Top Energy Stories Of 2009 – The end of the Naughties

Ok we are 14 hours away from the year 2010 so I am going to have to post several top 10 lists. It seems that everyone has to have one. Since that is the case I will use theirs. But first I have to say:

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

Our First top 10 is from the Energy Tribune but actually originates with:

Posted on Dec. 28, 2009

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2768

The Top Ten Energy Stories of 2009 Ed. note: This item originally ran in Robert Rapier’s R-Squared Energy Blog.

Here are my choices for the Top 10 energy related stories of 2009. Previously I listed how I voted in Platt’s Top 10 poll, but my list is a bit different from theirs. I have a couple of stories here that they didn’t list, and I combined some topics. And don’t get too hung up on the relative rankings. You can make arguments that some stories should be higher than others, but I gave less consideration to whether 6 should be ahead of 7 (for example) than just making sure the important stories were listed.

  1. Volatility in the oil marketsMy top choice for this year is the same as my top choice from last year. While not as dramatic as last year’s action when oil prices ran from $100 to $147 and then collapsed back to $30, oil prices still more than doubled from where they began 2009. That happened without the benefit of an economic recovery, so I continue to wonder how long it will take to come out of recession when oil prices are at recession-inducing levels. Further, coming out of recession will spur demand, which will keep upward pressure on oil prices. That’s why I say we may be in The Long Recession.
  2. The year of natural gasThis could have easily been my top story, because there were so many natural gas-related stories this year. There were stories of shale gas in such abundance that it would make peak oil irrelevant, stories of shale gas skeptics, and stories of big companies making major investments into converting their fleets to natural gas.Whether the abundance ultimately pans out, the appearance of abundance is certainly helping to keep a lid on natural gas prices. By failing to keep up with rising oil prices, an unprecedented oil price/natural gas price ratio developed. If you look at prices on the NYMEX in the years ahead, the markets are anticipating that this ratio will continue to be high. And as I write this, you can pick up a natural gas contract in 2019 for under $5/MMBtu.
  3. U.S. demand for oil continues to declineAs crude oil prices skyrocketed in 2008, demand for crude oil and petroleum products fell from 20.7 million barrels per day in 2007 to 19.5 million bpd in 2008 (Source: EIA). Through September 2009, year-to-date demand is averaging 18.6 million bpd – the lowest level since 1997. Globally, demand was on a downward trend as well, but at a less dramatic pace partially due to demand growth in both China and India.

:}

Then there is Greentech Media:

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/top-ten-energy-storage-of-2009/

Top Ten Energy Storage of 2009

Electric vehicles boost lithium-ion batteries, DOE dollars for grid storage, ice-making air conditioners, and a smart grid to rule them all.

Energy storage – you can’t do electric vehicles without it, and it sure would make renewable solar and wind energy a lot more useful.

That’s the imperative behind 2009’s push into energy storage – from the fast-moving world of batteries for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles to the slower development of a variety of technologies for storing power on the electricity grid.

1. A123, Green Tech’s First IPO of 2009: A123 Systems broke the green tech IPO drought in September, when it debuted its shares to the public markets and was immediately rewarded with a doubling of their price. But the lithium-ion battery maker has since seen shares fall to close to their initial offering price of $13.50, perhaps linked to the scaling back of electric vehicle plans by customer Chrysler. A123 is also making batteries for grid energy storage, bridging two worlds that have until now been mostly separate.

2. The Government Boosts Vehicle Batteries” Next-generation batteries wouldn’t be where they are today without the billions of stimulus dollars the federal government has aimed at the sector. In August, the Department of Energy handed out $2.4 billion to such companies as EnerG2, A123 Systems, Johnson Controls, eTec, EnerDel, Saft and Chrysler and General Motors, most of it to build battery factories in the United States – a key goal of the grants, given Asia’s dominance in battery technology and manufacturing.

3. Fuel Cells’ Waning Fortunes? What the federal government has given to batteries, it has taken away from a once-favored alternative – fuel cells. Technologies to convert hydrogen into electricity and water are clean, but they also require a massive infrastructure to deliver hydrogen – which is mostly made today by cracking natural gas – to millions of vehicles. Energy Secretary Steven Chu has said he will cut back drastically on DOE funding for vehicular fuel cell research, which he described as decades away from commercial viability. In the meantime, fuel cells soldier on in the stationary power generation market, and are finding niches in forklifts and other short-range heavy vehicles, as well as in military applications.

But wait? Panasonic has started to deliver fuel cells that burn natural gas to produce heat and electricity in Japan and Bloom Energy is expected to come out of its hidey hole soon to talk about devices that pretty much do the same thing for industrial customers. By exploiting heat and power, these fuel cells can be 80 plus percent efficient.

:}

What better way to end the new year but with the Department of Defense:

http://dodenergy.blogspot.com/2009/12/year-in-review-top-10-dod-energy-events.html

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Year in Review: Top 10 DOD Energy Events of 2009

Not sure if you’ll agree, but from my vantage point, this was the first year that merits a DOD Energy top ten. Folks who’ve been at this enterprise a long time, like Tom Morehouse and Chris DiPetto at OSD (and a small handful of others in the Services), have been doing energy grunt work without a heck of a lot of support or credit (that’s my take, not theirs). Over the past decade there have been isolated wins and signs of improvement, but nothing sustained.

But this year something changed, and I have to give credit to the increasing strength of the convoy connection. It’s finally shown everyone that being smart and proactive on energy issues isn’t the domain of Birkenstock wearing, granola eating, tree hugging peace-nicks. The clear (and easy to understand and communicate) link between fuel convoys and 1) causalities, 2) costs, and 3) mission degradation.

