For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
Let's get real here folks. Why are there such doomer forecasts? Maybe it's because a bit of homework has been done about the Big Picture. Hydrocarbon depletion is going to change the world. Some think for the better soon, some eventually, some never. Mad Max.
I tend to look at our limitations to bear the brunt of this storm. We know that whatever we do, it will require trillions of dollars of investment in infrastructure. Money that we don't have unless we "print it" causing hyperinflation.
Building new nuclear plants, transmission lines (more important than the plants, I'll have you know), ramping up coal production, hydrogen facilities, LNG tankers, etc. Massive new infrastructure.
No problem, you say? Well, let's have a look at our "current" infrastructure, shall we? After all, this is America, the "can do" place. We have built the best crap anywhere, right? So, let's see how we are doing, cause if we are not doing well, we don't have a snowballs chance in hell in building the required infrastructure to deal with peak oil.
The American Society of Civil Engineers assembled a panel of 24 of the nation’s leading civil engineers, analyzed hundreds of studies, reports and other sources, and surveyed more than 2,000 engineers to determine what was happening in the field.
Here is their report.
The American Society of Civil Engineers' 2005 Report Card for America's Infrastructure
Quote:
Congested highways, overflowing sewers and corroding bridges are constant reminders of the looming crisis that jeopardizes our nation's prosperity and our quality of life. With new grades for the first time since 2001, our nation's infrastructure has shown little to no improvement since receiving a collective D+ in 2001, with some areas sliding toward failing grades.
Aviation D+
Gridlock on America’s runways eased from crisis levels earlier in the decade due
to reduced demand and recent modest funding increases. However, air travel and
traffic have reportedly surpassed pre Sept. 11 levels and are projected to grow
4.3% annually through 2015. Airports will face the challenge of accommodating
increasing numbers of regional jets and new superjumbo jets.
Bridges C
Between 2000 and 2003, the percentage of the nation’s 590,750 bridges rated
structurally deficient or functionally obsolete decreased slightly from 28.5% to
27.1%. However, it will cost $9.4 billion a year for 20 years to eliminate all bridge
deficiencies. Longterm underinvestment is compounded by the lack of a Federal
transportation program.
Dams D
Since 1998, the number of unsafe dams has risen by 33% to more than 3,500.
While federally owned dams are in good condition, and there have been modest
gains in repair, the number of dams identified as unsafe is increasing at a faster
rate than those being repaired. $10.1 billion is needed over the next 12 years to
address all critical nonfederal dams—dams which pose a direct risk to human life
should they fail.
Drinking Water D–
America faces a shortfall of $11 billion annually to replace aging facilities and
comply with safe drinking water regulations. Federal funding for drinking water in
2005 remained level at $850 million, less than 10% of the total national
requirement. The Bush administration has proposed the same level of funding for
FY06.
Energy (National Power Grid) D
The U.S. power transmission system is in urgent need of modernization. Growth
in electricity demand and investment in new power plants has not been matched
by investment in new transmission facilities. Maintenance expenditures have
decreased 1% per year since 1992. Existing transmission facilities were not
designed for the current level of demand, resulting in an increased number of
‘bottlenecks’ which increase costs to consumers and elevate the risk of blackouts.
Hazardous Waste D
Federal funding for ‘Superfund’ cleanup of the nation’s worst toxic waste sites has
steadily declined since 1998, reaching its lowest level since 1986 in FY05. There
are 1,237 contaminated sites on the National Priorities List, with possible listing of
an additional 10,154. In 2003, there were 205 U.S. cities with ‘brownfields’ sites
awaiting cleanup and redevelopment. It is estimated that redevelopment of those
sites would generate 576,373 new jobs and $1.9 billion annually for the economy.
Navigable Waterways D–
A single barge traveling the nation’s waterways can move the same amount of
cargo as 58 semi-trucks at one-tenth the cost—reducing highway congestion and
saving money. Of the 257 locks on the more than 12,000 miles of inland
waterways operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, nearly 50% are
functionally obsolete. By 2020, that number will increase to 80%. The cost to
replace the present system of locks is more than $125 billion.
Public Parks & Recreation C
Many of our nation’s public parks, beaches and recreational harbors are falling
into a state of disrepair. Much of the initial construction of roads, bridges, utility
systems, shore protection structures and beaches was done more than 50 years
ago. These facilities are anchors for tourism and economic development and
often provide the public’s only access to the country’s cultural, historic and natural
resources. The National Park Service estimates a maintenance backlog of $6.1
billion for their facilities. Additionally, there is great need for maintenance,
replacement and construction of new infrastructure in our nation’s state and
municipal park systems.
