Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak Oil is Contrived!

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

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Battle_Scarred_Galactico » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 05:43:26

"The only real way to make a transition now is to institute draconian measures. We are talking about uprooting families, slavery conditions for 90%+ of people, massive rationing that makes WWII look like a feast."


This is the first solution I've seen posted that is at all realistic. And it's a bit of a far cry from electric cars isn't it?

I believe that by default the Government will desperatly try to scramble for something resembling this, as ever, not until the last minute.
---
Battle_Scarred_Galactico
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu 07 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Battle_Scarred_Galactico » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 05:47:31

"Why, because you're hding in a bunker somewhere and plan to emerge and live in some utopian fairyland (without suburbs)?.Come on. Get some counseling and go get a job."


Ahhh, don't like the message so attack the messenger. The old ones are the best.
---
Battle_Scarred_Galactico
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu 07 Apr 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Wildwell » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 07:01:16

I'm wondering if cars could come with a health warning and people will sue beceause they can't get over their addiction. Anyway, I'll post the myths about the jobs on POD another time and show where they came from.
User avatar
Wildwell
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1962
Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: UK

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 10:34:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Daryl', 'M')onte, I was doing some reading of your links. I apologize. I didn't understand that you are a seer. I am honored that you have emerged from your temple to address me.

Honestly, you are belaboring the obvious. A cursory study of geologic history makes it painfully obvious that the human species time frame for existence is very small. Basic astronomy teaches us we are tinier and more emphemeral in relationship to the universe than bacteria are to us. Duh!!! Did you grow up watching Star Trek and it just dawned on you that our presence here is temporary? We're just trying to figure out a way to delay the die-off. Why? Because we don't want ourselves or our children to be ones to experience it! So you think modern technology and population growth will trigger our demise and it's going down tomorrow. It could just as easily be 2000 years from now be caused by something else. You don't know. You want to engineer a die-off now? Why, because you're hding in a bunker somewhere and plan to emerge and live in some utopian fairyland (without suburbs)?.Come on. Get some counseling and go get a job.


Shooting the Messenger
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

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby ashurbanipal » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 12:52:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') didn't understand that you are a seer. I am honored that you have emerged from your temple to address me.


If I get a a large caliber handgun, point it at the back of someone's head, and pull the trigger, do I have to be a seer to predict that the person will die? Of course not. Why not? Because I understand physics well enough to know that the bullet has sufficient velocity to cause, and the tissues of the human head not enough density, structural integrity, and mass to prevent, massive damage to the afforementioned head. I also understand enough about biology to know that if a brain is destroyed, the person who owned the brain is killed.

Of course, maybe the gun will misfire. Maybe the bullet will travel along precisely the right arc to strike the skull with exactly a 45 degree angle of incidence, in which case it might bounce off. Maybe a meteor will crash through the roof at precisely the right time and place to deflect the bullet as it is travelling through the air. But those are rare occurrences, and the likelihood of them happening is pretty small. I'm right to predict death.

So do we have to be seers to look at how the world works, how much food is produced, how dependent we are on oil, how many people there are and what the minimum each one needs would be, how politics functions, etc. and predict doom? Of course not. Now, maybe someone will discover a couple Ghawars somewhere. Maybe zero point energy will actually work out. Maybe a great and benign world leader will emerge with a plan and enough power to mitigate without doom. But none of those are likely scenarios.
User avatar
ashurbanipal
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: A land called Honalee

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Daryl » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 14:16:08

OK I apologize. I was out of line. I read some more of the back threads. I see you are a hard working man. Sorry about the get a job comment.

Having said that, you should be able to take some teasing about your tone. It is a bit oracular at times, isn't it? I'm not sure that is helpful, because so many doomers I read sound eerily like the literalist Book of Revelations Christians. A chosen few are saved to heaven/bunkers after which a time of troubles reigns on earth. Sinners suffer/SUV owning surburbanites eat each other. Finally, history/the modern world ends, the newly saved rise to heaven/bunker people emerge to establish eco-fairyland, rich with bicycles, women with hairy armpits and little wooden waterwheels spinning away in fresh streams.
User avatar
Daryl
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon 10 Oct 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 14:45:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Daryl', '.')

Having said that, you should be able to take some teasing about your tone.


No, he shouldn't. You are just one more in a long line of people saying the same ignorant things. I imagine he is so sick of them he could just give up and let you die in your ignorance.

