I’ve just finished watching the first of three episodes of The Future of Food on iplayer. In it there’s a fascinating interview with Hilary Benn, secretary of state for DEFRA. Fascinating not because of what he says, but what he doesn’t say. On this programme about the upcoming global food shortages (mainly due to fuel prices, water shortage, and changing climate), he says:
We know we’re going to have to grow more food with a changing climate and probably less water being available… I think looking at what happened last year, the food riots, the rise in prices, we’ve got to take responsibility now to ensure that people have enough food to eat.
So it’s ok to talk about rising oil prices and it’s ok to talk about climate change. But it’s certainly not OK to mention the fact that global oil production will shortly plateau and begin its inevitable decline (if indeed this hasn’t already begun).
Even the IEA, whose information forms the foundation of energy planning in much of the developed world, has said that conventional oil will peak by 2020. Many others see this as an overly conservative estimate with the peak coming sooner. But regardless we’re talking about a radical change in agriculture (and all other areas of our lives) in the next decade.
Ministers know the IEA figures. They know we are facing the end of the era of cheap and plentiful fossil fuel. Rob Hopkins’s Transition Handbook, urging communities to start adapting now to a post-peak world, was apparently the 5th most popular book taken on holiday by MPs in the summer of 2008 for goodness sake.
Benn’s omission is reminiscent of Ed Miliband’s reaction to being a “keynote listener” at a Transition Conference in July (spotted by Ackers). Take a minute and read Miliband’s words on that link. It is an impressive feat of verbal gymnastics to gush about what is essentially a peak oil conference without once using the words peak or oil. Hard to believe this language is not part of a coordinated policy by government.
So start keeping an ear out. I suspect that climate change will increasingly be used as the politically acceptable face of peak oil.
carbon limited 
“I suspect that climate change will increasingly be used as the politically acceptable face of peak oil.”
Nice post Casey & I’m thankful to not be the only slightly concerned and suspicious government watcher where peak oil is concerned.
We (Bealers and I) have long realised that the words “climate change” are a really poor euphimism for ‘Ooooh people I think we may need to change our ways because the cheap energy is, ahem, about to be discontinued’. It is a policy which has not worked to the extreme. Just look at how long it took the nation to finally cease using free plastic bags.
Interesting piece Casey.
The link between this governments approach to climate change and the transition movement is interesting. The recent Ed Milliband paper on energy was actually called a low carbon transition plan, and the transition movement name checked in the House apparently.
I agree “climate change” is increasingly “the politically acceptable face of peak oil.”
So as we edge towards peak oil it will indeed be interesting to watch the lexicon change, or the meaning behind the lexicon change. From low carbon to no oil ???