11th Hour Action's topics - tribe.net

speech by Al Gore: 7-17-08

2008-07-18T15:50:17Z

WASHINGTON -- Former Vice President Al Gore called Thursday for a "man on the moon" effort to switch all of the nation's electricity production to wind, solar and other carbon-free sources within 10 years, a goal that he said would solve global warming as well as economic and natural security crises caused by dependence on fossil fuels.
"The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels," Gore told a packed auditorium in Washington's historic Constitution Hall. "When you connect the dots, it turns out that the real solutions to the climate crisis are the very same measures needed to renew our economy and escape the trap of ever-rising energy prices."
Gore compared the challenge to establishing Social Security and the Interstate highway system, as well as landing a man on the moon -- all successes that took more than a single presidency to accomplish and required members of both political parties to overcome their partisanship.
The Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan group Gore leads, put the 30-year cost of his plan -- both government and private -- at $1.5 trillion to $3 trillion.
Story continues belowAdvertisementTo speed up the transition to new energy sources, Gore said the single most important policy change would be to "tax what we burn, not what we earn," advocating a tax on carbon dioxide pollution.
Gore's proposal would represent a significant shift in where the U.S. gets its power. In 2005, coal supplied slightly more than half the nation's 3.7 billion kilowatt hours of electricity. Nuclear power accounted for 21 percent, natural gas 15 percent and renewable sources, including wind and solar, about 8.6 percent.
Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize for sounding the alarm about climate change and his documentary on the issue, "An Inconvenient Truth," won an Oscar. In his speech, he did not address what to do about coal, which is responsible for more than a third of the United States' carbon dioxide pollution, the most prevalent of the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
Coal's share of electricity generation is only expected to grow between now and 2030, according to Energy Department forecasts that assume no new government controls will be put on pollution.
Renewable energy resources' share of the power production would grow to 11 percent under that scenario.
In an interview with The Associated Press after his speech, Gore said coal's place in the nation's energy future will depend on whether the industry cuts back on carbon.
"Even coal has a role to play if the carbon dioxide is captured and safely buried ... but clean coal does not exist right now," Gore said.
Gore told the AP that his plan counts on nuclear power plants still providing about a fifth of the nation's electricity while the U.S. dramatically increases it's use of solar, wind, geothermal energy and clean coal technology. He said one of the largest obstacles will be updating the nation's electricity grid to harness power from solar panels, windmills and dams and transport it to cities.
The Edison Electric Institute, the private utility industry's trade association, said it shares Gore's support for more renewable generation, a "smarter" power grid and the eventual use of plug-in electric vehicles.
"But we cannot do the job with renewable and efficiency alone," it said. A portfolio for the future must also include "an expanded role for nuclear energy, as well as natural gas and clean coal with carbon capture and storage."
Some energy experts said the turnaround Gore advocates is too fast.
Robby Diamond, president of Securing America's Future Energy, a nonpartisan energy policy group, said weaning the nation away from fossil fuels -- coal, oil and natural gas -- can't be done in a decade.
"The country is not going to be able to go cold turkey," Diamond said. "We have a hundred years of infrastructure with trillions of dollars of investment that is not simply going to be made obsolete."
Gore said the changing economics of energy, in which high gasoline and oil prices are driving investments in renewable energy, would overcome the political and technological obstacles.
His challenge comes as Congress, and the White House, are debating how to address high energy prices, particularly the oil that drives the nation's transportation. Both Democrats and Republicans are pushing for more exploration and production of domestic fossil fuels, albeit in different ways.
"It is only a truly dysfunctional system that would buy into the perverse logic that the short-term answer to high gasoline prices is drilling for more oil 10 years from now," Gore said.
In the past year, Congress has rejected initiatives that would make Gore's vision a reality. Requiring part of the nation's energy to come from alternative sources didn't have enough support in the Senate to become part of an energy bill in December. And a bill before the Senate last month to cut greenhouse gases got 48 votes.
Jonathan Lash, president of the World Resources Institute, said in a statement Thursday that the problem has been political will.
"Climate change and energy security are not just threats ... , they are opportunities," he said. "We need to change the debate in this country from what we can't do, to what we can do."
Gore told the AP he hoped the speech would contribute to "a new political environment in this country that will allow the next president to do what I think the next president is going to think is the right thing to do." He said both fellow Democrat Barrack Obama and Republican rival John McCain are "way ahead" of most politicians in the fight against global climate change.
McCain, who supports building more nuclear power plants as one solution to global warming, said Thursday he admires Gore as an early and outspoken advocate of addressing the global warming problem even though "there may be some aspects of climate change that he and I are in disagreement (on)."
Of the goals Gore outlined Thursday for generating more electricity with solar and wind resources, McCain said, "If the vice president says it's doable, I believe it's doable."

