I am not even going to get into this until after the conventions. There will be plenty of time to talk about it then. Right now it looks like we are on a fault line. One guy wants to get us off hydrocarbons as fa uel and headed towards a new green future. The other guy wants nukes, clean coal, and “drill often and drill here”. I will let you guys figure out whom is who.
For 3 generations now, environmental stewardship has been taught in the k-12 school systems of many countries. The change it will bring is only now a wave but soon it will be a tidal wave:
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/index.cfm
Welcome to the EcoKids recognition zone. The place where EcoKids clubs strut their stuff to the world-wide-web! Have a look around to see what’s going on across Canada and who’s doing what in your province. Get ideas for your own club by reading about the efforts and successes of others.
:}
I put up examples – for a complete list go to the site
:}
Delwood Elementary School, Edmonton
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/atlantic/Ecole_St._Catherine_School.cfm
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/bc/FourSeasonsMontessori.cfm
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/manitoba/Stonewallhomepage.cfm
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/ontario/Gore_Hill_Public_School.cfm
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/quebec/CirqueduSoleilAlegriaSchool.cfm
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/saskatchewan/Ecole_Elsie_Mironuck_School.cfm
:}
Here is a sample of what they do:
http://www.ecokids.ca/pub/home_pages/schools/atlantic/NorthEastKingsEducationCentre.cfm
One of our major projects for this year was our penny drive for the World Wildlife Fund. This program was called “Pennies for the Planet”. Over five weeks, we were able to raise $759.29 in pennies. It took a lot of time and dedication to count all of the pennies. On average, about five students every lunch hour would count pennies by hand. This took approximately a month. All together, that´s close to 76 000 pennies! We used the money to adopt a Panda bear, an owl, an Orca, a Sea turtle, an Asian elephant, a Polar bear, part of the boreal forest, the Arctic and the oceans
Another project that we´ve been working on this year is our Peace Garden. We worked very hard to clear it of trash and weeds and planted new flowers and plants. We also raised awareness about global warming and littering. One of our environment club members gave a speech about global warming this year and another member is part of a news crew that makes announcements once or twice a month about littering.
To help get the message out, we made posters about different environmental issues. Some of the issues were anti-idling, composting and waste reduction. To help encourage the use of composters, we were able to purchase a compost bin for our cafeteria
:}
Wow! The Australians rally kicked the energy ball forward. I suppose this would be called the ultimate hot rocks project. Drill to the uranium and get the heat. An electricity generator that could last for 25,000 years and be totally clean. Where are the investment bankers when you need them?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080508132406.htm
ScienceDaily (May 12, 2008) — Australia is uniquely endowed with heat-producing elements under its surface that could provide potentially unlimited amounts of geothermal power for this country, says geoscientist Dr Sandra McLaren.
Dr McLaren will speak about her research into Australia’s heat-producing elements, and their potential for future energy production, at the Academy of Science’s peak annual event Science at the Shine Dome May 7.She says that west of the line between Cairns and the mouth of the Murray River lies a belt of rocks containing the enriched elements uranium, thorium, and potassium that are around 1.5 billion years old. These enriched elements are essentially a heat source located in the upper part of our continental crust.’Our status as one of the most prospective countries in the world for geothermal power generation is due to this extraordinary enrichment in uranium. That’s because when we bury these enriched rocks, even beneath only about two or three kilometres of sediment, they’re capable of generating extremely high temperatures which we can use to generate geothermal power.’
She says that nuclear power and geothermal power use the same source of fuel – enriched uranium.
‘The fundamental difference between the two energy options is the degree to which the uranium is enriched in a particular spot, and the way in which we choose to use it. So, although as geoscientists we are aware of this resource, there is still a lot of work we can do in assessing and documenting it and developing new exploration strategies and, further down the track, new technology to exploit this.
‘Its an extraordinary resource that we have. Its had profound impact on our geological past, and we’re at the point in time, in terms of society, of making a choice of what to do with that resource into the future.
‘We have on average 2-3 times the normal concentration of uranium, thorium and potassium in the crust, so we’re in a better position than probably any other country in the world to generate this type of geothermal energy.’
In terms of the future of geothermal power in Australia she says: ‘Its potentially unlimited in terms of the actual resource. I think the thing that’s going to constrain how and when we can use this resource for generating power is more on the engineering side, more understanding how to exploit it once we’ve identified how much is there.
