Is Nature Trying to Tell Us Something?

Recent Blog Post

What the leaders need to understand about Canada’s shifting economy

As Canadians are becoming all too aware, the spectre of a recession, no matter the definition, looms large during an election campaign. Despite such prominence, the recent debate made it abundantly clear that none of the candidates understand why the economy stopped growing in the first half of the year and they have even less [...]

Read More...

Is Nature Trying to Tell Us Something?

Posted by Jeff Rubin on March 23rd, 2011 under SmallerWorldTags: BP, fukushima, japan, nuclear power • 33 Comments

Was it not just last summer that BP’s engineers were working desperately around the clock to find a way to plug a three month leak from the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig that spilled 205 million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico? Now, engineers and plant operators are braving potentially lethal radiation to avert a catastrophe in the crippled Fukushima nuclear power station in Japan.

There are many disturbingly parallels between the two events. Both involve industries, nuclear power and deepwater oil, that are seen as technological answers to conventional oil depletion. And both involve companies that were giants in their respective energy industries.

But the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), like BP, is no angel. Between 1977 and 2002, it was found to have falsified nuclear safety data on at least 200 separate occasions. Public disclosure of the TEPCO’s numerous nuclear indiscretions forced the resignation of the company’s president, Nobuya Minami, and a number of board members in 2005.

Safety concerns were of sufficient magnitude that the Japanese government forced TEPCO to shut down all 17 of the company’s boiling water reactors for inspection after evidence surfaced that Japan’s largest utility and nuclear operator had failed to report numerous incidents at their nuclear plants.

But the firm’s problems didn’t end there. Only two years after TEPCO was allowed to restart its boiling water reactors, an earthquake in 2007 forced the company to admit its reactor in the Niigata Chuetsu-Oki region was not built to withstand such tremors. The plant was immediately shut down and has not been reopened since.

So much for the Japanese nuclear industry’s “world-leading earthquake resistant construction standards”.

Radiation from the Fukushima nuclear power station is now entering the food chain, just as oil from the Deepwater Horizon leak soiled the Gulf of Mexico’s oyster beds and shrimp fishery. Radioactive iodine has already been found in milk 20 kilometers from the crippled power plant and in spinach 100 kilometers away. And trace elements of radioactive iodine are now showing up 220 kilometers in tap water in the Greater Tokyo area, which is home to 35 million residents.

Is the close timing between the Deepwater Horizon and Fukushima disasters just coincidence or is nature trying to tell us something?

Of course, it’s not a message many of us want to hear. The Japanese nuclear power station, like the Deepwater Horizon rig, are both products of our insatiable demand for energy, which compels us to harness ever more costly and problematic sources of energy supply.

As the Japanese assess the growing environmental impact of their nuclear disaster, the country is already making plans to burn more diesel oil, coal and liquid natural gas to make up for the power shortfall. Meanwhile, the Obama administration, feeling the heat from rising gasoline prices and local state pressure, is about to reissue permits for new deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

The environmental costs seem to be increasing exponentially but our thirst for energy can never seem to be quenched.

Michael

Nature is not telling us anything, this is our technical incompetence speaking to our own hubbris.
CrisisMaven

Your readers might be interested in the pertinent question, their probably most pressing concern of how to treat their radioactively contaminated drinking water:
http://crisismaven.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/dangers-properties-possible-uses-and-methods-of-purification-of-radioactively-contaminated-drinking-water-e-g-in-japan/
A Japanese translation seems underway, see comment by Takuya there.
Larry

Should all offshore (Pacific Rim) products be subject to a radioactivity inspection before entering North American markets??
God

This is what the convergence of energy, environmental, and financial collapse looks like. This seems to me like just the beginning.
CrisisMaven

It is too early to say on one hand as all this largely depends on wind strengths und directions, and on how much is spewed from any reactor at any particular time that a wind were there to carry it. However, to find out, if or not, you must measure. So yes, even if nothing’s found in a long while …
CrisisMaven

It is too early to say on one hand as all this largely depends on wind strengths und directions, and on how much is spewed from any reactor at any particular time that a wind were there to carry it. However, to find out, if or not, you must measure. So yes, even if nothing’s found in a long while …
JB

The tap water in Tokyo is now reported to be unsafe for very young infants. Radioactive iodine levels taken yesterday at a treatment facility in Katsushika ward were double the recommended limit for babies, a city official said in a televised briefing. The water would pose a health risk if drunk over the long term, such as a year, he said.

