Dawn of the Solar Era , Aube de l 'ère solaire ? .
DAW N
O F
T H E
S O L A R
E R A
ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
AUBE DE L' ERE SOLAIRE
http://www.ecotopia.com/ases/SolarToday/DawnOfTheSolarEra.pdf
TRES BONNE PRESENTATION 19 PAGES
ANGLAIS
www.solartoday.16 .org SOLAR TODAY
Since the beginning of our short oil era around 1860,
world population has increased dramatically. This population
growth has been fueled substantially by oil. In the United
States, food travels more than 1,000 miles on average, requiring
over 10 times the petroleum energy to produce than its
solar energy food value (calories). As a practical matter, we
are eating mostly petroleum.
Many societies throughout history have faced resource
depletion. History tells us that Plato deplored the deforestation
in Greece, and that the Greeks started using passive
solar orientation in their settlements when they ran out of
firewood. Archeologists have found many societies that disintegrated
because they depleted their resources with no
concern for the future. Some simply abandoned their settlements
and moved to fertile land. Others, like the people on
Easter Island, could no longer move. They had cut down all
their trees and couldn’t even make crude boats to fish.
Developed and developing countries alike are addicted to
cheap oil. For the United States, depletion is going to be especially
difficult. Americans use oil as if it will never run out.
The country is designed and built around cars using cheap
gasoline. With fossil fuel resources becoming scarce, we
have to learn to make do with what we have peacefully or
we will have war, depleting humanity’s collective resources
even further.
What might be the possible early reactions to peak oil?
Conservation: Whenever natural disasters or political
disruptions shed light on our energy
vulnerability, earnest appeals for
conservation can be heard. Conservation
can be voluntary: I can
choose to buy a Toyota Prius and
still go to the beach on the weekend.
I will use less oil, but my
lifestyle will be preserved.
Deprivation: As oil supplies
continue to dwindle, energy conservation
will cease to be voluntary.
That may lead to rationing if we
make a reasoned response. But if
depletion is not managed effectively,
deprivation will overwhelm
efforts to conserve rationally. As
shortages impact the industrialized
world, trips to the beach will be
sparse. Lifestyles will change.
Conflict:With oil as an essential
foundation of productive modern
agriculture and starvation already
intense in certain regions, it can be
argued that the poor of the world are
already deprived, involuntary participants
in energy conservation.
Energy inequities will continue to
grow between the haves and the
have-nots, and the struggle over the
remaining oil reserves will intensify.
A Wake-Up Call
Peak oil is an emerging reality. To avoid disaster, solar energy must rise to meet the oil depletion challenge.
RONALD B. SWENSON
1:0 1:20 1:40 1:60 1:80 1:100 1:120
Solar Thermal Electric
Photovoltaics
Wind Turbines
Geothermal
Hydro
Ethanol
Firewood
Willow Biomass
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Coal to Liquid
Coal
Oil (Tar) Sands
Imported Oil, Today
Imported Oil, 1970
Domestic Oil, Today
Domestic Oil, 1970
Domestic Oil, 1930
Energy Return on Investment
Sources: Various publications by Charles A. S. Hall, Cutler J. Cleveland, Robert Costanza
and Robert Kaufmann (conventional), and the authors (renewables)
Estimated Net Energy Yield
of Conventional and Renewable Sources in the U.S.
March/April 2006 17
Some say the conflict in Iraq is a grab for oil. Whether true or not,
how might we avoid conflicts over energy resources?
Substitution: We will inevitably have to find other energy
sources, substituting new energy for oil and what oil does. Are
there solutions close at hand?
No Answers in Non-Conventional Oil, Nuclear
One place where the peak oil message is being heard is at the
margins of the oil, gas and coal industries. As energy prices rise
exponentially, researchers are attempting to exploit carbon-intensive,
non-conventional fossil fuels to replace transportation fuels.
Massive investments have been made to extract tar sands in
Alberta; research is ramping up to find a way to convert oil shale
in Wyoming and Colorado; and improved technologies are being
developed to convert coal to liquids, using the same process that
fueled Hitler’s desperate army.
But such attempts have produced inadequate amounts of net
energy. For heat to extract oil from tar sands, natural gas equivalent
to one-third of a barrel is used per barrel. This natural gas
is in addition to the liquid fuels and electricity needed for mining,
refining and environmental remediation. Recognizing rising
natural gas prices, advocates are even suggesting nuclear power
to replace natural gas for heat in the extraction process.
