I've recently done a research paper on peak oil and what I have learned is really scaring me. I think it should be scaring everyone, and I don't think there is enough awareness on the problem.
To get a feeling for what peak oil means, I'll give you a brief definition. Think of the amount of oil in the earth in terms of a bell curve. Before we reach the top, oil production is high and prices are rather low. After we reach the top, we must inevitably go down. At the top 50% of our oil reserves on earth have been used up. Once we start going down, prices rise considerably, and economic disaster can come.
Why? well, everything we use today was probably made from oil. Plastics are, and so are computers, and cars. Besides being made with oil, cars also use oil to run. Airplanes also use oil to run. In fact, planes can only use oil to run. That means after we reach peak oil, the price of plane tickets will soar. Now, think of a world without transportation. Where will you get your food? Not only is oil needed to make pesticides and fertilizers and to create equipment to cultivate land and grow the food you eat every day, oil is also used to transport the food from the farm to your local gorcery store. Without food in the grocery store, people in big cities will starve. They have no place to grow their own food!
Now think of a world with no electricity. You may have experienced it for a few days during a temporary power outage, but nothing to the extent of what could happen in the United States when peak oil is reached. The person who lives on the 30th floor of their high-rise apartment building now has to climb 30 flights of stairs to get home. The elevators don't work- they run on electricity, remember? And how would it feel if you couldn't blog anymore, because your computer uses too much energy? And what about water? We cannot get water without electricity because the pumps are electric.
And what about alternative enery sources? you may ask. Well, here is your answer. They work, but they are very advanced. Parts break and will be difficult to replace. Besides that, America consumes so much energy every day that alternative energy sources would just not live up to our current standards.
What can you do about it? Well, I don't rightly know. For now, I suggest getting the word out there that this crisis is happening NOW. Peak oil was reached in the United States in 1970. People did not know this until a few years later. We won't know when we have reached it until after it has happened. By conserving more than ever we are only prolonging the inevitable. Eventually what is left of the earth's oil will be too difficult to get at, and then we will have to live without. Are you ready for this crisis?
read more about peak oil at http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php This is where most of my information came from.
No worries, the U.S. has 5% of the population and uses 25% of the energy (oil). Peak oil just means the people in the U.S. will use less oil and drive less.
Peak oil translates into fewer glutton cars. All is good, especially if your a cyclist who can avoid being hit by cars.
Ok, the US does use 25% of world supplies, but it isn't going to be pretty going from this to
say 5%, and even when the US does only consume a 1/5th of todays oil - everyone will still need to carry on cutting down all the way to zero. The big question is becoming not when we peak, but how sharp will the decline be - thats the important bit.
Sure, there will be electricity around, but gas, nuclear, coal are finite, and the amount that renewables can supply each day is limited so I doubt it'll be wasted on the hydrogen fantasy of zooming around like oil never ran out.
(By the way on biofuel, most large plantations are not actually renewable as they just rely on leaching the nutrients out of fertile ex-rainforest turning it into poor arable land - kind of biological strip mining, local bio deisel growing is good though).
Big worries, this isnt about bikes and solar panels. As a society we have out grown our bricthes. Our economic collapse is where our heads should be at. Our dollar will be worthless , inflation will explode. Best case scenario we relocalize and create energy efficient societies, worst case scenario we fall on our face and become the 3rd world country we like to believe we arent.
Actually, I think the US population will deny there being a probem until it is a crisis situation. And there should be worries about the US using so much oil in the first place. It is disgusting. And yes, they will have to use less oil, because the price is going to shoot up. And so is everything we buy. Everything produced in factories is going to be more expensive, because machines run off of oil and use oil in their processes. I honestly do not think Americans will use less oil. We are spoiled.
Nicely put although I have to chuckle at the bit about renewable energy being complicated so that's a good reason it won't work!! It's no more complicated that any other technology and certainly a lot less complicated than nuclear! We can churn millions of cars out each year so why not millions of wind turbines for a few years?
As for peak oil, it's going to be a massive wake up call especially for the US where you are so utterly car dependent, life will go down the pan - what do you do with vast areas of suburbia that can only survive with cars. Sadly it's probably pay-back for blowing it all on cars that do 10 mpg when there are perfectly good ones that do 5 or 6 times that!
yeah! what is this trend of Hummers anyway? They are big and ugly and guzzle gas like no other.
