Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

This Is What the End of the Oil Age Looks Like

By Richard Heinberg, Post Carbon Institute
June 14, 2010   |   32 Comments
Deepwater Horizon & the technology, economics and environmental impacts of resource depletion.

Do you like this opinion & commentary?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on its Web site and other publications.

32 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 32
June 14, 2010
Even the Arabs are reported to have said "the stane age did not end because we ran out of stone."
Comment
2 of 32
June 14, 2010
The cost of continuing to use fossil sources should include environmental costs. Our use of GNP does not presently take into account the reverse effect of pollution and other harm incurred in the process. The great plastic garbage heap in the Pacific and the oil spill which is surely to affect the Atlantic are signs that we are not concerned with maintaining a world of which we can be proud.

Peak environmental disaster will probably affect us more than peak oil. We have mountain tops being shaved off, stream and water systems spoiled, coal miners dieing or developing preventable lung diseases because safety standards cannot be effectively implemented, and companies such as BP which seem to be above any law when it comes to being responsible for bypassing protective procedures just so as to make more money.

These environmental disasters and their effects upon us will continue to mount unless there is a collective realization by both fossil fuel companies as well as the public that new policies should be passed and old, this far ineffctual laws, be enforced.
No image available
Comment
3 of 32
Anonymous
June 15, 2010
Adrian writes: "and the oil spill which is surely to affect the Atlantic..."

Well, the oil spill is going to affect some of the US coastline and be a royal mess to clean up, but its effect on the ocean itself is likely to be pretty modest and transitory. The plume of oil that is widely referred to is already extremely dilute (the dilution solution really does work) and may not have any significant effect on the environment.
Steven
Comment
4 of 32
June 15, 2010
The "Holy of Holys" - "Economic growth" - is too often confused with "Economic Sprawl" i.e. more of the same crap, rather than more good investment that will help Everything. This is because "Crap" is Paying (someone) and the cost to the Earth is just "hogwash from jealous tramps"
This is the reason that Nuclear energy - even if perfected so that there were no bad points - would Still be a disaster. It would simply continue to enable Muppet "Man" to improve His strangle-hold on the natural world, rather than give it a hand by .. say .. re-foresting the Amazo region and then maybe moving-on to do the Sahara ?
Comment
5 of 32
June 15, 2010
Let's consider what we are doing by looking outside of the box. We are a planet using the weight of our planet, the gravitational pull of the planet, and the balance of our planet, to keep us in motion. If we keep sucking the oil and other minerals out of the center core of the earth we will keep on shifting our weight distribution. Eventually won't this throw us completely out of orbit? We need to consider alternatives that nature has given us and we need to do it soon.
Comment
6 of 32
June 15, 2010
We should keep the oil spill with context. It is an accident and it will be fixed. Maybe the probability of such events is greater as you have to dig in more obscure places and depths, but percentagewise, such accidents are and will be few and far between. With any luck this would have been cleared up in a day or two but bad luck intervened. Long term, higher oil prices will cut the demand and alternatives will be found/used by necessity. People pay $ 7 and 8 a pack for cigarettes now in NJ.. at some point .. $ 25-30 a pack?? .. they will cut down their consumption. The same with oil. We have subsidized oil for years and now we are subsidizing renewable technologies. At some point we need to stop interfering (with our inept governments)and let things play out in the market - we'll all be better off and the world will be a better place in which to live.
Comment
7 of 32
June 15, 2010
I like the idea of an economic solution like an oil tax and higer prices too. Energy prices are, and have been held artificially low for too long. Clean energy sources should be cheaper than dirty sources, though they are actually more expensive because the environmental costs aren't internalized into the prices we pay; not even close. I agree with Rich that the majority of people generally choose to buy the cheapest thing (whatever their political party) and we should not expect people to volunteer to pay higher prices for clean sources. I would expect people to slowly begin to adjust their usage habits slowly though maybe over decades, so for higher prices to begin to impact demand we would need to sustain higher prices on costly resources immediately extensively. A start would be to eliminate the oil subsidies which have been in place for a long time.

