<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dear ACT Peak Oil-ers</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>The following
is a message from (former Senator) John Coulter:</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Sandra Kanck
has introduced a motion in the SA Legislative Council for a <BR>Select Committee
to inquire into various aspects of peak oil. Here are <BR>her terms of reference
and supporting speech indicating Sandra is one of <BR>the few pollies in
Australia thinking and working outside the <BR>conventional
square.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>John<BR>><BR>><BR>> From Hansard, Legislative Council, South
Australia<BR>> Wednesday 13th February 2008<BR>><BR>> *The Hon. SANDRA
KANCK: * I move:<BR>><BR>> 1. That a Select Committee of the Legislative
Council be established <BR>> to inquire into and report on the impact of peak
oil in South <BR>> Australia with particular reference to—<BR>><BR>>
(a) The movement of people around the State, including—<BR>><BR>> i. the
rising cost of petrol and increasing transport fuel poverty in <BR>> the
outer metropolitan area, the regions and remote communities;<BR>><BR>> ii.
ways to encourage the use of more fuel efficient cars;<BR>><BR>> iii.
alternative modes of transport;<BR>><BR>> iv. the need to increase public
transport capacity; and<BR>><BR>> v. implications for urban
planning;<BR>><BR>> (b) Movement of freight;<BR>><BR>> (c)
Tourism;<BR>><BR>> (d) Expansion of the mining industry;<BR>><BR>>
(e) Primary industries and resultant food affordability and
availability;<BR>><BR>> (f) South Australia's fuel storage capability
including—<BR>><BR>> i. susceptibility of fuel supply to disruption;
and<BR>><BR>> ii. resilience of infrastructure and essential services
under <BR>> disruptive conditions;<BR>><BR>> (g) Alternative fuels and
fuel substitutes;<BR>><BR>> (h) Optimum and sustainable levels of
population under these constraints;<BR>><BR>> (i) The need for public
education, awareness and preparedness; and<BR>><BR>> (j) Any other related
matter.<BR>><BR>> 2. That Standing Order No. 389 be so far suspended as to
enable the <BR>> Chairperson of the Committee to have a deliberative vote
only.<BR>><BR>> 3. That this Council permits the Select Committee to
authorise the <BR>> disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any
evidence or <BR>> documents presented to the Committee prior to such evidence
being <BR>> presented to the Council.<BR>><BR>> 4. That Standing Order
No. 396 be suspended to enable stranger to be <BR>> admitted when the Select
Committee is examining witnesses unless the <BR>> Committee otherwise
resolves, but they shall be excluded when the <BR>> Committee is
deliberating.<BR>><BR>> Our world is in the process of being substantially
altered as a <BR>> consequence of a phenomenon known as peak oil. Peak oil is
a shorthand <BR>> term to describe the dwindling world oil supply—a shortage
that will <BR>> only get worse as time progresses. This is because all the
big <BR>> easy-to-find and easy-to-extract oil fields have largely been
<BR>> discovered and exploited. What remains are the smaller ones with
<BR>> greater technical extraction difficulties and with, of course, <BR>>
associated high costs. We will not run out of oil—at least not in the <BR>>
short term—but there will be less of it and it will be more expensive. <BR>>
This problem is being exacerbated by the burgeoning economies of India <BR>>
and China; so, just as supply is decreasing, demand is increasing. The <BR>>
latest BP “Statistical Review of World Energy” states, 'It is no <BR>> secret
any more that for every nine barrels of oil we consume we are <BR>> only
discovering one.'<BR>><BR>> I first became aware of the concept of peak
oil 12 years ago when I <BR>> attended a talk given at Adelaide University by
a former oil company <BR>> researcher, Brian Fleay. He had knowledge of a
secret Saudi report <BR>> showing that our world was getting close to the
halfway point of <BR>> exploitation of all known and unknown oil reserves. As
a result of <BR>> that talk, I became aware of the work of M. King Hubbert, a
Shell oil <BR>> petroleum geologist, who in 1956 predicted that the US
production of <BR>> oil would peak in 1971—and he was proved correct. He was