(Copyright ©2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

WE ALL MUSTBE in the space to CREATE action!!!!!!!!!

2008-04-25T23:32:09Z

http://tribes.tribe.net/eckarttolle

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

Earth Hour - Saturday, March 29th from 8 pm to 9 pm

2008-03-28T14:32:53Z

This year's Earth Hour - taking place on March 29th (Saturday!) from 8-9 pm local time. Nearly 200 cities spanning the globe and millions of individuals and businesses (form mom-and-pop joints to multinational corporations) have pledged to take part by turning out their lights for this symbolic hour. Organizer, World Wildlife Fund is encouraging people to use the time to engage in eco-friendly activities.

From candlelight dinners in San Francisco to glow-in-the-dark ultimate frisbee at the Illinois Institute of Technology, it's a time to get eco-imaginative. To see how you can get involved, visit http://earthhour.org.

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

I was under the impression that votes MATTER!

2008-03-10T22:31:01Z

she is lookin' like an old washed-up HAS BEEN... which she is~ looking like an IDIOT bushie~ trying to STEAL the election!!!!!!!
Barack does have MOST popular & delegates!!!!!!!

SOORY, but move along NOW!!!!!

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

from earth first group on yahoo.com

2008-01-13T02:02:28Z

Primary Navigation
HomeU.S.BusinessWorldEntertainmentSportsTechPoliticsElectionsScienceHealthMost Popular
Secondary Navigation
Science Video Weather News Space & Astronomy Animals & Pets Dinosaurs & Fossils Biotech Energy Environment Search: All News Yahoo! News Only News Photos Video/Audio Advanced

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environment NewsWith nuke rebirth come new worries
AP - Sat Jan 12, 2:02 PM ET
VIENNA, Austria - Global warming and rocketing oil prices are making nuclear power fashionable, drawing a once demonized industry out of the shadows of the Chernobyl disaster as a potential shining knight of clean energy.

View: Headlines Only | Include Summaries | Include Photos
Greenpeace says located, chasing Japanese whalers
AFP - Sat Jan 12, 2:45 AM ET

SYDNEY (AFP) - A Greenpeace protest ship located Japan's whaling fleet in Antarctic waters and is pursuing it to stop the hunt for the giant sea creatures, the environmental group said Saturday.
Greenpeace finds Japan's whalers
AP - Sat Jan 12, 2:25 AM ET

SYDNEY, Australia - A Greenpeace ship on Saturday confronted a Japanese whaling fleet that had initially planned to hunt protected humpbacks, the environmentalists said — setting off the latest round of cat-and-mouse in a sometimes dangerous feature of the hunting debate.
Scientists to discuss how global warming affects diseases
AFP - Fri Jan 11, 4:16 PM ET

PRAGUE (AFP) - Global warming in Europe could mean a host of potentially fatal diseases become more prevalent, a leading scientist warned Friday ahead of a major conference on the subject.
ADB to help SE Asia find ways to cut greenhouse gases
AFP - Fri Jan 11, 1:48 PM ET

MANILA (AFP) - The Asian Development Bank said Friday it will conduct a yearlong study on what six Southeast Asian countries can do to cut their greenhouse gas emissions.
Calif leaders voice EPA frustrations
AP - Thu Jan 10, 7:22 PM ET

LOS ANGELES - A panel of outraged state and environmental leaders met Thursday to examine why the federal government won't let California and 16 other states regulate emissions from cars, trucks and SUVs.
Canada oil sands projects flunk green test: groups
Reuters - Thu Jan 10, 6:45 PM ET

