The World systems are broken No solutions exist – yet Not enough solvers – too many making worse Up to you – yes YOU – to fix it Epic FAIL is not an option Mistake will be made Nice words don’t change a thing

We know energy is lighting, electricity and heat … but we often forget that energy is food, mobility and goods we consume Energy makes everything possible: life, work, economics, money, fun, design Without energy there is literally nothing Or more specifically a surplus of energy beyond our daily basic needs enables specialization and complex societies to grow In effect, energy is what makes the world go around. NOT money! Energy is life

Most of the forms of energy on earth are derived from the sun, it gives us a flux of solar radiation Sun also drives wind and hydrological patterns, giving us renewable energies in those forms Sun also makes most of our fuels : biomass (food, biofuels), which was also turned into fossil fuels a hundred million years ago. In addition we have some radiactive materials we can use for nuclear power (not solar derived) We then turn these fuels, usually via burning into heat, then into mechanical energy and finally to electricity We then transport electricity, or store it in storage containers like batteries or hydrogen (maybe in the future) Finally we use various energy processes (mainly electricity) to turn the energies into useful services that we use everyday: Heating our buildings Lighting places Powering machines Moving from place to another Using machines and plant fuels to make food etc

Now, let’s simplify even more If we are to run our socities as it is, the services represent energy DEMAND, that is use of energy. That grows c. 2% p.a. Further, if we are to run our societies the way they are built now, they run almost completely on fossil fuels. So let’s forget about solar for now (short-to-mid term) So, what is left are fossil fuels and demand for energy. That’s the most simplified model that captures almost 90% of the way we use energy today and majority of the way we are likely to use in the near future.

We have moved from: Human labor to use of animal labor Then via steam engine from burning of Wood to burning of Coal From Coal to Oil and also Natural Gas Every transition has been from a energy source that is superior (more dense), providing more energy per unit of measure + very little renewables and nukes Almost all our useful work is now driven by fuels which we turn into different forms of energy (heat, movement, light, etc)

Marchetti: Siirtymä aina huonommasta polttoaineesta parempaan, jossa suurempi energiatiheys Siirtymä huipulta huipulle n. 50v Seuraava siirtymä: paremmasta heikompaan polttoaineeseen ja pitäisi tapahtua alle 50 vuodessa

Our energy use, or primary fuel mix is 82% fossil fuels Most of that comes from oil Oil use is extremely rapid, over 1000 barrels of oil every second, c.85-87 million barrels every day Natural gas is heat, electricity and petrochemicals (incl. Industrial agriculture) Without these we don’t have: personal mobility, exotic goods, cheap clothes from Asia, trips to Hawaii, plastics, computers, television, phones, How much is this use? The amount of an average citizen uses fossil fuels each day represent the slave labor equivalent of 300 slaves for each citizen In effect we are living today like kings of the days gone by

So what exactly does energy support in our consumption. Let's see some examples: Goods - Raw materials are extracted (electricity, oil and natural gas are used) - Materials are distributed (oil, electricity) - Goods are manufactured (electricity, petrochemicals out of natural cas) - Goods are delivered (oil for boats, planes and automobiles) - Goods are sold (electricity, lots of it) - Goods are disposed of (again oil, electricity – also giving back a fraction of energy when recycled – or actually downcycled) Same goes for Food, which is in it's current industrial agricultural form highly fossil fuel dependent: - fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides (from natural gas and oil) - machines (use oil) - delivery (uses oil) - refining and food manufacturing (uses electricity and petrochemicals made out of natural gas) - sales and delivery (electricity and oil) And again our mobility by land, air and sea is 97% fossil fuels based and 80% oil based And every other major area of consumption production system is permeated by massive uses of coal produced electricity & heat, natural gas driven petrochemicals and oil based mobility of people and goods In fact, almost everything consumed for most people in the world is either directly or indirectly subsidized by cheap, abundant and constantly available fossil fuels One could say we are eating, consuming and moving (based on) fossil fuels. Without fossil fuels and especially oil, which is the only liquid fuel available to us in current volumes, global economy in it's current form would not be possible.

