Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Nothing to fear but fear itself

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
Post a reply

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Mon 05 Sep 2005, 23:47:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JudoCow09', '1')1% isn't bad, especially since we haven't been worried about renewable energy until now.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd as readily available?


...I can't say. There isn't great need for them now. As oil goes up though, more companies will devote money into them making them more profitable. Of course companies may not, I don't know. It would seem dumb to stick to a economy of less profit.


You can't say? Then how do you know they will be our saviour? Profitable? What does that have to do with being readily available?

Again I ask of you, what percentage of increase, on a yearly basis, do you think we can achieve with solar technologies?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby JudoCow09 » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 00:16:21

So many responses, so little time...

So Monte. My argument? You ask what it is based on, do you not? It's quite simple. It's based on the unknown. It's based on what you don't know. It is based on reasoning to believe there is a significant possibility that we can adapt without having massive death.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o, you are betting that we can where all before us have not?

On what do you base this, given that there is no fresh horse in sight?


No, I'm making your statement right. The fact is that every species before us has. No one said every species ever would. Have you read The Giver? Good book. Fits well here. Anyway, no other species could live anywhere on the planet. No other species made many types of weapons like we can. No other species can conquer something 20 times its weight by itself.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou can't say? Then how do you know they will be our saviour? Profitable? What does that have to do with being readily available?

Again I ask of you, what percentage of increase, on a yearly basis, do you think we can achieve with solar technologies?


Monte, I don't often twist facts to meet my demands. Of course you just said to me exactly what I've been trying to tell you. You can't say how many people will die? So how do you know it'll happen? How do you know that maybe only 1 person will die? You don't? Noooooo.

I didn't say it would be our saviour, did I? And yes, profitable has everything to do with alternative energy and its availability. If no one wanted oil, it wouldn't be readily available. There wouldn't be drills sitting around waiting for someone to want it. Same here. If people want it, it will be produced. And in theory, since there are 6x the people there were when oil started, it should take 1/6 of the time or less to implement it. If you include the population growth, then it's less than 1/6.

As for solar, I really can't predict how things will change. I'm not going to try. Solar will most likely make large strides at a time, not a gradual build up.
User avatar
JudoCow09
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun 07 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby rogerhb » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 00:45:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JudoCow09', 'I')t's based on what you don't know. It is based on reasoning to believe there is a significant possibility that we can adapt without having massive death.


A couple of simple examples of predicting based on knowns:

1. A kid survived a 20m fall off a cliff in NZ a couple of days ago. He was exploring an abandoned house on the edge of a cliff (coastal erosion). He opened the back-door and stepped out and disappeared down the cliff.

Now, he knew he was on the edge of a cliff but obviously being inside the house meant he temporarily forgot, then just did an every-day walk through the door.

2. Ever stepped on a non-moving escalator? You know it's not moving, you can see it's not moving, but you still get a feeling of decceleration when you take the first step.

Now if those are experiences based on knowing, how can you predict based on the unknown unless you employ the uncertainty principle?

If you don't "know" how can you say it's a "significant possibility"?

Your significance of the possibility is only based of the desirability, nothing else.
User avatar
rogerhb
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Smalltown New Zealand
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby JudoCow09 » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 00:53:41

I do know some things, I just don't know what will result in them, much like Monte. He thinks he knows there will be a die-off, but he's not sure to what degree. I think I know that we will learn more possibly doubling our knowledge in years. What I don't know is if the degree of improvement will be enough to stop a die-off.

By the way, I have stepped on a non-moving escalator and I had no sensation that I was moving at all.

Did I mention I don't see your point with those examples at all?
User avatar
JudoCow09
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun 07 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby rogerhb » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:03:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JudoCow09', 'B')y the way, I have stepped on a non-moving escalator and I had no sensation that I was moving at all


No, you get a feeling of decceleration, even though you know it's not moving you still think it should be moving, you step on "half" expecting to move.

The point of the two examples is that even though you know what's happening, you make a mistake based on your experience, eg normal experience of walking though a door is not to plummet 20m, normal experience of an escalator is for it to move you.
User avatar
rogerhb
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Smalltown New Zealand
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby aldente » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:39:29

The darn thing is HUGE!

Image
User avatar
aldente
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:42:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JudoCow09', 'S')o many responses, so little time...

