A
Three Way For The Real Third Way
By Jeff Berg
15 October, 2007
Countercurrents.org
You
know how politicians are always talking about a third way? Bill Clinton
and “Triangulation”, Tony Blair & “The Third Way”,
even the Bush’s had “Compassionate Conservatism” as
their third way. And we all know how sex sells. Which is why I call
this piece written especially for you here today:
A THREE WAY FOR THE REAL
THIRD WAY
“Science – Sustainability
& Distributed Generation in the Information Age”
Two things to start: the
first being, that by every measure we humans can agree on, moving as
quickly as possible to get off of fossil fuels will leave ourselves
and future generations the richest of all possible lives.
The 2nd is that i am not
an environmentalist or even a socialist per se.
Now don’t get me wrong
i completely accept that the weight of scientific evidence proves that
anthropogenic factors are a major contributor to climate change &
I too think Tommy Douglas was the greatest Canadian.
I also accept the consensus
among marine biologists that states that if we don’t change our
fishing practices we are going to collapse fish stocks so thoroughly
that all commercial fisheries will be wiped out by 2048! And i do see
how this problem is being generated by the economic distortions known
as net present value, future discounting & the maximization of shareholder
profit and so is a social issue.
So yes in the sense that
i believe the scientists’ information I’m an environmentalist
& a socialist. Or at least i am when these movements are in alignment
with the best available information. This point notwithstanding the
subjects that i write about aren’t so much about what’s
coming out of the tailpipe in terms of emissions as they are about what’s
going into the industrial engine in terms of fossil fuels.
And the message that i am
involved in massaging for the purpose of increasing its general consumption
is about the increasingly strong consensus that is taking place in the
field of resource geology and petroleum and mining engineering about
the future of coal, oil, gas and even uranium.
-In a word ENERGY is my bailiwick-
And speaking about the future
of energy how many of you here feel you have a strong understanding
of the term peak oil or peak gas? Please raise your hands (less than
half did)
One last question how many
of you believe that oil and gas are finite? Please raise your hands
if you think oil is finite. (all but one did)
Exactly!
Which is why I prefer the
term fossil fuel finitude over peak oil. Everyone gets that this stuff
is finite. And once you dispose of that fact the whole rest of the sound
and fury surrounding the peak oil & gas & coal & uranium
debate is about nothing more than timing and urgency.
Not that timing and urgency
are unimportant by any means. They are after all near and dear to my
heart very precisely because i know how little understood are the necessary
lead times for the ramp up to sustainable systems and how pressing is
the urgency that we do everything possible in this direction now!
Fossil fuel finitude has
been shall we say misunderestimated. Unsurprisingly it is also one of
the few things that GW jr. Has not been guilty of doing.
My favourite line concerning
the reams of “Is peak oil just a theory?” literature was
actually told to me by a climate scientist. U of T's very own dr. Danny
Harvey, a lead author of the IPCC's AR4. What he said was: "Peak
Oil is a just theory in the same sense that Round Earth is just a theory."
On the other extreme from
those like me who are studying fossil fuel finitude and peak energy
are the environmentalists who think the whole peak oil debate is pointless.
In fact one of the best environmental
minds in Ontario, now a Toronto city councillor, Gord Perks, said just
that this summer to myself and Greg Greene the director of two documentaries
on peak oil and gas, The End of Suburbia and Escape from Suburbia.
What Mr. Perks said verbatim
was, “Peak oil’s a crock!” And yes he did say it with
a smile and with an intention to rile. Still why he said it is for the
very same reasons a lot of environmentalists say it. Which basically
comes down to two reasons. Reason #1.
1) To them if we burn what
we have we’re cooked anyway, so what does peak oil matter? &
2) Because they think to
themselves, even if only privately, “we’re running out of
cog? Good can’t happen soon enough!”
COG is by the way how I refer
to the trinity of fossil fuels Coal, Oil and Gas as they are the cog
to our industrial wheel. Whether it be a holy or unholy trinity I leave
to you.
And even after five years
of banging my head against the wall of indifference on the issue that
I have chosen to specialize in still I say. I hear you and you are not
wrong.
