Petrocollapse for change of culture
Jan Lundberg speaks at Manhattan peak oil conference, Oct. 5
The Community Church of New York, Unitarian Universalist on
October 5, 2005
Culture
Change Letter #111 from www.culturechange.org
Many in this audience have done their homework on the basics
of peak oil. I will summarize the concept and offer evidence,
very briefly. Then I will quickly move on to the larger issues at
hand highlighted by peak oil. I've given a lot of talks lately,
all ad lib, but this one I must read.
I wrote this on the train here, as poor as this country’s rail
service is. Besides poor subsidies, Amtrak has to be sidelined frequently
by freight trains unpredictably. But reflection and making notes
have flowed from my tour around the country by rail, the nation’s
safest, most energy efficient and least polluting motorized transport.
Out the windows I saw nature mostly raped and buried, and in the
train I lamented the artificial and toxic environment I was breathing
in.
Since I stopped analyzing the petroleum market on a daily basis
in 1988, I have observed other aspects of our world and learned
far more about petroleum and energy after leaving the industry.
I will impart to you some of what I learned in my for-profit career,
then in my nonprofit career up against oil industry expansion, and
now as a writer as likely to make songs as compile my culturechange.org
essays into a book. Some years ago I dedicated my life to a revolution
in cultural values. When I realized this, I wanted people to define
real cultural change in terms of no longer paving over the good
Earth or driving around in deadly, isolating machines. This is mostly
why I’m in front of you today.
I have observed petroleum closely and from a few steps back,
during my whole adult life. My former firm, Lundberg Survey, predicted
the Second Oil Shock in 1979 from our data revealing that a nine
percent shortfall of gasoline would hit in March of that year. I
no longer do primary research, but I appreciate others’ good efforts.
I do see tight supplies today as real and deep-seated, and I fear
a cold winter can help trigger a sudden global shortage. This could
bring on petrocollapse: a breakdown of the whole socioeconomic structure
that has an unhealthy relationship with the only reality, our ecosphere
wherein economics must function sustainably. In trying to understand
the big picture, I do not closely monitor oil industry developments
except in broad strokes. Many of us are so distracted by myriad
details that our general direction remains unclear or misunderstood.
We need to look beyond the current phase of history and forget about
news headlines.
USA Today had a headline in 1988 that said “Lundberg
Lines Up With Nature.” The story could have predicted he was ignorant
until a reader of that headline had him write a review of Beyond
Oil – The Threat to Food and Fuel in the Coming Decades. My
huge review, in Population and Environment, started with the announcement
“Party’s over!”
There comes a time that the crude oil of a field, nation or
the planet reaches its maximum rate of extraction. It follows a
predictable, rough curve, although according to my analysis we may
see instead a sudden drop off in the case of the world’s oil “production.”
This would be if the market’s reaction and resultant hoarding, followed
by economic collapse, bring on a swift and messy end to the oil
age. The market in terms of soaring demand has helped bring the
time of peak forward, but we can also note some serious developments
indicating peak has arrived or will hit very soon.
About twenty oil-exporting nations are reported
to be in decline and are past their peak.
World discovery peaked four decades ago. The U.S., for decades
the top oil exporter, peaked in extraction in 1970 about four decades
after its peak of discoveries. Globally, reserves are not being
replaced to keep pace with consumption. The world uses about four
barrels of oil for every one barrel discovered. The lower and lower
energy production ratios of new wells, and more dry holes, indicate
the world has been rather well exploited for oil. Less and less
net energy yield from oil can be an accelerating factor in permanent
shortage, and serves to raise costs hidden in countless goods and
services. Although oil companies’ data are misleading, these entities’
preference to buy other oil companies rather than explore for more
oil is an indication of the long-term global supply picture.
The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq had petroleum considerations
driving the decisions, and, petroleum helps dictate the military
occupation, “privatization,” and policing of the region. There appear
to be no huge oil discovery bonanzas possible that could change
the basic depletion trend, so the violent, illegal seizing of Middle
Eastern oil makes sense – especially since the White House, for
example, has been aware of peak oil longer than the general public.
