The SA Liberal Party is considering electrification of the rail network as a policy. This is a progressive step. The Labor Government says there is no money for that (but there is money for a desalination plant).

It would help if the feds would divert money into electric rail and tram infrastructure instead of highways and tax cuts. Would be short term economically neutral and long term very positive.

Too many powerful pro-car lobby groups.

The next story after this one on that episode of PM was talking about the rising cost of food. Energy input to farmers was glossed over as just another increase in cost as was increase in fertilizer. No links, no deafening sound on the other shoe dropping. But we got a mention so that is a good thing...

Seems to be that "scramble" is a euphemism, and not about warming.

Chris

To put the whole Climate Change issue into perspective vis-a-vis the Peak Oil Crisis, everyone needs to ask themselves, their associates, all sitting elected officials and those seeking office, especially the office of President of the United States, "What is more threatening in both the long and short terms, a beneficial 1 degree F rise in average world temperatures over the past 100 years, or a 1 percent decline in world oil production over the last 100 weeks - with steepening declines forecast? Furthermore, can our economy better deal with declining fuel inventories in an environment of persistent warming, or in an environment of declining average temperatures over the next several decades, the most likely, and the most serious, scenario given the highly reliable solar inertial motion (SIM) model forecasts of climate change?" Everyone is going to make their Kyoto targets whether they plan to or not, so we all need to let go of the Global Warming boogy-man. It does not matter, and it is foolish and arrogant to think that somehow humans can change the climate.

I think it is very encouraging that CEO's of large IOC's are coming forward to acknowledge PO. I hope that sooner, rather than later, this will help to raise public awareness, which in turn might motivate our political leaders to tackle this serious issue. There are too many discouraging crisis unfolding at an ever increasing rate and I can only hope we find a way to deal with them. Thinking that it is "too late" achieves nothing, even if it is true.

As to jjauregui's comment that "we all need to let go of the Global Warming boogy-man. It does not matter, and it is foolish and arrogant to think that somehow humans can change the climate", I find this remark extremely misinformed and simply wrong. Humans are changing the climate. This is no longer in dispute within the scientific community. And although we should all be very concerned over PO, climate stability must be our priority even as we seek to mitigate this crisis. After all, what is worse, losing our energy intensive way of life or losing the integrity of our biosphere (read - losing our lives). While PO should reduce CO2 emissions - most climate scientists agree that we have perhaps less than a decade to act in significantly reducing GHG emissions if we are to avoid climate catastrophe - I'm afraid that as oil declines we will use more and more coal to compensate. This would be disasterous and I hope we as citizens demand that our leaders instead focus on renewable energy and sustainable living to meet the challenges PO presents.

Opinions, based on much study: I believe we will have BOTH peak oil and global warming. As others have mentioned, although oil will become scarcer, we will continue to use fossil fuels - there is plenty of coal, and there is the messy and global-warming and low-energy-production tar sands and oil shale. So global warming will happen, while oil becomes harder and harder to obtain. Lack of natural gas and oil will also mean difficulty fertilizing our depleted soils, and difficulty moving food around. Plus, biofuels take away farmland and forest - a bad path!

You can read a variety of articles and blog entries on this topic at PlanetThoughts.org

The best way to minimize this negative double threat is with true renewables. These are primarily wind, photovoltaic, tidal, and wave power. Unlike nuclear and all the others, they do not create toxic waste, they use the unlimited and freely available resource of sunlight, and every country has sun and some wind, at the least.

So, what is wrong with these renewable, wonderful-sounding energy sources? It seems the big companies worry about maintaining control with renewable sources that anyone can set up. Towns can set up their own windmills and not need a large power plant. Individuals can set up small vertical windmills and photovoltaics. My question is, will the public be smart enough to push the planet down that sustainable path, or will coal/oil/nuclear/natural gas fool us and back us into an awful corner in 20 or 30 years (and poor countries way before then)?

You may have seen the new ad being run on CNN by API. It contains some numbers that makes my (our?) ears burn. It may be worth an outright challenge. The public certainly deserves clarification!

API begins softly enough, by claiming the oil and gas business has a relatively low to middling return on investment. I believe they use 8.2%. They then claim "$1.25 trillion has neen invested in the search for new resources since 1992." These selected numbers are clearly only statistics in the sense of "lies, damn lies etc..." No mention, of course, of stock buybacks: Jim Buckee's company Talisman may be Canada's biggest buyer for its own underperforming shares. This is why I chose his post for this comment.

API's final statement just can't be left unchallenged: "We will need 50% more oil and gas by 2030." To state a high demand case without any reference to supply is ridiculous, verging on fraud. The omission allows API to leave viewers with the impression that increased oil profits (presumably hand-in-hand with solving the usual laundry list of industry complaints; ANWR, pesky environmental laws, sovereign supplier problems etc...) can actually lead to this outcome.

IMHO, the API is reminding a new administration exactly how perilously addicted to imported oil Cheney's White House will leave a great nation. Is the API telling them the golden goose could use more and more of its eggs for purposes other than producing more eggs if it doesn't get what it wants from its main "customer"?

Exxon Mobil just released news of $40+B in quarterly profits this morning. Another new record. This is more than high stakes. The issue of stock buybacks versus exploration expenditures and, especially, domestic energy diversification looks more like end-game. No amount of hand-holding, sword-dancing or butt-kissing with the friendly suppliers like the KSA can change geological and sovereign facts of life on the other side of the petro-hill.

I'd love to hear Mr. Buckee as well as other oil drummers opine on the API's shameless misuse of selected statistics with the general public. In addition, does anyone know exactly where these Newspeak ads are running? If the API is only running this ad in US markets, the implications regarding access to overseas oil and/or demand destruction are scary eg. Key aspects of both World Wars. Does defending Mr. Cheney's version of "the American way of life" justify wars of aggression? Is US military power deployed to protect supply lines all over the globe? Talk about diminishing EREOI!

Ironically, the API's irresponsible and self-serving propaganda has the indirect effect of supporting the likes of Iranian rent-a-mobs and their trademark death chants. Coming from the API, the suggestion that 50% leaps in oil production are conceivable (not to mention carbon ceilings) when even CERA is backpedaling is nothing short of seditious. Sorry, Dick. We know who your friends are. It's come down to this: Diversify or die, America.

I'd love to hear Mr. Buckee and other oil drum members opine on the API's shameless use of "numbers". While we're at it, I am surprised to have not found any mention of Scientific American's cover piece on Mega-Solar last December. Admittedly, I've been pretty busy lately but but it sometimes seems Oil Drum is dominated to the point of paralysis by "apocalypticians"? Prove me wrong. Please.