[Devil]

The majority on this forum seem to be pessimistic and foresee, as a minimum, an AK-47 to prevent marauders from attacking your cabbage patch, with wholesale slaughter everywhere as everyone fights for a single candle. Is this impression right?

[Permanently_Baffled]

You are correct Devil , I think I maybe the last soft lander around here !!

Maybe I cannot get my hands on a AK 47!!

PB

[gnm]

I'm gonna have to opt for a 60% scenario Devil, (good to see ya back) - I am sure some places or groups would pull together and get it together but I don't have such a high opinion about the majority. There are way too many people who kill others for thier sneakers, thier food, or because they are the wrong religion. And thats without severe resource stress.



-G

[pair-of-noids]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', 'I')s this impression right?

[gnm]

Yikes, well if there is something to be paranoid about a pandemic about hits the top of my list. I don't stay up nights worrying about peak oil, but I do pay close attention when I hear about the latest human crossover case of H5N1 (bird flu) in Asia. Those who have had it have had an 80% mortality rate. I think the 1918 flu was like 5%...

-G

[mindfarkk]

i think the worst case is possible, but not by any means inevitable. i will probably have an AK-47 if i can eventually afford one, but for now i'll be content to have a few necessary items reserved for emergencies, and not a full-scale fall-out shelter. i will have my "bug-out" backpack (assembling as i can afford items). but i'm really investing the minimum i think i can get away with that will actually work in an emergency, say one of similar severity to the recent tsunami destruction, and not long-term. on the other hand i am learning skills that i hope will help me re-establish myself if i am wrong and the worst case ends up being the long-term.

once i have my bug-out pack assembled, and primitive survival skills learned, and during same, i am going to invest considerably more time and money preparing for a middle-of-the-road solution - a homestead that can be worked part OR full-time if needed, a full self-powering home. because i DO really believe that heat/electrical/fuel power of any kind is going to become a luxury for some and a scarce treasure for many, particularly the unprepared. i'd love to homestead part-time and work my private practice part-time. my main concern is how to handle all this as i'm aging and potentially dealing with certain illnesses. i'm hoping that if they lack other opportunity, my BFs kids will be willing (and possibly glad) to join us and take over the farm as we get older. i can even see one or more of them joining us soon after we start it - john's youngest is a really sweet, basic, pooh-tao kinda kid, and a hard worker by nature.

i do not really believe there will be any pulling out of this economic swan dive, just maybe a few rolls along the way. and i don't consider that pessimistic. i honestly feel it is the best thing that can happen, in the larger scheme of things. i do think it's LIKELY we as a speces are going to pay a huge price in human suffering and possibly (probably) die-off in one form or another. globally speaking, we already are, so that's a safe bet. i expect it will get worse. where the swan dive ends is anyone's guess and that will depend on many unpredictable but expectable factors, including international politics, leadership, technology, medicine, religious fanaticism, social security, weapons of mass destruction, the earth's crust, global warming, etc etc. so how steep is the descent? no idea.

if i'm completely wrong, though, the worst that will happen is i have a lovely country home, good neighbors, and a self-sustainable lifestyle, and that seems like a fine thing to me anyway.

[0mar]

Varies from week to week depending on what I'm reading, but I'm leaning towards 75% on that scale. It looks to be that bad anyhow.

[Tyler_JC]

I have a major issue with this poll.

100%= global anarchy and slaughter. Isn't the slaughter already happening right now...IRAQ?

Global anarchy isn't happening, but wars are being fought over oil right now. I had to vote for 100%

Secondly, $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '7')5% Pessimistic: Widespread anarchy, especially in the USA

[Permanently_Baffled]

I think a lot of people would like to know your view on this Devil. As I understand it you have a lot of experience in the energy field(amongst others) , how do you see PO playing out?

PB

[tmazanec1]

gnm
Go to Google.com and click on News. Enter "h5n1" to search the latest news on this scary virus. You can do it every week (articles stay for a month) and sort by date.

[Devil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Permanently_Baffled', 'I') think a lot of people would like to know your view on this Devil. As I understand it you have a lot of experience in the energy field(amongst others) , how do you see PO playing out?

PB

[Devil]

OK, how about the developing countries? I think this will be more difficult to predict, because there will a delay of 5-10 years before they are affected. This economic inertia will result more in an initial slow-down of the rate of development, rather than an actual turn-down. The large countries, like India and China, will react faster than Burkina Faso or Myanmar, which are already more dependent on an autonomous agroeconomy and which will not have the means to develop faster.

[0mar]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Permanently_Baffled', 'I') think a lot of people would like to know your view on this Devil. As I understand it you have a lot of experience in the energy field(amongst others) , how do you see PO playing out?

PB

[khebab]

I'm cautiously optimistic but my viewpoint fluctuates according to my readings. I don't think a massive die-off is realistic because it requires either a catastrophic event or an abrupt discontnuity in our energy supply. However, I anticipate a slow demand destruction due to steady higher oil prices over maybe a decade or more. A slow down of the world economy will then occur that will bring instability. Right now, all our focus should be on conversation, alternative ernergy and lifestyle makeover.

[khebab]

I mean conservation!

[Devil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('0mar', '
')Wasn't there almost total anarchy when fuel was denied access to Britan. I distinctly remember reading about that.

[Pops]

What did the man say? Making predictions is easy except for the ones about the future?

According to the ASPO by ’10 we’ll be back to where we are today production wise and down about 10% by ’15.

There will surely be some bad feedback from higher energy prices, maybe as soon as this year and a slowing or even a receding economy could easily extend the peak out a couple of years. A reduction in supply enough to hurt the economy badly but hardly sufficient to imply anarchy.

Considering a large percentage of the corn and beans the US grows is fed to cattle I can’t see us starving in the near term. Perhaps a return to cooking at home of items still somewhat resembling their natural state but not widespread starvation.

I can’t make any kind of guess regarding other countries. Perhaps if the US were to reduce some exports such as corn, to places such as Mexico where the little guys have been forced off the land by AgCorp, the little guy could move back to the farm from the shanty in the city and actually make a living again. Just speculating.

Things will surely change but not to widespread anarchy and starvation IMO; now 20 years down the road...

[Permanently_Baffled]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
') now 20 years down the road...

[The_Virginian]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')K-47 to prevent marauders from attacking your cabbage patch,

[theshadypeach]

I would've voted for an in between 50% and 75%. I think the high price of oil is going to be a rough time on our economy and agriculture, but at the same time, there are substitutes of energy, with smaller outputs of energy, so we'd still have to conserve and change our lifestyles. I can see a die-off happening because every species overshoots and undergoes a die off. However, I think the die off might be an organized one. Not having the masses starve to death, but I can bet there might be legislature passed to limit the population. If agriculture is affected greatly by the dwindling supply of oil, countries would have to limit their populations and stop the population growth. Anyways that's my take.


cheers