Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The "We Ain't Dead Yet" Thread. With a Side of Gu

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby mkwin » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 06:09:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', '
')Care to explain why renewable energy has been growing at a rate of approximately 50% per year for the last 4 years?


Demand, rising energy cost, cheap oil depletion.

Excuse me, I should have said "repress growth rates" instead of "inhibit growth."

There are only so many quads to go around in any given year. We'll have to make some hard choices quickly if maximum alternative growth rates are to be realized. Resources need to be poured into alternative energy growth.

50% is good. Let's get it up to 200% for a few years. Will it happen?


Well little oil is used to produce electricity. We don't have an urgent need to cover the landscape in windfarms and solar.

You could argue we do from a climate change point of view and I would agree with you. But until the external costs of burning fossil fuels are recognised by CO2 caps it won't happen. It might happen in Europe and hopefully in 2008, when the neo-cons are thrown out of the Whitehouse, the democrats might just push it through in the US. Until then we will have to make do with a 50% compound growth rate. Still, it could be worse.
User avatar
mkwin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2007, 03:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby mkwin » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 07:12:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'W')allace, It's going to be a hard grind down to third world status, with or without the windfarms. Solar and alternative energy may keep it from going Neolithic, but that is all. It's not just oil that's depleting, it's many natural resources, including water, not to mention consumer credit. Did you read the thread I started --Demons of Our Own Design? You should.

A positive planner, hopes for the best, but plans for the worst. Optimists are biased in terms of hope, at the expense of caution. The middle way, seems to be the most prudent approach.


Assuming it is going to be grind down to a third world standard of living is a little on the pessimistic side Threadbear.

Peak mitigation will be very expensive but it not all wasted money. It will generate an enormous amount of economic activity. WW2 was not cheap for the US but it had an average annual GDP increase of 17%!!

Robert Hirsch has quantified this figure at a $3 trillion capital requirement. This could come from both government and the private sector. However, this activity would generate the following:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
• Over 10 million employment years of jobs created
• Total industry sales of over $3 trillion
• Over $125 billion of industry profits
• Over $500 billion in federal government tax revenues
• Nearly $300 billion in state and local government tax
revenues


From here:

http://www.odac-info.org/bulletin/docum ... UMMARY.pdf

There has recently been another official US government report on non-conventional resources. It seems your government is gearing up to implement some or all of his suggestions.

http://www.unconventionalfuels.org/imag ... Final_.pdf

Hirsch's suggestions only relate to substitution liquid fuels and are pretty conservative in its estimation of what can be achieved. It assumes only a 50% increase in vehicle fuel effciency. Thats an average of 30 mpg up from 20 mpg. The 100 mpg hybrid is here and would displace 6 million barrels of oil consumption in the US alone. Retooling Detroit to build it would also create a lot of jobs. He also fails to discuss the amount of fuel saved by switching to mass-transit, carpooling and simply people not wasting petrol by driving to places they really don't need to go to.

It is likely that after an initial inflationary recession peak oil will cause a drastic slowdown in economic activity and credit contraction, i.e. deflationary pressure. This type of massive government spending will not only be required but will be welcomed in order to counteract deflationary pressure.

I am becoming more convinced that there is not going to be a 'crash' but a slow grind and hopefully a transition away from oil first but then gas and coal. I see Oil prices hitting $90 and inflation in the UK is 1.8%-3%. How much inflation will $200 oil really cause? 6%? 8%? I just cannot see it causing much more, especially with the inevitable recession when interest rates rise.

I do not disagree with the possibility the doomer scenario, the decline rate could be much higher than the 5% assumed, exporting countries could restrcit exports, Saudi Arabia could collapse, the financial system could collpase. The point is we just don't know but it is not a foregone conclusion like many on this forum assume it is. In fact, quite the opposite, there are many development in recent years that shoud give us a reason to be positive. The mass production of plug-in hybrids and full electic cars, the continued advancement of renewable energy technology and investment, global realisation (slowly) that we have to substitute away from oil and a drive towards sustainability, to name a few. The are also potentially postive break through that could change the whole oil picture in the long-term....things like THAI. See here http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic31781.html
User avatar
mkwin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri 01 Jun 2007, 03:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 11:29:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', 'A')nother good thread to beat my ERoEI drum:

Alternatives are great, and will grow. If you are young and looking for a career, alternative energy will likely keep you attached to the economy for your entire life.