I wish we would churn out a million wind turbines instead of cars. We just scrap cars after a few years anyway. I heard something very sad about wind power today. There is at least one wind turbine field in Hawaii but most of the turbines sit there doing nothing because nobody will find out what's wrong and change the parts! how wrong is that?!?
I believe the majority of oil is used for transportation. Your elevators and computers will still work since electricity is produced by hydropower, nuclear, etc. In due time fuel cell cars will be made available...
No, think again...oil is indeed heavily used in transportation (inc flying which incidentally don't have many alternatives) but is also heavily used in food, medicines, plastics, heating (esp in US) and electricity. What you may not realise is that prices may jump to $10 a gallon which doesn't just mean that getting around in your car is expensive - it means EVERYTHING is expensive...too expensive for most of you. It also means your house in the 'burbs is suddenly worthless so you're stuck with a massive mortgage you can't afford as interest rates have gone through the roof. It basically means the end of everything you know - modern society is totally dependent on CHEAP oil...not just any old oil, it has to be cheap. Take it away and everything else follows...And as for fuel cells, honestly, look it up - there's about zero chance of them ever being as useful as oil-based cars - it's all a scam. And you need to ask what will power them - your gas is going fast so that won't work. It will end up being coal which will mean we're all heading into the sea...a very warm sea :-)
The result of global oil depletion is not utopian local agrarian societies. At least not immediately. There will be some pain. Use history as a guide and you will see what is to come.
The result of ever more expensive energy is an even greater global depression than the Great Depression. Then after that....totalitarianism! On a global and (more frightening) a local scale. Just wait until energy resources are scarce. You'll get every "do-gooder" ninnie coming out of the woodwork seeking to implement a plan to "manage" resources on a local level. As far as global totalitarianism, the signs are already all around us. Islamic fundamentalism, China (still a totalitarian regime) rising at an exponential rate in global influence, Russia dismantling the economic and political reforms from the last decade, unstable countries clamouring to develop nuclear weapons and even our own government tipping over all our hard fought, 'Constitutionally guaranteed' liberties.
Just take a good look at the landscape of the future and get ready. It isn't doing to be pretty. And the worst part.......there's not a thing you or I can do about it. Except resolve ourselves to not let circumstances force us into lowering ourselves to the lowest common denominator.
So don't panic. We as a nation got by without oil in the past and I'm sure we will in the future. There just won't be as many of us and we who do make it will have a lot of bad memories.
There are enough known and documented facts that ckearly state that Peak Oil actually happened in 2005. Whether it happened in 2005, or happens in 2015 it is still too late. The time to start developing alternative sources of energy is NOW.
Losing electricity is one thing, but losing the availability of oil is something much more severve. The world has never had to face such a daunting challenge.
The United States and the rest of the world MUST start NOW to find and/or invent altervative sources of energy.
Higher gas prices will definitely decrease the number of miles drivers will drive their cars, but the price of oil and gas will soon eclipse $100 a barrrel and $6.00 a gallon.
Don't count on Saudi Arabia to solve our oil needs because they are also running out of oil, but haven't yet leveled with the world. Today most of the Middle East countries are not worrying about our problems - they have their own.
A concerned citizen who in his liftime bought gas for .12 cents a gallon.
I think we are at peak oil plateau in that modern technology is extending the peak for a few years (output will then fall quicker). The US is in trouble due to the low density housing and little or no public transport servicing it. Europe will fair better as it has a high fuel tax and a (albeit we complain about it!) fairly well developed public transport system. Africa is at one level toast - i.e. it will not develop but at another level ok as they had little money anyway. Asia has real issues given India and China. Australia given it large reserves of coal et alia could be okay.
However some facts:
The world poplation will fall (i think the to one billion is a little harsh! however fall it will both enforced and by people over a generation realising they cannot afford so many kids)
The world economy will take a real kicking that will take twenty to thirty years to recover
We have to layer on global warming the quick fix of using coal for oil etc will simply speed up climate change! we need to reduce our CO2 footprints asap, encourage wind and solar use AND research so it gets mucmmuch more effiicent, but also look for more compact cities so there is more LAND to act as the lungs of the world.
A lot of ifs people. I think it will be a painful twenty years plus a futher 100 plus years in stabalising climate change. Jimmy Carter was right the wise old fool!
