http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/06/06-0
Published on Monday, June 6, 2011 by TomDispatch.com
How to Wreck a Planet 101: Three Energy Developments That Are
Changing Your Life
The Global Energy Crisis Deepens
by Michael T. Klare
Here's the good news about energy: thanks to rising oil prices and
deteriorating economic conditions worldwide, the International Energy
Agency (IEA) reports that global oil demand will not grow this year
as much as once assumed, which may provide some temporary price
relief at the gas pump. In its May Oil Market Report, the IEA
reduced its 2011 estimate for global oil consumption by 190,000
barrels per day, pegging it at 89.2 million barrels daily. As a
result, retail prices may not reach the stratospheric levels
predicted earlier this year, though they will undoubtedly remain
higher than at any time since the peak months of 2008, just before
the global economic meltdown. Keep in mind that this is the good
news.
As for the bad news: the world faces an array of intractable energy
problems that, if anything, have only worsened in recent weeks.
These problems are multiplying on either side of energy's key
geological divide: below ground, once-abundant reserves of
easy-to-get "conventional" oil, natural gas, and coal are drying up;
above ground, human miscalculation and geopolitics are limiting the
production and availability of specific energy supplies. With
troubles mounting in both arenas, our energy prospects are only
growing dimmer.
Here's one simple fact without which our deepening energy crisis
makes no sense: the world economy is structured in such a way that
standing still in energy production is not an option. In order to
satisfy the staggering needs of older industrial powers like the
United States along with the voracious thirst of rising powers like
China, global energy must grow substantially every year. According
to the projections of the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), world
energy output, based on 2007 levels, must rise 29% to 640 quadrillion
British thermal units by 2025 to meet anticipated demand. Even if
usage grows somewhat more slowly than projected, any failure to
satisfy the world's requirements produces a perception of scarcity,
which also means rising fuel prices. These are precisely the
conditions we see today and should expect for the indefinite future.
It is against this backdrop that three crucial developments of 2011
are changing the way we are likely to live on this planet for the
foreseeable future.
Tough-Oil Rebels
The first and still most momentous of the year's energy shocks was
the series of events precipitated by the Tunisian and Egyptian
rebellions and the ensuing "Arab Spring" in the greater Middle East.
Neither Tunisia nor Egypt was, in fact, a major oil producer, but the
political shockwaves these insurrections unleashed has spread to
other countries in the region that are, including Libya, Oman, and
Saudi Arabia. At this point, the Saudi and Omani leaderships appear
to be keeping a tight lid on protests, but Libyan production,
normally averaging approximately 1.7 million barrels per day, has
fallen to near zero.
When it comes to the future availability of oil, it is impossible to
overstate the importance of this spring's events in the Middle East,
which continue to thoroughly rattle the energy markets. According to
all projections of global petroleum output, Saudi Arabia and the
other Persian Gulf states are slated to supply an ever-increasing
share of the world's total oil supply as production in key regions
elsewhere declines. Achieving this production increase is essential,
but it will not happen unless the rulers of those countries invest
colossal sums in the development of new petroleum reserves --
especially the heavy, "tough oil" variety that requires far more
costly infrastructure than existing "easy oil" deposits.
In a front-page story entitled "Facing Up to the End of 'Easy Oil,'"
the Wall Street Journal noted that any hope of meeting future world
oil requirements rests on a Saudi willingness to sink hundreds of
billions of dollars into their remaining heavy-oil deposits. But
right now, faced with a ballooning population and the prospects of an
Egyptian-style youth revolt, the Saudi leadership seems intent on
using its staggering wealth on employment-generating public-works
programs and vast arrays of weaponry, not new tough-oil facilities;
the same is largely true of the other monarchical oil states of the
Persian Gulf.
Whether such efforts will prove effective is unknown. If a youthful
Saudi population faced with promises of jobs and money, as well as
the fierce repression of dissidence, has seemed less confrontational
than their Tunisian, Egyptian, and Syrian counterparts, that doesn't
mean that the status quo will remain forever. "Saudi Arabia is a
time bomb," commented Jaafar Al Taie, managing director of Manaar
Energy Consulting (which advises foreign oil firms operating in the
region). "I don't think that what the King is doing now is sufficient
to prevent an uprising," he added, even though the Saudi royals had
just announced a $36-billion plan to raise the minimum wage, increase
unemployment benefits, and build affordable housing.
At present, the world can accommodate a prolonged loss of Libyan
oil. Saudi Arabia and a few other producers possess sufficient
excess capacity to make up the difference. Should Saudi Arabia ever
explode, however, all bets are off. "If something happens in Saudi
Arabia, [oil] will go to $200 to $300 [per barrel]," said Sheikh Zaki
Yamani, the kingdom's former oil minister, on April 5th. "I don't
expect this for the time being, but who would have expected Tunisia?"
