The Oil Drum: Europe

I recently received an interesting e-mail:

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House and Author of "Know Your Power: A Message to America's Daughters" will answer questions in a live discussion on washingtonpost.com today (Wednesday, Aug. 6 at 3 pm ET).

Pelosi will discuss the current political scene heading into the conventions, the message of her new book and other questions submitted by readers.

To submit questions and participate in the live discussion click here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/08/01/DI2008080102174.html

This seemed to me to be an ideal opportunity to question her on two issues that she is clearly passionate about, but seem to me to be diametrically opposed: Tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and reducing carbon emissions. So, I submitted the following question, several hours prior to the chat:

I have a friend who is addicted to nicotine. His liberal friends tell him that this addiction is bad, and point out that it is costing him too much money. Therefore, they want policies passed that ensure that he can continue to consume as much as he likes, and not hurt his budget too much. They are sure that nicotine substitutes will come along soon to save the day. For reasons I detail below, I call this the Boxer approach, but it could just as easily be the Pelosi/Democratic Party approach.

His conservative friends agree that he is addicted, but their solution is to carve out areas in the U.S. where we can grow more tobacco, and therefore his addiction can at least be homegrown. Sort of like "If you are going to smoke pot, at least smoke American pot." This is the Bush approach.

Gasoline prices give a a clear measure of consequences of making oil the lifeblood of our economy. As our economic lifeblood, oil is giving us:

1. Heart attacks, unstable price spikes in this plateau of Peak Oil
2. Leukemia, undermining our planets ability to support us with Global Warming

Facing the facts and acting to resolve them can defeat peak Oil and Global Warming, both civilization killers. A primary fact is that our current infrastructure is the cause of these killers. We built the infrastructure. We can build better. The purpose of this essay is a call to action to defeat these civilization killers by changing the way we govern infrastructure from specifying HOW to build it, to stating WHAT is needed and allowing a free market to find the rare individuals with lucky breakthroughs that can build sustainable infrastructure. We must get lucky and discover the energy equivalents of lasers, personal computers, cell phones, the Internet, etc....

With gas topping $4 per gallon and oil prices seemingly reaching new highs every week, more pain at the pump is certain in the foreseeable future, and energy policy is rightfully claiming its place as a major topic of the 2008 election. Indeed, John McCain gave a major campaign speech earlier this week in Houston specifically on energy (the full transcript can be found here) and addresses the issue again this week in Santa Barbara. It is worth looking in more detail at how he describes the current situation, and what he is proposing.

This is the first in a series of posts co-authored with Phoenix and Matt Mushalik. In my previous post I took a high-level look at solutions for Australia. This post starts the process of iterating down from the high-level view. It assumes that we will not be able to instantly convert to sustainable solutions - we need to get there in steps. This article is co-authored with Phoenix, a qualified mechanical engineer who has been working in the infrastructure construction industry for over 28 years. He has held senior manangement positions with a number of organisations delivering projects to key energy providers. These projects have included oil refineries, power stations, LNG plants and gas processing facilities. He currently works as the National Manager – Power Generation for a major Australian construction group.

Action Plan

1.0 INTRODUCTION: THE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSPORT

Transport is critical to the functioning of our society. If Australia’s transportation stopped tomorrow, then most of us would be starving in the dark a few weeks later.

Yet this is exactly the scenario that is emerging. The vast majority of transport in Australia is fuelled by oil. Without oil, transport stops. And we are being warned from every direction that our oil supplies are no longer secure.

This scenario will be the most serious threat experienced by our society since the Second World War. This is the first in a series of discussions that look at ways to secure Australia’s oil based energy security into the future. Over the next few weeks we will look at short and long term goals for personal and industrial transport.

This is a guest post by Eugene Linden. Eugene's most recent book is Winds of Change: Climate, Weather, and the Destruction of Civilizations. Prior books include The Future in Plain Sight: Nine Clues to the Coming Instability. Over the years, Eugene has written for publications ranging from Parade to Foreign Affairs (for more complete list, please visit Eugene's site). In recent years Eugene has been publishing more and more on the web. Apart from his writing, he does a good deal of speaking, and also serves as chief investment strategist for Bennett Management, a family of hedge funds.

"The Speech I'd Like to Hear from a Presidential Candidate on Energy and Climate Change" by Eugene Linden

“As I stand here today on the shore of Lake Lanier in Georgia, I’m sure that many of you are wondering why I’ve chosen to talk about climate change when we face so many immediate problems. Climate change seems far away while the housing and credit crisis, unprecedented oil prices, expensive healthcare, a global food crisis, and the never-ending war in Iraq are right upon us.

These are all urgent issues, and the American people have every right to demand that a Presidential candidate address these problems with leadership and credible programs. Indeed, I’ve spent the great majority of my time in this campaign trying to lay out the way I would confront such issues should the voters entrust me with the Presidency.

But many of these problems, particularly energy prices, our national security and soaring food prices cannot be addressed in isolation. Moreover, changing climate feeds into a number of these immediate issues, and the threat of climate chaos may not be as far off as we might hope.

This is an excerpted letter from Members of Congress Don Young and Roscoe Bartlett asking for other MoC's to support and/or co-sponsor H.R. 6107, an Important Step to American Energy Independence and Price Reductions for Consumers.

If you wish to find your Representative's number or email to express your support or contempt for this legislation, go to http://house.gov. To learn more about the details of the legislation, look it up at http://thomas.loc.gov .

We must act now and illustrate that we are serious about bringing down the high cost of energy and generating good paying jobs in our communities. Abundant, affordable, and secure supplies of energy are essential to this Nation's economic and national security.

This week Andris Piebalgs talks Nuclear in his blog. Without taboos, Andris lays down the advantages of Nuclear energy that have put it at the core of the Commission's New Energy Policy for Europe.

Nuclear energy has been discussed many times at TOD, mostly from a technical perspective, on its practicality and long-term sustainability. This time we look at Nuclear Energy policy, from the perspective of an Executive that has made a clear option towards this energy source.

Source: NewScientistTech (click to enlarge)

and we can't embed CNN's video player, so you'll have to go over there and watch Kunstler's well-done piece on Glenn Beck if you haven't seen it already:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/05/14/beck.life.oil.cnn?iref=videosearch

And, yes, under the fold, if you can believe it, yes, that's your president doing his best Dr. Evil (from Austin Powers) impression. No, I am not kidding.

40 professors of ETH Zurich, one of the most highly reputed and visible technical universities on this planet, belong to the Energy Science Center, a collaborative effort created in order to study the challenges that lie ahead in terms of resource depletion and the effects exerted by our presence on the global dynamics of our planet. Currently, the potential ramifications of peak oil and global warming are the Center's main focus.

A year and a half ago, six of the professors decided to define a new Energy Strategy for ETH Zurich, to determine how ETH, through research and educational activities, could contribute to finding solutions to these rapidly emerging and ever more pressing issues.

In February 2008, they published the results of their collective efforts in a brochure that can be downloaded from the web in either German or English. Last week, they finally presented the results of their studies to the broader public in a special energy science colloquium entitled 1 t CO₂ and/or 2 kW per Capita? Strategic Goals and Transformation Paths for the Energy System of the Future. The presentation (in German) can be downloaded from their website in streaming video format.

This paper provides a critical review of the seminar talk presented by Prof. Boulouchos, who spearheaded the research effort, as well as of the recommendations made by the committee.