Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on October 12, 2015
Busting the myth called development
Mansoor Khan wears many hats. An alumnus of IIT Mumbai, Cornell University, New York and MIT, Boston, he chose instead to follow in the footsteps of his illustrious filmmaker father Nasir Hussain and directed some blockbusters like ‘Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak’ (QSQT) and ‘Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikandar’ (JJWS). Then he left the glamour industry to run an organic farm in Coonoor, and at present, the first time author is making time to lecture on his book ‘The Third Curve-The End of Growth As We Know It’ in an aim to educate the public on how we have reached saturation point in our energy consumption. In conversation with NT BUZZ he speaks about his book, tryst with filmmaking and tells us why renewable energy source options are not sustainable
Q: What is ‘The Third Curve-The End of Growth As We Know It’ about?
My book, as the title suggests, explains why the endless economic growth we expect in our current paradigm globally is over. This growth does not happen because of money but because of cheap energy availability and is determined by laws of geology and thermodynamics. The availability of oil, coal and natural gas follows a bell curve which goes up and then down when half the resource is over.
It went up relentlessly from 1750 to 2005 when we reached Peak Oil. This was a prime reason behind the beginning of the industrial age. Now post the peak we are in a global descent of energy and that can only spell the end of industrial and economic growth. This discipline of understanding energy of the true driver of all systems is called energetics and it is not something we can alter or fudge. Economics is a discipline on money and you can fudge it because more money can be printed and fake rules about money like shares, hedge funds and derivatives, which are nothing but numerical jugglery, can always be made-up. This kind of thinking does not alter the availability of energy and resources which fundamentally determine how much growth is possible on a finite planet. In short economies in trouble, banks collapsing, commodity prices increasing and most dangerously- financial bubbles being blown by mainstream financial systems are all signs of energy descent, which means the end of growth. We have to recognise this reality and deal with it by being in sync with it, rather than foolishly insisting our systems can keep growing. That will cause an even worse collapse of financial and social systems in the near future. It is already happening.
Q: What was the turning point in your life that led you address this issue in the form of a book?
I was researching developmental issues in 1997 while trying to defend my land near Mumbai that was to be acquired for the new proposed airport. During my research not only did I become aware of a plethora of environmental and social issues that are consequent to this form of development, but also the reality of Peak Oil. Basically, I became aware of the fact that it is a scientific and geological reality that we get oil (the blood of the industrial world) in the shape of a bell curve irrespective of where we get it from. The bell curve rises steeply in the beginning and slows to a peak when only half the oil is pumped out. After that peak (middle point) it only declines. The problem is not really the end of oil but reaching the middle point beyond which it relentlessly declines. It is very simple- you cannot have growth beyond that point. It was no longer a matter of choice for one to follow the model of perpetual growth because that itself becomes impossible. Our argument with the planners was that with our current model of development we are going to run into a dead end because we simply won’t have the energy to run and maintain them.
Q: In your book you speak about Global Peak Oil and the global meltdown of 2008. It only shows that we have reached a point where we will get less oil, which means less energy from the Earth. But, on the other hand, we as a nation have an idea of development which is purely based on non-renewable energy. Comment.
Renewable energy cannot match what you get from fossil fuels. In fact, all so called renewable energy systems like solar, wind, nuclear, hydro-electric are fundamentally built, run and maintained within a system that runs on fossil fuels. So, it is a myth that they are alternative energy sources. They are nothing but energy converters. You put in a huge amount of fossil fuel energy to run the system that builds and maintains these so called alternative systems and out comes electricity. Electricity does not run the modern industrial world, it is liquid fuels that do. Beyond that we get 6000 by-products from fossil fuels which build our modern industrial world, these are bitumen, plastics, lubricants, synthetic materials, fertilisers, pesticides and so on. You would have to find a replacement for 6000 items which none of the alternatives provide. It is not as simple as what people are told and believe. That is why it is crucial to discuss this subject more widely and scientifically to understand the unique role of fossil fuels that allowed this one-time spurt of growth that we are now taking for granted.
