The Fundamental Unsustainability ofCurrent and Future Fuel SystemsFuture Fuels Workshop - Fuel SustainabilityMarch 7, 2016, Building 19, Hall I, 9:00 a.m.
Tadeusz Wiktor Patzek
Patzek 1 / 55
Google Searches
Billions of hits on March 2, 20160 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Car
Food
Stocks
Fashion
iPhone
Death
Energy
Environment
Clothing
Sustainability
Patzek 2 / 55
Number of Automobiles in the WorldEstimated 1.5 billion; that’s 2.3 Google hits per car
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
All
Veh
icle
s, m
illio
ns
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
U.S.A.
Est. world
Sources: US Department of Transportation, DOE EIA, accessed 03/04/16
Patzek 3 / 55
What I Am Going to Tell You
A body painting by Hikaru Cho, 2015
Men who created the science andphilosophy westill useto understandthe world
Necessaryandsufficientconditionsof sustainability
Unsustainabilityof almost everythinghumans do
Flow of power = work/timethatcreates and maintains modernsocieties
Parting thoughts
Patzek 4 / 55
Two sciences
First Science: What Is It Made Of?
Weiwei Lei et al., RSChem, 2009
This question leads to the notions offundamental elements, building blocks;to measuringandquantifying:
(a) Low-magnification SEM image of Al nitride seaurchin-like nanostructures
(b) High-magnification SEM image of a singlenanostructure
(c) and(d) High-magnification SEM images ofbranched nanostructures
(d) High-magnification SEM image of nano-ringand nano-bow, marked by arrows
Patzek 5 / 55
Two sciences
Second Science: What Is the Pattern?
Landsat, Lena River delta
This second question leads to the no-tions of order, organization, and rela-tionships. Instead of quantity, it in-volvesquality, and instead of measur-ing, it involvesmapping
Answers to these two questions:“Howmuch?” and “What pattern?” havebeen in competition throughout hu-manity’s scientific and philosophicaltradition
For most of the lastfour centuries, thestudy of quantities and magnitudes hasdominated
Patzek 6 / 55
Modern reductionist science
Galileo Galilei: Dead Modern Science1564–1642
Justus Sustermans, 1636
The father of modern westernscience, inparticularphysicsandastronomy: Hecombined scientific experimentationwith mathematics
His approach isempirical: Scientificknowledge is based on observation ofevents in nature andinduction
Galileo’s program offers us adeadworld: Out go sight, sound, touch, andsmell, along with them estheticsensibility, values, quality, soul,consciousness, spirit.. . . We had todestroy the world intheorybefore wecould destroy it inpractice(Fritjof Capra, 1988)
Patzek 7 / 55
Modern reductionist science
Francis Bacon: Domination of Nature1561–1626
Frans Pourbus, Łazienki Palace, Warsaw
The father of thescientific method
His approach isempirical: Scientificknowledge is based on carefulobservation of events in nature andinduction
Whenfalsephilosophies have beencultivated and gained dominance theyare no longer questioned. Falsesuperstructuresare raised on falsefoundations, and in the end systemsbarren of merit parade their grandeuron the stage of the world (Idols of theTheater,Novum Organum, 1620)
Patzek 8 / 55
Modern reductionist science
René Descartes:Cogito ergo sum1595–1650
Frans Franchoisz Hals, Amsterdam Museum
Science providesabsolute certaintythatis mathematical: “My entire physics isnothing other than geometry”
His approach isanalytic andreductionist; it breaks up thoughts andproblems into pieces and arranges themin logical order
The material universe is aperfectmachineand nothing but a machine
This mechanistic picture provided a“scientific” sanction for themanipulation and exploitationof naturetypical of modern civilization
Patzek 9 / 55
Modern reductionist science
They Spoke So Well For Us. . .
“I perceived it to be possible to arrive at knowledge highly useful in life . . . and thusrender ourselvesthe lords and possessors of Nature.”
“My only earthly wish is . . . to stretch the deplorably narrowlimits of man’sdominion over the universeto their promised bounds.”
“I am come in very truth leading you to Nature with all her children tobindher toyour service andmake her your slave. . .The mechanical inventions of recent yearsdo not merely exert a gentle guidance over Nature’s course, they have the power toconquerher andsubdueher, toshake her to her foundations.”
Patzek 10 / 55
Modern reductionist science
They Spoke So Well For Us. . .
