By: michael baram

michael baram — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 03:17:16 +0000

Yergin is fully informed and respects the facts, in this case the global consensus that there are abundant global supplies of oil, natural gas, and gas hydrates which have been located by incredible advances in seismic imaging and can be exploited by incredible advances in offshore and onshore drilling and production technologies. Thus, new rigs and drilling methods for deepwater and Arctic sources are being put to use and are now used to enable drilling from floating rigs atop 5,000 ft of seawater to 15,000 ft or more into the seabed…some 4 miles from floating rigs to deeply buried deposits…with even greater distances in the works. Altho these resources and their exploitability are finite, it will be many decades before these resources are consumed to the point that they no longer meet demand. So yes, this truth is inconvenient for all of us who hope for a renewable energy world hastened by an imminent shortage of oil and gas…it will take longer than we expected. And it will require more leadership than provided by McKibben. All I remember after reading his latest book is that it resembled an exercise in Googling for bad things that he attributed to climate change and provided some dubious models of local renewable projects in VT such as composting dead cattle for methane. So its time for a reality check and determine what can be done systematically to reduce energy consumption and advance renewables despite the abundance of oil and gas for the foreseeable future.

By: Timothy Harwood

Timothy Harwood — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:25:19 +0000

This is a well written blog that deserves a lot of attention. If Dr. Yergin is correct – and “The Economist” for ones agrees in large part with him – then climate change advocates are faced with a tough dilemma. If there will never be an economic reason for leaving fossil fuels behind, then the only rationale for doing so is climate change. For those who dispute climate change – a large and seemingly growing part of the America’s electorate – that would be never. So, it pits one ideology against the other – climate change is a myth, let’s create jobs vs. climate change is happening, let’s sacrifice in the short term to avoid long-term disaster. To date, climate change advocates, for better or worse, are losing that battle, and America’s culture wars have shown they are ill-equipped to fight it.

Comments on: Doctor Yergin’s dilemma

By: michael baram

By: Timothy Harwood