25 Comments on "Busting the myth called development"
Plantagenet on Mon, 12th Oct 2015 7:56 pm
Mr. Khan’s claim that oil production always follows a “bell curve” has been falsified by TOS oil production. US oil production did indeed follow a bell curve from 1856 to ca. 2008, with the peak occurring in 1970 followed by a production decline. But over the last decade US oil production has been going up again, and now is either at or over the prior peak in 1970.
Of course US and global oil production will peak some day, but the claim the oil production always follows a “bell curve” is much oversimplified, and damages the whole idea of peak oil, as it is so clearly wrong.
Cheers!
makati1 on Mon, 12th Oct 2015 8:43 pm
“Renewable energy cannot match what you get from fossil fuels. In fact, all so called renewable energy systems like solar, wind, nuclear, hydro-electric are fundamentally built, run and maintained within a system that runs on fossil fuels. So, it is a myth that they are alternative energy sources….”
The last paragraph is the gold in this mine. Not that it will change the minds of the unicorn hugers that are counting on alternate energy to power their future.
BC on Mon, 12th Oct 2015 10:20 pm
@Plant: Mr. Khan’s claim that oil production always follows a “bell curve” has been falsified by TOS oil production. US oil production did indeed follow a bell curve from 1856 to ca. 2008, with the peak occurring in 1970 followed by a production decline.
https://app.box.com/s/s0wyvm4xh7kvd4fxcwyxx3mfevtf8yub
https://app.box.com/s/8rqnbk0mqgctg7vlt04su71711vumjs9
https://app.box.com/s/znv4wjuy14zhycbh16itks7tt66duln1
https://app.box.com/s/0vgiilt9j85ix0yzaq7zi851zx6qw08x
Per capita, Plant, i.e., the LTG BAU scenario.
It has NOT been falsified per capita. In fact, the US shale boom/bubble is barely a blip along the inexorable log-linear oil depletion regime per capita since 1970.
Had US oil production continued at the long-term trend rate from 1900-20 to 1970 and 1985, US oil production would be ~71Mbd and 26Mbd respectively. 😀
https://app.box.com/s/ys8ijadj4b57nb95ka0b3ilph38ga7fm
https://app.box.com/s/x61sqtg4c3vp1ubo67k8715ulapw35me
https://app.box.com/s/0hroqkg7zym2us8em4k55a36affs4xmc
https://app.box.com/s/npygb8t139jm69yjcz5nhzm8ygibd5pd
Despite the price of WTI having crashed to $45-$50, it’s not “cheap”, as the share of oil consumption to the decelerating rate of final sales means that the economy no longer has the capacity to increase consumption of oil as a share of final sales in order to sustain future growth of oil/kerogen production.
Demand destruction, IOW, brother.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?g=2705
And the decline in the price of WTI is directly attributable to the concurrent crash in the acceleration of the velocity “money”, which is another way of saying that the aggregate of investment, production, revenues, profits, employment, wages, purchasing power, and gov’t receipts is similarly contracting as occurred in 2008, 2001, and the early 1980s.
Again, demand destruction underway, Plant, dude.
And when the price of oil does not exceed $58-$62 in the months ahead and potentially tests $32-$37 or lower, and the global economy rolls over into another deflationary recession, most eCONomists, analysts, and shills of all kinds will profess surprise or shock, just as they did during and after 9/11 and the Lehman take down.
In the context of the global supply-demand dynamic for the price of oil and its (see, a possessive pronoun :-D) consumption as a share of real final sales, there is no “glut” of oil.
In fact, the rate of change of growth of oil production per capita at the current price and consumption as a share of final sales reflects anything but a “glut” at a price that the global economy cannot grow in real terms per capita.
And to the author’s point and mak’s affirmation, without growth of supply of easily accessible, high energy-dense, “cheap” oil that is profitable to extract at increasing supply (and costs), real GDP per capita cannot grow, neither can costlier, lower-quality kerogen extraction, and thus there will be insufficient growth of demand, profits, wages, and gov’t receipts to sustain further build-out at necessary scale of so-called renewables.
