Point-Counterpoint on Fossil Fuels
In this SALON article by Michael Lind, “Everything You’ve Heard About Fossil Fuels May Be Wrong,” he argues that humans still enjoy access to abundant fossil fuel-based energy resources, particularly with discovery of new natural gas reserves, and advancing energy recovery technology.
Andrew Leonard quickly penned a response published in SALON the next day, titled “A New Golden Age for Fossil Fuels? Huh?”, which stated that while there is plenty of natural gas and it is relatively cheap and clean compared to sources such as oil and coal, fossil fuels are still in limited supply, and all new natural gas sources can do is buy us a little more time to transform our energy supply to renewable sources.
What do you think?
CRAIG
here’s what I think about all of these “debates” –
– if the “we’ve got plenty of energy” side is wrong, there is an awful lot we’re going to lose. Oil won’t disappear, but it will become (it already HAS become) very costly to find and harvest.
For one example that might not be “top of mind” — the Green Revolution (in agriculture) is built on the back of fossil fuels
… not just to run the machines that make farming more productive, but take a little bit of a look at what goes into fertilizer.
– if the “Peak Oil is coming!” side (I include myself in there) is wrong, however . . . all we’ve done is waste a little money.
Considering the options for wasting money include making people on Wall Street even more filthy rich than they were in 2002 — as well as the price if the other guys are wrong and the “Peak Oil” side is right — I’d think common sense would dictate that we get ready for an oil-supply-constrained future
[which, by the way, I'm thinking we're already in].