-----------------------------

The problem is:

The energy required to develop alternative-energy infrastructure combined with:

The global energy loads required to offset GW effects plus:

Cheap oil depletion means that:

Growth will be inhibited.

-----------------------------

In "normal" circumstances, new markets (alternatives)would emerge to offset old markets (sweet light crude) at an accelerating rate. That won't happen this time due to "energy starvation".


Beat your drum all you like, but IMHO you won't be leading the parade. :)

OK, let me give you my reason why ERoEI doesn't apply to solar/wind.....

EROEI applies when one has limited energy and has to make the decision whether or not to use that energy to produce additional energy.

It makes sense to burn a gallon of oil to pump four additional gallons of oil.

It does not make sense to burn a gallon of oil to pump 0.95 additional gallons of oil.

Use that gallon of oil to create a solar panel and that panel keeps kicking out power for the next 30+ years. (The energy payback is fairly short, unlike what the common myth reports. )

The power from that solar panel can be used to create more and more solar panels which can also be used to produce more and more solar panels.

We can multiply the energy available in oil by using it to create solar panels (and wind turbines, etc.). The growth in that production can be exponential.

Kick the 'clean' energy harvesting process into gear and it (cleanly) fuels its own development. Energy In stops with the first bit of oil and Energy Out just flows.

OK, I get something wrong?
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 11:39:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('brobak', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hin film solar is shipping at under $1.50 per watt wholesale. It should be closer to $1 per watt in the next few months.


Could I respectfully inquire as to where I might be able to purchase these solar panels at this price? I'm not making the usual 'I'll believe it when I can buy it at walmart' post. I really would like to know, because I'm currently in the market for a PV array for my home.


You can't. That's the wholesale price given to companies that buy very large quality. It's going to be more at the retail level. That price doesn't include mounting, distribution, etc.

Right now PV prices are high due to a problem with material supply and high demand. That should be over soon and prices should drop a bit.

Hopefully from the now ~$5 per watt to below the previous $3.85 watt that I was paying. I'd like to add some more panels.
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 12:25:51

"Production and conversion BEVs typically use 0.17 to 0.37 kilowatt-hours per mile (0.1–0.23 kWh/km)."

"Nearly half of this power consumption is due to inefficiencies in charging the batteries."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_

The American driving average is 29 miles per day.

That's between 4.9 and 6.7 kW per day per driver.

Given a four hour solar day that's between 1.2 and 1.7 kW of panels per driver.

Given under $2 per watt for installed solar that's an expenditure between $2,000 and $4,000 per driver.

If (and I do say "if") ultra-capacitors pan out then efficiency (and battery cost) will greatly improve.

(Did I mess up the math?)
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby jbeckton » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 12:34:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'R')esidential electric is minor demand. Home consumption of electricity only accounts for 6% of per capita energy use. The rest goes toward commerce, industry, agriculture, and transportation and most of that is gasoline/diesel.


References?
User avatar
jbeckton
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri 05 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 12:34:24

My house (two people) gets about 90% of its electricity from 1.2 kW of panels. I paid about $5k for the panels, about $4 per watt. The other $5k is backup generation and storage.

Solar is reaching the $2 per watt level on a commercial level.

We don't need storage right now, we need additional peak power which solar and wind supply.

Will we come up with the money to "green" our houses or will we return to caves?
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 12:47:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jbeckton', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'R')esidential electric is minor demand. Home consumption of electricity only accounts for 6% of per capita energy use. The rest goes toward commerce, industry, agriculture, and transportation and most of that is gasoline/diesel.


References?



About 7% of residential power comes from oil.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts ... dence.html

About 25% of our delivered energy goes to transportation.

About 25% to industry.

About 10% to residential use.

About 10% to commercial use.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/consumption.html

Obviously a lot of that industry/commercial stuff is now delivered in the form of electricity.

