On Earth Day, Contemplating the Human Cost of Energy

April 20, the one-year anniversary of the beginning of the Gulf oil spill, has no shortage of news events. Environmentalists and fishermen along the Gulf coast offered tours of the shoreline, to show the spots where the oil still remained. BP—with its impeccable sense of timing—lodged a $40 billion lawsuit against Transocean, the Swiss drilling company that operated the Deepwater Horizon, and separate suits against other contractors. Republicans in Congress marked the anniversary of the biggest oil spill in U.S. history with a call to renew and expand drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. “Safety reforms have been implemented, new technology has been deployed and the Gulf is ready to get back to work to help create jobs and lower gasoline prices,” said Doc Hastings, the chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, in a statement.

But there were other, smaller events on April 20, memorials that recalled the 11 crew members killed in the Deepwater Horizon blowout. They were forgotten quickly, those men, as the rig sank and the oil spread and the fears focused on the vulnerable Gulf coastline, on the fate of the fish and the bird and the wetlands. But they should be remembered, men like Roy Wyatt Kemp, husband to Courtney and father to 3-year-old Kaylee and 14-month-old Madison. “Their daddy and my husband is never coming home,” Courtney Kemp told the Advertiser in Louisiana a few days ago.

It’s Earth Day today—the 41st one—and it comes at a time when we’ve all been made aware of the environmental cost of the energy we use.  The BP oil spill caused ecological damage that scientists will study for years, and the partial nuclear meltdown at Fukushima may render large parts of the surrounding area uninhabitable. Coal and other fossil fuels continue to blacken the sky and warm the climate, and even natural gas—seen as a greener bridge fuel—has experienced recent accidents, with a major well blowout occurring this week in Pennsylvania. Alternatives like solar and wind are growing, but there are even environmental and quality of life complaints about renewable power as well.

Still, the fate of Roy Wyatt Kemp and the rest of the Deepwater Horizon 11 is a reminder that there is a terrible human cost to our energy system, as well as an environmental one. The BP oil spill wasn’t the only deadly energy industry accident over the past year—though it was one of the few that received headlines. There was a natural gas explosion in California that killed five people; a gas explosion in China that killed 21 people; an oil pipeline explosion in Mexico that killed 27. We justly celebrated the near-miraculous rescue of the 33 Chilean coal miners last year, yet just two days apart in November 29 coal miners in New Zealand were killed after a gas explosion, and 87 Chinese workers were killed in a terribly coal mining accident. It isn’t just oil or electrons that flows in our pipelines and transmission wires. It’s blood.

In fact, the blood cost is another way to calculate the energy equation: blood per kilowatt. Mark Fulton, the managing director and global head of Climate Change Investment Research at DB Climate Change Advisors, introduced me to the concept at the Fortune Brainstorm Green conference earlier this month. When we evaluate different forms of energy, we shouldn’t only take into account the financial price or even just the environmental cost, but the damage to human health and well-being as well.

And the results are a bit surprising, as Seth Godin made clear in this illuminating post from a month ago. Coal is by far the deadliest source of energy per unit of power—both because of the risk to miners (especially in developing nations like China) and to all of us through air and water pollution. Oil comes in next, while natural gas remains perhaps surprisingly low. Lower still is wind and rooftop solar, which is dangerous mostly because installers might fall off a roof while putting in panels. (It happens.) And at the bottom is nuclear power, which causes 0.04 deaths per terrawatt/hour of electrical power, although the full toll from Fukushima still remains to be seen.

All of those numbers are too high, and they can be reduced through better workplace regulation and pollution controls—and maybe even switching in less dangerous sources. But the best way to cut the human toll of our energy system is to simply use less energy, which means we’d need to mine less coal and drill for less oil. Americans are doing a better job of that then we often think—on a per-capita basis, we don’t use much more energy now than we did a few decades ago. But we can do much, much more, whether through fuel efficiency requirements for automobiles or less wasteful appliances or simple conservation. We often talk about cutting our dependence on foreign oil, or reducing greenhouse gas emissions. But this Earth Day, we should think about people like Roy Wyatt Kemp, and the other casualties of our energy system—and stop trading so much blood for power.

Related Topics: accident, blood, BP, Chilean miners, coal, Deepwater Horizon, Earth Day, Fukushima, nuclear, oil spill, Oil
  • Latest on Ecocentric

    Alexander Demianchuk / Reuters

    Global Warming: An Exclusive Look at James Hansen’s Scary New Math

    A new analysis by the NASA climatologist for the first time ties specific weather events to human-induced climate change

    Victor Fraile / Getty Images

    By Sea, Land and Air: Hong Kong Inventor Leads Charge in War Against Pollution

    One Hong Kong engineer puts the city’s surf and turf to work toward a cleaner future

    Paul Souders

    Can Polar Bears Keep Their Heads Above Water in a Warming World?

    Polar bears are classified as marine mammals, like a seal or a walrus, which might come as a surprise given that they’re usually pictured on land. But polar bears spend a lot of their time in the waters of the Arctic, fishing or swimming among the sea ice. They may look awkward in the water, but no creature with paws is a better swimmer.

  • waynebernard

    Here is a look at the impact that China is having and is projected to have on the world’s energy markets:

    http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2011/04/macroeconomics-of-oil-supply-and-demand.html

    If we ignore the day-to-day volatility of the oil market and look at the supply and demand picture, it becomes quite apparent that, unless alternative sources of energy are soon put in place, the price of oil will likely set new highs in the not too distant future. The impact of the demands placed on the finite supply of oil by 1.6 billion citizens of China is not going unnoticed.