The America SAD DENIAL Case
Your war against Fear is not justified. It is actually a Resource War for oil, and a currency war for the dollar. Global Oil production has peaked and US will suffer the most from this crisis. The United States uses 25% of the world’s oil yet only has 5% of the world’s population. America is heavily in debt and bankruptcy is unavoidable. The coming housing bust will send the economy into a second greater depression.
While the Middle East countries find themselves targets in the "war on terror", China, Russia, and Latin America find themselves targets in the recently declared and much more expansive "war on tyranny." Whereas the "war on terror" is really a war for control of the world's oil reserves, this newly declared "war on tyranny" is really a war for control of the world's oil distribution and transportation chokepoints.
The dollar is in collapse, the economy is going to crash, oil is getting more scarce everyday. America is a nation that has its infrastructure built exclusively to be run on abundant cheap oil, with global demand of oil increasing exponentially and supply decreasing year after year, America has no other choice than to wage a global war on oil and currency and under the ruse of terror and freedom.
What? No believe? You still denial??
Is your entire country on crack? Are all you Americans out of your cotton picking minds? Are you completely freaking delusional? Homicidal? Psychotic? Have you lost any shred of a moral compass? WHAT IN THE NAME OF JESUS H. CHRIST ON A CRUTCH IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!
Let me offer up one small datum which may completely change the equation for you: According to the CIA (If they have any credibility left.) even accord to them Iran is at least five years away from a nuclear weapon.
Five years.
Five years is time for diplomacy to accomplish a hell of a lot.
I would also point out that the Atomic Energy Commission, various other international bodies and other inspections have essentially found no sign that Iran is even working on a nuclear weapon.
The only actual evidence that Iran has anything close to nuclear weapons technology is blueprints *that the CIA gave to them!*
Have you all forgotten that the evidence on Iraq was spectacularly wrong? Have you all ignored the fact that it was fabricated? Why then are we going down the exact same road of stage managed, fabricated pseudo-evidence and wild-ass hysteria?
What is wrong with you people?
This entire crisis has been manufactured, and has been years in the making.
Stop and think back five years. What did we have five years ago? A moderate reformist Iranian government making overtures to the United States, rebuilding its relationship with Europe, liberalizing its society, and modernizing its economy.
Post 9/11 vigil in Iran. 9/11 comes along, the Iranians are overflowing with sympathy. Mass candlelit vigils are held in Tehran. Iran offers aid and cooperation.
Iran hates the Taliban who have executed Iranian diplomats and massacred Afghan Shiites. Iran hates Saddam Hussein. Iran hates Al Qaeda which is a Sunni Fundamentalist organization which declares Shiites infidels and subhuman.
Iran shares its intelligence with America - they even arrested Taliban members and handed them over to US custody.
So we've got the Iranian spring; things are finally going to sort out.
And what happens? The Bush administration rebuffs every Iranian overture and does its best to instigate a cold war. Afghanistan is invaded, and suddenly, the Iranians are looking at American troops and allies on their eastern border. Then Iraq is invaded, and American troops and allies on their western border. Then bases and treaties in Uzbekistan, and whoops, there's more American troops and allies on the northern border. The Persian Gulf is filled with American warships and carrier fleets.
Now the Iranians are surrounded. And the tough talk is constant. Iran is part of the 'Axis of Evil' and Americans tell each other "Baghdad, humph, real men go to Tehran." Essentially, America has been threatening military action against Iran for the last five years, and has surrounded the country on every side with troops, bases and allies.
American aircraft invade Iranian airspace regularly, American special forces undertake operations inside Iran and Americans regularly accuse Iranians of interference in Iraq.
Dick Cheney pontificates about Israel bombing Iran *after he has just handed over to Israel the long range bombers and bunker busting bombs* required to do the job.
Meanwhile, the United States undertakes economic warfare against Iran, interfering with its business dealings with third party countries, trying to scuttle a pipeline deal with India, and it goes on and on. The hysteria about the Iranians nuclear program is just more of the same.
Now how in God's Bloody Name do you think the Iranians are going to respond to that. Should they concede the nuclear program, abandon their pipeline project? If so, its not going to do them any good. America will just seek more concessions. Each surrender will be met by new demands. This isn't hard to figure out. It's exactly what Bush did with Iraq.
Perhaps overtures, good will gestures, trying to act like a peaceful nation. Did all those things, doesn't matter. The Bush administration is still on a collision course.