I’m sure I’m leaving a lot out (that’s a good thing). But without further adieu, here’s the list for the year, in no particular order:

  1. Gigantic Army solar installation off the ground at Fort Irwin in California’s Mojave Desert to advance conversation beyond Nellis. Score – Fort Irwin: 500+ Megawatts, Nellis AFB: 14 Megawatts
  2. Boeing’s high tech, super efficient 787 Dreamliner finally flew. Basis for future tanker/transport?
  3. Convoy lessons brought the concept of proactive energy planning fully out of its Birkenstock phase … for everyone.
  4. Energy audits in Afghanistan commence with Marines. It’s called MEAT, for Marine Energy Assessment Team, see here and here.
  5. Like DARPA to advance US space tech post Sputnik, ARPA-E‘s mission is to turbocharge US competitiveness in energy tech (ET).
  6. 3 of the 4 Services hold major confs exclsively on energy issues. The Navy version in particular generated a huge amount of great info

:}

HAPPY NEW YEAR

:}

Alice In Greenland – Guest poster Jed Morey has his say

I rarely have “guest posters”, mainly because nobody asks but also because I like to run my mouth. I forget how I found Jed’s Column but it makes so much sense in such a short space that I actually ASKED Jed if I could use it. How rare is that? So far that would be 2 people Jed and Dan Piraro soooo without further ado (I always wanted to say that…damn).

http://www.longislandpress.com/2009/12/09/alice-in-greenland/

Alice In Greenland

Written by Jed Morey on Dec 9th, 2009 and filed under Columns, Off The Reservation. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry

Want to take a trip down the environmental rabbit hole? Spark a discussion about climate change and watch human warming reach extremes far greater than any place on the globe.

To the right you have the laughable stance adopted by the conservative movement that humans are having no effect on climate and the atmosphere. At the other extreme are non-scientist policy makers and pundits holding “The End Is Near” signs on every street corner claiming that Iowa and Chad will be beachfront property by the end of next year.

Personally, I’m not qualified to discern which side is closer to representing the truth.

What I do know is that the debate should remain in scientific circles because I have yet to meet anyone qualified to entirely explain the variances in global temperatures. While world leaders are dithering in Copenhagen and arguing over hacked e-mails about tree rings versus thermometers, the public needs to close its ears to the noise produced on both sides of the global warming debate and focus on the tangible aspects of industrial pollution.

You don’t need to be an expert on carbon emissions or reference “parts per billion” to understand that we are seriously screwing up the planet. Public health has been compromised by the rise of industry. While there are several factors that contribute to the decline in public health, much of the discussion centers on energy production and sources because it’s the baseline driver of industry. So let’s look at it.

First of all, there is no such thing as clean coal. True, you can clean coal emissions, but the process of scrubbing coal to burn cleaner is just as much of an environmental disaster. There is no such thing as clean nuclear energy either, for that matter. True, the emissions are carbon neutral, but at some point every nuclear facility must dispose of the spent fuel used in production. The spent fuel must be stored somewhere and wherever that place is, it’s no place you want to be near.

Large wind farms in lakes and oceans are unrealistically expensive and remarkably inefficient. The Danes will tell you differently and espouse the virtues of wind power—just look at the marvel that is Copenhagen—but the fact remains that they are the largest manufacturers of wind turbines and have a vested economic interest in, shall we say, massaging the numbers. However, wind, solar and geothermal energy present viable options on a micro level and should be encouraged in every corner and backyard of the world. Individuals and small businesses need affordable access to clean energy solutions, not just municipalities.

Economically, there is no such thing as cheap oil anymore. Whether or not the Saudis or Venezuelans care to admit it, we have hit peak oil in the largest, most accessible oil fields around the world. Period. Are there places on Earth with large reserves of oil and natural gas? Yup. Is it easy to get to? Nope. Expensive to retrieve? Yup. Environmentally secure to extract? Nope.

As far as Cap and Trade is concerned—please. Giving large corporations and polluters the ability to buy their way out of cleaning their emissions is a lousy practice. Lisa Jackson from the EPA is on the right track by simply drawing a line in the sand and taking it out of the hands of Congress. The message from the Obama administration is clear: Clean it up. If Cap and Trade is allowed to continue one can only imagine Goldman Sachs creating a derivatives market that bundles pollution credits in with mortgages on homes with inefficient boilers and selling them to school boards in Greenland. No more government-backed securities bought by large corporations and sold on opaque markets, especially if they contain something as ethereal as carbon credits.

This is it folks. We have reached the tipping point. The only option heretofore is conservation.

If you wish to comment on “Off the Reservation,” send your message to jmorey@longislandpress.com.

:}

Can’t say it any better than that. By the way those who know me know I disagree with Jed about renewables, broadly stated, to replace fossil fuels but as he says “Cheap nope, time consuming Yup”. Thanks Jed.

:}

Iceberg Attacks Australia After Destroying New Zealand – Get out the Nukes it is the end of the world

It is Jam Band Friday Delbert style – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxNnEEK6uG0

OK now that I have everybody’s attention. The people who do not accept Man Caused Global Atmospheric Destabilization (some people call it Global Warming I don’t) are insane or delusional. They just don’t want people to notice the obvious. They try to draw the arguement so far back into the clouds because if they admit MANKIND is contributing to the mess then the rest of their rhetorical walls begin to tumble. But to ignore this is pretty hard to do.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdXzJaCeHP8 )

Australia shipping alert over massive iceberg

SYDNEY (AFP) – Australian authorities Friday issued a shipping alert over a gigantic iceberg that is gradually approaching the country’s southwest coast.

The Bureau of Meteorology said the once-in-a-century cliff of ice, which dislodged from Antarctica about a decade ago before drifting north, was being monitored using satellites.

“Mariners are advised that at 1200 GMT on December 9, an iceberg approximately 1,700 kilometres (1,054 miles) south-southwest of the West Australian coast was observed,” it said, giving the iceberg’s coordinates.

“The iceberg is 140 square kilometres in area — 19 kilometres long by eight kilometres wide.”

Experts believe the iceberg — known as B17B — is likely to break up as it enters warmer waters nearer Australia, creating hundreds of smaller icebergs in a hazard to passing ships.

“It’s still 1,700 kilometres away, so it’s quite a long way away, it’s not really on our doorstep yet but it’s been heading steadily towards us,” glaciologist Neal Young said Thursday.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeNNBUhobNg&feature=related )

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/12/11/tech-iceberg-australia.html
This satellite image shows several icebergs breaking off the Antarctic ice shelf in 2000. The iceberg B17B on the left has been spotted 1,700 kilometres from Australia.