So Monte. My argument? You ask what it is based on, do you not? It's quite simple. It's based on the unknown. It's based on what you don't know. It is based on reasoning to believe there is a significant possibility that we can adapt without having massive death.


That is succession. We are not candidates for succession, we are in "overshoot."

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o, you are betting that we can where all before us have not?

On what do you base this, given that there is no fresh horse in sight?


No, I'm making your statement right. The fact is that every species before us has. No one said every species ever would. Have you read The Giver? Good book. Fits well here. Anyway, no other species could live anywhere on the planet. No other species made many types of weapons like we can. No other species can conquer something 20 times its weight by itself.


So, we are above nature? Special? Exempt from her laws?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou can't say? Then how do you know they will be our saviour? Profitable? What does that have to do with being readily available?

Again I ask of you, what percentage of increase, on a yearly basis, do you think we can achieve with solar technologies?


Monte, I don't often twist facts to meet my demands. Of course you just said to me exactly what I've been trying to tell you. You can't say how many people will die? So how do you know it'll happen? How do you know that maybe only 1 person will die? You don't? Noooooo.

I didn't say it would be our saviour, did I? And yes, profitable has everything to do with alternative energy and its availability.

I have never said how many people will die. We don't know what the actual carrying capacity of the earth would be following a die-off. Often it is less than what existed before the population bloom.

How do I know it will happen? Because that is the way the world works.

It is what we have consistently observed in every case of "overshoot."

I know the sun will come up in the east because it always has. It has been observed. Might it come up in the west some morning? Perhaps, but I wouldn't stake my life or future on it. Don't you think it a bit optimistic to base your future on the chance that reality might change?

Do you not think there is a difference between available and readily available? The sun energy is available, but not readily, no matter how profitable. You have to consider scalability.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s for solar, I really can't predict how things will change. I'm not going to try. Solar will most likely make large strides at a time, not a gradual build up.

Well, then how can you be so optimistic about it? How large a stride? 10% a year? 25%? 50%? 100%? Make a guess.

So, Judo, what you are telling us is that you don't have a clue as to how soon and what it will require to scale up and replace fossil fuels, but you are sure we will find a way in time

This is called blind faith. :roll:
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:47:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JudoCow09', 'I') do know some things, I just don't know what will result in them, much like Monte. He thinks he knows there will be a die-off, but he's not sure to what degree. I think I know that we will learn more possibly doubling our knowledge in years. What I don't know is if the degree of improvement will be enough to stop a die-off.


You are just willing to take your chances that it will, huh?

Piss on ecology and overshoot and all that other science shit.

They call that mindset Cargoism: A faith in technology will stave off institutional change. The mere idea of a powerdown and accepting finite limits runs counter grain to their way of thinking. This solution entails accelerating the drawdown. It remedies the near future problems by shortening our future.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Catton', '.')..people continue to advocate further technological breakthroughs as the supposedly sure cure for carrying capacity deficits. The very idea that technology caused overshoot, and that it made us too colossal to endure, remains alien to too many minds for"de-colossalization" to be a really feasible alternative to literal die-off. There is a persistent drive to apply remedies that aggravate the problem.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby JudoCow09- » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 21:20:39

Didn't log in.

I'll reply once I get my graphics card back. It had a seizure so now I have the worst refresh rate on the planet.

Oh, but what I did read, we are significantly more intelligent than any other animal. Maybe we are exempt from nature's doom.

And you're a blind pessimist if I'm a blind optimist.
JudoCow09-
 
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby sameu » Wed 07 Sep 2005, 13:27:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('backstop', 'S')ameu -

Your use of English is generally fine apart from a confusion you share with Judo cow and a few others on the site over the distinctions between

Speculation

Hypothesis

Prediction

Theory

Rather than defining those distinctions from my understanding of them, I'd suggest you look them up in a good science dictionary.

Having done so you'll be in a better position to discuss Leibigs Law and the ecological inevitability of a die-off in any species that goes into overshoot.

regards,

Backstop



yes why thank you
I do know what the difference is between speculation, theory etc...
And they have one big thing in common, they aren't FACTS

That 's why in my original post I stated: "let's look at the facts"

We're facing an extreme event, something unique that has never happened before in modern western society

That alone tells me that we should be very carefull with 'laws' in general.

You can extrapolate current findings and knowledge to the future, but always with a certain degree of uncertainty. And that's something Monte doesn't seem to grasp. The way he talks implies there is no such thing as uncertainty.
Ever heard of the third variable? You can have a perfect correlation between to variables, but in a few cases it is a so called third (unknown) variable that was in play. Something the researchers just couldn't foresee, or detect.

