The Aberfan Disaster (21st October 1966).

Today is the 60th Anniversary of the Aberfan Disaster.

I wrote this article 20 years ago, and 40 years after the event itself, which I remember only too well. I was a young boy at school in Bridgend at the time, and will never forget the shock in the teacher’s voice as he told us all what had happened. 

I also wrote this poem, to try and capture some of the emotions evoked, at least to me. The poem’s structure is inspired by the traditional Welsh form known as Englyn Milwr:


Aberfan.

Long ago, in sixty-six, a slag-heap
slid, so it is said;
so we have read.

It rolled on down and squashed
a school; we didn't know
about the stream.

I was in school and heard
the crash, the teacher's
fear, it was so near.

Just valleys off, my mother's home;
and just the kids,
under the tonnes.

Eight hundred feet, without a rest,
they piled it on,
it had to go;

but no one knew
about the stream,
so it is claimed;

(a pack of lies) the locals knew,
but no one heard -
not even now.

— Chris Rhodes.

A summary: Sixty years ago an enormous slag-heap slid onto a school in the south Welsh coal-mining village of Aberfan. 144 people died, 116 of them children. The cause is now believed to be what engineers call thixotropy, that an underlying stream combined with several days of torrential rain caused the coal/stone debris to turn into a physical state with properties of liquid flow. Knowledge of the stream was denied by the National Coal Board (although it was well known locally) who did all they could to avoid admitting responsibility.

I was just a small boy in South Wales at the time, but I remember that morning well enough, to this day. The effect on the world psyche was something like that of the "Boxing day" tsunami of 2004. "Everyone" wanted to do something to help, and financial assistance was provided from a disaster fund contributed from the pockets of individuals; it took many years for formal compensation to be paid, and bad-feeling remains to this day, over the whole sorry affair.

Recasting our relationship with plastics (and microplastics): Looking to the broader context.

This article is a much abridged version of a full paper [with 179 references] published (21-1-26) in the journal Clean Technologies and Recycling and accepted as a member of the Scientists Warnings series.

Field of plastic waste... left behind after the Reading Festival, UK, 2025. [Photo credit: Chris Rhodes].

1. Introduction

Plastics are wonder materials that have enabled the creation of the modern, industrialized world. They are manufactured on a truly massive scale (almost half a billion tonnes each year), but much of this is for single-use applications, which both fuel and urge our throwaway culture. As a consequence, plastic waste is a vast and growing problem, in part due to the robustness of plastics, meaning that they degrade only slowly in the environment and tend to break down into increasingly smaller particles, namely microplastics (MPs) and nanoplastics (NPs). These threaten the health of ecosystems and organisms that inhabit them, including humans. Toxic chemicals associated with plastics and their uses pose further adverse health effects.

Although John Wesley Hyatt, who introduced nitrocellulose to make billiard balls from, instead of ivory, is said to have remarked that, “in spite of their tendency to catch fire, cellulose nitrate saved the elephant”, the cumulative mass of plastics made by humans now exceeds the total mass of all living animals on Earth. 

Research from the Stockholm Resilience Centre concluded that plastics impact adversely upon all nine planetary systems—including climate change, ocean acidification, biosphere integrity, freshwater change, and land-system change. Harmful effects are delivered across the entire life cycle of plastics, beginning with fossil fuel extraction and polymer production, through to environmental degradation and MP/NP dispersion into the atmosphere, deep oceans, and living organisms.


2. Plastics and the consumer society

The proliferation of plastic materials in society is a consequence of their ease of production and cheapness, along with durability and strength, but low mass, as compared to other materials, such as metals. Thus, road vehicles may be made from up to 20%, by weight, of plastics. For the Boeing 787 “Dreamliner” Jumbo Jet, the proportion is around 50%, which means that the fuel needed to be burned for each flight is reduced by 20%, in comparison with a similar-sized aircraft made from traditional materials, such as aluminum. The use of plastics in packaging and for medical applications has resulted in improved healthcare and food safety, while savings in energy and costs are a further advantage of using them, for example, in place of glass or metals. The availability of cheap plastics has unleashed a flood of consumer goods across the world, overcoming many of the physical limits and supply constraints of their natural equivalents, and placing otherwise expensive items into the hands of citizens ranging across the socioeconomic spectrum.

Bakelite was introduced in 1907 by Leo Baekeland, and this could be heat-moulded into numerous consumer products; of particular importance being radio sets (thus made available in most households), furniture, and other objects, including telephones, vehicle parts, washing machines, toothbrushes, combs, cutlery, drinking vessels, and ashtrays, to list just a few. In 1938, Nylon was first used to make bristles for toothbrushes, being featured at the 1939 World’s Fair. Nylon became an iconic feature of the 1940s period, in the form of “nylons”, as substitutes for the more expensive silk stockings.

Famously, in 1955, Life magazine published an article on “Throwaway Living” that featured a picture of a family throwing a range of kitchen and other household items into the air, noting "The objects flying through the air in this picture would take 40 hours to clean—except that no housewife need bother. They are all meant to be thrown away after use". This is often cited as the dawn of what is now referred to, mainly dismissively, as the “throwaway society”.

Given that the presence of plastic items, objects, and devices is ubiquitous in the modern age, plastic has been proposed as a distinctive stratal component and a possible critical geological indicator of the Anthropocene.


3. Microplastics

Primary microplastics (MPs) are those originally manufactured at the (<5 mm) sizes in which they are found in the environment, for example, microbeads, and nurdles from which plastic items are made. Secondary microplastics are formed by the degradation of larger plastic items, including bottles, to hold water and other drinks, plastic bags, and fishing nets. There is, nonetheless, some controversy over whether certain MPs should be considered primary or secondary; for example, particles from the wear of vehicle tyres on road surfaces and microfibers from washing textiles. However, Song et al. have proposed that this can be resolved by using the classifications “intentional” and “unintentional”, so that primary MPs are those actually manufactured at <5 mm dimensions, while all others can be categorized as “secondary”, having broken down from larger objects, or painted areas, including road markings, ships, and bridges.

MPs have been found wherever they have been sought, e.g., in the air, rivers, aquifers, mountains, glaciers, soils, Arctic sea ice, insects, drinking water, food (honey, sugar, salt, beer, seafood), the oceans and ocean sediments, including waters and deep sea sediments around Antarctica, and in the depths of the oceans. Atmospheric transport has been identified as a major transfer route for MPs to remote regions, for example, the Arctic. MPs can be transferred through different life stages of mosquitoes that use different habitats and can thus be potentially transferred from aquatic systems by flying insects and those that feed on them, spreading them even further.

It has been estimated that, in 2019, there were 82–358 trillion plastic particles, primarily MPs, floating in the world’s oceans, with a total mass of 1.1–4.9 million tons, and that a rapid increase had occurred since 2005.

Exposure of plastic items to the erosive forces of the outdoor environment, e.g., polytunnels, agricultural films (mulches), construction materials, and vehicles, also generates secondary MPs. The most effective long-term solution to the microplastic (MP) problem is to reduce overall plastic consumption, since MPs, once formed, are extremely challenging to remove from the environment.


4. Nanoplastics.

Although definitions vary, nanoplastics (NP) may be characterized by a size of less than 100 nm in at least one dimension. NPs are either considered to be short-lived entities resulting from the fragmentation of MPs, or that their concentrations are actually high and constitute a significant environmental threat; this ambiguity being the result of difficulties in detecting them.

