[Rambo]

I know oil runs everything I understand all the points that have been made on the boards for the last year I have been clued into peak oil.

However remember back to 1998 1999 we were told that computers run the modern world and that the Millennium Bug could sent us back into the stone age cause nuclear launches ect.

Bio fuel wind solar nuclear wood and wave power ect I know none of these on their own will provide an energy solution to replace oil and I am not denying that our way of life may have to change.

Is it possible however that the change may be gradual and relatively painless?
Using computers and working from a nice comfy home may become the norm in international business and the idea of going half way around the globe for a meeting may seem crazy, is it possible that we have so much oil that we just don’t know what to do with it?

Is it possible that higher oil prices could restore a bit of sanity back into our lives?
How many cars carry only the driver and sit in endless traffic jams? How many people die on the worlds roads every year?

I live in Ireland and for the size of the country we have a fairly small population bio fuel could be a solution for us we have plenty of land to grow it on.
In other countries this would not be the answer maybe more public transport and combinations of other energy’s.

Even with all the possible alternatives to oil I hear it said that they will not make up the shortfall however in the modern world we waste most of the energy anyway.

Right now I have on five or six lights a fridge a DVD satellite box two televisions on standby ect.
If the price of energy goes up we may think to ourselves how many of these things do we need running at once?

Oil has been cheap an easy no doubts there but why does the world have to come to a crashing end just because we have to use a bit of self control and put a bit of effort to obtaining energy.

When energy costs more we may value it more.

On the other hand this may be all wishful thinking the doomers may be right and we are all screwed or the truth may lie somewhere in between.

Please discuss.

[kjmclark]

The thing about Y2k that everyone seems to forget is that companies and governments spent millions of dollars fixing the problems before the change in dates. I.e. the problem was recognized, accepted as a problem, and significant sums of money were applied to resolve the issue. Frankly, that's the kind of reaction that people are hoping to see for peak oil, but it isn't happening.

Use another example. Hubbert predicted that in '71 oil production in the US would peak. A corollary to that is that since the US was the swing producer of the day, even a plateau, much less a peak in US production, meant that the US lost its ability to control pricing. A reasonably observant exporter with large oil reserves could see such a situation and decide that they suddenly have the reins of world prices. If such an exporter also has an ax to grind, they could decide to withhold production and cause economic mayhem in the large consumer nation that formerly controlled prices. Would you say the gas lines of the 70's really happened? Seemed pretty real to me.

I expect that world oil production peaking will result in some additional starvation in the third world and higher inflation in the first world. The rich nations will continue to buy the oil that's available, at progressively higher prices, until they can't afford it any longer. I'm only worried about the poor really. The rich will continue to get by.

Eventually population and energy use will meet again at some lower, more sustainable level. We'll keep reducing demand to meet reduced supply, but the demand reduction really will involve destruction. Many people think James Kunstler is a doomer, but I don't. He seems pretty reasonable about things. 50 years or so after peak, life will be different, but someone living then won't think the differences are so extraordinary, though they'll be happy to have the past 50 years over.

I also expect the Anglo world to get bitten harder than others, since we've all collectively bought into the macho truck status symbol more than the rest of the world. The US will have the biggest problems of a rich country, because we're so hopelessly addicted to gasoline and diesel. The people here that will be most in trouble will be those who look at things as VP Cheney does, but don't really have the income that he has.

BTW, is there a way to be labelled "Wood" instead of "Coal" for our contribution rankings? I'd just as soon be "Wood", or maybe "Sunshine", forever.

[SHiFTY]

The problem is too non-specific for a definite target. With the millenium bug, there was a defined timeframe, predictable consequences and minimal opportunity cost of getting it wrong. i.e. the worst thing was that you would replace your hardware / software earlier than usual.

With peak oil, it is not known when it will happen- there is considerable room for developments to affect outcomes. The estimates range from 5-20 years away, or not at all, which creates a lot of doubt, and therefore inaction.