This satellite image shows several icebergs breaking off the Antarctic ice shelf in 2000. The iceberg B17B on the left has been spotted 1,700 kilometres from Australia. (Australian Antarctic Division/Associated Press)

Scientists say that ice shelf calvings such as the one in 2000 happen about once every 30 years.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMwpHkQlrtQ&feature=related )

Wish they would make up there minds…is this a once every 30 years experience or once every 100 year event…but in a way it is so monumental that it is amazing that there is a Climate Summit going on and the deniers have everyone talking about stolen emails and NOT this. Cover your ears and go lalalalalalala.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUgzsdqY1uE&feature=related )

This chap’s post is in the same vein as mine but alas he is a Denier.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/11/australia-iceberg-casting-the-news

 

Casting the news: The Blizzard of Oz, the Australian iceberg disaster movie

This week we need your help producing the big-screen version of the smackdown between one big island and one mammoth iceberg

 

 

Iceberg in Sydney

Strewth! An iceberg passes under Sydney Harbour Bridge. Photograph: Dennis Degnan/Corbis

A crowd of suntanned Australians stand at Sydney harbour. As is traditional, they are having a barbecue. Someone has set up a cricket wicket in the middle of the road. The mood is a happy one. Then, all of a sudden, the light disappears from the sky. Men and women alike turn round to find a 50bn-tonne iceberg where the sun once was. This is B17B, the superberg, and it’s headed right for them, bringing with it a nightmare microclimate: cyclones filled with swirling tinnies, raining wombats and vicious blizzards (to enable the title).

The latest Guardian/film/films production – working title: The Blizzard of Oz – promises to take the disaster movie where it’s never been before. Australia. Inspired by latest events, we plan to tell a tale of ecological disaster that will keep you on the edge of your seat for pushing three hours and guarantees a flying CGI kangaroo every 15 minutes.

To clarify: the latest news seem to suggest that B17B, a 140 sq km block of ice that has broken free from the Antarctic ice shelf, looks set to miss Australia altogether. What’s more, it was heading for the west coast, not the east, so featuring Sydney would be a stretch, too. But this is the movies; rules get bent. Which is how we came to cast Stefan Dennis in the lead role.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qY1e2hGQ2o&feature=related )

After Australia it is probably headed towards India and they are concerned…

http://trak.in/news/iceberg-19-km-by-8-km-drifting-towards-australia/33597/

 

Iceberg, 19 km by 8 km, drifting towards Australia

2009/12/09Tags: , , ,

in India News, International

Sydney, Dec 9 (DPA) An iceberg twice the size of Sydney Harbour is heading towards Western Australia, news reports said Wednesday.

:}

They don’t have too much else to say about it. They must emit one hell of a lot of green house gases…do you think?

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEYuo5jxuzQ&feature=related )

:}

Iceburgs Attack New Zealand – well maybe they kinda drift by but

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

While the people who don’t want to admit that people are pooping on the planet so much that we are destabilizing the planet by citing bogus statistics or hacking emails that appear to challenge the L shaped curve for global warming over the last hundred years…the real destabilization continues. Which is the real point

.http://www.livescience.com/environment/etc/091123-icebergs-surprise-new-zealand.html

Environment

Etc! More Science News Out There...

Icebergs Surprise New Zealand

Submitted by Robert Roy Britt

posted: 23 November 2009 11:50 am ET

iceberg

An iceberg at Bauer Bay on the west coast of Macquarie Island has drifted from Antarctica. Credit: Brett Quinton / Australian Antarctic Division

At least a hundred icebergs have trekked from Antarctica toward New Zealand, arriving at islands off New Zealand in recent weeks after being set adrift perhaps 9 years ago.”The larger icebergs seen from Macquarie Island are tabular in shape, which indicates they have calved relatively recently, probably from one of the massive icebergs which originally calved from the Ross Ice Shelf nearly 9 years ago,” said Australian Antarctic Division glaciologist Neal Young in a statement released earlier this month.

More than 100 icebergs were seen in just one cluster, AFP reports today. Young says the smaller icebergs likely resulted from the breakup of a larger one.

“Everyone on station has their eyes glued to the horizon trying to spot new icebergs,” said Cyril Munro, acting station leader on Macquarie Island. “The scientists working on the southern tip of the island were astounded to see an iceberg of about 2 kilometers [1.2 miles] in length,” he said.

:}

Here are several maps if you would like to see the icebergs:

http://www.acecrc.org.au/uploaded/117/797697_63nz_iceberg_20091124_200.pdf

http://www.acecrc.org.au/uploaded/117/797697_61nz_iceberg_20091124.pdf

When they get to Tasmania we will be in big trouble.

:}

And then there is this

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gsr62jU7bnmBi2Z-iKs_Mbgy-9rQD9C5TPD80

Icebergs head from Antarctica for New Zealand

The alert comes three years after cold weather and favorable ocean currents saw dozens of icebergs float close to New Zealand’s southern shores for the first time in 75 years.

New Zealand maritime officials have issued navigation warnings for the area south of the country.

“It’s an alert to shipping to be aware these potential hazards are around and to be on the lookout for them,” Maritime New Zealand spokeswoman Sophie Hazelhurst said.

dot dot dot

Large numbers of icebergs last floated close to New Zealand in 2006, when some were visible from the coastline in the first such sighting since 1931.

It is rare for whole icebergs to drift so far north before melting, but a cold snap around southern New Zealand and favorable ocean currents have again combined to push the towering visitors to the region intact.

dot dot dot

Young said that having the icebergs end up near New Zealand is not necessarily linked to global warming, but said that the rate of icebergs breaking off the Antarctic ice shelf in recent years may have increased due to dramatically rising temperatures on the continent over the past 60 years.