Due to their small size, NPs can penetrate the tissues and organs of living creatures, potentially resulting in harmful biological effects. NPs can be formed by the mechanical breakdown of commonly used polystyrene products, such as coffee cup lids and expanded Polystyrene foam. Toxicity, varying with particle size, has been demonstrated in zooplankton, along with size-dependent uptake in these and other aquatic organisms. NPs have been shown to traverse food webs, ranging from algae, zooplankton, and planktivorous fish to piscivorous fish, potentially causing changes in the behavior and metabolism of the fish along this feeding chain.


5. Environmental and human health impacts of plastic pollution

Millions of sea animals and birds are killed each year by entanglement or ingestion involving larger plastic waste items. Overall effects of MP/NPs on ecosystems and food chains are likely to be detrimental. Plastic items have been found in the stomachs of seabirds, sea turtles, seals, whales, and fish; MPs have been identified in the tissues and organs of a range of marine creatures. Plastic is harmful to corals as a consequence of light deprivation, the release of toxins, and anoxia, which encourages pathogen invasion.

Leachates from plastic items, such as HDPE bags and PVC matting, can impair growth and oxygen production from Prochlorococcus, which is the most abundant photosynthetic bacterium in the ocean. Thus, the ability of the oceans to absorb carbon dioxide may be further impeded.

There is evidence that MPs may be present throughout the entire water column of the oceans. This is highly significant, since in marine environments, MP/NPs pose a direct danger to plankton and other key Earth ecosystems, including mangroves and coral reefs. Since MPs may further serve as vectors of major ocean pollutants, an additional hazard to marine ecosystems (and humans) is presented. Bisphenol-A (PBA), plasticizers, and other related materials have been identified in the bodies of humans and other animals, which may act as endocrine disruptors. Possible human health effects of MP/NPs have been identified, including their potential to induce inflammation, oxidative stress, apoptosis (cell death), and metabolic homeostasis (leading to obesity).

In The Lancet Countdown on health and plastics, it was emphasized that we are in the midst of a “plastics crisis”, as this is a “grave, growing and under-recognized danger” to people and the planet, causing “disease and death” from infancy to old age. The authors note that plastics damage human health through a matrix of influences, including direct exposure to landfills or chemical plant emissions, environmental contamination, absorption via food packaging, microplastics, air and soil pollution, and the burning of related fossil fuel feedstocks. Such health consequences range from birth defects and microplastic poisoning in the womb, to asthma, cancers of various kinds, heart attacks, hormone disruption, and developmental problems. It has been estimated that the average human brain may contain 7 grams of MPs and NPs.

MPs can affect the transport, fate, transformation, and bioavailability of contaminants in soils and further threaten food security and human health. Furthermore, the structure, diversity, and functions of soil microbes are all affected by MPs at high concentrations, while plastic debris can be ingested by soil fauna, with consequent detrimental effects. In one study, when sewage sludge was applied to soil over a period of 5 years, the soil MP levels were found to increase by 1450%; hence, MPs should be considered along with other types of pollution (such as heavy metals) that can be transferred to soils. Furthermore, MPs are shown to be directly toxic to earthworms, which are keystone species and ecosystem engineers in soil. Thus, long term damage to food systems is a likely legacy of MP pollution.


6. Plastics recycling

Only 9% of manufactured plastic is actually recycled. A major impedance to recycling is actually economic, since it is often cheaper to make new (“virgin”) plastic than it is to recycle it; accordingly, investment in better recycling infrastructure and technology is not sufficiently encouraged, thus maintaining the pattern of low recycling rates. Thus, as an essential means to encourage greater recycling of plastic waste, it is necessary to increase its value, as compared with virgin materials.

From a mathematical study, it was demonstrated that the only way to reduce the amount of plastics that finally end up in landfill or are incinerated is to produce less plastics in the first place: what is not created does not need to be disposed of. Thus, recycled material must displace primary production, but since this is driven by market forces, there is no guarantee it will happen. To assume, incorrectly, that all recycled plastic avoids disposal underestimates the environmental impacts of the product system. It is proposed that “scholars and policy makers should focus on finding and implementing ways to increase the displacement potential of recyclable materials rather than focusing on disposal diversion targets”.


7. Plastics we can’t (easily) manage without

To reduce our use of plastics will require fundamental behavioral (and societal) changes, but for the most part, it would be best to reserve them for those purposes where they are not easily replaced by other materials. That we cannot live entirely without plastics is the subject of an article from the think-tank Chatham House, which once again emphasized their criticality for healthcare, food safety, and other safety applications ranging from cycling helmets to electrical insulation. However, a hugely complex variety of plastics is currently being produced, often not in forms that can easily be recycled.

The report proposed that the number of plastics produced be reduced to perhaps 10–20 key polymers, which can be easily identified, sorted, and recycled, from the thousands now available. However, resistance to this strategy is to be expected, since it would reduce profits for the fossil fuel industry, as primary producers, and for others who rely on a rapid turnover business model, such as fast fashion or “on-the-go” consumables such as disposable cups.

Some of the many specific uses of plastic that cannot (easily) be avoided include sterile, single-use medical items such as surgical gloves, syringes, IV bags and catheters, vaccines and bandages, PPE facemasks, and protective clothing (i.e., as used during the COVID-19 pandemic). Sterile storage and lightweight transport of medicines and medical supplies, including vaccines and bandages, are also facilitated by plastics, although the absolute necessity for their use throughout the healthcare system has been challenged.


8. Behavioural changes

Since plastics are such a deeply entrenched feature of our modern, consumer society, to avoid them entirely seems a remote prospect, at least without drastic changes to the fabric and mechanism of that society. While finding a single solution may be difficult, by integrating different voluntary behavioural change strategies, the problem of overconsumption might be addressed, with plastic reduction as part of a broader aspect of reducing materials use and waste production (“human ecological overshoot”).

The broader picture of systemic human behavioral traits and the polycrisis has been addressed, of particular importance being those which have become maladaptive in the context of modernity; in particular, warfare, resource overexploitation, and human cognitive biases. On the basis of key literature articles, behavioral traits are highlighted that underpin these maladaptations, and which are further proposed to offer leverage points in the global system where the likelihood of a polycrisis might be alleviated.

Similarly, it has been identified that the root of human ecological overshoot lies in a (maladaptive) behavioural crisis, driven in part by advertising, but that those same mechanisms may also provide means for throwing into reverse three “levers” of overshoot—consumption, waste, and population. The authors further identified that a gulf in communication exists, “between those that know, such as scientists working within limits to growth, and those members of the citizenry, largely influenced by social scientists and industry, that must act”. Hence, bridging this discontinuity is an essential strategy for making necessary systemic changes.


9. The oil, plastics, energy nexus

Since the vast majority of plastics are derived from fossil sources, mainly coal (44%) and petroleum (40%). It has been argued that the recent dramatic increase in plastics production is part of a deliberate strategy by multinational fossil-carbon corporations, which, in integrated form, produce coal, oil, and gas and additionally manufacture plastics. Thus, while there is a reduction in the production of fossil fuels per se by particular enterprises, their manufacture of plastics is increasing in order to maintain and expand the overall product base.

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s “New Plastics Economy” report concluded that, in 2014, the plastics industry consumed 6% of the global oil supply (including natural gas liquids). They further estimated that, in 2050, 20% of the world’s available oil supply will be consumed by making plastics. However, such reasoning assumes that the oil supply will remain sufficiently robust for these projections to be realized, which is not guaranteed, as a result of limitations in global oil production. Evidence has suggested that growth in the global oil supply is being substantially maintained by fracking, mainly in the US, but this industry may not be able to sustain its output, leading to a supply downturn at some point from 2025 to 2030.