I think government is required to step in too regulate the higher prices. We cannot continue to rely on for profit companies to govern themselves because the decisions they make will never be alturistic.
Comment
8 of 32
June 15, 2010
Rich, I wish I could agree with you but I can't. We don't "have to dig in more obscure places and depths." That is the kind of mindset that has allowed the greedy corporations and the corrupt politicians to justify the rape of the earth for the gain of a few. "At some point we need to" wake up and smell the oil and get "our inept government" out of corporate hands and place people and the environment first. We need to have sustainable economic growth and develop local markets that are regulated by the communities that will both benefit or die from the decisions to approve or deny a permit. Please do not tell us how "we'll be better off and the world a will be a better place" by allowing corporations to have their way- that is a completely ludicrous statement. Renewables and energy conservation/efficiency are the solution- not later but now! If all energy sources are weighed equally in regards to the overall power plant lifecycle including national security, health and social/economic costs then renewables are already cheaper- hands down. We need to stop playing with our childrens earth!
Comment
9 of 32
June 16, 2010
miadam
Rich, it was not an accident! The evidence so far makes clear is that corners were cut, lobbiests prevailed, safety controls were not installed, and those in charge knew it and hoped to save money.This consciousless behavior is the typical corporate psycopathic behavior we have come to expect from large corporations. If the Exxon Valdez grounding can be taken as an example, the damage to the lush fishing grounds of the Gulf of Mexico will be ruined for 25 years or more, and the payments to the people who lost everything will be paltry and fought in court for many years. As Jacque Cousteau found in the Meditereanian in the 1970's, polution from the south of France eliminated fish from a lush reef in only 20 years. We are ruining all of our ocean fishing, e.g. The Cod off Newfoundland, the Salmon on the British Columbian Coast, and the Australian Barrier Reef, to name a few. Please tell me where is the food of the future to come from? We must stop ocean drilling, stop government funding of all fossil fuel production, and invest far more heavily both public and private funds in renewables of all sorts starting now.
Comment
10 of 32
June 16, 2010
WELL SAID!!!! To both of the above 2 posts.
Comment
11 of 32
June 16, 2010
"...the oil spill is going to affect some of the US coastline and be a royal mess to clean up, but its effect on the ocean itself is likely to be pretty modest and transitory."

Not bloody likely with the bacteria using up the oxygen in the water to eat up the oil undersea. There is great worry that the whole area on the coast could easily become one solid "dead zone." That would impact the whole fish population and spread to everything that eats the fish, swims with the fish, and also includes everything that lives with the fish, such as coral reefs, plants, etc. And of course, forget the whole fishing industry in that area. Migrating birds that eat fish will simply have to go someplace else or starve. It is a huge disaster that will not go away. This will have impact in other parts of the Atlantic that we will have to wait and find out later because this area is like a nursery. What happens when all the "children" are dead?
Comment
12 of 32
June 16, 2010
Republicans need to replace cap and tax, no is a good answer for cap and tax, but no is not a solution.

Cut taxes on infrastructure and Build Baby Build, with already proven reality-tech, not more government "investment" in Obamatopia future-tech. We need jobs, national security and a cleaner environment today, why are we waiting for Obamatopia?

Cut taxes 100% on all forms of alternative energy, infrastructure, equipment and power. Cut utility regulation of the sales of power from alternative sources. Encourage the use of natural gas for; Integrated heating cooling and power (ICHP) and for use in hybrid, trucks and buses. ICHP technology has been up and running for years already. ICHP is extremely reliable and proven. NG and ICHP are not a total solution, nothing is, but while we await the next big government "investment" winner" and Obamatopia, shouldn't we be building with our already proven reality based solutions? Cut taxes on all forms of alternative energy and Build Baby Build.
Comment
13 of 32
June 16, 2010
This 'accident' no, this 'incompetence' is a tragedy for sure. This is the very reason we must push hard on the renewable energy portfolio. Fossil fuels will deplete, and the source of abundant renewable energy has yet to manifest itself. If we convert our automobiles to electric drive then we can kiss our 100 year coal reserves good bye also. 20 years tops, and you damn well better scrub those emmissions. Forget nuclear, the accident damages there well exceed oil spills as well as providing terrorist materials for their dirty work.

If you invest in renewable energy I suggest you kick it up a notch or two, for your family's sake as well as our planet.

This oil mess makes me want to scream. My condolences to my brothers and sisters on the Gulf Coast. I grieve for you, my country, my land, and her natural creatures.

