European Tribune

What A Difference Two Years Make

by Luis de Sousa
Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 07:09:03 AM EST

By the beginning of 2006 the EU's Energy Commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, was directly interpellated at Parliament about the coming issue of Peak Oil. "...no more than a theory" he answered. Full text (21/01/2006).

Peak Oil is more than a theory, and two years later the tune is different.

Promoted by Colman



This is a crosspost from TheOilDrum:Europe

Two years ago, Caroline Lucas, a member of the European Parliament representing the Green Party asked Andris Piebalgs about the EU's plans to deal with Peak Oil. He replied that there was no plan, but there was also no need to worry:


The EU's energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs has admitted he has no plan to deal with rapidly rising oil and gas prices in the face of shrinking supply and booming demand.

In a response to a parliamentary question put by Green Party MEP Caroline Lucas, he shrugs off the so-called 'Peak Oil' scenario as 'no more than a theory'.

Dr Lucas, an MEP for South-East England and a member of the European Parliament's Environment and International Trade Committees, said: "The Commission's attitude represents a frightening dereliction of duty.

[...]

Mr Piebalgs said the EU was 'reflecting on an energy policy framework' but admitted future proposals would likely be restricted to a common energy policy - a solution likely to prove politically unpopular in the UK and elsewhere in Europe.

 

Two years and 40 more $/barrel later, Peak Oil looks a lot more real. Speaking to the Swiss Energy Congress (hat tip to Rembrandt)  Commissioner Piebalgs sounded worried:


With the Commission set to release on 23 January a series of proposals designed to help the EU realise its commitment of reducing CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020, Piebalgs argued that while tackling climate change is crucial, policymakers should not lose sight of the issue of security of fossil fuel supply.

The combined challenge of climate change and supply security leads to the conclusion that the EU cannot "hang on" to its "old, fossil energy system', he said.

[...]

Highlighting the potential gravity of the problem, Piebalgs noted that the oil crisis of the 1970s presented a discrepancy between oil supply and demand of only 5%, but that in a post-peak oil scenario, the gap between supply capacity and demand could widen by 4% annually, leading to a 20% gap within five years.  

As noted by the original article by EurActiv, credit has to be given to the IEA for sending governments a clear message of urgency on energy matters during recent months. An energy shock is upon us and it is good to see that at least some of the stake holders are actually noticing it.

Commissioner Piebalgs and EU citizens in general lost two years of preparation for what will likely be the greatest challenge of their lives, not only collectively but also at an individual level. With the institutional stalemate addressed for the time being, let's hope the lag can be made up in the upcoming years.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
Evolution by Natural Selection is no more than a theory, say the creationists and the Vatican.

Anthropogenic Global Climate Change is no more than a theory, say neoliberals everywhere.

Peak Oil is no more than a theory, too.

What is wrong with something being "a theory"?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 05:11:59 AM EST
I would say "Anthropogenic Global Climate Change" is an hypothesis. Ain't Gore a liberal, btw?

Vencit omnia veritas.
by Luis de Sousa (luis[dot]a[dot]de[dot]sousa[at]gmail[dot]com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 05:45:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That.. being theories they got perfected over time.. and their meaning is slightly modified... and this kind of modification or improvement to udnerstand more data (that we probably look depending on what we look for) is so human, and so far away for "truthiness" (oh colbert you know I love you)... than some people do not find it useful...

Usefulness to one's vision of the world...that's the problem they have with the word "theory"...

And then there are the radical who use this lack of usefulness to attack it for purely "projective" reason (I will be more powerfull, I will be more high in the hierarchy,...)

A pleasure

I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude

by kcurie on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 05:47:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's simple. People don't know what "theory" means. Everyone who thinks the theory of gravitation and Intelligent Falling are on the same level didn't get the joke.

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 01:27:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
because now they cannot claim they don't know, and yet there is still no sense of urgency whatsoever. It's still unbundling this, and competitive that, and Russia blabla, either stupid "reform" agenda or efforts at the margin.

Sigh...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (jeromeguillet@yahoo.fr) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 06:00:33 AM EST
Energize Europe?

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 08:35:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Energize Europe!

Vencit omnia veritas.
by Luis de Sousa (luis[dot]a[dot]de[dot]sousa[at]gmail[dot]com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 09:18:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The Catholic Church, as is its won't, is showing the way forward:  Burn Physicists.

True, they are soggy and hard to light but there are several extraneous factors that, I feel, under careful examination would make it a going proposition.

Och nu den svenska kocken bakar en Alaskan älg jägare. Bonk! Bonk! Bonk!

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 11:05:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ATinNM:
several extraneous factors

well|?

Don't leave us in suspense?

How DO you burn them....

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 02:15:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Could someone suggest to the EU member of parliament the story is about to go on asking what energy policy is implemented at EU level?

Maybe she could have a different answer this time...

I always regret that questions in parliaments everywhere seem so often to stop right away after the first attempt at an answer. It seems to be like a long, boring sarkozy press conference...

by Xavier in Paris on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 07:23:27 AM EST
Xavier, there is indeed an Energy Policy for Europe. But who wrote and agreed upon it thinks that:
  • Internal Market Liberalization will bring more energy to the EU.

  • CO2 emissions from the EU will be a problem by 2020.

  • Agro-fuels can solve the liquid energy vector scarcity.

  • Coal is so plentiful in the EU that we'll be exporting it in the future.

Not only is the policy misconceived as some of its guidelines are even contradictory.


Vencit omnia veritas.

by Luis de Sousa (luis[dot]a[dot]de[dot]sousa[at]gmail[dot]com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 08:32:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Xavier in Paris:
Could someone suggest to the EU member of parliament the story is about to go on asking what energy policy is implemented at EU level?

You want an energy policy?  Certainly Sir,  how many would you like?

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 02:17:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You have to pardon doofus because it's hard to understand:  

There is A amount of non-renewable stuff lying around and there is only b% that can be extracted.

These complex mathematical models take years to fully grasp and, when expressed with arcane terminology, e.g., "extracted" ....  well, you just gotta give the guy credit it only took him 2 years to 'get' it.

</snark>


Och nu den svenska kocken bakar en Alaskan älg jägare. Bonk! Bonk! Bonk!

by ATinNM on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 10:52:35 AM EST
I didn't meant to implicate that Comissioner Piebalgs is "stupid" or cognitively diminished in any way. Two years ago he could avoid the problem, not any more.

I also think he is a well informed person on energy matters and understands certain problems like the pointless dash for agro-fuels. This makes his hesitation in putting forward a proper policy even more awkward.

Vencit omnia veritas.

by Luis de Sousa (luis[dot]a[dot]de[dot]sousa[at]gmail[dot]com) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 11:19:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I admire your generosity. A man charged with detailing policies relating to the energy security of europe over the long term denies global warming when it was already an established fact, and you feel it is charming but minor character flaw !!!

We elect these people to do the best for us in the long term, there are situations that require national and trans-national responses and playing 3 wise monkeys and fiddling while Rome burns don't constitute effective policy making.

Like all the neocons in the US who were wrong about everything, they should resign from being invovled in the prediction/decision making game and let in those who were right all along.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sat Jan 19th, 2008 at 09:55:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah well in fact it's NOT non-renewable stuff.

It's only that the renewing is maybe 10000 times slower than consumption, but maybe he thought we were extracting less than was recreated, or only just as much.

"The womb that spawned that thing is fertile yet"

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 11:42:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for writing the commissioner's name correctly because I have always admired his thought and transparency so much, that I pronounce it 'peel bags'.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. --Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Fri Jan 18th, 2008 at 12:02:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]