Peak oil

Pop Quiz:

What are the scariest two words in the English Language?

A. Global Terrorism
B. AIDS Pandemic
C. Thermonuclear War
D. Global Warming
E. Peak Oil

If you answered A: Global Terrorism, then I'll bet you live in the United States, and you watch at least the amount of television required by law (i.e. four to five hours a day.) Buzz! Thanks for playing, but A is not the correct answer.

If you answered B. the AIDS Pandemic, unless you live in one of the many so-called Third World nations,say, in Africa or Asia, then you would also be wrong. Not scary enough by half. AIDS is a preventable disease, and unless you've never heard of it, you can avoid its deadly effects. Whoops, wrong again.

If you answered C. Thermonuclear War, you'd almost be right, even though most people thought we had "dodged that bullet" ten or fifteen years ago, it may yet ricochet back to us courtesy of our hero, the correct answer, but even that old nightmare doesn't hold a candle to the "next big thing" in doomsday scenarios.

So now you're saying, "well it must be D. Global Warming, because we've all read that global climate change will submerge major cities and kill millions with catastrophic changes in weather patterns, and even though the US Government seems to be turning a blind eye to this potential disaster, most reputable scientists that have expressed an opinion have said that this is the real thing," I know you're saying that because a large portion of the world has experienced some of the foreshadowing effects of this phenomenon. Ask anyone in Western Europe if things are different. But, even though global climate change is a serious matter, it is not the correct answer to the question at the top of this writeup.

So we're left with E. Peak Oil. That doesn't sound at all scary, does it? It sounds like a company name, like Sun Oil, or Standard Oil. But it's not.

Peak Oil sounds pretty harmless, until you hear the explanation of what it means. Simply stated, peak oil is the point at which crude oil production is permanently outpaced by its demand. At that point, oil becomes increasingly more expensive to produce, thus forcing an ever-increasing pressure to satisfy its demand. When this happens, oil and natural gas and all of its many by-products) will increase in cost until practically no-one except the very wealthy will be able to buy it. This will, of course, be felt at the gas pumps, but also at the grocery store, because the production and transportation of food, at least in the US, requires gasoline or diesel-powered machinery. Plastics, non-recyclable that is, are produced in part from crude oil by-products as well as fertilizer, and practically everything we have grown so accustomed to here in the good old 21st Century.

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. "Peak Oil" is the oil industry's term for the top of the bell curve.

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."

While some government estimates suggest that the year 2020 will be the peak oil year, we've all heard recently government estimates for other economic trends and statistics that have been, well, horribly optimistic. A more realistic estimate is between the years 2004 and 2010. But we won't know what the actual Peak Oil year is until 3 or 4 years after it happens.

Every industry, without exception, is dependent on cheap, readily available oil and gas. The economic meltdown that followed the stock market crash will seem like the an unpleasant day at the beach compared to the devastation that will begin once peak oil occurs.

Think of the last two "wars" that the US has been involved in. There is little to refute the position that the Middle East is in the process of being annexed because of its resources. When the US finally "owns" Iraq, which country will be next? Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia?

The significance of this Perfect Storm of crisis, opportunity and political expediency amounts to much more than paying a couple more dollars a gallon for gasoline. These circumstances will result in continued war, starvation, economic and social collapse, and massive numbers of dead human beings.

When viewed in the context of Peak Oil, the often irrational policy choices made by the Bush Administration and the British Government under Tony Blair begin to make a perverted kind of sense. The invasion of Iraq, and the tough talk against Syria and Iran afterwards belie a sense of desparation, regardless of the various official justifications offered for war.

Regardless of your political ideology, ask your congressperson, or your preferred presidential candidate what his or her policy is regarding Peak Oil, but don't be surprised if you have to do a bit of educating them on the subject.

Note: I found the link to this little eye-opener, as well as many others at a place called http://www.democraticunderground.com. Check it out!

Disclaimer: The above was synthesized (paraphrased, summarized, what have you) from a website known as www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net with the exception of the administration quotes and the bit about the bell curve which was lifted from www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net verbatim.