When that news officially broke out, people rushed to the stores to buy bottled water. Many found that store were out of stock and many were outraged. The Japanese government had to announce that it would provide to families having young children bottled water (one wonders from where).

Disclosures of rising contamination, coupled with assurances that risks are minimal, underscore the government’s struggle to contain the ripple effects from the crippled Fukushima 1 power plant north of Tokyo. Japanese stocks extended declines after Tokyo issued the water advisory.

It’s hard to tell people they’re ingesting radiation in any way that won’t provoke a panic. It might be a lot more difficult to tell them that, if they continue to do so during the coming few years, it will likely kill them…
I. Sotope

If this is as bad as it gets we have nothing to worry about. Too much whinging and gnashing of teeth happening here.
I. Sotope

Here’s an opportunty for Canada to export bulk water. We would have to irradiate the water to guarantee “Beaver Fever Free”.
I. Sotope

This smacks of a marketing campaign by bottled water companies.
I. Sotope

The public was unknowingly paying to buy premium bottled radioactive spring water for years with little apparent effect. Now it is a big worry?
I. Sotope

Nature has spoken. Let us hope it will now shut up while we fix the mess it has made.
I. Sotope

Yes. We need more sniffer dogs.
Anonymous

With recent brent oil prices stubborningly hovering above 110$ we see the emergence of rhetorics that tend to relativize the role of production capacity vs demand, instead focusing on the role of speculators and conjuncture, like the case of Lybia and Japan.

Recently a current is emerging strongly that blames low refining capacity for low sulphur gasoline and the environmental guidelines that caused it as the main driver behind high gas prices. What is the real impact of the low-sulphur guidelines on gas prices?
Anonymous

The UK government has enabled step 1 on the paliative politics regarding high oil prices mitigation: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/23/budget-2011-fuel-duty-cut-road-lobby?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Step 1: Gradually reduce oil taxation (demand keeps going or increases)
Step 2: Use oil reserves to lower prices (temporary solution)
Step 3: Enable rationing system
Step 4: Restrict fuel use to public, essential uses
Abitibidoug

It’s more like probability and statistics is trying to tell us something. If there were only a few nuclear reactors or deep water oil rigs in the world, the probability of one failing at any one time would be low. However, given that there are so many of them, the probability of failure of any one of them is much higher, as we have seen with the events over the last year. Given that the world’s demand for energy keeps increasing, let’s hope some lessons are learned on how to make deep water oil rigs, nuclear reactors, or other energy sources more reliable to keep the frequency of accidents lower in the future.
One’s Opinion

As Earth’s population increases alongside communicative technology and ability to transmit messages instantly and globally, there becomes increased PERCEPTION that geologically-based natural disasters are getting worse and more common.

Geologically, Earth’s crust plates have been moving around, shifting changing continents for billions of years. But with unchecked human population growth & associated infrastructure, humans as a species becomes more susceptible to Earth’s geologic forces, which will always be a constant, at least relative to our lifespans, mere blinks in time.

What humans ARE doing to Earth is completely altering Earth’s many environments. But this will occur for only so much longer before the laws of population dynamics within a finite environment ‘balance the scales’, so to speak. The only way that humanity could possible truly control this inevitable occurrence in some manner is to actively control human population growth in a globally concerted manner. But what will prevent this from happening is social norms that are completely non-aligned with the laws of nature, and the lack of most people’s acknowledgement that ultimately, humans are not immune to nature’s capacity to keep things in check.

So, because of one fatal flaw in human’s social scheme, we will ride this course that we’ve laid out in front of ourselves — that fatal flaw is currency, money, dollars, yen, euros, gold, etc. Currency clouds out, blinds us, and highly complicates what really is most essential and quite basic to us all. Food, shelter, water, air. Currency has caused so many of us to go overboard with derivatives of all of these, and has over-emphasized and made primary one thing that would otherwise be quite secondary. And that is comfort. Roughly speaking, wealth equates to comfort. The more wealthy, the higher our ability (and to some extent, perception) to achieve higher comfort. And the key ingredient that has defined wealth is the ability to harbour enough energy to support the lifestyles that such wealth brings. Oil has been our main currency in the energy scheme, and the tables are now turning on that.