CALGARY, Alberta (Reuters) - Canadian oil sands mining projects, seen as a key source of North American energy supply for decades to come, have been given poor environmental marks in a report released on Thursday, with even the best performer barely garnering a passing grade.
Briton finds ethical jewellery good as gold
Reuters - Thu Jan 10, 5:10 PM ET

CHICHESTER (Reuters) - "Customers don't realize that one wedding ring weighs 10 grams and causes three tonnes of toxic waste," says Greg Valerio, whose company aims to follow fair trade coffee with ethical gold jewellery.
Threat to African wildlife could upset delicate ecosystem balance: study
AFP - Thu Jan 10, 3:53 PM ET

CHICAGO (AFP) - The pressures on elephants, giraffes and other big mammals could have far-reaching effects on the ecosystem of the sub-Saharan savannah, including disrupting the relationship between acacia trees and insects, researchers said Thursday.
Britain backs new nuclear power plants
AP - Thu Jan 10, 2:35 PM ET

LONDON - The British government on Thursday approved construction of the first new nuclear power plants in a generation, saying atomic energy could help fight climate change and secure the country's energy supplies in an increasingly unstable world.
Environmental Action Driving Global Economy - Report
OneWorld.net - Thu Jan 10, 1:45 PM ET

WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (OneWorld) - Business and governments are vastly increasing their investments in solutions to climate change and other environmental problems that threaten the global economy, says a new report from a leading environmental think tank.
South Carolinians Press Republicans on Climate Change
OneWorld.net - Thu Jan 10, 10:43 AM ET

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 10 (OneWorld) - Coastal residents and students from all over South Carolina are planning to picket this evening's Republican Party Presidential Candidates Debate.
Desert Mystery Has Electrifying Answer
LiveScience.com - Thu Jan 10, 9:45 AM ET

Sweeping sands across the Sahara and other dune expanses are blown by more than just wind, scientists have discovered. Powerful electric fields spring up near the desert floor and propel sand grains into the air. By accounting for this electricity, researchers say they can design better climate change models, and even explain features of the dust on Mars.
Warming forces Iditarod changes
AP - Thu Jan 10, 8:53 AM ET

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - The modern challenges of global warming and population growth are catching up with the world's most famous sled dog race.
Switching To Green-Collar Jobs
BusinessWeek Online - Thu Jan 10, 8:08 AM ET

On Dec. 6, Berkeley (Calif.) nonprofit Avoided Deforestation Partners hosted a panel at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali on the topic of REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation). The group's 55-year-old founder, Jeff Horowitz, took the stage and addressed a crowded room of environmental movers and shakers on his vision for the protection of rainforests. Horowitz describes the moment as "a career milestone." And he is no lifelong activist; only a year before, he was a highly paid, sought-after architect in San Francisco.
Global warming could make Australia's outback tougher: study
AFP - Thu Jan 10, 2:04 AM ET

SYDNEY (AFP) - Life in Australia's rugged outback could get even tougher when the effects of global warming bite, with extreme weather and outbreaks of exotic diseases in unexpected places, a new study suggests.
China poised to be world leader in renewable energy, expert predicts
AFP - Wed Jan 9, 7:57 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - China is poised to become a global leader in renewable energy in the next few years, the head of environmental research group Worldwatch said Wednesday.

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

CHECK.IT!

2008-01-11T00:11:17Z

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/globalwarmingactivistsforobama

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

bio-gas and the third world--- big solution or big stink?

2007-12-19T17:08:27Z

hi,

I thought I'dd start here and throw this one in ..... it is a touch contentious and has perhaps distasteful undertones ...but....

I am sure that the few of you here are aware of the many issues now surrounding bio-diesel production and in particular the growth of palm oil plantations at the expense of virgin forest ... here are a few BBC news links if your not..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6949861.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4927976.stm

Earlier this year I visited a small NGO in southern India who had begun a bio-diesel project. It was a new area for them completely with all their other activities being in womans issues and child labour. My involvement came about through an advert on the Idealist.org web site on which they had advertised for a "Seed technologist"; a specialization that I doubt exist but as I had skills in mechanical engineering (in particular diesel) and a joint honours degree in plant and soil science I felt I was potentially useful to them.

