Advertisement

The Petroleum Revolution III: What About Technology?

  • Charles A. S. Hall
  • Kent Klitgaard
Chapter

Abstract

A main concern of this book has been that—given the extreme dependence of most contemporary societies and economies on energy and the finite nature of fossil fuels—what kind of a future can the young readers of this book expect if our economic needs and expectations face severe constraints in the future availability of fossil fuels. As we have developed previously in this book (► Chap.  8) and frequently elsewhere, the two principle concerns we have about future availability and affordability of fossil fuels have been absolute supplies (e.g., «peak oil,» the idea that oil will reach a peak in production and then inevitably decline) and declining EROI. But what if these issues were not to occur or to do so only so far in the future that they would have no meaning to anyone alive today? Certainly there have been economists who have argued that technology and substitutions will indefinitely hold off the effects of depletion [e.g., ► 1]. Could they be right?

References

  1. 1.
    Adelman, M.A., and M.C. Lynch. 1997. Fixed view of resource limits creates undue pessimism. Oil & Gas Journal 95: 56–60.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hughes, David. December 12, 2016 Revisiting the U.S. Department of Energy Play-by-Play Forecasts through 2040 from Annual Energy Outlook 2016.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berman, Art. Personal communication and website.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    US EIA weekly reports.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hall, C.A.S. 1975. The Biosphere, the industriosphere and their interactions. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 31: 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maggio, G., and G. Cacciola. 2012. When will oil, natural gas, and coal peak? Fuel 98: 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mohr, S.H., J. Wang, G. Ellem, J. Ward, and D. Giurco. 2015. Projection of world fossil fuels by country. Fuel 141: 120–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Laherrere, Jean. ASPPO France website.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McGlade, C., and P. Ekins. 2015. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2°C. Nat 517 (7533): 187–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacobson, M.Z., M.A. Delucchi, G. Bazouin, Z.A. Bauer, C.C. Heavey, E. Fisher, S.B. Morris, D.J. Piekutowski, T.A. Vencill, and T.W. Yeskoo. 2015. 100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States. Energy and Environmental Science 8 (7): 2093–2117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heinberg, R., and D. Fridley. 2016. Our renewable future: Laying the path for one hundred percent clean energy. Richard: Island Press. see Hall 2016. Review in BioScience 66: 1080–1081.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smil, V. 2011. Global energy: The latest infatuations. American Scientist 99: 212–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Trainer, T. 2013. Can Europe run on renewable energy? A negative case. Energy Policy 63: 845–850. Trainer, T. 2012a. A critique of Jacobson and Delucchi’s proposals for a world renewable energy supply. Energy Policy 44: 476–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    MacKay, D. 2010. Sustainable energy without the hot air. Cambridge: UIT Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Friedemann, A.J. 2016. When trucks stop running: Energy and the future of transportation. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    See web site of Matt Mushalik in Australia for intelligent update of fossil fuel and other data.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles A. S. Hall
    • 1
  • Kent Klitgaard
    • 2
  1. 1.College of Environmental Science & ForestryState University of New YorkSyracuseUSA
  2. 2.Wells CollegeAuroraUSA

Personalised recommendations