by tsakach » Wed 11 Jun 2008, 21:11:14
A group called the
Millenium Institute has developed a model of U.S. Energy, called "Threshold 21".
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his paper presents a significantly updated version of the T21 USA model that is designed to analyze
the major energy challenges and choices faced by the USA in the broader context of their relation to
the economy, social factors, and the environment, and with links to the rest of the world as necessary.
Analyzing these issues in a single, integrated framework is complex, but the T21 USA model builds on
the available expertise and detailed models in many sectors to achieve a highly transparent way of
presenting and visualizing the results of different assumptions and policy options, to promote
productive dialogue among different stakeholders, and to help design reasonable policies while
offering options to mitigate possible negative effects.
T21 does not present the ultimate, optimal solution. Rather, it allows users to examine the long term
plausible outcomes of different scenario options and assumptions to assist policy makers,
stakeholders, and the interested public make more informed decisions and reach agreements on how
to move ahead, instead of staying locked in disagreement and inaction.
See
How Can We Deal with Rising Demand and Constrained Supply? (pdf, 4.3MB)
Also See
Modeling U.S. Energy with Threshold 21 (T21) (pdf)
I downloaded the T21 model and ran the simulations. The model includes projected oil and natural gas depletion, and allows you to change certain parameters such as recovery percentages for oil reserves, growth rate of renewable energy sources and so on. After running a simulation you can examine projections for population growth, food production or oil prices.
I was interested in simulating a full-blown "MonteQuest Overshoot and Die-Off Scenario." After setting the renewable energy sources and recovery rates to the minimum values, the simulation showed oil prices at $300/barrel and gas at $10/gallon by 2014 with food production sharply dropping off around 2035.
However, projections for economic and population growth were not affected even with the sharp drop off in food production and increase in oil prices. This suggests to me that the goals of the model were merely to show "it can be done", where alternative energy sources replace oil depletion without much economic impact.
I actually found it a little unsettling to discover that they did not include relationships between food production and population growth or oil prices and economic growth. With oil at $300/barrel one might expect to see some type of economic contraction, but instead the growth rate was just a bit smaller. There wasn't much variance between their best case and worst case scenarios.
Nonetheless, this model seems fairly comprehensive and includes many variables for economic and population data.
Maybe someone else can try it and see if they get different results.