Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.
Post a reply

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby Newfie » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 08:23:01

What are we running out of?

Options
Time
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby argyle » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 09:04:05

Hey..

I've been on this boards for 2005.. collapse was only a few months away back then.. but the world is still turning on oil as we speak.. Collapse has missed a few deadlines already along the way

Now.. I'm no expert and haven't read all the above links but I think the odds are something else than peak oil will get us first (pandemic, climate change, AI, etc, etc, etc there are frighteningly a lot of entries on this list).

My point is, don't be frightened, rather enjoy life and all what it has to offer.. I might die in a car crash tomorrow anyway. Having control is an illusion.

That said however I do got out of debt, have a well, do own a piece of land to grow my food on (hobby for now, but could be expanded easily), try to gather tools & equipment & seeds for my garden (and other things like beekeeping), hold a +- 1.5 month worth of food (possibly to 3 months if rationed and added on with some "unusual" stuff) which is one of the few things I would like to extend to 6 months worth of food (mainly by buying and rotating my current staples), invested in some silver and gold. (ps, the above changes were not so big for me, and I enjoy the garden/beekeeping anyway)

But i'm not living out in the sticks (which I had started planning on in 2005) and enjoying lots of the good stuff our current society has to offer.. although I personally don't like to travel (ppl always give me weird looks if I tell this) and don't really enjoy stuff where lots of people are anyway. However it's 12+ years now since I was convinced the world as we know it was going to end, i'm glad I didn't "hide away" and miss out on all the good things I was planning to miss out on.
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
argyle
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue 31 Mar 2009, 04:39:02
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 10:39:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'C')ollapse may refer to catastrophic failure:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catastrophic_failure


It might. Alternatively, it could refer to the ill-informed ramblings of unemployed ambulance chasers that suckered in the gullible to make money off their Amazon affiliate accounts, said members then fleeing their old locations when unemployed ambulance chaser revealed their inner need for daddy figures, and they took the original ill-informed ideas elsewhere.

Just saying...
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 10:52:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')what are running out of by, say, mid-century?


The biggest ones I'm concerned about are: topsoil, freshwater, pollinators, stable enough weather and rainfall to support agriculture where it's being practiced. (We're not just gonna suddenly move the world's breadbasket toward the poles.)


So some things that are normally renewbable, but people are using so quickly that they can't be renewed in the timeframe mentioned? I can see the topsoil one, agriculture is critical but when people discuss innovative farming methods those appear to be more resilient than typical US "feed the world" mono-cropping. Not worried about rainfall much, warmer air holds more water, that's a given, and if there is more in the air, then it is likely there will be more coming out of it when it does. Pollinators strikes me as the tricky one. I'm betting that just as we are in for some clean disruptive technology as Tony Seba lays out, there is more lurking on the agricultural science side, but I spend no time really researching in that arena, so it is just a guess based on the idea that people, we don't stand still much. And that is exactly what made both Malthus and Ehrlich look bad, and we certainly haven't gotten worse at innovation.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '
')You're good when you're riffing on the continued resistance of the peak-oil movement to cede failure on their predictions but when you try to downplay the rest of limits to growth you really do come off as a corny.


I don't downplay limits to growth, because they exist. I downplay the model pretty hard on the non-renewable side because it makes the standard mistakes people make when existing the availability of such things. I am NOT familiar with the detailed components of agricultural, pollinators, basically the entire biologic side of the world. Keeping up with what goes on in the non-renewable world is a full time job.

I also will downplay any system that utilizes the ideas of Albert Bartlett and exponential growth equations because by design such a scheme CAN'T represent the real world, and is misrepresenting it in a critical way that is itself causal to delivering a particular model result. No different than what shorty does except they were at least clever about it, but it is still there. Ran into that one problem early in my modeling career and it drove me bonkers for awhile until I realized that you must explicitly understand the mechanisms that dampen assumption out, and I am in no way convinced that Meadows et al had that figured out for the world. They just plugged in a representation and went with it. I've tried that before as well, sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. And that was for simple systems, but ultimately the program always came back around to the limiting systems that the exponential was operating against.

