[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?

[EnergyUnlimited]

Academic institutions/industrial R&D should simply do their job while FF are still around.
They may or may not find satisfactory solutions to PO related problems.
Ultracapacitor technology coupled with expensive (but still feasible) commercial fusion reactors may just do the trick.
If they find it on time - fine
If they find it but late - some hardship will come, but still fine
If they fail - well we will go back to 18 century socioeconomic setup if we are lucky.
However continuation of exponential growth for ever according to current economy paradigm has no future IMO at least.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'U')ltracapacitor technology coupled with expensive (but still feasible) commercial fusion reactors

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'U')ltracapacitor technology coupled with expensive (but still feasible) commercial fusion reactors

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'U')ltracapacitor technology coupled with expensive (but still feasible) commercial fusion reactors

[mrflora]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')According to the scientists who study physics, as opposed to companies marketing this idea, the failure of micron-level control in manufacturing techniques makes the ultra-capacitor a pipe-dream.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mrflora', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')According to the scientists who study physics, as opposed to companies marketing this idea, the failure of micron-level control in manufacturing techniques makes the ultra-capacitor a pipe-dream.

[EnergyUnlimited]

It may be the case, that society will have to accept something like $3 per mile driving expenses and adequate increase of transport price.

It is still better than to go back to rely on oxen.
An interesting combination of oxen/horses with ultracapacitor powered (means electric) HGV or emergency/military/rich mens vehicles.
This is likely to be our actual fate IMO.

The actual "solution" to PO may be to replace 10% of FF with biofuels, 30% with electricity and resign from 60% of our current transporting/travelling activities.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'I')t may be the case, that society will have to accept something like $3 per mile driving expenses and adequate increase of transport price.

It is still better than to go back to rely on oxen.
An interesting combination of oxen/horses with ultracapacitor powered (means electric) HGV or emergency/military/rich mens vehicles.
This is likely to be our actual fate IMO.

The actual "solution" to PO may be to replace 10% of FF with biofuels, 30% with electricity and resign from 60% of our current transporting/traveling activities.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')...But don't you think that some powerful countries won't just "resign themselves" to energy poverty?

They will be very tempted to solve their energy problems the same way they have for decades...

Don't we all already know the answer to this question?

Is there even the slightest doubt?

[Aaron]

That's funny, I just wrote a paper on that:

Texas enjoys a unique status in energy terms.

And also faces unique challenges.

As a native Texan myself, I have had the opportunity to observe the evolution of our state from the early 1970's through today. During this time Texas has experienced some rather remarkable changes, as events and ideas have marched from Beaumont to El Paso; Houston to Lubbock.

Texas has enjoyed strong economic growth through most of this time span, despite some devastating losses like Enron or the S&L scandals. Houston & Dallas in particular, & by extension the rest of the state, cemented our position as an International crossroads for the Petrochemical & Oil Industries. To this day, much of the commerce in global energy markets, takes place right here in Texas.

Texas is also unique in it's energy usage & infrastructure compared to the rest of America. Texas has it's own separate electrical grid for example. The rolling blackouts which swept the nation were never a real danger here, because of our separate system. This is typical of several key industries in Texas, including livestock & agriculture, manufacturing & processing, as well as transportation and shipping. Taken as a whole, Texas enjoys more "self-sufficiency" as a state than perhaps any other. The unique combination of geography & history has provided Texas with some singular opportunities to not only benefit our own state, but the entire nation.

Much has been written recently about hydrocarbon alternative technologies. As oil & gas prices skyrocket, suddenly energy technologies which seemed marginal, become more viable. But not all these alternatives are created equally. We must consider carefully the viability of each candidate technology based on it's merits overall, as opposed to a blanket policy which says that everything which is profitable, is desirable.

It's critical that we understand the context of the energy sources we consider pursuing, not just the novel technology itself. By this I mean that the "quality" of a given energy source is the final measure of it's viability. Lot's of things are potential sources of energy, from wood to Whale Oil, Coal, Oil & Gas, many things will burn. We need to be more discriminating about which one's we actually choose to exploit.

The other side of this equation is the certainty that we will be forced to make new energy choices going forward. There is no credible debate about the coming decline in conventional hydrocarbon production, only about the shape this event will take & it's duration. If you have not heard yet, our conventional sources of oil & gas are near their peak production levels right now, and experts expect declining production of these natural resources by 2025, or perhaps as soon as 2007. What this means in real terms is more expensive & less available conventional oil & gas from here on out. This unavoidable shift will dictate that we find new ways to replace these lost resources, or suffer the consequences.

I had the privilege of spending several hours interviewing the late Dr. Richard Smalley of Rice University's Carbon Nanotech Lab in Houston, & he shared some interesting observations with me. Among the topics we discussed, he explained his thinking on the entire group of hydrocarbon alternatives. His central point, was that oil & gas, are simply wonderful sources of energy. Very dense, packed with potential energy, in a safe, fluid form... the perfect fuel. Therefore when considering alternatives to natures wonder fuel, we are obliged to view these alternatives in the light of what they will be replacing.

Furthermore, we must consider how dependant a given technology is on existing sources of conventional hydrocarbon energy, to really understand how viable it is.

I won't rehash specifics that can be Googled easily, but will present my findings of current thinking on a per topic basis.

Bio-Fuel (Ethanol, BioWillie Diesel, switch grass etc...)

A clear net energy loser. It's profitable because of an economic condition, but it still takes more energy than it produces.

Hybrids (Electric car hybrids, fuel-cells)

Also energy losers. In fact recent studies indicate that hybrids consume as much energy as a Hummer because of their expensive manufacturing and part replacement schedules.

Wind

A marginal energy winner. Wind is low impact, low yield electricity production. Great for scaled, localized needs. Limited in large scale by geography.

