absent of divine intervention, there is no way that we will have enough fossil fuel for economic progress and development
as an investor who is banking on peak oil, i am always on the lookout for things that could upset the theory. these possibilities are easily split into supply and demand categories. on the demand side, we could have a synchronized global recession, but even that is probably not going to reduce demand by more than a few percent per year. more seriously, we could have an exogenous event such as avian flu wiping out a billion people or at least radically curtailing all economic activity--this could in theory cut demand by 20% or so and create an oil "glut". that might at best push peak oil out by a few decades, but it certainly would change the urgency of the current debate (and probably radically reduce energy prices). but exogenous events are highly unpredictable--i think it's just something to keep on the radar screen.
on the supply side--that's where your "divine intervention" could also come in. if you read the books and articles written by the usual suspects of the peak oil camp, basically all of the nonconventional energy sources are dismissed out of hand. i think Heinberg has done the best job of addressing these possibilities in a serious manner--though there's certainly some worthy discussion and evenhanded treatment by Vaclav Smil in Energy at the Crossroads.
one of the more intriguing possibilities, i think, is ethanol production from switchgrass cellulose. according to the authors of the paper linked below, switchgrass provides a net efficiency benefit of some 300%+, compared with a negligible (or possibly nonexistent) benefit from corn-derived ethanol. switchgrass also happens to be easy to grow in North America and Europe, with minimal fertilizer requirements. i read one article (can't recall where) which claimed that the US could become energy-self-sufficient or possibly even a net exporter (!) if it implemented enough switchgrass utilization.
most of this is still at the prototype stage and one must question its scalability (as with unconventional oil sources like tar sands) in considering the true impact on energy prices. but i'd like to see some discussion of this, and knowledgeable critique, if anybody is capable. while being no expert myself, on the face of it i have to wonder about the scalability of switchback refining facilities. if the US is to replace anything like 10 mm boe per day deriving from low-density biomass cellulose, it would seem like the facilities investment would eclipse all existing US refineries in size and scale. from a realpolitik POV, one must question whether there is anything like the political and budgetary will to realize even 5% of this capacity, given our unwillingness even to fast-track technologically proven facilities such as LNG terminals. not to mention all the bat lovers that want to shut down windmill farms...
public.iastate.edu |
