The high price of petrol today is causing discomfort among motorists. So much so that our federal politicians have spent almost a week haggling over whose scheme is best suited to knocking a few cents per litre from the pump price.
But in a world where oil is increasingly scarce, where the security of supply remains a problem, and where the environmental cost of using fossil fuels to power your car is soon to be factored into the pump price, is that the right response? What are the long terms solutions to our oil dependence? And is this the beginning of a new era of high-priced oil?
Crikey asked a panel of experts to answer questions on the good old days of cheap oil, what the politicians should really be arguing about, and how our economy will look when petrol costs many dollars per litre.
Today, Adam Grubb, the Australian editor of Energy Bulletin, answers Crikey’s questions.
Have we entered a new energy era of high-priced oil? Are the days of $1/litre petrol gone for good?
Yes, the fundamentals would suggest so. We appear to have reached the peak in oil production. Global conventional oil production peaked in May 2005. Australia as a net importing nation is particularly vulnerable. Our internal oil production peaked in 2000, as shown in this US Department of Energy graph.
Australian oil production
Most of the major countries we depend on for imports are themselves past their own peaks of production: Vietnam, PNG, Malaysia, New Zealand and Indonesia. Internal affluence and oil consumption is increasing in most of these countries such that exports are falling far more rapidly than actual oil production. Of the major countries we depend on, only the UAE has not been decreasing exports in recent years. (See, for example, this graph on Indonesia.)
This is a trend we are seeing globally. Competition for increasingly scarce oil exports will make procuring replacement oil an expensive exercise, perhaps one sometimes resulting in conflict. Only a fairly severe global recession is likely to make oil a less scarce commodity, and then only temporarily.
As a policy response, how useful is lowering the fuel excise in combating the rising price of oil, both in the short and long term?
Of course there may be some short term relief for struggling families. However we need to face the reality that oil is never going to be as cheap again as it was in the late eighties and nineties. As global oil exports continue to fall, prices will continue to rise in real terms. So we would merely be delaying the inevitable, while reducing government revenue which might be better spent helping those in need with more long term strategies and preparing the country for a leaner, and greener, future.
Peak oil and climate change present us with an unprecedented challenge: how to begin consuming radically less fossil fuels while maintaining dignified lifestyles and essential services. At a personal and national level we need to be investing much of the remaining fossil fuel energy into sustainable infrastructure, research and behaviour change. Electrifying transport, building renewable capacity, restructuring university courses, energy retrofitting buildings, relocalising economies; these are major investments, and they require energy. We simply won’t be capable of making the investments on the scale necessary if we wait until we no longer have access to cheap energy.
It’s also worth considering just how cheap oil is in energetic terms. A litre of petrol contains the energetic equivalent of a worker performing three weeks of hard manual labour. Might you not consider that cheap, even at $20 or $200 a litre? Sadly, we’ve built an economy, housing, food and transport systems dependent on extraordinary amounts of cheap energy, such that someone commanding enough energy to put an Ottoman sheik to shame can be just barely getting by, working two jobs and paying back a mortgage.
What sort of policies should Australia be developing to cope with high-priced oil?
We need to radically increase investment in renewable energy technology; implement a Tradable Energy Quotas (TEQs) system for allocating personal carbon allowances; adopt the Oil Depletion Protocol on top of the Kyoto Protocol; encourage in every way urban and small farm organic food production; extend public transport services; promote suburban mixed-use planning, to allow people to work near where they live; encourage the rebuilding of local industries, with an emphasis on the small scale production of reliable, repairable essential items; develop sustainable forestry practices; stop all new freeway development; produce public education campaigns directed at the understanding of the issues and resulting in behavioural change.
For all this we need a strong sense of purpose and common goals. The collective history of all Australians must be drawn upon, we must feel ourselves part of a story, as a nation that rises to challenges with good humour and that values self reliance and the land we live on. We must be made to feel we are going forward into a healthier, earthier, more community oriented future. The suburban dream didn’t work out that well for most people. There is much to be gained by the challenges ahead of us. The government must provide the leadership necessary to bring the nation together for these challenges within a spirit of good will.
Sketch a picture of the Australian economy when petrol is $5/litre and rising, considering things like food, infrastructure, the family budget and inflation?
The McMansion suburbs are likely to fall into disrepair as the price of commuting and mortgage repayments cause many houses to be completely abandoned and stripped for copper wiring and other resources. Many formally middle class people who have lost their homes will be living out of their cars, perhaps even in gated car camps as are already being set up in the US. Many adult children won’t be able to afford moving out of home, and many households may take in boarders and relatives, creating larger households.
Repair and reuse industries will flourish, many based in garages and sheds. Urban and peri-urban food production will increase and vacant lots will be turned into food gardens. The streets will be more lively, with ad-hoc markets in used goods and home produce.
Use of foot transport, bicycles and public transport will increase. Street crime will not necessarily increase in direct proportion to economic hardships, as greater social use of the streets, due to less cars and the presence of walkers may provide a level of surveillance.
Some infrastructure and centralised social services may be slowly beginning to break down. Important phone lines will be left unanswered more often, unfilled potholes will be more prevalent. Many services of the welfare state may be withdrawn, depending on the political climate.
Restaurants, tourism, recreation, personal services and electronics are likely to be some of hardest hit industries. The cheap airline industry will collapse.
There may be food rationing of basic items.
