[Ayoob_Reloaded]

Our newest poster listed her top 10 (+4) questions for us. I've seen her questions before in a number of different places. They're fairly frequently asked. Why not just start with these and pull from the board to flesh out answers? Anyone interested in compiling data to answer questions can feel free to jump in. After that thread has been quiet for 2-3 days, we edit the information into an answer, and move on to the next one. I'd suggest we keep it to ten questions to begin with and get this whole thing done in a month.

In my mind, when discussing something as complex and important as PO, I'd like to think that a long answer with lots of links and details is a good idea. There are so many possibilities to consider. We can always edit down for clarity, so just throw it in and see what kind of answers we compile.

Question #1.

1) Are you saying the end of the world is nigh? Are you level-headed thinkers, or a bunch of reactionary camo-wearing fringe-element back-woods-dwelling conspiracy-minded doomsday-prophesying crackpot survivalists? If so, should i consider buying some face paint and stick around for camp-fire stories?

[Sencha]

I'm insulted by that question. First of all, if we were the latter, chances are we wouldn't even have access to a computer, much less the internet. So maybe people have been speculating about the end of the world, since well, the beginning of it.

We all know the world has to end sometime, well, the world's number is finally up. I'm not suggesting the planet is going to explode, or we're going to become extinct. I'm saying the modern civilization, commercialized, resource gouging lifestyles we've been living, is going to end. We're going to be forced into returning to simpler roots.

I think it takes a level headed person to come to terms with that reality. In effect, the world will end. But that shouldn't be taken the wrong way. More appropriately, maybe we should say that, modern civilization as we know it will end.

[Aaron]

Can you guys see this link? Or do I need to do some adminin?

http://www.peakoil.com/gate.html?name=FAQ

[marek]

How about Hubbert Peak

[marek]

Or Energy Bulletin

[Ayoob_Reloaded]

And here's my reply to #1.

It sounds like you're asking about who the ordinary citizens are who talk about this issue. We just did a thread about educational background, current job, age, and place of residency. While that thread was interesting and informative, we really need a sample size of 800 or so in order to do a good job of collecting demographics. It would be misleading to suggest that we here on this site right now are the sample. We're a small group of perhaps 1000, whereas the Yahoo groups have been around for years and have several thousand members each. It might suffice to say that as far as demographics go, it's a fairly diverse crowd. We have young and old, education levels from 7th grade to PhD, jobs ranging from medical to trades to teachers to researchers to business etc etc etc, both theists and atheists, men, women, and children. I've seen quite a diverse mix of people at screenings of End of Suburbia, and an attorney driving a Hummer of all godforsaken things bought a copy from me at a film festival.

Another side to this question might be put a little differently. What is the range of opinion on how Peak Oil will affect my life -- from the gloomiest to the most optimistic, and which place on the range seems to be most likely to actually show itself?

A couple of the terms we've used (and I don't really know who coined them or where they came from) are Cornucopian and Doomer. The Cornucopian position is that there is plenty of oil, no need to even think about a peak in production, we'll just keep rolling along without noticing any difference because we'll never peak. That's the most extreme Cornucopian position I can think of. Another Cornucopian position is that we may begin to decline in oil production, but something else will take its place. We went from wood to coal to whale oil to "rock oil" and we'll go to something else next, and it'll be even better than oil so our lives will improve after the peak. Those seem to be the most optimistic viewpoints.

The very most pessimistic viewpoints say that human population is in "overshoot." What that means is that the Earth has a finite carrying capacity for human beings. When we get too numerous, we will exhaust both the renewable (fish, lumber, drinking water) and nonrenewable (oil, coal, uranium) resources on the planet that are physically necessary to sustain life. Peak oil is but a symptom of this idea of overshoot. They say that human population was fairly steady for quite some time at about 800 million, whereas we now number some 6.4 billion, an overshoot of 87.5%. The "optimistic" overshoot people say that our population would crash back to 800 million or so and become stable there. The "pessimistic" doomer position is that we will not be able to sustain an 800 million human population on this planet because we've overtaken so many complimentary species' habitats which may never be restored. Less deer/buffalo/fish/turtles, so fewer hunters. No oil, so no waterproofing your canoe or lighting your lamp. Water polluted, so no drinking water in the wild. No 800 million people, but some other, lower number.

So, that's the range of opinion. No problems at all to virtual extinction of all human beings.

