From Firewood To Fracking – 250 Years Of Energy Sources

33 Comments on "From Firewood To Fracking – 250 Years Of Energy Sources"

sunweb on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 7:22 am 



Disclaimer: I earn no money from this blog, I do it for research and education.
We will go kicking and screaming down the path to the new Middle Ages as fossil fuels desert us. With the decline of available energy, those of most of us who have sat at the top of the energy pyramid will become the new peasants. With the popular view of the Middle Ages as a brutal and dirty time filled with famine and disease and at the mercy of armed overlords. We cringe at the thought.

With great sadness, we must recognize the direct connection between present day population levels and the use of fossil fuels in food production, medical procedures, medicines and hygiene. With the fall in fossil fuel availability there will be a reduction in population. Population soared with the industrial revolution and the development of industrial, fossil fuel based agriculture. It cannot be sustained.
From: The New Middle Ages
http://sunweber.blogspot.com/2011/05/new-middle-ages.html

dolanbaker on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 7:49 am 



I find the quantity of firewood hard to believe as mush of Europe was largely deforested by the late 19th century.

paulo1 on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 8:48 am 



I can see coal ramping up in conjunction with huge climate change events. (What timing, eh?) However, this pick-up-sticks economic system will collapse long before industry starts to really lick its chops over the forests. Sure, locals will heat (as I have done for 40 years), but it takes a helluva lot of energy and equipment to haul out a meaningful supply of logs. Machines need diesel to build the roads, harvest, and haul.

What? You think some apartment dweller from Philidelpia will join a horde on their heavy-haul bicycle and pick up sticks in the country to heat and cook on? Not likely.

rockman on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 8:51 am 



There is only one significant remaining energy source that has a proven economic ability to sub for oil/NG: coal.

Yes: other sources of energy: solar, wind, etc. But I’ve yet to see any development that can come close to utilizing the existing infrastructure as efficiently as coal. But even coal can only do so much: like the other alts coal has a limited ability to sub for motor fuels.

shortonoil on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:05 am 



The EIA has been making some extraordinary claims lately! At present production levels, if petroleum prices were to rise to $250/ barrel in 20 years, the extraction portion of the industry, would grow from $1.7 trillion a year to $8.3 trillion over that period. That would be an annual increase of 8.2% per year, which is absurd. In its 150 year history the industry has never even come close to an annual growth rate of that magnitude.

$250/ barrel oil is itself absurd. The economy can not afford $250 oil; it can no longer even afford $100 oil. Depletion has reduced the value of a barrel of oil:

http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm

In reality the long term price of oil is going down, while its cost of production continues to rise. The industry will soon be unable to maintain its ongoing production. Price is already below the average cost of production, and the only way to alleviate that situation is to shut-in high production cost fields. Shale, bitumen, ultra deep water, arctic, and high sulfur extra heavy production will end in the next few years.

Petroleum is in serious long term trouble, and there are a great number of people who wish to keep the public unaware of its future. Watch the rate of closures, and not the hyperbole emanating from the industry, and its minions!

http://www.thehillsgroup.org

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:06 am 



The graph is a bit misleading by only showing percentages of total energy use. Coal use continued to grow (humans burned a record amount in 2012, IIRC). While ‘firewood’ has declined as a percentage of total energy, it seems humans still burn a huge amount of the stuff.

marmico on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:09 am 



Machines need diesel to build the roads, harvest, and haul.

Maybe you should re-think that. Distillate (diesel) consumption is about hauling all goods on the highway not just firewood from the forest to the mill.

Amazingly, the oil and gas patch only consumes about 3% of distillates.

What surprises me is the tonnage of freight hauled by railroads for such a piddling amount of distillates.

Sales of Distillate Fuel Oil by End Use

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:09 am 



Edit to my above post: Seems the graph is only Energy intensity of Europe; limited usefulness in assessing the global situation.

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:16 am 



Marm: (Machines need diesel to build the roads, harvest, and haul.)

“Maybe you should re-think that.”

Gosh, Marm, perhaps you can tell us what percentage of machines DON”T need diesel to build the roads, harvest, and haul. Not much to rethink here.

marmico on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:26 am 



Go lick your solar panels, you dipshit!