Nuclear Power on the Downward Slope
In terms of the energy markets, the second major development of 2011
occurred on March 11th when an unexpectedly powerful earthquake and
tsunami struck Japan. As a start, nature's two-fisted attack damaged
or destroyed a significant proportion of northern Japan's energy
infrastructure, including refineries, port facilities, pipelines,
power plants, and transmission lines. In addition, of course, it
devastated four nuclear plants at Fukushima, resulting, according to
the U.S. Department of Energy, in the permanent loss of 6,800
megawatts of electric generating capacity.
This, in turn, has forced Japan to increase its imports of oil, coal,
and natural gas, adding to the pressure on global supplies. With
Fukushima and other nuclear plants off line, industry analysts
calculate that Japanese oil imports could rise by as much as 238,000
barrels per day, and imports of natural gas by 1.2 billion cubic feet
per day (mostly in the form of liquefied natural gas, or LNG).
This is one major short-term effect of the tsunami. What about the
longer-term effects? The Japanese government now claims it is
scrapping plans to build as many as 14 new nuclear reactors over the
next two decades. On May 10th, Prime Minister Naoto Kan announced
that the government would have to "start from scratch" in devising a
new energy policy for the country. Though he speaks of replacing the
cancelled reactors with renewable energy systems like wind and solar,
the sad reality is that a significant part of any future energy
expansion will inevitably come from more imported oil, coal, and LNG.
The disaster at Fukushima -- and ensuing revelations of design flaws
and maintenance failures at the plant -- has had a domino effect,
causing energy officials in other countries to cancel plans to build
new nuclear plants or extend the life of existing ones. The first to
do so was Germany: on March 14th, Chancellor Angela Merkel closed two
older plants and suspended plans to extend the life of 15 others. On
May 30th, her government made the suspension permanent. In the wake
of mass antinuclear rallies and an election setback, she promised to
shut all existing nuclear plants by 2022, which, experts believe,
will result in an increase in fossil-fuel use.
China also acted swiftly, announcing on March 16th that it would stop
awarding permits for the construction of new reactors pending a
review of safety procedures, though it did not rule out such
investments altogether. Other countries, including India and the
United States, similarly undertook reviews of reactor safety
procedures, putting ambitious nuclear plans at risk. Then, on May
25th, the Swiss government announced that it would abandon plans to
build three new nuclear power plants, phase out nuclear power, and
close the last of its plants by 2034, joining the list of countries
that appear to have abandoned nuclear power for good.
How Drought Strangles Energy
The third major energy development of 2011, less obviously
energy-connected than the other two, has been a series of persistent,
often record, droughts gripping many areas of the planet. Typically,
the most immediate and dramatic effect of prolonged drought is a
reduction in grain production, leading to ever-higher food prices and
ever more social turmoil.
Intense drought over the past year in Australia, China, Russia, and
parts of the Middle East, South America, the United States, and most
recently northern Europe has contributed to the current
record-breaking price of food -- and this, in turn, has been a key
factor in the political unrest now sweeping North Africa, East
Africa, and the Middle East. But drought has an energy effect as
well. It can reduce the flow of major river systems, leading to a
decline in the output of hydroelectric power plants, as is now
happening in several drought-stricken regions.
By far the greatest threat to electricity generation exists in China,
which is suffering from one of its worst droughts ever. Rainfall
levels from January to April in the drainage basin of the Yangtze,
China's longest and most economically important river, have been 40%
lower than the average of the past 50 years, according to China
Daily. This has resulted in a significant decline in hydropower and
severe electricity shortages throughout much of central China.
The Chinese are burning more coal to generate electricity, but
domestic mines no longer satisfy the country's needs and so China has
become a major coal importer. Rising demand combined with inadequate
supply has led to a spike in coal prices, and with no comparable
spurt in electricity rates (set by the government), many Chinese
utilities are rationing power rather than buy more expensive coal and
operate at a loss. In response, industries are upping their reliance
on diesel-powered backup generators, which in turn increases China's
demand for imported oil, putting yet more pressure on global fuel
prices.
Wrecking the Planet
So now we enter June with continuing unrest in the Middle East, a
grim outlook for nuclear power, and a severe electricity shortage in
China (and possibly elsewhere). What else do we see on the global
energy horizon?
Despite the IEA's forecast of diminished future oil consumption,
global energy demand continues to outpace increases in supply. From
all indications, this imbalance will persist.
