What If We Never Run Out of Oil?
This was one of the only extended periods of time I was going to get at home for quite a while, so I sat down on the couch with my iPad and starting scanning the articles in the Longform app (http://longformapp.com/), which, by the way, is an excellent app that features articles from a wide variety of magazines that are all over 2000 words. The article that caught my eye was from Mother Jones, and was a reprint of an article by the same name from The Atlantic magazine, namely the title of this entry (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/05/what-if-we-never-run-out-of-oil/309294/).
The article starts out talking about methane hydrates, which evidently contain more than twice as much fossil fuel as all the current reserves of all fossil fuels (i.e. oil, coal and gas) combined, in the form of trapped methane. The article goes on to posit the title question, which is the natural question one, such as myself, would ask, given the news reports of constant new finds of fuel.
Though the article dwells hardly at all on the consequences of using all this fuel, it opens up the discussion about fossil fuels to include the possibility that exploitation of methane hydrates could extend even further the reign of these carbon dioxide sources. The author clearly thinks that if used properly, natural gas could be the "bridge fuel" that its proponents suggest.
I've been thinking extensively lately about climate change and whether it matters, whether we can stop it, and what to do about energy, in the larger context of changing our system of government and our economic system. It appears certain that, barring an overwhelming natural disaster or series of disasters that change the game, we are committed to using pretty much all the economically available fossil fuels on the planet. If the climate scientists and activists are right, this means "game over" for the planet, perhaps in my lifetime. This is a big deal.
Or is it? I really need some input on this. I just can't figure out whether to drop everything and get the movement started that will stop all this. Maybe I'm just overwhelmed by the enormity of it all. Because to stop the mining of fossil fuels would really require the complete revamping of the governmental and economic systems of the world. We're kind of doomed if we do, and doomed if we don't.
The article starts out talking about methane hydrates, which evidently contain more than twice as much fossil fuel as all the current reserves of all fossil fuels (i.e. oil, coal and gas) combined, in the form of trapped methane. The article goes on to posit the title question, which is the natural question one, such as myself, would ask, given the news reports of constant new finds of fuel.
Though the article dwells hardly at all on the consequences of using all this fuel, it opens up the discussion about fossil fuels to include the possibility that exploitation of methane hydrates could extend even further the reign of these carbon dioxide sources. The author clearly thinks that if used properly, natural gas could be the "bridge fuel" that its proponents suggest.
I've been thinking extensively lately about climate change and whether it matters, whether we can stop it, and what to do about energy, in the larger context of changing our system of government and our economic system. It appears certain that, barring an overwhelming natural disaster or series of disasters that change the game, we are committed to using pretty much all the economically available fossil fuels on the planet. If the climate scientists and activists are right, this means "game over" for the planet, perhaps in my lifetime. This is a big deal.
Or is it? I really need some input on this. I just can't figure out whether to drop everything and get the movement started that will stop all this. Maybe I'm just overwhelmed by the enormity of it all. Because to stop the mining of fossil fuels would really require the complete revamping of the governmental and economic systems of the world. We're kind of doomed if we do, and doomed if we don't.
Comments