International Energy Agency and oil: How much is left, and what are the alternatives, part 1

The International Energy Agency (IEA) report, issued on Tuesday, makes for grim reading. The report is used by governments all over the world to set energy policy.

Business as usual would put the planet on track for a 6 degree rise in global temperatures.

The report demonstrates that containing climate change is possible but will require �a profound transformation of the energy sector.�

Keeping Co2 levels in the atmosphere at 450 parts per million (ppm), which many experts feel will only give the planet a 50-50 chance of avoiding runaway climate change, will require �a profound transformation of the energy sector� according to the IEA.

�To achieve this scenario, fossil-fuel demand would need to peak by 2020 and energy-related carbon dioxide emissions to fall to 26.4 gigatonnes (Gt) in 2030 from 28.8 Gt in 2007� according to the IEA

Two of the main challenges include increased demand from China and India, as well as lack of investment in renewables and efficiencies due to the downturn.

Current oil producers also face losses of many trillions of dollars if global agreement can be reached on aiming for a limit of 450 ppm.

The small rises in supplies of "non-conventional oil", such as the tar sands of Canada, involve extreme climate polluting extraction methods.

Even nuclear, often lauded as carbon neutral, is not. The drilling, blasting, excavating, separating and transporting of uranium is not taken into account by western governments in their own figures.

It has been reported that the Namibian government plans to build a coal fired power plant to provide electricity for its uranium mines, due to increased UK demand. This could produce more than 10 million tonnes of Co2 a year, while also draining resources such as water and producing huge mountains of nuclear waste, waste which remains problematic far into the future.

Coping with nuclear waste for millennia, in a world with no fossil fuels, will be interesting to say the least.

Alarming and all as it was, some of the IEA's thunder was stolen by a whistleblower, as reported in the Guardian on Monday.

This person, described as a senior official with the IEA, claimed that the IEA has been exaggerating the amount of oil left due to US pressure. This then prompted the IEA to publish more details on the figures.

However even the figures themselves are worrying. Fields yet to be developed and even yet to be found make the situation look better than it otherwise is.

What are the implications for Ireland? How ready is Ireland for a oil shortage? See next posting.