I think basically that now, that peaking of oil will never be accurately predicted until after the fact. But the event will occur, and my analysis is leaning me more by the month, the worry that peaking is at hand; not years away. If it turns out I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.

But if I'm right, the unforeseen consequences are devastating. But unfortunately the world has no Plan B if I'm right. The facts are too serious to ignore. Sadly the pessimist-optimist debate started too late. The Club of Rome humanists were right to raise the 'Limits to Growth' issues in the late 1960's. When they raised these issues they were actually talking about a time frame of 2050 to 2070. Then time was on the side of preparing Plan B. They, like Dr. Hubbert, got to be seen as Chicken Little or the Boy Who Cried Wolf....

Matthew Simmons
May 27, 2003
CEO of Simmons and Co. International
Advisor to Vice President Cheney's 2001 Energy Task Force and the Council on Foreign Relations¹

We live off the energy captured from the sun. Every year plants capture the sun's radiant energy, fueling their growth. The plants become our primary source for food and fiber.

Petroleum comes from the accumulation of millions of years of plant and animal remains. The animals ultimately depended on plants. and both depended on sunlight. Oil is essentially liquid sunlight, banked over millions of years. This much you learned in elementary school.

Some other things you learned in elementary school, however, may no longer apply. You may have learned about the cycle of life, a process often illustrated by the quintessential family farm. Plants take energy from the sun->animals eat plants->animal and plant waste goes back into the soil to feed the plants. Quaint.

In middle school, you may also remember learning about certain plants' ability to fix nitrogen--that is, convert nitrogen (the dominant gas in air) into ammonium, a form easily used by plants. (To be fair, the plants need the help of certain bacteria--the whole process wonderfully entwined.)

In high school, you learned a little something about thermodynamics (I hear the groans, but bear with me). The second law states:

Energy spontaneously tends to flow only from being concentrated in one place to becoming diffused and spread out.

Order tends to disorder, things fall apart--when all is said and done, we will be nothing but discrete tiny bits randomly drifting away from each other. But not today. Today the sun will toss out gazillions worth of BTU's out to the great void. A few gazillion BTU's worth will hit the Earth. Plants will capture a small percentage of these few gazillion BTU's, and make carbohydrates using photosynthesis. We'll take some of these carbohydrates and eat some, creating the energy that lets us grow, heal, make babies, or even write essays here on E2.

The plant mass created in a given year, the total amount of plant stuff produced, is called the planet's "primary production." Solid, useful sunlight. And humans use 40% of this in a given year.

Humans got pretty good at making more humans; there are now 6 billion or so of us breathing today. And we got pretty good at farming. Still, we ran into a problem back in the 1960's--we ran out of new, available land.

What to do? Increase production on the land that is available. Sunlight we have, more than we could use. If you increase the yield of an acre of land, you deplete the soil faster than it can sustain future crops. In the olden days (and still practiced by much of the world today), you rotated crops, planting, say, a legume such as clover to restore the soil's fertility. Field might lay fallow, or might be used as pasture. Cow manure makes for good fertilizer.

What does this have to do with oil?

Industrial farming requires industrial fertilizer--lots of it.

Fertilizer is made by fixing nitrogen to make ammonia, NH₃. The nitrogen is easy--every breath you take is 79% nitrogen. The hydrogen, however, is not as cheaply obtained. We currently use hydrocarbons (natural gas, naphtha, or other petroleum products) to do this.² Ammonia is then combined with nitric acid to make urea, a pretty fancy way to make piss.

Restoring productivity to an acre of used up soil in the form of industrially produced fertilizer takes about 5 1/2 gallons of oil.³

In 1940 the average farm in the United States produced 2.3 calories of food energy for every calorie of fossil energy it used. By 1974 (the last year in which anyone looked closely at this issue), that ratio was 1:1....