The remaining 50% of conventional oil: expensive & slow to produce, less energy Unconventional oil (oil shale, tar sands) produce even more slowly, is really expensive and URR unknown (e.g. Shell/Alberta, pit mine, 700C for 3 years, seeps out) In summary: there is less oil to go around, it’s more expensive and lower quality How fast/cheap oil is to pump, move, refine is most important, not the amount of oil Dilemma: need to pump faster to maintain production => faster decline Oil left: more expensive, slower to produce & gives less energy / barrel Newly found resources requires lot of capital and resources to become useful Not all oil is equal: oil from 1940 contained x more joule/barrel than oil from 2005 It takes more and more energy to get energy out of oil Tar-sand oil has only x% of joules/barrel compared to 2004 oil and x% to 1940 oil We are near the point were it costs more to get and refine oil than the market is able to pay We near the moment were there is simply no oil to be taken form the earth

We find the big fields first (dispersive discovery model) Each Field produces roughly as a logistic function Together all fields summed produce aggregate as a rough logistic fit Once peak production (flow/day) is reached, there is still roughly 40-50% oil left in the ground to be produced However, each subsequent field found and brought online for production slows the decline rate, but doesn't move the peak forward mostly at all

As oil becomes harder to produce, once must Use more energy to get it use more money to get it Use more of the all the energy in society for energy production (more and more each day) Use more of the all the money in the society for energy production (more and more each day) … until a cheaper and easier to produce energy source is found and substitutes for oil in daily use

Oil production is subject to so called above ground factors, in addition to the below ground geological factors One such limit is the increasing consumption growth of oil producing and exporting nations. Their internal consumption is growing faster than their production This means less and less for export. That is, for you and me. All the big oil producing nations subsidize their internal oil consumption (oil is artificially cheap domestially), causing excessive consumption demand of oil

All the OECD countries have been claimed to become increasingly energy efficient According to theory, they are producing more and more GDP with less and less energy per unit of GDP This is partially a statistical fallacy in the global scheme. What rich OECD countries have done, is to export their energy consumption to developing countries and imported the energy into their countries as products in which the energy is embedded Now, energy consumption should be booked to the country where the consumption happens However, if we were to calculate the net exchange of imports/exports for their energy content, OECD countries are actually importing an additional 25%-30% of their energy from developing countries Without these cheap goods, the living standards of OECD would be considerably different, as would be their energy consumption (which would be officially higher)

Unconventional oils, like oil shale and tar sands are very expensive, time consuming and greenhouse gas producing to turn into crude oil equivalents. The GHG emissions are roughly twice that of conventional crude oil, which isn't pretty to begin with

With high likelyhood we are facing a long and structural transition away from fossil fuels (ref. Batteries of nature) to sustainable energy forms This transition, due to our current consumption rate, the possibility of limited flow of fossil fuel production and the time it takes to build up energy infrastructure, may pose serious challenges. We may run into an energy deficit where demand for c. 1.2% -1.8% annual economic growth average would greatly exceed available production Turning rapidly into bio-fuels, esp. Current generation fuels made out of feedstock or forests would likely worsen our food and deforestation crises Moving over to alternatives is also a huge investment challenge in terms of the amount of money required out of the whole GDP globally During transition we may have to rely increasingly on coal, which is fairly cheap and plentiful, but quite dirty. Carbon Capture is yet no panacea here and may require up to 25% out of the energy output of a coal plant In addition to all this, it is not guaranteed that the remaining assumed oil reserves are actually there and can be produced at the flow rates assumed

An important concept for fuels or energy uses is Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) EROI tells us how many units of energy you get back by investing one unit of energy. Anything below 1 is a net energy loser and cannot sustain any activity for long. Current oil production is estimated to be at around 14:1. So for each oil barrel worth of energy spent on oil production, one still gets back c. 14 barrels of oil or so. This ratio diminishes as we near oil peak, oil fields start to age, they go into production decline and the remaing oil is harder to produce and is of worse quality Most liquid fuel alternatives are much worse off. The smaller the net energy ratio you have, the less energy is left for society at large (other than energy production) – see scale on the vertical axis The figures given are illustrative and are bound to be wrong, but not by an order of magnitude. It has been estimated that our current type of complex societies may require a net energy ratio of EROI of about 8:1 to be run without a significant risk of system failure. What this means is that bio-fuels cannot replace fossil base conventional oil.