:}

hmmm…things are different in the REAL world

:}

If We Just Changed People’s Behavior We Could Save The Earth – I used to believe this

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

It’s Jam Band Friday ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJbFVJvRqOQ&feature=PlayList&p=DA3BD18D4E01082D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=16 )

Until I realized that all the capitol involved for social investments the size of a nuclear powerplant or a huge wind farm of the same megawattage was controlled by people who had a vested interest in one or the other. The simple way to put this is that which Energy Infrastructure we have is a political decision. That means that we will never have an Earth Friendly Economy until we have Earth Friendly governments. Don’t get me wrong people can make a difference. They can try to stop some of the damage being done. They can change themselves and their children to adopt Earth Friendly behaviors. I do not believe that they should have to give up mowing their grass, or back yard barbeques however because it is the big polluters that are causing the problems. But let’s look at the literature:

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/11/19/19climatewire-how-understanding-the-human-mind-might-save-16335.html?pagewanted=2

I know I know the New York Times is hardly literature and the “difficulty” of changing behavior is well understood by anyone who has ever tried to get someone to quit sucking their thumb or give up their bankey.  But it is helpful to show some examples:

:}

How Understanding the Human Mind Might Save the World From CO2

Published: November 19, 2009

What will solve climate change? Will it be technology? Policy? A growing number of researchers and activists say it’s what’s behind it all: people. And understanding them is vital to addressing climate change.The problem is that people don’t understand people very well, research shows.

In the 1970s, a researcher at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University named Scott Geller and colleagues conducted a workshop in residential energy efficiency and then measured its impacts. A newspaper advertisement recruited 40 participants on a first-come-first-served basis, and the workshop lasted three hours. Before and after the workshop, subjects took surveys measuring how much they knew and cared about energy efficiency. The change was significant — participants significantly knew and cared more about the issues after the workshop than before.

But when the researchers looked at the actual actions that people took afterward, the results were discouraging. One person lowered the temperature on the hot water heater. Two additional people had installed insulating blankets around their hot water heaters — but they had done it before the workshop. Eight people did install low-flow shower heads — after all 40 participants had been given the low-flow shower heads at the workshop.

If these were people who cared enough about energy efficiency to attend a three-hour workshop, what hope was there for people who didn’t?

:}

Of course since this talk is being given by famous environmentalist Doug McKenzie-Mohr who believes that social marketing is the answer to the question, “how do you change people’s behavior”, I will put up a few more cuts from this article because some of it is intriguing . But infrastructure and public policy are controlled by the moneyed elites and the government officials. Good luck with the social marketing scheme with them.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZVzH5yBFQA )

While the study, spurred by the last energy crisis, was conducted in the 1970s, its lessons about human nature still apply today, said McKenzie-Mohr, a professor of psychology at St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick, and author of the book “Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-based Social Marketing.”

dot dot dot

“Social psychologists have now known for four decades that the relationship between people’s attitudes and knowledge and behavior is scant at best,” said McKenzie-Mohr. Yet campaigns remain heavily focused on brochures, flyers and other means of disseminating information. “I could just as easily call this presentation ‘beyond brochures,'” he said.

dot dot dot

Bridging the gap between attitudes and action

To bridge the gap between attitudes and action, people must first address the barriers that stand in the way of action, McKenzie-Mohr said.

dot dot dot

As the U.S. Senate debates sweeping climate legislation and leaders express increasing doubts that next month’s Copenhagen climate negotiations will lead to a treaty, a poll conducted in October by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed that only 57 percent of Americans believe that climate change is happening. Only 36 percent believe humans are the cause.

Individual behaviors can achieve fast, immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, if they are implemented, presenters said. But Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change and a leading expert on public opinion on climate change, said that what will have the most far-reaching effect is policy changes. And for that, public opinion is critical.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqeSUAlI5uI&feature=related )

As I said before…they always get around to the politicians and public policy WITHOUT talking about the moneyed elites that hide behind their hedgerow.

:}

McKenzie-Mohr gave an example of a town’s efforts to reduce idling at schools. After learning that air quality was something residents cared about, leaders of the effort placed signs by where parents parked to pick up their children from school. The signs had no effect. But when, instead, a person dressed as a public health official spoke to parents personally as they waited, the frequency of idling dropped by 32 percent, while the average length of idling dropped by 72 percent.

dot dot dot

Ultimately, McKenzie-Mohr, Leiserowitz and other speakers said, what the climate movement needs is vision — which it currently lacks.

“I think we have become very, very good at describing that we’re against. … We’re terrible at describing what we’re for. We’re against climate change, we’re against biodiversity extinction, we’re against land-use change, etc., we’re against pesticides … but what are we for?” Leiserowitz said.

For more on the same topic please see

http://www.cbsm.com/public/world.lasso

http://www.conservationpsychology.org/profiles/31/

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSMW4Gwi0y0&feature=related )

Other approaches have been tried but they always “start from the bottom”…why because they are afraid of the “top” that’s why. More on this Monday. Have a good weekend.

:}

http://eetd.lbl.gov/eetd-org-dc-uecb.html

Washington, DC Projects Office

Clockwise: closeup of a hand using a computer mouse; a checkbook, credit cards, a calculator and bills; a Compact=

Understanding Energy Consumption Behavior

Research to understand the psychological, cultural, and institutional context within which energy-related decisions are made and how these factors influence energy consumption. Applying these insights to help public agencies design and implement more effective energy-saving policies and programs.

Projects

:}

Thank god for Burton Cummings and Randy Bachman

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQJ4toj-JY&feature=related )

:}

The Smirking Monkey Is Going Out Of Business – Please help out

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

Here is a web site that suffered from lack of support, has 4 no 3 no 2 days left, and a point to make:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/25006

Nuclear promises safe, cheap energy, but the truth is less enticing

by Pierre Tristam

| November 17, 2009 – 11:04am

Energy independence is the new creationism; nuclear power its deity. As the head glow for nuclear’s new dawn, you can’t do better than Aris Candris. He’s president and CEO of Westinghouse Electric, the company aiming to build 14 of 25 new nuclear reactors planned in the United States. Candris also sums up everything that’s wrong with the nuclear power industry’s orchestrated revival — the deceptions, the manipulated numbers, the false promises and the sheer swindle of taxpayer dollars for a technology with a lethal past and an unproven future. Candris’ Nov. 9 tribute to nuclear in The Wall Street Journal tells the tall tale.