Lastly, OPEC cannot seem to open the spigot further, although one
may debate what is really the interests of nations and corporations
profiting off high oil prices; prices could become still more lucrative
yet backfire and be a total damper on global economic growth. As
you may know, OPEC nations jacked up their oil reserves on paper
massively in the 1980s and ‘90s. Smoke and mirrors will not change
peak or prevent the final energy crisis, as Andrew McKillop described
the world’s coming situation with the title of his recent book.
This
conference is not so much an
exercise in proving peak oil has occurred or will occur soon,
but rather an attempt to explore our post-peak options and fate
as individuals and communities.
Clearly, the government is offering no leadership other than
war and social control. Even if Bush’s new conservation option sticks
after the recent hurricanes, it is too late for the U.S. to recreate
its infrastructure to a non-petroleum infrastructure, and it is
inconceivable that the government would start facilitating local
economics at the expense of the transnational corporations. With
the U.S. gobbling up one fourth of the world’s 80-plus million barrels
a day of oil demand, and no sensible policy-change in sight, we
are all consigned to involuntary and sudden change through nature’s
force and/or global financial events reflecting monumental debt
and deficit situations.
Even the environmental groups paid to tout the renewable energy
technofix have to admit that the substitutes for petroleum are not
ready. Such boosters are engaging in the same promotion tactics
as the coal and nuclear industries. These technologies, along with
heavy oil and tar sands, are not ready to substitute for today’s
preferred petroleum sources. If the alternative fuels were ready
to go on stream massively today, then and only then might we see
the widely assumed gradual, downward curve for post-peak petroleum.
The prestigious insiders in the peak oil “movement,”
Matthew Simmons and Robert Hirsch, want to see economic growth
continue. I do not.
Such members of the establishment as Simmons and Hirsch want the
present industrial society to continue. I want to see a transformation,
and it so happens that the effects of peak oil promise to provide
it.
Several other well-known peak oil authors and activists prioritize
“regime change” in the U.S., or at least a host of policy reforms.
I do not. Such authors and activists would do better to fully understand
the implications of peak oil and what is likely to happen that will
sweep away agendas. We don’t know what is ahead, but it might be
unrecognizable to the typical oblivious citizen who ought to be
learning here today with us.
One reason for my stance is that petrocollapse, like peak oil,
is inevitable and is right up ahead. There is little the government
can do about it except to try to protect the most powerful elites.
This will not work in the long run, and more equitable means of
people
helping one another will jump in. I’m accused of being too optimistic
about a new culture of egalitarianism and mutual aid, when I predict
cooperation and solidarity will be the order of the new day. I frankly
do not see any alternative if we are to survive as a species, and
if peace is the only state we can allow at this juncture.
Fossil-fuel intensive societies may be ten times beyond their
ecological carrying capacity, if cheap energy is finite which it
is. Such a measurement is made in a crucial book, Overshoot,
by William Catton. This realization gives us an idea of the
potential for die-off.
A bigger reason for my possibly unique stance on growth and
reformism is that I’m promoting fundamental, system-change. The
idea of returning to our species' former, complete reliance on nature
during our long prehistory, instead of relentlessly exploiting nature
– at a time of apparent incipient ecological collapse – and the
idea of returning to a real community-based culture (e.g., tribal),
are heresy here in the land of techno-worship. The Western Civilized
world is still revered by those who approve of destroying nature
and driving countless species extinct, or by those who believe Western
Civilization is its own cure. I do not. I believe petrocollapse
can cure the Earth of this civilization, such as dissolving the
U.S. because only local bioregions can correctly and efficiently
address their own problems.
Individually, all of us are suffering the same fate as nature.
