Energy
War
by Shuchen Tan, Ijsbrand Van Veelen,
and Rudi Boon, Directors
First Run/Icarus Films, Brooklyn, New
York, 2007
DVD, 78 mins., col.
Sale,
DVD: $398.00; rental, DVD: $125
Distributor’s website: http://www.frif.com.
Reviewed by Martha Patricia Niño Mojica
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana de Bogotá
Facultad
de Artes Visuales
Carrera
7 Number 40-62
Colombia
ninom@javeriana.edu.co
Energy war is
a documentary that analyzes the final
outcome of our modern addiction to oil
and gas. Fossil
fuels are described from the political
side as an element of prime importance
in both foreign policies and social distribution
of power. Countries such Iran,
Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Nigeria,
Sudan, Algeria, Equatorial Guinea, Angola
and other petrol-states might be the
new superpowers for a short span. Examples
of this context are given through interviews
with government officials in charge of
energy resources of various countries.
An extensive interview with the economist Thomas Friedman has
valuable insights from the economic side for countries that produce oil, as
well as countries that consume it. Friedman also has a very alarming
research about the pace of freedom house index and the price of oil from 1979
to 2006. Watch out for the breaking of the addicts to high oil prices and the
addicts to oil, or we will be victims of our own stupidity and greed, warns
Friedman. Norway is portrayed as a good example to follow because it has
petrol but also a diverse economy without petrol autocrats. His interview also
contains an
interesting historical account of previous research done about energy that
represents an alternative to fossil fuels that produce greenhouse gases. They include
a 1978's Chevette that uses no gasoline, because the car is driven on hydrogen
produced by solar power, so it just emits steam into the air.
If this technology would have been adopted back then, now we would
be enjoying 57% less of our current air pollution in each city of the world.
This is especially relevant in the face of global warming and the increasing
scarcity of natural resources, such as oil. The concept of peak oil and its
decline is widely explained by the geologist Kenneth Deffeyes of
Princeton University. The high impact lifestyles in terms of energy
of the large American dream — which
has a big ecological footprint [1] — has to be redefined
if we don't want to choke and burn up. What are we going to do if three billion
persons in countries with a fast growing middle class such as China want to
adopt this unsustainable model? Another ill-fated factor is that in America
the term green was named by its opponents and associated
with girly man, liberal, tree hugging, unpatriotic, or vaguely French. Friedman
proposes to rename the term green as patriotic, geo-political, geo-strategic and geo-economic.
The film explores the future scenarios of alternative power sources
and exposes the imminent need for government policies, research and development
in the field of renewable energy. The analysis includes bio fuels made of corn
and sugar that are said to require a large cultivation area and make food
more expensive and can be as polluting. Bio-diesel made of Jatropha plant is another option for countries like
Africa that don't have the infrastructure yet for offering it for export.
Nuclear energy is not a good option because the total
amount of uranium that can be mined energetically without using more energy
will only add five to ten years beyond the life
span of the fossil fuel age and is very dangerous. Geothermic energy
is not mentioned in the DVD, but it can be a good source of energy in countries like
Colombia, which counts with 95 volcanoes. Kinetic energy produced by walking
or by sea waves is another unexplored alternative in the
film. The main problem of all this options is that they require
some geo-strategic characteristics in order to operate. The film advocates
solar energy — which is not very
cheap to set up — but it is very accessible,
and does not produce pollution. The documentary openly advertises
the Suntech Company, it sounds like paid advertisement, but it really serves
as a good example of a successful research case of solar energy from 1996 until
now. It is all about photons and sun light and they really have impressive and
reliable products that have 25 years of guaranty and can be used in public
lighting, transport systems, rural areas, urban outdoors, and military applications
worldwide. Although some interviews in the documentary question it,
it is possible to say that this is a feasible option if combined with
ecologically conscious designs, such as the use of lighting made with LEDs
(Light Emitting Diodes), which consume 97% less energy than
a light bulb, last a hundred times longer and protect the environment. In a
country like U.S.A, about 35 billion dollars a year could be saved. This
measure is being undertaken in cities like Austin [2]
Another
not discussed option is
the need of research in the field of
Ultra Low Voltage Complementary Metal
Oxide Semiconductor (ULV-CMOS) circuits.
Despite the anti migrant phobia associated with Muslim people,
which was reinvigorated by the September 11th attacks, the film
shows Saudi
Arabia as an example of development and future research. The film also
deploys moments in which oil has been used as a political weapon but it draws
attention to the need for immediate action in order to ensure a sustainable
world. This work is of general interest and especially useful for politicians,
designers and architects.
This work is worth seeing, because it leaves the viewer with
important questions about the most pressing issues of our time: Who will be
the winners of the electricity race? Who will be the next super powers? How
can we stop polar melt down? Will the world centre shift from London, Brussels,
and New York to Moscow, Caracas, and Tehran?
References:
[1] http://www.earthday.net/Footprint/.
[2] http://www.ledcity.org/.