:}

You can read all of those lies here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704224004574489702243465472.html

He pretty much says the same thing no matter where he speaks – More Nukes..More Nukes

Nukes Good – Renewables Bad

:}

Aris says: Only nukes can supply the huge electrical demand. My source is bigger than your source.

Pierre says:

Actually, that’s more true of nuclear, far less so of renewable. Not a single nuclear power plant has been approved and built in the United States since the 1970s. The newest one, Watts Bar in Tennessee, began construction in 1973 and went online in 1996 — a 23-year span that multiplied its initial costs, to $7 billion. Candris gives the impression that a slew of plants are about to be built. Not so. A slew of plants applied for licenses, but only because the federal government is offering up to $1 billion in tax credits per new nuclear plant (once electricity production begins), as long as the application was in by the end of 2008.

:}

Aris says: Nukes planned will come in starting in 2016. My source is faster than your source.

Pierre says:

Look for pigs flying around Turkey Point, too, because Westinghouse’s claims are identical to those of Areva, a French company building what was supposed to be a next-generation nuclear plant in Finland — quick, safe, cheap. The plant, Europe’s first in 30 years, was supposed to open last summer. Finns will be lucky if it’s open by 2012. It was to cost $3.5 billion. The cost is now creeping close to $7 billion and counting.

:}

Aris says: Renewables, conservation, efficiency weak. Look at France.

Pierre says:

But French electricity consumption is 7,200 kilowatts per person per year, 44 percent less than the American consumption of 12,900 kilowatts per person. France is a model — of conservation. (Candris is wrong about France’s independence: it imports all of its oil and natural gas.)In the United States between 1995 and 2008, electricity consumption increased by 22 percent, more than the projected increase over the next 21 years. The country coped without gobs of nuclear power — and can cope again as renewables like wind and solar increase their share of electricity generation, from 5 percent today (compared with nuclear’s 20 percent) faster and safer. Imagine if renewables had the kind of obscene tax subsidies the nuclear industry is receiving.

:}

Aris says: ALL those wimpy girlie technologies  are expensive and US manly Nukes are cheap.

Pierre says:

In fact, nuclear energy is more expensive than solar or wind energy. Take Florida Power & Light’s plan to build two new nuclear reactors sometime over the next 12 years (it’s not clear when, though the company is already socking it to customers by making them pay for construction today. No other state but Georgia allows that con). The projected cost of the two reactors is $18 billion. It’ll certainly go up well beyond that by the time they’re done, but go with the $18 billion figure. The two reactors will produce 2,234 megawatts of electricity. That comes out to $8 million per megawatt at the opening bell. FPL just started operating a 25-megawatt solar-power plant in DeSoto County. Cost: $152 million, or $6 million per megawatt — $2 million cheaper than the projected cost of the nuclear reactors. With wind, it’s even cheaper. A Chinese-American consortium on Oct. 29 announced plans for a 600-megawatt wind farm in West Texas. Cost: $1.5 billion, or $2.5 million per megawatt. Cheap nuclear power? Demonstrably not.

Keep in mind that wind and solar farms require zero raw materials to operate, and minimal security. Terrorists aren’t about to crash planes into wind turbines or solar panels. Operating a nuclear plant is said to be cheaper than operating gas- or coal-fired plants — but not when security, liability and potential catastrophes are figured into the equation. And for all the safety advances of the past 30 years, the current fleet of about 100 reactors has a projected Chernobyl- or Three Mile Island-like severe accident rate of one every 100 years. Would you like to live near those odds?

The nuclear power industry can’t even persuade its own investors to bet on it, so it’s going after tax dollars and captive customers to pay for its dreamed-up expansion. Simple solution: If nuclear power can make it on its own, fine. But it’s far too dangerous, too uncertain, too costly and too tempting to terrorists to be subsidized by taxpayers and unwilling customers. So far, the nuclear power industry is betting equally and exclusively on public dollars and gullibility. Don’t let it get away with it.
:}

Pierre is right and Aris is wrong. Please support him.

:}

Cap And Trade – An industry insider opposes it when industry proposes it

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

This is an example of what we have to put up with in this community. Springfield has been raped by corporate media purchases. First a right wing conglomerate, the Sinclair Broadcast Group, bought channel 20 and gave us an ex-CIA agent as a far right social commenter. Then Gatehouse buys our local paper, the State Journal Register, and in one week they give us an editorial in which Union Pacific says that they can ram as many freight trains down our throats as they want and the opinion below that Cap and Trade will kill the USA’s economy. This by the guy who lead the deregulation train before it derailed our economy. Thanks a lot man.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x801093616/Dan-Miller-CO2-curbs-would-be-devastating

In My View: CO2 curbs would be devastating

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Nov 07, 2009 @ 12:03 AM

 Regulations and mandates that force nationwide cuts in carbon dioxide emissions offer only speculative environmental benefits, if any, as a switch to wind and solar power will certainly cause more harm than good to the environment.

But command-and-control forces in Congress are headed in that direction, with the House narrowly passing a bill to cap CO2 emissions, and the Senate taking up a companion bill this month.
Engineers calculate that a stunning 600 square miles of wind turbines would be needed to produce the same 1,000 megawatts of electricity as a single medium-to-large coal power plant. That’s enough to provide electricity to about 10,000 homes.

Even in favorable locations, wind turbines can supply electrical power only about 20 percent of the time, meaning utilities still must have an alternative baseload source to compensate for wind fluctuations, and those alternatives are three: coal, natural gas or nuclear power plants. But by taking coal and natural gas out of production due to carbon dioxide restrictions, a massive and enormously expensive program will be needed to build more nuclear power plants to supply this baseload.

Further, wind turbine developments despoil nature’s beauty, and indiscriminately kill birds and bats, including many endangered species.

