Another excellent observation worth noting and pondering, from Chris Nelder (links in original):
I really didn’t think I’d have to say this again, but peak oil is about data, and specifically data about the production rate of oil. If you want to claim that peak oil is dead (or alive), you have to talk about data on production rates. There is no other way to discuss it.
It’s just not that difficult a concept, but you wouldn’t know it from the endless parade of Happy Talk from those who know but won’t say and/or those who don’t have a clue but say it anyway. Typical of too many similar efforts in discussions about climate change or almost any policy proposal of note, the “debate” about peak oil is one featuring a collection of facts on one side and carefully-massaged tidbits within shouting distance of the truth on the other.
Frame it nicely, spin it fast enough, tweak it just so, and presto, we have a dispute. That it may be “effective” in keeping alive the conflicting assessments is not the same as saying both parties to these various disagreements are acting with the same motivations or desires to promote the public good and our future well-being. They are not.
Despite the diligent efforts of deniers to assure the public that we’re “not running out of oil” because “human ingenuity” and “technological advancements courtesy of the free market” are resulting in “vastly massive potential” blah, blah, blah, facts still matter. So no matter what the Ingenious Technology Fairy might potentially find, that’s all secondary.
If the tar sands/tight oil and their brethren cannot be extracted at a rate sufficient to meet demand, at affordable costs, in sufficient quantities in timely fashion and of a quality matching the conventional resources which are past peak [just for starters], the Happy Talk is just that. And in uttering those slim on evidence and slimmer on context talking points, another day passes with the public left confused by the merits of arguments offered from each camp, and the easiest option is to simply ignore those contentious debates.
But those matters matter! They matter now, and they will be of even greater and broader significance in the months and years to come as the realities and limitations of geology work their own magic on the optimistic hopes of the few who benefit every day that the public is served less than a full share of facts and truths.
What’s now being relied upon requires more financial investments and greater expenditures of energy to extract, produce, refine, and deliver. It costs more. It’s more challenging to locate and extract. It does not provide the same energy bang for the buck as the finite resource we’ve all been relying upon for nearly two centuries.
Annoying details, but the facts matter. Rate of production matters, too. If one’s go-to people aren’t discussing and explaining these annoying yet vital issues, then they have an agenda different than yours. They do, and that should be obvious by now.
Might be worth pondering how the differing agendas each plays out for all of us.
(Adapted from a 2013 blog >post of mine)
Top Comments Submission Made Easy
|