| Popis: |
The previous chapters have spelled out the wide-ranging vulnerabilities of South African society to peak oil and the likely impacts of oil price and supply shocks if our government and society continue along a business-as-usual trajectory. A strong pragmatic case has been made for the government to implement mitigation strategies to lessen the negative consequences of increasing oil scarcity for social welfare and economic development. One can further argue that the state has a clear moral and constitutional obligation to mitigate peak oil, to limit its detrimental societal impacts, and to help avoid possible economic and social collapse. It is worth noting that mitigation of peak oil in a developing country context such as South Africa is arguably less politically and morally contentious than mitigation of climate change. For developing countries the goal of mitigating climate change, specifically by reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels, is often regarded as inimical to the objectives of socioeconomic development and poverty alleviation (at least for the current generation). The main reason given for this viewpoint is that fossil fuels are cheaper than alternative energy sources and thereby allow more rapid and extensive industrialisation and rising living standards. In contrast, mitigation of peak oil does not require deliberately retarding economic growth or forgoing a cheaper industrialisation path, since oil will become increasingly scarce and expensive, rendering an oil-intensive industrialisation process increasingly unviable. Furthermore, many of the peak oil mitigation strategies and policies advocated in preceding chapters are expressly designed to ameliorate the negative impacts of peak oil on poverty, employment, and human well-being. |