Well I spent a very frustrating month with this NGO; they seemed to have plucked figures out of thin air, were unable to show any mechanism or decision process by which they determined plant purchases or an ability to justify the means by which they were operating... it's a long story (and sadly I doubt a unique one) but the upshot was that the organization had identified that under the Kyoto agreement there was potential to generate income through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). I personally doubt (and hope) that they will succeed either in developing bio-diesel (for which India has a non food crop policy.. i.e the development of Tree Bourne Oilseeds (TBO's) or raising any funds through the CDM since the process is a real 'nuts and bolts' affair with accreditation, screening and monitoring requirements that the organization was incapable of implementing or taking any professional (mine) advice on.

Anyway another area that they had also become interested in was bio-gas production. Unlike bio-diesel, bio-gas or methane production through anaerobic digestion of organic wastes is relatively simple. Gas is produced by anaerobic fermentation in sealed vessels and under low pressure supplied to cooking stoves. One could build a unit using a few plastic bins, some polythene bags, a water hose and some duck tape. In a rural area waste materials such as brush cuttings, animal bedding and manure and even human waste are easily and sufficient available to act as feed stocks.... however we are talking India here and we are talking about the production of a gas, methane (CH4) which is 20 times, thats right 20 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2...

Nothing runs properly in India... and I mean nothing (The New Delhi metro is an exception but then the Japanese built it ). The country operates a 'power sharing' policy; by that it implements deliberate power cuts in order to reduce power consumption (it lacks sufficient electricity generation potential). You can set your watch by the cuts and 5 minutes after the streets become alive with small diesel generators. These generators are clones of the old low RPM single cylinder Lister and Petter type engines... something I am extremely familiar with (I have overhauled hundreds of them). They are extremely easy engines to work on and too maintain yet in over a years experience in the sub continent I have yet to come across one that isn't belching out blue smoke (oil rings gone so burning oil) or black smoke (in need of a decarb or injector replacement/service). Similarly every single tap drips.. so don't believe the hype that India will be the next super power--- we in the west will have to descend a considerable distance for that to happen. Sure we may well do but I for one hope not.

Anyway with the above in mind consider the implications of a country, housing one sixth of the worlds population, pursuing a rural bio-gas production policy: a country that can't build anything to a decent standard producing a gas that is 20 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2. Producing this gas using a combination of old pesticide containers, plastic bin bags, garden hose and duck tape. My estimates, and I suspect that they are conservative' are that for each cubic meter that is burned (thus producing CO2 and H2O) 19 cubic meters will scape to the atmosphere.

So as you can see, even the 'solutions' are likely to cause more harm than good......

any thoughts?

regards

GM23

posted in 11th Hour Action - 6 replies

just letting ya'll know ;)*

2007-12-19T16:19:34Z

http://tribes.tribe.net/environmentprotect
http://earthfirst.tribe.net/
http://tribes.tribe.net/stopglobalwarming

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

Question for Roy

2007-08-22T22:12:45Z

I hope this isn't to far off topic for this tribe, but it seems like people interested in the subject of the documentary are also interested in this subject.

Roy, as you live in Costa Rica, I am aware that there is going to be a vote in October for the consideration of DR-CAFTA. What is your sense of what may happen?

posted in 11th Hour Action - 2 replies

Cradle to Cradle

2007-08-21T20:59:55Z

has anyone here read the book Cradle to Cradle by William McDonough?

K
Hi by the way!!

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

Wood-Stock is in search of Land. We are going to build Paradise

2007-08-19T11:56:44Z

Wood-Stock is an 'Underground' Stock which Guarantees Exponential Growth to all of its participating Members/Holders. It also Grants them access to a Fully Sustainable Paradise.

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

Do Green Dry Cleaners Exist?

2007-08-19T06:30:50Z

By: Isha

Contrary to what its name implies, dry cleaning involves washing clothes in a liquid solvent to remove stains. In about 85 percent of dry cleaning shops this solvent is perchloroethylene (or “perc”), a chemical that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers both a health and environmental hazard.

