Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
– Shell’s outgoing UK boss has seen oil firm’s role shift in a changing climate
– Edward Burtynsky’s Oil Exhibition Shines
– Energy and Security Issues in the Red Sea Transforming as the Age of Gas Begins in Earnest
– Fukushima Daiichi and Decision Time
– Fukushima Nuclear Disaster at One Month: The Explosion of Nukespeak
Natural gas is being promoted as a "bridge fuel" to a clean energy future, and even as an abundant, long-term energy source. The claims are audacious, but do they match with reality?
The original version of the “Nuclear Power? No thanks” logo that was created in Danish in 1975 by Anne Lund and Søren Lisberg. Lisberg tells his story which dates from the “pre-Chernobyl” era of opposition to nuclear power.
Today I joined the newly formed Board of Directors of 350.org. I have been a supporter of 350.org since I first heard about the wacky plan to turn a wonky scientific target into a global people’s movement. In the past three years, we have all watched the number “350” morph into a beautiful and urgent S.O.S., rising up from every corner of the globe, from Iceland to the Maldives, Ethiopia to Alaska.
On an almost daily basis, the American public is presented with false solutions, rhetoric, and partisan bickering. The only conclusion I can come up with is that one or both of the following is true:
1) Our elected officials think we’re too childish to speak to honestly about the complex issues and choices we face.
2) Our elected officials are, themselves, too childish to govern.
But here’s the thing… When it comes to facing these daunting economic, energy, and environmental crises, we’re all going to need to grow up. And fast.
– Prime Minister of France: Oil production can only decline
– Libyan unrest sends oil prices soaring to $124 a barrel
– Barclay oil analyst Amrita Sen answers your questions
– NYT: Rush to Use Crops as Fuel Raises Food Prices and Hunger Fears
– Survey of natural gas in shale deposits
The oil price hit a two and half year high this week of $123/barrel as the Libyan conflict continues to dominate market sentiment. This pushed the sterling value of crude to an all time high, exceeding even its level in the summer of 2008 when the dollar price reached $147/barrel, because the pound has slumped 17% against the greenback since then.
This article makes the case that the Saudi economy will consume ever increasing quantities of the oil they are currently exporting. The argument will be made that they could meet much of their power needs with either nuclear or solar power in order to continue earning oil export revenues. While enticing in theory, the real world of existing infrastructure, existing know-how, existing finance and existing technology will trump in the near term.
As the unfolding nuclear disaster in Japan has shown, the costs of cleanup after a nuclear meltdown are borne in large part by national governments and taxpayers rather than the industry. Paying for cleanup is just one of many hidden costs of nuclear energy that make judging the value of nuclear power difficult. Many countries, including the United States, are rushing to build a new generation of nuclear power plants to reduce carbon emissions. However, the disaster in Japan should force us to take into account the full costs of nuclear power (and other energy sources).
Let me repeat that: the U.S. imports more oil from Canada than (yes) Mexico, which ranks second, and (believe it or not) Saudi Arabia, which ranks only third. Tar sands are largely responsible for Canada’s new petro-status. Nearly a million barrels of tar sands oil arrive in the U.S. every day. By 2025, Canada is expected to be producing 3.5 million barrels of tar sands oil daily. Most of that, says Ryan Salmon of the National Wildlife Federation, will be imported to the U.S. And believe me, when it comes to energy ugly, tar sands could take the cake.
Obama’s recent speech on energy policy, which rehashed nearly every cliché uttered in forty years of empty White House rhetoric on the subject, drove home the hard fact that meaningful responses to the predicament of industrial society will not be forthcoming from the American political class. Instead, the foundations of a very different kind of energy system – localized, small-scale, and based on diffuse renewable energy – will need to be laid by individuals, families, and community groups. Passive solar technologies offer one useful example of how the ecotechnic energy system of the future can begin to evolve.
Professor Emeritus of Agricultural Economics of the University of Missouri at Columbia John Ikerd argues that humans cannot wait much longer to address the reality that economic growth is unsustainable—because the world is running out of energy resources. “We simply can’t continue to grow at the rate we’ve been growing in the past.”