What is really needed for this discussion is the figure that reflects what can only be done with petroleum. The other stuff can be gradually switched to electricity. We now use petroleum largely because it has been cheap.
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby jbeckton » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 13:12:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '
')What is really needed for this discussion is the figure that reflects what can only be done with petroleum. The other stuff can be gradually switched to electricity. We now use petroleum largely because it has been cheap.


Exactly, just because it say commercial or industrial doesn't mean it's not electrical power. There is no difference between home electricity and commercial or industrial electricity. Most manufacturing is/can done by electric motors.

Where is the reference for:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he rest goes toward commerce, industry, agriculture, and transportation and most of that is gasoline/diesel.


Agriculture sure, but industry? WTF?
User avatar
jbeckton
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri 05 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby threadbear » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 13:37:09

Wallace, Just briefly...I'll respond more at length later. India is a third world country showing great growth, as it industrializes and modernizes, according to statistics. Those statistics don't account for the 2/3 of the population that are losing ground.

This is what the U.S will look like in the future, after going through an Argentina type ecomic collapse, the direct result of a credit freeze.

Everything is going to be more expensive, wages will not keep pace, the govt--eventually unable to borrow it's way out of past failures will rely on private equity corporations to finance their own new energy projects and infrastructure projects. In return for blatant oligopolic control and pricing --ie toll booths on roads, bridges, etc... they will see to it that bridges, roads, new sewer systems, are built. All of those dying dollars have to go somewhere.

New nuclear power facilities are a perfect case in point. High barrier to entry, crazy expensive to build. Without govt assurance that they will refrain from interferance as part of a pre-condition to building them, they won't be built. However, with people beginning to actually freeze to death, govt oversight and pricing controls will be very relaxed. When they are finished, the electrical bills to run cities and transport will more than double.

The upper layers of management, all of the engineers, IT upper crust, plus the professional class, will easily be able to afford the expense, as they will be compensated generously. What's left of the middle class and the poverty class will have a very hard time. So let's say, it'll be first world, for those who can afford it, and third world for everyone else.
User avatar
threadbear
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7577
Joined: Sat 22 Jan 2005, 04:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Tue 23 Oct 2007, 17:13:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'W')allace, Just briefly...I'll respond more at length later. India is a third world country showing great growth, as it industrializes and modernizes, according to statistics. Those statistics don't account for the 2/3 of the population that are losing ground.

This is what the U.S will look like in the future, after going through an Argentina type ecomic collapse, the direct result of a credit freeze.

Everything is going to be more expensive, wages will not keep pace, the govt--eventually unable to borrow it's way out of past failures will rely on private equity corporations to finance their own new energy projects and infrastructure projects. In return for blatant oligopolic control and pricing --ie toll booths on roads, bridges, etc... they will see to it that bridges, roads, new sewer systems, are built. All of those dying dollars have to go somewhere.

New nuclear power facilities are a perfect case in point. High barrier to entry, crazy expensive to build. Without govt assurance that they will refrain from interferance as part of a pre-condition to building them, they won't be built. However, with people beginning to actually freeze to death, govt oversight and pricing controls will be very relaxed. When they are finished, the electrical bills to run cities and transport will more than double.

The upper layers of management, all of the engineers, IT upper crust, plus the professional class, will easily be able to afford the expense, as they will be compensated generously. What's left of the middle class and the poverty class will have a very hard time. So let's say, it'll be first world, for those who can afford it, and third world for everyone else.


The problem with your post is that you are making an assumption that things will go terribly. And that's only one of a couple of directions that things could head.

We could, for example, get busy and create a lot of wind, solar, storage, etc. in country, reduce our trade inbalance, get truly cheap power, and be better off. Build a lot of robots to make stuff cheap and give it away.

That's the flip of what you suggest.

Or reality could be somewhere in between.

Just because you read somewhere that we will crash does not make it so.

