By Roger Diamond
Your grandmother passing away at a ripe old age from general ailments will never make the headlines. A person in their prime, stricken by a nasty disease or a fatal accident is always good, newsworthy material. This seems to be a simple formula, which rules in all fields and areas of information, knowledge and behaviour. The rule’s like this: the expected is known and therefore not worth knowing more about; the unexpected is exactly that and therefore worth finding more about because each case may be slightly different. Furthermore, this information may prove useful for your survival — if you learn about something to be avoided or be careful about.
The question of why climate change is sexy and peak oil is not, is an interesting one. You may all have your own ideas, but today I’ll put down what I think the difference is. I believe the answer lies in the above observation about newsworthiness. Climate change is undoubtedly a wild card. Nobody really knows what’s going to happen. Hence the perennial interest in the weather, as it’s always changing and can bring the unexpected. Add in the possibility of storms and you have the perfect media story. Hence the intense interest in what is quite a scientific and complex debate. But just about everybody who can read has some knowledge of it and some genuine interest. Climate change is like a healthy body being stricken by some wild and unknown disease with potentially fatal consequences.
Peak oil is quite the opposite. The depletion of a finite resource is obvious. Primary school children grasp this concept easily. The consequences of peak oil, at least the immediate ones, are also very predictable — less oil. This scenario is very much like your grandmother passing away. The exact date and illness and her condition at the time can be debated endlessly, but the essential truth and final consequence — your grandmother no longer being around to make pancakes for you or discreetly grabbing a swig of whisky at Christmas — is obvious. You will have to live without her and learn to make your own pancakes!
To confirm my opinion, let’s look at two relatively recent bits of news related to oil. A year or two back, Mexico’s largest oil field, Cantarell, reached peak production. This was significant globally because Mexico was a fairly large oil producer and was also next to the largest oil user, the US. Now both of these countries are going to need to import oil (the US has been doing this for many years now). This piece of news slipped the international media like a well-greased button on a railway line, out of sight with hardly anyone noticing.
In contrast, geographically around the corner from Mexico, in the Gulf of Mexico, an oil well has just gone awry and is bleeding millions of gallons of oil into the ocean. This dramatic event has grabbed international attention for many days. This is a far less significant event for the world’s economy than Mexico reaching national peak oil, although it may influence decisions on deep-sea oil production, which does have larger implications. Quite simply, the oil-well disaster is unexpected and may have further unknown effects — therefore a sexy news item.
If you have any suggestions on how to make peak oil sexy, let me know!
Perhaps smothering Oprah Winfrey in olive oil and releasing her into the Oman Straits would do it…
Develop a mass Armageddon scenario based around peak oil. Include the Illuminati, Jews, “the capitalist machine”, republican party, powerful corporations and lots of sentimental rhetoric. If you can, get a powerful celebrity or politician to promote the coming oil-peak Armageddon.
This should appeal to all the bubblegum lefties, tree huggers and romantic anarchists. It will get you publicity, ferocious blogging and perhaps a few violent protests.
But, you are right because this process in more straightforward (causes, consequences, timelines) it is characterised by more rational debate and at least potentially humanly manageable.
If alternative energy make economic sense it will be adopted and get attention. Economic realities reflect demand/need and cost-benefit calculations.
Either alternative energy must become cheaper to produce or the demand side of it must rise sufficiently for people to buy expensive power/producers to sell it at a premium.
Hopefully technological breakthroughs and better business models can be advanced to promote greener energy that makes sense from a business and political perspective for the private sector and policymaker alike.
Are you serious?
The Peak Oil movement is jealous of climate change because climate change has caught the public’s attention in a way that Peak Oil cannot. Climate Change didn’t just appear as a concern to science, though, since the subject has been debated scientifically for over 100 years. There is a reason why it has caught the public’s attention, though: It is a really serious threat to not merely human life but all life on the planet.