But! Yes the proverbial but.
The thing is energy matters!
For one thing people want it. I can’t tell you how many people
I’ve heard say, “Ya, ya, the greenies. All they care about
is the planet; they don’t care about the people!” This is
of course not a socialists’ problem but people nonetheless wonder
where is the guts and the nuts and bolts of the NDP's energy plans?
People want the services
that fossil fuel energy today provides and I got to say on this one
I side with the people. Because if you don’t care deeply about
energy & fully attend to all it does negative and positive then
you are not truly caring about the people in an effective and responsible
way. Point finale, full stop!
It truly is that profoundly
and fundamentally simple in this global warming and fossil fuel finitude
parmetered world of ours.
And yes if we were to stop
using all COG tomorrow the planet would be happier ; and the plants
and the animals would be happier, and more abundant, and prolific which
has a certain amount of attraction to it. But at the same time if we
stopped using cog tomorrow a whole lot of people would die prematurely
as well.
How many? Well I’m
no expert in this area but I can tell you since the start of the oil
part of COG in 1856 we have gone from 1.2 billion to 6.7 billion.
Beyond that straightforward
fact I am as I say no expert. And in any case we don’t have time
to today to go into this aspect of the energy, sustainability and carrying
capacity debate. Suffice to say if you don’t make energy a centrepiece
of whatever sustainability and social justice programs you’d like
to see implemented then you are economically and therefore politically
and culturally dead from the get go.
Now there is no doubt that
this fact has begun to penetrate deeply into the environmental community.
The NDP’s energy platform this past provincial election here in
Ontario (thank you peter Tabuns), the work of Pembina, WWF, sierra,
Greenpeace, Environmental Defence, ICF International and Science for
Peace among others, including our government staff researchers and scientists
who were part of the national round table on economy and the environment
are very clear proof of this.
And speaking of proof I could
have talked to you today about geoscience, linearization curves, creaming
curves, pool size distribution, tectonic plate theory and what the fractal
law of self similarity tells us about the possible range of extraction
rates that we can expect as we make our way to “Ultimate Recoverability.”
I could have talked about
the various forecasts that are being made for the end in the growth
of supply of hydrocarbons and even uranium and sought to prove to you
that the consensus among resource geologists is now for all intents
and purposes as strong and meaningful to the future of humanity as the
consensus that exists among climatologists.
I could have prattled on
about why ASPO’s & EWG'S and IFE's analysis is more reliable
than the EIA and the IEA and even the EIEIO. I could have explained
why production is a better indicator of the future of reserves than
reserves are of future production .
I could have talked to you
about the findings of Dr. Stuart Staniford and the data gnomes at the
oil drum and throughout the U.S. and what Mathew Simmons study of over
200 technical papers from the society of petroleum engineers and his
book ‘Twilight in the Desert’ says about global oil production.
But these are not the facts
that matter to you. These are merely the means necessary to vanquish
the deniers. You all know that we have to get off oil and you all know
that 95% of all transportation is today wholly dependent on oil. That’s
why you have added this section to your conference. You are ready to
move on the next stage of the energy discussion and the why doesn’t
matter so much anymore.
The facts you need to know
are that the U.S. General Accounting Office’s most recent finding
is that if the U.S. pushes hard in the direction of biofuels it might
get up to 4% of current liquid fuel consumption by 2015. In numerical
terms this translates to less than 1 MMb/d. In other words no matter
what you think of biofuels they are no silver bullet for business as
usual.
To my mind in any case Fidel
Castro got it right in an essay published on the internet a few months
ago when he called the biofuel revolution the ‘Internationalization
of Genocide’. This summer saw corn riots among Mexican peasants
because they now have to economically compete with the biofuel market
for their corn flower tortillas.
Another fact you need to
know as we battle to get off the sauce and save our transportation system
is that the hydrogen transportation economy is an impossibility from
the basic standpoint of the fundamental laws of physics.
Not to mention the fact that
virtually all hydrogen today in North America is made by burning natural
gas. The techno “solution” being proposed for this problem?
Nuclear fired electricity.
