Like many institutions and individuals, Shell, the oil giant, is trying to divine what lies ahead in a world with limited energy options, a fast-growing energy appetite, and a climate system almost assuredly disrupted should carbon dioxide emissions from today’s fuels of choice continue their seemingly inexorable rise.

Earlier this month, the company’s forecasters produced two energy scenarios for the next two generations, which they call “the world of scramble” and the “world of blueprints.”

Scenarios can be a useful thought experiment. In 2002, I wrote about a report, “Great Transition,” that envisaged more possible futures, ranging from Eco Communalism to Fortress World.”

Exercises aside, the real future will likely be a messy mix similar to the present — just more so. There’ll be instability, poverty, overpopulation, and pollution in some places (they tend to go hand in hand, as in Haiti) and wealth, order, and efficiency in others (think Stockholm or Portland).

But it doesn’t hurt to aspire, and to try to test which institutions, technologies, habits and norms (personal, communal, global) can be nudged in a direction most people would define as progress. Again, that is the goal of Dot Earth (slide show), both this blog and a set of stories I plan to write in coming months.

So let’s see what Shell’s energy futures look like.

Here are excerpts from a transcript of a video the company created to illustrate these two possible paths (links added by me).

SCRAMBLE WORLD. In the Scramble world, events outpace actions. Security of energy supply and fears of losing economic ground shape decision-making. For the next 10 years, people from all walks of life join in the debate about energy and climate change. But no one seems truly wedded to action on a large scale. Governments generally choose solutions that are politically straightforward, and local. They prefer to rely on indigenous energy sources. So coal makes a big comeback in some regions, despite its higher emissions. Drivers stay with liquid fuels. With oil becoming harder to find and produce, biofuel use grows rapidly. Energy efficiency improves only gradually. Trading in emissions credits remains patchy and ineffective. Without a meaningful price, business lacks direction for technology investments to improve emissions management. In the Scramble world, no one is prepared to change the status quo. Dealing with today’s problem takes priority. By the 2020s, life has become volatile and uncertain. Energy availability is often tight. Severe weather events are blamed on a lack of previous action on climate change. The public cries out. And governments in the different regions respond in different ways – but without consistency or cohesion. Eventually a new, more positive phase emerges. Enforced steps to reduce energy demand gradually have an effect. …Individual, local efforts to promote renewable energy sources start to pay off. Renewables become well enough established, and on a large enough scale, to be competitive. Greenhouse gas emissions eventually begin to fall in the Scramble world. But the earlier periods of economic volatility, and the legacy of high emissions, continue to have an impact. Because events outpaced actions, major work will still be needed after 2050 to achieve real sustainability.



WORLD OF BLUEPRINTS. The world of Blueprints shows what can happen when actions outpace events. Groups of seemingly disconnected people in California –- venture capitalists, farmers, politicians –- collaborate around opportunities for profitable action on climate change. Publics put international pressure on governments for change. Smart investments in modern facilities improve air pollution, energy efficiency, and greenhouse gas emissions all at the same time. This isn’t a sudden outbreak of altruism. It’s a recognition of shared interests, new opportunities for profitable business, and the benefits of taking action before it’s forced by circumstances. In the world of Blueprints, local actions spread and join up –- like the C40 megacities pact of mayors and others, experimenting and sharing good practices around carbon emissions, transport and energy efficiency. During the next decade, the Blueprints world is diverse. Different parts use different approaches to promote energy efficiency, and technology development. Some choose taxes. Others use mandates. Some look for voluntary action by businesses and consumers. The most successful approaches spread. However, the diversity makes life difficult for investment. Pressure is created on local, national and international authorities to harmonize arrangements better. With harmonization comes widespread adoption of good efficiency practices. Trading schemes for carbon dioxide emissions rights begin to cover a critical mass of industry sectors in a critical mass of countries. The ball is rolling. Meaningful carbon dioxide pricing gives people and organizations more incentive to improve their energy efficiency and invest in technologies, paving the way to carbon capture and storage after 2020. Meanwhile, transport is becoming “greener” through growth in hybrids and later full-electric vehicles. Biofuels play a role alongside traditional oil products. By the 2040s, the Blueprints world sees renewable energy technologies compete on price against fossil fuels, which are well managed with carbon capture and storage.

So carbon emissions are well advanced on a downward path by mid century. It’s been a bumpy journey for some. But collaboration, successful carbon policies, and faster technology deployment have all contributed to a more sustainable world than Scramble. …At Shell, both scenarios help us in making our choices and preparing to face uncertainty. Traditionally, Shell uses its scenarios without expressing a preference for one over another. However, in a break with tradition, in our view, from the two scenarios, the Blueprints outcomes offer the best hope for a sustainable future, whether or not they arise exactly in the way we describe. We are convinced they are possible with the right combination of policy, technology and commitment from governments, industry and society globally. But achieving them will not be easy and time is short.

Is there any merit to trying to create blueprints? Managed development strikes many as a “new world order” that stifles human freedom. But on a finite planet with a shared atmosphere and oceans, doesn’t traditional free enterprise, by its nature, guarantee harm to the commons?

Gus Speth, the dean of Yale’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, has a new book out (on my reading table but only nibbled at so far), arguing that traditional capitalism is at fundamental odds with sustainable development.

In Common Wealth, Jeff Sachs, the economist who heads Columbia’s Earth Institute, addresses related themes in outlining ways to avoid something looking like the “fortress world” I mentioned above.

But Indur Goklany’s book, The Improving State of the World, says trajectories are already pointed in the direction of ever more prosperity, so, in essence, why mess with a good thing? [UPDATE 4/19: Indur wrote to say this is an oversimplified distillation. I have added his full note in the comment string below. I’ll be doing a sit-down interview with him later this spring.]

What’s your desired scenario for the next few decades for the planet, your town, your life? What’s the scenario you feel is most likely?