So I would say I don't downplay the renewable side of things, it just looks that way because I am uneducated on them, and I tend to stick with what I know best. So my bias in posting is towards my strong side. Which I would freely admit if anyone asked, which is sort of what you did.
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 11:06:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'W')hat are we running out of?

Options
Time


Well, I might disagree with both. We have plenty of options, and some outright solutions. But they tend to be unpalatable (anyone remember the good ol' days where members were advocating nuclear war as a solution? Neutron bombs for everyone! The long pork discussions?) and arbitrary (we only have 2 years to figure it out! Hirsch said so!). We have as much time as it takes. Depending on what anyone builds into the "it" part of that statement.

Peak oil was once simple. Then it became even more simple when it turns out that it wasn't as relevant as some had hoped. Some of those then ran off and found cooler doomer porn ideas, but it strikes me that there are some honest ones, pollinators and some of the things asg70 just mentioned, that require a bunch of smart people paying more attention to them then they have been. If asked to issue odds, I would bet that what really turns into a problem (as opposed to the various cheering sections for their version of peak oil matters) is something related to what we can see, but the worm turns not as we might expect. The semi-blindside hit as it were...yeah yeah yeah we know we should pay attention over our shoulder on occasion but then there is that ONE time..and KA POW! Something little, but critical, and it then cascades through the rest of the system. Oil was once imagined that way, but it is too big, this thing is going to be weird, and small, but fundamental. Pollinators strikes me as having potential. Fresh water doesn't. The recent flying insects disappearing was interesting. Nuke reactors polluting everything all at once not so much. Stuff like that.
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 14:04:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', ' ')Pollinators strikes me as the tricky one. I'm betting that just as we are in for some clean disruptive technology as Tony Seba lays out, there is more lurking on the agricultural science side, but I spend no time really researching in that arena, so it is just a guess based on the idea that people, we don't stand still much. And that is exactly what made both Malthus and Ehrlich look bad, and we certainly haven't gotten worse at innovation.

Of course we could always employ technology. The "Black Mirror" Season 3 full length movie gave us a peek at that one (colonies of self-replicating electro-mechanical bees) -- and an example of what could potentially go very wrong (in this case, hacking a supposedly unhackable system).

As you know, I'm not some fast-crasher, but I am concerned that as the decades roll on, the assumption that BAU economic growth, consumption, and increasing population can continue unabated in the face of all we now are learning about issues like AGW -- and no worries, because "technology will always have a viable answer" is seen as the catch-all solution, generally.

Approaching 60, I don't worry about myself being affected much, but anyone under 20 can't be so sanguine.

What's most disturbing to me is how, increasingly, so little focus on the long view is apparent. Maybe in the age of smart phone apps and twitter, peoples' minds are increasingly incapable of serious long term focus (on average). (Hell, I'm guilty of this, and I don't even HAVE Twitter or a smart phone).

"Planning" more like lemmings or bacteria doesn't strike me as a way to try and manage the biosphere (which is increasingly needed, due to our ever-larger impacts on it).
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 10142
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 21:26:42
Location: Central KY
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby Newfie » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 15:01:22

Because we can’t b sure of the timing it’s best to find preps that you enjoy.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby asg70 » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 18:08:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '
')What's most disturbing to me is how, increasingly, so little focus on the long view is apparent. Maybe in the age of smart phone apps and twitter, peoples' minds are increasingly incapable of serious long term focus (on average). (Hell, I'm guilty of this, and I don't even HAVE Twitter or a smart phone).


In this respect fast-crashers and blue-pillers are two sides of the same coin. Blue-pillers, not seeing mutant zombie bikers, ignore the trend-lines entirely. Fast-crashers, not being patient enough to wait for the trend-lines, need to cook the books and spin narratives of insta-doom.