So, the Mullahs are concerned that they're faced with a homicidal crazy state, the Iranian people are scared. When people are scared and faced with an aggressive warmongering power which keeps threatening to attack them, continually trespasses on its borders and is undertaking economic warfare... who the hell are they going to elect? Ahminajad may be a crazy bastard, but you assholes, you utter assholes did every thing you could to elect him short of donating 50,000 Diebold machines and mailing his party the trapdoor codes.
So, having pursued a psychotically aggressive course, you've backed Iran into a corner, and engineered a regime which refuses to back further.
And *you* are the victims in all this? *You* are the ones under threat? It's *self defense*????
And of course, you goofily believe that you can just bomb or nuke Iran with impunity?
Holy microeconomic theory batman! Iran's nuclear facilities are distributed across the country and in hardened sites near population centers. So any strike that cripples a significant portion of Iran's nuclear capacity will inevitably be so large and kill so many people that its going to be tantamount to inviting full scale war.
Think about that. Iran is 70 million people, an area five times the size of Iraq, not disemboweled by 12 years of sanctions and air raids. On the other side of the coin, America's ground army is busted and tied down in Iraq. There's no troops to throw at a major Iranian military force, so you have to hope that bombing will do the trick. The occupation forces in Iraq are in occupation and not territorial defense mode. And Iraq is 65% Shiites who are probably not going to be happy that you're blowing up their brother Shiites.
Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz is so narrow that sinking one supertanker will block it indefinitely, and Iran borders the strait on three sides. Block Hormuz and any naval groups inside the Persian Gulf are trapped there. Any naval groups outside the Persian Gulf are trapped outside. Forget about any oil coming out of the Persian Gulf from Iraq, Kuwait, Quatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia or the UAE. Think about what that does to the price of oil, and to the world economy. Think about what that does to dependent countries like Japan, India, China and Europe.
In short it’s so appallingly stupid and colossally risky, that I can see why your idiots in charge might consider using nuclear weapons. But throw a few nukes around and see how the rest of the world reacts? Every dirt-wad country is going to be mortgaging the Presidential palace to get its own nuclear deterrent from Pakistan or North Korea. How do you feel about the Indonesian Bomb, the Malaysian Bomb, the Thai Bomb, the Myanmar Bomb, the Algerian Bomb, the Saudi Bomb, the Egyptian Bomb, the Brazilian Bomb, the Argentine Bomb, the Venezuelan Bomb, the Cuban Bomb, the Japanese Bomb, the Canadian frigging Bomb. You are no longer trustworthy. North Korea, always borderline psychotic is going to be mondo difficult to deal with. You've just guaranteed yourself a full fledged nuclear arms race, balls to the wall with both Russia and China, and quite possibly Europe.
And of course there's no guarantee that the rest of the world will allow this. Do you want an armed standoff with the Russians? Suppose they 'loan' their finest interceptor jets, pilots and radar systems to the Iranians... Do you want to meet *that* on a bombing raid? And if you do meet *that* what are you going to do when half your planes are blasted out of the skies conducting an illegal raid on civilian populations in a foreign country? Cry? Send a harsh note?
Launch a first strike?
World goes boom. What happens if the Chinese decide to hold Taiwan and South Korea hostage? What do you do? Back off Iran or sell out East Asia?
Hell, in that kind of standoff, someone sneezes and its not going to matter who launched a first strike.
Or would you like an economic standoff, say with Europe, or with Japan and China. Suppose that the Europeans or Chinese decide "screw the worldwide depression, you assholes are just too dangerous to have around." Trillions of dollars get dumped on the market, loans get called in, the bottom drops out of your dollar, its thousand per cent inflation and no manufacturing base and your own trade embargoes. So much for America.
I mean, it’s morally wrong; it’s stupid on every level. And yet here you are discussing why maybe you should get out in front of the Republicans on this, or planning your surrender to Bush. Why are you even discussing this?
What is wrong with America?
Case in Iraq:
Anyone here still remember the scam of Al Samoud 2?
I totally forgot about it until today when I read that Iran has enriched a supply of uranium for the first time and Iran's president has said Iran won't back down ``one iota'' over its nuclear program.
Remember when Saddam backed down? Its been so long even MY memory's
been washed by Washington, but before the WMB bullshit we were hearing ranting and trash from Bush that it was because of Iraq's Al Samoud 2 missiles had 10 miles extra range than allowed by the UN [funny how US itself never follows UN regulations] that the US was going to attack Iraq. Al Samoud 2 was a big issue for a while, and Bush gave Saddam an ultimatum of a week or so to disarm and destroy all 90 some missiles or else the US EVIL EMPIRE was going to attack....
what happened?
