CROSSING THE ENERGY CHASM

The EIA (Energy Information Administration) announced that it is now in the process of radically lowering its estimates for future oil production. So, here's a brief that put this news into context.
____________________

In tech and marketing literature, "crossing the chasm" is a popular tag for describing how a company crosses the gap between the early adopters of its products to the start of mainstream acceptance. It's also a good description for the energy situation we find ourselves in today.

What the Situation Looks Like
Our current global energy burn rate is 16 TW (terawatts), which is up from 0.7 TW at the turn of the 20th Century. This rate is growing at 0.5 TW a year (and accelerating), driven by three major sources of demand (China, India, and the energy exporting 14). It's very likely, given a judicious evaluation of the data, that this demand will double to 32 TW by 2025 (even with a global 1-2% decline in usage per $ of GDP due to efficiency improvements).

From Stored Solar to Active Solar
The bulk of the energy we feed this burn rate with is from stored solar -- essentially, energy delivered from the sun millions of years ago and stored inside the earth's crust. The problem we face with stored solar is that it is reaching production limits (particularly crude oil). In combination with this rapidly increasing demand, we will face a never ending series of price increases (occasionally mitigated by demand destruction) for stored solar energy as oil, natural gas, and coal deplete in series.

The only plentiful and scalable source of energy for continued growth of our civilization (as a dissipative system) is active solar, estimated to be in excess of 600++ TW per (recoverable). The problem is, when compared to liquid stored solar fuels, active solar energy is still 25-40 times more expensive (remember, electricity is a premium energy source when compared to liquid fuels) and must scale from a VERY low base (we are only in the "playground" stage of active solar). Further, by most optimistic technical estimates, we will only see equivalents to today's pricing and scale in 2050 and beyond.

The span in years between now and 2040 or so, is the CHASM we need to cross. Big money projects in the short term won't solve the problem (due to step function economics in an uncertain environment). In contrast, resilient communities provide a way to cross it organically.

Comments

[Kim McD]

So, when we need to jump this chasm in our agriculture from imported additive/chemical dependency, let us please consider an intensified biological systems approach - the soil food web:

http://www.soilfoodweb.com/03_about_us/approach.html

Good on all scales from backyard diversity to industrial monocrop...

[Syn Diesel]

"active solar energy is still 25-40 times more expensive..."

Ouch, that screams for a long list of references. Hopefully none authored by anyone named Pimental.

The capital accumulation / step function* problem is the only real issue and that's more of a psychic phenomenon of design.

* For some reason I always visualize the step function concept as Homer Simpson standing at the base of a mile-high wall looking up at a sign at it's top flashing "FREE BEER".

[Mark]

"It's very likely, given a judicious evaluation of the data, that this demand will double to 32 TW by 2025"

I suspect the unspoken comment here is that unless supply doubles to 32 TW/year, the current world bureaucracies will cease to exist.

"The only plentiful and scalable source of energy for continued growth of our civilization (as a dissipative system) is active solar, estimated to be in excess of 600++ TW per (recoverable)."

This strikes me as overly optimistic, though I would love to be convinced otherwise. Assuming the 1900 energy consumption rate was 1 TW, and this was essentially 'active solar' (which ignores a lot of coal consumption), an increase in active solar conversion rates from .5% to 3% (what plants do for themselves), you only get 6 TW from active solar. Additionally, all the alternative energy sources use a great percentage of the 'total' energy recovered in the process of freeing that which will be sold or used. Tar sands are a good example. Despite there being vast 'reserves', the 'free' energy recoverable is limited if it exists at all after considering environment costs.

2025 is only 17 years away. A more likely chasm we face is going from 16 TW/year world wide to 12 TW/year in 2025. The problem is not having it happen, but how to get through these years without a long stretch of complete local and international anarchy.

Sustainable communities are the key.