BOLD PREDICTIONS
-Billions are on the verge of starvation as the lockdown continues. (yoshua, 5/20/20)

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 14:17:28
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby kublikhan » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 20:07:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cliffhanger1983', 'N')ASA Study: Industrial Civilization is Headed for Irreversible Collapse (Motesharrei, 2014)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 0914000615
That study was not from NASA:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ASA Statement on Sustainability Study
The following is a statement from NASA regarding erroneous media reports crediting the agency with an academic paper on population and societal impacts.
"A soon-to-be published research paper 'Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling Inequality and Use of Resources in the Collapse or Sustainability of Societies' by University of Maryland researchers Safa Motesharrei and Eugenia Kalnay, and University of Minnesota’s Jorge Rivas was not solicited, directed or reviewed by NASA. It is an independent study by the university researchers utilizing research tools developed for a separate NASA activity.
"As is the case with all independent research, the views and conclusions in the paper are those of the authors alone. NASA does not endorse the paper or its conclusions."
NASA Statement on Sustainability Study
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby asg70 » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 22:21:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')I am NOT familiar with the detailed components of agricultural, pollinators, basically the entire biologic side of the world.


So why don't you take some of the time you currently waste shaming PStarr for taking photos next to dead sea mammals and bone up on this stuff rather than casually shrugging off these concerns?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')ultimately the program always came back around to the limiting systems that the exponential was operating against.


That's the problem. The limiting system of population overshoot is die-off.

I know I slam perma-doomers' when they start talking about zombie hordes and what not, but in the end I think something like that is inevitable. It's just not "nigh".

BOLD PREDICTIONS
-Billions are on the verge of starvation as the lockdown continues. (yoshua, 5/20/20)

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 14:17:28
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 22:46:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'B')ecause we can’t b sure of the timing it’s best to find preps that you enjoy.


Now that is an answer that makes perfect sense. It seems to me that a majority of doomers are just looking for an excuse to justify doing something far more BAU, but the doom rationalization comes in handy. Doom is coming! What to do? I like like guns...lets stock up on ammo, and go to more IDPA matches! Doom is coming? What to do? I need a hunting cabin...let me buy one and call it a doomstead! Doom is coming! What to do? I like gardening....let me go and make mine 10X the size and put up cool electric fences to keep the bunnies out and if I grow too much hey, I can sell it at the local farmers market and make a mint! Need a chance to fish more? Tell the wife you need practice for basic survival skills when doom arrives! Want to play more tennis? Need to keep in shape for doom! The market is rigged, what to do! Buy gold..it will be a great trading thing after doom hits! Same with whiskey!

Doom is the most wonderful excuse/rationalization/scheme to go do whatever it is someone really DOES want to do...which is the entire point. I find it confusing, because you don't need an excuse to go do what you want to do, just realize that Nike had it right, stop wasting time on doomer forums trying to come up with better excuses...just go with the slogan and be happy!

Image
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 23:13:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')I am NOT familiar with the detailed components of agricultural, pollinators, basically the entire biologic side of the world.


So why don't you take some of the time you currently waste shaming PStarr for taking photos next to dead sea mammals and bone up on this stuff rather than casually shrugging off these concerns?


Because my motivations and cost/benefit ratio calculations don't line up this way. It required but a minute to discover pstarrs background as a spectator at forest clear cutting events, or Sarah's triumphant victory poses over dead sea mammals. Small time investment, major benefit when it comes to demonstrating faux environmental concerns.

It has required 3 careers and almost 40 years to become an authority on certain topics. It turns out that peak oil is a subset topic within my professional expertise, yet still required a significant cost for only
moderate benefit. Turns out, not many people want a professional's opinion on the scientific basis, or lack thereof, behind random malthusian based nutters.

I can only "shrug off" concerns about the topics mentioned because I honestly admit that I don't have enough lifetime left to reach the level of expertise I possess elsewhere, on a new topic. Can I fart around and read some papers? Sure. Is that enough? Nope. Because you need the time to track down the references involved, to understand the seminal work in the field, to discuss the ideas with other experts to see where the hedging is (or is not), double check the statistics. I am familiar with the size of this undertaking because I've done it before, on more than one occasion now, and it is just a ton of work to answer the question. And that answer, after perhaps a year of dedicated personal time, might be, "gee, they don't really know yet".