David Pimentel, an expert on food and energy at Cornell University, has estimated that if all the world ate the way the United States eats, humanity would exhaust all known global fossil-fuel reserves in just over seven years.....Some have accused him of being off on other calculations by as much as 30 percent. Fine. Make it ten years.

Richard Manning⁴

The problem is real enough. While people fret over the cost of our gasoline, and imagine a world of bicycles and buses once the demand for petroleum exceeds the ability to extract it, getting from here to there will not be our biggest issue.

What to do? The sun still shines, and peas and clover are fixing nitrogen by the tons upon tons every day.

Participate in food production to the extent that you can. If you have a yard or even just a porch box or a pot in a sunny window, grow something to eat in it. Make a little compost of your kitchen scraps and use it for fertilizer. Only by growing some food for yourself can you become acquainted with the beautiful energy cycle that revolves from soil to seed to flower to fruit to food to offal to decay, and around again. You will be fully responsible for any food that you grow for yourself, and you will know all about it. You will appreciate it fully, having known it all its life.

Wendell Berry⁵

² see Production Processes, from the European Fertilizers Manufacturing Association, www.efma.org/manufacturing/section01.asp, for a summation of fertilizer production methods

³Richard Manning, "The Oil We Eat," Harper's Magazine, February, 2004.

⁴Ibid.

⁵ Wendell Berry, "The Pleasures of Eating," from What Are People For?North Point Press, New York., 1990, pp. 149-50.

It's much, much worse than that.

As we approach, and pass, peak oil, the cost of oil goes up. This is worrisome, but but it is only the beginning; as things now stand, the peak oil crisis is set to start off a chain of unpleasant events the likes of which the world has never... Well, judge for yourself.

As the cost of fossil fuels go up, people will find other, cheaper ways of meeting their energy needs. Currently, the primary way to fuel a car without fossil fuels is through ethanol. Ethanol comes primarily from corn, although it can be produced from other plants.

Corn, and all other plants, require land, water, and nutrients to grow. All three of these resources are limited. All three of these resources are being used at very near 'peak use' in most parts of the world. This means that every acre used to grow fuel-producing crops will require us to give up an acre used to grow food-producing crops. This means that producing fuel causes a drop in the amount of food coming to market. This means a rise in food prices.

"Converting the entire U.S. grain harvest to ethanol would satisfy only 16 percent of U.S. auto fuel needs."
-- Lester R. Brown, 2007

There isn't enough viable farmland to provide all the food and all the fuel we need; we will need to cut back on both fuel and food in order to live at anything approaching the standard of living we are used to.

Technically, land area is not the problem; nutrients and water are. Doyle has done a good job of explaining the issue with nutrients. Water is also currently in short supply in many areas. Cities usually deal with this by buying water rights from farmers. But as the value of crops go up, farmers will be much less willing to sell water rights, leading to major water shortages. If agriculture is actually ramped up to provide 50% of our energy needs, there will be no water. Anywhere. We will have exceeded all water supplies produced by all sources.

All of this also means that the richest countries in the world will have to choose between either driving to work or feeding the poorest countries in the world. America currently provides over 40% of world grain exports. We cannot export this grain and still meet even 16% of our fuel needs. Egypt and Mexico do not produce enough food to feed themselves. (Neither does Japan, putting it in a very interesting position). Countries like Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and Sudan already rely on food aid, and as the prices of food go up, they will get less and less. And even when the need for food crops is the greatest, we can only expect the supply to go down. China has been losing harvests to water shortages since its harvest peaked in 1997. China is by no means alone in this predicament, and the situation promises to get worse as aquifers continue to go dry and populations continue to increase.

If you think peak oil is bad, imagine peak food.

There are a surprising number of things we can do to make the future less dire. Improving the fuel efficiency of new cars, switching to electric power whenever possible (although this only helps if the electricity comes from solar, wind, and other 'unlimited' resources), improving our methods of farming, conserving water however possible... The human race will make it through this, and life will be quite tolerable after things settle down. And in the meantime, those who starve will be people we don't know and will never see.

