Nye 8
the energy crisis and the computer shifted the high
energy economy
what changed or didn't change?
- oil was no longer in reliable plentiful
supply
- but the price was kept low so it wasn't
profitable to find more
- American automobile makers were slow to shift
to making smaller cars
- government required car makers to improve gas
mileage
- the public didn't see the need for change
- thought technology will keep solving the
problem
- the increase in energy use did slow
down--partly government regulation, partly new technology
1972 energy crisis
- oil was already in short supply because the
price was low and so not many new wells were being drilled
- Nixon imposed price controls, which further
discouraged investment in new production
- OPEC
raised prices and then in Oct 1973 imposed an embargo--no
oil sales to the US because of its aid to Israel
- Long lines and doubling of price. Oil companies
made large profits
- Showed US dependence on cheap imported oil.
- responses:
- conservation--small cars and requirements on
automakers for greater efficiency
- energy policy, particularly subsidies for
alternative energy sources including nuclear power
- higher price and deregulation led to more
exploration and drilling more difficult areas, such as
deeper at sea
- more drilling on federally-owned land
- little change in behavior, even though Americans used
twice as much energy per person as equally rich Europeans
- In 1979 Iran cut off production, causing
another increase in price
- high inflation--interest rates on savings
accounts were close to 20%
In the 1980s some OPEC members produced more than
they were supposed to and prices declined
but the underlying problem of over-consumption and
underinvestment (because the government kept prices low)
continued
Nuclear
Power
- opposition grew in the 1970s even before the accident at
Three Mile Island
- the accident shocked the public because it contradicted
government reassurance and the company was slow to release the
information people wanted
Public reactions
- predictions of disasters, for example from overpopulation
- Limits to Growth study argued that we would run
out of many natural resources
- people on the other side said the problems were not real
at all
- some people called for changing our values and our way of
life
- population growth did slow dramatically in the
developed world
- Shumacher and Lovins argued for a more decentralized
energy system
- relatively easy fixes such as more energy-efficient
houses and cars were slow to catch on
- faith that technology would solve the problem so we don't
have to change our way of life
- technological momentum made changes in policy difficult
Energy use per capita did start to decline in the 1980s
- government regulation such as fuel economy standards for
cars and energy efficiency standards for appliances
- consumer reaction to higher prices
- tax incentives for energy conservation measures such as
insulated windows
- but the public still believed in a right to plentiful
cheap energy
- computer control increased efficiency of many processes
- automation reduced jobs and lowered wages for the lower
half of the income distribution
- but online communication reduced driving and made
possible more diverse communities
What will the effects be?
- loss of jobs because of technology has been repeatedly
predicted but not come true
- why didn't working hours decrease? Partly because
workers were competing with other parts of the world
- the expectations held by consumers continued to rise
- there would still be plenty of energy if we used strip
mined coal, which also contributes more to global warming for
the amount of energy produced
Should we use more coal?
- still in very plentiful supply
- coal used to create smog and acid rain, there is
technology now to reduce that a lot
- coal contributes more to global warming than other
fuels (there are possible solutions such as carbon
capture)
- mountaintop removal is cheap but very environmentally
damaging
Are we willing to change our lifestyle?