Dry cleaning is not always necessary; clothing makers often place the “dry clean only” label on tags because they can list no more than one cleaning method and can be held liable if an item is damaged when the owner follows the listed procedure. Yet many of these items can be safely washed at home, either by hand or using a washing machine’s delicate cycle. For clothes that must be professionally cleaned due to their size, fabric, decorations, or other factors, there is no perfect solution, but you could consider using a cleaner that offers one of the following perc-free methods.

Wet cleaning uses the universal solvent—water—along with computer-controlled washers and dryers, specialized detergents that are milder than home laundry products, and professional pressing and finishing equipment. The EPA considers it one of the safest professional cleaning methods; its benefits include “no hazardous chemical use, no hazardous waste generation, no air pollution and reduced potential for water and soil contamination.”

Carbon dioxide (CO2) cleaning uses non-toxic, liquid CO2—the same form used to carbonate soda—as the cleaning solvent, along with detergent. The CO2 is captured as a by-product of existing industrial processes, thereby utilizing emissions that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere; since only about two percent of the CO2 is lost into the air with each load of clothing, its impact on global warming is minimal. CO2 cleaning also uses less energy than traditional dry cleaning, which involves heating the solvent.

Silicone cleaning is a proprietary technology that employs a silicone-based solvent to clean clothes. The solvent itself is currently considered safe for the environment because it degrades to sand, water, and carbon dioxide, but it has caused cancer in lab animals in EPA studies. In addition, it is manufactured using chlorine, which can generate harmful dioxin emissions.

Not all cleaning methods advertised as “green” are as environmentally benign as they may seem. For example, a solvent called DF-2000 being touted as an “organic” dry cleaning fluid is actually a petroleum product manufactured by ExxonMobil. It is indeed organic in the same way gasoline and perc are organic: it contains a chain of carbon atoms. But the EPA lists DF-2000 as a neurotoxin and skin and eye irritant for workers, and its use can contribute to smog and global warming.

-courtesy Union of Concerned Scientists

The dry cleaning chemical "perc" was identified as the cause of a recent drinking water contamination scare in Queens, New York.

Personally, I have been hand washing my dry clean only clothing for years with great success. Try it.

Reposted from www.11thhouraction.com/blog

posted in 11th Hour Action - 2 replies

Entering the Tough Oil Era

2007-08-18T03:58:30Z

Published on Friday, August 17, 2007 by TomDispatch.com

Entering the Tough Oil Era
The New Energy Pessimism

by Michael T. Klare

When “peak oil” theory was first widely publicized in such path breaking books as Kenneth Deffeyes’ Hubbert’s Peak (2001), Richard Heinberg’s The Party’s Over (2002), David Goodstein’s Out of Gas (2004), and Paul Robert’s The End of Oil (2004), energy industry officials and their government associates largely ridiculed the notion. An imminent peak — and subsequent decline — in global petroleum output was derided as crackpot science with little geological foundation. “Based on [our] analysis,” the U.S. Department of Energy confidently asserted in 2004, “[we] would expect conventional oil to peak closer to the middle than to the beginning of the 21st century.”

Recently, however, a spate of high-level government and industry reports have begun to suggest that the original peak-oil theorists were far closer to the grim reality of global-oil availability than industry analysts were willing to admit. Industry optimism regarding long-term energy-supply prospects, these official reports indicate, has now given way to a deep-seated pessimism, even in the biggest of Big Oil corporate headquarters.

The change in outlook is perhaps best suggested by a July 27 article in the Wall Street Journal headlined, “Oil Profits Show Sign of Aging.” Although reporting staggering second-quarter profits for oil giants Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell — $10.3 billion for the former, $8.7 billion for the latter — the Journal sadly noted that investors are bracing for disappointing results in future quarters as the cost of new production rises and output at older fields declines. “All the oil companies are struggling to grow production,” explained Peter Hitchens, an analyst at the Teather and Greenwood brokerage house. “[Yet] it’s becoming more and more difficult to bring projects in on time and on budget.”