Can’t you see I’m setting up the quart shy of oil for another one of his buffoonery claims.

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:33 am 



“Gosh, Marm, perhaps you can tell us what percentage of machines DON”T need diesel to build the roads, harvest, and haul. Not much to rethink here.”

As usual, you can’t, revealing that the a’hole has no clothes (but we already knew that). If ever there was an example of an utter waste of resources, it’s you. How does it feel to be an utter waste? Another simple question; one you’re actually qualified to answer.

marmico on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 9:42 am 



Sit on your ass and let your spouse bring home the bacon, dipshit! After you are finished cleaning the solar panels with your tongue, go to the garage and contemplate innovation so you can lick more goat shit off Davy-boy Doomer’s boot soles per pass.

Peak what? Your tongue lashes.

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 10:00 am 



How does it feel to be an utter waste? Another simple question; one you’re actually qualified to answer.

Davy on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 10:29 am 



Marmi, thanks for including me in your temper tantrums. I am alone so much it is nice to have companionship even with a creep.

Are you feeling nervous lately with all the bad news? I am wondering why you have been in such a bad mood lately. Penny stocks take a hit? Margin calls to the small investment account? Chill out man losing everything is not the end of the world.

marmico on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 10:49 am 



Oh, Davy Doomer, I told you I was gonna slap you around.

Now Ghung wants to intercede. He’s gone from an engineer and large systems analyst guy in September 2009 to a carpenter today. I guess the pathetic douche bag found Jesus.

Apneaman on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 10:54 am 



From Firewood To Fracking – 250 Years Of Energy Sources resulting in 404.84ppm of CO2 as of two days ago. Approaching levels similar to past extinction levels. Burn baby burn.

The Keeling Curve

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/

Apneaman on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 11:08 am 



Positive feedback loops everywhere.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Northern fires caused almost a quarter of global forest loss

“As many as 90% to 95% of fires in Russia are ignited by human interventions, he said. “This is very different to North America.” Forestry, and oil and gas exploration have driven roads through previously inaccessible forests, increasing the risk of fires.”

“Dr Nigel Sizer, study co-author and director of the forests programme for the World Resources Institute (WRI), said the increase of fires in northern forests had worrying implications for the climate. “If global warming is leading to more fires in boreal forests, which in turn leads to more emissions from those forests, which in turn leads to more climate change. This is one of those positive feedback loops that should be of great concern to policy makers.””

http://www.thestar.com.my/Lifestyle/Features/2015/04/13/Northern-fires-caused-almost-a-quarter-of-global-forest-loss/

shortonoil on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 11:39 am 



The graph is a bit misleading by only showing percentages of total energy use. Coal use continued to grow (humans burned a record amount in 2012, IIRC). While ‘firewood’ has declined as a percentage of total energy, it seems humans still burn a huge amount of the stuff.

The energy delivered from petroleum to the general economy has been declining for quit a awhile. More than half of the energy in a unit of petroleum is now consumed producing it, and its products. Even though the general economy has deteriorated over the last twenty years, it has not declined as much as would have expected from the impact of petroleum’s depletion alone. Other fossil fuels have been able to make up for some of the loss. Coal has certainly been a major factor in that equation. Burning coal, however, emits a huge amount of heavy metals into the environment. There is hardly a lake remaining in the US that does not have levels of mercury which are not high enough to effect wild life. Heavy metal toxicity has a perverse way of traveling through the food chain. Even if burning coal produced no CO2 we would probably have to discontinue the use of coal over the next few decades to avoid poisoning ourselves into extinction!

ghung on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 11:45 am 



Marm: “Now Ghung wants to intercede. He’s gone from an engineer and large systems analyst guy in September 2009 to a carpenter today.”

Renaissance Man. Beats being a shrill shill.

Northwest Resident on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 11:46 am 



Why does peak oil dot com management allow pathetic slugs like marmico to crawl around on this forum, leaving slime trails everywhere?

marmico on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 12:04 pm 



Renaissance Man

You ain’t no Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, dipshit! You are an old redneck collecting social security yelling at people to get off your lawn.

