarbons as well as the continued availability of hydrocarbons... forever. We cannot conceive of a world without them.
Our perception of the future, therefore, is not valid and any long term decisions our society makes are, by definition, wrong. That is why I think we will not be able to move into the "real" future until we finally understand and accept that we will have to live without hydrocarbons.
Before hydrocarbons people did not think of unending progress, unlimited technical innovation and, indeed, continuous economic growth. There was no way to get to that frame of mind without an unending supply of cheap and easily transported energy. Now, although there actually isn't an unending supply of hydrocarbons, there is so much of it that we have totally built our world view on its availability. We have essentially accepted that it is in infinite supply. In the future people will not expect hydrocarbons to be available forever. That will profoundly change the way we live our life. In this Blog I am going to try and get my mind around our future. It won't be easy because I was born, and have lived a full life, on the leading edge of the hydrocarbon age. I really only have that reality to work with.

Democrats and 'Energy Independence'

James Kunstler is sometimes a rough read but his writing style is not nearly as rough as his ideas. In this piece he is lamenting that the powers that be are promoting the idea that energy dependence is merely a matter of switching from one technology to another. In fact, he says, there is another aspect to energy independence. We will have to give up a lot of our mobility and change not just the mode but the quantity of transportation we use. I see many instances of this energy ignorance in the press today. Over time we will begin to understand that the "independence" in energy independence really means living without it. But that surely hasn't happened yet.
[Link: Democrats and 'Energy Independence']

Past, Present and Future

Everything has a past, a present and a future. Humankind is no exception. Lately, I have been thinking about our (for argument's sake I have included myself in humankind) past, present and future. I have come to the conclusion that our past existed from the time we separated from the evolutionary chimpanzee line (or more accurately from an extinct line that became both humans and the modern chimpanzee) to become distinctly human, until the time that we first extracted hydrocarbons from the earth to produce energy. Our present, then, spans the time between our first use of hydrocarbons and now. That is pretty long time to be calling the present you might say. It isn't really, it is just a tiny bit of time in our life as a unique species (see below). I think of the present in this way because it has resulted in a way of life for us that is unsustainable and will soon disappear in favor of what I now think of as our future.
So lets say that the age of hydrocarbons is our present. What does that portend for the future. Hydrocarbons are in finite supply. They aren't always easy to find, and we certainly haven't found them all yet, but there will come a time when we can't find enough to satisfy our desires. We don't know that yet. The idea that we may have to live without hydrocarbons hasn't sunk in to our collective psyches. At that point in time when we "suddenly" realize that we are going to run out of hydrocarbons someday, and can't possibly replace them with sustainable energy, we will have entered into our future.
What will this future be like. Who knows? Unfortunately we have, with the help of all that cheap energy, multiplied our numbers beyond any hope of maintaining our present level of consumption once hydrocarbons are constrained. Undoubtedly, in the future we will be required to reduce our use of the planets resources in every way . We have not begun to address those questions however. We haven't, because we haven't admitted to ourselves that we need to. The future is not yet here. Oil wars and climate change are trying to tell us. Eventually we will understand.

Just for fun. A while ago I put a little timeline together as a way to help me visualize the unfolding of humankind's story. My device was to fold all of the history of humankind into a 24 hour period. The life of humanity in one day. I was very surprised by the perspective that it gave. I am placing it here to reinforce my claim that modern history is just a moment in time.