listened to <BR>> with great respect after that and his theory has come to be
accepted <BR>> as fact.<BR>><BR>> The pessimists believe that the world
peak was reached in 2006, and <BR>> the supreme optimists are even hanging
out for a 2035 <BR>> scenario—although I have to say that the numbers of
those optimists <BR>> are dwindling. Then we even have the occasional ostrich
with its head <BR>> buried in the sand—such as OPEC—which says that there is
no problem. <BR>> But it is well known in the industry that OPEC fudges the
figures and, <BR>> when looking at this issue, we should be acutely aware
that the value <BR>> of an oil company on the stock market is almost entirely
dependent on <BR>> the amount of oil in any one basin it owns. It is always
in their <BR>> commercial interest to exaggerate the amount of their oil
reserves.<BR>><BR>> The evidence is against the optimists, and it is
instructive to look <BR>> at World Energy Outlook reports of the
International Energy Agency <BR>> (IEA). In its 2005 WEO report the IEA was
predicting a crude oil price <BR>> of $US47 a barrel by 2012, gradually
increasing to $US55 by 2035. I <BR>> should point out that when I am talking
dollars at any point in terms <BR>> of the price of oil I am talking US
dollars.<BR>><BR>> Anyone who drives a vehicle knows that, despite the
fact that that was <BR>> only three years ago, those figures are wildly
inaccurate. In each <BR>> successive year the WEO report becomes increasingly
dire. A report <BR>> entitled 'Peaking of World Oil Production' by Hirsch,
Bezdek and <BR>> Wendling, prepared for the US Department of Energy, and
handed to that <BR>> department in 2005, states:<BR>><BR>> The world
has never confronted a problem like this, and the failure to <BR>> act on a
timely basis could have debilitating impacts on the world <BR>> economy. Risk
minimisation requires the implementation of mitigation <BR>> measures well
prior to peaking. Since it is uncertain when peaking oil <BR>> will occur the
challenge is, indeed, significant.<BR>><BR>> In so many ways, economies at
state, national and international level <BR>> are built on oil. The massive
movement of people and goods around the <BR>> world utterly depends on it. I
turn again to the comments made 12 <BR>> years ago at that seminar I attended
by Brian Fleay. He said, 'Wealth <BR>> is based on energy and all costs are
energy costs.' It is clear that <BR>> we have failed to recognise this
concept and we have treated oil as if <BR>> it is inexhaustible. What is
closing in on us is the equivalent of an <BR>> economic tsunami and we,
especially the state government here in South <BR>> Australia, are going
about our lives in ignorance of it. Peak oil does <BR>> not even rate a
mention in our State Strategic Plan.<BR>><BR>> South Australia has no
transport plan. If there was an understanding <BR>> of peak oil, we most
certainly would have one. The transport <BR>> minister's recent rejection of
the extension of the Noarlunga line has <BR>> further demonstrated that lack
of understanding. The extension of <BR>> Adelaide's urban growth boundary and
development such as the proposed <BR>> Buckland Park urban subdivision is
reflective of that same lack of <BR>> understanding in the urban development
portfolio. Buckland Park is <BR>> both a climate change and peak oil
nightmare.<BR>><BR>> At the national level that same ignorance exists. As
I have previously <BR>> elaborated in this place, the transport-related
promises of both the <BR>> Labor and Liberal parties in the recent federal
election were, <BR>> despairingly, almost entirely about roads. Yet, in May
2005, the then <BR>> Premier of Queensland, Peter Beattie, listened to the
concerns of the <BR>> member for Hervey Bay, Andrew McNamara, and set him up
as the chair of <BR>> the Queensland Oil Vulnerability Task Force. Its report
was tabled in <BR>> the Queensland parliament in October 2007 and it
recommended the <BR>> development of a Queensland oil vulnerability
mitigation strategy and <BR>> action plan. Queensland's minister for
sustainability responded by <BR>> saying: Queensland would have to adopt a
wartime mentality in regard <BR>> to oil use, and a committee has now been
set up to prepare that <BR>> recommended strategy.<BR>><BR>> That will
