Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage
‘Earth 2100’: the Final Century of Civilization? (text and video)
Alexa Danner, ABC News (US)
Planet at Risk: Experts Warn Population Growth, Resource Depletion, Climate Change Could Bring Catastrophe in Next Century
—
It’s an idea that most of us would rather not face — that within the next century, life as we know it could come to an end. Our civilization could crumble, leaving only traces of modern human existence behind.
It seems outlandish, extreme — even impossible. But according to cutting edge scientific research, it is a very real possibility. And unless we make drastic changes now, it could very well happen.
Experts have a stark warning: that unless we change course, the “perfect storm” of population growth, dwindling resources and climate change has the potential to converge in the next century with catastrophic results.
Watch “Earth 2100,” a two-hour television event, Tuesday, June 2, at 9 p.m. ET.
In order to plan for the worst, we must anticipate it. In that spirit, guided by some of the world’s experts, ABC News’ “Earth 2100,” hosted by Bob Woodruff, will journey through the next century and explore what might be our worst-case scenario.
(29 May 2009)
Main index page for the show:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Earth2100
ABC’s Earth 2100
Eugene Duran, email
If you happened to watch ABC’s Earth 2100 on Tuesday June 2nd at 9:00 pm ET, then you may have been exposed to the theory of Peak Oil without even knowing it. Although the show’s primary focus was on the environmental effects of climate change and the resulting almost – worst case scenario, it did mention high gas prices by 2015 of @ $5:00 per gallon and even closed gas stations. It accomplished this without the mere mention of Peak Oil. How utter bold of ABC to have the likes of Richard Heinberg, Howard Kunstler, Michael Klare, and never talk about the real threat people in this country will face due to our reliance of the teat of petroleum.
Instead we get Lucy, a woman born in our time and having to go through all the slow deterioration of a world in slow collapse… mostly due to rising water levels, drought, and displaced people, Including a ticking clock displaying the decline of the world’s population to around 2 billion by 2100. Haven’t we peak oilers heard this before? Let’s see… going all the way back to Dieoff.org? Hmmm maybe someone at ABC is starting to get it?
Bob Woodruff did a nice job of seeming to make the subject a serious one but anyone who has studied energy and our reliance knows ABC’s worst case scenario was not so bad. Hey, I could live most of the rest of my life (I am @45) and not feel the real problems outlined in this not so gloomy take. Besides, Most of the problems outlined are going to happen regardless of what we do.
I did like the point that if every human on the earth lived the lifestyle of an American it would take 4 Earth like planets. Should we allow others to be like us or should we learn to live like others not so energy reliant. Doesn’t seem to be a choice there. Unless we just do it any way and damn the 3rd world and their starving working class… Oh I forgot… they are the ones feeding us and making all our stuff. Maybe we can allow them to live on less than $ 2:00 dollars a day. That’s the ticket!
Anyway I did get a kick out of the show not because it was a bunch of lies, but because it points to the wrong problem. I do not deny global warming and I do not wish to enter the arena of its cause, I just wish the main stream media would point to the real problem… contracting energy supplies and it accompanying consequences. That’s all. Nice try ABC!
(3 June 2009)
TODers on “Earth 2100”
Various, DrumBeat, The Oil Drum
Darwinian (Ron P.)
I watched “Earth 2100” an ABC last night. It was pretty good though they put far more emphasis on global warming than on peak oil. They still had jets flying right until the end. About 2040 they traveled from San Diego to New York in their car, part of the way with a convoy of cars. That gives you some idea of what they thought about the supply of oil.
In the end the water rises and destroys New York. The population of the world was dropping by millions per year. I think they had it down to about 2 billion in 2100 but I don’t remember exactly. The power finally went off completely during the last decade.
The last 15 minutes was devoted to the theme “This does not have to happen.” Then they gave the feel good message as to what we could do to prevent it. It was mostly about how to slow down global warming however. There was one line about “slowing population growth”. And there was lots of advice about solar and wind power. That seemed to be their answer to the energy problem.
If anyone else saw it please post your opinion on the show.
Google ABC Earth 2100 and you will gets lots of links about the show. Here is just one of them.
Scientists From Around the Globe Join ABC News in a Forum on Surviving the Century
“We really have less than a decade to start getting this right. If we’re still dragging our feet in 2015 I think it really becomes at that point almost impossible for the world to avert a degree of climate change that we simply will not be able to manage without intolerable cost and consequences.”
As I said, they were far more concerned about global warming than peak oil. They are watching out for a warming planet and almost completely unaware of peak oil that is about to bitch slap them right in the face.
Note: At the above link there are over 800 readers comments, so far. Some of them very interesting. Many of them highly critical of the opinion that there is any problem at all. Others thought God would fix everything. One example:
This is the BIGGEST piece of propaganda crap I have ever seen, I am sure all the wacko liberal teachers will be asking for a copy to watch in their classrooms to indoctrinate the poor children even more. This is DISGUSTING and NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!
wisco
Here is the index page:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Earth2100
Not terribly well organized, you have to keep going back to view the “Act I”, “Act II”, etc.
I wonder if Disney is working on the apocalyptic version of EPCOT Center? If so, they should probably look for a location outside of south-central Florida.
Also, ABC has a facebook index that has been up and running since at least last fall.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Earth2100/24271186421
(3 June 2009)
Review: Earth 2100
Lou Grinzo, Cost of Energy
I watched the ABC News production Earth 2100 last night, and I have some very mixed feelings about it.
In no particular order:
* My overwhelming sense is that this production will be lambasted by the usual denier crowd as being “The Century After Tomorrow” and ridiculously overblown. While that group would have screamed like wounded animals at any serious look at the issues addressed in Earth 2100, I think it’s undeniably true that ABC made several decisions that only hurt their (and humanity’s) cause.
* Cartoon representations of Lucy’s storyline? Really? Isn’t that just begging for the deniers to call the entire production “cartoonish”? They could have ditched the entire Lucy story, stuck to a more traditional documentary format, and shaved 30 minutes off the show, easily. If doing things as they did was ABC’s way of trying to appeal to a broader audience, then I think all they managed to do was make themselves look like clueless panderers.
* They said several times that this was a “worst case scenario”, which was patently false. Try this just to get the ball rolling: The methane time bomb goes off not in 2070 as (I recall) they depicted, but in 2010, leading to a far quicker and worse drinking water situation in Asia and a nuclear exchange between at least two countries.
* I was impressed by the number and range of talking head experts they included, nearly all of whom I thought were excellent choices.[1] I was a little bothered by the impact their sheer number had on the production, though. It felt as if several of them could have been edited out completely, with comments on the same topics provided by other experts, and a reduction in the whirlwind effect. My guess is that they included so many as a defensive move–they didn’t want the show to come across to people new to the topics as nothing more than the ravings of four or five lunatics.
* They were far too colorful in their depiction of peak oil, and they bordered on falling into the “peak oil means no oil” trap. The comment from Thomas Homer Dixon (a.k.a. the thinking person’s James Howard Kunstler) about oil doubling or tripling in price is wildly speculative. In a vast and horribly complicated market like the world wide market for crude oil and products made from it, price is the hardest thing to predict, simply because it’s a function of the interaction between supply, demand, and market psychology, all of which are perversely difficult to predict.
(3 June 2009)