A Day in the Life of Humanity

12AM Midnight (24 hrs ago) - the genealogical line of Great Apes that will become Homo Sapiens splits from the line that will become Chimpanzees.
4PM (8 hrs ago) - 16 hrs later humankind has made much progress. They have mostly developed the upright stance, large brain and tool using specialties that will eventually be their trademark as true humans.
8PM (4 hrs ago) - In another 4 hrs they will have mostly achieved their final status in preparation for life as Homo Sapiens. Their physical stature, brain capacity, tool making skills and probably the use of language and culture have been established. They are master of their domain which is most of the temperate eastern hemisphere. They are accomplished hunter-gatherers. There are still other hominid lines around at this time. They will not survive.
11:57PM (3 mins. ago) - It is finally time for a major change in their lifestyle. For the last 23 hours and 57 minutes they have been living under nature's rules, moving from place to place and obtaining everything they need from their local environment or by trading with fellow travelers whose path they might cross. But now, a few humans decide that they are going to control the life cycles of some of the plant's and animals they need to sustain themselves. They are going to become farmers. This decision results in several compromises and leads to many complications. They will need to stay in one place to tend their domesticated plants and animals. They will have to cooperate with each other. They will have to bring the resources they need to their new fixed living place if they are not available locally. Hierarchal social organization, economic relationships, division of labor, technical innovation - many new concepts emerge from this new way of life. There are probably several million humans now.
11:59PM (1 min. ago) - By now this new human lifestyle has become the norm. Great cities, sprawling nation-states and grand cultures and religions have grown around the fixed locations suited for growing plants and animals for food. Humans have spread to nearly all of the land masses of the earth. Resources are sometimes exhausted. Civilizations come and go and wars are fought to secure and obtain resources from neighboring human populations. Humans begin to use writing to record their activities. Great constructions begin to occur and monuments to rise. The human population could be as many as 25 million.
11:59:25PM (35 secs. ago) To honor a central figure in one of the major religions of the world, many humans decide to begin counting time now, celebrating his birth.
11:59:55PM (5 secs. ago) It is time for another major change in their lifestyle. Until this point in time humans have been limited in their use of energy to that provided by the sun and the biological, wind and water cycles that it drives. But clever humans have found a new way to produce energy, by burning underground combustible wastes left over from ancient biological processes. This activity bypasses some very serious constraints on human activity while postponing the negative feedback of its own use into the future. Increased use of these resources allow significant improvements in the quality of life for many more humans. Human labor can now be reduced or amplified at will. Tools can be manufactured that will allow more tools to be built that will, in turn, exponentially raise the ability of humans to consume resources. Population may now be as high as 800 million humans.
11:59:58PM (2 secs. ago) A new form of the stored energy is found. It is in a powerful, portable liquid form that can be moved easily to where it is needed. All humans covet this new energy source. The new energy source enables great increases in resource conversion and food production. Many more humans arise to consume these newly produced goods. The world soon devotes itself, full time, to procuring, producing, consuming and protecting this new energy source. There are 1500 million humans on the earth now.
11:59:59.95PM (.05 secs. ago) At this time a few humans realize that, in the last two seconds, half of all this wondrous new energy source known to exist has already been used up. Oh, and by the way, in that same two seconds 5000 million additional humans became poised to use up the rest.
12AM Midnight: You are here.

Peak Oil is not the problem

Let's face it. "Peak Oil" is just a math problem. In the real world it doesn't mean a thing. In the real world there used to be a lot of oil. In the real world there eventually won't be much oil left at all. That is because in between those two real world end points we will be producing and using as much of it as we can. We can't help ourselves. Peak Oil is just as much oil as we ever can produce. The usage over time might look like that curve, it might not. My first inclination is not to worry about how much oil I use. I won't effect the final outcome. As much of it as can be used will all eventually be used no matter what I do.
That isn't the whole story though. Even though I believe we are bound to quickly use it all up, I do feel there are good reasons not to. From a standpoint of the climate, for instance, we shouldn't use oil at all. We should leave it in the ground and find another way to power our lives that doesn't carry the cost to our atmosphere of carbon based fuels. There is another compelling reason for not using oil as well. When it is gone it is gone. Anything that oil might have provided to future generations will be foreclosed. Leaving aside the fact that they would never be able to fashion an industrial civilization like our own without oil, our descendants will not have the benefits of this resource no matter what grand magic could potentially be derived from its use (think medicines, plastics, industrial chemicals).
We were given a great gift. By using it up as quickly as we can, and in many cases for completely non-essential purposes, we are taking a huge pile of chips off the table for future generations. Can you imagine explaining someday to your great-granddaughter that she can't have her petrochemical based artificial kidney because you used the oil to pave your driveway. I don't think it is too radical to claim that our most important task as a species right now might be to find a way to live with out oil. No matter how little we use we will eventually run out. If we are lucky we will learn how to live without it before that happens. If we are really lucky we will be able to save a little for posterity.