Alan on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 12:27 pm 



This is the behavior of a paid shill. Disruptive, distracting, energy wasting and just plain old Oppositional Defiant. It serves well to frustrate needed conversations by pissing folks off.

Possibly Koch, possibly DOE, or DHS.

Perk Earl on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 12:29 pm 



Just went through this thread – read the first 6 posts, short’s, Ap’s and no other, and what a pleasant experience it was.

If you were in a hallway with doors leading to different lectures, would you go into the one’s that agitated you and piqued your interest, or just the one’s that piqued your interest?

paulo1 on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 12:32 pm 



Hey Marm,

Quit trolling and trying to push buttons.

You are attacking good folks who are willing to share ideas and opinions.

Have a better day.

Apneaman on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 12:59 pm 



ghung, good on you for challenging yourself and learning new skills. I have been on the tools my whole life and I know how it feels to build and fix things for yourself (you can’t buy that at any price)instead of paying people to be mommy and daddy for everything. Not to mention not getting ripped off and knowing it’s been done correctly.

Mike989 on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 1:07 pm 



Totally blind to SOLAR.

US Corporations spend 6 BILLION this Quarter on Solar.

We don’t need your stinking poisonous carbon.

GregT on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 1:42 pm 



“We don’t need your stinking poisonous carbon.”

Hmmm Mike,

Where you gonna drive your electric car? Last time I checked, building roads generated massive amounts of CO2.

apneaman on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 2:27 pm 



Do as you will regarding alt energies, but it will not bring back what has been lost or prevent what is locked in. And it has serious long lasting costs and consequences too.
…………………………………..

Extinction Machine: Fixable?

“Natural habitats, ecosystems and living species that have evolved over millions of years, only to be quickly and casually annihilated in the wake of human profit driven activity, do not bounce back with the application of quick technical fixes. They disappear and do not resurrect.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-carlisi/extinction-machine-fixabl_b_7066818.html

Nony on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 5:30 pm 



What $250/bbl prediction? Is this article from 2008?

We’re at 55 and the 20 year futures are at 70.

Nony on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 5:35 pm 



P.s. Even though oil seems to require very high prices to enable shale production, natural gas is another story. Production is up 50% in last few years and price is at 2.50. Well below prices from 5 to 10 years ago. And the Marcellus in particular is selling at well under $2 local price. Not to mention renewed interest in the Haynesville. Not to mention the high growth of the Utica. Or even incipient development of the upper Devonian Pennsylviana shales or of the Rogersville in KY/WV.

So…I don’t think natural gas needs to worry about a need to be replaced by coal. After all, it is muscling out coal!

Makati1 on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 8:18 pm 



Nony, does your car run on a road built out of natural gas? Most highways in the Us are oil in the form of asphalt. Even concrete roads take a barrel of oil per cubic yard in place. About 5,000 barrels per mile of two lane road.

Those roads will return to gravel and then mud, eventually, as they get too expensive to maintain. What will that do to your natural gas recovery system? Is natural gas going to mine all of the resources needed? How about refining, trucking, assembling, highway repair, etc?

No, natural gas is going to go away along with oil and coal soon. There is no coal that does not require moving mountains or burrowing deep into the earth, all done by oil powered machines. Ditto for oil and natural gas recovery. Fraking, deep sea, arctic, etc. Wait and see.

Nony on Wed, 15th Apr 2015 8:57 pm 



Natural gas does not do everything oil does and visa versa. Agreed.

But it’s still relevant how amazing natgas has been in beating the peaker predictions. Including from Hubbert.

Arthur75 on Thu, 16th Apr 2015 3:26 am 



Although it doesn’t change anything to the current “problem”, one shouldn’t forget that the primary energy source of today and tomorrow remains the sun.
And this without talking PV or even solar thermal.
Just the energy provided for photosynthesis, heat without any specific equipement, lighting, etc.
Or in other words, just switch off the sun, and see the results, for sure a bigger issue than lack of oil or coal ! 🙂
But then again, it doesn’t change much to the current energy issue.

However it is false to say “the primary energy” used to be muscles, muscles were just the tool (amongst other) used to gather concentrated amount of solar energy in plants or animals.