You can read a lot about different claimed HUGE oil finds like the Santos Basin off the coast of Brazil. In addition, Arctic is supposed to hold untold oil treasures beneath the sea surface. However, when converted to current level of oil consumption rate, we quickly notice how small these huge finds are. Further, oil cannot be produced by sticking a straw into the oil field and sucking it dry. Oil must be produced over a long span of time (due to geological and physical constraints), so any huge oil find is likely to be produced over a span of time of 50 or so years. In this regard, it is easy to see how small impact even these huge potential oil finds make to the overall picture. They don't change the timing of the peak materially, although they may slow the rapid decline after the peak.

Current economic stability is said to require a yearly economic growth of c. 1.6%-1.8% per annum. The oil consumption demand growth is coming mainly from Asia and Middle-East. This constitutes as the Business As Usual (BAU) demand. However, as we near the peak (year 2020 is illustrative, we cannot know for sure the time of the peak), more and more of the oil is uncertain. Uncertain if it's there, uncertain if we can produce it, uncertain if we can deliver it at a price (and EROI) that makes sense. Uncertain that producers actually want to export it. In a recent study by UK Energy Resource Center (2009), the uncertain part of global oil production was c. 65% of all potential BAU demand by 2030. Even by 2020, in the worst case scenario, this would require that we find 4 new Saudi Arabia's (world's biggest oil producer) worth of oil and magically put all of that into production at world breaking speed. That oil has not been found, nor are the plans to put it into production. Oil fields take roughly 5-7 years to be built into production after which the production flow rate starts to grow slowly. Even if Iraq and Iran could be turned into roaring successes, Brazil would have much more oil than imagined and West Africa + Gulf of Mexico would produce new gigantic oil finds, we'd still be missing roughly up to 4 Saudi Arabia's worth of oil production capacity to run Business as Usual. These figures, as anything about the future, are wrong. It's just a matter of how much. Even if they are off by 50%, the challenges ahead are still big.

So, what could it mean: High energy prices, disruptions in energy services (like electricity, heating) locally Less food security, less exotic foods from all around the world, more expensive food Less profligate energy consumption : throwaway consumption, excessive consuming cars, seasonal fashion, gadgets, air travel, exotic holidays Medical industry is also fairly petrochemical dependent so price rices there would be likely However, a more effortful life-style (more biking, anyone?) might also reduce our obesity. It certainly happened in Cuba during 90s oil crisis In addition, the world's poorest are the most likely to be hit hardest and first: food becomes increasingly more expensive, even for aid organizations. Also, those who have access to electricity produce it mainly with diesel generators, which were already starved of diesel during the 2008 oil price spike Also, it would be likely, that if things with oil availability would continue bad for a long period of time, we'd turn more and more to using coal

What makes a society? Many say it is the hierarchical complexity that allows the development of higher human endeavors beyond basic daily survival. Activities like higher learning, philosophy, arts, culture in general and other peculiarly human pursuits. According to Joseph Tainter, an archeologist who has studied the collapses of past complex societies, this complexity of societies is kept going by a surplus of energy. An energy surplus is excess energy left over after the daily basic activities have been completed. The surplus allows for growth of complexity and thus, growth of societies which then consume more energy - reducing the surplus – unless more energy is produced for consumption. The break point and fall of societies is at level of societal complexity when the basic societal functions start to consume increasingly more energy than is available. Energy production cannot keep up with societal demand and if society's ability to downsize to a new energy paradigm is not fast enough – a collapse happens. Most societies studied by Tainter have collapsed, by not being able to reduce complexity along with the energy surplus going down. Chinese Han and Tang dynasties being an exception and achieving an ordered powerdown by reducing complexity through decentralisation.

