Working in the energy industry, I receive a daily email (or two) from the Ontario Energy Association summarizing a long list of energy related articles in the mainstream media. Yesterday was no exception.
I noted an interesting contrast in the stories carried by various papers yesterday, including the Globe & Mail, the Toronto Star, the Kingston Whig-Standard, and the Sault Star.
As reported in a G&M article entitled, “Rise in global energy demands ‘alarming,’ IAE says“, the International Energy Agency predicts that “the ‘alarming’ rise in energy demand will speed up climate change, threaten global energy security and possibly create a supply crunch that will send already high prices soaring.” Their report predicts a rise in global oil production from 85 million barrels per day now to 116 mbpd in 2030. No mention of where this oil is supposed to come from, just the assumption that it will be there as demand rises.
The Toronto Star questions, “Is it too soon to bet on lower oil prices?” In their analysis, they don’t mention worldwide production, but they do blame high crude prices on the usual suspects such as growing demand by China and India, as if it’s an offense that they should be so demanding. They conclude with the rather silly statement, “in the longer term, not only America but also developing world economies will turn to alternative energy sources because oil has effectively priced itself out of the market.” [Emphasis mine] Of course it’s true, the world will turn to alternatives. But might not that be for other reasons, rather than just supply and demand economics?
It’s really a shame that these large papers with national distribution are not viewing this from the same perspective of their smaller cousins.
The Whig-Standard’s “How we’re sleepwalking our way into an oil crisis” and the Sault Star’s “Who dares to tell the whole truth about the supply and price of oil?” actually raise the spectre of Peak Oil and question the ability of even reaching 100 million barrels per day, let alone exceeding that level. They go further and question what we will do when the crisis is upon us and what should be be doing now?
The Whig-Standard hits the nail right on the head with their request to the Ministry of Natural Resources as to what is being done to address the issue. On Oct. 2, Natural Resources Canada responded, in yet another example of our government not thinking about the future, “At this time the department has no views on this issue.”
No kidding.
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
I don’t know how to categorize it, laziness, personal agenda, conspiracy, but most journalists don’t do their job anymore.
You don’t see much original or in-depth research, a 1 hour news cast only has about 12 minutes of news the rest is sports, entertainment, fluff.
In the last 2 years the mainstream media has missed the ball on the sub-prime fiasco, U.S. dollar meltdown, all the real issues in the recent provincial election just among a few. Peak oil is ignored while Economic Development Canada, makes claims that the Canadian dollar will have to drop once oil corrects to $60 and the media reports it without questioning the logic of the statement. I can’t get my head around it, are they really this daft or is the Media no longer independent enough from Gov and industry to be trusted. It’s especially obvious in the realm of financial news, where the media , especially business networks needs to maintain the good will of brokerage houses and CEO otherwise they get no interviews. Since Peak oil is the ultimate financial/political story that will impact our entire way of life collusion seems the only answer, I mean people can’t be the stupid, Can they?
Most people don’t follow the news closely.
The Dumbing down of print by rags like the Sun/24/metro promotes ignorance
The packaging of celebrity gossip as news is used as a diversion
The only reasonable source of information/news seems to be the web but even there you have to deal with and sort through fluff, nuts, and misinformation.
We can win the fight against climate change with technology that is already available. We CAN have SUVs that get 114mpg that costs slightly more than todays SUV. How do you ask? Carbon composites. Instead of wasting time reinventing the combustion engine, make the car lighter with a material stronger than steel.
From one of my favorite websites:
http://news.mongabay.com/2007/0329-lovins.html
I think it requires more than just Carbon Composites, while lowering the weight gives you the best and fastest fuel savings unless regulations force HP down we will end up with ultralight cars that can go twice as fast. The 1300 people who’ve been charged with racing in Ontario shows people have too much power available and too little sense.
I’m not sure I bye that the hybrids with their extra systems including many Kg of lithium, copper, rare earth magnets are actually efficient enough to offset the carbon released from mining and manufacturing and the extra weight.
Yes they will save gas but with most of the magnets, windings, batteries made in china, and some of the mining done in China using dirty coal electricity it might actualy be worse than simply buying a smaller, lower powered, lighter vehicle.
If we do go hybrid the design by volvo for direct electric drive plug in with a small gas motor to provide electricity makes much more sense than weighing down a car with two drive trains.
There are going to be shortages of Lithium and rare earths and this hybrid/plugin sollution will not workable for all cars, in the end less cars, smaller lighter cars is our best choice.
(ultra capacitors might solve this but leading developers have not proven claims and the maket is getting wary of their claims)
That said, carbon Composites are the very reason I’ve invested in Quinto Mining who has a resonable sized graphite deposit in Quebec ,arguably of the highest qualtiy ever found. I might be a Green but I’m not adverse to making a profit on mining something that will help solve the larger problem.
It’s funny greens often hammer mining yet the high tech solutions , solar, hybrids, wind(permament magnets), require minerals that are in low supply and require intensive mining. The best green solution is always “JUST USE LESS”
Green Assassin Brigade
Interesting debate and thanks for the investing tip. Now if EEStor’s ultra capacitor doesn’t turn out to be a complete fraud, then maybe Zenn Motors would be a good play as well.
Obviously the ultimate goal would be to have a fast charging electric vehicle than can travel 500 miles at 120km/h . Carbon composites are a step in that direction. Toshiba made a breakthrough in 2005 with the development of a fast charging lithium ion battery prototype. Combine these two and you have an emissionless vehicle. But as you say, there may be shortages in rare metals which in turn would increases mining operations.
Another technology I have read about is methanol fuel cells. Methanol can be made from CO2 and emits CO2 as a byproduct of the fuel cells reaction BUT the CO2 can be recycled to produce more methanol. Methanol has an Octane rating of 100. The only downside is that methanol is toxic.
Interesting story on old vehicles and climate change in the Star today:
http://wheels.ca/article/33033
I wonder what kind of policy the Greens would enact to address this because even if you have a carbon tax, paying the tax would still be cheaper than buying a new car.