Nuclear power is also being examined for the extraction of oil
shale. This misnamed substance (neither shale nor oil but marlstone
and kerogen, an immature hydrocarbon) must be heated
under pressure to convert it to oil. One proponent in Colorado
How Will We Fill the
Fossil Fuel Gap?
Solar energy far exceeds all other possible forms
of substitution, with none of nuclear energy’s safety
and waste-disposal challenges.
The Energy Challenge
13 terawatts (TW) continuous world energy consumption in 2005
30 TW projected demand in 2050
Projected shortfall = 17 to 20 TW*
NONCARBON RESOURCES
Hydropower
4.6 TW global theoretical
potential
0.7 TW technically feasible
0.5 TW installed capacity
Tides/Ocean Currents
< 2 TW cumulative energy
globally
Biomass
7 to 10 TW global theoretical
potential
Geothermal
12 TW globally, of which only
a small fraction could be
practically extracted
Wind
50 TW global theoretical
potential
2 to 4 TW economically feasible
land usage, plus additional
offshore potential
Sources: Energy and Transportation: Challenges for the Chemical Sciences in the 21st Century
(National Academies Press, 2003) and Basic Research Needs for Solar Energy Utilization (2005,
U.S. Department of Energy Office of Basic Energy Sciences).
The Atlantic County Utilities Authority dedicated the Jersey-
Atlantic Wind Farm, supported by solar power, in Atlantic City,
N.J., in December.
ALTERNITY POWER
envisions a nuclear facility generating more power to heat oil shale
in situ than all electricity now consumed statewide. Water requirements
and environmental impacts could be huge.
As the informed public becomes aware of the impact of greenhouse
gases, nuclear power is being promoted again, this time as
a carbon-free energy source. But the popular notion that nuclear
is carbon-neutral is faulty. High-grade uranium ores have already
been exploited, and the mining and refining of lower-grade uranium
ores are increasingly fossil-fuel intensive.
If all bets are placed on marginal fossil fuels and nuclear
power, the consequences for society will be dire. Perpetuating the
automotive fleet, for example, may seem laudable. But propping
up the fleet with low-grade fuels could be more dangerous than
doing nothing because, as U.S. Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett suggests in
his article (page 27), these marginal sources too will run out, and
humanity will be left high and dry.
Only Solar Energy Can Fill the Gap
Meanwhile, renewable energy technologies are being brushed
aside by some peak oil “experts” as too intermittent or diffuse to
merit serious attention. Let’s examine a few of these objections
to a full-scale transformation to renewables.
“Solar energy, plant biomass and other renewable forms of energy
are diffuse forms of energy.”
Direct sunlight is indeed diffuse, but thin collectors are a
perfect match to diffuse. Mirrored surfaces on solar concentrators
Nuclear
10 TW, based on construction
of a new 1-gigawatt
nuclear fission plant per day
for the next 50 years
Solar
120,000 TW global theoretical
potential
600 TW available incident
solar power
60 TW technically feasible
generated power based on
10 per cent conversion
efficiency
20 TW based on usage of
just 0.16 percent of global
land area and 10 percent
conversion efficiency
*1 TW equals 1 million megawatts
(MW). For context, if a large electric
power plant generates 1,000 MW of
power, it would require 1,000 such
power plants to produce 1 TW.
www.solartoday.18 .org SOLAR TODAY
are thin. Solar cells are thin, and thin-film cells are even thinner.
Furthermore, sunlight is far more evenly distributed around the
globe than is oil.
“Photovoltaic electricity is expensive.”
The profitability test is often the result of accumulated political
decisions favoring special interests. In economics it is formally
assumed that oil and other natural resources have no value until
they are “produced” (i.e., extracted), and then the only value
assigned to the resources is the cost of extracting them. They are
free for the taking, and so we have been paying nothing for the
inherent value of oil. Lobbying efforts have provided large subsidies
for oil. Externalities are not charged at the gas pump. Preferential
tax treatments, highway construction and defense budgets
underpin the oil economy.
Renewable energy subsidies are beginning to level the playing
field. As fossil fuel costs increase, the economics of renewable energy
will transform the market. (See January/February SOLAR TODAY
for features on the theme, “Solar Energy Cost Breakthrough Ahead?”)
“The EROI (energy return on investment, or net yield) for fossil fuels
tends to be large, while that for solar tends to be low.”