  • http://kcheckeye.wordpress.com kcheckeye

    The problem is we all need to get to work, heat our home and eat. I know there is a cost for energy, but even before reactors, power plants and such, people had to work, hunt for food and cut down trees for energy and I’m sure the human cost was more than today. I agree we need to conserve and that goes for our president who has no problems flying all over the place on our dime. Perhaps it’s time to close the stores one day a week, lower the speed limits, change traffic light patterns to reduce fuel consumption. If we would all do our part by recycling, driving smarter and stop the senseless waste of energy – we can make a difference. We need energy. and over time can adjust how we use it, but I still need to get to work. When energy costs increase beyond my income, I can’t just go out and buy a new car to gain a couple miles/gal.

  • http://caribousteaks.wordpress.com caribousteaks

    Its a bit like complaining about getting a car crash when you drive everyday of your life instead of walking. And your point is…? 19,000 Americans killed each year….by each other…with guns. I guess you could say it all decreases the surplus population? Good for the earth….no? I haven’t heard anyone say, I’m not going to have kids to save the planet. Would, not having kids save the planet? Would, not producing energy save the planet? Would not cutting down trees, mining metals, fishing, farming…..breathing not save the planet? What indeed is the point? Should we all just drop dead? Maybe the earth would be pristine then? Or maybe it wouldn’t and just carry on being what it is? I say enjoy life whilst you are here. Drive that SUV, drive it hard, drive it fast! Fish that stream and ocean, buy at Costco and pop that CO2 foaming champagne every evening with the wife unit. Life is a carnival worth living and if that means eating a few endangered species and crashing a few gas guzzling earth destroying cars and planes and ships then so be it. Heck its better than living in a cave and huddling by the fire from the last remaining trees left any day. Bring it, big oil, big coal, big nukes. Bring it!
    P.S. I love my MTV!

  • http://azbearhuntr.wordpress.com azbearhuntr

    Soooo what about the death toll that would result if we didn’t have fuel oil to heat houses this winter? The introduction of fossil fuels and the products that are made from them such as plastics have saved more human life than taken. It is surely impossible to be completely “green”. Did a solar powered truck deliver that windmill to your house? I am all for seeking out cleaner technology but complaining about our current choice doesn’t ignite innovation. It also seems that there are too many legal hurdles to jump to really immerse ourselves into the current options we have, for example: Bunnyhug group #1 sues becuase there is a coal fired plant in operation so we build a wind farm, Bunnyhug group #2 sues becuase the blades kill .0000000001% of migrating love swallows so we tear down the windfarm and build a solar plant. Bunnyhug group #3 sues becuase the foot print of said plant is 20x the size of the original coal plant (and produces 10% of the power) and destroys the mother earth lizard of peace’s habitat. Oh and I forgot to mention the EPA and current WH administration sticking their hands in every step and making them file and re-file 200,000 pages of documents only to get a decline after satisfying all requirments. We need a MAJOR shift in thinking before anything new will actually take root. Until then it’s just an excuse for a small few to pat themselves on the back and smile at thoughts of saving the planet.

  • http://9lights.wordpress.com 9lights

    We humans seem to think that fuel and energy are the same thing. Don’t you see articles mentioning energy prices? Yet the price is not the energy, it’s the price of fuel. It’s as if we have forgotten that fuel and energy are different things.
    .
    It’s natural we humans are so baffled by our addiction to fuel, the substances we burn in our cars, or burn up in power plants. The fire is hotter than its surroundings, and the difference in temperature yields energy. The heat of a flame is not the same thing as the cost of oil.
    .
    Who will start with me, to begin saying “fuel prices” instead of “energy prices”. It’s the fuel that costs us so much money — not the fire.
    .
    Who will stand with me to speak of the “fuel crisis”, rather than an “energy” crisis? Our universe is chock full of energy. But our planet is scarce on fuel, especially now that we treat fuel and energy like they’re the same thing.

  • http://toeflmark.wordpress.com p7mark

    “stop trading so much blood for power.”???
    What about driving in cars? How many killed per mile?
    What about riding byciles?
    What about eating lunch and choking on it by accident? (eating can be dangerous too)
    What about sex?
    the list goes on and on…

    The Human Cost of Energy to the environment is vastly understated or pretty much ignored when we price it and pay for it on the open market. This will come to haunt us for sure but your article highlighting 2 miners here 10 miners there being killed while doing their work while certainly tragic, pales in comparison to the mayhem caused by automobile driving or even beer drinking. Please~

  • http://sydfynskhaandvaerk.wordpress.com sydfynskhaandvaerkdk

    i think too: Here is a look at the impact that China is having and is projected to have on the world’s energy markets:

    http://www.sydfynskhaandvaerk.dk/tagtaekning.html

  • http://fatcatwatch.wordpress.com FatCatWatch

    The sooner Oil peaks up to reflect it’s real value the better (and we should then tax the profits of Big Oil away).

    Perhaps we can then stop this vicious cycle of senseless over consumption and have a day off every week. There is far too much buying things we don’t need with money we don’t have to impress people we don’t like. We need more simplicity in life.

    I understand a single barrel of oil can do the equivalent of 23,000 hours of human labor. Thats 11 years labor with no holidays! When this fundamentally free energy runs out we are going to be in deep guacamole! The sooner we get to renewables the better – there is a lot of work to be done.

blog comments powered by Disqus