Perhaps all the Mayans really predicted very well was when unchecked human population growth would collide with our fatal flaw that made currency (and the dependence on finite energy soruces) preside over what ultimately has always supported and dictated our existence — Earth’s natural environment and nature’s pre-programmed capacity to maintain some level of balance, from which humanity managed to derail itself as it became more industrialized and more obsessed with purely objectual currency.

What is happening in Japan is but one example of how things will continue to play out when such things collide. When Chernobyls and Fukushima’s occur, we literally remove the footprints and large areas around such areas from being habitable by anything for a long time, at least in relation to our lifespans.

The ‘God’ in all this is simply our efforts and struggles to cope or explain life’s extremes, to try to maintain some level of sanity, deal with guilt, death, maintain some type of order, etc. — which (religions) has been backfiring for centuries and continues to this very second.

It would appear that we’ve gone so far down this road that only one thing will save us from losing all control of our ability to keep in-synch with Earth’s environment.

As unfortunate as this may sound and may be, perhaps the only way to get us back on track with Earth’s natural balance is to make it profitable to improve the environment. But unless we can de-link the greed for individual and unnecessary comfort from our initial purpose of having currency, then such an approach will fail due to the overwhelming negative feedback that comes along with anthing that is profitable, which is to become more comfortable, which spirals back to increased environmental degradration. So we need to re-define what we consider to be profitable — having lots of money, or attaining carbon-neutrality and the ability to lead lifestyles that are resilient to what nature has to dish out.

So what we need is a reality check of what really defines an adequate lifestyle, adequate comfort, adequate resources. And that, unfortunately, will require, one way or another, that our species depopulates or at least curbs or levels human population growth, and it must mean reduced, not increased globalization.

…the writing is on the wall for humanity, whether we like it or not.

Jeff is just telling us the bare and dirty truth about the finite energy side of this equation.
Scottt

in this whole farago around the possibilities of a big run up in the cost of energy, its always about the USA, USA, USA. Maybe because JR is from canada, and the whole political narrative in canada is mostly about the USA even during a canadian federal election. But think for a minute, and realize canada as a country would not survive a big run up energy cost, because who will want to live there when it costs 8000 a year to heat your crappy two bedroom bungalow home up in canada…
I. Sotope

You leave only two questions unanswered. When is the second coming? And will it be a carbon-neutral event?

By the way, which wall are you reading?
Abitibidoug

People will continue to live in Canada (or other cold countries), but in a manner quite different from now. Demand (and of course prices) will fall for those big houses, which will cost a fortune to heat, located in the sprawling suburbs where it will cost a fortune to drive to and from them. Expect to see smaller, more compact multiple unit housing with solar panels on the roof to assist heating. The upside? This inefficient urban sprawl will stop while there is still some good agricultural land left, so it’s not all doom and gloom. One way or another, Canadians will adapt.
One’s Opinion

Anyone can see that your back alley (know-it-all) answers to a lot of others’ postings here speak for themselves. Ever thought of contributing anything useful?
I. Sotope

We are but a pebble in Uncle Sam’s shoe.
I. Sotope

We are but a pebble in Uncle Sam’s shoe.
Unc

Scotti, mabey you best beam your fat ass up here to canada, and I will give you a, person-all, tour of our living standards,not to many for-closure signs in our, out-fit. Sincerely.UNC.
Unc

Jeff, sadly, this Night-mare on elm street, in Japan is not going to be rectified for many years to come.The incident ,at hand has been downplayed as a managable situation all along,NOT. It is in a mode of crisis management.This is very definetley a Fluid situation and the ramifcations of the fall-out are yet to be determined. How it will be impacting, with the world eco-system , as such, will have to be figured out later.One thing is for sure, the price of energy,now is seriously being contemplated by the markets.Our world is becoming smaller.Unc.fsj -b.c. canada
ra

In keeping with Mr. Rubin’s ideas that everything will eventually become more local as energy prices rise over time, please see the article “Restaurants Look To Combat Higher Food Prices By Buying Local” by Kristen Morales at onlineathens.com

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/032711/bus_805979179.shtml
ra

In tandem with the article mentioned below in my post, see “Record Gas Prices Blamed On Peak Oil” at cbc.ca/news by Mychaylo Prystupa.

