The Peak Oil Apocalypse
Peak oil is to the ecological left what the rapture is to
the Christian right. Some people seem
to
have a psychological need to believe that history is about to end in a catastrophe that will destroy the wicked.
I am not denying the obvious fact that oil production will
peak and disrupt our economy. I am
criticizing
the people who claim that, after oil production peaks, industrialism will collapse and be
replaced by local subsistence economies that are much poorer.
In reality, we have enough clean energy to sustain an
industrial economy. It is
estimated, for example, that we could produce all the electricity that America
now uses with solar arrays on a land area of 100 miles by 100 miles, so we will
obviously not have to close the factories and start producing subsistence by
hand. Of course,
renewable resources cannot support endless growth, but there is enough clean energy to give us all a comfortable
standard of living.
We also have enough dirty energy to keep the industrial
economy going after oil peaks. When
gasoline prices reach about $5 per gallon, it becomes economically feasible to
use liquid coal instead of petroleum.
There
is enough coal, tar sands, and shale oil to keep the industrial economy growing
for decades after oil peaks - and enough to cause severe global warming.
The constraints of global warming are much tighter than the
constraints on fossil fuel resources.
As
Bill McKibben points out, we have to limit our carbon emissions to 565 gigatons
to keep CO2 concentrations below 450 ppm and avoid the worst effects of global
warming, but there are now proven world reserves of fossil fuels containing
2,795 gigatons of carbon, five times as much as we should burn. The battle against the Keystone XL pipeline
is the first of many battles that will show that scarcity of fossil fuels will
not automatically limit CO2 emissions, that we have to make deliberate
political decisions to limit fossil fuel production to avoid severe global
warming.
Now, let’s imagine how those political decisions will go
if
the peak oil crowd speaks for environmentalists.
Conservatives say that we can maintain our
standard of living if we “drill, baby, drill” to produce more oil, if we remove mountain tops to produce more coal, and if we get rid of all environmental
regulations that limit energy production.
Peak-oil environmentalists say that we cannot maintain our standard of
living: limited energy will make our economy collapse and will make the survivors scrape out subsistence using more
labor-intensive
methods. If the public is faced
with
this choice, it will obviously go with the conservatives.
Environmentalists can win the debate with conservatives, if
we show that there is enough clean energy to give us a comfortable standard of
living, and if we can paint a convincing picture of a better future.
But if environmentalists focus on an imaginary apocalypse
that will inevitably occur after oil production peaks, then the conservatives will win the political debate, and the
world will face a real apocalypse caused by global warming.