be released later this year. It will be more than three <BR>> years since the
report was commissioned, but it is three years ahead <BR>> of South
Australia.<BR>><BR>> The Senate's Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
Committee <BR>> conducted an inquiry based on a very conservative question,
somewhat <BR>> like: will the sun rise tomorrow? The question was whether
Australia <BR>> should be concerned about peak oil. It tabled a report
entitled <BR>> Australia's Future Oil Supply and Alternative Transport Fuels
in <BR>> February 2007, but I am unaware of any government response or
actions <BR>> arising from that.<BR>><BR>> The Queensland report
considered three scenarios of low, central and <BR>> high in relation to
petrol prices and made observations about the <BR>> implications under each
of the scenarios. The authors assumed that the <BR>> most likely scenario was
the central one; that is, oil prices <BR>> averaging—listen to it—$58 to $60
a barrel between now and 2015, then <BR>> reaching $70 to $80 a barrel by
2050. The high scenario assumed that <BR>> prices would rise to $110 to $115
a barrel by 2050.<BR>><BR>> History tells us that, only two months after
the release of that <BR>> report, the average price for December in the world
was $87 a barrel <BR>> and it hit an historical peak of $100 a barrel early
in January this <BR>> year. Although it has fallen back a little since then,
it remains <BR>> remarkably high and the average January price, which I
understand will <BR>> be revealed by OPEC in a few days, is expected to be
$94.<BR>><BR>> We are already facing the high scenario that the Queensland
Task Force <BR>> did not think would be with us until nearly 2050. It
demonstrates how <BR>> quickly this situation can get out of control without
government <BR>> having strategies in place. We might be able to exert some
control <BR>> over the situation, but oil market volatility could plunge the
economy <BR>> into crisis. We think of oil principally in terms of
transport—driving <BR>> cars and trucks, running buses and trains, and flying
planes. Higher <BR>> prices for use of the private car will most certainly
result in social <BR>> disadvantage. Anywhere in our large cities those with
less income are <BR>> pushed to the boundaries in order to obtain housing.
Adelaide's urban <BR>> sprawl is a direct result of oil dependence and an
unstated <BR>> expectation that oil will always be there.<BR>><BR>>
People living on the edges of cities are almost always car dependent <BR>>
because public transport appears never to be factored in with urban <BR>>
expansion. They are usually carrying higher levels of debt, often <BR>>
having recently purchased housing and, because they live on the <BR>>
outskirts, often there is no business or industry to provide <BR>>
employment, so they are forced to commute long distances in their <BR>> cars.
They start off being on lower incomes, they have more debt, more <BR>> of
their income is expended on fuel, and the impact is worse, creating <BR>>
fuel poverty. This raises serious questions about the wisdom of <BR>>
expanding Adelaide's urban growth boundary. Peak oil will most <BR>>
certainly increase locational disadvantage.<BR>><BR>> Regional areas will
be hit harder still because, as always, their food <BR>> and commodity costs
include the extra cost of petrol to get those <BR>> commodities there. The
state government will have to look seriously at <BR>> providing assistance to
rural cities and towns with public transport. <BR>> One of the risks
associated with rising costs in rural areas is a <BR>> further loss of
population to Adelaide and larger regional cities. Our <BR>> government will
have to find strategies to deal with that influx of <BR>>
population.<BR>><BR>> The South Australian government could be taking
action on a variety of <BR>> fronts to encourage the use of fuel-efficient
cars by, for instance, <BR>> offering lower registration costs. I know
members would be aware of <BR>> the Solar Shop's attempts to have the Reva
electric car registered; it <BR>> has been refused because of the question of
impact in a road crash. <BR>> However, we do not refuse to register
motorbikes, despite the impact <BR>> that occurs to them in such crashes. We
know that the Reva has <BR>> potential as an alternative mode of transport.
