|
Archived Articles
Business Needs Rules to Cooperate |
Abundance and Balance
A recent report put out by the CIA estimates that 80% of the world's known reserves for oil are still underground along with 95% of natural gas. Coal reserves will last hundreds of years even with increased consumption. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated the value of methane hydrates in the United States at 320,000 trillion cubic feet of gas, 200 times conventional natural gas resources reserves in the country. There are a couple of serious issues surrounding our current energy sources. First, there are fossil fuels (which is a misnomer these days) or non-renewables. That they are non-renewable in and of themselves is not a problem except for the fact that one day, we will run out. The issue we have today is that we have not learned how to use these fuels efficiently (although there are some exciting advances on the horizon). As a result, by-products from these fuels are usually sent out into the air we breathe or into the water we drink. The unused components cause us great difficulty when concentrated in one area (large cities such as Houston or Los Angeles, or in the Northeastern U.S.). One of the biggest culprits in many of these areas is the automobile. Human health is greatly affected by these concentrated by-products as a result. Second, we get about half of our energy, in the form of petroleum, from foreign sources. This dependence has a very large consequence for our economy. The U.S. has spent hundreds of billions-maybe even trillions-of dollars to defend these supplies over the last 50 years. Tack onto that the cost of a gallon of gas and you'll soon find out that this "cheap" supply isn't so cheap ("True Cost" article). Now, buying petroleum from foreign suppliers is not such a bad thing if you can get it from your friends. Oil has been a big help for some developing countries (when the revenues have been applied to benefit the public at large and not just to make the rulers rich). It has helped shift some of the wealth from the developed nations to those still trying to get off the ground. Abundant Alternatives Most of the low-cost, easily accessible sources of oil in the U.S. have been depleted. The more controversial, new sources found in the U.S. (the Alaskan wilderness or off shore in places like California, Florida and the Gulf of Mexico) are difficult to get to and potentially damaging to the environment. As a result, technology and science take a backseat to politics as groups line up on both sides of the issue. The argument against drilling is "Why should we take a chance in spoiling this beautiful natural area for the sake of a few months of oil?" Proponents say, "We need to be less dependent on foreign oil and there is minimal risk to the environment, and collectively, all these domestic sources translate into years of supply and many more American jobs." The opponents say they want tougher mileage standards for autos and more efforts placed on conservation and on renewables to lessen the demand for foreign oil, relieving the pressure to drill for oil in sensitive areas. The proponents speak to the fact that we have many sources of oil in the U.S., which we can tap into, with little risk. Many of these sources are available today. Renewables will take years to put in place to offset the demand for oil. Remember, the car is the biggest culprit. Best estimates see a twenty-year transition from the internal combustion engine to electric-drive technologies powered by fuel cells (California Fuel Cell Partnership hopes to see sales of fuel-cell electric-drive cars reach 40,000 by 2010) or batteries. So what do we do in the meantime? Balance It's a simple word, and we need to keep it in mind. It's the fundamental principle in nature. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Nature always comes back into balance. The change that many groups are pushing for is already underway and, as a result, the battle for sensible alternatives is over. We are moving toward cleaner and cleaner technologies whether these sources are renewable or non-renewable. The global community understands and wants this. It will take time. But the course correction has been made. Most agree that this is occurring, but it is the rate of change that is important. Sooner is better in some people's minds. Others think that if we move too fast, we will disrupt the economy, causing greater problems. Some think if we move too slowly, we will cause irreparable damage to the ecosystem. These people urge a "Manhattan-like" program to make this transition. You really don't have to go any further than your own backyard to see this transition starting to take place. Driven by Federal (and even tougher State) laws, communities are looking for solutions to local problems to help them meet mandated guidelines or to meet the expectations of the local citizenry. NIMBY (Not in my backyard) is alive and well. I don't know of anyone who disagrees with the idea that our water and air should be clean. Everyone supports these efforts to one degree or another. Most argue over the fine points as they try to balance the need for air that's a bit cleaner and the economic result that change may have on the community. First and foremost, we have to have our health. I can't believe anyone would argue that point. Then, a strong, vibrant economy is also important for any community. Of course, it's all relative but, in general, we need jobs so that we can live comfortable, quality lives. There is a lot of thinking around "quality of life" as well. So, again, we come back to balance. We have to continually work to keep all these factors in mind. The sky is not falling! On both sides of the environmental issues groups have based their existence on the need to continue the fight. Some take a more thoughtful, constructive approach to the issue, while others consistently spew out rhetoric to enrage and confuse. In the states of Texas, South Dakota and Kansas, there are enough wind resources to meet all the electricity needs of the entire U.S. And guess who gets paid every time a new windmill goes up on their farm? A square meter of earth receives 180 watts of electricity. Add it up; that's a lot of electricity on a sunny day. In one minute, enough solar energy strikes earth to power the entire planet for a year. If you want to get a sense of what's going on, globally, take a look at the CIA sponsored Global Trends 2000. You can find it on the web at: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/globaltrends2015/index.html. It's approximately 100 pages in length, but it will give you an overview of the big-picture issues facing the U.S. and the planet. Of course, it's from a U.S. perspective, but you'll see how connected the U.S. is becoming to the rest of the world. Many believe that countries like ours (the U.S.) should dramatically reduce their energy usage since we use a disproportionate amount. I think we need to use our energy efficiently. Again, the real issue isn't energy, but rather, pollution. I also believe that our drive to become more efficient may have a dramatic effect on the developing countries, a real concern for environmentalists. The great new technologies and advances in efficiencies will most likely come from Europe, the United States or Japan. One of the big problems in the developing world is that they don't have the infrastructure to support their growth. People flock to the cities, where some infrastructure exists, to get jobs and services they can't get in their rural communities. They will be the beneficiaries of new technologies which will be much more efficient than those which built our "developed" societies. They will not have to wire remote areas to connect their populations. They, instead, will use locally generated power (because it will be cheaper) and wireless communications (cell or satellite) and satellite television. We see this already happening. Much of what environmental groups would like to have happen here in the States, may actually happen there, first. It will be the continuing developments driven by the developed economies and market forces, which will allow underdeveloped countries to leverage these incredible technologies for a fraction of the price of the traditional wired infrastructures. In the not-too-distant future, the developing countries like China and Brazil will begin to equal their developed counterparts in energy usage. We will continue to use energy more and more efficiently and they-as a result of their 7 to 8 % growth rates-will use more and more energy in support of their growing economies. Their successful growth will mean that their industries will have to be globally competitive. To do that, they will have to have world-class efficiencies. Much of the efficiencies will be learned from the developed countries and some will be the inspiration of local entrepreneurs. In any case, we will not see crazy, unrestricted global growth, but rather well thought-out, structured and very efficient growth. We aren't there today, but we are moving in that direction. It all comes down to efficient use of resources. How do we best do this? How do we best use our fresh water supplies and our non-renewable energy sources? How quickly should we ramp up our renewable sources of energy? If we truly allow the market forces to drive this change, then it will happen sooner rather than later. Ray Rasmussen is the founder of The New Environmentalist, an online magazine dedicated reducing resource waste by ten percent by reaching 15 million to Over the next five years, we will work to reach fifteen million people over a five year period. This article appears in the March 2002 issue of The New Environmentalist (thenewenvironmentalist.com). |