We also have the option of being very, very proactive. We could introduce these changes on a larger scale, even before we are forced to, and even in countries too poor to do so on their own. It would require a lot of people to change their behaviors, and quickly. It would not be fun. But wouldn't it be nice....

Sources and resources:
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2007/Update63.htm
http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/PB3/Contents.htm

My grandfather rode a camel. My father rode in a car. I fly a jet airplane. My grandson will ride a camel.

- Saudi Saying

Err, how do I say this... It's much, much, much, much worse than all this. It is an apocalypse, it is inevitable, and it is very, very soon.

Bloom, overshoot, die-off. It's a rule that all organisms obey. The concept is this: when an organism discovers a new source of energy (commonly a food source), the first thing they do is begin to breed and consume the resource as quickly as possible. This is followed by overshoot, when the population of the organism is much too high for the energy source to support, since the energy source has been severely depleted, hence the coming die-off. This is the essence of the most catastrophic problem of Peak Oil. We are currently in overshoot. According to Richard Heinberg, author of Party's Over and Peak Everything, the human carrying capacity of Earth without fossil fuels is two billion. Our current population is six billion and climbing. Ponder that for a moment.

Peak Oil is not, like many apocalyptic situations, a possible consequence. It is not even a very probable situation. No: it is absolutely, inarguably going to happen at some point. It is a matter of time. If you have a fixed supply of something (and oil undoubtedly is) and you are using more than 72 million barrels of it a day¹, eventually you will run out of it. Unfortunately, we don't have to worry about running out of oil, because chances are we are never going to suck the last drop of oil out of the Earth. We have to worry about when we reach the half-way point: when we run out of cheap, quality, easily-accessible oil. Estimates range on this point (the Peak Oil point), but the majority fall somewhere between 2005 and 2015, but we will not know we have hit peak until 4 or 5 years after. A Shell oil executive sent an email to his employees warning "Shell estimates that after 2015 supplies of easy-to-access oil and gas will no longer keep up with demand."²

Okay, 2/3 of the population being killed off is ominous. But pushing that aside, let me lead you through what Peak Oil will herald.

1) Resource Wars

First thing, when Peak Oil becomes more apparent, will be massive resource wars. Relax; this is the tamest stage. Some Peak Oil buffs have argued that the only way to explain the invasion of Iraq and the general involvement in the Middle East is that the US government is aware of Peak Oil, and is trying to get its hands on the last of the supplies. This is a doomed attempt. Resource wars will be futile, and probably quite short, for a couple reasons. One is that wars oversea require shipping people and equipment oversea, and this consumes a lot of oil. Two is that war is expensive, and although money will probably be no object, when supplies of oil get low, people will be hesitant about pouring it into producing weapons towards a doomed attempt at acquiring the dregs. So, in my opinion, oversea warfare will be short, though most likely disastrous, as governments and populations get panicky and are willing to obtain oil at any cost. Resource wars between neighbouring countries, however, will probably continue for some time, which is why it will be wise to get thyself away from the border when the Peak Oil effects begin to kick in.

2) Trouble in paradise

When people hear Peak Oil, their first thought tends to be SUVs. Yes, you're right, people won't be driving around their SUVs. And yes, at first, you will see higher prices at the pumps, and longer lines. But very quickly, driving will not be an option at all. Do you think dwindling oil reserves are going to go to your minivan? Ha! No, they'll be siphoned off into military ventures, and into producing food, and into shipping and manufacturing. Civilian transportation is waaaay down the priority list. If I may make one suggestion to prepare for Peak Oil, other than planting a garden, it is get a bike. It will serve you very, very well. But as I said, civilian transportation will be the first to crumble. If you commute, say goodbye to your job.

One of the next things to collapse, or perhaps it will be sooner, is big-box stores. I will be experiencing some serious schadenfreude when Walmart crumbles. Big-box stores typically get their products from overseas, which means fuel to ship these products across the world. These items are sent to warehouses, and from there a fleet of trucks take them to individual superstores, to which people usually drive, because they are rarely within walking distance. To get an idea of the scale of Peak Oil, imagine never again buying anything from China. In fact, imagine only being able to buy things that were grown and processed inside your own country. How about within your state/province? What about in your own town? What are you left with? This will be the beginning.