Where are the laws describing human behaviour during a PostPO time?
There simply aren't any.
How inventive are people going to be when facing problems due to PO?
What's the effect of billions of people facing the same sort of problems at the same time?
We don't know. Not me not Monte.

Is this a way to lighten up the bananas here. No
It's just a reality check. I still think we're going to face huge problems.
But if anybody here states that he knows with 100% certainty what's going to happen, I'd say, regardless the fact he has done all the reading in the world about PO, Liebigg's Law, alternatives etc, he's making a fool out of himself.

no offence to anyone :)
User avatar
sameu
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu 18 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Belgium, Europe
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby Jaymax » Wed 07 Sep 2005, 14:51:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jaymax', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jaymax', 'Y')es, if we ever exceed the cheap, tap-able, energy carrying capability of the planet, there'll be a die-off, at least of western society, whether or not not of total human population. I just don't see the connection to peak oil. (That's an exaggeration, I see the possible connection, but it looks increasingly speculative and rather unlikely to me).


So, the other factors of air, water, food, and shelter have no limits?


Of course they do - there are limits to every resource within a niche, and one of them will be limiting. Sometimes, when a resource withn a niche runs low, a species find a new niche. If they can't do that, they are in an overshoot and will die-off.

I just don't think there's a real connection to peak oil in that.


So, you maintain that post-peak, air, water, food, or shelter will be less abundant than cheap, readily available energy?


Not sure how you drew that conclusion. Just 'cos there is more energy available (if it works out that way) does not mean that energy will not remain the limiting factor.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ecause as you say, one of these must always be a stave in the barrel.

I'm not convinced that cheap oil is the shortest stave in the barrel for all humanity. In, say, both Bangladesh, or amazonian tribes. Food seems a much more likely candidate... Cheap energy clearly IS the shortest stave for western society - it cannot continue to expand (spread to other places - a spread of a memeset, not genes) without additional cheap energy being obtained, and will clearly contract otherwise.

I regard it as possible that with a loss of cheap energy, a different memeset will take over, which is less energy dependant, and consequently the limiting factor will flip to something else, and human population will increase as ex-western civilisations go to a third-world subsistence lifestyle with much low energy requirements.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')r alternativly, I expect we are more than capable of moving to a new niche which provides greater quantities of energy than we currently get from oil, in much the same way that a nomadic peoples will pack up their lives and go for a long walk.

Ah, the cornucopian!

"see a limitlessly abundant future for humanity" - Sorry, definition does not apply. I see great tradgedy heading our way from warming, possibly from PO induced economic collapse leading to contraction for a period. No, simplistic labels will not work.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd what about the fact that when any given species exploits a heretofore unexploited resource that it always blooms and then crashes? It never moves on.

Really? What planet is that on then? Sometimes blooms, then falls back a little into a new balance, sometimes grows slowly, overshoots a little, and falls back a little into a new balance - still tend to be much more abundent than prior to the move to the new niche tho. Evolves? Evolution? Where did humans come from to start with? I don't remember humanity crashing shortly after learning to make fire? And talk to a New Zealand farmer about the abundance of rabbits.

You are surrounded by and living the very proof of the falseness of that statement. Humanity did not go from zero to 6.5b people JUST because of oil - there were a great many steps along the way, each one of which expanded our niche. We've done it again, and again, and again. Yet you seem to be convinced that learning to use oil was the very final time we'll do it.

The available historical evidence suggests differently - you might be right, part of me even thinks it would be for the best if you were, but I seriously doubt it.

--J
Doomerosity now at 2 (occasionaly 3, was 4)

Currently (mostly) taking a break from posting at po.com. Don't trust the false prophets of doom - keep reading, keep learning, keep challenging your assum
User avatar
Jaymax
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: England
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 21:46:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sameu', ' ')You can extrapolate current findings and knowledge to the future, but always with a certain degree of uncertainty. And that's something Monte doesn't seem to grasp. The way he talks implies there is no such thing as uncertainty.


I can say the sun will rise in the east every day until the sun goes nova with absolute 100% certainty. Is there any uncertainty about this? Sure, but as far as we are concerned, if it doesn't, it doesn't matter.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')here are the laws describing human behaviour during a PostPO time?
There simply aren't any.
How inventive are people going to be when facing problems due to PO?
What's the effect of billions of people facing the same sort of problems at the same time?
We don't know. Not me not Monte.