A hundred years ago, oil gushers yielded high net-energy recovery
rates, but today solar, hydroelectric and wind power have net
energy yields higher than conventional fuels such as oil, gas and
coal, and an order of magnitude better than non-conventional fossil
fuels. With their inherently high net-energy yields, renewables
can be ramped up rapidly. (See table, “Estimated Net Energy Yield of
Conventional and Renewable Sources in the U.S.,” page 16.)
“Neither solar nor wind power is an immediate, large-scale solution
to the energy problem. … Plants, on average, capture only about 0.1
percent of the solar energy reaching the Earth.”
Humanity’s “primary energy production,” including all fossil
fuels, nuclear power, hydroelectric and renewables, is 13 terawatts
(equivalent to 13,000 large power plants), less than 1/100 of 1 percent
of the 170,000 terawatts continuously delivered to the earth
as sunlight. With 600 terawatts of terrestrial potential, solar energy
far exceeds all other possible forms of substitution. (See sidebar,
“How Will We Fill the Fossil Fuel Gap?” page 17.)
Transportation in a post-cheap-oil world poses special challenges.
If non-conventional fossil fuels are untenable and
A Solar Future Long Anticipated
When Hubbert predicted global peak oil, Farrington Daniels
focused on the solution.
The afternoon of Sept. 15, 1948, was an important date for
solar energy, the petroleum industry and the International
Solar Energy Society (ISES). The American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) was 100 years old, and AAAS
President Edmund Sinnott, Ph.D., invited three prominent
speakers for a Symposium on Sources of Energy at the Centennial
Celebration in Washington, D.C.:
■ Dr. M. King Hubbert, a geologist working for Shell Oil,
addressed oil depletion, as the “Golden Century of Oil” was
getting under way.
■ Dr. Farrington Daniels, a physical chemist who had been in
charge of the Chicago branch of the Manhattan Project and
later started the organization that would become ISES,
addressed the future of solar energy, while solar energy was still
a dream.
■ Dr. Eugene P. Wigner of Princeton, who would receive
the 1963 Nobel Prize in Physics and who had worked on the
Manhattan Project for Daniels, addressed the future of atomic
energy, about eight years before there were any commercial
power reactors.
At this symposium, Hubbert presented his first paper on
what would become known as the “Hubbert Curve,” the brief
period in human history during which petroleum was discovered;
adopted by society as its principal energy source; extracted
in ever greater quantities; burned with no serious concern for
the future; fostered affluence, wars and pollution; became ever
harder to find and “produce”; and was destined to decline
inexorably — leaving us no choice but to switch to sustainable
energy sources.
Even in this first paper, Hubbert warned that the post-oil
transition process would be extremely difficult. Neither Daniels
nor Wigner had much to offer except hope; solar and atomic
energy technologies were still primitive. Despite Daniels’ experience
in the Manhattan Project (or perhaps because of it), he
decided to concentrate on solar energy, forming the society now
known as ISES and creating a solar energy program at the University
of Wisconsin-Madison that remains famous.
Getting to know Hubbert made Daniels aware of oil depletion
and the energy deficiencies that solar energy would have to
address. In 1964 Daniels wrote that U.S. oil “production” would
peak about five years later, as Hubbert had predicted accurately in
1956, and that worldwide oil scarcity would begin shortly after
2010. As humanity now encounters the Hubbert Peak, the man
who established ISES to meet the challenge of oil depletion will
inspire members of the solar community in the decades ahead.
Getting to know Hubbert made Daniels
aware of oil depletion and the energy deficiencies
that solar energy would have to address.
A Wake-Up Call
Humanity’s “primary energy
production,” including all fossil
fuels, nuclear power, hydroelectric
and renewables, is 13 terawatts.
Solar energy has 600 terawatts
of terrestrial potential.
March/April 2006 19
transportation is powered almost exclusively by liquid fuels,
it is tempting to propose biomass as a substitute for oil. In the
United States, 1 billion tons of biomass are managed each
year. To meet all our energy needs, 7 billion tons more would
be required. Obviously, electric airplanes or cargo ships are
impractical, so biomass will play an important role in our
energy future. But liquid fuels exclusively from plant material
will be possible for transport at only about one-tenth the
present level worldwide. Something has to give.