Yeah, I know, you still don’t get it.
i1 on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 6:00 am
Dude gets it.
It’s a good thing Alaska’s weather has taken a turn for the warmer.
“Absent any mitigation of these issues, the reliable operating throughput for the
pipeline is about 550,000 BPD un
der normal conditions.”
LOFIS
penury on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 9:34 am
A new day, same old song, Second verse” Too damned many people, finite means. there is an end point. Hubris the belief that “GOD” has your back, and everything will always work out for the wonderful humans.
Dave Thompson on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:03 am
Once more planty ex[pains why he is a compete fucking moron.
ghung on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:03 am
Mak said; “Not that it will change the minds of the unicorn hugers that are counting on alternate energy to power their future.”
Power industrial civilizations future? Not. Power my own future, at least most of it? Absolutely; at least for a while. Get it while you can.
ghung on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:27 am
BTW: sunelec.com is in the last day of a super sale, especially grade B modules. I’ve had great performance from the grade B array I installed about 11 years ago. Grade B modules just have minor defects that don’t affect performance.
Some panels under $.50/watt.
Davy on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:36 am
G-man, thanks for the tip. I am buying panels soon. It may be time now if the price is right.
eugene on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:39 am
The reality is we can rant about whatever. Plant can hate whatever president, we can endlessly debate the time of the “peak”, we can pray for a renewable with the energy content of oil, we can deny climate change and other endless fantasies that all is well. Reality is we’re in a corner there is no way out of. All else is endless chatter.
BC on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:50 am
I have a lengthy response to Plant to refute many of his/her claims (not that s/he will read it or consider the data), but it’s awaiting moderation because of the many chart links included, i.e., the post has presumably been flagged as potential spam.
C’est la vie.
ghung on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 10:52 am
Davy; They’re a wholesaler so you need to move fast. The price of Grade A Suntech STP-280 is $.53 per watt, and I’m getting great performance from the Suntechs I installed a couple of years ago. Grade A Canadian Solar modules are at $.68/watt, outstanding price for Canadians. Avoid the Grade B modules if you plan to go grid-tied. May not pass inspection. Also, may not qualify for tax credits. Depends on your location.
Assumes they haven’t sold out, since they’ve extended the sale a few days. Also, their $530 price on the Outback FM80 charge controller is hard to beat. Love my Outback BOS stuff.
Davy on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 11:12 am
G, outback is what i use in my barn. Has worked flawlessly for 3 years now
BobInget on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 12:48 pm
Your flight to Europe could one day be completely powered by rechargeable batteries.
Elon Musk is convinced that some of the largest vehicles — we’re talking planes and ships — will soon be electric. In an interview with Marketplace on Monday, the Tesla and SpaceX chief spoke of a future in which all manner of conveyances will shift away from traditional energy sources.
“Aircraft and ships, and all other modes of transport, will go fully electric — not half electric, but fully electric,” Musk said. “No question.”
If Musk’s vision comes to be, it would mean a total transformation of some of the world’s most polluting industries. Shipping is estimated to generate nearly 5 percent of the world’s annual greenhouse gases, according to a leaked United Nations report from 2008. Cruise ships are just as guilty — many rely on bunker fuel, which is cheap and releases high levels of pollutants, and dump enormous amounts of sewage and other wastes into bodies of water.
Aviation, meanwhile, is among the fastest-growing causes of carbon emissions. A roundtrip flight between New York and London produces around 2 or 3 tons of carbon dioxide per person, the same amount of emissions released by someone in Europe heating his or her home for an entire year. As more and more people travel by plane, that carbon footprint is only going to grow.
Musk also entertained the possibility of researching electric-powered planes. “I do like the idea of an electric aircraft company. I think one could do a pretty cool supersonic, vertical take-off and landing electric jet,” he said during the Marketplace interview. “I have a design in mind for that.”