Railroads C
For the first time since World War II, limited rail capacity has created significant
chokepoints and delays. This problem will increase as freight rail tonnage is
expected to increase at least 50% by 2020. In addition, the use of rail trackage for
intercity passenger and commuter rail service is increasingly being recognized as
a worthwhile transportation investment. Congestion relief, improved safety,
environmental and economic development benefits result from both freight and
passenger market shifts to rail creating a rational for public sector investment. The
freight railroad industry needs to spend $175-$195 billion over the next 20 years
to maintain existing infrastructure and expand for freight growth. Expansion of the
railroad network to develop intercity corridor passenger rail service is estimated to
cost approximately $60 billion over 20 years. All told, investment needs are $12-13
billion per year.
Roads D
Poor road conditions cost U.S. motorists $54 billion a year in repairs and
operating costs—$275 per motorist. Americans spend 3.5 billion hours a year
stuck in traffic, at a cost of $63.2 billion a year to the economy. Total spending of
$59.4 billion annually is well below the $94 billion needed annually to improve
transportation infrastructure conditions nationally. While long-term Federal
transportation programs remain unauthorized since expiring on Sept. 30, 2003,
the nation continues to shortchange funding for needed transportation
improvements.
Schools D
The Federal government has not assessed the condition of America’s schools
since 1999, when it estimated that $127 billion was needed to bring facilities to
good condition. Other sources have since reported a need as high as $268 billion.
Despite public support of bond initiatives to provide funding for school facilities,
without a clear understanding of the need, it is uncertain whether schools can
meet increasing enrollment demands and the smaller class sizes mandated by
the No Child Left Behind Act.
Security I
While the security of our nation’s critical infrastructure has improved since Sept.
11, the information needed to accurately assess its status is not readily available
to engineering professionals. This information is needed to better design, build
and operate the nation's critical infrastructure in more secure ways. Security
performance standards, measures and indices need to be developed, and funding
must be focused on all critical infrastructure sectors, beyond aviation.
Solid Waste C+
The nation’s operating municipal landfills are declining in total numbers, but
capacity has remained steady due to the construction of numerous regional
landfills. In 2002, the United States produced 369 million tons of solid waste of all
types. Only about a quarter of that total was recycled or recovered.
Mass Transit D+
Transit use increased faster than any other mode of transportation—up 21%—
between 1993 and 2002. Federal investment during this period stemmed the
decline in the condition of existing transit infrastructure. The reduction in federal
investment in real dollars since 2001 threatens this turnaround. In 2002, total
capital outlays for transit were $12.3 billion. The Federal Transit Administration
estimates $14.8 billion is needed annually to maintain conditions, and $20.6
billion is needed to improve to “good” conditions. Meanwhile, many major transit
properties are borrowing funds to maintain operations, even as they are
significantly raising fares and cutting back service.
Waste water D–
Aging wastewater management systems discharge billions of gallons of untreated
sewage into U.S. surface waters each year. The EPA estimates that the nation
must invest $390 billion over the next 20 years to replace existing systems and
build new ones to meet increasing demands. Yet, in 2005, Congress cut funding
for wastewater management for the first time in eight years. The Bush
administration has proposed a further 33% reduction, to $730 million, for FY06.
America‛s Infrastructure G.P.A. = D
Total Investment Needs = $1.6 Trillion
(estimated 5-year need—does not include security investment needs)
A = Exceptional
B = Good
C = Mediocre
D = Poor
F = Failing
I = Incomplete
Each category was evaluated on the basis of condition and performance, capacity vs. need, and funding vs. need.
I haven’t posted in a while, so here’s my current take on things. The main problem we are facing is that peak-oil is tomorrow in planning terms. This is where the “doomers” have the upper hand in the argument, all alternatives aside. The debate over "Peak Oil" itself is already over, in my opinion. It no longer matters whether peak oil theory is proven or disproven, because there isn't time left to do either, much less powerdown or come up with a techno-fix. Events in the world are revealing to us the only truth that matters: that a desperate resource war is emergent, one that will not be won by trade sanctions, saber-rattling, or technology. This is the only issue which should now be under scrutiny by those who wish to “Outwit, Outplay, Outlast."