Don't be such an asshole.
Ludi
 

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby richardmmm » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 16:25:25

an electric car will do 500,000 miles without needing a service, i think that answers most of the questions about why we don't have electric cars. no oil change, no spark plugs, so parts etc etc. the thing just rolls.
User avatar
richardmmm
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat 20 Aug 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby LadyRuby » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 16:39:16

There seems to be this assumption that we have to make all of these massive changes within just a few years. Why assume we can't gradually reduce our oil consumption (with higher prices) by conservation, switching to more fuel efficient cars, etc.?

- We hit peak oil.
- Prices go up as supply goes down.
- Some countries are priced out.
- Fuel conservation, fuel efficient cars, etc. reduce demand in countries not priced out.
- Alternative energy sources developed more quickly.

Yes, we may have some very serious economic problems as we navigate through all of this (i.e., an economic depression), and yes we're way behind on developing these renewable energies. But we're not going to be at the point in 10 years where there's no oil available. There will still be quite a bit. I definitely see hard times ahead, but I don't invision seeing a bunch of grannies running around with knives trying to eat small children.
User avatar
LadyRuby
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Mon 13 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Western US

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby azreal60 » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 17:44:29

I tease monte about his tone all the time. But generally i don't use adhom attacks while doing it, I be, well, teasing about it. He takes that as well as anyone.

And yes, he does sound a bit preachy, but that's because those preachers are what i like to call learned men. Monte, like them, likes to use the written word like a woodcarver uses a knife. He likes the beauty of the sentence and the paragraph. Trust me, if you where ever in gradutate school there are a million guys who talk just like him. What it comes down to is, he is a very eloquent speaker on the topic. If your looking for a similar opinion with more real world examples, i saw you met matt savinar on another post. He's very doomeristic, but he does tend to be more grounded in the world you and i can see. Monte is more of a theorys guy. Don't blame him for having theorys that are pretty well grounded in alot of studies and facts though. :-D
Azreal60
azreal60
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Madison,Wisconsin

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby SHiFTY » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 17:55:01

I agree. There is no good reason that car use cannot reduce by 50% in the developed world relatively easily, rendering peak oil not a problem for the short-medium term.

In a NZ Government document about options for the country in the event of a fuel "shock" 1979 style, there was a startling graph of car usage in NZ that showed the vast majority of car journeys to be discretionary- people using their cars for non-essential purposes.

The market will be the solution to the peak oil problem. If the price of oil goes up to $100 or $200 a barrel, people will reduce their driving, and switch to alternative means. Fuel demand is elastic, the price just hasn't gone high enough yet.

If the high prices last for a long time, there may well be a recession. However at some point electric cars will certainly become viable, you already see them in London all over the place, pure electric 2 seaters! And that is with prices under 1 pound per liter ($US6 a gallon or so.)

And the demand for decent public transprt and new electricity generation will go through the roof, providing many make-work opportunities.

I don't think it will be all that bad myself. Life may be very different in 30 years time though if all this comes to pass. That is something that no-one can know...
User avatar
SHiFTY
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon 27 Jun 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Atlantean_Relic » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 18:19:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')aving said that, you should be able to take some teasing about your tone. It is a bit oracular at times, isn't it? I'm not sure that is helpful, because so many doomers I read sound eerily like the literalist Book of Revelations Christians. A chosen few are saved to heaven/bunkers after which a time of troubles reigns on earth. Sinners suffer/SUV owning surburbanites eat each other. Finally, history/the modern world ends, the newly saved rise to heaven/bunker people emerge to establish eco-fairyland, rich with bicycles, women with hairy armpits and little wooden waterwheels spinning away in fresh streams.


And Yet Christians and Hippies can't seem get along. Maybe it's the hairy women.
User avatar
Atlantean_Relic
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon 24 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Location: North of Id, west of Oz, and infront of the damned rabbit

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby 0mar » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 18:48:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('LadyRuby', 'T')here seems to be this assumption that we have to make all of these massive changes within just a few years. Why assume we can't gradually reduce our oil consumption (with higher prices) by conservation, switching to more fuel efficient cars, etc.?

- We hit peak oil.
- Prices go up as supply goes down.
- Some countries are priced out.
- Fuel conservation, fuel efficient cars, etc. reduce demand in countries not priced out.
- Alternative energy sources developed more quickly.