Peak Oil is truth — but it is not a common sense truth — since the Earth is finite. Yet the Peak Oil message is a tough sell because there is a long history of oil corporations and their employees lying for their own benefit. For example, some Peak Oil advocates have advocated for the removal of environmental restructions and regulations in order to delay Peak Oil. We can see where such ideas lead, right now, in the Gulf of Mexico.
How many Peak Oil advocates are there who are not knee deep in the oil industry either from the standpoint of career or investments? Unfortunately none of these people are trustworthy and they have a long history of failed predictions combined with oil industry advocacy.
I’m not opposed to peak oil, though. The sooner it happens, there better. The oil industry can go straight to hell.
People are selfish and interested only in the present. If you can show how their current predicament (unemployment, bad stock returns, etc.) is directly related to peak oil, they may take notice.
I agree with HD – excellent idea!
Another opinion:
I believe that Peak Oil is finally being recognized for what it is – The greatest challenge of the 21st Century.
I have been following Peak Oil closely for the past five years. In 2005 if you saw one new article on Peak Oil per day that was about it. Today, there are scores of articles on Peak Oil each day which means to me that the acceptance of Peak Oil has finally arrived into the conscientious of people who are worried about where the world will get oil in the future now that “cheap oil” is gone forever. Also, oil is much harder and more expensive to find as the BP Gulf of Mexico has shown us in spades.
On the other hand today there seems to be a lot controversy whether global warming is for real. I never thought I would see that day, but it has happened over the past year. For the record I believe that Global Warming is a serious world challenge, much like Peak Oil. The third greatest challenge of the 21st Century is water. I rank them by importance as: oil energy, followed by water, followed by global warming.
C. Paul
Why P.O. isn’t a hot media topic has been an issue for years- and maybe that’s the clue right there: So far, it’s been too slow to be interesting. Sort of like a glacier rolling over an Alpine village (before global warming, of course).
Maybe some day it will pick up a bit of speed- and a bit of media attention.
One can only hope.
Peak oil gained more attention when oil was like $140 a barrel in 2008. But then people went back to “bed” again when the price fell. Damn.
“Remi” is right, but up to a point, since not _everyone_ is selfish and we can/should/must learn not to be (of course that requires individual choice and can’t really be forced). However, of course, many are. When oil reached $140/bbl and gas got over $4/gal, people started to notice because it was impacting them right then and there. I suggest we go and tell everyone to read this, which says what was the hidden factor behind the economic crash:
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-112467
Then they can see how this will/does/is impacting them now. Many will probably blow it off, but if even some listen, that’s better than nothing and every bit helps.
David Matthews: “Peak Oil is truth — but it is not a common sense truth — since the Earth is finite. ”
Uh? Anyone who’s seen a globe should know that the Earth is finite.
@HD, Carla …
Already been done – Last Light by Alex Scarrow …
Climate change has been known in modern form since about 1988, peakoil in modern times since about the 1998 Scientific American article…so a 10 year head start…more than 10 years when you consider related environmental movement awareness about “sink” problems while peak oil is an example of a “source” rather than “Sink” environmental problem. Both are important, but that’s one reason peak has gotten less attention.
Non-sexy stories being itnored happens also in climate for example what percent of Americans have seen this graph,not just heard the arctic is in trouble, but visually seen the extreme “Collapse” compared to models’ predictions, as in this graph:
http://furrygardener.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/arctic-sea-ice-loss1.jpg
Not many. Those concerned about the destruction of a viable climate and those concerned with resource depletion should work together, not demonize the other “side”and everyone should be on “both”sides, concerned about both, and getting us off fossil fuels and to replace our economic systems which are based on “expoenential growth, forever and ever”
“If alternative energy make economic sense it will be adopted and get attention. Economic realities reflect demand/need and cost-benefit calculations.”
Economic realities? Maybe you mean market prices. Well guess what? Market prices do not reflect externalities, and do not reflect true costs of such actions as burningthe massive amounts of oil and coal and NG burned every day (85,000,000 barrels of oil burned per day). So the cost benefit “calculations” are based on these prices that do not reflect actual costs in the present, and are even further away from reflecting true long-term costs. Profits above human needs is bad, above survival is worse, but even worse still is what is being put aheada of profits: short-term profits fight against moves to sustaibility even though long-term profits (and human health and possibly survival) suggest otherwise. So much for market prices having to do with reality.
