The 8008 1781

There are lots and lots of coal reserves, and new ones show up all the time as a side effect of oil exploration.

The problem is CO2. Burning coal generates 2.5 times as much CO2 as the hydrocarbons in oil, and 4x as much as with gas. That CO2 has to go somewhere. Old oil wells is actually a good alternative; if the pressure goes above 80 athmospheres it will stay liquid or solid. That pressure is acheived under around 130 meters (400 ft) of rock.

Burning coal for hundreds of years will also impact oxygen levels in the athmosphere. We have got 15 years to get to grips with the slow decline in oil production. We got a century to make a real sustainable economy in terms of energy use.

With those budgets above we still can cope with tranportation, around 30% of energy usage, and rising faster than the total.

With a tripling of global energy needs oil+gas will only be able to supply 35% of the total need, and then transportation will suffer.

Coping with this is problem#1 for humanity at the moment. It is really about whether the majority of humanity is to acheive living conditions we would accept for ourselves. To get there, even with a lot of saving, we will have to triple energy output.

Energy is the #1 driver. It affects everything.

Because, with energy you can make materials, foods, go for vacations and run computers.

We need to do that while keeping prices sane, avoid nasty political fallout or destroy the environment.

And we need to unask whatever question led to the hydrogen economy pipedream. If we need to synthesize something then methanol or propane are a lot easier to make and use. That is a pretty minor problem in comparison.

-- mrr