Should you get some facepaint and camo and join the bonfire with the crazy survivalists? Well, that's actually a matter of some debate here, surprisingly enough. I guess it depends on whether you'll be alive when it's time to change your lifestyle either by choice or force. If oil is going to be around for another 500 years, then I personally would head back to the office and continue faxing TPS reports like no tomorrow, even if oil would peak at that time. Not much of a concern. On the other hand, what if PO hits in 2004, as some suggest, or whether oil peaked in 2000 as Ruppert said, or isn't due until 05 per Deffeyes, 08 as somebody else says, or 2037 as is bandied about by government agencies, or 2006-2007 according to Samsam Bhaktiari. Assuming any of the information we get is correct, as Richard Heinberg says. This is where opinion seems to enter into it.

Personally, I wonder how accurate the production numbers are anyway. How am I supposed to check and see whether demand was 66MBD or 68MBD or where this oil went and who bought it for how much? How do we verify those numbers? I talk as though I know what I'm talking about, but I actually haven't verified very much.

So that rant, without any links or fact-checking, is at least on file now. Tear it apart, add, delete, contribute your own answer, link to external sources, etc. I'll be checking facts and whatnot over time as well as I'm pretty sure I got plenty wrong.

[Ayoob_Reloaded]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'C')an you guys see this link? Or do I need to do some adminin?

http://www.peakoil.com/gate.html?name=FAQ

[mindfarkk]

Aaron i can see the link.

i had no intention of insulting anyone, i'm honestly surprised if it doesn't seem obvious that there ARE a lot of doom-saying crackpots out there who have been spouting end-of-the-world prophecies for the last twenty years (or twenty centuries). of course, even a broken clock is right twice a day. So of course anyone new to this is going to be asking that question. and in my opinion rightly so.

the way i asked it was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, not serious; intended to ask a serious question in a lighthearted manner.

half this country thinks i'm a bleeding-heart liberal pinko, and i know they are full of . but i'll never convince them because they dont' want to know what i'm really talking about, so i don't bother anymore. i was actually asking a question about how each of you see yourselves.

[mindfarkk]

ayoob thanks that was very helpful!

[savethehumans]

Or, they could just read Matt Savinar's Intro over at his site:

www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

THAT ought to get their attention!

[skateari]

the faq. you put together looks like a good start.. but im sure we could do a much better job with it, and im sure there are a few of us out there who would love putting it together. I propose setting up a 'team faq' to gather and sort information into a larger and more complete question list. A FAQ is the first place a person who is new to this will look. With the right information and enough information people wouldn't have to leave that area. Im willing to voulenteer if your willing to set up a group who can accomplish this

[seb]

If I remember well, there is already a topic about the future nice wonderful unbeatable FAQ we plan to do. A poster named Smiley looked quite active about it.

[smiley]

I few months back I posted a proposal to put a FAQ together. So far two members responded and are currently writing parts on alternative energy.
I myself am also busy although I have to admit it is going slower than anticipated because I have to combine it with my normal work.

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic2800.html

I set up the current part as a start. It is a modular system so it is easy to add or change things. If you want to help with writing you're more than welcome to submit parts.

However. You have to understand that the purpose of the FAQ is to provide information, not opinions.

For instance: If you write that the world will end and try to convince them that it will (like Matt is basically doing), a lot of people will disagree and immediately stop reading. If you just provide them with plain information they will want to learn more. Perhaps they will decide that the world is going to end perhaps not.

The information which is currently available on Peakoil is sufficiently alarming to (i) convince people that peakoil is going to happen and that it is going to be a major change and (ii) that we seriously have to think about what this is going to mean for us personally and the world as a whole. That should be our purpose.

[Aaron]

Thanks folks,

Everyone gather around Smiley to help fill out the FAQ section. He is a FAQ admin and can add FAQ items to that section.

[seb]

I am supposed to write the nuclear energy part for the FAQ.

But I haven't started yet , sorry...

[2007]

Suggestion to FAQ: what about a simple FAQ in alphabetic order, ex:

A
Abiotic oil: theory that oil comes from the deep inside of earth
more As

B
Something that starts with B and is related to PO (haven't got a clue)
more Bs

C
Same with C
Cs

D
Depletion: when you use a finite resouce, then so and so...
Ds

Etc

[mindfarkk]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', '
')...If you write that the world will end and try to convince them that it will (like Matt is basically doing), a lot of people will disagree and immediately stop reading. If you just provide them with plain information they will want to learn more. Perhaps they will decide that the world is going to end perhaps not.

The information which is currently available on Peakoil is sufficiently alarming to (i) convince people that peakoil is going to happen and that it is going to be a major change and (ii) that we seriously have to think about what this is going to mean for us personally and the world as a whole. That should be our purpose.