3) Gridcrash

I intend to address the reason why alternative fuel sources won't save us in another node, but here's why the electric car won't save us: even without considering that every part of an electric car takes a huge amount of petroleum to produce, and that upkeep and repairs will also require oil, the fact is that electricity, though it will not fall at the exact time of Peak Oil, will eventually topple as a result. Natural gas, which is approaching its own peak, does provide a sizeable amount of electricity, but even if that weren't true, electricity is indirectly dependent upon oil. The majority of electricity generated today is generated by coal. Mining, processing, and shipping coal all requires oil. Plus, coal will not be around forever. In fact, some people (like Richard Heinberg) suggest coal will peak a lot sooner than expected. Nuclear energy is heading for its own doom as peak uranium approaches. Nuclear power also requires a huge amount of fresh water, which is peaking itself (the Peak Everything title is sounding pretty reasonable now, eh?). Wind power and solar power, which provide much less than 1% of energy at the moment, would take a huge amount of energy to set up, and besides, the plastics used in these are synthesized from oil. Producing the turbines and solar panels requires oil. Even the upkeep of power lines requires a large amount of energy.

4) Die-off

Imagine living in a world where you cannot heat or air-condition your home, ever. Where food cannot be shipped to you. Cities like New York, Las Vegas, Tokyo, etc will collapse quickly. The suburbs will become the slums of the future. I cannot overemphasize how catastrophic the change will be for people living in oil-dependent countries. Third world countries, who have never been allocated much oil, will remain mostly the same, I suppose. Actually, I don't know how 1/3 of us will manage to survive. Everything we are accustomed to will change. Acquisition and purification of water will be up to the individual, as well as food. The most fitting description I have read said that it will not be like the Middle Ages, it will be worse, because we have squandered the natural resources that were heavily relied on then. To top it off, Peak Oil will be experienced at the same time as global warming. We will face the greatest environmental challenge we have ever seen at the same time that we will deal with our greatest energy crisis. Oh, and did I mention a global depression? Our economy is based on infinite growth. Peak Oil will provide the check that was never supposed to happen, but is inevitable on a finite planet.

Peak Oil is a ridiculously depressing subject if you take it seriously (as you should). Of course, it will have its upsides. We will be forced to learn to create a sustainable way of life. Community ties will be strengthened. In times of great crisis, there is great innovation. There will be pockets of communities that will prepare and flourish. There will be a greater bond with the natural as we seek our food sources. Families will reconnect. Perhaps, on the whole, it will be an improvement to the artificial and unsustainable lifestyle we are currently promoting.

Bloom, overshoot, die-off. At the moment, the human race is behaving exactly as any organism would. Very soon, we will face the greatest challenge humanity has ever known. It will be up to us to earn the praise we have always heaped upon ourselves, to see if human beings are really so different from other organisms. Will we band together, make drastic and unpopular decisions and steer the ship toward solid ground, or will we stubbornly refuse to notice and continue on the doomed voyage?

(I don't know about you, but I'm building me a lifeboat.)

A correction: I don't mean to imply that we will suddenly wake up one day and be without oil and electricity, and that day 2/3 of the population will die off. No; Peak Oil will be slow, gradual, and painful process. As for the 2/3 of the population, well, assuming this estimate of the Earth's carrying capacity is true, it still doesn't mean that the population will suddenly need to plummet to that level. Hopefully the majority of it will be absorbed by a population self-check: people not having children they cannot support.

I also don't mean that cities will be a thing of the past. Likely in the future, the most common system will be small cities surrounded by farms, instead of bloated cities surrounded by sprawling suburbs.

¹ Total world consumption of crude oil in 1996.
² Jeroen van der Veer, reported January, 2008.