Saddam disarmed all missiles.
and then...
US Charged in with Guns a Blazing....
SHOOT FIRST THEN ASK questions torture...
Quick Draw Trigger Happy Cheney saying GO FUCK YOURSELF to the world.
The point is, North Korea, Iran and indeed the rest of the world saw this and learn from Iraq's lesson. When dealing with EVIL like the US WHEEL OF EVIL EMPIRE there is no use in disarming your own weapons!!!!
Any country that still does that is PLAIN STUPID!!! LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO IRAQ!!!!
The Native Americans was too slow to learn the lesson, Iraq was too dumb to learn the lesson. Lets hope Iran does a pre-emptive strike FIRST this time and give Shrub a taste of his own medicine!!!
Now, to be fair I realize most Americans do not take lightly to criticism. But what about reason? Logic? Or plain common sense?
You seem to agree with the doctrine of pre-emptive strike correct? You say that if you know your enemy will attack you anyway, that it is your duty and obligation to attack them first to prevent damage to yourself.
So when I that Iran should attack America’s military and not wait until it is first attacked upon, what then do you have to object? I am simply praticing YOUR DOCTRINE OF PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE. If an enemy [the US in this case], will attack you anyway, (like how America will attack Iran, and how US with its proven track record DID attack Iraq) it is then Iran's duty and obligation to pre-emptive the pre-emptive strike. America has proven TIME AND TIME AGAIN that is PRACTICES THE DOCTRINE OF STRIKING FIRST, so why the hell should other nations not do the same? If I know a bully in my neighboorhood already took out 5 of my neighboors why the hell should I not practice what he does and take HIM out first?
So if you [US] can do it, why can no other country practice the same thing?
Let us not forget one of your major characteristics: your duality in both manners and values; your hypocrisy in manners and principles. All*manners, principles and values have two scales: one for you and one for the others.
Your war against Fear is not justified. It is actually a Resource War for oil, and a currency war for the dollar. Global Oil production has peaked and US will suffer the most from this crisis. The United States uses 25% of the world’s oil yet only has 5% of the world’s population. America is heavily in debt and bankruptcy is unavoidable. The coming housing bust will send the economy into a second greater depression.
While the Middle East countries find themselves targets in the "war on terror", China, Russia, and Latin America find themselves targets in the recently declared and much more expansive "war on tyranny." Whereas the "war on terror" is really a war for control of the world's oil reserves, this newly declared "war on tyranny" is really a war for control of the world's oil distribution and transportation chokepoints.
The dollar is in collapse, the economy is going to crash, oil is getting more scarce everyday. America is a nation that has its infrastructure built exclusively to be run on abundant cheap oil, with global demand of oil increasing exponentially and supply decreasing year after year, America has no other choice than to wage a global war on oil and currency and under the ruse of terror and freedom.
What? No believe? You still denial??
Don’t forget what horrible unspeakable atrocities your nation did to the Native Americans who were here before them.
America is not a legitimate nation. It is a British renegade colony that should have been repatriated. The Evil Colony of America and the Evil Treacherous George Washington General Coward betrayed his own England and set up this Avarice Nation. The Evil American Colony sent a bitching letter to King George and in essence said they were tired of paying their fair share of the taxes, but used the ruse of ‘taxation without representation’ as a pitiful pathetic excuse to cheat the motherland of resources.
This is true beginning of the EVIL AVARICE NATION that you so ardently defend.
This nation later went on and killed all the Native Americans. This is the Evil nation that usurped land from the French and called it a so called “Louisiana Purchase
LOL , COME ON MY MAN ............ THEN TELL US " OH ONE IN THE KNOW"............ WHAT HAPPEND THAT TERRIBLE DAY KNOW AS 9/11 ?
GEORGE BUSH, DICK, AND RUMMI DID IT , IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT US TO THINK ? ................. OOOOOOOO........... YYYYYYEAH .
The 11th Sept just gave them what was needed - a perfect excuse to invent an enemy so great it could topple the US...when it really couldn't but who's going to argue when it means you can get your oil.
Wake up - the US is totally corrupt and this is why the rest of the world hates you. I'm realy sorry but the world is going to change in a very big way and the US will be weak and with lots of people getting their own back for years of imperialistic war mongering.