Considering society’s huge investment in the vehicle fleet
and these limitations of biofuels, it is difficult to imagine the transformation
of transportation to renewable energy sources. To
make the shift, the premise that solar energy must be converted
into fuel has to be challenged. A direct path from sunlight to
electricity can be 10 times as efficient as photosynthesis. Solar
energy can’t be touched or put into a bottle. Solar is radiant
energy, not a solid, liquid or gas.
Electricity from renewables is ideally suited for urban transportation.
It is nonpolluting and well-suited for fixed guide rail
and automated routing of traffic, and an electric vehicle is at
least twice as efficient as a gasoline vehicle. We are ready for
a good reason to get rid of the internal combustion engine in
dense urban areas, where it is about as practical as a campfire
in the kitchen. Efficiency in the face of oil depletion is that
compelling reason.
Solar technologies continue to improve, and so do electric
vehicles. A battery with three times the energy density of
lead-acid and a charging time under two minutes is scheduled
for introduction in 2007 or 2008. Shanghai has an electromagnetic
propulsion maglev train that travels at 270 miles per hour.
Getting Up to Speed: Think Terawatts
According to Campbell and other leading peak oil experts, permanent
oil decline will begin during this decade and will likely
proceed initially at 2 to 8 percent per year. If oil declines at 4 percent
and photovoltaic manufacturing grows at 40 percent per year
until 2020, PV would meet less than 20 percent of the oil shortfall
without meeting any demand growth. If the PV industry sustains
growth averaging 50 percent or more per year, it will contribute
significantly. Though such growth is an aggressive goal, it
is realistic under a scenario slightly more ambitious than the
two-year doubling time projection that Ron Larson presents in this
issue’s “Chair’s Corner” (page 4). As nonsilicon-based solar products
quickly become commercialized, this goal is even more feasible.
(See graphic, “As Oil Supplies Decline, Photovoltaic Capacity
Grows,” left.) Developing similar growth rates for all renewables,
it will be possible for sustainable solutions to realize their potential
for oil, gas and coal substitution. The sidebar, “Making the
Transition,” (page 29), samples some industry proposals.
France converted from zero to nearly 100 percent nuclear
power in less than 20 years. Renewable energy technologies have
higher net-energy yield than nuclear by far and are faster to
install, so it will be possible to ramp up in even less time. If
others continue to insist that nuclear power, tar sands or coal-toliquids
are options, the move to renewables will be even more
critical as the only pathway that avoids potential nuclear terrorism
and curbs global warming.
We must recognize the limits of our fossil fuel reserves and
begin to push for rapid growth in solar energy. For the first time
in history, all of humanity will share the same problem. This common
challenge can help unify us, to recognize the futility of war
and to make governments more responsive to our needs. We will
need large national and international programs, similar in ambition
and spirit to the Apollo “Man on the Moon” program, to
reduce our oil consumption and to create alternative energy
sources. This transition will provide many good local jobs that
cannot possibly be outsourced, and we will need a significant
grassroots effort.
If we get it right, we will be able to share a future of clean air
and fresh water, viable oceans, thriving forests and peaceful coexistence.
We must get it right, and be proud that we are members
of the generation entrusted with the task. ●
Francis de Winter, principal of Francis de Winter & Associates,
originated the “heat exchanger factor,” used worldwide in solar water
heating. He served during four years as chair of the American Solar
Energy Society. An ASES fellow, he has received the Charles Greeley
Abbot Award and many other honors. Contact de Winter at fdw@
ecotopia.com. Ronald B. Swenson is cofounder of ElectroRoof, SolarQuest
and Solarevolution, and publisher of OilCrisis.com. A former ASES board
member representing the Solar Fuels and Transportation Division, he
has published numerous peer-reviewed articles in this field. Contact
Swenson at rbs@solarquest.com.
As energy prices rise, researchers attempt to exploit
non-conventional fossil fuels to replace transportation fuels.
But such attempts have produced inadequate amounts of net energy.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Conservation
(Deprivation)
As Oil Supplies Decline,
Photovoltaic Capacity Grows
Oil declines at 4% per year
PV increases at 50% per year
Source: Ronald B. Swenson
Billion Barrels of Oil (or Equivalent)
Peak + 5 years + 10 years + 15 years
Increasing Unmet Global Demand
Shortfall
Oil, including
non-conventional
PV
Other renewables
help fill the gap
www.solartoday.20 .org SOLAR TODAY
Soaring oil prices have raised concern about the relative
supply and demand of the world’s premier
fuels, having a central place in the modern economy.
