Commentary A look at fossil fuels by Don Farrell, Publisher Fossil fuels are so essential to our way of life that, without them, we would be transported back to chopping wood, horse drawn carriages and an overall plummet in our standard of living and health. In today’s world, it is not very popular to promote or even defend fossil fuels, but an article in the March 14- 15, 2015 Wall Street Journal (page C-1) does just that and does it very well. Matt Ridley, author of The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves and a member of the British House of Lords, wrote the article with the premise that fossil fuels benefit the planet and the people who live here. He effictively disputes the three main arguments against fossil fuels; 1) We will soon run out of them; 2) Alternative sources of energy will price them out of the market; and 3) We cannot afford the climate consequences of using them. In 1922 a presidential commission opined that “the output of gas has begun to decline,” and in 1977, then-U.S. President Jimmy Carter announced on television, “we could use up all the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.” Clearly wrong. The recent drastic drop in price is largely due to an abundance of fuel caused by an incentive for new exploration and technologies mandated by the high costs of the previous decade. The notion that alternatives will price fossils out of the market has not proven to be accurate. Only hydroelectric power, the biggest and cheapest alternative fuel, can compete—but it has almost no capability to expand. Both wind and solar are heavily subsidized, receiving $10 per gigajoule, on a worldwide average, to remain viable. In some countries, fossil fuels are also subsidized— albeit at a much lower rate, an average of about $1.20 per gigajoule. As for the climate consequences, Mr. Ridley cites many examples where fossil fuels have helped more than they’ve hurt. One, from Alex Epstein’s book The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels, refers to the positive ecological impact of fossils. The total deforestation of Europe and North America to harvest wood was halted with the use of coal and subsequently oil and gas to generate power. It was also the discovery of oil as a replacement for sea mammal blubber that ended the whaling and sealing industries, allowing those animals to recover their numbers. Global warming has failed to live up to its hype and the earth has failed to live up to its warming predictions, even with an increase in carbon in the atmosphere. Predictions from the 1970’s and 1980’s saw the earth’s temperature rising 2 to 4°C per decade. In actuality, the rise has been less than 0.2°C per decade and has effectively stopped over the last two decades. Another example talks how fertilizers manufactured with gas doubled the food production per given piece of land, and adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere has contributed to increasing the amount of green vegetation on the planet by roughly 14% since 1980. Mr. Ridley even addresses the cost in human health in places around the world that do not have access to the power of fossil fuels. Approximately four million die each year from the ill effects of smoky wood fires in their dwellings. Perhaps solar and wind deserve a place where climate conditions can truly take advantage of their best properties. An advanced biofuel, like biodiesel, should have an important role, as it offers a high-quality renewable fuel with extremely strong environmental credentials for both transportation and heating. It would be great if a new energy was discovered that was clean, easy to access, made by nature, powerful, portable, and versatile—and on top of all that—was right under our feet. Oh wait, that describes fossil fuels perfectly! 4 ICM/March/April 2015
ICM September-October 2014
To see the actual publication please follow the link above