One of the fundamental questions raised during discussions
of Global Warming, though really just about never discussed at all, is that of
how our use and abuse of resources today will impact the planet down the
road...say 250 years from now...a quarter millennial or so, and what we need to
do to ensure that energy needs are met along the way.
The United States uses 25% of the world's resources, amazing
right? We use it and abuse it all. That isn't in any way a sustainable effort.
When it comes to fossil fuels...coal, oil, natural gas...we burn more than
anyone, and we therefore add to the global dispersion of GHGs at an alarming
per capita rate.
So, what will our energy outlook for the year 2266 look
like? Well, our use of fracking technologies and oil-sands recovery is creating
a surplus of oil and natural gas today, all of which can be sent to market at
alarmingly low rates ($). We seem to want to extract it faster than we could
ever use it. But profit today...that's the goal...so frack away.
At our production pace today we have about 100 years of low
cost natural gas and perhaps the same for oil. On the same scale, however, we
find that we have coal supplies in the United States that, if we could clean it
up, might produce electricity for as long as 250 years. So about 100 years out
we will probably find that coal, on the decline now, may have a resurgence,
especially if our government finds a way to employ Clean-Coal technologies that
would reduce the emissions of GHGs, capture most of those, and then sequester
them.
What is Sequester? you ask. Well, that means create
filtration and separation systems that will capture the GHGs and the toxic
particulate (poisons and radionuclides) and then inject them into storage,
perhaps deep underground (miles deep) so that they are held sequestered there
forever...or so we hope.
250 years from now the planet will be out of natural gas and
oil (oh, some remains, but not enough to run the world), we will be closing in
on the end of our coal deposits, and we will be relying heavily on
alternatives...like solar, wind, thermal, and perhaps manipulated hydro power
as well...if we can figure out how to engage deep ocean currents and coastal
tides.
So, why not move forward now? Afterall, we don't have any
clean coal technologies in place, sequestration is being experimented with, but
it is way to expensive...and oil and NG both emit carbon, so they are not
perfect either. Other technologies are in the mix as well...and we will surely
need them in the centuries to come. What we don't need is more Global
Warming...and we need to make a stand on creating sustainable programs that
will deliver energy and, through it, prosperity to future generations.
Hey, just a thought...or we could just lob off the top of
say another 100 mountains and burn that coal to keep us warm...in more ways than
one.
