There are many different energy sources that can be used to help us transition away from petroleum. Unfortunately, there is no silver bullet solution, and none of them is particularly well suited for transportation use and none provides easy substitutes for asphalt, plastic, or polyester. One of the biggest issues to consider is just how much energy is concentrated in crude oil. For example, one barrel of oil contains the energy equivalent of almost 25,000 hours of human labor. As we will soon see, it is hard to replace that kind of energy with renewables like wind and solar.
The following is a list of energy sources and the likelihood that they will be part of the solution to the peak oil energy crisis:
Wind – Wind power is renewable, need a lot more!, but has two major drawbacks: it cannot be used everywhere due to a lack of wind and it produces a low power output per windmill. For example, “It would take every single one of California’s 13,000 wind turbines operating at 100% capacity (they usually operate at about 30%) all at the same time to generate as much electricity as a a single 555-megawatt natural gas fired power plant.”
Solar – Solar power has the same to drawbacks as wind: low power output and the fact that it is dark almost half of the day. It is currently expensive but improving as it is becoming more economically viable. If you add up all the solar photovoltaic cells now running worldwide the combined output of 5,000 megawatts (at 20% efficiency) produces the same amount of power as one large coal-fired power plant. It is estimated that to produce enough solar energy to power the world requires solar cells the twice the area of Pennsylvania, which is more than 20,000 times the area in use today!
Hydrogen – Touted by many as the next generation fuel as it is abundant and energy rich, hydrogen is not without drawbacks. Currently, 96% of hydrogen comes from fossil fuels and only 4% comes from water (through electrolysis). The problem with obtaining hydrogen from water is that actually consumes more energy than it produces. The smallest of all elements, gaseous hydrogen is difficult to store and transport.
Nuclear - Considered by many to be a sustainable, even renewable source of energy, nuclear power is plagued with disadvantages. First of all, it is not renewable, rather it is fueled by radioactive uranium, which could easily run out by 2050 if consumption is increased. It would take 10,000 nuclear power plants to replace all of the fossil fuel power plants in use today at the cost of $3-5 billion each. Of course, there is the issue of dealing with the radioactive waste that is produced.
Fusion - Nuclear fusion has potential, but has been in research stages for over fifty years. It takes and immense amount of energy to start and contain the fusion reaction, therefore it will not be economically viable for decades, if ever.
Biofuels – Biofuels like ethanol and methanol are good for small scale use because growing crops for these fuels consumes a lot resources. Valuable water, fertilizer, and space are consumed, and more importantly potential food is taken out of the food supply. It takes 11 acres to grow enough corn to fuel one car with ethanol for 10,000 miles. We would have to cover over 97% of land with corn in order to power all of our automobiles with ethanol. Biodiesel from vegetable oil runs into many of the same issues, assuming crops are being grown as a fuel instead of food source.
Geothermal & Hydroelectric – These are both renewable but are generally fully utilized already as there are only so many rivers that can be dammed and limited areas where magma deposits are near the earth’s surface. We will not find significant gains from these sources.
Even if politicians and corporations decide to take action today and we make significant strides in advancing renewable technologies, it is estimated that at best we will be able to produce the equivalent of 3-5 billion barrels of oil per year — our energy use in 1950. We will still have a major shortfall as we currently consume over thirty billion barrels of oil per year, 6-10 times as much as projected. This means not only do we need to reduce our energy consumption in a major way, increase efficiency of devices, and rapidly develop renewable sources, we need to start today if we hope to even have a chance a lifestyle from a half century ago. The fact that we need to reduce energy consumption alone makes a hard landing look like an increasingly likely scenario in light of the fact that we are putting more cars on the road, building more homes, and running more electronic devices with each day that passes.
Much of the info for this page was taken from Life After the Oil Crash, Page 2.
Click here to go to the next page to see what you can do to prepare for a peak oil energy crisis.
