Keeping our problems buried

I read a very thought provoking article yesterday on the The Oil Drum by Chris Vernon. Chris's basic premise is that if we can accept that climate change is largely being caused by humans and more specifically by humans burning carbon based fuels (oil, natural gas and coal) then our primary goal has to be to burn less carbon based fuels. We can run around trading carbon credits, planting trees or improving efficiency all we want but if doing these things does not result in less use of carbon based fuels then we haven't really accomplished anything. Chris is saying that by focusing on how we consume carbon based fuels we are missing the real opportunity. The only carbon not going into the atmosphere is carbon then is not produced in the first place. We need to focus on keeping the oil, natural gas and coal in the ground.

To any adherent of the theory of peak oil (peak gas, peak coal), this should really resonate. Becoming super efficient in the use of fossil fuels won't gain you any traction in the fight against global warming. In a world fast approaching peak oil or perhaps even past the peak, demand will always outstrip supply as we move forward. Spare capacity only exists where the cost of oil exceeds the cost of doing without. So far the only players that have been priced out of the oil markets as oil approaches $100 a barrel are poor countries. How much further do we need to go before leaving oil in the ground is more cost effective then producing it for the rich countries?

I have run up against this logic before but never made the link to how it will affect our response to global warming. Jevon's paradox states that increasing efficiency can sometimes lead to higher consumption not lower. We see this paradox in action when we look at CAFE standards (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) in the US. US Congress is currently debating the first increase in CAFE standards in 30 years. The senate already passed the bill and now the battle has moved to congress. The debate isn't on whether or not to increase CAFE standards but by how much. 35mpgby2020 is a lobby group that is pushing for the higher standard of 35mpg by 2020. The auto industry is lobbying for a lower target of 32mpg by 2022. The fact is that the auto industry could meet the higher standard in a couple of years if properly motivated. 35mpg is not a very high bar with the technologies that have been developed over the years. The auto industry has consistently improved fuel efficiency over the years but these improvements have been offset by increasing vehicle weights. Some people even believe the higher standard could be met without decreasing vehicle weights (See Saving Gas and Saving Lives).

Regardless of the outcome of the debate on CAFE standards, any fuel savings (and they are substantial) would only enable the US to drive more. If we are really looking at a near term peak in oil production then CAFE standards won't matter much by 2020 or 2022. In my opinion, whatever gas is being burnt in 13 or 15 years will be burnt as efficiently as possible regardless of what laws are in place.

As long as global oil production and global oil consumption is being driven by market forces, you can be certain that oil will be produced to maximize profits and every drop of oil produced will find an eager buyer. Will oil peak soon enough to save our planet? Can we change the nature of our markets to put the fight against global warming ahead of economics? Will the political will develop to combat climate change before we've done irreversible damage to our climate? I'm not optimistic but I certainly hope so.


velomobility