Geopolitical influences, such as constraints in the passage of oil through critical points, such as the Strait of Hormuz which had formerly carried 20% of global traded oil, and potentially, the Bab al-Mandeb strait, will likely add further complexity to the picture.

Future such restrictions may limit how much plastic can actually be made, given other demands for fossil fuels, as well as considerations over reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The implication, therefore, is that, along with limits to possible bioplastics production, there may be less plastic available overall, which, therefore, should be “saved” for critical applications where there is no ready substitute, e.g., medical/healthcare industry, electronics, clean water, clean medicine, and clean food.


10. The broader context

In 2019, 460 Million tonnes (Mt) of plastic was produced, a number projected to reach 1,230 Mt by 2060. Plastic waste amounts to more than 400 Mt/a, roughly half from single-use items such as packaging, a number that is expected to exceed 1,000 Mt by 2060. By 2050, 20% of the world’s oil supply is predicted to be consumed by plastics, along with 15% of the global carbon budget.

Microplastics (MPs) cannot be avoided entirely, so long as we keep using plastic materials that go through a wear and tear process, including vehicle components (tyres, brakes, upholstery, etc.), road markings, marine coatings, clothing, paints, agricultural films, and synthetic textiles. Plastic pollution poses significant and grave health risks, impairs biodiversity, and contributes to emissions/climate change along the entire “cradle-to-grave” chain. Consequent damage to ecosystems impairs their ability to absorb carbon, e.g., phytoplankton and soils.

Plastic waste should be ameliorated, mainly by curbing the overall use of plastics per se, through the approach: Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose, and Recycle (as a last resort). Wasteful (unnecessary) and single/short-term-use plastics, especially disposable packaging, must be minimized. Limits to the production of bioplastics, along with an ultimately declining supply of fossil fuels, suggest that relentless expansion in the availability of plastics may, in any case, be unlikely, and that a combination of more effective use, material substitution, and behavioral changes is the more viable way forward. Plastics should be “saved” for critical applications, where there is no ready substitute, as in healthcare, food/water provision, and electronics.

This approach also accords with the need to respect overall resource limits and planetary boundaries. Means to leverage behavioural changes regarding consumption patterns are required to bring humankind to below ecological overshoot, into the realm of “one planet living”, and begin healing the current polycrisis.

Achieving a sustainable future also likely involves living in a more locally focused way, including local, place-based food growing. This will further reduce both the need for plastic packaging and MPs emissions from vehicles, along with a lower dependence on food imports and other supply chains, which may fail as a result of climate change impacts on agriculture and eventual restrictions to the global oil supply.

"London's Last Wilderness." Film screenings at Reading Biscuit Factory, running from Tuesday September 29th - Sunday October 4th (2026).

“AN ALIEN LANDS ON PLANET EARTH AND COMMUNICATES WITH ITS POWERFUL OCEANS."

Overview:

When an alien visitor discovers it can communicate with Earth's oceans, it becomes the only intermediary between humanity and a vast marine intelligence whose patience with the human race is running out. 

Part survey, part discovery, the film explores a stretch of the wilderness [the Greater Thames Estuary; itself the size of London] that has largely slipped through the cracks of human attention, and in some places, bears the marks of human failure. 

The alien encounters a force both beautiful and terrifying, a voice as old as the planet itself, carrying memories, warnings and a power beyond human control.

 
London's Last Wilderness offers a parable about nature on Earth, through an unidentified alien interacting with the planet. By way of subtle messages, the sea warns the alien that the existence of the planet is at stake. The alien discovers a controlling citadel, but does not intrude in its purpose and hopes that the sea will find a way to survive.

Booking:

Join us for a screening of London's Last Wilderness, including a post-film Q&A panel discussion on October 2nd. To be held at the independent cinema, Reading Biscuit Factory, 1 Queens Walk, Reading RG1 7QE.

Screenings run from Tuesday September 29th - Sunday October 4th (2026) all at 7.30 pm.

The screening on Friday October 2nd, will be Introduced by Professor Chris Rhodes (Chair of Transition Town Reading), and then followed by a Q&A session with the film's director: Pablo Behrens.

For more information about the film please follow the link > HERE

Review:

"London's Last Wilderness is visually stunning from beginning to end. Following the hidden wildlife and disappearing natural spaces, tucked inside one of the world's busiest cities, the documentary uncovers a side of London most people never even realise exists. The film balances beauty, urgency, and hope in a way that feels immersive and genuinely emotional." - devpatelfanboy

Further Media Coverage:

THE GUARDIAN REVIEW HERE
THAMES21 REVIEW HERE
FILM NEWS REVIEW HERE
ESSEX ECHO NEWS HERE
WILDLIFE-FILM HERE
​JEREMY C PROCESSING REVIEW HERE
IMDB HERE

“From the Water Itself.

It is not enough to explore the Greater Thames Estuary from the land. To understand how the river and the sea interact with each other you need to go on the surface of the water and live and film from it for a period of time. You need to understand what rules the water..

But what you can see from the sea level is also limited. You need to go up into the sky and also film from above.”

 

Film Director:

Pablo Behrens.

Writer:

Pablo Behrens

 
Cast:

Marcus Darivas, Anastasia Pillar.

Production and Distribution:

Miracle Communications and Burning Films Ltd.

“The Man From Earth” ...and all of us.

 

Prompted by the 2007 film of the same name, which I found utterly spellbinding, I attended a stage version of "The Man From Earth", directed by Freddie Elcock, in London this week. In fact, I have now seen the play twice, and enjoyed the second performance even more than the first, as deeper details and more widely reaching ramifications unfolded to me.

The essential plot is that a man, “John Oldman” [and the name is significant], is about to leave his post as a university professor, which he has held for 10 years, and arranges a small “do”, as we call them in the UK, to say farewell to some of his closest friends and colleagues, with the usual nibbles and drinks, including a fine bottle of scotch whisky that he has been saving for some time.

All is going fairly well, although there is an underlying unease and tension, mainly stemming from the tacit question of “why” is John leaving?; then he drops the bombshell... that he is actually 14,000 years old.

He is not reincarnated, but has actually lived a single human life, since the end of the last ice age: what is sometimes termed the Late Upper Palaeolithic archaeological period, when the Earth experienced major retreat of glaciers and a transition into a warmer climate. This era marked profound ecological shifts, human expansion into the Americas, and the early roots of settled communities. It is the final phase of the Old Stone Age, when human hunter-gatherers used advanced stone-blade tools, and is set within the broader Pleistocene epoch, which preceded our present Holocene.

While he cannot remember every single day of his epically long life, any more than we mortals can, John has experienced the immensity of change, in both geographical distance and time, travelling around the globe, in its environment, its peoples, their cultures, and technologies: circumnavigating with Columbus (who still thought the world was flat), the industrial revolution, the far more recent rise of techno-industrial civilisation, and here the hint is made that he has become aware that, in the unbridled pursuit of what we have come to regard as “progress”, we are destroying the foundation of our existence; yet he believes it is still not too late for salvation, though time is shortening rapidly.

I use the word salvation deliberately, since John claims to have been a disciple of the Buddha, and that he was, himself, the inspiration for the figure we call Jesus. In this claim, or revelation, he deeply hurts and offends Edith, a devoutly Christian lady, who is horrified when he says that he survived the crucifixion by using techniques he had learned in the “East”, to slow down his metabolism, and feign death; that the biblical account is not literally true, but mythology.