‘The exploration companies in Australia are used to exploring for base metals and gold and metallic resources. Exploring for geothermal energy is a different ask all together and we really need to develop a framework to get better data sets for us to assess different resources and better ways of looking fo
The former Cindy Paddock that now operates a Framing/Art Busines in Wray Colorado sent me this Photo. Pretty amazing…its not so much that the birds look weird, they are acting weird.
Dedicated to John Martin and Susan Kay who blog at www.thedrunkablog.blogspot.com
I am told that unofficially and off the record, Chris Robertson and the people at Peak Sun Silicon think so too.
http://bizarrocomic.blogspot.com/
I think the Peak Oil People are wrong. I think Oil Speculation has DOUBLED the price of oil. The Saudi’s claim that they believe oil is worth 70$$ a barrel. The real question is who tried to corner the Oil Market and Why? The second question is like the Hunt Brothers before them (in silver) when will they go to jail?
A bigger question is will the Saudi’s give the money back that they made as a result? Unfortunately they may have screwed the pooch because people are switching to mass transit and scooters.
:}
:}
The big breasted modern urban turbines make a man hard as steel. OKOKOKOK so pornography will never sell electricity but the new generation of wind turbines is enough to set the heart aflutter. When I posted on this last year these sexy designs were nowhere to be found.
| A New Wind Power Design Good For Rural And Urban Environments | |
|
Washington 10 June 2008 |
New Wind Power / Broadband – Download (WM)
New Wind Power / Broadband – Watch (WM)
New Wind Power / Dialup – Download (WM)
New Wind Power / Dialup – Watch (WM)
Wind power is one of the fastest growing forms of alternative energy in the world. More and more, wind power mills are seen in the countryside, in large wind farms and for the most part, away from city life. But a new form of “wind power” is now designed to work in an urban environment. VOA producer Zulima Palacio has more in this Searching for Solutions report. Mill Arcega narrates.
Wind farms, like these ones in California, are becoming more common in rural areas of the U.S. An industry association says last year, alone, wind power capacity in America grew by 45 percent. Mostly wind power is generated by large propellers that can only be placed in the countryside.
But now, a U.S. company is offering a propeller-free personal windmill that can be set up in city or suburb. The president of Mariah Power, Mike Hess, demonstrates what he calls the “Windspire.”
“This one generates 25 to 30 percent of the power in your house, but if we are building a three kilowatts version, which is only twice the width, same height, then it generates 100 percent of your power requirements,” Hess said.
This new system was part of an environmentally friendly exhibit at the U.S. Botanical Garden in Washington. The design was inspired by a 3,000 year-old windmill the Egyptians used to grind wheat.
The company had the modern version independently tested, here in Utah, to prove it can be competitive with large propellers of traditional windmills.
The large blades have been known to kill birds and bats. And because they move much faster than wind speeds, they can be noisy.
But Hess says the Windspire’s verticle-axis wind turbine is not only very quiet, but also bird-friendly.
“Bird friendly yes, because they only spin at two and a half times the speed of wind, so they can see it.” He explained.
http://ecotality.com/life/category/green-building/
Duval’s hotel won’t have conventional wind turbine – instead, he’s looking at a German-designed vertical axle turbine, thought to be was safer than having a high-speed rotating propeller that could cause serious damage if it became dislodged. The building internal environment also is a factor in the choice, he says. “We are on top of a building. We can not have anything that vibrates or emits sound. It’s got to be very smooth.”
Duval also plans to install a pyramid of solar panels on the roof.
Vertical axis wind turbines are a growing segment of the wind turbine industry. Mercedes Benz recently installed one at one of its facilities in Great Britain.
The company said that the 20m-high turbine, developed by wind energy company Quiet Revolution, was one of only six in operation in the UK and had been designed to work quietly and efficiently in urban environments where the wind direction changes frequently.
Mercedes-Benz plans to use the energy generated to power electric cars and has installed three charging points next to the turbine. It estimated that the installation will generate enough power for 30,000 miles of driving a year using its electric Smart fortwo cars, equivalent to the electricity needed to power two average homes. Wilfried Steffen, president and chief executive of Mercedes-Benz in the UK, said that the installation was part of a project to ultimately generate 10 per cent of the company’s energy onsite through a combination of wind energy, ground-source heat pumps and solar water heating.
From London to New Zealand, vertical axis wind turbines appear to be gaining popularity as a way for just about any business to get in on the generation of power from the wind
:}
And they look so cool:
http://www.bluenergy-ag.net/English/products_wind.html
BSWT is a vertical wind turbine based on sailing engineering. The wind rotor is rotated by two spiral-formed vanes. For best performance, these vanes are covered in solar cells, so that sun and wind produce electricity as one element. The BSWT installation costs relatively little, produces no noise or significant shadowing, can be easily maintained from ground level, and is an attractive addition to any home.
