by Kyn » Sat 16 Jun 2007, 11:17:15
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ebyss', 'T')here are plenty of solutions to the problem of PeakOil. Ethanol, Solar, Wind, Nuclear, Conservation, Population Reduction, Voluntary Powerdown and so on. The real crux of the issue is whether world leaders and the western population can be convinced to implement any of them in a timely, responsible and sustainable manner
We will reduce our consumption as production decreases. That's not the question. The question is, how this will look like.
As we see it today, the first world will be those who'll reduce consumption fast and strong, as they did in the first (and second) oil crisis, while the developing nations will slightly increase consumption for a few years and than cut back, too.
Currently, the OECD countries are reducing their consumption while the poorer countries are increasing it.
At the same time, food prices increase, which will mean that the poorer countries will increase their food production because we don't ruin their markets as we did in the past.
Their will be fewer undernourished persons in the world, as 90% of the undernourished world wide are peasants, workers in the food sector and fishermen.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')gain - the real problem facing us isn't Peak Oil, it's overpopulation.
The global increase of the population number by 35-40% by 2050 won't increase energy use significantly. As there's enough food for far more people than the 9-10 billion that will live in 2050, that's not the problem, too.
The main problem, in future, is global inequality. As PO means rising prices for raw materials, PO will mean more wealth for the poorer nations and, at least at the beginning, a slower increasing wealth for the richer nations.