“I perceived it to be possible to arrive at knowledge highly useful in life . . . and thusrender ourselvesthe lords and possessors of Nature.”
“My only earthly wish is . . . to stretch the deplorably narrowlimits of man’sdominion over the universeto their promised bounds.”
“I am come in very truth leading you to Nature with all her children tobindher toyour service andmake her your slave. . .The mechanical inventions of recent yearsdo not merely exert a gentle guidance over Nature’s course, they have the power toconquerher andsubdueher, toshake her to her foundations.”
RENÉ DESCARTES, 1596-1650,Discourse on Method(1637)
SIR FRANCIS BACON, 1561-1626,Cogitata et Visa(1607)
Patzek 10 / 55
Modern reductionist science
They Also Speak For Us. . .
Aggressiveaction to developadvanced biofuels. . . could virtually eliminate ourdemand for gasoline
Farmers will plantenergy cropson a large scale
Fast-growing, cost-efficient trees such as poplar and eucalyptus, and grassessuch as alfalfa and switchgrass, [are] to beharvested as biofuels
More power plants willburnbiomass along with coal to produce electricity
Patzek 11 / 55
Modern reductionist science
They Also Speak For Us. . .
Aggressiveaction to developadvanced biofuels. . . could virtually eliminate ourdemand for gasoline
Farmers will plantenergy cropson a large scale
Fast-growing, cost-efficient trees such as poplar and eucalyptus, and grassessuch as alfalfa and switchgrass, [are] to beharvested as biofuels
More power plants willburnbiomass along with coal to produce electricity
Natural ResourcesDefenseCouncil, 2006
Patzek 11 / 55
Modern reductionist science
This is the Path Science TookGalileo’s observations of phases of Venus (left) Descartes’ optics (right)
Patzek 12 / 55
Modern reductionist science
. . . And This Might Have Been Another Path . . .Leonardo da Vinci, 1452 – 1519
Arno drainage basin, northern Italy
Patzek 13 / 55
Technology
Technology Challenges Us Forth to Find Truth
. . . Challenges and reveals the Earth:
“Such challenging happens in that the energyconcealedin nature isunlocked, what is unlocked is transformed, what is transformed is storedup, what is stored up is in turn distributed, and what is distributed isswitched about ever anew. ”
“Everywhere everything isorderedto stand by, to be immediately onhand, indeed to stand there just so that it may be on call for a furtherordering.”
Technology is a“standing-reserve”of energy for humans to order natureand, in turn, beenframedby their technology.
Martin Heidegger,The Question Concerning Technology, 1954
Patzek 14 / 55
Technology
In Plain English. . .
Martin Heidegger, 1889 – 1976
What Heidegger meant is:
We are an impatient species thatregards astanding-reserveof energy asa must
Since wecannotcontrol technology,technologycannotbe our tool tocontrol nature
We are apartof technology
We tend to think of technology as aninstrument that is outside of us.Instead, we are a part of a biggersystemthat comprises us andtechnology – theTECHNOSPHERE
Patzek 15 / 55
Summary of Conclusions
Summary of Conclusions
The Earth perhaps could sustain2 billion peoplewith renewabletechnologies (Patzek, 2007)
Old human societies wereunsustainableover the time scales of centuriesor millennia
Modern societies arehyper-unsustainableover the time scale of decades
Fossil fuelswill have to underwritea transition to other sources of energy
Sunlight and its derivatives alone, harvested in real time,canneversustain7.5billion people, even meagerly subsisting
We are in denial and have not yet developed a meaningful language totalk about therequiredchanges in global thinking and actions
Patzek 16 / 55
Sustainability
Process or System
SystemInputs Outputs
Boundary
Theboundaryseparates the process from the environment at any time (it isthe inter-face), and it defines theduration of the process
We may not describe a process by what happens inside or outside of it, but only bywhatcrossesits boundary
Patzek 17 / 55
Sustainability
Linear Processes in Resource Mining
Stock offossil fuels
500 years
Chemicalwaste
Waste heat
Examples: Coal mining, oil & gas recovery,. . .
Patzek 18 / 55
Sustainability
Industrial Agriculture = “Green Revolution”
Stock ofsoil/waterfossil fuels 150 years?
Chemicalwaste
Crops
Waste heat
Patzek 19 / 55
Sustainability
Definition of Irreversibility. . .
Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, 1926: A process isirreversibleif itcan inno way be reversed, all other processes arereversible
George Hatsopoulos & Joseph Keenan, 1965: An irreversible processcannot be reversed without introducing changes in the immediatesurroundings and in the constraints of the system.
Patzek 20 / 55
Sustainability
Corrolaries. . .
A linear processthat converts low entropy of fossil fuels into waste isirreversible andcannot be sustainable
The linear fossil fuel process accumulates chemical entropy in the earthand the atmosphere, and irreversibly degrades our planet ona time scaleof our civilization, measured in hundreds of years
Modern agriculture, with its reliance on mining fossil fuels, soil,water and air, is irreversible and unsustainable
Patzek 21 / 55
Sustainability
Corrolaries. . .
All human processes interact with the “environment”
A sustainable processcannot belinear, therefore it must be acycle
Patzek 22 / 55
Sustainability
Thermal Cycles. . .
Work
Heat source
Heat sink
Life
Sun (5780K)
Universe (3K)
Patzek 23 / 55
Sustainability
MassStays on Earth: Only HeatLeaves
Source: Image Science & Analysis Laboratory, Johnson SpaceCenter
Patzek 24 / 55
Sustainability
Ecological Cycles =No Waste!
Otherlife
Death &Decay
H2O, CO2Nutrients
PlantMatter
Waste heatWaste heat
Sun energy
“Forever”
Patzek 25 / 55
Sustainability
Almost All Mass is Recycled Above GroundThe Amazon rainforest has persisted for 55 million years,but any more
Patzek 26 / 55
Sustainability
Result of Amazon Deforestation: Exposed Poor SoilSource: Greenpeace. An overflight of new soybean fields;topsoil will be gone in 3 years
Patzek 27 / 55
Sustainability
Global Impact of Indonesia FiresNASA’s Earth Probe Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer (TOMS), October 22, 1997
Patzek 28 / 55
Sustainability
CO2 from SE Asia Fires =Clean Biodiesel + OilSource: D. SCHMIL AND D. BAKER, The Wildfire Factor, Nature,420 29, 2002
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 20021.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
CO
2 em
issi
ons,
gig
aton
nes/
yr 20 Gt of CO2
Patzek 29 / 55
Sustainability
Sustainability
Tadeusz W. Patzek, 2004: Acyclic process issustainableif and only if
It is capable of beingsustained, i.e. maintained without interruption,weakening or loss of quality “forever,” and
Theenvironment on which this process feeds and to which it expels itswaste is also sustained “forever”
Thermodynamics of the Corn-Ethanol Biofuel Cycle, CRPS,23(6), 519-567, December 2004
Practically all human activities are unsustainable; they’re not even cycles.“Forever” must be defined.
Patzek 30 / 55
Sustainability
Gross and Net Primary Productivity on LandEstimated from the MODIS instrument on Landsat
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Land
GP
P, N
PP
, bill
ion
tons
C/y
0
20
40
60
80
100
120GPP
NPP
Respiration = food for plants
Plant growth and food for plant consumers
NPP of all cultivated land
Crops
Based on estimates of temperature, water stress, and APAR onland surface, accessed 03/04/16
Patzek 31 / 55
Sustainability
The Paradigm of Earth =No GrowthThe Paradigm of Humans =Exponential Growth
How will this clash of paradigms end?
Patzek 32 / 55
Power and Society
We Run on Power =Work/Time
Tokyo
A modern society is a dynamic,far-from-equilibriumstructure thatrequires constantflow of energythrough it
The more complex the society is themore energy throughput (power) itrequires
Conversely, the diminished powerresults in asimplificationof socialstructures
Edible food-like substances weconsumerequire huge power flows
Patzek 33 / 55
Power and Society
U.S. Hydrocarbon Metabolism
Each day, a U.S. resident gulps4 gallonsof hydrocarbons as crude oilequivalents
Patzek 34 / 55
Power and Society
Global Hydrocarbon Metabolism
Barrel of oil equivalent/day-person10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100
GD
P (
US
D)/
day-
pers
on
100
101
102
Burundi
Chad
Congo
Togo
China
Gibraltar
Luxembourg
Poland
Qatar
KSA
US
Brazil
y∝ x0.63 - mammal skin area with body massy∝ x3/4- metabolism with body mass
Sources: CIA, EIA, Patzek’s calculations, 03/28/11Patzek 35 / 55
Power and Society
Global Hydrocarbon Metabolism
Power inputs from 100W, 12 h/day energy servants10-1 100 101 102 103
Pow
er o
utpu
ts, G
DP
/day
-per
son
100
101
102US123
Brazil
US
KSA
Qatar
Poland
Luxembourg
Gibraltar
China
Togo
Congo
Chad
Burundi
Botswana
Angola
y∝ x3/4- metabolism with body mass
Sources: CIA, EIA, Patzek’s calculations, 03/28/11
Patzek 36 / 55
Power and Society
Parting Thoughts. . .