:}
It doesn’t get any sexier then that.
Even Jay Leno has one:
http://www.ecorazzi.com/2007/05/29/jay-lenos-garage-gets-a-vertical-wind-turbine/
Popular Mechanics and Jay Leno have been working together on a project to take Jay’s car garage and turn it into a model of sustainability. We covered Jay’s ownership of some of the first electric cars last month and now we’re happy to report that a vertical wind turbine will shortly be joining the solar panels on the roof of his garage. From the article,
“[The Turbine] can produce 10 kw at around 28 mph and has a cut-in wind speed of 6 mph. These turbines don’t need a braking mechanism and can self-start at very low wind speeds—something similar designs in the past could never do. They take up very little space, they’re virtually silent, and multiple units can be placed within feet of one another. Delta II units can also be stacked vertically up to 50 kW.”
Vertical wind turbines are a sort of “Holy Grail” for wind energy because they tend to alleviate some of the environmental concerns associated with large scale blade turbines. While Jay’s turbine is still considered small, the design is holding promise for commercial farms. The 500-watt unit Pacwind dropped by his garage with costs just under $3K. For his 17,000-sq-ft. garage, however, a more powerful 10kw version called the Delta II will most likely do the job. This unit comes in at $20K — but with the proper rebates will most likely fall closer to $12K. Granted, Jay’s probably not too concerned with counting pennies.Â
You can take a look at Jay’s progress on his green garage by visiting the Popular Mechanics site here. Of course, we’ll keep you updated on the latest as it zooms into our laps.
In a post in-or-around May 28th I said that the Airforce was preparing to switch to a synthetic fuel made from coal. I said if done properly that it might not be a bad thing environmentally premised on the fact that the Death Comes From Above crowd was going to fly and going to kill no matter what. I mean it’s hard enough to sell a noncarbon economy without trying to argue for peace and harmony. I am for all of the above, but the Corporate Capitalists are never going to buy peace and harmony – it’s just not their thing. There is nothing good about flying from a global warming point of view. But that is for another post.
http://gasification-igcc.blogspot.com/
Anyway in that post I repeatedly and obnoxiously referred to the process as gasification and it’s not. It’s an entirely different process process using entirely different reagents and at entirely different temperatures. The proper term for that is Coal To Liquids Process(ing)(es) and Harry pointed it out to me. I am soooooo sorry. It has been corrected. I shall never do it again.
For more on this devastating mistake:
www.worldcoal.org/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=423
www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/coal/liquids.pdf
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal
and even where to invest if you want to:
www.seekingalpha.com/article/
:}
But it still stinks, generates huge amount of CO2 and other Sox and Nox gases, and it is from the past not the future. Did I mention that it uses twice as much energy as it produces?
images available from:
Then there is this:
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/003569.html
July 09, 2006
First US Coal To Liquid Plant ComingThe New York Times reports on plans by Rentech to build a plant to convert coal to liquid fuel burnable in diesel engines.
Here in East Dubuque, Rentech Inc., a research-and-development company based in Denver, recently bought a plant that has been turning natural gas into fertilizer for forty years. Rentech sees a clear opportunity to do something different because natural gas prices have risen so high. In an important test case for those in the industry, it will take a plunge and revive a technology that exploits America’s cheap, abundant coal and converts it to expensive truck fuel.
“Otherwise, I don’t see us having a future,” John H. Diesch, the manager of the plant, said.
If a large scaling up of coal-to-liquid (CTL) production takes place then an increase in pollution seems likely. Though perhaps advances in conversion technologies and tougher regulations could prevent this. The use of coal to make liquid fuels will increase CO2 emissions since the conversion plants will emit CO2 and of course the liquid fuel will emit CO2 just as conventional diesel fuel does. Those who view rising CO2 emissions with alarm therefore see a shift to CTL as a harmful trend.
And, uniquely in this country, the plant will take coal and produce diesel fuel, which sells for more than $100 a barrel.
The cost to convert the coal is $25 a barrel, the company says, a price that oil seems unlikely to fall to in the near future. So Rentech is discussing a second plant in Natchez, Miss., and participating in a third proposed project in Carbon County in Wyoming.