Lets dismantle BP, recover as much as we can, then hang its ugly hide on the shed for all to see. Like we should have done with Exxon. Then these jerks might have been more careful in the Gulf. BP stockholders? Maybe your losses will teach you to invest responsibly. You are now getting less than what you deserve. You should have put your money on clean energy development.
Comment
14 of 32
June 16, 2010
WELL SAID,LETS ROLL UP OUR SLEAVES AND USE OUR TALENT TO ADDAPT OR DIE.
G.FRONZI
Comment
15 of 32
June 16, 2010
"ELECTROCUTE" BIG OIL......DEMAND AND BUY ELECTRIC VEHICLES...NOW!!!

STOP THE DRILLING AT THE RETAIL GAS PUMP.....DEMAND AND BUY ELECTRIC VEHICLES...NOW!!!
Comment
16 of 32
What a load of hogwash: One (count it) accident in the Gulf of Mexico, and we are witnessing the End of Civilization? ROFLOL!

Accidents, tragic as they are, happen, and they don't prove anything, other than the need to be careful when you do things that involve risk (that would be anything). Risk cannot be eliminated, something that spoiled Westerners seem to have trouble understanding.

Yes, we do indeed use (cheap) oil for everything you can think of. And will continue to do so until oil is no longer the cheapest option. Nobody knows when that will be, in spite of all the hand wringing in the Church of Peak Oil.

When oil is no longer the cheapest option, we'll simply switch to the next cheapest option, most likely King Coal. As SASOL has kindly showed us, you can make fuel, plastics and all that good stuff from coal. Or natural gas.

We might even give renewable fuels a try, if only Uncle Sam can stop interfering and using our $taxes to sponsor foolish food-to-fuel schemes.

BTW, Robert Malthus has been wrong for 200 years and will keep his batting average of 000 for eternity. There is no "inevitable point where growth may in fact no longer be an option." Growth is the only option, unless you're prepared to stagnate (that WOULD be the end of civilization). Every generation needs a higher level of technology to deal with all the new problems. Luckily, with more people you also get more clever minds to help you meet all the challenges.
Comment
17 of 32
June 17, 2010
---"Every generation needs a higher level of technology to deal with all the new problems."------

Numerous trips to the supermarket have taught me that "new and improved" is hardly ever new and certainly not improved.

---" Luckily, with more people you also get more clever minds to help you meet all the challenges."---

However, the voices of the few clever minds are drowned out by the cacophony and din of the least qualified but most self assured of their own omniscience.

The wise man knoweth the fool, for he was once a fool.
But the fool knoweth not the wise man, for he has never been wise.
No image available
Comment
18 of 32
Anonymous
June 18, 2010
Therese write in comment #11: "Not bloody likely with the bacteria using up the oxygen in the water to eat up the oil undersea. There is great worry that the whole area on the coast could easily become one solid "dead zone."

Concentrations of oil in the plume are quite low and now that much of the oil is being recovered should decline further. I have not seen any credible reports of substantial O2 concentration declines and do not expect to. But if Therese has any hard evidence for this concern perhaps she will post links to the information....
Steven
Comment
19 of 32
June 18, 2010
Steven------" I have not seen any credible reports of substantial O2 concentration declines and do not expect to."--------

You also can't see anything with your eyes shut.

I have not even seen any credible reports of how much oil has(and is being) released.

You also can't see anything if it isn't there to see.
No image available
Comment
20 of 32
Anonymous
June 18, 2010
Regarding Fred's remarks in Comment #21:

There are lots of estimates for the oil leak. 50,000 barrels/day would be in the upper range of the latest estimates, and probably not off by more than a factor of two. This is small by comparison to the volume of the plume and oil concentrations are probably below the ppm range whereas O2 concentrations are typically larger than 2 mg/liter (larger than the oil concentrations). We are also close to 2 months into the spill with little evidence to indicate that leak rates have been dramatically different earlier than they are now. Thus, if we were going to see a dead zone of oxygen depletion one would have expected to see it already. Also, much of the oil is now being collected so going forward we should expect oil concentrations to decline. I rather expect that the worst of the plume effects are behind us rather than ahead of us. The decision to use dispersants seems to have significantly reduced the amounts of oil reaching the surface and thus likely to reach the shores.

The part of text that Fred didn't quote from my comment #18 was where I asked if anyone had any actual evidence that contradicted any of these expectations to please post links to the data. Fred like hyperbole so his isn't interested in making rational assessments rather than doomsday predictions.
Steven
Comment
21 of 32
June 19, 2010
I feel a pity than some solutions are available to fix it quite before 2 months ( I have proposed some using the existing equipment already available). Is there no scientific panel to show how the BP Solutions were empirical and unprepared for such event. First they should have smashed the pipe clause to the bending, cut it, put the coffin and remove the flange cutting the bolts. This would have cut leakage at minimum. It might have been possible, putting a robot inside the coffin to install a valve on the flange pipe, after cutting the bolt on the flange. Worst the technology use are not fail safe as many other platforms. I hope than some standard will appears to avoid such incident. Also some commission should be done to do inspection of existing installation and force retrofitting with new security level is unacceptable otherwise this means than the petrol industry is the strongest lobby and they can do what they want.
Comment
22 of 32
June 20, 2010
I'm reading "Solar Revolution" by Travis Bradford right now in which he explains pretty much about the same point. Great book, but not the easiest read.
Comment
23 of 32
June 20, 2010
Steven------" Thus, if we were going to see a dead zone of oxygen depletion one would have expected to see it already. "-------

When did you make your last inspection tour?

------" There are lots of estimates for the oil leak. 50,000 barrels/day would be in the upper range of the latest estimates, and probably not off by more than a factor of two."--------

Lots of estimates---well, THAT is true. We've gone from 1,000 to 50,000, that's quite a spread. 50X Not off by a factor of two---that would be 50K to 100K----hum, the same amount that the factor 50X got us to today.

My rational assessment is that we have been lied to consistently all along. Your error factor of 2 in your flow rate guesstimate means that even if they collect the entire amount supposedly leaking now would still be escaping.

I don't think either of us can make any kind of assessment.

-------" The decision to use dispersants seems to have significantly reduced the amounts of oil reaching the surface and thus likely to reach the shores."-------

Just because it is out of sight does not mean it is not causing damage.
Comment
24 of 32
June 20, 2010
Steven----besides water quality, and floating oil----you forgot to pooh pooh damage to the air.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE3CcfFHadY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Uax5FRWnvs

Today is the second month of the spill from Deepwater Horizon---and the amount of oil is surpassing the last worst spill, Mexico's Ixtoc1. Ixtoc1 was finally stopped by drilling relief wells---the same strategy now being used on Deepwater. Ixtoc took 10 months to get the relief wells drilled---and it was in MUCH shallower water, 160' vs over a mile deep.
So, now we have oil in the water, dipersed far and wide with disperants that are toxic in themselves, in the marshes and estuaries, and now they are burning oil and releasing huge clouds of toxic smoke. And it is possible this scenario will continue for a VERY long time----2 months by BPs estimate(who have been notoriously averse to telling the truth it seems to me) and the possibility this could last 5 times or more as long based on history of previous incidents.

Drill Baby Drill.
No image available
Comment
25 of 32
Anonymous
June 21, 2010
In comment #26 Fred writes: "Steven----besides water quality, and floating oil----you forgot to pooh pooh damage to the air."
Well Fred, if you read carefully you would note that I never said floating oil wasn't a problem--it clearly is the major concern and is causing billions of dollars in economic losses and considerable damage to the environment. The dispersed undersea oil plume seems--from the available data--to be a significantly lower concern. As for air pollution, this is by far the least problematic--the air pollution from controlled burns of collected oil is trivial compared to the daily output of all the oil we burn the ordinary way: in cars, furnaces, etc. If would be good to distinguish the real problems from the minor annoyances, but you seem to complain about all things with equal shrillness....
Steven
No image available
Comment
26 of 32
Anonymous
June 21, 2010
Regarding some of Fred's remarks in comment 26:
There have been surveys by independent scientists concerning plume size, effects, etc. No one has yet observed underwater O2 concentrations below levels needed to sustain live, and plume concentrations should be on the decline because much of the oil is now being collected but the diffusion rates are still the same.