It has also been studied and argued by many scholars, that the world's sustainable population without the excess energy offered by fossil fuels is roughly below one billion. Conversely it has been asked, what might happen to the population, once the amount of energy / capita starts to diminish and the effects work their way through the food production chain and daily energy consumption. Needless to say, not all scenarios out of this question come out as happy ones.

This discussion is just scratching the surface. We could go on and on about 3rd and 4th generation biofuels, all possible energy efficiency measures, the amount required for renewable energy investments, the doom and gloom scenarios of mad max type survival and huge resource wars. However, all this does not take us forward. The risk remains, even though hard to pin point accurately in time or to quantify with statistics. Also, once the decline starts from the peak, the reduction in available energy can be in the worst case fairly rapid. This could stress our socities ability to cope with the change the the energy starvation diet. As such, we just have to move along from trying to analyze all the nitty gritty details and consider what we could to proactively.

Often the response can be roughly divided into 3 groups: Denial – can't be true. Why isn't this something the politicians talk about (they are), why aren't scientists studying this (they are) and why isn't the media reporting this (they are) Doom – oh, it's all going to a hell in a hand basket. Abandon all hope all ye who enter here, etc. Perhaps not the most upbeat and personally not the most constructive strategy Determination – ok, so this might happen. What can we do about it and let's do it! Even a good try is worth it.

UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown - Used up all their Oil, now building LNG import capacity and may have to reopen coal mines in the future US President Barack Obama Uses 25% of world's oil, fights wars for oil on two fronts, more drilling on GoM, subsidizes completely useless bio-ethanol from corn China Premier Wen JiaBao Buying up oil reserves in ME, Africa, GoM, etc. Building new coal power plants every 10 days or so Russia President Vladimir Putin Increasing domestic natural gas and oil consumption extremely rapid. Uses energy as a geopolitical tool Saudi Arabia Minister of energy Ali Ibrahim al-Naimi Abruptly warns OECD countries NOT to transition to alternative oils or Saudis may have to raise the oil price (and kill the economy) Brazil president Luiz 'Lula' Da Silva - Drilling activity through the roof. Deforestation problems due to biofuel. Still, perhaps the most sane current generation biofuel program and lots of wind / solar potential, most of which still remain untapped

Electricity is no substitute directly. 1st electricity must be produced from other sources (88% fossils, biofuels can't scale, not enough renewable harnessed yet). Second, our societies run on liquid fossil fuels. We can't pour electricity into a gas tank or fly planes with it. At least not yet. Remember Marchetti's transition cycles: c. 50 years from peak to peak. Also, hydrogen is a battery, as it's not found freely on earh and can't be gathered. It must be produced – again using electricity. This whole cycle of using, say electricity to split hydrogen from water, storing hydrogen in fuel cells, using cells to produce electricity and that electricity to drive our machines – all this is hugely inefficient. About 80% of energy is lost in conversions. Even chemical batteries are much better. There is some slight light at the end of the tunnel if direct photocatalytic conversion of hydrogen from water using sunlight could be harnessed, but even that wouldn't solve the efficiency well-to-wheel issues. Further, hydrogen is like no other element in the world and requires it's own infrastructe of transport and delivery. We don't have that yet and it would take decades to build. Some expert researchers, like Ulf Bossel, are directly advocating against spending time and energy on wasteful hydrogen processes. Instread he advocates other approaches from renewable sources and using different type of storages.

Once oil starts to go down in daily production flow, we will most likely turn more and more to natural gas (relatively clean) and coal (not so clean). However, even the flow rate maximum peaks of these two remain in question. If we look at some recent estimates of all combined fossil fuels PER CAPITA we notice that even this energy flow could by 2020. The situtation is a bit less challengin if we just look at the aggregate word production estimate (and not per capita). We just have to figure out a way to distribute the available energy in somewhat fair manner.