And I'm just an average European...imagine what the rest of the world really thinks!
well if anyone is interested,, one of the biggest peak oil conferences ever in new york is this weekend
www.energysolutionsconference.org
we can blame allday, we can wait all day, but the prices keep rising and our countries economy is still in the tank. time to get our heads together and work this baby from the ground on up
I have to say the US guys are not the most popular in the world. Given vietnam, iran hostages, gulf war 1 and 2 etc etc plus the various trade/IMF led US economic policies they are not the flavour of the century. A more level headed entity in the US - the US Army engineers - has actually said a key reason for reducing the 25% usage for 5% population ratio is to try and help reduce the negative view of the US outside of their country.
I think we all know that, as with the Brits last century, this century will see the demise of the US "empire". Which is fine every empire falls but aside from the Suez War (Great Britains faux par) the transformation of the British Empire was are fairly orderly affair -although there is an argument it should have progressed slower, just ask the African countries.
The problem is the US is taking the classic dying empire approach of trying to hold everything together and act in denial. eg Rome, Ottoman, Persian empires etc. This ALWAYS results major pain to the dying empire as the dam finally breaks. A oil price spike, deficit collapse, GDP falling foriegn policy backlash could be the US's which will have much greater pain for the US than the Suez had for the UK (Seem to remember the US did not support us there hmmm...).
If they bite the bullet now massively reduce their energy footprint and form real international alliances the world will be a much safer place.
I agree with the poster who said we need to put our differences aside and start working on solutions. Yes, it's a daunting task and we may already be too far in the crapper to climb back out but we need to try.
Who am I kidding? Peak oil is already here. It won't be long before people start hoarding, hyperinflation takes it's toll, nuclear war becomes the defacto, and TB, bird flu and a myriad of other diseases follow to clean the human stain.
Did you know that the average Cuban lost 20 lbs after their energy crisis (linked to the former Soviet Union Peak in the 80's? ) The big difference between the cubans and the americans is that the cubans have strong community ties and family values. All the yanks have is guns and Hummers. Get the picture?
Whoa Fellas,
Poseur ranting is an ancient internet tradition, of course; but shall we flaunt tradition and stick to the topic?
Retrogurl suggested that Peak Oil may be imminent, and that the immediate consequences may be harsh (e.g. no electricity). This strikes me as an overstatement. For example, there is substance to the notion that global oil production does not necessarily follow the same logistic curve that geologists have described for production from single oil fields. Moreover, alternative fossil fuels will blunt the some of the impact arising from the rising price of conventionally produced oil. I suspect that the "wobbly plateau" forecast for oil production is as good as any, even if I doubt that the plateau will last as long as 10 years. I suspect that our immediate problem will inflation, arising from the effect of growing global demand and price-constrained supply.
That said, the experience of the 70s is a sad but perhaps useful guideline for what Retrogurl and her cohort might expect for their near-term future. Inflation and demand destruction (people giving up jobs, cars, the shrinking of GM, Ford, Airbus and Boeing, etc) may be a prominent feature of adapting to higher energy costs. Coal and nuclear energy sources ought to boom. (Yes, today is the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster; but do we not build immense cities below water level in hurricane prone areas?) It will be financially difficult to keep houses warm in cold areas, or to keep houses cool in hot areas. As a former inhabitant of East Texas, I'm wondering how much of my income would have to be eaten up by inflation before I'd give up air conditioning. It would not be easy - other things would go first. Things to give up would include commuting the three miles to work (I could walk), almost all saving, all dining out, movies, recreational travel, home computers, DSL, purchased books, family-gathering trips (most of my family lives in the Chicago area), apartment insurance, foods for which there are cheaper alternatives (no more honey, no more fresh winter vegetables) and even jogging shoes might be stretched to their utmost limit before the air conditioner would be shut off. Everyone would have their own priorities, but I love a good night's sleep and that is hard for me when nighttime temperature stays above 80 degrees and humidity hugs 90 percent. Doesn't that make me sound like a spoiled movie star (listing a half-dozen forgone luxuries)? But I note with concern that it was hard to find anything that I'd give up, and it is not at all clear to me that I'd give up savings before air conditioning. So, could it be that inflation would only have to eat up 5-10% of my income before it is back to open windows? I'm glad that my neighbors are thoughtful, quiet folk! Of course, being a cancer researcher means that my job will head out the window even before Boeing cuts back. I'm entirely dependent on Federal investment spending - the very first thing to depart the worldly budget.