Take oil. A growing number of energy analysts now agree that the era
of "easy oil" has ended and that the world must increasingly rely on
hard-to-get "tough oil." It is widely assumed, moreover, that the
planet harbors a lot of this stuff -- deep underground, far offshore,
in problematic geological formations like Canada's tar sands, and in
the melting Arctic. However, extracting and processing tough oil
will prove ever more costly and involve great human, and even greater
environmental, risk. Think: BP's Deepwater Horizon disaster of April
2010 in the Gulf of Mexico.
Such is the world's thirst for oil that a growing amount of this
stuff will nonetheless be extracted, even if not, in all likelihood,
at a pace and on a scale necessary to replace the disappearance of
yesterday's and today's easy oil. Along with continued instability
in the Middle East, this tough-oil landscape seems to underlie
expectations that the price of oil will only rise in the coming
years. In a poll of global energy company executives conducted this
April by the KPMG Global Energy Institute, 64% of those surveyed
predicted that crude oil prices will cross the $120 per barrel
barrier before the end of 2011. Approximately one-third of them
predicted that the price would go even higher, with 17% believing it
would reach $131-$140 per barrel; 9%, $141-$150 per barrel; and 6%,
above the $150 mark.
The price of coal, too, has soared in recent months, thanks to
mounting worldwide demand as supplies of energy from nuclear power
and hydroelectricity have contracted. Many countries have launched
significant efforts to spur the development of renewable energy, but
these are not advancing fast enough or on a large enough scale to
replace older technologies quickly. The only bright spot, experts
say, is the growing extraction of natural gas from shale rock in the
United States through the use of hydraulic fracturing
("hydro-fracking").
Proponents of shale gas claim it can provide a large share of
America's energy needs in the years ahead, while actually reducing
harm to the environment when compared to coal and oil (as gas emits
less carbon dioxide per unit of energy released); however, an
expanding chorus of opponents are warning of the threat to municipal
water supplies posed by the use of toxic chemicals in the fracking
process. These warnings have proven convincing enough to lead
lawmakers in a growing number of states to begin placing restrictions
on the practice, throwing into doubt the future contribution of shale
gas to the nation's energy supply. Also, on May 12th, the French
National Assembly (the powerful lower house of parliament) voted 287
to 146 to ban hydro-fracking in France, becoming the first nation to
do so.
The environmental problems of shale gas are hardly unique. The fact
is that all of the strategies now being considered to extend the
life-spans of oil, coal, and natural gas involve severe economic and
environmental risks and costs -- as, of course, does the very use of
fossil fuels of any sort at a moment when the first IEA numbers for
2010 indicate that it was an unexpectedly record-breaking year for
humanity when it came to dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
With the easily accessible mammoth oil fields of Texas, Venezuela,
and the Middle East either used up or soon to be significantly
depleted, the future of oil rests on third-rate stuff like tar sands,
shale oil, and extra-heavy crude that require a lot of energy to
extract, processes that emit added greenhouse gases, and as with
those tar sands, tend to play havoc with the environment.
Shale gas is typical. Though plentiful, it can only be pried loose
from underground shale formations through the use of explosives and
highly pressurized water mixed with toxic chemicals. In addition, to
obtain the necessary quantities of shale oil, many tens of thousands
of wells will have to be sunk across the American landscape, any of
one of which could prove to be an environmental disaster.
Likewise, the future of coal will rest on increasingly invasive and
hazardous techniques, such as the explosive removal of mountaintops
and the dispersal of excess rock and toxic wastes in the valleys
below. Any increase in the use of coal will also enhance climate
change, since coal emits more carbon dioxide than do oil and natural
gas.
Here's the bottom line: Any expectations that ever-increasing
supplies of energy will meet demand in the coming years are destined
to be disappointed. Instead, recurring shortages, rising prices, and
mounting discontent are likely to be the thematic drumbeat of the
globe's energy future.
If we don't abandon a belief that unrestricted growth is our
inalienable birthright and embrace the genuine promise of renewable
energy (with the necessary effort and investment that would make such
a commitment meaningful), the future is likely to prove grim indeed.
Then, the history of energy, as taught in some late
twenty-first-century university, will be labeled: How to Wreck the
Planet 101.
To listen to Timothy MacBain's latest TomCast audio interview in
which Klare discusses the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and resource conflicts,
click here, or download it to your iPod here.
To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive
the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.
Copyright 2011 Michael T. Klare
Michael T. Klare is the Five College Professor of Peace and World
Security Studies at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts, and
the author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of
America's Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum. A documentary
version of that book is available from the Media Education
Foundation. His newest book, Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New
Geopolitics of Energy, was recently published by Metropolitan Books
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