It has led people to ask, “Are we running out of
oil?” A sensible short response would be, “Yes, we
started doing that when we produced the first barrel.” The
world is not about to run out of oil, but what it does face is the end
of the First Half of the Age of Oil. That opened 150 years ago when
wells were drilled for oil on the shores of the Caspian and in
Pennsylvania. The cheap, convenient and abundant energy it
supplied, led to the growth of industry, transport, trade and agriculture.
This growth was accompanied by the creation of huge
amounts of financial capital, as banks lent more than they had on
deposit, confident that tomorrow’s economic expansion was adequate
collateral for today’s debt. Many people came to think that
it was money that made the world go round, when in reality it was
an abundant supply of cheap energy, much derived from oil.
Petroleum geology has made great advances in recent years,
such that the conditions under which oil and gas were formed in
nature are now well understood. In fact, it transpires that the bulk
of the world’s current production comes from deposits formed in two
brief epochs of extreme global warming 90 million and 150 million
years ago. Algae proliferated in the warm sunlit waters, providing
the raw material that eventually became oil. It was preserved and
trapped in places having the right combination of geological conditions.
A glance at the oil map shows that oilfields are clustered in
such exceptional places, which are separated by vast barren tracts.
Natural gas was formed in a similar way, save that it was derived
from vegetal remains as found in the deltas of tropical rivers. Ordinary
oil also broke down into gas if overheated by excessive burial.
Oil and natural gas are clearly finite resources, formed in the
geological past, which in turn means that they are subject to depletion.
That is not a difficult process to understand, as every beerdrinker
knows. The glass starts full and ends empty; the quicker
he drinks it, the sooner it is gone; and every bar has a closing time.
So, how far along the oil and gas depletion curves are we? The first
step in answering this question is to ask how much has been found
so far and when it was found, because production has to mirror
discovery after a time-lapse.
They sound like simple questions, being just a matter of looking
up the data, but as we dig into the details, we find a minefield
of confusion, obfuscation and disinformation.
Assessing the Remaining Reserves
In the past, the word depletion was not one the oil companies
liked to mention, fearing that it smacked of a dwindling asset that
March/April 2006 21
The question is not when
the world will run out of oil
and natural gas,
but how we will prepare today.
By C.J. Campbell, M.A., D.Phil.
THE SECOND HALF OF
THE AGE OF OIL
DAWNS
NEW JERSEY BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES
DAW N O F T H E S O L A R E R A
Facing page, A BP Solar array of 5,880 panels in Paulsboro, N.J., provides
an adaptive reuse of a former petroleum and specialty chemical
storage and distribution facility. The solar field produces 350,000 kilowatt-
hours of electricity per year.
ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
22
did not sit well with the stock market, but
now some of them do begin to be more
forthright. An example is Chevron, whose
CEO deserves great credit for his frank presentation
(see www.willyou
joinus.com). The official institutions, for
their part, tend to continue to publish
bland scenarios and half-truths, recognizing
that their governments are not yet
ready to face bald reality.
In most contexts, the term reserves
means something sure, but that is not the
case for oil. Estimating the size of an oilfield
early in its life poses no particular scientific
or technical problem. The difficulty lies
in the reporting. Oil in the ground is a
financial asset to its owners, against which
money can be borrowed. Accordingly, the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), very properly moved in the early days of U.S. oil production
to introduce strict reporting rules. The SEC recognized two
main classes: proved producing reserves for the expected future production
of current wells; and proved undeveloped reserves for the
expected production of yet-to-be-drilled infill wells.
The rules were designed to prevent fraudulent exaggeration,
but smiled on underreporting as laudable prudence. In practice,
the major international oil companies reported just as much as
they needed to report in order to deliver satisfactory financial
results, building up for themselves a useful stock of unreported
reserves to tide them over lean discovery years and cover any temporary
setback around the world. As a result, they were able to progressively
revise their reported reserves upwards, giving a comforting
but very misleading impression of steady growth, which was
commonly attributed to technology, when in fact it was mainly
an artifact of reporting practice. But the luxury of underreporting
is fading fast, forcing the major companies to merge and, in
some cases, revise downward their reported reserves. In part, this
situation reflects the aging of the giant fields holding most of the
world’s oil — it being clearly easier to underreport a large field than
a small one. In any event, the revisions have to be backdated to
the original discovery to obtain a valid discovery trend.