Current biofuels on a large scale do not offer a practical alternative to conventional oil. They are just too energy and labor intensive to produce. Next generation cellulosic based fuels offer better alternatives, but even they are unlikely to scale to more than 10% of all energy consumption by 2030.

From Dennis Meadows: • Assume 4 year construction time. • Assume 40 year operating life. • Assume energy payback is 10. • One plant starts to give net energy in the 9th year. • A system building one plant/year gives positive net energy in the 13th year. • A system building 10% more plants each year gives positive net energy in the 15th year. • A system building 20% more plants each year never breaks even. Topmost we can also see that unsubsidized nuclear power isn't amongst the cheapest energy forms in many parts of the world were wind and solar are plentiful. That's not to say nuclear energy would be a total waste or that it will not be build. It is highly likely that nuclear will be a big part of the energy production mix for a long time into the future. Fusion energy is still, as always, roughly 25-40 years off. Time will tell…

Wind power is the fastest revenue and net energy payback generating new power generation type we have currently. Of course, it is limited to it's usefulness due to intermittency and availability, but huge amounts of untapped wind potential still remain to be used.

Solar energy, in many different ways (indirect, biomass, passive, concentrated, thin-film, pv, et) will probably be a big mix of the energy mix in the future. Solar energy is plentiful around many parts of the world, technology is getting better and cheaper. The remaining challenges are mega-project challenges: construction would be multi-national, there are geopolitical, security and funding issues. There are plans to build a huge solar power plant into Sahara and grid the electricity back to ME and Europe (hopefully also to Africa!) using new multinational super-grids. Still, it's currently just a plan.

IEEE Spectrum magazine article illustrated the roughly equivalent of one year's worth of oil consumption (a cubic mile of oil) as other electricity production equivalents. The figures here have been changed to scale down the challenge, based on the public criticism of the article. Input oil: 6120 * 10^6 MJ/brl * 10^3 brl/s = 6120 GW Let's say only 1/3 becomes useful output and is thus comparable to equivalent electricity amount Assumptions: 3-gorges: 22GWe (200) Nuke (modern, like Olkiluoto-3): 1.6GWe (2500) Coal (modern, not-CHP): 1GWe (5020) Solar installation panel: (4500M) Wind Turbine: 1.5MWe (1.5M) Yet, even with these modifications, the challenge is huge. Our constant oil consumption is so vast that replacing it with any type of other electricity production seems like a long way off.

Robert Hirsch and other consultants did a groundbreaking study for the department of energy in USA in 2006. They estimated how many years would it take to mitigate the effects of global oil peak, if we started well in advance of the peak. They estimated it would take about 20 years for a crash course to make big counter-effect for the consequences of oil peak. This means starting 20 years before the oil peak.

Electricy: 99% off grid Technology: mostly 70s tech, some upgraded Heating: passive & active solar, wood burning stoves, great insulation Greenhouse: parasitic heat off the house. Can grow bananas (for the past 29 years!)   Remarkable considering how difficult the conditions are (as harsh or harder than South Finland)   Location: Snowmass, Rocky mountains, Colorado Elevation: 2 200 meters Climate zone: Dry Arid (roughly same as Hämeenlinna & Helsinki) Latitude: 39.3 deg N (Helsinki is 60.10 N) Temp mininum avg: c. -26 C (avg -18C during wintertime) Temp maximum avg: c. +32 C (avg +24C during summertime) Rainfall: min 0, max 3800mm, avg 70mm Snowfall: min 0, max 38cm, avg 10cm

Electricity generation Transportation Food Consumption redirection Education Innovation There are plenty of opportunities.

