Life After The Oil Crash
"Deal with Reality, or Reality will Deal with You."
Civilization as we know it is coming to an end soon. This is not the wacky conclusion of a religious cult, but rather the result of diligent analysis sourced by hard data and the scientists who study global “Peak Oil” and related geo-political events.
So who are these nay-sayers who claim the sky is falling? Conspiracy fanatics? Apocalypse Bible prophesy readers?To the contrary, they are some of the most respected, highest paid geologists and experts in the world. And this is what's so scary.
The situation is so dire that even George W. Bush's Energy Adviser, Matthew Simmons, has acknowledged that "The situation is desperate. This is the world's biggest serious question."
According to Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, "America faces a major energy supply crisis over the next two decades. The failure to meet this challenge will threaten our nation's economic prosperity, compromise our national security, and literally alter the way we lead our lives."
If you are like 99% of the people reading this letter, you have never heard of the term "Peak Oil". I had not heard the term until a few months ago. Since learning about Peak Oil, I have had my worldview, and basic assumptions about my own individual future turned completely upside down.
A little about myself: A few months ago, I was a 25 year old law school graduate who found out he had just passed the California Bar Exam. I was excited about a potentially long and prosperous career in the legal profession, getting married, having kids, contributing to my community, and living the "American Dream."
Peak Oil has caused me to seriously question how realistic this vision of my life is.
Whether you're 25 or 75, an attorney or an auto mechanic, what you are about to read will shake the foundations of your life.
Below you find a brief explanation of Peak Oil, the ramifications, and what we can do about it. For the sake of simplicity, I have designed the following explanation for somebody unfamiliar with Peak Oil. If you would like more in depth explanations with graphs, charts, and the like, please consult the extensive interviews, articles and sites I have linked to throughout this site.
What is "Peak Oil"?
The question is not "When will we run out of oil?", but rather, "When will we run out of cheap oil?"
All oil production follows a bell curve, whether in an individual field or on the planet as a whole. On the upslope of the curve production costs are significantly lower than on the downslope when extra effort (expense) is required to extract oil from reservoirs that are emptying out.
For the past 150 years, we have been moving up the upslope of the global oil production curve. "Peak Oil" is the industry term for the top of the curve. Once we pass the peak, we will go down the very steep downslope. The further we go down the slope, the more it costs to produce oil, and its cousin, natural gas.
In practical terms, this means that if 2000 was the year of Peak Oil, worldwide oil production in the year 2020 will be the same as it was in 1980. However, the world's population in 2020 will be both much larger (by approximately 200%) and much more industrialized than it was in 1980. Consequently, world'wide demand for oil will outpace the worldwide production of oil by a significant margin.
The more demand for oil exceeds production of oil, the higher the price goes.
While we will not run out of oil anytime in the near future, the increasingly high price will soon wreak havoc on the world's economy.
When will Peak Oil occur?
The most wildly optimistic estimates indicate 2020 will be the year in which worldwide oil production peaks. Generally, these estimates come from the government.
A more realistic estimate is between the year 2004-2010. Unfortunately, we won't know that we hit the peak until 3-4 years after we actually hit it. Even on the upslope of the curve, oil production varies a bit from year to year. It is possible that the year 2000 was the year of peak oil production, as production has dipped every year since.
The energy industry has quietly acknowledged the seriousness of the situation. For instance in an article entitled “A Revolutionary Transformation,” the president of Exxon Mobil Exploration Company, Jon Thompson stated: "By 2015, we will need to find, develop and produce a volume of new oil and gas that is equal to eight out of every 10 barrels being produced today."
That sounds pretty bad, but I don't drive an SUV or anything. Even if gas prices get high, I could probably still make ends meet. Why should I be concerned?
Almost every current human endeavor from transportation, to manufacturing, to electricity to plastics, and especially food production is inextricably intertwined with oil and natural gas supplies.
Commercial food production is oil powered. Most pesticides are petroleum (oil) based, and all commercial fertilizers are ammonia based. Ammonia is produced from natural gas.
Oil based agriculture has been fantastic for food production. Oil allowed for farming implements such as tractors, food storage systems such as refrigerators, and food transport systems such as trucks. As oil production went up, so did food production. As food production went up, so did the population. As the population went up, the demand for food went up, which increased the demand for oil.
Unfortunately, we are at a point where the demand for food/oil continues to rise. Oil (food) supply, however, is about to drop dramatically.
Within a few years of Peak Oil occurring, the price of food will skyrocket because of the cost of fertilizer will soar. The cost of storing (electricity) and transporting (gasoline) the food that is produced will also soar.