John suggests that religions would work best if they followed the teachings of the Buddha, and that he simply tried to put those ideas [of peace and harmony – the “Eightfold path”] into practice, but the concept was hijacked, and the idea that he was the Messiah, which he never claimed to be, grew from expanding legend.

He seems more or less content, but weary, carrying what must surely be a tremendous burden of endless days, resigned to a fate conferred by a one-off genetic defect. 

In reality, such longevity is highly unlikely, since we are programmed to die, as a result of oxidative stress (from breathing oxygen), and most creatures, be they flies, rabbits, rats, or humans, begin to rapidly accumulate oxidative damage during the last third of their maximum lifespan – say, aged 60, onwards for a human - and increasingly on to their ultimate and unavoidable end. All that lives must eventually die, to be consumed by Nature’s recycling mechanisms, and new life be brought forth.

In the play, however, the question lingers: will our protagonist live forever, or eventually die? Is he blessed, or cursed, by this remarkable congenital hand of cards? 

John can also be seen as a metaphor, for all of humanity, and not just one extraordinary person. He is a passenger, traveller, sensor, and living record of all he has experienced, and adapted to. He has reinvented himself, in order to survive under different times and circumstances, as they prevailed upon him.

He must, in any case, move on every ten years, so that people do not realise he is ageless, and hence supernatural, and in their fear make him an enemy. It is alluded that there are legends, across time and cultures, about an immortal being, who steals life from the living to sustain itself, and which men seek to kill, in the hope of prolonging their own time on Earth: a silver bullet to the werewolf, or stake through a vampire’s heart.

As the action moves toward the play’s conclusion, John regrets his confession, and makes out that it was all a joke - albeit maybe in poor taste - and one by one the characters leave, bar for Sandy, who says she is in love with him. But, John has seen too many people in his life die, and hence has come to eschew romantic relationships.

Almost to the end, it is not entirely clear if John is telling the truth, is a liar, or crazy, and to explore this, the figure of Will, a psychiatrist - who threatens to have John taken off in a straightjacket for evaluation of his mental state, if he does not confess his story is all a hoax - is pivotal in the plot. Will overhears John and Sandy talking, where John [he has always been “John” or some variant, plus a different surname] mentions some of the pseudonyms he has used along the vast swathe of his life, and recognises one as being the name of his father, who abandoned him and his mother when he was young.

He asks John specific questions – e.g. the name of a childhood pet – which he answers correctly, and in the shock of revelation that this man, apparently younger [looking about 35] than him, is actually his long lost father, Will suffers a heart attack, and dies in his arms. This is the first time John has actually seen one of his adult children die.

The “Man From Earth” is all of us - all part of a single lineage; a kind of collective immortality passed down through generations, but the stuff of myths and legends, that run through most cultures and creeds, belief systems and faiths.

In the final scene, John gets into his truck, intending to drive to wherever his journey may take him next. But he then reconsiders, stops, and waits for Sandy, who slowly walks over to him.

We are thus poignantly reminded of the preciousness of time, and urged to embrace joy in this world, however fleeting it may prove to be. In similar mood, I recall the lines by Thomas Osbert Mordaunt, a British Army officer and poet, taken from "The Call", which was written during the Seven Years' War of 1756–1763:

"Sound, sound the clarion, fill the fife!

Throughout the sensual world proclaim,

One crowded hour of glorious life

Is worth an age without a name."

While none of us can know the future, there are yet indicators. Bill McGuire has highlighted a philosophical reflection by the Persian poet and polymath, Omar Khayyam, from almost 1,000 years ago:

"When I want to understand what is happening today, or try to decide what will happen tomorrow, I look back.”

Hence this ancient insight emphasises that understanding modern, unprecedentedly accelerating climate change requires looking deeply into Earth's geological past, and that studying historical climate patterns and past epochs is essential for predicting where our current climate trajectory is heading. McGuire warns that failing to heed the lessons embedded in Earth's history leaves humanity dangerously unprepared for future climate extremes.

But, the pages of history having been written, what of our future? Are we simply part of a carbon-pulse, a flicker of impermanence, as a complex civilization begins to unravel? Is humanity condemned to a sad end, and if it is, how can we best live, in the time that remains to us?

The questions run still deeper: What is a good life? What kind of a world do we want... really? 

While there are probably no definitive answers, “backcasting” might offer the best approach to charting our forward journey, aiming toward a way of life we deem desirable, as has been expressed previously: 

“... most climate action plans are... working forward from now, which almost tacitly assumes that the future will be substantively like the present.

Backcasting is the reverse of this way of thinking, used in the Transition Towns ideology, which sets a series of steps back, say, from 2050, to the present, in order to provide a logically progressive sequence toward attaining desirable attributes identified for that later date.

By setting year-stones conveniently along a defined pathway, a practical and ideological “rack and pinion” gear is engaged to propel the journey toward its destination, with reduced risks of straying or derailing.”

The play is utterly compelling, and almost 20 years on from the original film, its theme feels all the more resonant with the world that has since emerged. It begs questions of what it is to be fully human: our values, beliefs, relationships, concepts of impermanence and death, and what being alive truly means to us.

Even since the 2017 sequel, “The Man From Earth: Holocene” - in which John has begun to age, and knows his own time is, after all, limited - we are now living in very different, and increasingly uncharted territory, as the climate and nature crisis has garnered momentum: in flame, flood and geopolitics, including the outbreak of major wars.

Critically and urgently, we must mitigate consumption of all resources, to steady our course into the future; but like John, also adapt to those changes that we cannot circumvent.

"The Little Things That Run the World": Film screening + TTR's own film ("What If a Better World Were Possible?") + Panel Discussion, 6.00 pm on Tuesday, July 14th (2026).

"Anyone who cares about our natural world and our place in it should watch this documentary."                               

As part of the Reading Climate Festival (2026), join us for a screening of "The Little Things That Run the World", plus Transition Town Reading's own short film, "What if a Better World Were Possible?", followed by a post-film Q&A panel discussion. To be held at the independent cinema, "Reading Biscuit Factory," at 6.00 pm on Tuesday, July 14th (2026), 1 Queens Walk, Reading RG1 7QE.

                                              Here is the booking link

The Main Film:

"The Little Things that Run the World" introduces viewers to a diverse group of scientists, nature lovers, gardeners, farmers, and general bug enthusiasts in exploring the importance of flying insects amid rapid declines in their numbers. This most numerous group of animals on the planet by far—three quarters of all animal species—have also been called the "glue of life" on Earth. They literally hold ecosystems together.

Insects were the first animals to evolve flight nearly 440 million years ago, and they survived all five of the known mass extinctions since then. But, there is evidence that the pace of decline among insects in parts of the world today is fast approaching the levels of previous catastrophes. What this means for the rest of life on Earth, including humans, is the focus of the film.

The film documents the mysteries of the declines alongside creative and heroic human efforts to change the course of evolutionary history. What is causing this extinction crisis? What can be done to reverse the trend? The Little Things that Run the World attempts to find answers to those questions and more."

The Transition Town Reading Film: "What If a Better World Were Possible?" (21 minutes long). 

Watch trailer here // 

'Deep in the heart of Reading, a community of local change makers are harnessing the power of nature and each other to reimagine and rebuild our world'

While many of the world’s problems are global – the climate emergency, resource scarcity, pollution, overconsumption and inequality – the local scale is becoming an increasingly powerful source of change.