Crude oil and natural gas will have tounderwritethe incredible newdemand forpowerto develop a new infrastructure and new sources ofpower for the world in the next50-75years
Seventy fiveyears is how long the responsible environmentalists willhave to rely on oil and gas to realize their dreams
If investment in maintaining global oil and gas production goes down,we lose hydrocarbon production, the global economy goes down too, andall bets are off
Patzek 37 / 55
Power and Society
Epistemic Humility
Captive Mindby Czesław Miłosz:
An old Jew in Galicia once made an observation: “When someoneis honestly55% right, that’s very good and there’s no use wrangling. Andif someone is60% right, it’s wonderful, it’s great luck, and let them thank God. But what’sto be said about 75% right? Wise people say this is suspicious. Well, and whatabout 100% right? Whoever says he’s 100% right is a fanatic, athug, and theworst kind of rascal.”
Patzek 38 / 55
Backup slides
Net Primary Productivity of the EarthLand 56.4 GtC/y, ocean 48.5 GtC/y
Provided by the SeaWiFS Project, Goddard Space Flight Center and ORBIMAGE, 25 Oct, 2005
Temperate forests, 24; tropical forests, 16; cultivated land, 11; open ocean, 39 gtC/y
Patzek 39 / 55
Backup slides
Net Ecosystem Productivity→ 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600−0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Age, years
kg/
m 2 −
yr
NPPR
h
NEP
Source: SONGA & W OODCOCK (2003), simulation of H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest
Patzek 40 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Net Increase of World’s Oil & Lease Condensate ProductionRelative to 2005. Source: U.S. DOE EIA, accessed 02/01/2016
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Pro
duct
ion
Rat
e, 1
06 b
arre
ls/d
ay
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
Global O&LC relative to 2005US O&LC relative to 2005
Patzek 41 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Barnett Gas Production RateSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Pro
duct
ion
rate
, EJ/
year
0
1
2
3
4
5
6Texas RRCPrediction
Patzek 42 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Energy Production RateSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Tot
al R
ate
EJ/
year
0
1
2
3
4
5
6TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 43 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Energy Production RateSource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Tot
al R
ate
EJ/
year
0
1
2
3
4
5
6N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 44 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Barnett Cumulative Energy ProducedSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
prod
uctio
n, E
J
0
5
10
15
20
25
30Texas RRCPrediction
Patzek 45 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Cumulative Produced EnergySource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
ener
gy p
rodu
ctio
n, E
J
0
5
10
15
20
25
30TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 46 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Cumulative Produced EnergySource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
ener
gy p
rodu
ctio
n, E
J
0
5
10
15
20
25
30N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 47 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Oil RateSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Oil
rate
10
6 b
bl o
il/da
y
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 48 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Cumulative OilSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
oil p
rodu
ctio
n, B
illio
n bb
l
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 49 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Gas RateSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Gas
rat
e 10
9 s
cf g
as/d
ay
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 50 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Eagle Ford Cumulative GasSource: Texas Railroad Commission
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
gas
prod
uctio
n, 1
012 s
cf
0
2
4
6
8
10
12TRR CommissionHubbert curve
Patzek 51 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Oil RateSource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Oil
rate
10
6 b
bl o
il/da
y
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 52 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Cumulative OilSource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
oil p
rodu
ctio
n, B
illio
n bb
l
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 53 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Gas RateSource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Gas
rat
e 10
9 s
cf g
as/d
ay
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 54 / 55
Shale Oil & Gas in U.S.A. vs. World
Bakken Cumulative GasSource: North Dakota Petroleum Council
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Cum
ulat
ive
gas
prod
uctio
n, 1
012 s
cf
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5N. Dakota PCHubbert curve
Patzek 55 / 55