Why not simply create a <BR>> new category of registration?<BR>><BR>>
Another thing, in terms of transport, the government will need to <BR>>
consider is car pooling, and perhaps it may have to become compulsory. <BR>>
We need to look at bus-only lanes; we need to look at the soft <BR>>
technology, such as scooters, cycling and walking. As far as work is <BR>>
concerned, we are going to have to look more at telecommuting, where <BR>> we
stay at home to do our work but we communicate via our
computers.<BR>><BR>> Quite simply, a very, very obvious solution is
developing public <BR>> transport. More services more often will be an
essential part of <BR>> moving people around. As international destinations
like Toronto, <BR>> Vancouver and Portland have demonstrated, people do not
take their <BR>> cars to work when they know they will never have to wait
more than 10 <BR>> minutes for a bus, train or tram.<BR>><BR>> As well
as the carrots, such as the increased frequency of public <BR>> transport, we
may have to look at a little bit of stick as well. For <BR>> instance, we may
have to look at a congestion charge for people taking <BR>> their car into
the city at certain times of the day. If we were to do <BR>> that, I would
suggest that the money raised would be hypothecated back <BR>> to public
transport infrastructure and rolling stock. Even a <BR>> congestion charge
has social implications, because it would mean that <BR>> taking one's car
into the city at those times of the day would be the <BR>> preserve of the
rich.<BR>><BR>> What are the implications for urban planning? How much
urban <BR>> consolidation do we need? I have certainly advanced
transport-oriented <BR>> development, where we allow much heavier density of
housing close to <BR>> our railway stations, for instance. In the suburbs,
should we be <BR>> encouraging the quarter-acre block, revisiting the way in
which we <BR>> restrict water usage at the present time and encouraging
people to <BR>> become food self-sufficient? I will talk more about that when
I get to <BR>> agriculture.<BR>><BR>> In regard to the movement of
freight, greater investment in rail <BR>> infrastructure should be happening
now, simply because it is far more <BR>> fuel efficient. Air travel is highly
fuel intensive, and it is likely <BR>> that in the future this mode of travel
will be used only for business <BR>> purposes rather than tourism. Andrew
McNamara, the MP who was chair of <BR>> the Queensland task force,
says:<BR>><BR>> You can't fly 747s on biodiesel or ethanol or hydrogen—it
is air gas <BR>> or nothing...the viability of the international tourism
industry by <BR>> air transport is at stake..we need to be looking very hard
at how we <BR>> use fuel for petrol for those things that only petrol can
do.<BR>><BR>> The tourism industry is highly reliant on transport
mobility, whether <BR>> that be bus, car or plane. However, if the fuel gets
too costly, such <BR>> holidaying will become an option for the rich, with
the resultant <BR>> economic impact on our tour and hotel operators. I hope
that, once <BR>> this committee is up and running, the Department of Tourism
will make <BR>> a submission to the committee about how it proposes this
matter should <BR>> be addressed.<BR>><BR>> We are told by the South
Australian government that we are on the <BR>> brink of a mining boom. I do
not have figures for South Australia, but <BR>> the Queensland task force
report does, and I suspect that, given the <BR>> distance of mining ventures
from cities and ports in Queensland, there <BR>> would be a great deal of
similarity.<BR>><BR>> The Queensland report states that the mining
industry in that state is <BR>> the second largest consumer of petroleum
products in that state, with <BR>> oil-based products making up 50 per cent
of its energy use. The more <BR>> remote the mine, the more it is likely to
consume, particularly in <BR>> regard to the use of diesel for power