It is also not known what the effects will be- will there be a gradual upward adjustment in prices as we have seen so far, or will there be spikes. The elasticity of demand is not known, for prices significantly higher than today.

There is also the matter of a reverse prisoner's dilemma- the first country to really act will assume considerable risk to their economy and people. The costs of converting an economy to be oil free will be considerable. Sweden is to be applauded on this one. Other countries can wait until a successful solution has been found through trial and error and simply use that technology.

I predict a market driven slump in vehicle travel, and a shift to electric vehicles and nuclear power, and a changed but not that different lifestyle. The doom and gloom is unwarranted for the first world IMHO, unless of course there are further resource wars in which case who knows.

So yeah, very different problem in scope. Humans are good at technology on a micro scale such as computers, but bad at macro solutions such as power generation (we still burn coal, the fuel of the 18th century...!) and energy in general.

[gt1370a]

The problem is the growth-based global economy. High energy prices will make marginally profitable investments no longer profitable. Some businesses will be unable to pay back loans; banks will be reluctant to make some loans. High prices and uncertainty will deter some investments. Consumer spending will be hit, because if people expect an uncertain future they will save to prepare for it.

You are right, technically we have way more than enough oil than we need to live sustainably at a comfortable level; there is a lot of waste. But what happens in a growth-based economy with a growing population when your main energy input is declining? I somehow don't think it will just gradually scale down. But hey, nobody knows for sure.

[TheTurtle]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kjmclark', 'T')he thing about Y2k that everyone seems to forget is that companies and governments spent millions of dollars fixing the problems before the change in dates. I.e. the problem was recognized, accepted as a problem, and significant sums of money were applied to resolve the issue.

[Aaron]

Long before the oil runs dry & zombie hordes roam the ruined Earth seeking human brains for sustenance, the economics of energy post-peak will further widen the wealth/poverty gap, which is a sure formula for one certain outcome.

And I bet you know what that is...

Since I also believe that no battle-plan survives the first shot, it's more difficult to say what's after that.

Suffice to say Kunstler's prediction of a global CF is probably a good characterization to describe the ugly repercussions as wealth stratifies and nations struggle for position in the game of the millennium.

What's the difference between the Y2K issue & peak oil?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')ohn Hammond: All major theme parks have delays. When they opened Disneyland in 1956, nothing worked.
Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but John, if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists.

[markam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')TW, is there a way to be labelled "Wood" instead of "Coal" for our contribution rankings? I'd just as soon be "Wood", or maybe "Sunshine", forever

[gg3]

Kjmclark and Shifty are right on target here.

Y2K had a definite timeframe. Megabucks were spent, a generation of geeks busted their butts, and it got fixed. Now we look back and say it wasn't the end of the world, but it could have been a major pain in the ass if it hadn't been fixed. (The part I resent like hell is when people write if off as a false alarm. This tends to happen when problems are solved, thereby providing negative feedback to those who work their butts off to solve problems.)

PO has an uncertain timeframe, and the fix is not confined to specific engineering solutions. Even with all the nuclear, wind, solar, and efficiency improvements we can muster, it still means lifestyle change and a certain degree of societal restructuring. The masses will resist the lifestyle change, the elites will resist the restructuring, and we'll all get to find out what happens. The hard way.

[MD]

The similarities may come down to this:

The scope of the problem was significantly less than as proposed by the "doomers of the day", and the general population had only the most rudimentary understanding of the issues.

[TheTurtle]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '
')The scope of the problem was significantly less than as proposed by the "doomers of the day", and the general population had only the most rudimentary understanding of the issues.

[MD]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheTurtle', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '
')The scope of the problem was significantly less than as proposed by the "doomers of the day", and the general population had only the most rudimentary understanding of the issues.

[BrownDog]

The company I was working at made a big deal out of testing the applications to prove they were Y2K compliant. We filled big binders with documents and screen prints, so that if we got sued, we could show that we weren't being negligent.

With PO, I guess the plan will be to sue the oil companies for price gouging...