@C.Paul
Interesting, I wonder if the growth in literature on peak oil cannot also be connected to the climate change hysteria? A lot of activists tend to heap a whole lot of stuff together and lets face it it appeals to the same target audience.
But, I agree it is an important issue with far more measurable and certain outcomes. I still think economics will dictate the outcome.
It seems like it is still cheaper to drill for oil in some challenging/sensitive places than to move to alternative sources of energy.
I think the demand for it is growing (and in that sense the green movement is a good thing) but I don’t think the cost/business models are there yet.
Also you can make a good argument that governments are implicit in allowing companies like BP to drill in places like the gulf/alaska by creating regulation that limits their risk. (regulatory capture and corporatism)
So, definitely we need to work on the political side of things as well and get government (politicians) out of big business.
“If you have any suggestions on how to make peak oil sexy, let me know!”
Easy, just:
- show how America is causing it
- then tie it into international capitalism
and lastly that it is the holdover of imperialism driven by the neo liberals.
Dont under any circumastance resort to truthful facts and figures, 98% of bloggers/people cannot stand unemotional logic and reasoning – just frightens them and the politicians cant give good emotional finger pointing speeches.
Brent
@Edpeak
http://jim.com/econ/chap15p2.html
Markets do get distorted through regulation and government intervention – corporatism, regulatory capture and state intervention is equally important to address.
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/anything-peaceful/hello-ever-hear-of-regulatory-capture/
http://reason.com/archives/2010/05/17/cap-and-scam
Agree more with the comments than the article (especially james graber):
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/not-so-fast/addicted-to-oil/
To embellish Brent’s post above, add a piece on how it has historically hurt Africans and causes little children to have flys around their eyes. How it has led to violent deaths over the last 400 years and that it is time to reverse the roles and give Africa the oil it needs without any colonial strings attached. Point out that corruption in Africa has been seeded by this vile black stuff and thank goodness it is drying up so Africa can be honest again. Etc…
Easy! Make it superfluous by producing half-price alternatives.
Don’t think we’re not bright enough to devise a vehicle that doesn’t need oil and could be bought, maintained and driven cheaply. We are. There is simply no incentive to do it.
Can we do without coal-powered electricity? Of course. But if solar and wind power could be bought by individuals at half the price, we’d all be there like so many shots and Eskom would be out of business.
Watch Telkom closely; it’s already been superceded and is gasping for breath and moving towards modern technology for its daily bread.
Find me a way to purify my own piped water at reasonable cost and I’ll wave my municipality (and Mike Sutcliffe) goodbye on that score.
Perhaps we need another war, so that all those poor bastards who sit in their trenches and fear for another day, will come home (well some of them) with lots of new, bright ideas.
Has it ocurred to you that the baby boomers got the modern world up and running the way it does? Now that we know the mistakes they made, the Y generation could do a better job if it really chose to.
I dare you all…
Peak Oil is a Myth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHD4U2q_p4c
This is a stupid obsession! Demand and supply forces will naturally sort out this issue. We already know that oil can be made from renewable sources, and the price and demand equilibrium will very quickly be reached when there is no alternative.
The solution to peak oil and climate change are exactly the same. SSShhhh, don’t tell anyone, its renewable energy, tee, hee.
I subscribe to John Michael Greer’s hypothesis that climate change is something people easily accept because it conforms to their cultural meme that humans are powerful and not bounded by nature. We’re so powerful we can destroy the planet and all life on it! Peak oil, on the other hand, is about limits. It’s about how humans aren’t powerful and are bounded by nature. Technology can’t overcome every obstacle. That is an idea that directly contradicts most people’s world view and is, therefore, immediately discarded. This explanation also explains why the two groups have very little overlap. Their goals are the same, but their world-views clash.