Is the future of energy just more coal?

Here in the nation’s capital I am the program chair for the National Capital Region World Future Society. (www.natcapwfs.org) Every month we have dinner meetings featuring experts from around the world telling us about the strategic implications of trends in their industry.

Last week our group was lucky enough to feature Alan Hegburg and Frank Verrastro, both experts in the oil and gas industry as well as fellows at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, for their presentation on the geopolitics of energy. (After all, doesn’t it seem like a major concern surrounding the conflict in the Middle East is the presence and flow of oil?) We wanted to hear how things would be different.

Al and Frank possess a depth of expertise that is impressive. They have forgotten more about the intricacies of the energy industry than I will ever know. But one part of their presentation disturbed me. Their forecasts for the energy market predict that in 2025 the mix of sources (oil, coal, nuclear, renewables) that go into providing the world’s energy…will be precisely the same, only bigger.

Huh? Really? No change at all?

I am not questioning their expertise in the matter. Part of being a good futurist is listening to top-shelf experts, which these gentlemen clearly were. But is there really no change on the horizon for energy?

Are we doomed to just keep melting the ice cap?

Is the future of energy really just oil, coal, nuke, and a little ethanol here and there?

This could be. Hegberg and Verrastro point out that the developing world’s growing thirst for energy will outpace conservation measures.

If that’s our future, the world’s designers need to go back to the drawing board, because that’s just not a sustainable future. To put it mildly.

–Garland