One could assume that the US assessment of the oil decline was exposed through this particular publication perhaps due to some arrangement that Barack Obama made with Nicolas Sarkozy. (Maybe it is an indirect way to alert the French while keeping most Americans still in the dark on the topic, so that the latter bunch can ignorantly carry onward as usual. After all, no unsettling prognosis should disturb their slow return into shopoholic ways that keep the economy, particularly China's, on which the US federal government depends for loans, going strong.)

All considered, there was not, as far as I know, even a ten-second blurb about Sweetnam's message issued via newscasts in New England where I live. At the time of his declaration, their reports primarily covered ad nauseam the recent flood again … and again.

In a similar vein, no reporter discussing the deluge dared to raise the point that worsening extreme weather is on the way with climate change consequences in the mix, along with oil's relationship to these outcomes. Moreover, imagine the effect on the Dow or NASDAQ if Sweetnam's estimation and a discussion of connected economic ramifications got splashed all across the USA.

via t r u t h o u t | After Peak Oil, Are We Heading Toward Social Collapse?.

 

From Change.org

The Clean Energy Economy Is Already Booming

Without much attention from policymakers, or funding from the public trough, a low-carbon economy has already taken off in the United States.  The jobs being created nationwide in clean energy are helping to bolster the nation’s environmental sustainability and cut greenhouse gas emissions — and expanding at a faster rate than the U.S. economy overall.

Research by The Pew Charitable Trusts, published in a new report titled “The Clean Energy Economy,” found that:

• Between 1998 and 2007, jobs in clean energy grew at a faster rate than overall jobs.
• By 2007, more than 68,200 businesses across all 50 states and the District of Columbia accounted for about 770,000 jobs.
• Jobs in clean energy, both white-collar and blue-collar, grew at a rate of 9.1 percent, while total jobs grew at a rate of 3.7 percent.
• Clean tech has not been immune to the economic meltdown, but it’s proving to be an especially resilient sector: Although venture capital investment in clean tech dropped by 48 percent in the first three months of 2009 (compared to the same period in 2008), investment across the board was down 61 percent during the same period.
• Employment in clean energy covers a broad swath of blue-collar and white-collar jobs, including plumbers, machinists, scientists, engineers, bankers and marketing consultants.  Annual incomes ranging from around $21,000 to $111,000.

Read the whole article…

 

The Business Logic of Sustainability

If an oil-intensive company can do it, anyone can do it…

 

The biggest obstacle is the cost: 420 billion dollars over 40 years.  But then again it is not that much when you consider that the war in Iraq has already cost more than that in less than 5 years, and the subsidies to the oil industry, depending on whose figures you use, are somewhere between $10B and $35B a year.

Things get even better if you start counting the savings from reduced energy prices (oil prices will keep climbing), the savings from not needing to build expensive nuclear plants and “clean” coal plants with CO2 sequestration, the savings from using much more efficient electrical motors (90% vs 20-25% for internal combustion engines), the reduction in the need to refine and distribute petroleum-based fuels, the savings from returning crop lands to food production, and the lower cost of health care and clean-up activities from reduced pollution.

They also talk of the creation of 3 million jobs to create and support these new industries.

Sounds like a winning solution to me!

 

Well worth reading here.

 

By Dan Shapley, The Daily Green

Forget building new nuclear power plants or trying to outfit every American coal plant with expensive technology that can capture carbon emissions.

Through relatively painless steps, the United States could cut its emissions of carbon dioxide — the leading greenhouse gas fueling global warming — by somewhere between 28% and 50% by 2030, and save money in the process.

“The United States could reduce greenhouse gas emissions in 2030 by 3.0 to 4.5 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent using tested approaches and high-potential emerging technologies,” a new analysis concludes. “These reductions would involve pursuing a wide array of abatement options with marginal costs less than $50 per ton, with the average net cost to the economy being far lower if the nation can capture sizable gains from energy efficiency. Achieving these reductions at the lowest cost to the economy, however, will require strong, coordinated, economy-wide action that begins in the near future.”

That’s according to a report by McKinsey & Co., a management consulting firm, detailed in USA Today, the New York Times, Newsday and other newspapers today. Significantly, those who paid for the study weren’t just environmental groups, but also big for-profit utilities and companies.

The report echoed some of the plans proposed by Democratic presidential candidates, including the rejiggering of energy markets so that there is a financial incentive for power companies to improve the efficiency of their clients, encouraging new energy-efficient building standards and putting a price on carbon pollution. But it also undercut the notion that carbon sequestration and other dramatic changes to industry or power generation would pay big dividends. Overall, the report said, the collective actions by individuals to reduce their energy consumption had the greatest potential, and at the lowest cost.

 

I hope she gets rewarded for it, and that she will deliver the goods.

Read the full article…

 

I have seen experts say that peak oil happened as early as 2004, and others who say it won’t happen for another 50 years. This latest study says it happend in 2006, and we are already seeing some of the effects of it.

Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says new study

 

CALGARY, Alberta (Reuters) – The premiers of Canada’s provinces and territories agreed on Thursday to promote an energy strategy that promotes conservation, cuts regulatory delays and boosts the use of cleaner and renewable energy sources.

The Council of the Federation, which bands together the leaders of Canada’s 10 provinces and three territories, released the strategy during its annual meeting, held this year in Moncton, New Brunswick.

Along with promoting conservation and clean energy, the premiers also called for improvements to electricity transmission grids and freer trade in electricity throughout the country.

They also demanded a role with the federal government when international discussions on energy, primarily regulated by the provinces in Canada, are held.

 

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7875_rv1s]

 

Read the full story…

 

By David Biello , Scientific American

Read the story here.