Writing last summer in the Boston Globe, Eleanor Tillinghast, director of the environmental advocacy group Green Berkshires, warned, “Cutting wide swaths of unspoiled forest for access roads, clear-cutting miles of ridgelines, erecting industrial structures with spinning blades that threaten migrating birds and the last remaining bats — these are irreversible actions with permanent consequences.”

Solar power likewise requires substantially more environmental destruction than coal. The Nevada Solar One array, the most efficient in the nation, requires 350 acres of land to produce less than 1/10th the power of a conventional coal-fueled power plant, and that’s at peak efficiency at noon on a cloudless day.

Both wind and solar power projects inevitably would require the construction of new transmission lines, often across otherwise-pristine lands, to reach energy-hungry consumers. The nation’s key wind corridor, from the Texas panhandle to the Dakotas, contains no major population center.

Further, wind and solar generators consume much more water than coal power plants, a serious problem in desert areas with the most sunlight.

All of that explains why so many environmentalists oppose further development of wind and solar power. By forcing construction of more of these projects, carbon dioxide restrictions will have a devastating impact on many of America’s most valuable natural treasures.

Dan Miller is publisher at The Heartland Institute and former chairman of the Illinois Commerce Commission, the public utility regulatory body in Illinois. He can be reached at
dmiller@heartland.org.

:}

More on this guy Miller later.

:}

Modern Electrical Grids Are Extremely Fragile – But I wish they would quit picking on Brazil

:}

Community Energy Systems is a nonprofit 501c3 organization chartered in Illinois in Sangamon County. As such we are dependent on public donations for our continued existence. We also use Adsense as a fundraiser. Please click on the ads that you see on this page, on our main page and on our Bulletin Board (Refrigerator Magnets) and you will be raising money for CES. We say a heartfelt THANK YOU to all who do.

:}

I guess this is the only way to test the technology without causing a war. Brazil is such an inviting target because they have no military. But who is next South Africa, the Philippines, or Indonesia?http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/06/60minutes/main5555565.shtml

Nov. 8, 2009

Cyber War: Sabotaging the System

60 Minutes: Former Chief of National Intelligence Says U.S. Unprepared for Cyber Attacks

“We know that cyber intruders have probed our electrical grid, and that in other countries cyber attacks have plunged entire cities into darkness,” the president said.

President Obama didn’t say which country had been plunged into darkness, but a half a dozen sources in the military, intelligence, and private security communities have told us the president was referring to Brazil.

Several prominent intelligence sources confirmed that there were a series of cyber attacks in Brazil: one north of Rio de Janeiro in January 2005 that affected three cities and tens of thousands of people, and another, much larger event beginning on Sept. 26, 2007.

That one in the state of Espirito Santo affected more than three million people in dozens of cities over a two-day period, causing major disruptions. In Vitoria, the world’s largest iron ore producer had seven plants knocked offline, costing the company $7 million. It is not clear who did it or what the motive was.

But the people who do these sorts of things are no longer teenagers making mischief. They’re now likely to be highly trained soldiers with the Chinese army or part of an organized crime group in Russia, Europe or the Americas.

“They can disrupt critical infrastructure, wipe databases. We know they can rob banks. So, it’s a much bigger and more serious threat,” explained Jim Lewis, director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Lewis led a group that prepared a major report on cyber security for President Obama.

“What was it that made the government begin to take this seriously?” Kroft asked.

“In 2007 we probably had our electronic Pearl Harbor. It was an espionage Pearl Harbor,” Lewis said. “Some unknown foreign power, and honestly, we don’t know who it is, broke into the Department of Defense, to the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, probably the Department of Energy, probably NASA. They broke into all of the high tech agencies, all of the military agencies, and downloaded terabytes of information.”

:} dot dot dot in reverse

Today it’s not only possible, all of that has actually happened, plus a lot more we don’t even know about.

Center for Strategic and International Studies
Sandia National Laboratories
IntelFusion

It’s why President Obama has made cyber war defense a top national priority and why some people are already saying that the next big war is less likely to begin with a bang than a blackout.

:}

Last night it happened again…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091111/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_brazil_blackouts

Lights return following Brazilian blackout

RIO DE JANEIRO – Brazil emerged early Wednesday from a widespread power outage that plunged its major cities and at least nine states into darkness for hours, prompting security fears and concern from residents about another black eye for a country hosting the 2016 Olympic Games.

Power went out for more than two hours in Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo and several other major cities, affecting millions of people, after transmission problems knocked one of the world’s biggest hydroelectric dams offline. Airport operations were hindered and subways ground to a halt.

All of neighboring Paraguay was plunged into the dark, but for less than a half hour.

Brazilian authorities blamed storms that took down power lines and towers, causing a domino effect that rippled across the region.

Lights twinkled back on along Rio’s Copacabana beach, in South America‘s largest city of Sao Paulo and in Paraguay‘s sleepy capital of Asuncion. But some traffic lights were still out in both Rio and Sao Paulo and traffic officials were expecting drivers to face difficulties the rest of the day, according to local media.

:}

Then again maybe it is just the third world:

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2006/02/19/afx2537855.html

AFX News Limited
South Africa hit by power outages
02.19.2006, 05:59 AM

JOHANNESBURG (AFX) – Parts of southwestern South Africa as well as its largest city, Johannesburg, were hit by power failures Sunday, disrupting households and bringing trains to a halt, local news reports said.

Power supply was restored to some parts of the Western Cape province which was without any power in the early hours of Sunday, power utility ESKOM spokesman Fanie Zulu said.

‘We are in the process of checking interaction between the national control and the City of Cape Town control room. They are increasing their supply,’ Zulu told the local SAPA news agency.

‘There are no trains running in the province until the power is restored,’ said Metrorail spokeswoman Riana Jacobs added.

Officials blamed the cuts on faults within the transmission lines because of misty conditions and residual pollution from fires which had recently raged in the province.

Areas in Johannesburg were also hit by power cuts, knocking out traffic lights and disrupting households, SABC radio news reported.

