How much petroleum is left?
I think that gas prices may drop before long. But only by a little bit, and not for very long. Then they will stabilize if we are lucky, or continue to climb if not. Most commentators seem to think that prices will go up in the long term. Up by how much is trickier to say.
Now T Boone Pickens, an oilman from way back, puts forward his opinion, and it is not reassuring for those who want to keep on using petroleum and claim that there is plenty of untapped oil out there, somewhere. Here's some of what he has to say:
Let me share a few facts: Each year we import more and more oil. In 1973, the year of the infamous oil embargo, the United States imported about 24% of our oil. In 1990, at the start of the first Gulf War, this had climbed to 42%. Today, we import almost 70% of our oil.
and
Consider this: The world produces about 85 million barrels of oil a day, but global demand now tops 86 million barrels a day. And despite three years of record price increases, world oil production has declined every year since 2005. Meanwhile, the demand for oil will only increase as growing economies in countries like India and China gear up for enhanced oil consumption.
Of course, T Boone has a plan. Tap the vast reserve of wind power in the midwest to run our power plants and use the natural gas that currently fuels them for our cars.
Don't know about the solution, but I think he see the problem clearly.
Labels: fuel conservation, gas prices
posted by Clemens @ 10:32 AM
2 comments
2 Comments:
I agree with the outlook, and with the problem. It also deflates the conspiracy theorists who say that we would have plenty more oil if only the greedy oil companies would drill for it.
I like his solution, but I've heard from lots of people who've looked into it that it doesn't matter how much wind energy you tap; the proportion of what you capture to what is there won't satisfy even our current energy needs.
Some scientists wrote in Scientific American a few months ago that we should build a huge solar farm in the Arizona desert. They asserted that if this were taken seriously, we really could achieve energy independence.
Color me skeptical, but if one of the presidential candidates were to get behind this proposal I'd support it. I'd much rather spend $420 billion on such a proposal, which is what they say we would have to spend (probably a rosy scenario), than we spend now on the farm bill, subsidies to oil companies, etc.
Only problem is this. I read recently that some attempts to build solar farms in Arizona have been delayed so that environmental impact statements can be prepared. The same will happen with wind farms on the scale you're talking about.
Wouldn't it be nice if a certain president would waive some regulations so that this could proceed, the way they've done with other interest groups to whom they're beholden?
Environmental impact problems are overcome all the time, and they will be with the solar panels. I don't think any one fix is going to do it all by itself. That's why I am intrigued by Pickens' proposal. Even if it only satisfied part of current demand we'd be much better off. Add to that the possibility of raising the proportion of our power that comes from atomic power plants, throw in solar panels (here, there, and everywhere: my school has just installed some), and we can seriously lower our requirements for petroleum.
As it is, we are addicts, and the folks who are our pusher intend us no good. That much is crystal clear.
Post a Comment
<< Home