Yes, we may have some very serious economic problems as we navigate through all of this (i.e., an economic depression), and yes we're way behind on developing these renewable energies. But we're not going to be at the point in 10 years where there's no oil available. There will still be quite a bit. I definitely see hard times ahead, but I don't invision seeing a bunch of grannies running around with knives trying to eat small children.


A more likely scenario is that supply declines. Prices skyrocket (demand outstrips supply is always bad). Economic paralysis ensues.
Joseph Stalin
"It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. "
User avatar
0mar
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Davis, California
Top

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Daryl » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 19:22:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('richardmmm', 'a')n electric car will do 500,000 miles without needing a service, i think that answers most of the questions about why we don't have electric cars. no oil change, no spark plugs, so parts etc etc. the thing just rolls.


Monte and Matt think that it's really important the we stop moving to more complex systems. I don't understand how that is important to the favored "we are going to collapse within 5 years scenario", but I'm new around here. Maybe I will figure that out one day. I think it is part of the long term die-off, then bicycles solution.

Let's assume they know what they are talking about on this subject. The electric car system is starting to sound simpler and simpler, when you mentioned the above advantages of electric transportation.

Also, there are some really interesting nuclear advocates on this board (I think it is StarVid). I wish he would weigh in on this. I think nuclear expansion is going to be necessary. Coal will be used as a stopgap to nuclear power.
User avatar
Daryl
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon 10 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 19:34:22

Daryl, it's really difficult to be patient with you. Do you understand why the doomers are doomeristic? I don't think you do. Would you be willing to try to understand them? I really hope you will. I really do.


They are doomeristic because they do not see anyone implementing the solutions people are mentioning here. Do you understand this? Not that those aren't good solutions, but that they are not being implemented fast enough.

More complex systems aren't a solution because they require more energy to implement and maintain, not less.
Ludi
 

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Daryl » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 20:44:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'D')aryl, it's really difficult to be patient with you. Do you understand why the doomers are doomeristic? I don't think you do. Would you be willing to try to understand them? I really hope you will. I really do.


They are doomeristic because they do not see anyone implementing the solutions people are mentioning here. Do you understand this? Not that those aren't good solutions, but that they are not being implemented fast enough.

More complex systems aren't a solution because they require more energy to implement and maintain, not less.


What is picture you have posted, a chicken?
User avatar
Daryl
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon 10 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 21:06:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Daryl', 'O')K I apologize. I was out of line. I read some more of the back threads. I see you are a hard working man. Sorry about the get a job comment.


Apology accepted.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')aving said that, you should be able to take some teasing about your tone. It is a bit oracular at times, isn't it?


I am a writer. Over time, one develops a style. Some see it as arrogant. Some see it as learned. Others see a "hidden agenda", while others see the strength of my convictions.

In the intro to my "Best of Montequest", I write:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hile I don't claim to have the definitive word on the peak oil debate, I do feel I have touched on issues that others have not. I write to stimulate thought, and to try to explain the parameters and natural laws which must govern the debate as we discuss solutions and consider the alternatives to our imminent energy decline.


Are my posts and threads not provocative? Do I not stimulate debate?

Must you agree with me? Certaintly not. But I'll make a good case to try and make you see the genesis of my topic point and make you think about it. :-D
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: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 21:57:14

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Daryl', '
')
What is picture you have posted, a chicken?


Yes, it's a little chicken, but not "Chicken Little."
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby MattSavinar » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 22:11:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
Monte and Matt think that it's really important the we stop moving to more complex systems. I don't understand how that is important to the favored "we are going to collapse within 5 years scenario", but I'm new around here. Maybe I will figure that out one day. I think it is part of the long term die-off, then bicycles solution.

Let's assume they know what they are talking about on this subject. The electric car system is starting to sound simpler and simpler, when you mentioned the above advantages of electric transportation.


Good overview of the problems with complexity from a reviewer of Collapse of Complex Societies on Amazon:

Tainter first elegantly disposes of the usual theories of social decline (disappearance of natural resources, invasions of barbarians, etc). He then lays out his theory of decline: as societies become more complex, the costs of meeting new challenges increase, until there comes a point where extra resources devoted to meeting new challenges produce diminihsing and then negative returns. At this point, societies become less complex (they collapse into smaller societies). For Tainter, social problems are always (ultimately) a problem of recruiting enough energy to "fuel" the increasing social complexity which is necessary to solve ever-newer problems.