Despite rapidly rising input prices, farmers, where the season is kind, will once again be making fair returns on their efforts, and will be able to employ some of those moving from the cities.
Those with strong community or family bonds will fare better than new immigrants and the otherwise socially isolated. Adaptability and resilience will be key personal strategies. Those too institutionalised by schooling and wage work, and those who consider high consumption lifestyles a birthright and the alternatives unthinkable will have a psychological struggle to adapt. Ecologically inspired strategies such as permaculture design will move from being an environmentally inspired hobby to a core economic strategy.
Those who are looking for solutions which simultaneously tackle environmental impacts, build social bonds, save money and increase health and wellbeing, will find ideal solutions in local food production and a network of manufacture and repair microindustries.
Matt may be interested to read “The Sea and Summer” by George Turner (1987).
I would be interested to know what finally persuaded the fourth estate that the environment was mainstream. Until very recently, even in the self-proclaimed progressive pages of Crikey, “greenies” were ridiculed. Did it really only need the price of petrol to go up?
Unfortunately, the damage is done. The sustained posturing of journalists, whether at the behest of their baron-employers, or on their own, economic rationalistic initiative, has convinced the electorate that only two parties, and those conservative, are required. This is true in all the English speaking partners of the near-defunct coalition of the willing, or rather, killing. I have watched the Australian media devote column metres and gigabytes of bandwidth to making fun of the Australian Democrats, which is the first Australian party to have formulated a comprehensive set of policies based on the triple bottom line – decades ago. The Australian media never thought it necessary to inform the electorate that the Democrats had any policies, or what they were. The electorate can now thank the media for the gift of a Senate with no honest broker.
The Australian Greens are all very well in their way. The media regards them as the left wing of the Labor party, and therefore acceptable. The Greens’ policy base is rather less costed and more wishlist than one might hope, but their hearts are in the right place.
In 1990, Scientific American did an Alternative Energy issue. Terms like “peak oil”, and “global warming” featured often. Back then, a number of Australian inventors, entrepreneurs and small comanies were designing and building lots of interesting technologies. Anyone who watched Landline during the 1990s would have seen quite a few of them, as they had applications for remote areas. Unfortunately, these ingenious folk continually found it difficult or impossible to access finance to develop their products. One after another, the inventions were picked up by overseas companies, many European, or left to wither.
These were the days of deregulation, privatisation and market forces, whichever horse you backed. The days of short horizons, profit forecasts and share market poker games played with other people’s superannuation. And the topics of energy conservation, environment degradation became unfashionable, even faintly distasteful. As if to be opposed to uncontrolled growth was somehow un-Australian…
Well. Now, it seems, there might have been something to those tales, told by fairies at the bottom of the garden. Some of those inventions went off-shore and succeeded. Germany produced about half the world’s solar power last year (according to the Washington Post). Australia could export solar power to the world (see * below). And the new PM (same as the old one?) has just revoked the solar panel rebate for households with combined incomes of over $100K. Any household with combined income less than that is probably too busy saving to pay for their children’s healthcare, education and transport to consider solar panels. And they are probably renting because they can’t afford to buy a house. Who is going to put solar panels on their rental house?
*The United States is developing technology to microwave energy from solar arrays in space back to earth. Always the big technology fix. And anyone who thinks that a bright new day can now dawn in Australian renewable energy might do well to read the US FTA. It was not widely discussed at the time, but there are provisions which may come into play if our trading partner’s companies’ profitability is threatened. Some of you stock market junkies may also have noticed that Australian energy companies are being gobbled up at an unseemly rate. Personally, I consider energy and communications to be factors of national security and find it astonishing that anyone would relinquish control of them to the likes of Enron.
But I don’t expect the media to grow any investigative muscles about how the current situation came about. After all, it took them – how long? Years to wake up to the fact that they were being lied to by the coalition of the drilling. And so far no apology to the hapless reader / listener / viewer for the oversight.
profound stuff
Cheers for the comments. I should mention David Holmgren’s new website http://www.FutureScenarios.org which offers much more sophisticated future scenarios than my sketches.
Richard, I admire your positivity in the face of your 1/3 odds that you’ll catch a deadly disease 🙂
Sketch a picture of the Australian economy when petrol is $5/litre and rising, considering things like food, infrastructure, the family budget and inflation?
“It will be an awesome time and place. A decade before $5/litre pricing came, many nuclear and environmental energy electrical power sources came on line. The conversion from petroleum to electrical propulsion engines came quickly, aided by both personal initiative and governmental mandating a ‘drop dead’ date for all petrol vehicles to be off the roads.
The international emissions trading schemes and carbon crediting allowed bus and train entrepreneurs to establish new high-speed and frequent commuter lines utilizing electric-hydrogen propulsion. As a result more that a quarter of all metropolitan populations migrated to previously marginal-to-inhospitable agricultural land, intersecting with the lines. The abundance of clean electricity and other innovations, generated breakthroughs in abundant atmospheric water harvesting which in conjunction with subsoil irrigation, made the deserts bloom.
The massive and regrettable plagues of 2020 which reduced global population by 33% did have their silver lining in the form of reduced competition for resources, a greater appreciation of being human, and a reduction in territorial conflicts. They gave us a feeling of starting over from a clean, yet enlightened, slate.
Thankyou, thankyou you ole peak oil for forcing us to kick your habit. What a wonderful time to be alive.