Sustainable Energy Flow Why it's a Game Changer

Framing the talk… "In 1960 I published a book that attempted to direct attention to the possibility of a thermonuclear war, to ways of reducing the likelihood of such a war, and to methods for coping with the consequences should war occur despite our efforts to avoid it.” "We must appreciate these possibilities. We cannot wish them away.“ - Herman Kahn, ‘In Defense of Thinking’, 1990

Overview of Presentation The Challenge Energy: Flow, Fuel, Process, Store & Use Fuel Consumption & Dependence Flow Sustainability But What Does it All Mean? The Response (so far) More Oil Coal Renewables New Challenges Summary

Part I – The Challenge

Systemic Background Summary + + + + + +

A B C of Energy LIGHT HEAT ELECTRICITY FOOD GOODS MOVEMENT

Energy Forms Energy Source Flux (flow) Fuels (source) Processes Storage Services Heating Lighting Powering Moving Farming Etc. Practically Everything we use today

Energy Supply & Demand Simplified Flux (flow) Fossil Fuels Services Heating Lighting Powering Moving Farming Etc. Practically Everything Energy Demand Energy supply

From Energy to Fuels Sources of useful work 1850-1980 World Primary Fuel Transitions Primary Energy Substitution Models: On the Interaction Between Energy and Society , Cesare marchetti, 1974

Source: Luís de Sousa (orig. Cesare Marchetti), Institute of Technology, Lisbon Aika Kulutus Historical Fuel Transitions 50 years 50 years 50 years

The Fuels We Consume Fossil Fuels = 82-88% of world consumption Source: BP Statistical Review 2009, World Energy Outlook 2009 (IEA)

Fossils Everywhere Extraction Distribution Manufacture Delivery Sales Disposal Growing Harvesting Logistics Food refining Packaging Sales & Delivery Design Manufacture Logistics Sales Use Infrastructure Medical Water Buildings Roads Tourism Telecoms Goods Food Movement The Rest

+16% +214% +231% +685% ~ 1000% Source: Energy Use in the US Food System , Science, vol. 184 Eating Oil Source: FAO, 2009

The Slavery of Oil 1 brl = 6120 Megajoules 16 brls/yr/capita (Finland) Oil = 40 energy slaves working 24/7 365d/year for every Finn All fuel forms ~ 120 slaves / capita (Finland ~ all of EU+USA) ≈

201x – 202x (?) Easy oil Cheaper High Quality More energy Less work Production/ Price / Net Energy Time Price $ Production profile Production maximum i.e. Sustainable Flow Peak Production profitability cut-off Oil left in ground? Net energy ratio Limits to Flows #1 - Geology Hard oil Expensive Lower quality Less Energy More work More time More investment

Later fields only slow decline. New recovery methods also only slow decline Limits to Flows #2 - Physics Source: Michael R. Smith (Energy Files Ltd.)

Limits to Flows #3 - Economics Energy Spent Energy Made Money created Money Spent Smaller EROEI => More Money Spent on Energy Source: Charles C. Hall (Export Land Model)

Limits to Flows #4 – Politics Source: Jeffrey Brown (Export Land Model) Production after the Peak Oil available for export (i.e. You and me) Internal Consumption by Producing Nations National Energy Politics After Oil Peak Limit Availability Geopolitical risks (wars, etc)

OECD Energy Consumption Outsourced via eMergy to BRIC Techno-fix Illusion Source: ARC Financial Research, BP Statistical rEview 2008, IME, OECD, UN

+100% 'Sustainable' – What?! Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Oil & Unconventional Alternatives Emissions, gramms of coal / MJ Source: Adam R. Brandt, Alex E. Farrell, University of California, Berkley

Down, Down, Down We Go Lähde: Energy Watch Group / Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik GmbH Business As Usual Demand Energy Crisis Food & Forestry Loss Infrastruct. funding challenge Dirty Energy Unsure Production

Can't Have Your Cake & Eat it Too Biogas Biodiesel Oil sands Tar sands Bioethanol Oil (current) Net energy cliff Energy for society Energy consumed in producing energy for society Source: Global Energy Crisis and its Role in the Pending Collapse of the Global Economy (The Oil Drum), Euan Mearns

Drill, Baby, Drill! Santos Basin, 8 Bb <100 days (spread over 50+ years) ANWR, 2.6 Bb ~ 30 days Arctic, 90 Bb <3 years

Production Uncertain: 2015 ~ 20% 2020 ~ 40% 2025 ~ 55% 2030 ~ 65% … of all demand BAU demand Here Comes that Sinking Feeling… Source: UK Energy Research Center, 2009 Time Liquid Fuels Production, 10E6 barrels/day Lowest availability scenario 4 New Saudi Arabias needed by 2020 just to stay even +4 new Saudis +4 new Saudis

Yeah, Yeah – What does it All Mean?