generation. The amount of <BR>> processing that occurs on site also
determines the degree of oil <BR>> dependence and, therefore,
vulnerability.<BR>><BR>> The exploration stage of mining is highly oil
dependent. The South <BR>> Australian government, with its airborne surveys
for geomagnetic <BR>> anomalies, is dependent on avgas, and on the ground
mining companies <BR>> use diesel or petrol to do their mapping, drilling and
collection of <BR>> samples. Once up and running, the mines use oil products
for the <BR>> extraction and trucking of ore, and flights into and out from
the <BR>> mines in remote areas are essential.<BR>><BR>> In the case of
those mines located close to rural towns and cities, it <BR>> is highly
desirable for moving casual and contract labour to and from <BR>> those
mines. I have a relative who lives on the Gold Coast and who <BR>>
periodically works for BHP Billiton at Roxby Downs, and that company <BR>>
flies him from the Gold Coast down to Adelaide and up to Roxby Downs <BR>>
and then, when he has finished his month or whatever period of time <BR>>
there, they fly him all the way back.<BR>><BR>> The Queensland report
gives some interesting examples of the <BR>> dependence on oil. New Hope Coal
Australia uses 16,063,000 litres of <BR>> oil to produce 2,068,000 tonnes of
coal. that is, 7.6 litres of diesel <BR>> to produce one tonne of coal. The
Association of Mining and <BR>> Exploration Companies needs 10 million litres
of diesel to produce <BR>> 100,000 ounces of gold, that is, 100 litres for
one ounce. A <BR>> Caterpillar 77D large truck hauling 95 tonnes in a load
uses 77 litres <BR>> per hour of diesel, when it is a well-tuned and
well-maintained <BR>> vehicle. So, one truck uses 1.5 million litres of
diesel per annum. <BR>> The mining boom predicted for South Australia will
not happen in a <BR>> hurry unless the peak oil issue is
addressed.<BR>><BR>> I turn to the issue of farming and food, and I quote
again from the <BR>> Queensland report, as follows:<BR>><BR>> If it can
be synthetically produced commercially (rubber, chemicals, <BR>> plastics,
dyes, inks, fibres, adhesives paint) it will today probably <BR>> derive from
the oil or gas industry.<BR>><BR>> Agriculture is often described as a way
of turning oil into food. Not <BR>> only do farmers need oil fuel for their
tilling, reaping and taking <BR>> their product to market but they also need
it for their fertilisers <BR>> and pesticides.<BR>><BR>><BR>> Ninety
per cent of the energy used in agriculture is oil-based. In <BR>> Australia
we begin food production with low fertility soils. We have <BR>> been
exporting our produce to the world, but this has been possible <BR>> only
because of the use of oil-based fertilisers. Queensland's report <BR>>
recommends that no subsidy be given to farmers, and the resulting <BR>> price
increases will force them to adapt and create efficiencies. So, <BR>> should
farmers have to absorb the extra costs, and, if we are telling <BR>> them
that that is the case, are we talking about forcing farmers off <BR>> the
land? I suspect that in the end farmers will have to pass on the <BR>> costs
on a user-pays basis, because I do not think we can expect the <BR>> farming
community to bear that. Without the pesticides and fertilisers <BR>> they
have become used to, will farmers have enough produce left to <BR>> export?
If not, what impact will that have on our state's economy?<BR>><BR>> As a
consequence of climate change and reductions in water we can <BR>> expect
dairy products to increase in cost, so we are already bearing a <BR>> cost in
terms of our food. I was also surprised to find out, during my <BR>>
research, that fishing will be quite strongly impacted by peak oil, <BR>>
given that 30 per cent of their costs are fuel-related, and this has <BR>>
been increasing as distances to reach fishing resources have <BR>> increased.