What would be a better career, given constrained energy supplies? My guess is that an awareness of energy technology might be the best. "ET" may take the place of "IT" for pithy hot fields. Imagine, however, having to tell the manager of an 80 story office building that the only economic option is to switch to fans. It may not be a good field if you feel the need to be popular. For a while, of course, expertise in petroleum discovery and extraction would be remunerative. It is doubtful that you would want to be in that field as you near retirement, however. Coal might be a better long term choice, if the problems associated with CO2 do not become too apparent. Ditto careers in oil sands (riskier) and oil shale (riskiest). Literally billions of us depend on high-yield, fertilizer driven crop production. The problem is the high energy input needed to capture nitrogen for fertilizer. Someone with a master's degree in low energy-intensity, high yield agronomy practices might find herself in a good position.
One of the remarkable features of the 70s was the period where you could not give away Cadillac. It was a poor persons car because you could drive off a used car lot with a Caddy for about $300. Similar things might happen to todays big vehicles. There might be a period where re-cycling Hummers, pickups, and ordinary SUVs could be big business.
Retrogurl - retreat is not an option.
Best,
George
We NEED to use the sun. We need to pour billions of dollars into how to harness the suns power. maybe a 10% tax on oil co profits!
I'm not worried about peak oil at all. There's still 90% of the oil ever created in the Earth's crust. The trick is getting at it.
I'm not worried about peak oil at all. There's still 90% of the oil ever created in the Earth's crust. The trick is getting at it.
you tell me how to get at it, if it's any good, and if it gives us more energy than we spend to get it. then i'll stop worrying too.
The fact is that we do keep discovering more oil. People started worring about oil running out back in the 1910s! Before we really even started using it!
Thankfully our supply has kept increasing and continues to do so.
We can also make our own oil from trash using a process called Thermodepolymerization. It is being done right now and sold on the world oil market. Once it is in a barrel you can't tell the difference from oil out of the ground.
Retreat is the only option (in reply to the bloke saying it's not an option). There's no getting away from it, hard times are coming for all in the west.
And as for 90% oil being left, yeah, really useful it is too - do you know how much gas they have to burn to get oil sands out? It only works (economically) because gas is currently less expensive than oil. That will change shortly when Canadian gas falls off a cliff and they'll then realise how mind-numbingly stupid it was to throw away all the gas to get oil out. Honestly, if there are future generations that have time to look back at stuff we did, this will surely go down as one of the most ludicrous!
Retrogurl is right - EROEI (Energy Returned on Energy Invested) - if you're spending 2 barrels of oil to get 1 out of the ground it's not a long term thing to be doing!
Face it - you're stuffed so make the most of it!
Retreat and EROEI
This is in response to Guest who asserts that retreat is the only option. To be fair, I do agree that conservation is an obvious and extremely valuable option. My own smug comments (above) about a career in recycling SUVs was intended to convey that, but apparently my writing could use a little work.
However, it seems a little harsh to assert that we are collectively so dumb that we have to push everyone back into an age where 50% of newborns die before reaching maturity and famine keeps us fashionably slim. I suppose it goes without saying that our goal is to eliminate this scenario in those places where it is still a central fact of people's lives.
The goal is not unreachable. Plants harvest sunshine and so can we. The problem is to make the process vastly more efficient and (hopefully) nearly water free. The exact technology for doing this has not been worked out, but there are options. Merely raising large vats of pond scum (cyanobacteria) and distributing the dried mats is used to provide nitrogen for rice farming (chiefly in India and part of China). Slightly higher tech is the production of ethanol from sugarcane; which works without public funding in Brazil. For the future, one can imagine a fabric that conducts solar-freed electrons to reaction centers where carbon dioxide is reduced to methanol (or, preferably, something less toxic).
The hard part is to stop waffling and get on with the task. It sounds easy, but just try and find a way to compete with today's almost unbelievably efficient petroleum industry. I can tell you, waffling is nearly a way of life in this field!
George
Sorry George, it's me again - I'm still not buying it. The whole technology will save us argument has no real basis in fact. Oil and gas are wonderful things (apart from the CO2 obviously) and there really isn't anything close.
As for Brazil, wonder how they get all that lovely ethanol? With lots and lots of fossil fuel based fertalizers and weed killers. Try that on an organic scale when your food growing ability is also massively limited due to the lack of oil / gas. The overall EROEI is also debatable and when times are hard will become more apparent.