Will a population that blooms on a one-time energy/food source crash and die-off? Yes. Is there some uncertainty about a die-off of a population in overshoot? Not in all of history, no.

Can a die-off be avoided when there is less food than required to sustain a population? No.

What could the genius of man do to avert a die-off? Depends upon how far into overshoot he has gone.

Remember the Lily Pond Riddle?

Where are we? If we are in the latter stages, there is nothing we can do. If we are in the early stages, we can reduce our population and powerdown.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut if anybody here states that he knows with 100% certainty what's going to happen, I'd say, regardless the fact he has done all the reading in the world about PO, Liebigg's Law, alternatives etc, he's making a fool out of himself.


And those that choose to believe that man is above nature and not subject to it's known laws are what, lesser fools?

No one knows what the future holds. But I will say with 100% certainty, that man will be subject to the laws of the minumum and overshoot.

And those laws predict with great clarity and certitude what happens to populations that overshoot the carrying capacity of their environment.

They crash.

Might we postpone it? Maybe, but then the die-off will be even greater at some future date.

Might we powerdown and reduce our population?

Maybe, but not likely. Might even be too late to do so.

What you fail to grasp is the momentum behind this.

So, would you rather gamble on reality changing in the near future?

Because that is your argument. That it will...somehow.

Place your bets...
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby Jaymax » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:09:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'S')o, would you rather gamble on reality changing in the near future?


Reality? Monte, your apparent arrogance is astounding. You confuse me. You debate, for the most part, so well... but this certitude possibly belies your rationality... I remain unsure whether you are a rational debater, with an inability to reign in you irrational certitude, or are an irrational debater, with a well honed and convincing style.

That probably comes across as a personal attack - seriously that's not how it's meant... but I don't know how to engage you in debate (that's perhaps something I hadn't really worked out when I talked about your 'disciples' - still a valid point however, to my mind)

I find myself wondering when you last seriously questioned your own argument - a critical requirement for meaningful debate...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')lace your bets...


Terms, please.

--J
Doomerosity now at 2 (occasionaly 3, was 4)

Currently (mostly) taking a break from posting at po.com. Don't trust the false prophets of doom - keep reading, keep learning, keep challenging your assum
User avatar
Jaymax
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: England
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:09:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jaymax', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd what about the fact that when any given species exploits a heretofore unexploited resource that it always blooms and then crashes? It never moves on.


Really? What planet is that on then? Sometimes blooms, then falls back a little into a new balance, sometimes grows slowly, overshoots a little, and falls back a little into a new balance - still tend to be much more abundent than prior to the move to the new niche tho. Evolves? Evolution? Where did humans come from to start with? I don't remember humanity crashing shortly after learning to make fire? And talk to a New Zealand farmer about the abundance of rabbits.


Really. Basic ecology 101. There has never been a case in all of known history where a species did not bloom and crash under these circumstances.

We are not talking about "succession" towards a climax community, we are talking about a species discovering a heretofore unexploited and previously unaccessible resource. A one-time food glut that causes a bloom in the population and it overshoots the carrying capacity of it's environment. The sequel to overshoot is always a die-off.

I have explained this a length several times.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou are surrounded by and living the very proof of the falseness of that statement. Humanity did not go from zero to 6.5b people JUST because of oil - there were a great many steps along the way, each one of which expanded our niche. We've done it again, and again, and again. Yet you seem to be convinced that learning to use oil was the very final time we'll do it.

The available historical evidence suggests differently - you might be right, part of me even thinks it would be for the best if you were, but I seriously doubt it.


No, he did it due to germ theory and the advent of fossil fuels to support the resultant population growth.

I wrote an entire thread about it called the Freedom to Breed. It is in the PO Discussion forum.

Final time? Do you see a "new" oil on the horizon?

A new oil that will be as cheap and readily abundant as oil? Have the same energy density and is scalable?

I don't. And it has to be.

And just because the population is still growing and we are living does not in anyway make my statement false.

Overshoot is when the population continues to grow even in the face of declining resources.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:16:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jaymax', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'S')o, would you rather gamble on reality changing in the near future?


Reality? Monte, your apparent arrogance is astounding. You confuse me.