This article features Canadian geoscientist David Hughes, who makes the case that the recent oil increases have less to do with Libya and more with the approach of peak oil, which he thinks will happen sometime between 2012 and 2015.
Anonymous

Ok, so we need water, food and transport fuel. Because of our tendency to form hierachies dominated by the most aggressive people, who concentrate more on maintaining their dominance than ensuring survival, we are in a position where hundreds of millions depend on a single resource for clean water, food and transportation. Populations are so big, so bogged down in complexity and are so detached from nature that changing course was a possibility, but fukushima and libya are clear indicators that its too late now for large institutions to change course.

By my basic calculations and research, you need 1/3 of the uk land area to generate 550 million barrels of hemp ethanol, 10% of the US land area to generate a similar porportion. Thats free energy for you. How come business hasnt seized this opportunity for the next big thing?

If you grow oyster mushrooms in a straw bag, fruit them, then feed your food waste or old newspapers to them, you convert waste into food – Guaranteed. If most people in the industrialised world could do this and feed themselves for one week on oyster mushrooms, it would be a start on reducing eco impact and food prices.

If businesses truly embraced working from home wherever possible, using virtual offices, webcams, then the amount of energy expended on rolling infrastructure drops significantly.

We are post industrial in the west, and it cannot be sustained. We dont need to ‘cull’ people or abandon people, we need to educate them.
Anonymous

Agreed. Classic example is the hemp plant. At the very least, you would keep it as a contingency energy source as a matter of national security regarding energy (no-one could cut off the supply of home grown hemp). Crude oil should never have been the only transportation fuel available to purchase.
I. Sotope

He goes on to say the solutions are right in our own backyard. But when it takes 25 years to finally approve something simple like the MacKenzie pipeline which could have flooded us in cheap gas by now and be powering most of NA we can see the problem in moving ahead. Who is to blame? I say the windmill/solar cell/anti-nuc crowd funded by powerful US green funds.
Anonymous

This is off-topic in regards to the point you’re making but I’m always entertained at the influence that is attributed to the shady “green funds”, since all empirical proof points towards the fact that its real power is the exact opposite of this mysterious and immense hypothetical influence.

Have they ever “won” anything significant? Do “they” even exist politically or outside the internet and farmer’s markets?
I. Sotope

If you are refering to oil companies as being the “exact opposite ” of the green influence then I think you are on the wrong track. In general, any influence that leads to higher oil prices is fine as far as they are concerned and may be why BP , for example, funded Greenpeace for $10 million. Others pour money into Suzuki, etc.
The green money source in the US is from wealthy family foundations channeling money into Tides, etc. that then send money to native groups and other organizations in Canada to kick up a fuss over any sensible idea like a pipeline. There has been an article on this in FP an a few other papers in the last few months worth reading. It is refered to as “de-marketing” campaigns against Alberta oil.
Then you have multi billion dollar funds such as managed by Jeremy Grantham who must be bright but at the same time sucked into the anti- CO2, carbon-neutral group, and a vehement disciple of global warming cult. He may be sincere but at the same time has a fortune invested in the green tech area that must be, shall we say, nurtured.
It goes on and on, with trillions of dollars now allied against reason and scientific rigour and a generation of largely scientifically deficient students that has swallowed this nonsense wholesale and now in panic mode.
The crackpot ideas pushed by these zeolots have “won” the war and we are now about to reap the “benefits”. Patrick Moore’s new book gives a more balanced viewpoint and illustrates how Greenpeace was hi-jacked by extremists. It is worth reading.
I. Sotope

Usefulness may be a function of PERCEPTION.

Recent Blog Post

What the leaders need to understand about Canada’s shifting economy

Is Nature Trying to Tell Us Something?