Look, I'd like the world to continue to be a fun easy place but if I take an object look at the situation we're facing some time quite soon it really isn't that great. There simply are too many of us to live anything like the life we have now and very sadly, the political systems we have don't foster long term thinking - only a view to get as much for yourself as quickly as you can.
Howdy Again, Guest
Not to apologize! I think almost everyone agrees that the data on oil availability is terrible. The most important point in Matt Simmons book (Twilight in the Desert) is his theme of the need for more reliable numbers. There is ample room in this gray fog for all sorts of positions.
You are entirely correct in pointing out that Brazil's system is still petroleum-dependent. But isn't that what we all would expect at this early stage of alternative fuel development? Each and every alternative that we develop will, necessarily, bootstrap off of petroleum. Just because coal bootstrapped off of a wood-based energy (it took a while before coal miners got coal stoves), does that mean that coal never was practical? Similarly, many people made contributions to the petroleum system while still depending on coal for most energy needs. Guest, you and I won't fall into the trap of demanding that a new technology solve all possible problems in its first appearance, will we?
I think it is more useful to note that Brazil's gutsy commitment to alternative fuels is slowly and expensively (but measurably) paying off. Plus, the Brazilians have been EROEI fanatics for about 30 years. I don't know of any reports that discredit EROEI of sugarcane. (Corn has more vociferous critics like Dr. Pimental). It is clear that sugarcane is a poor second to petroleum - it is hard to beat 30:1 or better!. But sugarcane-ethanol beats both corn-ethanol and oil sands by a substantial margin.
Do we have a solution in hand? No. But could get one if we replaced NASA and NIH with an energy program. Well, yes. The engineering problems are real, but not nearly as hard as getting to the moon using 1960s technology. (That was hard). For us, it will be crucial to get people to get started now. Guaranteed solutions would be wonderful. But in their absence the best that anyone could possibly do is look for plausible processes that might lead to solutions.
Will it be environmentally damaging to set up a suitably scaled alternative energy system? Of course it will be. Will the first solutions be only marginally effective in the early years? Of course they will be. Will politicians on all sides of every issue distort the promise and peril of the new technology. Of course they will. So what? "Doing nothing" means continued dumping of CO2 and spilling of petroleum. Doing nothing means living with an energy system that will slope towards marginal within a generation. Doing nothing feeds our esteemed national leadership endless soundbite opportunities.
We can decide not to decide, or we can make the most of situation. Lets make (ethanol from) hay while the sun shines.
George
Take all the fear, the enegry, and funding then put into alt. fuels and cleaner transpertation. There is no excuse for 4-9 BILLION in profits for oil companies!
Sell your homes in the burbs and move to a home in the city or at least on a bus line and invest $$ in railroads.
I dont want a house in the city- i might starve. I say get a house in a small town and work to make the town self-sustainable. I agree with investing $$ in railroads though.
I started off worrying about global warming. You guys should try that. Its pretty fun to worry and tell people how billions will die as the climate changes and makeparts of the earth uninhabitable.
I got bored with that and found Peak Oil. Its really cool to be the prophet of doom telling people how the Oil age is about to end and the new Dark Ages will begin! No electricity! No Cars! We'll all starve!
Thats getting old now so I am moving on to evian flu and worldwide pandemics that will wipe us all out. At least we won't need any oil..
of course you aren't worried about global warming. I found out in my geology class on monday that it will actually take a while to feel the effects of it- u'll be 6 ft under before global warming takes its toll, if it really is true. I have my doubts after reading "State of Fear" by Michael Chrichton (pardon if i misspelled the author's name). As for peak oil, I'm getting a lot of mixed comments and ideas about it through this blog, so I've decided to look into it further and take a specialized class on the end of cheap energy to try and find some real answers.
My remarks were somewhat facetious because I think people worry too much about all the possible catastrophies that could befall humankind. I have been reading about the Peal Oil issue because despite the fear mongering aspect, it is an interesting topic. That is how I came across your blog. The real truth I think is somewhere in between 'Were screwed' and 'Its not a problem'. As energy becomes more expensive it will naturally reduce the wasteful use of it and spur more R&D into energy efficiency and alternative sources. Clearly the one SUV per person model of the US will not scale globally as the emerging economies of India and China come on line and also require large amounts of crude oil for their societies to function. Things will change, but I am not in the doomsayers camp.