That sounds very profitable. The longer the price of oil stays high the likelier that capitalists will decide it is worth the risk to build CTL plants. Many are holding back worried that oil prices could tank again as happened in the early 1980s. That price decline drove the Beulah North Dakota Great Plains Synfuels Plant into bankruptcy. Though it was restarted and now produces natural gas from coal profitably. Though the bankruptcy cut the capital cost of operating that plant and so is not a perfect measure of the profitability of processes to convert coal to gas or liquid.
:}
Thanks Harry!
Oh I meant the Wall Street Journal, sorry….I bet this article wouldn’t see the light of day today. Wait till oil hits 200$$ a barrel and we shall see what they say then.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121055427930584069.html?mod=opinion_main
| REVIEW & OUTLOOK | ||
Congress seems ready to spend billions on a new “Manhattan Project” for green energy, or at least the political class really, really likes talking about one. But maybe we should look at what our energy subsidy dollars are buying now.
Some clarity comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an independent federal agency that tried to quantify government spending on energy production in 2007. The agency reports that the total taxpayer bill was $16.6 billion in direct subsidies, tax breaks, loan guarantees and the like. That’s double in real dollars from eight years earlier, as you’d expect given all the money Congress is throwing at “renewables.” Even more subsidies are set to pass this year.
An even better way to tell the story is by how much taxpayer money is dispensed per unit of energy, so the costs are standardized. For electricity generation, the EIA concludes that solar energy is subsidized to the tune of $24.34 per megawatt hour, wind $23.37 and “clean coal” $29.81. By contrast, normal coal receives 44 cents, natural gas a mere quarter, hydroelectric about 67 cents and nuclear power $1.59.
The wind and solar lobbies are currently moaning that they don’t get their fair share of the subsidy pie. They also argue that subsidies per unit of energy are always higher at an early stage of development, before innovation makes large-scale production possible. But wind and solar have been on the subsidy take for years, and they still account for less than 1% of total net electricity generation. Would it make any difference if the federal subsidy for wind were $50 per megawatt hour, or even $100? Almost certainly not without a technological breakthrough.
By contrast, nuclear power provides 20% of U.S. base electricity production, yet it is subsidized about 15 times less than wind. We prefer an energy policy that lets markets determine which energy source dominates. But if you believe in subsidies, then nuclear power gets a lot more power for the buck than other “alternatives.”
The same study also looked at federal subsidies for non-electrical energy production, such as for fuel. It found that ethanol and biofuels receive $5.72 per British thermal unit of energy produced. That compares to $2.82 for solar and $1.35 for refined coal, but only three cents per BTU for natural gas and other petroleum liquids.
All of this shows that there is a reason fossil fuels continue to dominate American energy production: They are extremely cost-effective. That’s a reality to keep in mind the next time you hear a politician talk about creating millions of “green jobs.” Those jobs won’t come cheap, and you’ll be paying for them.
The application on CD arrive several months ago but the ACTUAL Paper application arrive today at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission simultaneously. The application filled a semitrailer truck for each agency and took a chain of workers to unload the boxes. This is not getting off to an environmentally start is it? I wonder how many trees they killed to make the application.
So I thought we would take this day before Weird Bird Friday to catch up with the old “hole in the ground” in the Nevada Desert.
Here is what the what the current female Editor of the Magazine RadWaste puts it:
http://www.ans.org/pubs/magazines/rs/docs/2008-3-4-2.pdf
“Isn’t ironic? While the nuclear reactor sector is beginning to boom….In the area of high-level waste, the proposed Yucca Mountain/spent fuel repository project is expected to submit its license application to the NRC this year. But Congress, thanks to efforts of Yacca Mountain opponent Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev), the Senate majority leader, cut more than 100 million $$$ from the fiscal 2008 appropriation for the project, putting the the license application at risk and ensuring that continuing research….
The Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry’s trade group, is so excited about the nuclear renaissance that it’s willing to put waste issues aside for now.”
:}
That doesn’t sound good.
http://www.republican-eagle.com/articles/index.cfm?id=50783§ion=News
Others seem more hopeful – the Natives re restless:
A major step toward building a national nuclear waste repository has been met with support from Red Wing leaders.
The Department of Energy on Wednesday submitted its license application to build a facility at Yucca Mountain, Nev., where proponents hope to store spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste.
If accepted, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will undertake what officials estimate will be a three-year licensing process.
Prairie Island Indian Community Tribal Council President Ron Johnson called the application submittal “a giant step.”
“I hope it goes further than that,” he said.