To appreciate the nature of Big Oil’s dilemma, peak-oil theory must be briefly revisited. As originally formulated by petroleum geologist M. King Hubbert in the 1950s, the concept holds that worldwide oil production will rise until approximately half of the world’s original petroleum inheritance has been exhausted; once this point is reached, daily output will hit a peak and begin an irreversible decline. Hubbert’s successors, including professor emeritus Kenneth Deffeyes of Princeton, contend that we have now consumed just about half the original supply and so are at, or very near, the peak-production moment predicted by Hubbert.

Since the concept burst into public consciousness several years ago, its proponents and critics have largely argued over whether or not we have reached maximum worldwide petroleum output. In a way, this is a moot argument, because the numbers involved in conventional oil output have increasingly been obscured by oil derived from “unconventional” sources — deep-offshore fields, tar sands, and natural-gas liquids, for example — that are being blended into petroleum feedstocks used to make gasoline and other fuels. In recent years, this has made the calculation of petroleum supplies ever more complicated. As a result, it may be years more before we can be certain of the exact timing of the global peak-oil moment.

On Tap: The Tough-Oil Era

There is, however, a second aspect to peak-oil theory, which is no less relevant when it comes to the global-supply picture — one that is far easier to detect and assess today. Peak-oil theorists have long contended that the first half of the world’s oil to be extracted and consumed will be the easy half. They are referring, of course, to the oil that’s found on shore or near to shore; oil close to the surface and concentrated in large reservoirs; oil produced in friendly, safe, and welcoming places.

The other half — what (if they are right) is left of the world’s petroleum supply — is the tough oil. They mean oil that’s buried far offshore or deep underground; oil scattered in small, hard-to-find reservoirs; oil that must be obtained from unfriendly, politically dangerous, or hazardous places. An oil investor’s eye-view of our energy planet today quickly reveals that we already seem to be entering the tough-oil era. This explains the growing pessimism among industry analysts as well as certain changes in behavior in the energy marketplace.

In but one sign of the new reality, the price of benchmark U.S. light, sweet crude oil for next-month delivery soared to new highs on July 31, topping the previous record for intraday trading of $77.03 per barrel set in July 2006. Some observers are predicting that a price of $80 per barrel is just around the corner; while John Kildruff, a perfectly sober analyst at futures broker Man Financial, told Bloomberg.com, “We’re only a headline of significance away from $100 oil.” New disruptions in Nigerian or Iraqi supplies, or a U.S. military strike against Iran, he explained, could trigger such a price increase in the energy equivalent of a nano-second.

A signal of another sort was provided by the government of Kazakhstan in oil-rich Central Asia on August 7. It warned the private operators of the giant offshore Kashagan oil project — in the Kazakh sector of the Caspian Sea — to cut costs and speed the onset of production or face a possible government takeover. In an interview, Prime Minister Karim Masimov said threateningly: “We are very disappointed with the execution of this project. If the operator can’t resolve these problems, then we don’t exclude their possible replacement.”

Kashagan, it must be borne in mind, is not just any oil project: it is the largest field to be developed anywhere in the world since the discovery of Alaska’s Prudhoe Bay some 40 years ago. With estimated oil reserves of 9-13 billion barrels, it is crucial to the hopes of its principal developers — Exxon, ConocoPhillips, Shell, Total (of France), and Eni (of Italy) — to increase their output in the years ahead. Consistent with the “tough oil” aspect of peak-oil theory, Kashagan is, however, proving dauntingly difficult to turn into a successful font of petroleum. The oil reservoir itself is buried beneath high-pressure strata of gas, making its extraction exceedingly tricky, and it contains abnormally high levels of deadly hydrogen sulfide; moreover, the entire field is located in a shallow area of the Caspian Sea that freezes over for five months of the year and is the breeding ground for rare seals and beluga sturgeon.

As a result of these and other problems, the Kashagan operating consortium has seen the price-tag for launching the project nearly double — from $10 billion to $19 billion — and has postponed the onset of initial production from 2005 to 2010, infuriating the Kazakh government, which had hoped to be earning billions of dollars in taxes and royalties by now.

A Demanding World

And then there are those reports from high-level agencies and organizations on the global energy picture, all coming to the same basic conclusion: Whether or not the peak in world oil output is at hand, the future of the global oil supply in a world of endlessly growing demand appears grim.