Solar

Another marginal energy winner. The expense involved and exotic materials required make this a very limited technology, especially for large scale.

Hydro

A big energy winner, but severely limited by suitable locations.

Geothermal

Same problem as hydro.

Nuclear

A clear energy winner, nuclear is limited by the failure of breeder reactor technology to successfully reprocess spent fuel from conventional Uranium fueled reactors, without which nuclear is limited by available Uranium supplies.

Fusion

Not 1 watt of power has ever been produced by fusion.

What's left?

A collection of even less credible, marginal energy sources?

There is one massive energy source I didn't mention yet. And it's right under our noses.

What could it be?

It's Us!

Or rather it's our dogged reliance on ancient techniques for using our energy.

We lose over half the electricity we generate to the transmission process. We move this energy around our world using technologies which are basically the same we as have used for 150 years. Our inefficient use of oil based energy products is legendary. Our pursuit of the global economy with it's "3000 mile salads", has produced a vast network of machines which squander this energy in amazing quantities.

The problem isn't not enough energy... it's the exact opposite. We have had too much access to cheap energy for too long, and now we are in the position of owning an infrastructure which took decades to build, and requires enormous energy inputs to maintain.

It's this same problem which makes some of the oil alternatives I mentioned before losers. Solar is a great example; there's actually plenty of energy in sunlight alone to power everything forever. We just don't know how to use it efficiently.

I am confident that every possible oil alternative will have it's run in the marketplace over the coming years. Which begs the question about public policy. What course should our government endorse & pursue? What is the most important role of state & local governments in energy policy?

I assert that no marginal alternative energy sources will even begin to meet the coming energy needs for our world, until we find new ways to limit the waste of this energy. We could discover some giant oil field somewhere that was missed before, but unless we find ways to conserve this resource, it will have little effect in meeting our growing energy appetite.

What we really need are bright new minds to think new thoughts which we have not.

We need new ideas and an exchange of information to meet our energy challenges. And that means attracting new talent to the physical sciences. Physical science needs to be "sexy" again, to draw from among our children, the brightest minds to examine this energy trap we have gotten ourselves into.

As Dr. Smalley pointed out, Oil may well turn out to be simply the best overall energy source human science ever discovers. But given the decline of these resources being eminent, it is our moral obligation to try.

For Texas, that means taking advantage of our unique position in the energy sector, to revitalize the science behind those technologies. Without a serious academic push to provide more skilled scientists to work on these issues, there is a limit to how much money can be meaningfully spent on such research. It takes qualified people to conduct the studies which yield future results after all, so beyond their total capacity, further investments are all but meaningless.

There are no gigawatt solutions to terrawatt problems.

Aaron Dunlap

Peakoil.com

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '.'). if he thought the advances mankind needed to solve for hydrocarbon depletion were engineering challenges, or if primary science breakthroughs were necessary.

His response was "Primary science breakthroughs were needed."

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'A')cademic institutions/industrial R&D should simply do their job while FF are still around.

[coyote]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'S')tudy: a hybrid consumes more energy in lifetime than a Hummer

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'S')tudy: a hybrid consumes more energy in lifetime than a Hummer

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')irst you say that new basic real science is the only way to solve hydrocarbon depletion; then you spend copious paragraphs trying to decry scientists, 'professionals', and 'hubris' as at least part of the problem.

[coyote]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'Y')ou seem to have misunderstood the study.

[Aaron]

You have got to be kidding me...

Berman is editor of hybridcars.com

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ree Hybrid Price Quotes
Toyota Prius
The Toyota Prius, considered a midsize sedan, is the number-one selling hybrid car.

[gg3]

And just at the time when we most urgently need major leaps forward in basic sciences and engineering, what's the most notable cultural force on the educational scene? Right, religiously-motivated obscurantism.

The very idea that we as a society should be debating whether or not to teach creationism in biology classes is absurd. Every major problem we face today has a point at which the pure and applied sciences are required in order to achieve solutions.

And yet, standing back from the last sentence for a moment, the fact is that this is not a self-evident truth to approximately one third of the US population. To them, physical problems such as energy and resources simply aren't real, and the singular largest problem of our age is that not everyone believes in the same religion as they do. (If you reduce all of the issues e.g. abortion, sexuality, creationism, stem cell research, school prayer, etc. etc. down to their common denominator, it is this: not everyone believes in the same religious doctrine, and the extremist proponents of that doctrine cannot tolerate pluralism.)

Now what happens when these individuals run into the consequences of physical resource limits?

We have a small number of futures to choose from, plus or minus a miracle or two (e.g. controlled fusion): a) powerdown (voluntary measures to the necessary extent, with minimal government intervention), b) dieoff (lack of restraint on reproduction & consumption, leading to overshoot and hard collapse), or c) tyranny (eco-communism or eco-fascism or something in between, as a last-ditch effort to prevent dieoff).

People who are willfully ignorant of the basic facts won't choose (a), and in the panic to avoid (b) will probably choose the fascistic variant of (c).

---

Long story made short: it's in everyone's interest to do whatever possible to encourage greater emphasis on education in science & engineering, starting at the elementary school level.

There need to be programs in place, whether public or private or whatever, to identify science talent at a very young age and provide those kids with everything they need in order to develop it.

We need another Sputnik to give us a swift kick in the bottom in order to wake us up & get us moving again.

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', '
')Long story made short: it's in everyone's interest to do whatever possible to encourage greater emphasis on education in science & engineering, starting at the elementary school level.

There need to be programs in place, whether public or private or whatever, to identify science talent at a very young age and provide those kids with everything they need in order to develop it.

We need another Sputnik to give us a swift kick in the bottom in order to wake us up & get us moving again.