So, we can expect the price of fish to rise. I raised the <BR>> question
earlier regarding whether or not we will have to revisit <BR>> water
restrictions and the way we use water to, perhaps, encourage <BR>> people to
plant their own agricultural products in their own backyards <BR>> and become
self-sufficient in their own food.<BR>><BR>> Australia has already reached
its oil peak and our reserves are on the <BR>> decline, with less than 70 per
cent of our oil coming from local <BR>> fields. This means that we are now
seriously dependent on imported <BR>> oil, often from parts of the world
which are politically unstable. <BR>> Australia is supposed to maintain an
equivalent of 90 days' oil <BR>> supply, according to the Agreement on
International Energy. In <BR>> practice, Australia is lucky to have 50 days'
supply at any one time.<BR>><BR>> At a state level the situation is far
more drastic since the closure <BR>> of the Port Stanvac refinery. South
Australia holds between 10 and 17 <BR>> days of petrol, and there were two
days in December last year (I am <BR>> talking about only five or six weeks
ago) when the supply of diesel <BR>> was one day short of nothing—a potential
disaster for our freight <BR>> transport and Adelaide's train
services.<BR>><BR>> Without a refinery the South Australian government
might have to start <BR>> prioritising the use of diesel. For instance, most
remote communities <BR>> are dependent upon diesel for their electricity
generation, and <BR>> perhaps the state government will be able to assist
many of these <BR>> communities with the installation of solar and wind
alternatives. If <BR>> Port Stanvac was used as a tank farm it could give a
30 days' reserve <BR>> supply to South Australia, but this would put in doubt
the state <BR>> government's plans to use that site for a desalination
plant.<BR>><BR>> Alternatives to fossil fuels must be investigated and
advanced. There <BR>> is a federal rebate at the moment to convert cars to
gas, but this is <BR>> only a short-term solution as the world is also
running out of natural <BR>> gas. Biofuels are touted as one alternative, but
they can also result <BR>> in food price increases when land that was
producing food for human <BR>> consumption is turned over to crops that can
be used to create <BR>> transport fuels.<BR>><BR>> The International
Monetary Fund says that in 2006 around the world <BR>> this accounted for a
10 per cent increase in the price of food over <BR>> the previous year.
Ethanol is another possibility, but overall ethanol <BR>> is a net energy
loser; more energy is used in the cropping and <BR>> production than is
produced. Dutch Crown Prince Willem-Alexander says, <BR>> 'The amount of
water needed to produce biofuels for the tank of an SUV <BR>> equals the
amount of water needed to feed one person on grains for a <BR>> whole year.'
This demonstrates that in finding fuel alternatives we <BR>> must also look
at climate change and related water impacts.<BR>><BR>> Some in Australia
see the abundance of coal as a potential saviour, <BR>> but the process of
converting coal to oil produces huge amounts of <BR>> greenhouse gases.
Forgetting all the other arguments I have about <BR>> nuclear energy, it is
not a solution because it is not an alternative <BR>> to oil. I do recall
that as long ago as 1986 Professor Martin Green <BR>> was saying that, with
the solar technology we had, we could turn the <BR>> roofs of our carports
into solar collectors, put in an electric car, <BR>> and we would have enough
charge in our batteries to travel 80 <BR>> kilometres—which would allow most
people to get to and from work every <BR>> day. That is another possible
solution.<BR>><BR>> I go back again to the REVA car; if we are prepared to
create another <BR>> registration category we might have just a part of the
solution. We <BR>> have seen the announcement of the closure of Mitsubishi,
and I have <BR>> called for that site to be used for the manufacture of solar
buses; <BR>> however, it could equally be used for an electric car
industry.<BR>><BR>> When the squeeze is on resources, as it is as a
consequence of climate <BR>> change and related water scarcity, combining
those two factors with <BR>> peak oil must cause us to question those who
argue for increasing our <BR>> population in South Australia. The so-called
international green <BR>> revolution allowed the growth of populations
throughout the world <BR>> because agricultural output was increased through
the use of <BR>> fertilisers and pesticides but, as the price of these
increase in <BR>> response to peak oil, will that revolution grind to a halt?