The first of these recent warnings, entitled the “Medium-Term Oil Market Report,” was released on July 8 by the International Energy Agency (IEA), an arm of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the club of major industrial powers. Although filled with statistics and technical analyses, the report, assessing the global oil supply-and-demand equation through 2012, seemed to leak anxiety and came to a distinctly worrisome conclusion: Because world oil demand is likely to keep rising at a rapid tempo and the development of new oil fields is not expected to keep pace, significant shortfalls are likely to emerge within the next five years.

The IEA report predicts that world economic activity will grow by an average of 4.5% per year during this period — driven largely by unbridled growth in China, India, and other Asian dynamos. Global oil demand will rise, it predicts, by about 2.2% per year, pushing world oil consumption from an estimated 86.1 million barrels per day in 2007 to 95.8 million barrels by 2012. With luck and substantial new investment, the global oil industry may be able to increase output sufficiently to satisfy this higher level of demand — but, if so, just barely. Beyond 2012, the production outlook appears far grimmer. And keep in mind, this is the best-case scenario.

Underlying the report’s conclusions are a number of specific fears. Despite rising fuel prices, neither the mature consumers of the OECD countries, nor newly affluent consumers in the developing world are likely to significantly curb their appetite for petroleum. “Demand is growing, and as people become accustomed to higher prices, they are starting to return to their previous trends of high consumption,” was the way Lawrence Eagles, an oil expert at the IEA, summed the situation up. This is clearly evident in the United States, where record-high gasoline prices have not stopped drivers from filling up their tanks and driving record distances.

In addition, oil output in the United States and most other non-members of the Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries (OPEC) has peaked, or is about to do so, which means that the net contribution of non-OPEC suppliers will only diminish between now and 2012. That, in turn, means that the burden of providing the required additional oil will have to fall on the OPEC countries, most of which are located in unstable areas of the Middle East and Africa.

The numbers are actually staggering. Just to satisfy a demand for an extra 10 million or so barrels per day between now and 2012, two million barrels per day in new oil would have to be added to global stocks yearly. But even this calculation is misleading, as Eagles of the IEA made clear. In fact, the world would initially need “more than 3 million barrels per day of new oil each year [just] to offset the falling production in the mature fields outside of OPEC” — and that’s before you even get near that additional two million barrels.

In other words, what’s actually needed is five million barrels of new oil each year, a truly daunting challenge since almost all of this oil will have to be found in Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Angola, Libya, Nigeria, Venezuela, and one or two other countries. These are not places that exactly inspire investor confidence of a sort that could attract the many billions of dollars needed to ramp up production enough to satisfy global requirements.

Read between the lines and one quickly perceives a worst-case scenario in which the necessary investment is not forthcoming; OPEC production does not grow by five million barrels per day year after year; ethanol and other substitute-fuel production, along with alternate fuels of various sorts, do not grow fast enough to fill the gap; and, in the not-too-distant future, a substantial shortage of oil leads to a global economic meltdown.

The Missing Trillions

A very similar prognosis emerges from a careful reading of “Facing the Hard Truths About Energy,” the second major report to be released in July. Submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy by the National Petroleum Council (NPC), an oil-industrial association, this report encapsulated the view of both industry officials and academic analysts. It was widely praised for providing a “balanced” approach to the energy dilemma. It called for both increased fuel-efficiency standards for vehicles and increased oil and gas drilling on federal lands. Contributing to the buzz around its release was the identity of the report’s principal sponsor, former Exxon CEO Lee Raymond. Having previously expressed skepticism about global warming, he now embraced the report’s call for the taking of significant steps to curb carbon-dioxide emissions.

Like the IEA report, the NPC study does claim that — with the perfect mix of policies and an adequate level of investment — the energy industry would be capable of satisfying oil and gas demand for some years to come. “Fortunately, the world is not running out of energy resources,” the report bravely asserts. Read deep into the report, though, and these optimistic words begin to dissolve as its emphasis switches to the growing difficulties (and costs) of extracting oil and gas from less-than-favorable locations and the geopolitical risks associated with a growing global reliance on potentially hostile, unstable suppliers.

