Friday, February 13, 2009

Not so fast, Alternative Energy...

J. Robert McKnight
2-13-09
9:30

Saudi Arabia's "head oil guy," Ali al-Naimi, told the world that a rapid transition to alternative energy would be a bad thing at a US energy summit this week.  The gist of what he said was that the current energy system is so big and powerful that just walking away right now would be "prohibitive," as well as "costly and impractical."  He acknowledged the importance of eventually moving away from fossil fuels, but asked that we also think about the chilling effect doing so might have on investments in the oil sector.  Naimi warned of a "nightmare scenario," in which alternative energy doesn't work out the way everyone hopes it will and the "traditional" energy providers (having been crippled by the alt. push) no longer possess the ability to help.  All this in the middle of Obama's tremendous US energy reform intended to create jobs, help the economy recover, and presumably reduce America's detrimental effects on the environment.  Naimi said he was unclear on just what alternative would economically make sense as a permanent stand-in for crude oil.

I admit, it's hard to take an oil guy's statements on the inadvisability of speedily investing tons of money in alternative energy...  But I did take this from the story, though.  By solving this or that problem by investing in alt. energy, it's potentially creating new problems for others.  What's our rapid oil boycott going to do to Saudi Arabia?  It won't be good, that's for sure, so Mr. Naimi's got to say something.  Whether he's worried about America suffering a hiccup or Saudi Arabia being paralyzed is for us to decide.  

For me, it's sort of like Americans not buying as many televisions or cars right now.  That's what this whole economic downturn is about I guess but I'm still glad a little less crap is getting manufactured.  Do we have to make tons and tons of crap to sustain?  If we do, is that even sustaining?  We can't just keep making more stuff just like we can't keep using "traditional" energy.  That's the bottom line, for me.  The continued existence of the planet (and by extension, everything that lives on it), then whatever.

at

2 comments:

  1. maltz2/16/2009 11:19 PM

    If he had posited some type of realistic scenario in which alternative energy would "not work like expected" I could see some relevance to his argument. However, given his position within the oil industry and his main concern in the issue being the potential economic disturbance of moving to alternative energy, it really becomes difficult to take him seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  2. PGibson2/22/2009 4:29 PM

    My first instinct says he is protecting his investments, as many will try to do. To some extent however I can see how an abrupt change may shake some old traditional establishments. I think I would call that growing pains. There is a more serious problem, the health of the planet, which must be put ahead of greed and fear.

    ReplyDelete