The oil futures market has already accepted the long-term "bull market" in oil prices due to increasing demand. What they don't yet grasp is the coming "supply" problem. When this begins to dawn on them, and it could absolutely happen as quickly as within the next few months—given the current shortfall projections I have been reading as of late—then seemingly overnight the world will start to come apart at the seams. Crude oil prices will go through the roof. The commodity traders live solely by anticipating conditions and events, not by debating them.
Two other factors will have a major effect on the near future:
1) URR (ultimate recoverable reserves) there must be more transparency so that hard numbers can be run. If not, it is anybody’s guess here.
2) What will the rate of depletion be? Will it be exacerbated by “technology” and fools who will just steepen the curve through desperate water-cut or other production fixes? What if they blow-out Ghawar with this strategy? This really concerns me….
Energy investment banker Matthew Simmons put it quite succinctly: "The problem is that the world has no Plan B." After all, no one of any power significance (primarily the USA) is addressing the threat which most scientists/ecologists see to the future of the planet with regard to energy use, global warming, and their interrelationships with a growth-based economy. There is no grand scale movement to power-down or institute energy efficiency or conservation. There is no grand scale movement to develop alternative energies. We can debate this until the cows come home, but on a global scale, it is not happening. Locally, it can mean everything.
My best argument, that I suppose makes me a “doomer” is that the physical and chemical versatility of oil, combined with its high energy density, are such that no other known energy source can serve as a full or even adequate substitute. Energy density is the ratio of available energy per pound. For example: Gasoline’s energy density is 13,500 Wh/Kg (watt hours per kilogram) Ethanol, the often toted “replacement” is 7,850 Wh/Kg . Not nearly the bang for the buck as gasoline. The tide will turn on this fact alone.
Like I have been saying since I started posting, it’s all about rate and magnitude. We can't assume that somehow a gradual transition will be effected, because time isn’t on our side. Certainly there will be efforts among the global powers/OPEC to calm the markets in various ways, but so far their comments have not caused the price of oil to decline. I think we are one news announcement away from the start of the Survivor: Peak Oil episode. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
In the post-peak world, I see too distinct camps of thought: Those who want to consume as before, and those who wish to find stability. The first group will be the capitalist/economist type, forever-looking for new ways to exploit the environment based upon the economic mindset of supply/demand. They are always quick to adopt solutions that are brilliantly successful and perhaps understandable in the short run, but that fail or else create fatal problems in the long run, i.e., the current plethora of ills.
The second group will consist of those who realized that it was the mindset of the first group who got them to post-peak, although they had little choice as to whether or not to participate, and most did not know it was a path that led down a dark one-way alley.
You can solve most problems with enough money, energy, raw materials, and time, but you cannot solve an energy crisis by using more energy, more materials, and less time. This is what the cornucopians believe.
Energy is a unique commodity. It takes energy to do anything. And since you can’t create it, or destroy it, you had better make good use of it when you transform it from one form to another, as you are going to lose some of it in the process.
If we can have $60 a barrel of oil on the speculation of a shortage, imagine then what the price of a barrel might be when we do have real shortages. Since we have done little to nil to prepare for the coming oil shocks, we are completely reliant on increasing our supply of oil to power all of our transport needs, our food production, our manufacturing of goods and 40% of our total energy needs.
I keep coming back to a question that appears to be tugging at more minds, and with more urgency, every day: What if the die has already been cast? Suppose for a moment that we have passed the point of no return, and that some form of collapse is now already in the cards. Nothing new, you say. But I look at this in a way few have considered: As the reality of oil depletion goes mainstream, the direct use of available oil resources for energy consumption may well take precedence over their indirect use to produce another form of energy, whether it be wind or nano-technology, especially if the ROI is a distant reality. And, of course, a fascist government could ration what we can have, so they have enough to wage war to get more.
Or this: The Islamic fundamentalists are becoming savvy to the notion that if you want to hit America or the West, you go after the oil, which, of course, is right in their backyard. The market today cannot sustain any loss of production or supply. Some have likened this new terrorism to a “shadow OPEC.” The control of oil doesn't rest in the hands of the OPEC or the free market, but in the hands of the guerrillas who can stop the flow—and knock the needle out of the junkie’s hands.
Anybody ever seen a junkie in need of a fix?
Authors note: My title was inspired by an article by Warren Buffet, entitled, The Mercantilist’s Tale. Well worth googling. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