Again, the numbers involved are staggering. According to the NPC, an estimated $20 trillion in new investment (that’s trillion, not billion) will be needed between now and 2030 to ensure sufficient energy for anticipated demand. This works out to “$3,000 per person alive today” in a world in which a good half of humanity earns substantially less than that each year.

These funds, which can only come from those of us in the wealthier countries, will be needed, the council notes, in “building new, multi-billion-dollar oil platforms in water thousands of feet deep, laying pipelines in difficult terrain and across country borders, expanding refineries, constructing vessels and terminals to ship and store liquefied natural gas, building railroads to transport coal and biomass, and stringing new high-voltage transmission lines from remote wind farms.” Adding to the magnitude of this challenge, “future projects are likely to be more complex and remote, resulting in higher costs per unit of energy produced.” Again, think tough oil.

The report then notes the obvious: “A stable and attractive investment climate will be necessary to attract adequate capital for evolution and expansion of the energy infrastructure.” And this is where any astute observer should begin to get truly alarmed; for, as the study itself notes, no such climate can be expected. As the center of gravity of world oil production shifts decisively to OPEC suppliers and to state-centric energy producers like Russia, geopolitical rather than market factors will come to dominate the energy industry and a whole new set of instabilities will characterize the oil trade.

“These shifts pose profound implications for U.S. interests, strategies, and policy-making,” the report states. “Many of the expected changes could heighten risks to U.S. energy security in a world where U.S. influence is likely to decline as economic power shifts to other nations. In years to come, security threats to the world’s main sources of oil and natural gas may worsen.”

Read from this perspective, the recent reports from pillars of the Big- Oil/wealthy-nation establishment suggest that the basic logic of peak-oil theory is on the mark and hard times are ahead when it comes to global oil-and-gas sufficiency. Both reports claim that with just the right menu of corrective policies and an unrealistic streak of pure luck — as in no set of major Katrina-like hurricanes barreling into oil fields or refineries, no new wars in Middle Eastern oil producing areas, no political collapse in Nigeria — we can somehow stagger through to 2012 and maybe just beyond without a global economic meltdown. But in an era of tough oil, the odds tip toward tough luck as well. Buckle your seatbelt. Fill up that gas tank soon. The future is likely to be a bumpy ride toward cliff’s edge.

Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College in Amherst, Mass., and the author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America’s Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum. His newest book, Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy, will be published in the spring of 2008 by Metropolitan Books.

© 2007 Michael T.Klare
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

*
*
*
*
*
*

Article printed from www.CommonDreams.org

URL to article: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/17/3242/

Click here to print.

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

Leonardo DiCaprio will be on Nightline this Friday!

2007-08-06T18:28:52Z

Leonardo will be on Nigthline, Friday Night, August 10th. Go to the Nightline site here:

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3444889

Leonardo DiCaprio's new documentary "11th Hour" will examine the state
of the global environment. In an interview with "Nightline" airing on
Friday, August 10th, DiCaprio will talk about his new film, as well as
ways he thinks you can help live a greener life.

Do YOU have a question to ask Leonardo DiCaprio about the environment?

Please send your questions in by Tuesday, August 7th, and he will answer one of them on air on Friday night

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies

11th Hour Action Community

2007-08-02T19:26:03Z

The 11th Hour is so much more than a movie - it is a social movement that will motivate all of us to take action and create a more sustainable and healthy future...

"We are the generation that gets to change the world!"

What can you do?
First things first, you're here! you've joined our group on tribe! you are ready to start making changes and encouraging others to live in harmony with nature.

2nd: Go see the film once it is released in theaters beginning August 17th!!! Bring your friends and your family members!!! The more people who go see the movie, the bigger the buzz will be and the further our message about the importance of preserving our environment will spread to audiences all over the world!!!

3rd: Join in the action!!! Tell us what environmental actions you are taking in your own life. Share links to important environmental articles that you have come across. Submit posts to our group here and check out what other people are up to on our Action website: www.11thhouraciton.com

4th: Stay tuned ...

We'll keep you posted

Best,
11th Hour Action Team

posted in 11th Hour Action - 0 replies