Can the <BR>> existing population be sustained at the current levels of
affluence? I <BR>> contend that if we are to increase the population here in
South <BR>> Australia we will have to accept a lower standard of
living.<BR>><BR>> I have no facts or figures but, in talking to members of
the public, <BR>> it is clear that knowledge of peak oil is severely lacking,
with many <BR>> people never having heard the term. This is somewhat akin to
the <BR>> situation in the late 1980s when the environment movement talked
about <BR>> the greenhouse effect. Given the huge potential for economic and
<BR>> social dislocation, it is important that the public becomes aware of
<BR>> peak oil so that when government has to implement drastic action the
<BR>> electorate can at least understand what is happening and
why.<BR>><BR>><BR>> The IAEA's 2005 report, Saving Oil in a Hurry,
recommends development <BR>> of a plan. What a great idea! It
states:<BR>><BR>> Communicating this plan to the public also appears very
important. If <BR>> the public is not well informed of plans ahead of time
and supportive <BR>> of them, they may be less likely to cooperate and do
their part to <BR>> help the plan succeed during an emergency. Strong support
and <BR>> cooperation from the business community is also
essential.<BR>><BR>> When MPs move a motion such as this, we usually
include a final term <BR>> of reference, 'any other related matter', to cover
things we might <BR>> have neglected to include in the terms of reference. I
have done this <BR>> quite deliberately, because I know that I have left out
some items in <BR>> the terms of reference. However, here is a sample of some
of those <BR>> things that others, when they make submissions to or appear
before the <BR>> committee, might raise with us.<BR>><BR>> Plastics
have become a mainstay of the developed world; think of just <BR>> the
bottles of water we purchase and think of the plastic around our <BR>>
computers, the consoles, the package in which the hard drive sits, and <BR>>
the screen; they are all plastic. Some of the fabrics of our clothes <BR>>
are made from petrochemicals, as are our phones, paints, garden hoses, <BR>>
radios and TVs. If you look around, you will find how dependent we are <BR>>
on plastics and, therefore, oil.<BR>><BR>> Lester Brown, from the Earth
Policy Institute, has somewhat wryly <BR>> observed that supermarkets and
service stations are now competing for <BR>> the same commodities. So, what
are the alternatives to plastics? What <BR>> will be the impact on essential
services is another question we have <BR>> to ask. What about health? The
pharmaceutical industry is highly <BR>> dependent on the petrochemical
industry. What sort of industries will <BR>> we be able to sustain in South
Australia, and where will they be located?<BR>><BR>> How will we deal with
the intransigence of the road transport lobby <BR>> when recommendations are
made to reduce road construction? How will <BR>> climate change interact with
peak oil? Will we have double the <BR>> trouble, or does dealing with one
assist the other? Will our new super <BR>> schools have to be disaggregated
and relocated in order to put them <BR>> within walking and cycling distance
of the homes of the students? <BR>> These are just some of the many questions
that might be put to the <BR>> committee.<BR>><BR>> I would like to
look at what is happening internationally—again, <BR>> perhaps to illustrate
that we are behind the eight ball here in South <BR>> Australia. There are a
few places in the world that have understood <BR>> the seriousness of the
situation, and the select committee might be <BR>> able to turn to them for
inspiration and example. Sweden aims to be <BR>> close to becoming oil free
by 2020 by replacing all fossil fuels with <BR>> renewables. Its Minister for
Sustainable Development says that oil <BR>> dependency is one of the greatest
problems facing the world.<BR>><BR>> A series of self-designated ‘peak oil
transition towns’ have been set <BR>> up in the UK, including Totnes (which
has developed its Energy Descent <BR>> Action Plan), Bristol, Lewes, Falmouth
and Stroud. Individual cities <BR>> in the US, such as Ashland in Oregon,
Austin and Dallas in Texas, <BR>> Oakland and San Jose in California, and
Seattle in Washington, have <BR>> publicly recognised that there is a looming
problem. When you look at <BR>> the public transport systems that already
exist in some of the cities, <BR>> it is clear that they have a head start on
us.<BR>><BR>> Other cities, such as Portland in Oregon and Bloomington in
Indiana, <BR>> have gone beyond that and have action plans. Portland has