How ruinous would a hydrogen
economy diversion be? Let me count out for you just one of the ways.
If you start with a 100 barrels
of natural gas energy and convert it into electricity for the electrolysis
needed to create hydrogen; and then you store that hydrogen in a fuel
cell; and then you step on what is still very much your gas pedal powered
car; you will have lost more than 50% of the energy you started with
to unavoidable physical laws. Much better to heat or cook with this
non-renewable fuel. Or at the very least use it for a source point heat
purpose.
To instead now start entirely
new industries that will act as competitors for corn and natural gas
and electricity at a time when natural gas is ready to go off a cliff
here in N.A. in terms of production & when there are people that
are going hungry would be the height of car addicted folly. It is true
I know that we have paid every other possible obeisance to our metal
gods but are we now really going to feed the car and our war machines
our heat and food? Really? Sigh!
By the way many an environmentalist
& others got caught out by these developments thinking them great
green ideas and lending them their greenwashing support. And the reason
that this happened is because they did not pay attention to the energy
analysis. The nub of the matter.
The other nub of the matter
is that the problem of energy as it relates to the environment, transportation,
sustainable systems and social justice is not really a technical problem
but a social one. Which is why it can be so useful to the New Democratic
Party.
Oh sure there’s an
essentially infinite number of things that will need to be done from
an engineering p.o.v as we make our way off the sauce that even GW jr.
knows we are addicted to (addiction being something that he actually
knows something about) but that’s really just a chat about job
opportunities.
The real problem is not this,
the real problem is the social problem we face. That problem being that
too many people believe & are afraid that the real third way - sustainability
& social justice – demands they lose their creature comforts.
The solution to this is very
simple. All we need do is to reassure them that we love comfort just
as much as they do. Which is after all nothing less than god’s
honest truth. Ashes & sackcloth is not what we are practicing or
preaching.
After this is done what we
then need do is to utilize the minds in the fields of energy, geology,
economics and environmentalism who can illuminate for the public that
it is in fact their governments and their industries that are involved
via a conspiracy of dunces to fail away those very comforts that we
are trying to save for them.
Socialists have never in
fact had a problem with comfort. Their problem, and a legitimate one
it is, is that the way our systems are going about creating our comfort
is ensuring that many other people end up really depressingly poor and
uncomfortable. The good news today is that this is also viewed as a
problem by just about everybody. And yes some do less about it than
others it’s true, but this fact notwithstanding everybody but
everybody today at least pays this issue lip service and that wasn’t
always true.
That it is so completely
true today is a political advance & a significant evolution in human
thinking.
The bad news is if we do
not change business as usual a whole lot more of us are going to end
up in the depressingly uncomfortable category.
People very much need to
understand that this is one of the very real implications of the fact
that we have essentially come to the end of the growth in fossil fuel
availability. People in Canada and the U.S. also need to know that this
is especially true here in N.A.! The tarsands notwithstanding!
A great many of our citizens
are being put in grave jeopardy of becoming part of the depressingly
poor ‘others-class’ and since its true anyway we may as
well sell this fact as a political and environmental & conservational
tool. Sure a lot will not pay attention until they actually get whacked
but we must do this work now if we expect to be listened to then.
When our middle class does
finally get hit it will help a great deal with the enlistment of new
supporters, but even this will not count as much comfort to most.
As for the political competition
and how to manoeuvre the other parties to try and out compete us on
these issues, truer words were never spoke than these: “A moral
threat may serve to change your rulers rhetoric, but an economic one
will change their behaviour.” Senor Juan G. Carbonel.
This economic threat will
more importantly also serve to clinch the argument for conservation,
relocalized economies, a reinvigoration of our appreciation for our
neighbours, walkable communities and a slower pace of life, not to mention
the successful selling of the virtue of a simpler lifestyle.
It will even extend to include
the fact that the potential of ‘Distributed and micro generation
of energy in the information age’, the age of the great neurally
wired collective mind that the internet has made possible, very certainly
represents the greatest opportunity for real power to the people in
every sense of that phrase that the world has ever seen.