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, for its part,
announced enormous overnight reserve increases in the 1980s. At first,
these increases seemed to be a correction of the underreporting inherited
from the foreign companies before they were nationalized. But it
now transpires that they may have started reporting the total found,
not the remaining reserves, explaining why the official numbers have
barely changed since, despite massive subsequent production. At all
events, the dataset is grossly unreliable, with as much as 300 Gb (billion
barrels) being in doubt.
Compounding the problem is confusion over what was measured.
There are many different categories of oil, each with its own
costs, characteristics and, above all, its own depletion profile.
Producing oil from a free-flowing Middle East well is not the
same as digging up a tar sand in Canada with a shovel, albeit a
big one. Some types are cheap, easy and fast to produce, whereas
others are the precise opposite. It is, therefore, useful to identify
regular conventional oil, defining it to exclude oil from coal and
shale, bitumen and heavy oil, deepwater and polar oil, as well as
the liquids that are extracted from gasfields in specialized plants.
Regular conventional oil has supplied most to-date and will dominate
all supply far into the future.
Unraveling all of these confusions, so far as is possible,
suggests that the status of depletion for regular conventional is
as follows (to be generously rounded):
Produced to-date (end 2005) ................................... 968 Gb
Future Production ................................... 882 Gb
From known fields 760 Gb
From new finds 122 Gb
Total .........................................................1,850 Gb
Figure 1 shows the discovery record, using properly backdated
industry data published by ExxonMobil (Longwell, H., “The Future
of the Oil and Gas Industry: Past Approaches, New Challenges,” World
Energy, 5:3 2002: 100-104). World discovery has evidently been in
decline since 1964, despite a worldwide search always aimed at the
biggest and best prospects; despite all the many advances in technology
and geological knowledge; and despite a favorable economic
regime whereby most of the cost of exploration was offset
against taxable income. It means that there is no good reason to
expect the downward trend to change direction. The world started
using more than it found in 1981, and last year found only
about one barrel of regular conventional oil for every five or six consumed.
Oil has to be found before it can be produced, which
means that production in any country, region and eventually the
world as a whole has to mirror discovery after a time lapse.
Although the skills of a detective are needed to collect the evidence
and analyze it properly, we may be confident that the
depletion profile in figure 2 represents a realistic general assessment
sufficient for planning purposes.
In short, the Second Half of the Age of Oil now dawns. It will be
marked by the decline of oil and all that depends upon it. Gas, which
has a rather different depletion profile, will also in due course head
into steep decline.
The Second Half of the Age of Oil Dawns
The Growing Gap
Regular Conventional Oil
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050
Past Discovery
Future Discovery
Production
Past discovery based
on ExxonMobil (2002).
Revisions backdated
Billion Barrels per Year
Figure 1
www.solartoday.org SOLAR TODAY
March/April 2006 23
Preparing for Declining Supply
Much study and debate has been dedicated to determining the
date of peak production, but that really misses the point. It is not
an isolated or high peak, but merely the maximum value on a gentle
curve. What matters, and matters gravely, is the vision of the
long, remorseless and relentless decline that comes into sight on
the other side of the peak.
That said, the peak does represent an unprecedented turningpoint
of magnitude marking the shift from growth to decline. It
<notion that the market must always deliver is deeply entrenched
in their thinking. They rightly remind us that the Stone Age did
not end for want of stones as man found bronze, iron and steel
as better materials for tools and weapons. But the decline of oil
arises from natural depletion not from the entry of better substitutes.
Many people try to reassure themselves in the belief that
new technology or new investment will keep the oil and gas
flowing, but there is an irony about depleting a finite resource: The
better you are at doing the job, the sooner it ends.
The transition to decline threatens to be a time of great international
tension. The major consuming countries will vie with each
other for access to supply, most of which lies in just five countries bordering
the Persian Gulf, one of which has already been invaded.
The conditions that will unfold during the Second Half of the
Age of Oil appear dire, and for that very reason deserve serious
attention (see Campbell’s 2005 book, Oil Crisis, Multi-Science Publishing,
ISBN 0906522-39-0, for further discussion). It looks as if virtually
all companies quoted on the stock exchange are overvalued
insofar as their accounts tacitly assume a business-as-usual
supply of energy, which is no longer justified. Does this point to
a second Great Depression, perhaps accompanied by rampant
inflation to remove excess financial capital as debt loses its oilbased
collateral? Does it mark the end of economics as presently
understood? The world’s population expanded six-fold exactly
in parallel with oil, posing the awful question of how many
people the planet can support without oil.
