by reggieUK » Sun 15 May 2005, 13:02:33
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Don_Quichote', 'W')hy ?
The Hubbert peak of oil production is about conventional oil.
The real peak of all oil production will never happen...
The Athabasca Oil Sands and the Orinoco Belt will save us.
wow! I used to be you. Mine was nanotechnology though. (Everyone remember?)
No, if we ignore the science for a mo, the simple point is, we are fucked.
At least if you think that the end of consumption and materialism is a bad thing - which I don't.
However, having observed the peak oil thing for two years now, there
is a 'trend of response' with the newly initiated.
Generally, at first the topic of peak oil is ignored as musings from the family nutcase, but then on closer inspection from the listenee by doing a bit of research, the reality of peak oil eventually hits the 'oh shit' gland and that hurts, fear sets in and in comes the 4 reponse syndrome -
one or all of,
1/ 'technology will save us, they'll think of something'
or
2/ 'it's all a conspiracy'
or
3/ 'the oil sands/methates/nano/solar is enough to keep us going' (yours)
or
4/ 'they already have the magic elixir, they just haven't told us yet'
When someone spends a bit of time researching, they'll soon realise
that 1, 2 and 3 are folly and are the Ostrich option but 4 is fear's last
hope.
It's sort of like the aliens will land option (and they just may)
But it's nice to see far more 'anti' peak oil people on the forum as it keeps the rest of us on our toes.
Everyone realise that it's only newbies that are anti - it's a PO rites of passage thing. As I said, I know from experience.
Have you read the two Richard Heinberg books?
They will bring closure, in detail, to any peak oil objections.
They sold me
Also, reading the 'inroduction' at
www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.com
will ruin the viewpoint of most 'skeptics'
Can anyone get that link above to light up and work?
Thank ye kindly