In addition to food, oil is also required for nearly every consumer item, water supply pumping, sewage disposal, garbage disposal, street/park maintenance, hospitals & health systems, police, fire services, and national defense.
Additionally, as you are probably already aware, wars are often fought over oil.
Thus, the aftermath of Peak Oil will extend far beyond how much you will pay for gas. Simply stated, you can expect: war, starvation, economic recession, possibly even the extinction of homo sapiens.
This is known as the post-oil "die-off". The term "die-off" captures perfectly the nightmare that is at our doorstep.
What do you mean by "die-off"?
Exactly what it sounds like.It is estimated that the world's population will contract to 500 million during the Oil Crash. (current world population: 6 billion)
After we hit the peak, how are things likely to progress?
According to Proffesor Richard Heinberg:
1. Rising petrol prices.
2. Increase in cost of living.
3. Increase in death due to starvation (most likely to be seen in the 3rd world first).
4. War (pre-emptive) for resource rich areas.
5. Economic collapse and further chaos (mass scale starvation affecting the globe, increasing war, and potentially cannibalism due to food shortages and all that fresh meat laying around).
6. Restablization resulting from reduced numbers of humans and conservation of remaining resources (enough to potentially last another 100 years).
If you'd like to use history as a guide, I feel the following timeline is a reasonable approximation of what to expect in developed nations such as the United States:
1-5 years post-peak: Major recession comparable to those experienced during the artificially created oil shortages of the 1970's.
5-15 years post-peak: Recession worsens into a second Great Depression.
15-25 years post-peak: Society begins to collapse. Conditions in the United Statesbegin to resemble those in the modern day former U.S.S.R.
25-50 years post-peak:Societal collapse worsens. Conditions in what used to be called the United States begin to resemble those in modern day Iraq, Liberia, Somalia etc. . . .
50-100 years post-peak: Society begins to stabilize, albeit in a form drastically different than anything most of us have imagined.
Is it possible that we have already hit Peak Oil and are now in the first stages of the Oil Crash?
Yes. As stated above, we won't know we have hit the Peak until a few years after we hit it. Global oil production has dipped every year since 2000, so it is quite possible we've hit the peak.
Ample evidence exists that we are in the first stages of the Oil Crash. In the last year (2003), the cost of food has risen 16%-25%. Health care costs have risen 15%. Education costs have risen 20%. These are often excluded from measures of inflation because they are considered "volatile".
As of 12/03 the "adjusted" unemployment, which has been squeezed out of as much meaning as conceivably possible, still hovers in the 6% range. However, if you factor in the quality of employment, then the real numbers are closer to 12%-15%.
The rolling blackouts experienced in California during Fall 2000, the massive East Coast blackout of August, 2003 and the various other massive blackouts that occurred throughout the world during late summer of 2003, while not directly related to Peak Oil, are simply a sign of things to come.
At the Paris Peak Oil Conference in May, 2003, Princeton Professor Kenneth Deffeyes, author of Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage, explained that Peak Oil actually arrived in 2000 by noting that production has actually been declining since that time.
As further evidence of the production peak, Deffeyes noted that since 2000, there has been a 30% drop in stock values, interest rate cuts have not helped, 2.5 million have become unemployed and the employed have been unable to retire, budget surpluses have vanished, the middle class has vanished, and the World Trade Center has vanished.
What about alternatives like solar, wind, hydrogen etc?
Unfortunately, it is too late. It would take us a minimum of 50 years to develop a food delivery infrastructure based on alternative energies. Peak Oil is going to occur within five. Even if we stopped all wars, and committed ourselves entirely to energy alternatives such as solar, wind, hydrogen etc, the best we can hope for is a managed collapse.
Fossil fuels account for 65% of our current global energy supply. There are no alternatives to oil that can supply this much energy, let alone the amount of energy we require to feed a worldwide population that is estimated to increase from 6.3 billion to 8 billion in the next 7 years.
Deluding yourself that the energy problem has been solved or that there is a magic bullet just waiting to be discovered only guarantees that the crisis will hit you and the planet much harder in the end.
The end of the Age of Oil is a life and death game. You cannot afford to be cavalier about it. Do not think of prudent, but ultimately temporary, steps that should be taken to soften the blow as solutions.
For some important questions you need to be asking about alternative energy, read this article when you have some time.
In the meantime, let's briefly examine the commonly proposed oil alternatives:
(the following data has been extensively researched by Bruce Thompson, moderator of the Yahoo Group, Running on Empty)
Natural Gas:
Natural Gas currently supplies 20% of global energy supply. Gas itself will start running out from 2020 on. Demand for natural gas in North America is already outstripping supply, especially as power utilities take the remaining gas to generate electricity. Gas is not suited for existing jet aircraft, ships, vehicles, and equipment for agriculture and other products. Conversion consumes large amounts of energy as well as money. Natural gas also does not provide the huge array of chemical by-products that we depend on oil for.