established <BR>> a Peak Oil Task Force that produced a report with a
principal <BR>> recommendation of 'act big, act now', and I cannot think of a
much <BR>> better recommendation. The US House of Representatives has a
<BR>> bipartisan peak oil caucus, and it has recommended that the US, in
<BR>> concert with its allies, should establish an energy project along the
<BR>> lines of the ‘Man on the Moon’ project it set up in the late fifties
<BR>> and early sixties. It says that this should be done with the same
<BR>> urgency and creativity with which that project was tackled. Eight
<BR>> months ago, the British parliament formed its All Party Parliamentary
<BR>> Group on Peak Oil and Gas.<BR>><BR>> As I reach my conclusion, I
want to thank members of BOSA (Beyond Oil <BR>> South Australia), namely,
Michael Lardelli and Jennifer Bain, for <BR>> assisting me in refining the
terms of reference for this committee. <BR>> Michael regularly sends me BOSA
news, which keeps me up to date on the <BR>> good and the bad news about peak
oil.<BR>><BR>> Jennifer emailed me a copy of a large report on peak oil
she has <BR>> prepared and sent to her local MP, Jane Lomax-Smith. I know
that she <BR>> was about to meet her local MP to discuss it, and I sincerely
hope <BR>> that Jane Lomax-Smith has read it because, if she has, she will be
a <BR>> convert to this cause and, I believe, will argue the case with her
<BR>> colleagues that they support the setting up of the select
committee.<BR>><BR>> I have to say that this report was a marvellous
resource. I had <BR>> prepared my speech, but I found that I needed to expand
it, as her <BR>> research directed me to other reports, projects, comments
and <BR>> websites. Yet, despite enlarging my remarks, I have merely skimmed
the <BR>> surface of the dimensions of the problem that is peak
oil.<BR>><BR>> I remind members, as I have told them before in this place,
that the <BR>> former US secretary James Schlesinger said last year that
there was no <BR>> longer a debate on whether or not the peak oil concept was
arguable, <BR>> that 'we are all peakists now', and that we will face great
difficulty <BR>> in dealing with it. The IEA predicts that the first supply
crunch will <BR>> happen within five years, so we need to act
quickly.<BR>><BR>> Ian Dunlop, a former oil, gas and coal industry
executive, speaking on <BR>> the convergence of climate change and peak oil,
said, 'Policy must <BR>> ensure that solutions to one reinforce and do not
conflict with <BR>> solutions to the other.' Eleven months ago, he said that
Australian <BR>> governments had to act within six to 12 months. The Hirsch
report, <BR>> which I have referred to before, states:<BR>><BR>>
Without massive mitigation more than a decade before the fact, the <BR>>
problem will be pervasive and will not be temporary. Previous energy <BR>>
transitions (wood to coal and coal to oil) were gradual and <BR>>
evolutionary; oil peaking will be abrupt and revolutionary.<BR>><BR>> It
is highly likely that we do not have the decade for preparation the <BR>>
Hirsch report recommends, in which case this committee, and any <BR>>
recommendations it might make, are urgently needed.<BR>><BR>> Brian Fleay
told the meeting I attended 12 years ago that the <BR>> substitution of
energy for labour will no longer be viable when peak <BR>> oil begins
impacting, that a global economy will not be viable and <BR>> that economic
growth will end. Governments should be acting now while <BR>> they have money
in the coffers to deal with it. Delaying action will <BR>> exacerbate the
problem as the tax revenue will begin to decrease as <BR>> peak oil takes its
hold.<BR>><BR>> Ian Dunlop said that “visionary, principled long-term
leadership is <BR>> needed for government, community and business”. I cannot
indicate to <BR>> members just how strongly I feel about this subject. I have
a huge <BR>> sense of frustration. It seems that we are standing on a
precipice <BR>> with blindfolds on our eyes. Supporting this motion might
take us just <BR>> one step back from the edge of the cliff. I hope I gain
the support of <BR>> all members in getting this committee established
urgently.<BR>><BR>> ------<BR>><BR>> Note about private members
business -<BR>><BR>> Sandra's proposal for a select committee on Peak Oil
is Private <BR>> Member's Business. It is dealt with in the Legislative
Council on <BR>> Wednesdays of sitting weeks. Next Wednesday of sitting dates
are 27th <BR>> February, 5th March, 2nd and 9th
April.</FONT><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><BR></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>