-----Original Message-----
From: Portside Moderator [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 6:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [SPAM] The Global Energy Crisis Deepens


The Global Energy Crisis Deepens 
Three Energy Developments That Are Changing Your Life 

By Michael T. Klare

TomDispatch
http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175400/

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.

Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world
security studies at Hampshire College, a TomDispatch
regular, and the author, most recently, of Rising
Powers, Shrinking Planet. A documentary movie version
of his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from
the Media Education Foundation. 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.

Copyright 2011 Michael T. Klare

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.

Submit via email: [email protected]

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate


!DSPAM:2676,4ded84ee40301994383989!


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to