Our film, directed by Liam Rooney Productions, celebrates and brings together 7 community led initiatives across energy, water, waste, nature connection and ecosystem restoration.

From pub dwellers rallying to restore their local marsh, to a community owned hydro-power project and Solar Punk stories of the future, writ large across public walkways.

The film is about the joy of possibility in the face of uncertainty, cultivating a deep collective sense of place, and the power of local community action.

From What is to What If?

The Transition Town movement begins with a shared vision, and then works step by step, action by action, until that vision becomes real.

"It is members of the community who are the force of change. We hope the film lights the way for others to see what they might also do in their own town, village, or street. We're building the story of our future, and acting together to make it real." -- Chris Rhodes, chair of Transition Town Reading

Post-film Q&A panel:

Prof Chris Rhodes, Director of Fresh-lands Environmental Actions, and Chair of Transition Town Reading.

Dr Chris Foster, Lecturer in Animal Ecology, University of Reading, and University lead for biodiversity on the Environmental Sustainability Committee.

Grahame Hawker, Vice-chair of the Upper Thames branch of Butterfly Conservation, and President of the Reading and District Natural History Society.

Tricia Marcouse, environmental engineer and local naturalist, focussing on benefits of local green spaces on behalf of ECONET and RDNHS.

Evening Programme:

6.00 pm, "The Little Things That Run the World"

7.45 pm, short break

8.00 pm, "What If a Better World Were Possible?" (Transition Town Reading's own film, 21 mins long)

8.25 pm, Q&A panel discussion

9:00 pm, approx. finish

 

Film Director of "The Little Things That Run the World":

Doug Hawes-Davis

Reviews "The Little Things That Run the World is a visual treat! You'll come for the incredible insect photography and stay for the important lessons on land use, habitat disruption, native plants, and avoiding monocultures. This is an important and visually entrancing film that reminds us of the perils of ignoring the needs of our invertebrate neighbors." Chris Stelzig, Executive Director, Entomological Society of America "What a terrific and timely summary of the global status of insects! E.O. Wilson and more than a dozen other world-renown scientists provide insightful critiques of the anthropogenic causes of insect declines and what we can do going forward to protect insect biodiversity. The stunning photography, sobering statistics, and insightful interviews make the film a valuable resource for students, educators, conservation biologists, policy makers, and environmentalists looking to build a more sustainable and just future for humanity and nature." David Wagner, Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut "At times inspiring, at times heartbreaking, The Little Things That Run the World digs into understanding global insect decline. Today we are experiencing a new Silent Spring. The causes now are more complex and daunting, and we are moving closer to irreversible extinctions of the pollinators and ecosystem engineers that power the food webs supporting humanity. Yet this hopeful film shows that solutions are local, and that in our gardens, farms, and cities, we are far from helpless to turn the tide." Daniel Gruner, Professor of Entomology, University of Maryland "The Little Things That Run the World provides a thorough exploration of insect declines that includes historic context, scientific evidence, and examples of individuals making a difference. The film provides a great example of bringing peer-reviewed scientific literature to life. Pairing viewings of the films with readings of scientific literature referenced in the film or other scientific work by scientists featured in the film would be a great classroom activity." Elaine Evans, Extension Professor of Entomology, University of Minnesota, Author, Befriending Bumble Bees: A Guide to Raising Local Bumble Bees and Managing Alternative Pollinators "Insects are facing unprecedented decline, and we are to blame. This excellent documentary gives experts in the field of Entomology a powerful platform from which to sound the alarm. Anyone who cares about our natural world and our place in it should watch this documentary to learn what is happening and what we should be doing to fix what we have broken." Ryan St Laurent, Assistant Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Curator of Entomology, Museum of Natural History, University of Colorado-Boulder "Deeply engaging...Leaves us with a sense of wonder and a gentle, optimistic call to action, inspiring us to appreciate and protect the delicate balance of our natural world. It's a mesmerizing exploration of the vital yet often overlooked role of insects in our global ecosystem...A documentary that is both scientifically rigorous and visually stunning, taking us on a journey into the intricate world of these tiny creatures, and reminding us how fundamental they are to life as we know it." Lighthouse International Film Festival Jury Statement "The Little Things that Run the World provides a balanced, complete, and current covering of insect biodiversity loss, sharing the stunning beauty and enormous diversity of insects and the passion of those who devote their lives to understand and protect them. Even though the biodiversity crisis we are experiencing is extremely worrisome and there is no one solution that can solve it, there is a multiplicity of simple (and more complex) actions that every person can do to stop it." Anahi Espíndola, Associate Professor of Entomology, University of Maryland "Through striking visuals and content that is fully aligned with the current science, The Little Things That Run the World uncovers the essential role insects play in sustaining life on earth. With ecosystems under pressure, global experts outline the urgent threats facing insect population, and the critical steps humanity must take to halt their decline." Simon Potts, Professor of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Director, Center for Agri-Environmental Research, University of Reading

"For Our Children's Earth: Building the Soil, Sustaining the Future." A talk given at Braziers Park College.

              

               "Soil is the foundation of life and community."

I gave a talk at Braziers Park College last Friday, to begin their Wider Community Weekend, entitled "For Our Children's Earth - building the soil, sustaining the future." 

Here is a summary: 

“Soil is the fragile living skin of the Earth. It is living because it contains an amazing number of different organisms, and a billion microbes are present in a single teaspoonful of soil. It is fragile because it is prone to degradation, principally by erosion. According the United Nations, 30% of the world's crop-land has been abandoned over the past 40 years due to degradation and desertification. 

However, we must produce 60% more food by 2050, to match a population that is predicted to increase from 8.3 billion now, to 9.8 billion, then. Thus, we are destroying the productivity of that same land from which we demand a relentless increase in production. Is disaster inevitable? 

Soil is also connected to water and energy supplies. Lose the soil, and we lose everything. Local community resilience, permaculture, and changing our education system are all critical to a thriving future. Things have to change."

The audience was enthusiastic and engaging, providing excellent questions for the Q&A session, ranging from the nature and properties of soil itself, through energy, human ecological overshoot, national and world governance, Transition Towns, and the need to transform the university system in the times at hand.

I sold some copies of my black-comedy novel, "University Shambles", one to a very warm and friendly American chap, who gave me £20, and said, "Keep the rest as a donation for all your good work." I wrote a dedication in the book for him: “To Samir: Soil is the foundation of life and community,” which I believe is actually the truth!

He also asked me where I bought my shirts from, as he thought they were very smart and wanted some to wear himself. 

Never thought of myself as a fashion icon, but there you go! :-)

"Becoming Nature Positive" & "Transition Town Reading: What If a Better World Were Possible?" Film double bill, Tuesday June 9th (2026), 7 pm, Reading Biscuit Factory.

"While many of the World's problems are global – the climate emergency, resource scarcity, pollution, overconsumption and wealth inequality – the local level is becoming an increasingly potent source of adaptable, systemic change."

 

                                        

Overview.

Reading Climate Festival is pleased to bring you this FREE screening, in collaboration with Transition Town Reading and the Reading Biscuit Factory.

A double bill of short films highlighting both the global impact of the climate and nature crises, and celebrating and inspiring positive action right here in Reading.

The event will now be held at The Minghella Cinema, University of Reading's Whiteknights Campus, on Tuesday June 9th at 7.30 pm (Doors open at 7.00 pm).

                                                   Here is the booking link

• The venue for this screening has been moved! It is now The Minghella Cinema at the University of Reading's Whiteknights Campus. If you booked your free ticket via Reading Biscuit Factory (who have temporarily closed) it is no longer valid so please BOOK AGAIN through this page.