We hope, in our immersion in high-tech plastic convenience and pesticide
residues, that the epidemics of, for example, breast cancer and
prostate cancer don’t get us. But we, like nature, are being raped
constantly in every orifice. We don’t even know all the ways, when
a safeguarding government is an anachronism or a myth. Chemicals
such as plastics – petroleum – and their additives amount to the
unlearned lesson of Silent
Spring
by Rachel Carson.
We continue to tolerate the poisonous chemicals spewing into
our ecosphere and into our bodies with hardly an objection. These
are mostly petrochemicals that were developed from left-over crude
oil refining after kerosene and other early products were made.
With the scientific revolution and materialism that had taken place
previously, we were all set up to buy into endless progress. Progress
is a new idea, and a dangerous one as history has shown if we read
between the lines. Nature does not need progress. Tribes that survived
for millennia did not need progress, although there was some very,
very slow “progress.”
Human beings have clearly gotten out of control starting about
10,000 years ago. Not all humans are out of control; the dominant
culture of exploiting nature and consuming the Earth is the subset
of humanity creating havoc. But even though not all humans and cultures
are guilty of civilization, humans as a whole through their sheer
numbers are out of control. I believe the Earth will be lucky soon
to accommodate one billion people, considering the crash in energy
supply and the rapidly declining state of the ecosystem.
There are three ways to deal with overpopulation and population
growth:
Plan a reduction of population–size that would be fair,
gradual and effective, with some compassion to encourage voluntarism.
Enforcing it might not be gentle or evenly applied, however.
The elites simply bring about involuntary population reduction
of huge segments of peoples by nation and/or genetic traits. This
would probably be without warning. It may be disorganized and
sloppy, as in the current damage done to the ecosphere by depleted
uranium on the other side of the world.
People do themselves in as a species via environmental destruction
or starvation, whether it be by climate destabilization, petrocollapse,
or enough nuclear bomb explosions to poison the globe virtually
forever.
Of these three possibilities, the last looks operative already.
The first one seems idealistic and would require much less corruption
than prevails today. There would have to be a chance to try such
intelligent design in advance of some shattering event. To avoid
the second “option” of top-down culling through violence, the first
option (compassionate planning) would have to start soon.
The only good aspects of the last “option” are (1) that it could
preempt the top-down violent option -- an option that requires nation-wide
government control though having plentiful energy -- and (2) that
petrocollapse is the scenario that the human race can recover from.
Therefore, the whole range of possibilities seems to offer petrocollapse
as the most hopeful or desirable approach or outcome that is a realistic
scenario for population reduction. However, so much would have to
be learned from petrocollapse that other means of die-off would
be avoided somehow. It may be too late to prevent total climate
destabilization due to positive feedback loops.
Civilization is the threat. Civilization is
what brought about nuclear bombs and the commodification of nature.
Culure change is the cure.
Today we will be hearing about models for sustainability such
as urban gardens, pedal power produce delivery, depaving and lawn
conversion to gardens and farms, and more. Cuba has gone through
its own petrocollapse and we are fortunate to have a new film that
will be shown during the lunch break. Petroleum-dependent societies
urgently need Citizen Petroleum Councils, to survey the problems
and possible solutions. It is up to you to pursue implementation
of common sense approaches to energy and land use, even though we
run up against bureaucracy, and there are notions of individualism,
private property, and other abused concepts often cloaked in patriotism.
The idea of our country may be redefined back to love of the land.
The frequent concern voiced by well-meaning people is that there
are threats to civilization. The assumption these folk make is that
alleged progress has been a positive thing. But the very idea of
improving on pristine nature is the classic mistake of fixing something
that is not broken, and it’s the height of god-playing.
Now that we have broken nature, or broken a good part of the
ecosystem, it is assumed that we can only fix it by going “forward”
and abandoning natural living as simplistic or impossible or dangerous
or savage. This linear thinking is what got us into hot water in
the first place.
The people most responsible for our problem believe they are
in charge of solving it. As long as the rest of us accept that irrational,
authoritarian, and unjust notion, we are all in danger of being
victimized with extinction.
We can examine other approaches or leadership that rejects linear
thinking and the idea of progress. However, this contains a contradiction
we must address: a way out of this dilemma in today’s world of empire
and globalization most likely is linear and authoritarian, even
if through an activist movement. In any case, there is almost no
opposition movement. Upon petrocollapse, there could be a hopeful
embracing of non-linear living within the cycles of nature as well
as a hopeful adoption of community-based or tribal culture that
rejects with finality materialism and exploitation.
Our time as a species in a favorable, biodiverse ecosphere is
about up. Without a positive scenario attempted soon, there appears
to be little hope for a viable future. Instead of waiting for a
sustainable culture brought along by petrocollapse, it is possible
for people to stop buying their executions by ceasing the purchase
of new cars. It is true that these consumers would still be buying
gasoline, and when they react to the coming oil shock they will
fill up their vehicles’ tanks and thus exacerbate the shortage.
But en masse a buying pattern of only used cars, by enough people
who might have bought new cars, can cause immediately the proactive
termination over a few months of the main threat to life on Earth:
the growth economy.
In anticipation of your wanting elaboration
on my predictions of petrocollapse and a positive recovery for
a sustainable culture, let me summarize:
Rather than just a geological phenomenon, peak oil and its effects
can turn out to be a function of the oil market acting as its own
executioner. As alternatives to petroleum do not quite exist --
on the scale and cheapness necessary to allow the growth economy
to perpetuate -- there will be nowhere for "petrosociety" to go
but down and out. Reasons for the likelihood of rapid collapse include
hoarding of fuel which will create artificial shortage. Businesses
and people already hurting from post-hurricane petroleum prices
and from the anticipated much higher-to-come oil prices, will not
be able to stay on the road and on the job. As Congressman Roscoe
Bartlett quoted me at the House of Representatives in May, "the
trucks will not be rolling into Safeway and Walmart." As he added,
"the veneer of civilization is very thin."
The U.S. government and other leading institutions are not willing
or able to provide leadership, as evidenced by the lack of any learning
from the hurricane's effects on society and energy. Just as the
warning on Katrina was not heeded, the warning from Katrina's and
Rita's effects was not heeded. These hurricanes may be the straw
that broke the camel's back. Now the Energy Secretary is warning
of high prices and shortages. We may be being prepared for rationing,
and military management -- or the attempt -- of the nation under
emergency conditions, although rejected by governers a few days
ago. But the government will not be able to manage long without
energy, especially when the population is no longer busy using energy
as before. Congressman Bartlett told me last month that police and
firemen are known through studies to abandon attempts at public
order when the conditions of a given situation are past a certain
point.
Although there will be insufficient food and therefore massive
upheaval culminating in die-off, there will be plentiful land and
housing. A new society will come together on a local-ecosystem basis.
Cooperation and sharing will be necessary for survival, to make
urban and suburban land productive and to assure water is as clean
as possible. Petrocollapse along with climate distortion shall be
such an historic learning experience that a completely different
approach to human relations and economics will be adopted. There
will be a perhaps universal rejection of the ways and values of
petroleum society, and those who do not adapt will fail in contrast
to strong, tribal communities. A lifestyle of separteness or non-community
behavior, so rife in today's dominant, mainstream culture, would
be seen as threatening the common good and a throwback to history
BP: Before Petrocollapse. The bright side is that we will be taking
care of the Earth in order to survive. This is how it always was,
and appreciation of the long-term for the common good will return
as a basic cultural value.
All the best of luck to every one of you. I will now answer
questions, and then show a short documentary
on plastics pollution after a brief introduction.
Links:
www.petrocollapse.org
- (Soon see conference papers and details for availability of webcast
and video)
Peak Oil Poster: $10 from www.oilposter.org
www.culturechange.org
www.postcarbon.org
www.fromthewilderness.com
www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net
www.peakoil.net
www.energybulletin.net
|