These are serious questions, and there is certainly no solution
in terms of finding enough new oil and gas to prolong the past
epoch. But there certainly are responses by which to plan and prepare.
It is not difficult to formulate some useful steps:
1) Evaluate the Real Resource Situation. In this way, we can
avoid being misled by erroneous forecasts promulgated by international
organizations that are under political pressures.
2) Educate Users. Undertake a massive program of public
education, so that everyone may become more energy-conscious
and find ways to be less wasteful. Eventually, an efficiency factor
could be incorporated into utility and fuel charges to penalize the
wasteful and encourage the efficient. The transport system, in particular,
demands urgent attention.
3) Ramp Up Renewable Energy. Encourage the rapid development
of renewable energies from tide, wave, solar, wind and
other sources, including the growing of energy crops.
4) Reconsider Nuclear Energy. Reevaluate the nuclear option,
provided that it can be made safe and the waste-disposal issue can
be resolved.
5) Reduce Imports to Match Depletion Rates. Arrange for
importers to cut their oil imports to match world depletion rates,
namely annual production as a percent of what is left, currently
standing at 2 to 3 percent.
Of these, perhaps the last item deserves most attention. Such a policy
would have the effect of reducing world oil prices by putting
demand into balance with supply. The poor countries of the world
would be able to afford their minimal needs, and profiteering from
shortage would be avoided. The cost of producing oil has not changed
materially, so the high prices reflect profiting from shortage, especially
by Middle East governments. That in turn gives rise to massive
destabilizing financial flows threatening an already fragile system.
Above all, it would force the consumers to face the limits
imposed by nature. There are several options for practical implementation,
but some form of rationing would seem to be the
fairest (e.g., David Fleming’s proposed system for tradable energy
quotas, described at www.teqs.net). Energy might even develop into
a form of currency. Whereas the Kyoto Protocol on climate change
requires universal acceptance to work, an Oil Depletion Protocol
would not be so dependent, because the countries that adopted its
measures would soon find themselves having an enormous competitive
advantage over those that continue to live in the past.
Despite the challenges, we may hope at the end of the day that
a new benign age will unfold, as people again come to live in communities
with a better respect for themselves, their neighbors and the
environment in which nature has ordained them to live. Leading happier
and simpler lives, mainly in rural circumstances, they may look
back and realize that oil, and the excessive free energy it released from
fossil sunshine, had been more of a curse than a blessing. ●
C.J. Campbell is the chairman and founder of the Association for
the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), which is expanding throughout
the world. He started his career in the oil industry as an exploration
geologist, ending up as an executive vice-president. His career took
him to many countries, giving him a breadth of experience on which
his views are based. He is the author of five books on oil depletion as
well as many scientific and other publications, being now in demand
for radio and TV. Contact him at aspotwo@eircom.net.
Oil and Gas Production Profiles
2005 Base Case
Note: Regular oil excludes oil from coal, shale, bitumen,
heavy, deepwater, polar and gasfield natural gas liquids (NGL).
Billion Barrels of Oil Equivalent per Year
50
40
30
20
10
0
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
■ NonCon Gas
■ Gas
■ NGL
❏ Polar
■ Deepwater
■ Heavy, etc.
■ Regular Oil
There is an irony about depleting a finite resource:
The better you are at doing the job, the sooner it ends.
Figure 2
www.solartoday.24 .org SOLAR TODAY
Imagine the United States a century from now, as a society
that produces virtually all of its energy from clean, domestic,
renewable energy resources. What does it look like, and
how is it different from the one we live in today?
In 2106, there are those who bemoan the loss of cheap
oil, who long for the days when a gallon of gasoline cost less
than a gallon of milk. But access to cheap oil came at a steep price:
the price of dependence on countries that were politically unreliable
and economically unstable; the price of climate disruption
and its economic and environmental costs; perhaps even the
price of our principles, as we spoke of promoting democracy while
propping up tyrannical monarchies and other oppressive regimes.
For those of us with no stake in a continued reliance on fossil
fuels, however, the 22nd century holds enormous promise for
world economies, national security and the personal health and
economic well-being of our children and children’s children.
The stark contrast between this new century and the last is