High cost...potentially zero benefit...it just doesn't make practical sense.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')ultimately the program always came back around to the limiting systems that the exponential was operating against.


That's the problem. The limiting system of population overshoot is die-off.[/quote]

I was talking about a program...not the result in the real world you jumped to. They are 2 different things, and Catton has detailed a different answer than yours, specific to your real world example. He made the same CLAIM, but only after he detailed the reasons why we had escaped the same trap before...but just trust him...THIS time...yep...he was SURE it would happen.

Does this type of logic look familiar?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '
')I know I slam perma-doomers' when they start talking about zombie hordes and what not, but in the end I think something like that is inevitable. It's just not "nigh".


I don't THINK something bad is inevitable...I KNOW it is. The only difference between your uncertainty, and my certainty, is time. But note how rarely claims of doom include this critical component. Taking a geologists perspective, all doomers alive today are fast crashers, because none of them have the proper perspective of time. This perspective allows my certainty in doom, compared to your uncertainty.

Image
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby mmasters » Wed 25 Oct 2017, 23:35:01

If it were just Oil we might only have 10-15 years left (as the OP is saying) but we also have at least 20 or 30 years worth of Natural Gas (especially in the USA). Not to mention decades worth of coal (plenty in China) and when the oil crisis hits there's also the possibility of an upcoming Nuclear renaissance. So the bottom line is there is not going to be a collapse any time soon.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby dolph » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 04:06:05

Collapse is a process, not an event. On a long enough timeline, all of us collapse.

There was never any future, under any scenario, in which you personally live to 150 years old and feel like a 22 year old adonis the entire time. All of us grow old and decline.

Collapse just brings reality back, back to where it always was.

But, that aside, I'm looking at the general 2020 to 2040 timeline as one of progressive breakdown of our system. I'm not pushing it out indefinitely, I'm just analyzing certain trends and thinking, how long can this go on.
dolph
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 07 Sep 2009, 01:15:52
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby SeaGypsy » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 05:18:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mmasters', 'I')f it were just Oil we might only have 10-15 years left (as the OP is saying) but we also have at least 20 or 30 years worth of Natural Gas (especially in the USA). Not to mention decades worth of coal (plenty in China) and when the oil crisis hits there's also the possibility of an upcoming Nuclear renaissance. So the bottom line is there is not going to be a collapse any time soon.


Seems like it. At some point the mitigationists are going to have to spit it out- it's nukes or TEOTAWKI. Bit unfortunate that before then they are going to risk total devastation via CO2 & methane overload.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9285
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby Newfie » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 08:13:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolph', 'C')ollapse is a process, not an event. On a long enough timeline, all of us collapse.

There was never any future, under any scenario, in which you personally live to 150 years old and feel like a 22 year old adonis the entire time. All of us grow old and decline.

Collapse just brings reality back, back to where it always was.

But, that aside, I'm looking at the general 2020 to 2040 timeline as one of progressive breakdown of our system. I'm not pushing it out indefinitely, I'm just analyzing certain trends and thinking, how long can this go on.


Yes, too many negative converging factors. Eventually one will break bad and accelerate the general decay.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby KaiserJeep » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 09:27:16

As silly as I feel explaining this, people don't get degrees in Physics to design and build power plants. It is a pure science.

BTW, most people in the world do not even believe there is a power problem, much less approaching doom.

Have some perspective about these things.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 17:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby asg70 » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 09:46:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')I can only "shrug off" concerns about the topics mentioned because I honestly admit that I don't have enough lifetime left to reach the level of expertise I possess elsewhere


Expertise is not required. All you have to do is park your ass on google news and use humans' pattern-matching abilities to notice...a trend.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')I don't THINK something bad is inevitable...I KNOW it is. The only difference between your uncertainty, and my certainty, is time.


Predicting doom and deciding how to feel about it or what to do about it are two different things.

There's no law that says if you predict doom tomorrow that you have to panic, even. I know damn well that some doomers have become addicted to fear/anxiety and "turning" sheeple into these fear/anxiety zombies who have no life other than to keep aggregating alarming news stories.

