The December 20, 2007 edition of the Pencil Warrior presented a version of what could be in store for every person on our planet with the oncoming peaking and subsequent decline in world oil production. At the extreme end of a possible future, disruptions and even permanent scarcity of the basic necessities of life as we have known it are likely.

Such a grim scenario is admittedly predicated on a failure of the human family to find and institutionalize alternative sources of energy. In the earlier piece I highlighted the potency of vested financial interests and political ideologues in steering us toward a future ruled by the dead-end technologies of non-renewable energy sources.

There are other reasons for holding a skeptical view of the outcome of this crisis, not least of which is that it is not widely held to be a crisis at all. Three decades after the international “oil shocks” of 1973 and 1979 caused temporary shortages that plunged financial markets in the industrialized world into panic, renewable forms of energy today comprise a measly 8 percent of worldwide supply. Meanwhile a growing chorus of scientists, petroleum industry professionals, and even investment bankers are warning that a head start of as much as 30 years will be needed to bridge an imminent gap between dwindling (and ozone polluting) energy supplies and a new generation of as-yet-unproven sources.

From media coverage and interpersonal dialog I’ve noted while preparing this series it seems most Americans either remain unaware of the race to find new energy systems or take for granted that technology will provide a smooth transition.

In an effort to dispel such blind faith, Richard Heinberg points out in his book The Party’s Over some fundamental criteria which must be considered before putting too much credence (not to mention massive monetary investment) into one or more likely successors to the oil economy.

First, there is the question of whether a potential source is renewable or not, the basic characteristic which has delivered us to this juncture. Into the non-renewable category goes petroleum (and tar sands), as well as natural gas, coal, nuclear power, and geothermal power. Citizens should critically investigate any claims of virtually unlimited supplies being made by the extremely entrenched industries in this group, not only due to their power to “massage” the truth but also due to the next consideration, EROEI (Energy Return On Energy Invested.)

In oil, coal, and uranium mining, the most easily extracted forms and deposits are extracted first, meaning more energy (such as diesel engines) must be expended to retrieve, transport, and process the remaining goods. As the price of petroleum rises, as it must, these production costs will spiral upward, driving down the EROEI ratio even further. Even some renewable forms of energy such as biodiesel and ethanol are hobbled by low EROEI for a variety of reasons. Nuclear power proponents regularly conceal that source’s extremely high costs of mining, plant construction and decommissioning, waste storage, and security, which give nuclear power a much lower EROEI than advertised.

The range of potential applications also limits most energy sources, which cannot match oil’s transportability or adaptability to a variety of uses. Power derived from solar, wind, geothermal sources, tides, and waves can’t be applied to transportation without conversion into expensive batteries, although these costs could be reduced with increased production. Obviously also these forms of energy can’t replace petroleum in the manufacture of chemicals or the mind-boggling array of plastic-based objects in everyday use.

Finally, potential forms of energy must be looked at through the lens of greenhouse gas production and environmental destruction. If we haven’t yet learned the earth is not a limitless “resource” for our exclusive use, we soon will with the end of affordable oil.

Comparing the range of possibilities through these criteria, one arrives at the conclusion that solar and wind power, despite current flaws including low EROEIs, offer the best hopes for avoiding a cataclysmic end to the age of fossil fuels. But the transition will necessarily need to begin soon, be coupled with rigorous conservation, and overcome serious challenges presented by our system of market capitalization.

Space does not permit a thorough examination of the merits of alternative energy forms, nor do I write as an expert witness. Hopefully the few tools presented here can help similarly-endowed citizens take the first steps toward registering their preferences in the critical energy decisions we must soon make, not only as a nation but as a species.

Dave Wheelock, a member of the Oneida Nation of Wisconsin, is a sports administrator and athletic coach who lives and home-studies in Socorro. Reach him at davewheelock (all one word) at yahoo.com. Mr. Wheelock's views do not necessarily represent those of Socorro News, but frequently do.

Copyright 2008, Dave Wheelock; all rights reserved.