User:LordsReform/test

Fossil fuel availability

Main article: Hubbert peak theory

The controversy between Global warming and Global fuel depletion essentially is a debate between climatologists and geologists/mining experts over the extent to which economically available fossil fuels can cause global warming.

Typical of the climatologists perspective is the stern report which like many other reports, notes the past correlation between CO₂ emissions and economic growth and then extrapolates using a "business as usual" scenario to predict GDP growth and hence CO₂ levels. The report states:

“ Increasing scarcity of fossil fuels alone will not stop emissions growth in time. The stocks of hydrocarbons that are profitable to extract are more than enough to take the world to levels of CO₂ well beyond 750ppm with very dangerous consequences for climate change impacts ”

Similarly Livermore National Laboratory suggesting that: "the earth would warm by 8 degrees Celsius (14.5 degrees Fahrenheit) if humans use the entire planet’s available fossil fuels by the year 2300." However others believe the climate will reach a "tipping point" leading to run away global warming as e.g. warming causes sea ice to melt reducing the area of reflective ice.[4]

However geologist such as R.W.Bently based in the real world of mining and prospecting are less optimistic and base their estimates of available fossil fuels

“ the non-conventional resources are large, while the recoverable resources, when seen against near-term technologies, are not so generous. ”

Several experts have questioned the presumption underlying most predictions of global warming, namely that fossil fuels are effectively unlimited within the timescale of global warming predictions. In a controversial paper from Uppsala in Sweden[5], the authors warn that all the fuel will be burnt before there is enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to realise predictions of "melting ice caps and searing temperatures". Another paper from the Journal de Physique [6] reported that:

“ The unlikely aspect of the extreme scenarios does not dismiss the climate change problem, as some possible "modified medium scenarios", with an energy consumption or population that would not rise as quickly as assumed, but that would call massively on coal after oil becomes expensive, still bear a very significant menace, in the sense that they still lead to a couple degrees increase in the known simulations ”

Hubbert peak theory

The the Hubbert peak theory, is a model predicting the output from a natural resource such as an oil, gas or coal field and is used by most oil companies and governments.

Peak Oil

2004 U.S. government predictions for oil production other than in OPEC and the former Soviet Union

According to Matthew Simmons, Chairman of Simmons & Company International the peak oil model indicates that global oil production may have peaked in December 2005, however the US government are more cautious and estimate [7] world supply of oil will peak in 2015. As burning oil is a major contributor to Greenhouse warming the peak oil theory predicts that the contribution from burning oil will decline after the point of peak oil production has passed and therefore the contribution of crude oil to global will also decrease.

Peak Natural Gas

According to Bentley, world gas production will peak anywhere from 2010 to 2020. Since compressed natural gas powered cars are already available in North America, peak oil and peak gas are related for transportation usage.

Results of Hubert Model and Three Supply/Demand Scenarios

Method	Hubbert Model	Production Meeting Demand
Scenario	.	Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2004	Flat gas consumption and greater coal consumption	Flat gas consumption and synfuels from coal to replace oil
Peak Year	2032	2060	2053	2035

Source of data: USGS, EIA

Peak Coal

Gregson Vaux has analyzed the expected peak in U.S. coal production (the world’s largest reserves of coal)[8]. A scenario assumming future coal demand will exactly follow the EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2004 suggested coal will peak in 2060. However, the report on which this was based was published before it was widely accepted that U.S. gas production had peaked and that growth of LNG would be difficult. Another scenario assumming that U.S. gas consumption could not grow beyond 2002 levels (growth in electrical demand must be met by coal instead of gas) forecast coal to peak in 2053. The final scenario assumming flat natural gas consumption and oil peaking in 2010 with synfuels produced from coal forecast a peak in 2035.

Peak fossil fuel

Both oil and gas peak before coal. Since coal is a replacement for both fuels (synthetic fuels can be produced from coal using the process currently employed by the Sasol Company in South Africa), the final peak decline in fossil fuel output will follow peak coal which is predicted to peak in the US (the largest world reserve of coal), sometime between 2032 and 2060, with earlier dates more likely if coal is used as a partial substitute for plateauing or declining global oil supplies and North American natural gas supplies [9]

The IPCC climate reports use a range of scenarios.

File:Carbon Dioxide Scenarios.png

IPCC Scenarios for 2100

File:Carbon Dioxide Emissions Scenarios png

IPCC Carbon Dioxide Emission Scenarios for 2100

A1 The A1 storyline is a case of rapid and successful economic development, in which regional average income per capita converge meaning that current distinctions between "poor" and "rich" countries eventually dissolve. Global population grows to some nine billion by 2050 but declines due to increasingly world affluence to about seven billion by 2100. The global economy expands at an average annual rate of about 3% to 2100, reaching around US$550 trillion. This scenario is based on an assummed continuation the same average global growth since 1850, although the IPCC admit: “the conditions that lead to this global growth in productivity and per capita incomes in the scenario are unparalleled in history.” [10]

Within the A1 scenario family there is some diversity over the mix of energy sources and conversion technologies.

A2 The A2 world "consolidates" into a series of economic regions. Self-reliance in terms of resources and less emphasis on economic, social, and cultural interactions between regions are characteristic for this future. Economic growth is uneven and the income gap between now-industrialized and developing parts of the world does not narrow, unlike in the A1 and B1 scenario families. With the emphasis on family and community life, fertility rates decline relatively slowly, which makes the A2 population the largest among the storylines (15 billion by 2100).

The fuel mix in different regions is determined primarily by resource availability. High-income but resource-poor regions shift toward advanced post-fossil technologies (renewables or nuclear), while low-income resource-rich regions generally rely on older fossil technologies. Final energy intensities in A2 decline with a pace of 0.5 to 0.7% per year.

B1 The central elements of the B1 future are a high level of environmental and social consciousness combined with a globally coherent approach to a more sustainable development. Economic development in B1 is balanced, and efforts to achieve equitable income distribution are effective. As in A1, the B1 storyline describes a fast-changing and convergent world, but the priorities differ. Whereas the A1 world invests its gains from increased productivity and know-how primarily in further economic growth, the B1 world invests a large part of its gains in improved efficiency of resource use ("dematerialization"), equity, social institutions, and environmental protection.

B2 The B2 world is one of increased concern for environmental and social sustainability compared to the A2 storyline. Increasingly, government policies and business strategies at the national and local levels are influenced by environmentally aware citizens, with a trend toward local self-reliance and stronger communities. International institutions decline in importance, with a shift toward local and regional decision-making structures and institutions. Human welfare, equality, and environmental protection all have high priority, and they are addressed through community-based social solutions in addition to technical solutions, although implementation rates vary across regions.

Links

• [11]
• [12]
• New Scientist
• [13]
• Global oil & gas depletion: an overview, R.W. Bentley, Energy Policy, 30, 189–205, 2002 [14]
• Graphs