And I say again to you that
what stands in our way is not primarily a technical challenge. Once
we get started down the implementation road in a major way it will be
readily apparent to everyone just about immediately - if not sooner
- how much work/ employment opportunity is ahead of us. What stands
in our way is what has always stood in our way. The problem of capital
and its infinitely mutable talent for concentration and inexpert and
uncreative destruction.
Before all else what lies
before us is the challenge of putting into place the mechanisms that
prioritize best in class data and peer reviewed information far above
dollar concerns and even higher above $ interests. The fact of one dollar
one vote must go the way of all slave and chattel concepts and become
as odious.
To my mind events have redefined
left and right.
With freedom of information
as the new left and monetization as the new right.
Or as my more poetic friend
senor Carbonel puts it: “Today information is the new left, money
on the other hand is very much still the old right. The scientists is
who they are battling over.”
And as it is very much a
zero sum battle between these two combatants for diminishing resources
and the world's greatest minds there is no real room for compromise.
And since we are going to have to enlist all but everybody if we are
truly serious about winning this fight this means that we are going
to need to be far more flexible and inclusive than we have ever been
before.
Now to some of you no doubt
this kind of rah rah is beside the point and you’d like more steak
to go with the sizzle. If that be the case then I very cordially invite
you to Post Carbon Toronto’s next three events. And I sorta wonder
why you weren’t at our last five. Because this spring on May 24
as part of Doors Open Toronto and the Festival of Architecture and Design
we had engineer Greg Allen and climate scientist Dr. Danny Harvey detail
the challenges of energy and emissions and the many solutions that are
already available to architects and engineers.
This summer we had dr. Gordon
laxer from the parkland institute telling us about the book he is writing
about energy security, sustainability, global warming , NAFTA's energy
provisions and SPP.
We then had Dr. Richard Gilbert
present us with the data sets and information from his new book Transport
Revolutions which you all should buy if you are genuinely serious about
this subject as his book is entirely focused on post carbon transportation
solutions.
We then had geoscientist
David Hughes in Toronto city hall council chamber, fresh from 35 years
of research for NRCAN, the Canadian Geological Survey and the Canadian
Gas Potential Committee detailing for us the inconvenient truths about
fossil fuels for N.A. and the globe.
For the last 150 years we
in N.A. have been uniquely advantaged in terms of fundamental resources
this worm has now very much turned.
We followed this presentation
up the very next day with a meeting featuring once again Mr. Hughes
this time along with the irrepressible Ralph Torrie from ICF International
and Cherise Burda from Pembina. Each of them handing out free of charge
more meaty data than most can handle in one sitting.
We then we had Dr. Gilbert
again, this time reporting on the events of the global conference on
energy held by the geoscientists at ASPO in Cork, Ireland. It was attended
by 400 scientists, researchers, writers and interested citizens and
the presentations that were seen there are available on DVD. This DVD
too is very much worth buying if only because it was at this conference
that the arguments for nuclear power were demolished from the technical
standpoint of the paucity of uranium rich veins to bleed into our proposed
reactors.
Everyone of these events
was held within walking distance of the subway, most of them in fact
happened inside Toronto’s city hall, and Post Carbon Toronto both
invited and kept abreast of each event our Mayor and city Councillors.
Next up this month on October
24 we have Paul gypped who was one of the driving forces behind the
standard offer contract that was so instrumental in moving Ontario from
a few to 700 windmills over the last four years. We then in the middle
of November have David Lerch the author of Post Carbon Cities and at
the end of the month we finish off our year long program of monthly
public lectures & outreach by showing a DVD on biofuels featuring
dr. David Fridley.
A DVD that scientifically
debunks corn ethanol as a sustainable biofuel and very clearly illuminates
the limitations of biomass fuel en todo. Dr. Fridley by the way is employed
as a staff scientist at Lawrence Berkeley national laboratory. Since
its inception this lab has won 11 Nobel prizes.
So yes we at PCT can put
some meat on the bones of this argument if and when you like. And yes
I could have made this talk more data driven but I think at a forum
such as this it is far more important to make the point that what is
really needed is to point out to social justice advocates and environmentalists
that peak energy clinches the argument for conservation of all kinds.