The tribe has long been a supporter of the project, which proposes to store 77,000 metric tons of nuclear waste inside the remote, tunneled-out mountain.
Both the tribe and the city of Red Wing are members of the Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition.
City officials have also backed Yucca Mountain in hopes of moving the waste out of the Red Wing area.
“As neighbors to a nuclear power plant, it is vital to the community to move Yucca Mountain forward and create a permanent repository for this waste,” Red Wing City Council President Carol Duff said in a statement.
“It cannot continue to be stored in the backyards of communities like Red Wing, creating a risk of exposure.”
:}
In fact it’s all tied up in the new Carbon Capping Bill though the good thing is that the Global Warming as a hoax arguement disappeared from the debate:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0605/p02s05-uspo.html
On Tuesday, the Department of Energy (DOE) submitted a long-awaited license application to build a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada – a move that supporters say is essential to revive the nuclear-power industry.
Nuclear-power advocates hope to use the global-warming bill as a vehicle for reviving the industry. They make the case that without a significant increase in nuclear power, it will be impossible to lower carbon emissions without a blow to US living standards.
“It’s time we begin the nuclear renaissance in America and Yucca Mountain is a vital step,” said Sen. Jim DeMint (R) of South Carolina, in a statement after the announcement. “If Congress is serious about reducing carbon emission, nonemitting nuclear energy must play an even larger role than it does today.”
Many Democrats are wary of risking the support of some environmental groups over nuclear power. Majority leader Reid, a longtime opponent of a nuclear-waste dump in his state, charged that DOE filed the application with only about 35 percent of the work done to justify it.
“Yucca Mountain is as close to being dead as any piece of legislation could be,” he said on Tuesday. Republicans say they are holding out for a wide-ranging debate over the global-warming bill, including many amendments. Democratic leaders worry that some amendments, including those over nuclear power, could undermine support for the bill.
Commenting on the diverse coalition of lawmakers now supporting the bill, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) of California said: “They need a certain amount to stay on it. I need a certain amount not to get off it. We’re looking for that sweet spot.”
:}
Of course, the Energy Hogs are screaming VICTORY:
http://blog.heritage.org/2008/06/05/morning-bell-the-lefts-nuclear-nightmare/
Morning Bell: The Left’s Nuclear Nightmare
Posted June 5th, 2008 at 9.18am in Energy and Environment.
The U.S. Department of Energy officially submitted the license application to build a nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada earlier this week. A strong supporter of the Lieberman-Warner carbon-capping bill, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was incredulous, telling reporters: “Yucca Mountain is as close to being dead as any piece of legislation could be.” However, Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) both recognize that their bill will not pass without more nuclear power.
Far to Warner and Lieberman’s left though, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) thinks their bill does not need to reform the nuclear industry: “Already in the bill there’s a whole funding stream for these low-carbon, noncarbon energy sources and that’s sufficient. I don’t think you need more.” It is nice that Boxer believes this–but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA) sure don’t.
Throughout the debate on Lieberman-Warner, activists such as the Environmental Defense Fund have quoted selectively from EPA and EIA studies to minimize the ruinous effects the bill would have on the U.S. economy. For example, this press release celebrates the fact that under Lieberman-Warner the economy will grow by 80 percent by 2030.
What the EDF doesn’t tell you is that the same report says Lieberman-Warner would raise energy prices by 44 percent in the same time frame. But the real kicker comes when you look at the assumptions the EPA made to come to its conclusions. Despite the fact that the U.S. has not built a new nuclear reactor in two decades, the EPA assumes that the U.S. will build 50 new reactors in the next 25 years.
Without these new power plants, which the Environmental Defense Fund no doubt will oppose, the U.S. economy will be 650 gigawatts of electric power short of its needs. That will send the price of energy through the roof — and kill many more jobs than the EPA currently estimates.
:}
If you want to take a look at the site you can go here:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tab=wl
But trust me it’s pretty boring!
:}
People have been brainwashed to believe that our world will come to a crashing end without oil. The Peak Oil people in particular have a saying “back to the olduvai valley” because they believe that our civilization will crumble like the Egyptions, Greeks and other GREAT civilizations. Olduvai was the valley where they found the homonid Lucy’s bones.
Admittedly some of those societal “downs” caused famine and pestilence, but in others it merely led to lots of people going back to farming. As silly as it may sound, you can generate electricity with a bicycle and charge a battery to run a computer. Us modern humans have run on excess energy for so long it might not hurt us or the planet to take a break and set some priorities.