Energy surplus availability Complexity of society time Energy surplus / complexity overshoot undershoot Carrying capacity Doom & Gloom in 2 mins

Population supported by Energy Da Population Bomb

Yes-but, no-but, because… Investment needs: $26,3 trillion USD 2010-2030

The Response – 3 Ds Denial Doom Determination

Politics - More of the Same "We must now leave behind the old wasteful, oil dependent ways of yesterday." "America can be the 21st century clean energy leader by harnessing the power of alternative and renewable energy." "...Overcome the difficulties facing developing countries, including the immediate challenges of soaring oil and food prices." "We see higher energy efficiency as one of the key factors for energy security and future development." "In time, the world will transition away from fossil fuels, but we don't know what fuels." "Brazil will not relinquish its environmental agenda and simply turn into an oil giant. We plan to consolidate our role as a world power in green energy."

False Prophets Electricity Hydrogen Shuji Nakamura's team: Direct synthesis of hydrogen from (sun)light But…

The King Coal & The Queen Gas Source: Olduvai Revisited 2008, Luis de Sousa (TheOildrum.com)

Bio-fools – Scenario USA

To Nuke or Not to Nuke? Source: Phenomena, Fact and Physics, ULF Bossel, European Sustainable Energy Forum / Peak Oil & Limits To Growth, Dennis Meadows, ASPO5 / Lazzard 2009 Energy invested (eMergy + losses) Net Energy delivery Energy pay-back Energy for shut-down maintenance Energy needed for decommissioning Lifetime Net Energy delivereed Time Energy 0 Initial Energy Loss Non-productive time

Wind Power Fast Source: Phenomena, Fact and Physics, ULF Bossel, European Sustainable Energy Forum / Peak Oil & Limits To Growth, Dennis Meadows, ASPO5

Solar Future Source: Phenomena, Fact and Physics, ULF Bossel, European Sustainable Energy Forum / Peak Oil & Limits To Growth, Dennis Meadows, ASPO5

2040 90 1275 1 520 000 000 547 500 Source: Joules, BTUs, Quads--Let's Call the Whole Thing Off, IEEE Spectrum (I/O-adjusted to 30% output from oil input) Scaling the Energy Mountain 1000brl/s 2040 90 1275 1 520 000 000 547 500

Time is of the Essence Source: Hirsch, R.L. et al., Peaking of World Oil Production:  Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management (Department of Energy) Potential shortfall by 2030 : 75-80 Mbpd

Increased efficiency results (historically) in increased demand = savings lost If you save, economic growth goes into decline. Unacceptable by current theory Price / unit Quantity Original supply/price curve More efficient supply/price curve Orig. price Cheaper price Increased demand Orig. demand Efficiency – Close but no Cigar Demand/price function

Less is More Source: Phenomena, Fact and Physics, ULF Bossel, European Sustainable Energy Forum HARD LIMIT NEEDED?

Powerdown

Rocky Mountain Institute – 99% self-sufficient Amory Lovins – home-grown bananas for the past 29 years Case – The Bananas Man Colder in Winter – Hotter in Summer More Rain & Bit more sunshine Built on 70s Tech w/ some upgrades

BIOCHAR – Not a Car Less Fertilizer Improve Soil Less Emissions Energy Source Less CO2 Local Efficient Improve yields

I've Seen the Future "I have been over into the future, and it works." – Joseph L. Steffens

<Your Idea Goes Here>

Summary Spells: O P P O R T U N I T Y