Not just of the environment but also a very, very, deep conservation
of fossil fuels as well.
The simplest solution to
the problem of GHG’s and global warming is after all to keep hydrocarbons
sequestered right where they currently are. Admittedly effecting such
an outcome is a mite more complicated but starting by dedicating their
use for the sole purpose of the building of sustainable systems is an
idea whose time has come.
For once you think even a
little bit about the shape and scope of the energy/emissions problem
we face it is not all that difficult to come to the realization that
the deep conservation of fossil fuels, and their almost complete dedication
to nothing but the creation of sustainable systems, ties very neatly
and directly into what we need to do to save the planet from our mismanagement.
If only because conservation is from the most selfish of perspectives
what is best for ourselves & the creature comforts with which we
are so sensibly enamoured.
This is so because peak energy
in fact totally and utterly slam dunks the argument for conservation.
Again, if only because it is such a potent economic threat to the established
order.
And don’t think for
one second that the military industrial complex and the pentagon and
the CIA and the NSA haven’t picked up on this fact and are not
planning to use it to advantage their world view. Believe you me that
ain’t the case. For example just this past September at the 6th
ASPO conference, James R. Schlesinger said: “Conceptually the
battle is over.. The Peakists have won – everyone is a Peakist
now.” Schlesinger for those of you who may not know is a former
U.S. Secretary of Defence, former head of the CIA, and was the very
first minister for energy in the U.S.a. in other words this is one of
the most connected and influential militarists in the whole damned white
world.
And while its true that environmentalists
& social workers can ignore fossil fuel depletion and, unlike engineers
and militarists, go back to their work with a clean conscience. They
cannot do so and win! And really people it is now officially past time
for the forces of life to win.
Which means that it is also
past time that the environmental and social movements reach out and
fully embrace their natural allies in the peak energy movement.
Today all but everybody,
thanks to the environmental pioneers, understands just how right these
folk always were about the living systems crash we are enacting.
And “thanks”
to the disastrous failure of Pax Americana as practiced by Cheney, Rumsfeld,
Blair & Brown all but all of the techs and geeks and engineers get
the peril that genuine socialists have long been detailing.
We all get the peril. It
is time you all got the potential that lies begging.
Because for all the rightness
of the environmental arguments and for all the virtue of the socialist
positions the fact is that emissions and military spending are still
rising and they are doing so at an increasing rate.
And while fossil fuels and
uranium may be limited, and will fix both of these problems eventually,
even if we do nothing, this will not be sufficient to the task of saving
us from ourselves.
It really is time to end
the car culture, Nascar and Indie car and Formula 1 and motocross and
funny cars and drag racing and demolition derbies and monster trucks.
It is time to end the obscenity of $1.2 trillion yearly spent on creating
things that go boom. Over half of that being spent by the U.S.
Canada FYI is actually 12th
in the world in military spending and 7th in the OECD in absolute terms.
And that’s before our PM Harper and the bipartisan consensus among
the conservatives and the liberals finishes muscularizing our military.
For Christ and our sake -
if we as a people won’t abide by the moral threat implicit in
renouncing our Christian and secular moral values – will we not
then at least listen to the arguments of the moneylenders and the security
professionals who have proved that militarism drains the treasury and
not the swamp?
Dead ahead is one of the
greatest revolutions human society has ever seen and by hook or by crook
it will take place even if we make no choices. Geology alone makes this
inevitable. If best information dominates the policy process as we move
forward to meet the enormous challenges facing us then we can use this
unavoidably radical transformation to gain more social justice and a
higher quality of life.
If instead we fail again
and let consumption manage us and not us it, I’m guaranteeing
here and now that energy fascism is the jackboot that we will all be
ground under.
Most of the rest of the world
gets this already. They do not hate us for our freedoms they hate us
for the insane recklessness and abuse of freedom that our everyday fossil
fuel lifestyle screams at them.
And who can blame them?
Thank you for listening.
Jeff Berg
October, 13, 2007.
Extended version of a speech
given to the Ontario Socialist Caucus Conference held at the Ontario
Institute for Science and Education.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.