As for the time evolution of the spill estimates, some of the early ones were intensionally optimistic (but there were also early ones in the tens of thousands of barrels/day). After two months there is lots of data available (the amount of oil being collected, the amount eliminated in controlled burns, the amount of surfactants dumped in the ocean, imaging data of the spill, etc.) so the current uncertainly is clearly NOT a factor of 50. Using any reasonable upper bound on the spill rate and any reasonable lower bound on the plume volume yields an oil concentration that isn't large compared to the amount of O2 dissolved in the ocean. There may well be population displacements of certain species that seek to avoid dispersed oil even in low concentrations, and this may lead to population reductions, but dead zones don't seem to be likely.
Steven
No image available
Comment
27 of 32
Anonymous
June 21, 2010
The real solution, which no one of authority can talk about, is "have fewer babies". Population growth requires more cars, more oil, more homes, more buildings, etc. Shouldn't the U.S. be looking at scenarios for a healthy economy when population is declining? Italy's economy is suffering because population decline. The same is true for cmmunities throughout the U.S. that have lost industries to globalization.
Comment
28 of 32
June 22, 2010
-----" There may well be population displacements of certain species that seek to avoid dispersed oil even in low concentrations, and this may lead to population reductions, but dead zones don't seem to be likely."------

You and all non plant species need oxygen live. Oxygen is produced by algae carrying out photosynthesis on the surface of the worlds oceans.

Spread enough oil on the surface of the oceans and you block out light--algae can not carry out photosynthesis. No oxygen. Algae die. Everything that eats algae or anything up the food chain that eats something that ate algae die. Everything dies. Spread enough oil on the oceans, and everything everywhere dies. Not enough oxygen to breathe.

Too many babies will not be a problem. Spill Baby Spill.
Comment
29 of 32
July 3, 2010
Solar must grow ... Oil must diminish. My pool is heated by solar panels. Luxury for some. For me warm water is both a necessity and cool!Solar isn't sexy but it will help if it looks good in whatever environment it is placed.
I invested recently in Envision Solar (evsi.bb) and am looking for more Solar investments. The appeal was the CEO was an architect and all the projects (they showed the investors) looked great. Big clients McDonals, Dell Computers, Kyocera, UCSD. I think the EV will drive solar before residential but does it matter?
Comment
30 of 32
July 3, 2010
Solar must grow ... Oil must diminish. My pool is heated by solar panels. Luxury for some. For me warm water is both a necessity and cool!Solar isn't sexy but it will help if it looks good in whatever environment it is placed.
I invested recently in Envision Solar (evsi.bb) and am looking for more Solar investments. The appeal was the CEO was an architect and all the projects (they showed the investors) looked great. Big clients McDonals, Dell Computers, Kyocera, UCSD. I think the EV will drive solar before residential but does it matter?
Comment
31 of 32
July 3, 2010
Steven-----" The dispersed undersea oil plume seems--from the available data--to be a significantly lower concern."--------

WHAT available data----there is no available data. Here's how to make some data available. Take a quart of motor oil, mix in a few of ounces of dish washing detergent, and dry cleaning fluid. Mix well. Then dump it into an aquarium. Then record the position and movements of the fish in one hour. I think you will find that the fish will be floating belly up, and not moving at all.

------" As for air pollution, this is by far the least problematic--the air pollution from controlled burns of collected oil is trivial compared to the daily output of all the oil we burn the ordinary way: in cars, furnaces, etc. "---------

Air pollution from "controlled burns" is not trivial compared to air pollution from all the oil we burn in ordinary ways----it is IN ADDITION to air pollution from all the oil we burn in ordinary ways.

-------" If would be good to distinguish the real problems from the minor annoyances, but you seem to complain about all things with equal shrillness...."-------

Tinnitis and disorientation are common symptoms of toluene and benzene inhalation.
Comment
32 of 32
July 3, 2010
conraad p, comment 16------" Accidents, tragic as they are, happen, and they don't prove anything, other than the need to be careful when you do things that involve risk (that would be anything). Risk cannot be eliminated, something that spoiled Westerners seem to have trouble understanding."------

If risk can not be eliminated---then continuing to engage in the actions that are risky is not very bright. Accidents prove the need to be more careful----by eliminating risk.

Risk can not be eliminated? Well, yes it can. Don't do the action that creates the risk. If you don't drill for oil, you will not have the risk of an oil spill. If you do not skate on thin ice, you eliminate the risk of the ice breaking and drowning in cold water.

If we use biofuels, we do not need oil, then we have no need to drill for oil, and we have no risk of oil spills.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Solaire Generation American Solar Energy Society SMA America, LLC Blue Sky Energy, Inc. Upsolar SolarEdge Technologies The Stella Group, Ltd.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters