[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', 'Y')es, you can generate power and produce fuel for other reactors at the same time. All you need is enough uranium ore to produce enough enriched uranium to start the process.

[Mircea]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', 'Y')es, you can generate power and produce fuel for other reactors at the same time. All you need is enough uranium ore to produce enough enriched uranium to start the process.

[Mircea]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('chris-h', 'T')hird world : It has already started shutting down.Very soon it will be back to medieval times.Media age to live there approx 25 years
The lucky countries will be ones that have no resources to be stolen with extreme violence.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Derick', 'I') think that prior to the USA & China commencing fighting over remaining global reserves, China will dump all its US debt onto the market (forcing other US debt holders such as Japan to do the same) and bankrupt the USA.

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', 'I')t isn't a perpetual motion device.

[pukeko]

A comment like "much less driving" would only be made by someone who had never been in Europe. People in Europe rule their cars, unlike in the US where people are ruled by cars.
In Europe, cars are nice to have, but not necessary and certainly not essential.

It is not a question of whether people have fuel to run their cars but whether there is fuel oil and diesel for shipping and road transport. A city of a million people requiring an absolute minimun of 1kg of supplies a day would require a thousnad tonnes of su;pplies every single day. An essential commodity like wheat requires oil every step of the way to put bread on our tables.
Plowing, fertilising,harvesting,transporting,storing,transporting,milling,transporting,baking,transporting and finally the supermarket. All this talk of nuclear power will not get that wheat grown,stored , milled and to the table. And people worry about whether they can drive their cars????

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pukeko', 'A') comment like "much less driving" would only be made by someone who had never been in Europe. People in Europe rule their cars, unlike in the US where people are ruled by cars.
In Europe, cars are nice to have, but not necessary and certainly not essential.

[kokoda]

It will be like the old saying "The bigger they are the harder they fall".

America's military might won't save them ... they haven't won a war since WW2 ... and the next one they will have to fight without fuel.

Countries with oil reserves will prosper.

For third world nations it will be business as usual ... albiet a bit more miserable than usual.

Western Europe might be more affected by climate change than fuel shortages. If the the gulf stream shuts down they turn into Alaska.

China relies on fuel imports to survive, as do Japan, Taiwan and Korea. Japan went to war to secure fuel and access to natural resources 60 years ago. I don't think that this will be a fun part of the world to live Post Peak.

I think South America will do fine. They don't over rely on fossil fuels and have relatively low population density.

India I am not so sure about. It has a huge population but hasn't become as energy reliant as China. It might get through it reasonably well by going back to their traditional lifestyle.

The Middle East will still have plenty of oil for their own use ... Israel is screwed.

South East Asia have plenty of resources to survive ... although population pressures could cause issues.

Australia is a big hunk of near empty land. Not much oil or water but plenty of everything else. It should be OK.

[EnergyUnlimited]

Kokoda,
For you future appear bright with possible exception of some struggle between China and Japan.

I think, you are failing to notice, that we are in significant overshoot.

So where die-off will come?
On the Moon?

[bshirt]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', '
')Galliopoli exemplifies the tenacity and fierceness of Australian fighters, but that was far away in a different time. At the Battle of the Bulge in WWII, American troops fought valiantly, too, but that was also far away in a different time. That generation of Americans had different beliefs, values and ethics than today's troops. Could the US repeat its feats at the Battle of the Bulge in modern times? I don't think so.

[kokoda]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'K')okoda,
For you future appear bright with possible exception of some struggle between China and Japan.

I think, you are failing to notice, that we are in significant overshoot.

So where die-off will come?
On the Moon?

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kokoda', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'K')okoda,
For you future appear bright with possible exception of some struggle between China and Japan.

I think, you are failing to notice, that we are in significant overshoot.

So where die-off will come?
On the Moon?

[hagakure]

I agree that there will not be any major changes . The rich are always ok . The poor are and will remain as they are . Drastic changes have happened
at many different times of earths history . Why are we all so concerned with post oil . We have the technology for po already -it has not been released or has and is not being used . We should never be dependend on one resourse . Learn how to do without. Be in prision mode -as if you had no choice . I love the idea that there will be many new chalenges . For me I have been learning to survive . In my younger days I taught survival in extreme climates . Live as people did pre oil dependent days . My motto has always been never put all of your eggs in one basket .-that is dangerous ! Have a very challenging future . The future looks rossy . It's all in how you intreprete it . Ed

[Turboguy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') wouldn't call Korea or Vietnam smashing success stories. They US can beat up on small 3rd World countries but can't go head-to-head with 1st and 2nd World countries without getting its ass kicked.

[Judgie]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Turboguy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') wouldn't call Korea or Vietnam smashing success stories. They US can beat up on small 3rd World countries but can't go head-to-head with 1st and 2nd World countries without getting its ass kicked.

[Turboguy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat is why you wait for the energy "carpet", so to speak, to be ripped out from the US's "feet". THEN if you're smart, you'll find like-minded collaborators (face it, who, apart from a few 1st world countries wouldn' t like a shot at destroying the global police officer?).

[clodhopper]

The United States is a land with bountiful resources of all kinds of minerals, oil and gas reserves, agricultural land and best of all, a well educated, innovative and hard working people. In addition, it has the most powerful armed forces the world has ever seen. But, in my opinion, it is in a worse position to deal with the looming threats of climate change, oil and gas shortages, and Jihadist attacks then any developed country.

How can this be?

America has become incredibly wealthy by exploiting its resources, but most of all, by using lots and lots of energy from finite fossil fuels. In agriculture, Americans were way ahead of the rest of the world in turning oil calories in to food calories. While the rest of the world’s farmers were using the muscle power of horses, oxen and humans to till the land and harvest the crops before world war II, U.S. farmers were introducing tractors and harvesters to the huge field of the grain belt, where they were highly suited. This early mechanisation of farming freed up labour to work in industry. In industry too, Americans were leaders at using fossil energy to increase productivity, with highly mechanised factories using production line methods.

This mechanisation of farming, allowing most of the population to work in manufacturing or service industries is the key to prosperity. Even now, the poverty of a nation can usually be discovered by the proportion of it’s workers still employed in farming. In America today, despite being a big food exporter, only about 2% of the population work in agriculture. In many poor countries, over 75% still work in farming.

So why America the vulnerable?

Americans have become so expert at using fossil fuels to raise living standards that they have developed a system that depends on cheap plentiful and reliable supplies of oil and gas. Unreliable, scarce and very expensive oil and gas are no good.

America had massive reserves of oil and gas, and still does, but the system is now so hungry that about 22 million barrels of oil are used each and every day, about 25% of the world total, when domestic production is only about 7.5 million barrels per day and falling. Each American needs about twice as much oil as each European even though Europeans have a high standard of living. This means that the American system will collapse more easily and completely when the big oil shock comes.

www.peakfood.co.uk has lots of posts relating to Peak oil and other threats to food production

[kanman]

I think the guys on here know this. The sad thing is that they could be managing on half the amount of oil without any significant changes to lifestyle had they followed some of the policies implemented elsewhere.

[gasguzzler]

Not sure this is the best place to post this but I didn't want to start a new thread. I have come to realize that peak oil will never be recognized by the masses even as it becomes blatantly obvious. As oil peaks and enters decline nations will blame nations. Initially OPEC countries will be blamed for cutting production to hike prices a la the 1970's. As joblessness increases, China will attempt to cash in on the U.S. debt it owns. The dollar will collapse. The U.S. will blame China and acuse them of economic warfare. I am not savy enough with world politics to give a real guess as to exactly how it will all play out, but generally I think economic collapse will be the catalyst for world war. Nuclear is not out of the question. Between warfare, famine, and disease we should be well on our way to riding the downhill slope of the population overshoot rollercoaster. In the midst of all the chaos, any decline or shortage of oil or energy for that matter will be blamed on political events as opposed to actual geological and world carrying capacity contstaints. Nobody is going to look into the ashes and think it all happened because of peak oil. It will all be the fault on those nasty _____ (insert country of choice here)'s. Those that deny peak oil will never eat crow. Actually they might eat a crow or two to stay alive, but they'll never realize they were wrong about peak oil.

[dorlomin]

Increasing prices will lead to social instability in nations long before wars break out. Countries with large urban poor will mosly likely experiance growing domestic civil unrest as hunger spreads. The current trend for biofuel will most likely see this happening sooner rather than later.

Brazil, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa, India and the US are the countries who fit into this sort of demographic. America at least can reduce this with its wealth by subsidising with welfare, but this will be a heavy blow on the economy, but it will not face hunger just anger at higher prices and greater poverty.

The outcome is most likely to be communist, socialist and facist governments gaining power on anti capitalist anti free market tickets.

Mass social instability in the middle east is very likely in the comming decade as well, internal problems are far more likely to distrupt oil supplies from there than wars.