So anyway from where I live in Riverton IL in the USA, I would just go back to farming and let a few yard birds run. Others are not so lucky. I have said with no malice or cruelty that a lot of people are going to die. But I think we will do what humanity has done for 1000’s of years…we hang together.
Here is what other people say:
http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk/greenfutures/articles/602540
In a world on the cusp of fuel shortages, one enterprising collection of British farmers have come up with a solution they claim is practical, profitable – and close to home. They’re growing their own. Trevor Lawson reports
Barton reckons that the Goodwood estate’s tenant farmers could produce enough biofuel to supply the estate and themselves, and still have a surplus for sale. The key, he argues, is keep it local. “There’s no point in producing seed here, sending it miles for processing and then bringing the fuel all the way back. It’s too inefficient.” So Barton is looking at a combined rape press and refinery system that will produce 2,000 litres of fuel an hour, round the clock, for as long as there is rape seed to supply it. He’s also got plans for the pressed ‘cake’ that’s left over. “You can make it into dense briquettes for a superb solid fuel, burning more slowly than wood but at a higher temperature. So it can be used to feed boilers to generate heat and electricity.” Barton’s logic seems inescapable, and it’s finding allies in Whitehall, too. Nick Cooper manages the Farming Without Fossil Fuels project at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
http://globalpublicmedia.com/stephen_decater_on_farming_without_oil
Stephen Decater speaks with Els Cooperrider of The Party’s Over on KZYX about biodynamic farming in Round Valley of Mendocino county. Stephen talks about draft horses, their history, and how he uses them. He also talks about the Live Power Community Farm, which is a community-based agriculture (CSA) project, and how this arrangement differs from a market-based relationship. They are looking for apprentices now. Contact info: livepower@igc.org and (707) 983 8196.
:}
The above is a cool site complete with Post Carbon Institute and Energy Farming sections
:}
Then there are the back to the earth types:
http://www.soilassociation.org/peakoil
Peak Oil: the threat to our food security
Peak oil refers to the point when the maximum amount of oil that can be extracted globally is reached. Thereafter, production will tail off as remaining reserves become more difficult and more expensive to harvest. Many of the services that we currently take for granted – cheap flights, cheap imports and global distribution of food – will be radically curtailed.
One of the greatest impacts will be on how and where our food is produced. The dominant models of intensive agriculture and the global food trade depend on vast inputs of oil. In a post peak oil world, the combination of higher transport costs, climate change and increased conflict will necessitate us all relying far more on re-localised food supplies. Even though it requires far lower amounts of oil, organic farming is not exempt from the need to adapt.
You can find out more in our information sheets on peak oil and climate change and agriculture.
Over the last 20 years, the Soil Association has established organic farming as the most sustainable method of production and helped grow a burgeoning market for organic food. Now we must refine our focus if we are to adapt to the changing external circumstances which will touch all our lives very soon. The phrase that comes to mind is that we are ‘building the ark of sustainable agriculture’ for the new era ahead.
The challenge is immediate, but fear should not be the driver. The Soil Association is optimistic that we have the vision and means to create a new, localised food culture that will deliver long-term quality of life in place of the old dynamic of unrestrained globalisation and short-termist exploitation.
The Soil Association is the UK’s organic certification body, and they are making peak oil and the relocalisation of food the focal point of their 60th Anniversary conference in Cardiff in February. I am editing a report that will accompany the conference, which explores this deeper, and to introduce this, I recently wrote an article that appears in Living Earth Magazine, the organisation’s publication. It suggests that the concept of Energy Descent Plans could be applied to food and farming in the UK, an idea that will be explored in more depth in the report. Here is the article followed by some additions from within the Soil Association.
Energy scarcity is an opportunity for a better world, says Rob Hopkins
I used to think that one day the world would literally run out of oil. A driver in Leicestershire would use the last drop and that would be that, similar to the felling of the last Truffula Tree in Dr Seuss’s The Lorax. It turns out that scarcity kicks in earlier than that. It’s not the last drop that is the problem but the mid-point of production, when all the oil that is easy and cheap to extract has been used up. It looks as if we are reaching that point soon.
:}
Where folks have “farmable” or “growable” land, all of us will have to plant Victory Gardens and raise rabbits and chickens. We will have to buy and sell local. For those that do not… well that is something we all should be planning for now. There are probably 2 billion people in harms way. What about the economy? Well what about it? Aren’t WE the economy. Money may be worrthless…but so what. That is only gona matter to people that gots a lot of it.
:}