:}

Then again maybe it is going on under our noses.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=506242&publicationSubCategoryId=67

Short power outages seen in Mindanao
By Lino De La Cruz (The Philippine Star) Updated September 18, 2009 12:00 AM

Iligan City, Philippines – Short rotational power outages are expected in some areas in Mindanao as four hydroelectric plants and two independent power producers undertake repairs and preventive maintenance work this week.

Thus, the National Grid Corp. of the Philippines (NGCP) said it has asked power utility firms and electric cooperatives in Mindanao to set up a load reduction plan amid the situation.

Eugene Bicar, NGCP-Mindanao systems operation head, said the power plants have been temporarily shut down for preventive maintenance work.

He said requests have been made to power utilities and electric cooperatives in Mindanao to drop some of their feeders to address the generation problem and prevent overloading of transmission lines.

Power supply is now limited as the Agus 1 (unit 2) in Marawi City, Agus 5 (unit 1) in Iligan City, Agus 2 (unit 1) in Lanao del Sur, and the Pulangi hydroelectric plant in Bukidnon are now temporarily shut downAlso in the same situation are the Western Mindanao Power Corp. in Zamboanga City and the STEAG coal-fired power plant in Villanueva, Misamis Oriental.

“Short rotational (power outages) in some areas in Mindanao are expected during the peak hours from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. daily based on actual system condition until curtailment is lifted,” Bicar said.

However, he said steps are being made to correct the problems of the power plants as soon as possible so that power supply in the Mindanao grid is normalized with a comfortable level of generation reserves.

:}

What? And you think there are power outages in Indonesia? Comeon I don’t even have to Google or Bing that.

:}

Renewable Energy Fails And The Lights Go Out – This guy is so wrong in so many ways it is hard to count

It is jam band Friday – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irZi18VR31M

This is a perfect example of an Oil and Gas shill. Actually at this point I guess I should call him a Carbon front man. Ever notice how it’s always a man? He ignores the subsidies paid to the Oil and Gas business right now, which are huge. He ignores the impact of the pollution (externalities you know). He ignores the fact that, as predicted, we are starting to use oil shale and oil sands which are marginal materials because we are running out of resources. Not because of “magical” new technologies.  He ignores the simple fact that if everyone in the world heated their water using geothermal or solar we could cut consumption in half….

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeRa3RtBiIU&feature=related )

In fact he sounds like a buggy maker or a whip maker right after the automobile was first introduced.

http://www.buggymuseum.org/buggytown.htm

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,757393,00.htmlhttp://www.tocreateyourdestiny.com/html/where_have_all_the_buggy_maker.html

Unlike those Talk Radio these days, I like to periodically present the other side of a case and oh boy, does this guy do it.

http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=2544

Posted on Nov. 05, 2009

Renewable Banality: The Latest British Export

UK wind energy. Photo by Mitch: Flickr

Photo by Mitch: Flickr

I loved the true story of the Nigerian energy worker who, having received a pay check for $900, amended the figure to read $9,000. As the reporter wittily put it, “The check fraud proved entirely successful … right up to the point where he attempted to cash it.” That’s kind of how I feel about the renewable energy revolution. It will prove entirely successful in the eyes of the public and media — right up to the point where the lights start going out. And those lights will soon start going out, according to a new report.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYxp6OIEZlk&feature=related )

I fully understand the romantic attraction of the clean energy revolution and the rush to replace ‘dirty’ fossil fuels. In the light of the war on carbon it’s a no brainer, right? Which is precisely why, just as diminishing EU and UK subsidies are prompting an industry exodus westward, the British renewables industry may be about to be given an unexpected investment shot in the arm from some of the world’s biggest multinational companies in one of the biggest analogs to the adage “I gave at the church,” in this case the environmentalism church. Companies, it seems, in their rush to appear politically correct are oblivious to how that renewable revolution is ushering in a new dark age in Britain.

Why the multinationals?

Speaking at a UK Confederation of British Industries (CBI) conference in October, the Bank of America’s head of power and utilities, John Lynch, named companies like Google, Microsoft, Wal-Mart and IKEA (the Swedish home goods company) as being potential new investors for Britain’s offshore wind industry. “This is the technology that the UK is leading in, and these companies are looking at ways to get involved,” Lynch told his CBI audience, “because it meets their own corporate social responsibility objectives.” Enthusing over the prospect of a massive new injection of funds for British industry, Lynch noted how the Crown Estate (which owns the UK seabed) had launched the offshore program specifically to enable Britain to meet its target of 80 percent cuts in carbon emissions by 2050 compared with 1990 levels. Clearly nobody had told Lynch that in recent weeks the leaders of Britain’s biggest energy companies privately warned the government that its climate targets, contingent upon renewable sources replacing hydrocarbon fuels, are “illusory” and “delusional.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMdCLL9Q6Ck&feature=related )

as we say in the editing business … or dot dot dot

Put bluntly, Tucker shows that industrial scale renewable energy is, realistically and mathematically, an economic non-starter.

Ironically, just as UK and European subsidy opportunities are dwindling and the revolution faltering, the retail multinationals may be about to reinvigorate the flagging UK program. And as the economic cost of renewables is being counted across Europe, Britain’s energy-climate policy is likely to be touted increasingly as the blueprint for others to follow. A rash of UK studies continue to sound alarm bells over the government’s current energy direction and, one of these, just published, should do the same well beyond UK shores.

Does it really take an Einstein?

In October, the UK energy regulator, Ofgem (The Office of Gas and Electricity Markets), warned that Britain was facing 1970s style power blackouts within just four years – a much shorter timescale than previously thought. Project Discovery cited the British government’s failure to renovate its “crumbling power infrastructure” due to compliance with new EU rules that will force the closure of a quarter of the country’s power stations by 2015. In a typically British understatement, Alistair Buchanan, Ofgem’s chief executive warned, “There could be a potential shortfall in the period 2013-18 … Life might be pretty cold.” Buchanan’s assessment is that only an “involuntary curtailment of demand” – power cuts – can conserve household supplies, unless the government acts urgently to upgrade its nuclear plants. Jeremy Nicholson, of the Energy Intensive Users Group, representing some of Britain’s biggest manufacturers, said that power cuts that hit UK business first would present a “material threat to heavy industry.” Nicholson also warned that once the crisis hit the 60 percent hike in British energy bills currently being acknowledged by the government will, more realistically, hit the 120 percent mark.

