Why We Need to Replace Fossil Fuels
In this post I am going to look at the need to replace fossil fuels from a different perspective than the one that is part of the current narrative.
The current narrative is that we need to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy in order to save the planet by lowering the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If we do not do this (according to this narrative) the planetary temperature will skyrocket upward and all life on the planet will cease. Let me designate this narrative as the “we’re all going to die!” (WAGTD) narrative. There may be valid reasons for this narrative since the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide is likely to do things like lower the pH of sea water and produce erratic weather. But we will not know for sure if this will destroy the planet until it destroys the planet. That is, I suspect that there is a significant degree of uncertainty in how perilous the increasing carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere really is.
A more pressing, and more real issue is that fossil fuels are a non-renewable resource and that eventually we will burn them all up and there will be no more fossil fuels. This is problematic since our whole civilization is based on the prolific use of fossil fuels. Let me designate this narrative as “The fossil fuel party is over!” (TFFPIO) narrative.
The WAGTD narrative is based on mathematical modeling which may or may not be accurate. The TFFPIO narrative is based on known numbers of fossil fuel use and fossil fuel reserves.
If one looks at websites that attempt to predict when fossil fuels will run out, one gets dates that are somewhere in the 22nd century. But these predictions assume that fossil fuel consumption will remain constant. However, global fossil fuel consumption is actually increasing at a rate of 2% per year. I did a calculation of when fossil fuels will run out assuming that the consumption will increase by 2% per year. The date I came up with was 2060.
At first I thought that would never happen because we would realize our predicament and start conserving. But then I thought that perhaps the 2060 date was closer to the truth than not. After all, our leaders are showing no signs at all of scaling back on their fossil fuel usage even when they are doing things like flying to climate change conferences. And, as we know, there is no more fuel extravagant method of traveling than flying. Are they being hypocritical? I do not think so. I think they are illustrating how difficult it is to cut back on fossil fuels.
Consider how wonderful fossil fuels really are. They are an inexpensive source of energy that allows us to do things that people in the ancient world never even dreamed of. Did they think that people can safely fly around the world? We have only to look at the legend of Icarus to know what ancient people thought of flying. Let me tick off in a list all the things that we have today that were impossible for the ancients.
I suppose I could go on for pages and pages but that is enough to make my point.
领英推荐
Based on these thoughts, I think that people will give up fossil fuels when the fossil fuels are pried from their cold, dead hands. So it is entirely possible that we, as a species, will continue to burn fossil fuels as fast as we can. And all of those who scream and yell that we are all going to die from carbon dioxide poisoning (WAGTD) will be largely ignored.
But what about TFFPIO? This is also being largely ignored. Perhaps it is just that the thought of losing the numerous benefits of fossil fuels is too horrific to contemplate. Attempts have been made to ring alarm bells over this situation. President Jimmy Carter was worrying about this and even installed solar panels on the roof of the White House. But he was ignored.
Later, the Department of Energy issued a report entitled “PEAKING OF WORLD OIL PRODUCTION: IMPACTS, MITIGATION, & RISK MANAGEMENT” in 2005 authored by Robert Hirsch, Roger Bezdek and Robert Wendling. This report advised a vigorous program of building out alternate energy resources to replace fossil fuels. But little along this line has been done.
A number of authors have also been highlighting this issue. Among them are John Michael Greer, James Howard Kunstler, A.J. Friedemann, and Richard Heinberg.
The hour appears to be late and we should really worry more about building out alternative energy resources rather than obsessing about carbon dioxide.
We need to replace our current fossil-fuel generated electricity with solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal and hydroelectric generated electricity. This is a massive undertaking by itself. But in addition to that, we need to be able to replace the fossil fuel energy that is used for material production (steel, aluminum, fertilizers, etc…) as well as the fossil fuel energy used for transportation. I do not see anything on that scale happening today.
I know that much has been done to build out renewable energy sources. But my point here is that the effort must be increased by orders of magnitude to avoid a catastrophe later this century.
It is entirely possible that we will procrastinate on these issues until it is too late to do anything about them. After all, we need fossil fuels to build out alternative energy sources. When the fossil fuels are gone there will not be much that we can do.
Given our feeble effort at replacing fossil fuels, I would say that the most likely scenario is that we gradually regress to a life style similar to that of the eighteenth century. And that is if we are lucky. Worse outcomes are possible. Bryan Ward-Perkins suggests in his book “The Fall of Rome” that Britain regressed into something like the Stone Age when the Romans pulled out of Britain and that they didn’t recover for centuries.