That's why my commitment to coming here is...weak at best. Since the problem of doom is ultimately not one of prediction but in deciding what to do about it.

In that respect, there is a huge difference between processing the sad fact of the heat death of the universe or the death of the sun vs. the world progressing through shithole dystopia status (ala Blade Runner 2049 for instance) and from there into a Cormac McCarthy grade die-off.

When you pat yourself on the back for not being concerned about this and not being concerned about that, you're actually not being sincere, since obviously you are engaged with the topic enough to joust with the more comical representations of doomerism.

The question then becomes...why?

For me, I guess I feel a certain comfort in rhetorically killing the more alarming narratives that used to keep me up all night. To me, doom in a couple decades, as terrifying as that may be, is more comforting than doom tomorrow. Is it a bias? Sure, but informed by what I feel are the facts, which is for an apocalypse that's definitely within my daughter's lifetime, if not mine, just not...now.

You've been on this board for a while and I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Be willing to ask yourself why you put your energy into this or that discussion. What is the ROI? If it's simply the guilty pleasure of pointing out a stupid man's idiocy, well, then it's probably no more worthy a use of your time than boning up on ecology to the point where you might actually be able to weigh in on that side of the equation with some authority.

BOLD PREDICTIONS
-Billions are on the verge of starvation as the lockdown continues. (yoshua, 5/20/20)

HALL OF SHAME:
-Short welched on a bet and should be shunned.
-Frequent-flyers should not cry crocodile-tears over climate-change.
asg70
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 4289
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 14:17:28
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 11:51:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mmasters', 'I')f it were just Oil we might only have 10-15 years left (as the OP is saying) but we also have at least 20 or 30 years worth of Natural Gas (especially in the USA). Not to mention decades worth of coal (plenty in China) and when the oil crisis hits there's also the possibility of an upcoming Nuclear renaissance. So the bottom line is there is not going to be a collapse any time soon.


Sounds pretty reasonable. Are you sure you didn't mistakenly post this here? :)
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top

Re: Collapse by 2025---Irrefutable

Postby AdamB » Thu 26 Oct 2017, 12:04:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')I can only "shrug off" concerns about the topics mentioned because I honestly admit that I don't have enough lifetime left to reach the level of expertise I possess elsewhere


Expertise is not required.


For you maybe. I don't make my living randomly speculating. I launch my professional guesses from a position containing as much data, science, prior analysis, objective new analysis and critical thought as I can muster. Then I guess. :lol:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '
')All you have to do is park your ass on google news and use humans' pattern-matching abilities to notice...a trend.


See above. I don't do popularity.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '
')When you pat yourself on the back for not being concerned about this and not being concerned about that, you're actually not being sincere, since obviously you are engaged with the topic enough to joust with the more comical representations of doomerism.


Never said I wasn't concerned. Only that I am positive that doom will happen. And yes, I have my own doomerish tendencies, after all I am older now, and this appears to be an older persons game.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('asg70', '
')The question then becomes...why?

You've been on this board for a while and I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Be willing to ask yourself why you put your energy into this or that discussion. What is the ROI? If it's simply the guilty pleasure of pointing out a stupid man's idiocy, well, then it's probably no more worthy a use of your time than boning up on ecology to the point where you might actually be able to weigh in on that side of the equation with some authority.

A good question. I have doomer tendencies, undoubtedly. Besides just being older and seeing the "doom" that catches up with all of us. I believe most of it comes from the real energy crisis when I was younger. I was paying attention when Jimmy told us the world was running out of oil. It appears to have been deeply influential in some way, based on my career path from then on. And my perspective on resource and energy issues. Pointing out general idiocy can best be described as "routine entertainment" for lack of anything better to describe it.
Plant Thu 27 Jul 2023 "Personally I think the IEA is exactly right when they predict peak oil in the 2020s, especially because it matches my own predictions."

Plant Wed 11 Apr 2007 "I think Deffeyes might have nailed it, and we are just past the overall peak in oil production. (Thanksgiving 2005)"
User avatar
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 11018
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 17:10:26
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron