Also devastating can they be humanity survives them

The disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, where millions of litres of oil escaped from the depths, is a challenge to the way modern societies react to complex technologies. The frenetic pace of innovation appears to exceed the capacity of the State to establish regulations and controls adapted to the risks it presents, and even more to anticipate.

The parallel between the oil spill and the financial crisis is turning the knife in the wound: the promise of innovation, hardly manageable complexity and the lack of transparency (it is not known much of what is going on in the deep ocean). Lobbies put enormous pressure on government structures also resistant trouble. It is very embarrassing for the President Obama of proposed - it is true under pressure from the opposition Republican-d-' strongly increase offshore drilling shortly before the disaster of the BP platform.

The development of petroleum technology, such as the exotic financial instruments, was very attractive. The leaders of the oil companies bragged to drill up to two kilometres in depth then one kilometre to the horizontal to reach their targets virtually close per metre. Suddenly, instead of "peak oil" due to more and more scarce resources, the world hoped to have enough resources to even a generation.

Now, the games are made. In the United States, offshore drilling will likely follow the path of nuclear power plants, with the placing at the disposal of the new projects for dozens of years. And as is often the case, a crisis in a country can achieve a global dimension and other projects could be abandoned. Will the Brazil actually endanger its superb coastal zone for oil And what happens in Nigeria, where add still other risks associated with domestic conflicts

According to experts, the potential of offshore drilling is very limited compared to the total oil production. But we will now focus more of the risks associated with deep drilling in any "sensitive" environment And the problem is not limited to oil. The major topic of the day with respect to energy is now the technological revolution in the field of exploitation of the deposits of shale gas. In other areas, such as nanotechnology and the development of artificial organisms that are hoped for new horizons in the development of new materials, drugs and medical techniques, it is extremely difficult to find a balance between the management of the extreme risks associated with an unlikely event ("tail risk") and support innovation.

By comparison, financial crises are almost comforting. For centuries, bubbles and banking crises are part of the economic landscape. Also devastating can they be, humanity survives them.

Perhaps the leaders of the g-20 were not as brilliant as they claim to fill deficits of the financial system. Sovereign debt crisis that is raging in continental Europe and convent in the United States, to the Japan and elsewhere are the evidence. But in the light of attempts by BP to plug the leak of oil in the offshore oil drilling, the leaders of the g-20 appear to omnipotent.

The BP oil spill is the warning that Western societies need to rethink their dependence on increasingly faster technological innovation intended to support an oil consumption still on the rise. Even China, with its strategy of "priority to the development, the environment then" type, would do well to focus on what is happening in the Gulf of the Mexico.

The economy has shown that when there is uncertainty with respect to a risk of disaster, it is dangerous too rely on the market mechanism to encourage appropriate motivation to deal with. Unfortunately, economists know much less how to adapt regulations to complex systems where the risks are continually evolve, and even less how design resistant regulatory institutions.

The financial sector is already warned against any new regulations, which may be too much and put a stop to economic growth. We may soon face the same kind of situation with the energy policy.

Given the enormity of the financial issues, it will be difficult to reach a general consensus - as has been demonstrated by the fiasco of the Copenhagen Summit on climate change. In a better position to limit the growth in the long term, developed countries must give the example. The balance between technology, regulations and complexity is probably one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century. We do not have the right to the error.