The world economy remains much more dependent on oil than most of us imagine. Oil remains the world's primary energy source, even if the global economy is admittedly less dependent on oil than it used to be. The past couple centuries of technical progress have been powered by fossil fuels such as oil, coal and natural gas. Renewable energy sources such as hydropower, solar and wind energy, and geothermal heat are indeed gaining ground, but still only meet a fraction of the world's annual energy use.
So how important is oil really? Will the world economy be able to escape the grip of oil in the near future? The short answer is no. On the other hand, oil consumption in emerging economies, particularly in China, has risen substantially.
Net on net, the energy intensity the use of energy per unit of GDP has steadily declined over the past two decades on a global basis. Global energy consumption has almost doubled over the past three decades, with oil remaining the biggest source of energy, according to data released by the International Energy Agency IEA. In , oil accounted for 40 percent of the world's total final energy consumption, far ahead of the market share for electricity 18 percent , natural gas 15 percent , and coal 12 percent.
In the 34 OECD countries, which include many of the world's most advanced economies, the dominance of oil is even greater. It makes up nearly half of the bloc's final consumption, more than double that of electricity and natural gas combined.
Some areas of the global economy are totally dependent on oil. The transport sector is one of these. Nuclear power and hydropower stand at distant third and fourth positions. This means that in the short-term, the grid would likely still be active for a majority of Americans, despite the disappearance of oil for cars and other mass transit vehicles.
Apart from transit and electricity, petroleum is used to make plastics, life-saving medications, toys, pens and more. Growing food locally will likely become commonplace, as the fuel needed to bring fruits and vegetables to markets becomes better utilized to operate other necessary machines. Refrigeration could be a thing of the past as well, ushering in a new area of meats preserved by salting instead of freezing.
It is unlikely that anything in this article will happen as written, though peak oil may someday be a reality. So far, we have only discussed the impacts of an oil-less world to everyday Americans and comparable developed countries.
But the biggest geopolitical upheavals will occur in countries across Africa, the Middle East and South America. Meanwhile, other estimates claim that Britain will have all but exhausted its supplies within five years. Of course, vested interests of various parties make it difficult to know who to trust. As yet, no clear successor to oil has been discovered. We currently derive a third of all of our energy from the black gold, which are substantial shoes to fill. Nuclear, hydrogen, biofuel, wind, wave, solar… all of these have their particular advantages — and their particular drawbacks.
For more information on possible alternatives to oil in the future, see the article What is the Best Source of Energy for the Future?
Clearly, we must try to find a way to wean ourselves off of our dependence on oil and replace it with more sustainable forms of energy production. But what if we were caught off-guard? What if oil ran out tomorrow, with no contingency plan in place? Luckily, even the harshest of estimates give us at least a few years to redirect our energy efforts, but here are some of the consequences of what could happen if oil ran out tomorrow.
Such a bleak outlook on life after oil may seem extreme, but when you take into account the fact that we rely on the resource for almost every aspect of our daily life food production, transport, electricity, lighting, heating, clothing, pharmaceuticals, healthcare, electronics , it seems likely. We must act, and act soon. A new ASTM International standard will help in the design and monitoring of graphite components for molten salt design nuclear reactors.
Building on Petroleum is an incredibly complex material, with the average sample made up of more than 20, unique elements. Even as our thirst for oil seems insatiable, it is becoming politically and environmentally toxic.
As the world wakes up to the catastrophic impact of climate change, from rising sea levels and drought to wildfires and crop failure, scientists have warned of a need to rapidly shift away from fossil fuels. Yet when it comes to oil demand, there is little sign of this happening. Our usage has jumped 62 per cent over the course of a few decades — up from The International Energy Agency IEA forecasts that if governments continue with current policies, global demand will reach million barrels a day by How the world can provide abundant energy supplies while dramatically reducing emissions has become one of the defining issues of our time.
The challenge is huge. Environment analysts argue that we need to learn to survive on far lower levels — about 10 million barrels a day — and ultimately remove it from our energy system entirely. Governments are beginning to take some action, from incentivising the purchase of low emissions vehicles to funding cleaner energy research.
But the climate protesters scaling oil rigs, defacing energy company headquarters and denouncing the banks that fund crude production face considerable opposition. While coal and gas are starting to be displaced by lower-cost renewables in electricity generation, oil has a stranglehold over the transport sector, and the petrochemicals industry is a fast-growing consumer of refined products. Aside from the commercial interests of oil-producer nations and corporations, there is a practical question: how will the world function without a material on which we depend so deeply?
Do alternatives exist for its myriad, and often invisible, uses? And can any drop in oil usage happen quickly enough? It usually takes 70 years for energy transitions, such as from wood to coal, to happen.
We need to see a greater magnitude of change, in fewer than 30 years. The problem is absolutely immense. But humanity is capable of spectacular achievements. Throughout history, energy has been at the heart of how civilisations have prospered. For centuries, people burnt wood for warmth and for cooking. In the 19th century, coal emerged as the preferred fuel and enabled industrialisation.
But it was in the early 20th century that crude oil — plants and animals that lived millions of years ago, compressed deep underground — propelled the mass transit of people and goods, fostered modern lifestyles and enabled higher standards of living than ever.
The earth has warmed by 1C since pre-industrial times and is likely to heat up by a further 2C by the turn of the century — overshooting the targets of the Paris climate agreement. Even after the world began moving from coal to other fuels, coal did not disappear. With the emergence of each new source, we have simply added it to the mix rather than replacing old ones. We need to make a bigger change, twice as fast as it has ever happened before.
This is no way going to be easy. Climate activists argue that, unlike before, it is now a matter of urgency. Yet the IEA — the industry standard-bearer, which itself has been criticised for being too fossil fuel-friendly — has warned that even if governments meet existing targets, carbon emissions are set to rise through to They needed to fall, not break even.
Nick Mabey leads a London-based climate think-tank called E3G, which is pushing to accelerate the green transition.
0コメント