Tesla has been at the forefront of bringing (pricey) electric vehicles to the marketplace. Its new Model S sedan is more energy-efficient than previous versions, and the company unveiled an all-electric SUV last month. Tesla isn’t totally immune to criticisms about carbon emissions, though — while its cars run on battery power, most of those batteries likely draw their charges from a power grid that runs on fossil fuels.
ghung on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 1:06 pm
Sure Elon. We can’t even build toy flying drones that can stay up more than a few minutes. Then there’s the problem of getting the electricity to charge these things. How many additional terrawatts will be needed to power all of these new applications you want to sell batteries for?
Davy on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 1:14 pm
Bob, I am pissed at you. I just bit my friggen tongue from your comment. That is a crock of shit. Electric power and especially driven with batteries is never going to be high performance. I am not talking the little bullshit sports cars I am talking big shit like big plane’s, large ships, and heavy equipment. They would likely never scale in time even if a breakthrough happened. In batteries and or electric motors. Yes large electric motors run big equipment but with big fossil fuel power supplies immediately behind them.
Elon is a crock of shit living a high life on tax payers and uninformed investors expense. He is a clown and a fake. He has hoodwinked so many people by being Elon the great.
Now, back to nursing my poor tongue.
yoananda on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 1:23 pm
neither money neither geology drive energy production but innovation.
sometimes we innovate, sometimes we don’t.
We are now facing a period with not enough innovation (in the energy domain).
Bob Owens on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 3:23 pm
If you believe in Solar or not, it doesn’t make any difference. Soon Solar will be all we will have. Can it support our current civilization? Absolutely not. But it can do a fair job. We could easily reduce our energy use by 1/2 without altering our lifestyle much. Just turn off the ACs, ground all planes, only produce 4 cylinder cars reduce all speed limits to 35, and, presto, we are down bu 1/2. At that point Solar has a real chance to support Civilization in a reasonable fashion, if we put in the effort to make it so. Solar can also be sustainable if we want it to be. All the heavy lifting, mining, smelting, has already been done. Recycling of our minerals, metals, everything with a bit of coal to reform them can do the job. But this would require civilization will-power that we currently don’t have and will probably never have. I can dream.
ghung on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 3:53 pm
Yeah, Bob, you use “we” a lot, but their is no ‘we’ when it comes to any sensible collective response.
BTW: ‘WE’ (as in my family) do run ACs off of solar. A well built home that sheds heat in summer, and good management, makes that possible. We mainly cool the house by opening windows and such. How revolutionary is that?
Davy on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 4:35 pm
Bob, what you are talking about may well happen but it will be part of a process that will likely not stabilize. What I mean is we will drop our energy usage and economic activity and adapt and mitigate that somewhat per your description but it will not stabilize there. We are heading down an energy gradient where that ends will likely be post industrial man. Post industrial man has no place for altE.
makati1 on Tue, 13th Oct 2015 9:56 pm
Bob O, The Philippines gets along with about 1/16th the electric that the US uses. Europe gets along with about 1/3. So there is a long way to the bottom for you to fall. A 50% cut is a joke only it is on you.
BTW: coal is not going to power the future in any significant amount. It too is low energy content these days and fast approaching a zero net.
Bob Owens on Wed, 14th Oct 2015 5:10 pm
Ghung, Yes, I agree, there will be no collective response to our problems. It falls to us to serve as examples to our fellow citizens as to how we can live in a civilized world. Not many will listen or care, but there is no other way. We have to walk the talk.
It is possible to live without AC as you prove. When I was a child we had no AC, just big black fans. With appropriate Solar home design we can do a tolerable job without AC. But there would be a long transition; I live in Florida where they have people living in metal boxes (Mobile Homes) that would be unlivable without AC.
Boat on Wed, 14th Oct 2015 9:13 pm
Bob.
2 batteries from Tesla with solar will allow homes to go off grid for days without much sun. After the big plant is built I read the batteries will drop 1/2 in price. Time will tell. Like the IMF we have to wait for the revised numbers after the fact.
Boat on Wed, 14th Oct 2015 9:26 pm
BC,
Look at this chart and explain it to me.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRAPUS2&f=M
Boat on Wed, 14th Oct 2015 9:28 pm
So if fracked oil has such a bad API and is almost 1/2 of US production why did the API not go significantly higher. The chart hardly budges.