Bottom line? If Einstein’s E=mc2 as it applies to renewable energy doesn’t cut the intellectual ice for prospective investors and foreign governments alike, perhaps another will. Try this:

UK energy-climate policy, circa 2009 = a blueprint for black-outs.

See what I mean about a fraudulent check being entirely successful right up to the point

:}

But here is where his analysis shows his paradigm. He says industrial users have to have “so in so” amount of power. I say great. Let the industries that need it generate it in such a way that they generate no pollution. Thank you very much and usins in the residential market, well we will keep our alternative energies. Come on you ARE the smartest guys in the world right? oh..OR maybe not?

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQs4Ra_qEvI&feature=related )
:}

The Population Of Britain Falls To 2 Milllion After Spectacular And Bloody Die Off

That is that there will be a massive die off when the cheap oil runs out. He also believes in euthanasia for the less fortunate.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/environment/2009/11/peak-oil-and-population-control.html

November 04, 2009

Peak oil and population control

Flintoff

Last week I had the miserable experience of interviewing a man who had accidentally survived a suicide pact with his wife.

Dr William Stanton, 79, has bone cancer and is plainly very ill: doctors give him three to eight months. His wife Angela was 74, and in good health, but didn’t want to survive him.

Dr Stanton happens to be one of the foremost proponents of population control in Britain, possibly anywhere, and has written articles and letters for anybody who will publish them, including his local paper and the New Scientist. But the latter stopped publishing him more than 20 years ago because – he believes – his views are regarded as being beyond the pale.

A geologist by profession, Dr Stanton has made a massive study of global population growth since the start of the industrial revolution, and suggests persuasively that the growth can be accounted for precisely by the advent of cheap oil. He contends that global oil production is at peak now, however, and that diminishing supplies will require the population of Britain to fall from around 60m today to just 2m in 2150.

Two million!

This will either happen inadvertently, he argues, as people kill each other for precious resources, or in a controlled way, as laws restrict women to just one child each, humane euthanasia becomes widespread to deal with people who represent a “net drain” on society, and immigration is made illegal – arrivals would be put to work in chain gangs, with other criminals.

In its own terms, Dr Stanton’s analysis makes some sense, but his prescriptions are utterly repellent. But when I said that, he told me I was being sentimental. Was he right?

You can read my Sunday Times interview here. If you wish to find out more about Dr Stanton’s views – and his struggle to get them into the mainstream – you should Google him.

:}

Unfortunately, in the long article of maybe a gazillion words, he mentions Bill Stanton’s beliefs on population in two or three paragraphs focusing most of the rest of the article on Stanton and his wife’s botched double suicide. The irony of his healthy wife dying and he being terminal with cancer and living is over exploited. Also the author spills a lot of ink on Britain’s law against assisted suicide and how 132 Britains went to Switzerland to do the deed.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6897964.ece

November 1, 2009

William Stanton: I botched our suicide pact

William Stanton and his wife tried to end their lives together – but they only half succeeded. He says He’d do it again

Terminally ill Dr William Stanton from Westbury-sub-Mendip, Somerset who entered into a suicide pact with his wife Angela which he survived but left the otherwise healthy Mrs Stanton dead

Early one morning in September, William Stanton heard footsteps coming up the stairs of his cottage in Somerset. He knew who it was and panicked. “I shouted out: ‘Go away, Nigel, leave me to it, leave me to it!’”

Nigel, a neighbour and family friend, did not go away. He came into the bedroom and found Stanton in distress and his wife Angela lying dead with a plastic bag over her head.

The Stantons had made a pact to end their lives together and put it into effect just days after the director of public prosecutions revealed how he would apply the law prohibiting assisted suicide. It did not work out as they planned and stands as a terrible cautionary example for anybody thinking that self-inflicted death is easily arranged.

I met Stanton last week in the neat and pretty bedroom where Angela’s body was found. I noted a commode in the corner and a trolley-load of pills beside Stanton, who was sitting up in bed. He is 79 and obviously unwell — his doctors say bone cancer will kill him in three to eight months — but he complained only that the pills make him lethargic.

:}

For a better exposition you might look here:

http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2005/07/oil-and-people.html

Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas, Ireland

ASPO Newsletters, Article Number 573 (July 2005)

The population of the World expanded six-fold in parallel with oil production during the First Half of the Age of Oil. William Stanton, author of The Rapid Growth of Human Population 1750-2000 (Multi-Science Publishing, 2003) contributes the following analysis of how population will have to return to pre-Oil Age levels. Let us hope that it does not come to this, but the options explained do have a certain chilling logic.

Reducing Population in Step with Oil Depletion

by William Stanton

Recent articles in the ASPO Newsletter have agreed that the explosion of world population from about 0.6 billion in 1750 to 6.4 billion today was initiated and sustained by the shift from renewable energy to fossil fuel energy in the Industrial Revolution. There is agreement that the progressive exhaustion of fossil fuel reserves will reverse the process, though there is uncertainty as to what a sustainable global population would be.

In this time of energy abundance, and the complacency it engenders, the vast majority of the general public assumes that what the future holds is “more of the same”. They argue, if pushed, that the expertise inherited by post-fossil-fuel scientists and engineers will allow a smooth transition into a new kind of energy-rich world in which renewable generators will produce as much energy as fossil fuels do now. Such a view is untenable because it ignores the fact that almost all materials essential to modern civilization will be orders of magnitude more costly, and scarce, when they have to be produced using renewable energy instead of fossil fuels.

:}

Or more to the point read the original:

http://www.relocalize.net/files/Futures%20proof.pdf

By the By, if he is right there would only be 12 million people left in America. Best estimates for Native American populations the were 21 million..

:}