Changes coming to Energy Bulletin soon... Find out more... |
Eventually we’ll have unlimited cheap clean energy. But that will not help us or our kids.
by Fabius Maximus
Summary: Optimists about energy give glowing forecasts of new technologies, often with wildly underestimated estimates of when when these can generate substantial fractions of our energy. In the real world technologies take decades to evolve from the laboratory to commercialization. And then building new energy sources on a large scale takes decades. Here we sketch out realistic timelines. Contents
(1) Time, often the missing element from analysis about the energy problem There are two common errors about time when discussing new energy sources. First, exaggerating how quickly new technology develops from lab to commercialization. That’s the subject of this post. But optimists often make a more fundamental error.
Much of the cornucopians’ optimism comes from confidence that eventually new energy sources will be found. I agree. Future generations will use energy sources beyond anything in our science fiction. But that probably will not help us or our children. Our prosperity almost certainly depends on what we do. Trusting to the invisible hand (an exaggeration of what Adam Smith said) means that either we’re lucky — or our children might be poorer than us.
More specifically, the energy sources we will rely on in the next 25 (probably even 50 years) have already been discovered. (2) The path from lab to megawatts
There are no agreed-upon definitions for each of these stages. (3) Where are some hot new energy sources in the R&D development process? Enthusiasts often exaggerate when cheering their favorite technology’s state of development. Here’s a quick review of some energy tech:
New tech, especially break-through technology, usually takes decades to evolve from the lab bench to commercial use. (4) How long will it take to scale up successful new energy sources Politicians often speak of energy independence for America. Unfortunately it’s an absurd dream, except perhaps over several generations. The US imports roughly ten million barrels of oil per day. Nothing will replace imports during the next 10 years, and probably during the next 20 years. There are no fast solutions. Considered the microwave oven (from Wikipedia):
Look at bitumen (oil sands) mining in Canada. The first mine opened in 1967; the third in 2003. By 2005 (aprox) Canada produced over one million barrels per day (MBD), and 1.4 mbd in 2009. Their goal is 3.3 mbd by 2020 (down from a 20 mbd target a few years ago). Perhaps 4.2 mbd by 2030. But the next development is new technology tap deeper deposits (in situ mining), and progress is slower than expected. China planned to build plants converting coal to liquid fuels producing one million barrels/day by 2020, before putting most of the program on hold (see yesterday’s post for details). And large projects require more time to build in the US. A new mine in the US takes 7-10 years from initial application. If needed to move the coal from mines to the CTL plant, a new railroad can require 5 or 10 years to build, depending on the location (people hate dirty, noisy coal trains running through their neighborhoods). Of course, we could do crash programs. Which have some serious side-effects. Most important, accelerated programs drive up costs. A lot, as companies operating in the Albert oil sands boom discovered. WWII is not a useful comparison. Not only was cost not a factor for the US (great news for the war contractors), but the Great Depression resulted in vast idle resources (both plant and people) that could be quickly mobilized. For more about this see Could a new “Manhattan Project” produce radically new energy sources?, 29 June 2010 (5) So when should we get started?
(6) For more information Some posts about the Energy Crisis
Original article available here |
news by category
- Resources
- Regions
- Related Issues
featured content
- Authors
- Dan Allen
- Cecile Andrews
- Sharon Astyk
- Megan Quinn Bachman
- Albert Bates
- Ugo Bardi
- Dan Bednarz
- David Bollier
- Stuart Jeanne Bramhall
- Rebecca Burgess
- Sarah Byrnes
- Molly Scott Cato
- Kurt Cobb
- Dave Cohen
- Erik Curren
- Lindsay Curren
- Andrew Curry
- Herman Daly
- Kris De Decker
- Rob Dietz
- Charlotte Du Cann
- Rahul Goswami
- John Michael Greer
- Nate Hagens
- Richard Heinberg
- Øyvind Holmstad
- Rob Hopkins
- Robert Jensen
- Brian Kaller
- Frank Kaminski
- Paul Kingsnorth
- Justin Kenrick
- Amanda Kovattana
- Ellen LaConte
- Gene Logsdon
- Mary Logan
- Kathy McMahon
- Asher Miller
- Bill McKibben
- Rick Munroe
- Tom Murphy
- Andrew Nikiforuk
- Dmitry Orlov
- Christine Patton
- Damien Perrotin
- Dave Pollard
- Joanne Poyourow
- Barath Raghavan
- Wayne Roberts
- Stuart Staniford
- John Thackara
- Gail Tverberg
- Tom Whipple
- More authors...
- Publishers
- ASPO-USA
- Civil Eats
- Climate Progress
- Culture Change
- Energy Bulletin
- Fernand Braudel Center
- Feasta
- HomeGrown
- Nourishing the Planet
- Oil Depletion Analysis Centre
- On the Commons
- OpenDemocracy
- OpenEconomy
- Post Carbon Institute
- Shareable
- Solutions
- The Daly News
- The Oil Drum
- Shareable
- TCLocal
- TomDispatch.com
- Transition Milwaukee
- Transition Network
- Transition Voice
- Yale Environment 360
- Yes! Magazine
- Media Publishers
- Reviews
- Web chats
Local Dollars Local Sense
In Local Dollars, Local Sense, PCI Fellow and local economy pioneer Michael Shuman shows investors, including the nearly 99% who are unaccredited, how to put their money into building local businesses and resilient regional economies Buy now and receive a discount.
The Post Carbon Reader
A must-read collection by some of the world’s most provocative thinkers on the key issues shaping our new century.
Buy now.