Overview of the films.

‘Becoming Nature Positive'

A new 30-minute film created by the Nature Positive Initiative and co-produced with Open Planet Studios, featuring top voices from across the global sustainability community.

The vision behind the film is to highlight the nature crisis, less visible than the climate crisis but equally dangerous and interconnected. While laying bare the importance to urgently halt and reverse nature loss and exploring solutions, the film sets out key elements of the transition to a nature-positive economy and society.

 

'Transition Town Reading, what if a better world were possible?'

In the heart of Reading, local changemakers are harnessing the power of nature and community to realise their vision of a better world.

While many of the World's problems are global – the climate emergency, resource scarcity, pollution, overconsumption and wealth inequality – the local level is becoming an increasingly potent source of adaptable, systemic change.

Our film celebrates and brings together 7 brilliant community led initiatives across energy, water, waste, nature connection and ecosystem restoration.

These include, pub dwellers rallying to restore their local marsh, a community owned hydro-power project, solar energy installed all across town, community tree planting, and Solar Punk stories of the future, writ large across public walkways.

The film is about the joy of possibility in the face of uncertainty, cultivating a deep collective sense of place, and the power of local community action.

 

Post-film Panel Q&A.

The two films will be followed by an audience Q&A with a panel of local experts and champions featured in the Transition Town film, joined by Professor Tom Oliver, Professor of Applied Ecology from the University of Reading.

This event is part of Reading Climate Festival 2026. Browse the full two-week programme here.

Reading has a new framework for collective climate action, covering the years 2026 to 2030! Local organisations and volunteers can get involved here.

“What If a Better World Were Possible?" A film made by Transition Town Reading.

"In times of great change, resilient local communities will be the bedrock of future societies."

Post-film Q&A panel (L-R): Dr Tony Cowling, Austin Jacobs, Prof. Chris Rhodes, Stuart Ward, Ramandeep Nijjar, Kathryn McCann, Guglielmo Miccolupi, Natalie Ganpatsingh.

The film premiere.

Transition Town Reading have made a film, entitled: “What If a Better World Were Possible?" showcasing some of the really great "community action" projects happening in our town of Reading (UK). The filmmaker was Liam Rooney.

The film was premiered at Reading University, Minghella Studios, this week (6-5-26), aimed particularly at students. 

There will be further screenings, both for the local community and as part of the Reading Climate Festival: dates and venues to be confirmed, and more to come (watch this space!).

Meanwhile, here is a synopsis of the film:

"In the heart of Reading, local changemakers are harnessing the power of nature and community to realise their vision of a better world.

While many of the World's problems are global – the climate emergency, resource scarcity, pollution, overconsumption and wealth inequality – the local scale is becoming an increasingly potent source of adaptable, systemic change.

Our film celebrates and brings together 7 brilliant community led initiatives across energy, water, waste, nature connection and ecosystem restoration.

These include, pub dwellers rallying to restore their local marsh, a community owned hydro-power project, solar energy installed all across town, community tree planting, and Solar Punk stories of the future, writ large across public walkways.

The film is about the joy of possibility in the face of uncertainty, cultivating a deep collective sense of place, and the power of local community action. 


From What is, to What If?

The Transition Town movement begins with a shared vision, and then works step by step, action by action, until that vision becomes real.

"It is members of the community who are the force of change. We hope the film lights the way for others to see what they might also do in their own town, village, or street. We're building the story of our future, and acting together to make it real." 

- Chris Rhodes, chair of Transition Town Reading.”

Why are Fuel Prices so High?

[This was published in a local newsletter "Caversham Bridge", but given the current fuel price increases, I thought it might be helpful to post it here, not only for the residents of Caversham, but everyone].

The price of fuel has rocketed, with UK national petrol and diesel averaging 158p and 191p a litre, their highest for several years. This is a knock-on effect of the war in the Middle East, and specifically the chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil normally transits onto global markets. Due to consequent supply restrictions, the price of oil has soared to well above $100 a barrel. Since petrol and diesel are made from oil, their costs are impacted directly, with a $10 increase in oil pushing fuel prices up by around 7p per litre at the pump.


Tips for saving on money and fuel.

Shop Around: Typically, supermarket prices are among the lowest and motorway service areas the highest. Websites, such as petrolprices.com, can help find the cheapest fuel in your area, as prices often vary between different stations. Nonetheless, panic-buying fuel makes the overall situation worse.

Drive Efficiently: avoid abrupt braking and rapid acceleration, maintain a steady speed and shift gears earlier (in manual cars) – this can improve fuel economy by up to 10–30%.

Reduce Speed: Speeds of around 45–55 mph (where safe) often provide the optimum fuel efficiency.

Good Vehicle Practice: Keep tyres correctly inflated, curb unnecessary weight (e.g., empty the boot), and remove roof racks when not needed.

Combine Trips: Since a cold engine is less efficient than a warm one, combine several short trips into one.

Do Without a Car: Use public transport, carpool with neighbours and workmates, or walk/cycle wherever possible.

Work from Home: As far as is feasible, reduce commuting to minimise fuel use.


The Future.

While hoping fervently that the present situation will soon be resolved, oil will not last forever. Eventually, it will become increasingly more expensive and less available, so the present situation may provide a foretaste of what to expect, and how best to deal with this.

The idea of Transition Towns arose in anticipation of “peak oil”, which is where oil production reaches a maximum and then declines. A society with less oil will necessarily become more locally based, building more supportive, and self-sufficient communities, far less vulnerable to external shocks.

Undoubtedly, we face many interconnected and systemic challenges, but all essential efforts toward re-localisation and community resilience may provide the strongest available single buffer against the many storms that are likely to prevail upon us.

Strait of Hormuz Chokehold Released for Now, but Global Supply Chains Remain at Risk.

                 

                                    Satellite image of the Strait of Hormuz.

President Donald Trump has suspended his threatened bombing of Iran for two weeks, subject to the safe repassage of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. One can only feel a sense of relief that last night’s worst horrors of utter destruction did not materialise, but wonder where matters will go from here?

The importance of this channel cannot be underestimated, since it is the conduit for 20% each of the world’s traded oil and gas. It is also the gateway for one third of the world’s agricultural fertilizers, 30% of its helium (used to cool the magnets of MRI scanners and in data centres, and for electronics manufacturing) and 50% of global sulphur, which is converted to sulphuric acid, essential for the extraction of copper, cobalt, and phosphate rock – the latter, again, for fertilizers.

Aluminium, petrochemicals, plastics and pharmaceuticals also pass through the strait, and for Gulf countries, it is a critical portal for imported food, upon which there is a high dependency.

The name derives from Hormoz, which is a Middle Persian expression of Ahura Mazda – the Zoroastrian deity of wisdom, light, and cosmic order. However, in this terrestrial and mortal realm, order is profoundly under threat of fracture.

Trump has given credit for this abeyance of military onslaught to Pakistan, who have steadfastly offered their hand to broker peace in the region. Pakistan is also a key member of a new four-nation alliance, along with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey, and a nuclear power.

Even were the strait to remain open, full flow of energy and materials will take considerable time to recover, along with the knock-on effects from damage to refineries and pipelines. A further issue is the massive insurance costs for ships passing through the region. Should a lengthy interruption ensue, the global consequences are likely to be catastrophic. It is noteworthy that some analysts do not predict a "mass exodus" of ships through the strait, which will still require permission from the Iranians to make the transit.

Against this backdrop, and a chilling prospect that “A whole civilization will die”, I was profoundly moved by the Easter messages from the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury, in each case their first, both calling for peace in the Middle East. In his address to thousands in St. Peter’s Square in Rome, Pope Leo told them: “Let those who have the power to unleash wars choose peace,” while, in Canterbury Cathedral, Dame Sarah Mullally pressed for an “end [to] violence and destruction”. 

At a time of the National Emergency Briefing, it is clear that the world must focus on cooperation and harmony, if we are to deal with the climate and nature crisis - not fight to the bitter end for what is left of the Earth’s resources.

"The Energy and Climate Conundrum," talk by Prof. Chris Rhodes, on April 28th (2026), 7-9 pm, Zero Degrees Reading.

Oil runs the world, as we see from the present Chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz. I shall be speaking at Reading Cafe Scientifique in Zero Degrees bar, on Tuesday, April 28th, at 7pm: "The Energy and Climate Conundrum".

"The Energy and Climate Conundrum."


Short Blurb:

Crude oil is the backbone of modern industrial civilisation, underpinning most of its transportation, supply chains, manufacturing, and agriculture.

82% of the primary energy used by humans on Earth is from fossil fuels, but our increasing use of all oil, gas and coal, is driving a relentlessly changing climate.

While our energy sources must be decarbonised, this alone will not solve the fundamental problem, which is that the human species is in ecological overshoot.

A systemic solution is required, to bring about a consolidated amelioration of climate change, biodiversity loss, and relentless degradation of the ecosphere.

But, how might we bring about the changes necessary to build a thriving, sustainable, future civilisation?"

Speaker Bio:

Professor Chris Rhodes is Director of the independent consultancy, Fresh-lands Environmental Actions, and a Board member of Scientists Warning Europe. He became a full professor in physical chemistry in his early 30s, and was awarded a Higher Doctorate (DSc) by the University of Sussex. 

Chris is a scientific advisor to the European Commission and the governments of many nations. He has published more than 260 peer reviewed academic papers, which have received around 25,000 citations, along with an extensive online collection of essays and journalism.

He is ranked by Stanford University as being in the top 0.04% of World Scientists. 

Chris is also Chair of Transition Town Reading, and author of the black comedy novel ‘University Shambles’, nominated for a Brit Writers' Award, and an award-winning children’s picture book, ‘Hippy the Happy Hippopotamus’, which has been described as a modern day "eco-parable". He is also a published poet. 

Is the Hormuz Chokehold a Foretaste of Peak Oil?

          The Strait of Hormuz (red square) connects the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf.           

      

Oil and Gas in the Middle East.

The massive deposits of hydrocarbons in the Middle East always spring to mind when significant political events occur in the region. Thus, it is salient that Iran hosts the world’s second and third largest reserves of gas and oil, respectively. Even if deliberate actions are not being undertaken, intended to control the outward flow of oil and gas, almost inevitably there are consequences for this. One is reminded of the finite nature of such natural resources, that even while they remain plentiful in the ground, the day will come when they are no longer technically or economically viable to extract in quantity, and a new age will either have already emerged or be forced upon us – i.e. by design or default.

Hence, the severe restrictions in the flow of oil though the Strait of Hormuz, resulting from the recent US-Iranian attacks, may be seen as a stark rehearsal for the consequences of a severe shock in the global oil supply, as might be experienced from a "peak oil" crisis, with volatile price spikes and supply chain disruptions. Although “peak oil” per se, refers to an irreversible long-term production decline, given that around 20% of the world’s oil and 20% of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) passes through the channel, a simulation of an acute loss in global hydrocarbon availability is provided.

Since shipping has come to a "near standstill" at this chokehold, major energy providers have been compelled to put a brake on oil production as storage facilities begin to fill to capacity.  Saudi Aramco has said the present crisis is “by far the worst the region has seen”, and warned of “catastrophic consequences” to global oil markets, if the war continues to block shipping there. 

It has been reckoned that should this disruption last for more than four weeks, oil prices could be driven to above $100, and perhaps to $150 per barrel, which reflects the kind of economic shock expected when oil becomes materially scarce against demand: indeed, as we saw in 2008, when Brent Crude spiked to $147, thought to have been triggered, in part, by fear over growing demand for oil exceeding available supply.  Similar price escalations followed the invasion of Ukraine, just over 4 years ago, again reinforcing the vulnerability of the global energy landscape. 


A wider issue.

The Hormuz disruption has already raised fears of a 1970s-style energy crisis, with rising fuel costs expected to fuel global inflation, increase business costs, and bring recession. Since up to one-third of the world’s fertilizer trade also passes through the region, our economic and functional dependency on a single, fragile channel, is further highlighted.

While high oil and gas prices may offer some short term gains to producers and traders, it is clear that we place ourselves in grave peril by continuing to rely on volatile, high-risk, imported energy at current scale. Particularly from a European perspective, it has been pointed out that the North Sea holdings of oil and natural gas will be significantly exhausted within a decade or so. 

Thus, some commentators have voiced from this a rallying cry to accelerate the transition toward renewable, domestically produced, energy sources that are less jeopardised by unexpected external shocks. 

Knock-on effects.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, and if we look to the UK’s food system, we see it is massively vulnerable to supply chain failures, since we import more than half of the food actually eaten here, and much of what we do grow relies on imported fertilizers, e.g. 60% of our nitrogen fertilizers are brought in from abroad. Professor Tim Lang, an acknowledged expert on food systems, has averred that the UK must ready itself for climate shocks or war by stockpiling food to avoid people starving. 

There exists, therefore, a whole system of interlinked liabilities, but which depend fundamentally on imported hydrocarbons, and commodities made from them, including nitrogen fertilisers and plastics. 

Some by-products from oil and gas are less immediately obvious, for example sulphur, which is a nuisance to the industry, and takes technology, money and indeed hydrogen (also made from natural gas) to remove it and stop it from deactivating noble metal catalysts, used in further downstream refining, and more significantly, to reduce emissions of sulphur dioxide, when these materials are combusted, which is a major cause of air pollution and acid rain. 

In the wider world, however, sulphur is a material with very many important applications, primarily though its conversion to sulphuric acid. These include the creation of agricultural fertilizers, but also the extraction of metals such as copper (which is the bedrock of a putative largely electrified future “low-carbon” energy system), and cobalt for lithium ion batteries, which will be increasingly necessary to provide storage for intermittent wind plus solar energy, as they increasingly substitute for this same oil and gas. 

Since 80% of the sulphur used in the world is derived as a “hitchhiker element”, riding on the back of oil and natural gas production, eventually, more mined sulphur (and that recovered from smelting mined metallic ores) will be necessary to make sulphuric acid, if we manage to significantly curb our use of fossil fuels.

Extra-heavy oil.

Recent events in Venezuela have also proved controversial, but the nation is said to have the world’s largest reserves of oil. Now, all oil is not created equal, and most of that from Venezuela is of far lower quality than that from Iran, say.  There are issues too, over the amount of refining capacity available for dealing with oil that is either much lighter or much heavier than that from Iran. Hence, while over 300 billion barrels is claimed for Venezuelan ("extra-heavy") oil , its Energy Return on Investment (EROI) is very low (3-6), to be compared with an average of around 17 reckoned for global oil. 

Along with a very high viscosity, similar to “tar”, and heavy sulphur content, the material has been said to be practically unusable, “at current prices”.  Thus, the reckoned 200 billion barrels worth of high quality Iranian oil is a much better bet, on all counts.

The term “at current prices” is salient, and in principle, Venezuelan oil is not entirely unusable, but it is extremely challenging and costly to produce. To get this “extra-heavy” oil out of the ground requires specialized infrastructure, massive investment, and blending with lighter, imported liquid hydrocarbons to move it to the marketplace. Since the production infrastructure has been left in very poor shape, due to underinvestment, mismanagement and the effects of sanctions, it may cost over $100 billion to make it fit for purpose again. 

The overall “getting” process is also highly polluting, with high greenhouse gas emissions from extraction, methane leaks, and heavy refining requirements. Sustained high oil prices at say $100 a barrel, or more, make such kinds of “unconventional” production more attractive, so long as the economy can bear them. That noted, a rapid recovery in Venezuelan oil production is considered unlikely. 

Oil prices, production and consequences.

There is a [debatable] “goldilocks” window of between $50-$100, below which production is unprofitable, and above which, costs of oil products become increasingly unaffordable. The breakeven price for Venezuelan extra-heavy is around $80, but it typically trades at $12-20 less than the world benchmark price, in consequence of the greater expenses incurred in its production. While Iranian oil is cheaper to produce, the “fiscal” breakeven price (i.e. to support the national economy) is closer to $160 a barrel, and much higher than that for Saudi Arabia ($95). What it may now rise to in the coming years is anyone’s guess.

Naturally, the prevailing oil price will be a significant factor in determining exactly how much oil is produced, at points along the unfolding timeline, but Charles Hall, Roger Bentley and Jean Laherrere have reckoned future global oil production using Hubbert Linearization techniques. 

Their results indicate that, while the exact timing of the “peak” is shunted forward, albeit incrementally, by the respective addition of NGLs, extra-heavy oil, shale (both kerogen, and light tight) oil, coal/gas-to-liquids, refinery gains and biofuels, to the tally, oil production will begin to decline over the next decade or so; hence why the supply restrictions incurred by the Hormuz situation (and the war in that region, more broadly) may prove to be a rehearsal for the consequences of actual “peak oil”.

Indeed, the present global societal system is becoming increasingly unstable, with cascading events across the Middle East further increasing the risk of massive changes in the wider world order. As has been shown, when complex, adaptive systems begin to collapse, their behaviour becomes increasingly volatile, and I must say, this is how the world is looking to me, as an unfolding “climate, nature... [and also] resource and political crisis”. 

In context to this, I note that Nafeez Ahmed has written recently about the collapse of the US “empire”, signifying the fall of a civilization:  He convincingly argues that we are indeed on our way to a new age, and must adapt to this, rather than trying to restore the old equilibrium:

“The system is about to enter its most turbulent period of catastrophic decline. This is terrifying. The ramifications will be disastrous. But regardless of the fanatical fantasies of those at its helm, there is no going back.”

What about "peak oil demand"?

Undoubtedly, a transformation of our global energy systems is a critical factor in trying to hold any kind of steady course, and this is usually focussed in terms of installing more renewable (low carbon) energy, mainly wind and solar, which offers multiple benefits, in terms of getting away from carbon-polluting and precariously placed, imported fossil fuels, mainly oil and gas. However, the “new” energy system will still rely on fossil fuels to build and maintain itself, until it is of sufficient size to feed back energy for these purposes. 

Given the current massive energy use by global techo-industrial civilization of well in excess of 600 Exa-Joules (EJ), around 80% of which is derived from fossil fuels, this represents a huge challenge. Since wind plus solar, combined, account for 6% of total primary energy (reckoned using the “substitution method”, which divides the actual output in TWh by about 0.4, to allow for the inefficiencies of fossil fuel systems), this would need to be expanded by a factor of 13, to fully replace all, current, gas, oil and coal (513 EJ), which means installing around half the total wind + solar that currently exists on Earth (41EJ), every year out to 2050. 

The increase in W+S achieved from 2023 to 2024 is impressive indeed at 16%, but in terms of actual energy amounts to an extra 5.7 EJ. Hence, we may deduce that the present rate of installation of W+S would need to increase by a factor of nearly 4. Most likely, such a total substitution would not be sought, and might be difficult to achieve, due to the vast quantities of materials needed to build it out, especially when large-scale battery storage is included. 

To look at the problem from another angle, the IEA has estimated that the future, mainly electrified, energy system will be much more efficient than the present, largely fossil fuel based one, but would still need 2.5 times present electricity generation (20% of end use energy, now, being in the form of electricity). W+S now accounts for about 15% (up from 13.4% in a year) of the present electricity mix, but is expected to be 70% in 2050; however, the model also depends on more nuclear capacity and CCUS being brought on-stream. 

This implies that a 12-fold increase in W+S is required, and the installation rate must increase by about 4-fold, along with the additional nuclear and CCUS requirements. Hence the two sets of sums are in reasonable agreement, but allowing the caveat that such a “steady” displacement of fossil fuels is not rapid enough to hold back emissions sufficiently and avoid breaching the 1.5 degree target. Indeed, we have probably, at most, 3 years left of the “carbon budget” to accomplish this.

While moving away from fossil fuels is essential, we must avoid any "holes" in supply occurring, either while the low-carbon Plan B is being rolled out, and fossil fuel stations are closed down, or from any "variability" in the final, installed system. Nonetheless, some predictions of future oil use, e.g. by the IEA, show no decline in demand, and even growth, out to 2050. 

It is hard to see how this will hold up in practice, since falling EROI for oil means that by 2050, half of the energy content of “oil liquids” will be consumed in their production. As EROI falls, the oil industry must consume more of its own output to keep production going, a phenomenon that may make continued high-level investment inefficient and economically unattractive (a kind of “energy cannibalism”). Indeed, it has been proposed that falling EROI for “oil liquids” may become a limit to a rapid and global low-carbon energy transition. 

It seems more likely therefore, that we will experience a decline in the global oil supply, in accord with Hall, Bentley and Laherrere’s predictions. 

Our future – energy and beyond?

Affordable oil is a precious and finite material. While fracking bought us some time, the robustness of this industry is now in question. “Peak Oil Demand” is now forecast to be a long way off, but can sufficient oil supply be maintained to meet that demand? Climate change/emissions considerations, aside, once the oil and gas are gone, they are gone, and it would be sage to save them for specific future uses where substitution will be difficult or impossible.

Given the relative slowness of the necessary timescale for introducing a largely W+S based energy system, and doubts over the availability of sufficient materials for doing this, we must give focus to reducing our demand for energy as a critical strategy in creating a viable energy future. The Centre for Research into Energy Demand Solutions (CREDS), produced a report which concluded that the UK could halve its energy use by 2050. Yet, as has been pointed out, it is “not only energy”,  and while decarbonising our energy sources is vital, this alone will not solve the underpinning problem, which is that the human species is in ecological overshoot. 

Thus, reduction in our demand for all resources is essential, or our climate targets (“carbon tunnel vision”) may prove no more than hopeful and unrealistic attempts to preserve business as usual, while the polycrisis deepens. We face a “great simplification”  in which relocalisation is a key strategy.

Through such grassroots means, mitigation is achieved through reduced consumption, the production of food and energy at the local level, and by creating less waste. Adaptation arises from the creation of resilient, self-sufficient communities that can better cope with supply chain disruptions and the impacts of a changing climate (in all respects), along with a restoration of wild nature, thus providing some buffer to whatever shocks will come. Adopted on the grand scale, as a “village of globes”, both the long-term sustainability of ecosystems and the well-being of local populations may be supported across the world.