(BTW, been to India lately and seen how life is at the village level as opposed to 20 years ago? I have. Lately and 20 years ago.)
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The "We Ain't Dead Yet" Thread. With a Side o

Unread postby Twilight » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 16:33:13

The problem with the positive "could" is it too is only a possibility. We have a trend of greater and greater reliance on energy that has shown no signs of reversal in recent years. More out of town shopping centres are built, supplied by more and more efficient supply chains (read: small inventories with low resistance to disruption), visited by people driving longer distances in less efficient vehicles. The consumer could afford this on cheap credit. When it is removed, the consumer goes bankrupt and is not able to fuel the 'new tech revolution' or whatever by buying PV and other gadgets. This bit of the future is probably non-negotiable as it is very likely 'baked in' already. Any successful transition from oil and gas has to allow for most people being poor. If solutions emerge from the market, they will have a shortage of private buyers. A far-sighted state lead would be welcome but is an exceptionally rare animal in energy issues.
Twilight
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Fri 02 Mar 2007, 04:00:00

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby MD » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 16:42:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '.')..

OK, I get something wrong?


Yes.
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby MD » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 16:44:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '.')..

(Did I mess up the math?)


yes.
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 17:35:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '.')..

(Did I mess up the math?)


yes.


OK, educate me.

I do attempt to learn from my mistakes....
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby BobWallace » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 17:36:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '.')..

(Did I mess up the math?)


yes.


OK, educate me.

I do attempt to learn from my mistakes....
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The "We Ain't Dead Yet" Thread. With a Side o

Unread postby BobWallace » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 17:44:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', 'T')he problem with the positive "could" is it too is only a possibility. We have a trend of greater and greater reliance on energy that has shown no signs of reversal in recent years. More out of town shopping centres are built, supplied by more and more efficient supply chains (read: small inventories with low resistance to disruption), visited by people driving longer distances in less efficient vehicles. The consumer could afford this on cheap credit. When it is removed, the consumer goes bankrupt and is not able to fuel the 'new tech revolution' or whatever by buying PV and other gadgets. This bit of the future is probably non-negotiable as it is very likely 'baked in' already. Any successful transition from oil and gas has to allow for most people being poor. If solutions emerge from the market, they will have a shortage of private buyers. A far-sighted state lead would be welcome but is an exceptionally rare animal in energy issues.


A problem that I have with some of the people on this site (and TOD) is that they take "could crash" and make it "will crash".

A problem that I have with your "doomer" post is that it does not recognize that we are already moving toward solutions.

And it, IMHO, greatly overstates the severity of some problems such as the financial difficulty of mitigation.

Will we crash? Possibly, not guaranteed.

Will we make it? Possibly, not guaranteed.

Will we crash if we don't try to fix the problem? Well, will we punk?

(Clarification. That "Well, will we punk?" is totally intended to be a humorous throw-away. Dirty Harry take-off, don't cha know? Not intended to upset the easily upset....)


W
User avatar
BobWallace
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon 01 Oct 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The "We Ain't Dead Yet" Thread. With a Side o

Unread postby Pops » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 18:46:15

Bob, you need to understand there is a difference here between posters saying everything is fine or FUBAR and posters who say here is what I have done and help me with the rest.

From your posts in other threads I can see you have done something.

My thought is you should share your experience in doing things, instead of confronting those without a clue as to where to start with labels.

You know; help them to make the start you did.

The time of arguing is over and the time to help others should start - unless you plan to see them weep over your MRE wraper.

See what I mean?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: The Eternal Optimist Redux Thread

Unread postby MD » Thu 25 Oct 2007, 19:18:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BobWallace', '.')..

OK, educate me.

I do attempt to learn from my mistakes....


OK.

Based on the overall tone of your posts, I'd say you'd benefit most from an in-depth study of energy use patterns world wide. Look at systems of energy investment and consumption instead of finance. Look at energy as the currency of commerce. Inspect existing infrastructure and the energy required to keep it maintained and up to date. Look at raw material extraction rates as related to energy and their own depletion profiles.

My intuition tells me that your outlook will become quite a bit more grim the deeper you dig, but then again I'm always asking new questions and compiling new data. Have to give a nod to process, y'know.

And yes, we are going to build a whole shit-pile of solar panels; just for a smaller population.
Stop filling dumpsters, as much as you possibly can, and everything will get better.

Just think it through.
It's not hard to do.
User avatar
MD
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4953
Joined: Mon 02 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: On the ball
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

cron