Hydro-Electric:
Hydro-Electric power currently accounts for 2.3% of global energy supply, compared with the 40% provided by oil. It is unsuitable for aircrafts and the present 800 million existing vehicles.
Solar
Solar power accounts for .006% of global energy supply. Energy varies constantly with weather or day/night. Not storable or portable energy like oil or natural gas so unsuited for present vehicles and industry. Batteries bulky, expensive, wear out in 5-10 years.
A typical solar water panel array can deliver 50% to 85% of a home’s hot water though. Using some of our precious remaining crude oil as fuel for manufacturing solar equipment may be wise.
Wind
Wind power accounts for .07% of global energy supply. As with solar, energy varies greatly with weather, and is not portable or storable like oil and gas.
Wind can not supply oil derivatives such as fertilizer or plastics.
Hydrogen
Hydrogen accounts for 0.01% of global energy. Hydrogen is currently manufactured from methane gas. It takes more energy to create it than the hydrogen actually provides. It is therefore an energy “carrier” not a source. Liquid hydrogen occupies four to eleven times the bulk of equivalent gasoline or diesel. Existing vehicles and aircraft and existing distribution systems are not suited to it. Solar hydrogen might be an option in some of the hot countries.
Nuclear
Nuclear is currently being abandoned globally. Its ability to soften the oil crash is very problematic due to accidents and terrorism. Many more reactors would be needed. Tons of radioactive materials to transport at risk to public. Nuclear waste disposal is still the major, unresolved problem, especially breeder reactors producing plutonium a nuclear weapon/terrorist raw material, half-life contamination is 24,000 years. All abandoned reactors are radioactive for decades or millennia. Nuclear is not directly suitable for aircraft and vehicles. Adapting nuclear to make hydrogen or other fuels would be a huge, and energy-expensive project. Nuclear fusion is still not available, after 40 years’ research and billions of dollars invested.
Coal
Coal accounts for 24% of current global energy supply. As a replacement for oil, it is unsuitable due to the fact that it is 50% to 200% heavier than oil per energy unit. Substituting coal for oil would require expansion of coal mining, leading to land ruin and increase in greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast to oil and gas fuels, fine-tuning the rate at which coal burns is difficult. It is therefore used in power stations to make electricity, wasting half of its energy content.
Coal mining operations run on oil fuels as do coal-mining machinery and transportation. Pollution is also a major problem. A single coal-fired station can produce a million tons of solid waste each year. Burning coal in homes pollutes air with acrid smog containing acid gases and particles. Large pollution & environmental problems: (Smog, greenhouse gases, and acid rain). Finally, liquid fuels from coal are very inefficient, and huge amounts of water required.
Non-Conventional Sources Such as Shale, Tar Sand, Coalbed Methane, Ethanol, and Biomass
These non-conventional sources currently account for 6% of US gas supply. Each of these alternatives would require a huge investment in research and infrastructure to exploit them, plus large amounts of now-expiring oil, before they could be brought online.
For example, in Canada about 200 thousand barrels a day are being produced in Alberta of non-conventional oil, but it takes about 2 barrels of oil in energy investment to produce 3 barrels of oil equivalent from those resources. Additionally, the environmental costs are horrendous and the process uses a tremendous amount of fresh water and also natural gas, both of which are in limited supply.
The major problem with non-conventional oil is that they cannot be exploited before the oil shocks cripple attempts to bring them on line, and the rate of extraction is far too slow to meet the huge global energy demand.
What about that new technology that can turn anything into oil?
"Thermal depolymerization" which can transform many kinds of waste into oil, could help us raise our energy efficiency as we lose power due to oil depletion. While it could help us ameliorate the crash, it is not a true solution.
Like all other forms of alternative energy, we have run out of time to implement it before the crash. Currently, only one thermal depolymerization plant is operational. Thousands of such plants would need to come online before this technology would make even a small difference in our situation.
Furthermore, whatever comes out of the process must carry less useful energy than what went into the process, as required by the laws of thermodynamics. Finally, most of the waste input (such as plastics and tires) requires high grade oil to make in the first place.
The biggest problem with thermal depolymerization is that it is being advertised as a means to maintain business as usual. Such advertising promotes further consumption, provides us with a dangerously false sense of security, and encourages us to continue thinking that we don't need to make this issue a priority.