Well, it seems that many people are placing their bets that reality will change in the future and that somehow the laws that have governed all past ecological history will no longer apply to us, or that we will somehow escape them being applied to us.

What did you think I "meant" by my statement?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby Jaymax » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:24:46

For what it's worth:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'O')vershoot is when the population continues to grow even in the face of declining resources.


I accept that - the question is one of whether humanity is in overshoot or not. The resource is energy, specifically highly transportable energy - can we agree on that?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')e are talking about a species discovering a heretofore unexploited and previously unaccessible resource


Explain to me how fire does not fit that definition?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')inal time? Do you see a "new" oil on the horizon?


Horizon = sufficient delivery to offset oil peak effects, okay?

Oil is both an energy carrier and energy source - I assume we agree on that?

Do I see sufficient energy [EDIT] sourceS on the horizon, YES - blatantly (to cover the next 35 years as per ASPO decline curves). I believe those who say otherwise are ignoring published facts. - I also believe manufacturing will only ramp up sufficiently in the face of shortages.

Do I see a sufficient energy carrier on the horizon, YES - although there are technical challenges to face which will cause some pain in the interim.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A') new oil that will be as cheap and readily abundant as oil? Have the same energy density and is scalable?


Yup, absolutely, the evidence is readily available and published - some of it relating to energy transport is theoretical at present (eg: doped carbon nanotube hydrogen storage, or aluminium batteries) - but the theory is fairly well challenged and seems sound.

Whenever scalability is mentioned, it's important to think scale-down as well as scale-up.

--J
Last edited by Jaymax on Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:29:36, edited 1 time in total.
Doomerosity now at 2 (occasionaly 3, was 4)

Currently (mostly) taking a break from posting at po.com. Don't trust the false prophets of doom - keep reading, keep learning, keep challenging your assum
User avatar
Jaymax
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: England
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby Ludi » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:24:54

I haven't seen any reasonable arguments that indicate we can expect "another oil" to appear in the near future. Instead, I see people get angry and start calling names, calling people doomers and pessimists who don't see evidence for this new energy source.

That's my main problem with this argument, I'm just not seeing support for the idea there will be a "new oil" in the near future.

Jaymax, are you saying we should view theoretical energy sources/transport as virtually the same as those that are actual reality?
Ludi
 
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby JudoCow09- » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:34:40

Once again, didn't log in. Doesn't matter.

My refresh rate still stinks but I read the last few posts.

Ludi:
There are things as efficient as oil. It's what Monte speaks of call scalability that's the main problem. Of course, I don't think any species has exploited energy. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing most of the things were food, land, grass, water, or things along that line. They are all indirectly energy but not the same as our kind. Monte, can you give me several examples of species that have gone into overshoot and then experienced a die-off? I'm not challenging the Law, I was just wondering.
JudoCow09-
 
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby MonteQuest » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:38:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jaymax', ' ')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')e are talking about a species discovering a heretofore unexploited and previously unaccessible resource


Explain to me how fire does not fit that definition?


Fire is chemical reaction, not a food/energy source.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: The Only Thing We Have to Fear...

Unread postby Jaymax » Thu 08 Sep 2005, 22:39:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'I') haven't seen any reasonable arguments that indicate we can expect "another oil" to appear in the near future.


To which I would say go read up on hydrogen storage, or look at the curve of battery density (power/weight or power/volume) over the last few years. And then read up on 'alternative energy' deployment over the past few years, multiply it out by the factor required to offset the ASPO decline curve, and see if it really seems so hard (caveat, next 35 years is my standard figure)

And if you're response is what after 35 years, my reply would be either we'll know we're gonna be f****ed from global warming, OR we'll have probably sorted either fusion or hyper-efficient solar - 35 years is a loooong time.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')aymax, are you saying we should view theoretical energy sources/transport as virtually the same as those that are actual reality?


Sort of. The thing with theoretical, is it tend to move off the lab bench and into industry when the demand arises - and with that comes a massive increase in the research budgets and speed of development.

So, if the science and theories have held up in the labs for a fair time, then yes, invest some faith, because the probability is that market forces will bring those theories to the real world. On the flipside, anything like ZPE, which hasn't found serious support, should be disregarded (obviously)

--J
Doomerosity now at 2 (occasionaly 3, was 4)

Currently (mostly) taking a break from posting at po.com. Don't trust the false prophets of doom - keep reading, keep learning, keep challenging your assum
User avatar
Jaymax
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: England
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron