The Greening of Entertainment Tech

July 18th, 2007 | by Mark Fleischmann

Some of you are really going to hate this column.
           
Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about my future. More specifically, I’ve been thinking about what an energy-scarce future might mean for my career as a writer and my chosen subject matter. I write about the audio/video universe: surround sound, big-screen television, and all the other products and issues that attend them. These things are products of an expansive age of cheap energy, an era when bigger is better, whether it’s your 7.1-channel audio system, your 60-inch TV screen, your McMansion, or your SUV.
           
There is ample evidence suggesting that this happy-go-lucky age is beginning to wind down, largely due to something called peak oil. It follows a classic bell curve. On your way up the curve, the oil is easy to extract, of very high quality, can be sold cheap, and life is good. At the top of the curve the field is 50 percent exhausted—that’s peak oil. As you move down the curve, the oil gets harder to extract, harder to refine into something usable, and becomes exponentially more expensive. Domestic production in the United States peaked in 1970, setting the stage for the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 and a decade of financial instability. To cover the shortfall, we began importing more. Now there are many who believe worldwide production is peaking. For more details, see mainsteam media coverage. Then check out these folks who are keeping a vigil.
           
A Harris Interactive survey—sponsored not by some treehugger group, but by the oil industry itself!—found that Americans have a woefully low energy IQ. What nation is our single biggest supplier? Sixty percent of us said Saudi Arabia, but actually it’s Canada, followed by Mexico, Nigeria, and Venezuela. Less than 15 percent of our oil comes from the Persian Gulf, and only eight percent of us knew that. All 10 of the world’s largest oil companies are owned by the foreign governments that control the fields, and only two percent of us knew that.
           
I won’t bore you with a full essay on the subject of energy scarcity, but here are a few more highlights: Oil cost just over $10 a barrel in the 1990s. Right now it’s around $71, due to increased demand and flatlining supply. We’re running out of natural gas too, which is too bad, since it heats 50 percent of our homes, and unlike the bell curve of peak oil, a tapped-out gas field just abruptly shuts down. Producing ethanol from corn requires massive inputs of nitrogen fertilizer made from—uh-oh!—natural gas. Nuclear plants take a decade to plan and build and are mind-boggling terror targets. Coal mining rapes the land and aggravates global warming even more than other fossil fuels. Solar, wind, and hydro added together can satisfy only a small percentage of our needs.
           
And then there’s that whole global warming thing. I’ll assume you’re up to speed on that, even if you’re not.
           
So a lot of the things we take for granted are about to become prohibitively expensive, if not downright impossible, including industrial farming, large homes with central AC, capacious SUVs, a landscape optimized solely for private vehicles, discount air travel, the Wal-Mart retail environment, and—oh, yes—all that home theater stuff I write about for a living.
 
Let’s at least try to imagine a bright side: We’ll have to eat more locally grown organic food for sure. Maybe our post-WWII subdivisions will give way to an older type of traditional neighborhood with walkable streets and nearby shopping. For the first time in generations, we’ll have a chance to rebuild the national passenger rail network and build local light-rail systems to hold our communities together—and what kid doesn’t love trains? And we’ll still enjoy movies and music at home, especially since it’ll be hard to drive to our entertainment. Here’s what our home entertainment systems may look like.
 
 
Rash Predictions
 
 
Manufacturing will go local. Sure, most electronic products are made in Asia, but when fuel prices raise the cost of shipping beyond a certain level, much of that manufacturing will move back. It may be awhile before an iPod is made in the U.S. but speakers are obvious early candidates. They’re big, expensive to ship, made from fairly mundane parts and materials, and people can build them in their soon-to-be-empty garages (many hobbyists actually do). A generation or two ago, most audio and video equipment was still made in the U.S. Anything they can do, we can do, if economic conditions warrant.
 
New TV technology will keep the boobs tubing. Energy efficiency is not as big a factor in TV design as it should be. But when the need is upon us, we’ll find ways to save watts. Some models are already compliant with the Energy Star program, using less energy in general, especially in standby, and this trend will continue growing. We’ve already seen huge changes in TV tech with the virtual extinction of the tube. Direct-view TVs have given way to flat panels and tube-based projectors to slimmer microdisplays. Flourescent backlighting in flat panels is giving way to LED backlighting. New flat-panel technologies like the OLED (organic light emitting diode) will eliminate the backlighting completely.
 
Surround receivers will get smarter... If surround sound survives at all, it will have to go green. Digital (or Class D) amplifier technology is more energy-efficient because it dissipates less energy in the form of heat. And it’s already finding its way into receivers. Not all of them are good, but some—like the JVC RX-D702B—are both innovative and decent-sounding.
 
...And so will surround speakers. Satellite/subwoofer sets have come of age. With the sub producing bass, speakers can operate with relatively little power. Look at sensitivity ratings in spec sheets—the higher the number, the better. A speaker with rated sensitivity of 90dB uses half the power of one rated at 87dB to produce the same volume level.
 
Stereo will replace surround. Though I’ve devoted a large portion of my career to convincing people that a home theater system needs at least five speakers and a sub, a lot of people with good music systems have never gone that route, and never regretted it. Many people buy surround receivers and connect only two speakers to them. Stereo may make a comeback even in movie-centric systems. My colleague Steve Guttenberg refers to this as Home Theater 2.0.
 
Compact systems will prosper. A lot of people who operate power-sucking rack systems may just pack it in and go for something smaller. They will join a large group of technology-shy people who are just not within my audience even now. I recently offered a first-rate pair of speakers—a remnant of my former reference surround system—to several friends and relatives. One by one, they turned me down. How depressing.
 
The iPod will inherit the earth. There’s nothing smaller or more self-sufficient than a flash-memory player that can operate for long periods off the power grid. You’ll need it for company on the tram, or during all those long walks you’ll be taking to the grocer, the school, and the church. At home, it’ll become the a/v server for your main system, however large or small. Say goodbye to disc players.
 
Some commentators on the ramifications of the peak-oil phenomenon are pretty caustic. They have my attention, and I suspect they’re right about the tumult and convulsions they predict. But we are a smart, hardworking, imaginative people. I think we can build new lives for ourselves, if we have to—and after a long day of coping with our brave new world, we might even enjoy a little music in the evening.
 
Mark Fleischmann is the author of the annually updated book Practical Home Theater.


Post Your Comment...Comments

Matt on Jul 18th, 2007 at 4:40 PM:

I wonder with all that your saying, where do you think the time line falls? Within 10-20 years? I wonder if new technology will provide a relief to help prevent this from happening in the first place. Or are we too late to act in order to make this change already?

Prof. Goose on Jul 18th, 2007 at 5:35 PM:

Mark,

Thanks for your link to The Oil Drum (we're the link under the word "vigil" *laugh*).

To answer Matt's question, there is no new technology that has anything close to the return of energy invested of light sweet crude...that's the problem.

The other problem, as Mark points out, is a lack of energy education or knowledge. We take so much for granted, that's why we are working so hard over at The Oil Drum on just facilitating conversations so people can learn.

Truth is, we need a bunch of silver bb's to help ameliorate this problem...a Manhattan Project style effort.

I don't see that happening until there's a real economic consequence, or until people actually get the fact that we are not going to be able to produce any more oil than are currently. (NB: we are not running out, it's just that other countries are growing...and we can't produce any more...that means higher prices.)

If you're interested, this is what we talk about every day over at TOD. Stop by some time.

(Mark, drop me a note at our eds box would you? Cheers! PG)

Prof. Goose on Jul 18th, 2007 at 5:40 PM:

Oh, and Matt asked about timelines...

It depends on who you ask. The problem is that our estimates of how much oil is left in the ground (usually termed "reserves") are based on what countries tell us as opposed to what is actually there.

Matt Simmons' book _Twilight in the Desert_ argues that many of the ME countries have exaggerated their reserve numbers...

A lot of evidence is coming out of Saudi Arabia that their largest oil field Ghawar has peaked in production. If this is true, then the world has likely already peaked with regard to light sweet crude production...and as my other comment said, there's nothing quite like a barrel of light sweet for energy.

It's complicated, but we need to have these conversations. It may have already passed, it may be in five years...either way, it's close.

David J. McCartney on Jul 20th, 2007 at 8:30 AM:

Mark,

Thank you for bring up this issue in the context of technology.

The average person has absolutely no concept of our dependence on oil. Aside from its use as a fuel, oil is a component or feedstock in over 500,000 products and chemicals. Our life as we know it is wholly dependent on cheap energy.

The core issue is not that technology might be better served in a post-carbon era through reductions in energy consumption, miniaturization, or other improvements, but that technology might continue to exist at all. Without cheap oil, it can not exist.

We do not comprehend the fact that our entire agriculture system is based on producing food from oil: fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides are all carbon based. Add the fuel needed to plant, till, harvest, and transport the food thousands of miles to our plates and you ultimately have an unsustainable system.

Aside from the fact that we are up against a geophysical reality that will bring us to our knees, the real issue is one of potential catastrophic economic effect. We're looking at a recession or recessions, with a major depression highly likely. Remember, unlike the 1930's, we are the world's largest debtor nation. What is happening on Wall Street right now belies that fact.

This reality is very difficult to wrap your head around, the prospect of us losing every modern comfort and convenience within the next hundred years. The effects are already being felt with considerable economic ramifications on the horizon.

This coming maelstrom is just beginning to be picked up by the mass media, yourself included.

Everyone: Google "Peak Oil" and tighten you seat belts. It's going to be on heck of a ride.

Cherenkov on Jul 20th, 2007 at 3:28 PM:

I would like to point out that we are running out of oil. There are many who will say we aren't running out or that we will never run out, but they are mistaken. From the moment we began using oil, from the very first teaspoon we burned, we began running out. Oil does not renew itself, at least not on a meaningful time scale. Therefore, like a glass of beer, the very first sip means that a sip is missing from the glass. Since the oil, nor the beer in my example, will not reappear magically, then it can be said with authority that with each sip we have less and having less means categorically, we are running out.

Now, to further confuse the issue, most people who believe in peak oil, prefer to focus not on "running out" but on the peak in production, because that is in fact what they are talking about when they refer to "peak oil."

Since our economy is based upon the high growth that cheap energy bestows on modern economies, any reduction in the production level means a reduction in growth. And that means problems as far as our paradigm is concerned. It means recession after recession, leading finally to a depression that never ends.

Now, the most frightening aspect revolves around population. We are 6.5 billion people precisely because of cheap energy. Without that fossil sunlight in the form of anhydrous ammonia derived from methane, or natural gas, we would be unable to feed our population. Not possible. What you may not know is that natural gas peaked in the North America some years ago. It is only through frantic drilling that we have managed to avoid a spectacular catastrophe. Unfortunately, many experts in the field, such as Julian Darley, believe that we will be unable to hold off that catastrophe for much longer. In fact, because of cheap energy inputs, we have been able to act as if the earth was effectively two or three planets. That is about to come to an end. What that means for the excess population, approximately 4 billion people, is perhaps starvation unless extraordinary efforts are made.

In any event, it is nice to see that the peak oil trope is escaping into the mainstream. Keep up the good work.

Wade on Aug 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 AM:

Hey, I just came across this looking for peak oil stuff. I want to thank you for commenting on the future of something important to you, and me, considering peak oil. Usually it's only mentioned on websites dedicated to it. It makes me glad to see somebody considering peak oil as a part of the future who isn't in the peak oil ghetto of the web. The issue is in bad need of mainstreaming. We're in **** shape if only peak oilers talk about our future shortages.

Comment on this article




Please keep your comments relevant to this article. Email addresses are not displayed, they are only required to verify you are human.

When you submit your comment, an email will be sent to your email address with a confirmation link. Once you have clicked on that confirmation link your comment will be posted.

HTML is not allowed.




Join our newsletter to keep up to date on the latest Digital Trends content like Videos, Reviews, News and more delivered directly to your email!


Plus, get early access to contests and specials from our partners. Join today!





Loading...