Complexity, writes Tainter, describes a variety of characteristics in a number of societies. SOm aspects of complexity include many differentiated social roles, a large class of administrators not involved in the production of primary resources, energy devoted to different kinds of communication, centralised government, etc. Societies become more complex in order to solve problems. Complexity, for Tainter, is quantifiable. Where, for example, the Cherokee natives of the U.S. had about 5,000 cultural artifacts (things ranging from recipes to tools to tents) which were integral to their culture, the Allied troops landing on the Normandy coast in 1944 had about 40,000.

Herein, however, lies the rub. Since, as Tainter writes, the "number of challenges with which the Universe can confront a society is, for practical purposes, infinite," complex societies need to keep on increasing their level of complexity in order to survive new challenges. Tainter's thesis is that these "investments in aditional complexity" produce fewer and fewer returns with time, until eventually society cannot muster enough energy to fuel complexity. At this point, society collapses.

Consider this example: A simple hunter-gatherer society with limited agriculture (i.e. garden plots) is faced with a problem, such as a seasonal drop in food production (or an invasion from its neighbours who have the same problem and are coming over for food). The bottom line is, this society faces an energy shortage. This society could respond to the food crisis by either voluntarily declining in numbers (die-off, and unlikely) or by increasing production. Most societies choose the latter. In order to increase production, this society will need to either expand territorially (invade somebody else)or increase agricultural production . In either case, this investment can pay off substantially in either increased access to already-produced food or increased food production.

But the hunter-gatheres of the above example incur costs as they try to solve their food-shortage problem. If they conquer their neighbours, they have to garrison those territories, thus raising the cost of government. If they start agriculture on a larger or more intense scale in their own territories, they have to create a new class of citizens to man the farms, distribute and store the grain, and guard it from animals and invaders. In either case, the increases in access to energy (food) are offset somewhat by the increased cost of social complexity.

But, as the society gets MORE complex to confront newer challenges, the returns on these increases in complexity diminish. Eventually, the costs of maintaining garrisons (as the Romans found) is so high that both home and occupied populations revolt, and welcome the invaders with their simpler way of life and their lower taxes. Or, agricultural challenges (a massive drought, or degradation of soils) are so great that the society cannot muster the energy reserves to deal with them.

Tainter's book examines the Mayan, Chacoan and Roman collapses in terms of his theory of diminishing marginal returns on investments in complexity. This is the fascinating part of the book; the disturbing sections are Chapter Four and the final chapter. In Chapter 4, Tainter musters a massive array of statistics that show that modern society has been facing diminishing returns on investments in complexity. There is a very simple reason for this: we solve the easiest problems first. Take oil, for example. In 1950, spending the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil in searching for more oil yielded 100 barrels in discovered oil. In 2004, the world's five largest energy companies found less oil energy than they expended in looking for that energy. The per-dollar return on R&D investment has dropped for fifty years. In education, additional investments in programs, technology etc. no longer produce increases in outcomes. In short, industrial society is looking at steadily fewer returns on its investments in both non-human and human capital.

When a new challenge comes, Tainter argues, society will eventually be unable to muster the necessary resources to deal with the crisis, and will revert-- in a painful and unhappy way-- to a much simpler way of life.

In his final chapter, Tainter describes the modern world's "arms race of complexity" and makes some uncomfortable suggestions about our own future. (...). In an age where, for example, the U.S. invasion of Iraq has yielded net negative returns on investment even for the invaders (where's that cheap oil?), and where additional investments in education and health care in industrialised countries make no significant increases in outcomes, the historical focus of Tainter's work starts to become eerily prescient.

The scary thing about this deeply thoughtful and thoroughly researched book is its contention that the future, for all our knowledge and technology, might be an awful lot like the past.
User avatar
MattSavinar
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sun 09 May 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Peak Oil is Contrived!

Unread postby orz » Fri 11 Nov 2005, 22:18:45

Yet, here we are, a bit past the Hunter-gatherer stage, no? 2 steps forward, 1 step back.

Don't think I contend that point, only issue for me and many others, is how large a step back? Perhaps the global economy will fade for a few decades and come back? A bit of suffering, some death(more in some areas than in others), but not necessarily a full blown die off.
User avatar
orz
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat 05 Nov 2005, 04:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron