PeakOil is You
Is "Peak Oil" really that bad?
Re: Is "Peak Oil" really that bad?
by steam_cannon » Wed 28 Nov 2007, 03:00:21
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lighthouse', 'F')irst question: Is there a problem we experience now, which is directly related to peak oil?
Put simply, overpopulation. It is overpopulation that causes resource depletion which is the root cause of all peak oil problems. Resource depletion happens to follow a depletion curve. Peak oil, depleted climates and drought, the mining out of metals, soil erosion... These are all simply due to overpopulation and none of them would matter if the population were 1/20 of what it is. So the real question is: Is there a problem we experience now, which is directly related to overpopulation? The answer is yes, all our problems are due to overpopulation. Peak Oil is just the dipstick. And though we scramble to find ways to stretch things out farther, really we are all just playing a game of musical chairs. And every round there are less chairs and more people needing a seat.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lighthouse', 'I') refuse to follow this notion. I'm always sceptical if someone tells me there is no solution to a problem and therefore it does not make sense to look for one.
It's not that I personally want technology to fail, but honestly physics doesn't allow any solution to support infinite population growth. I can come up with all sorts of ways that people can save energy and live closer to the environment, but no one can come up with a solution that supports infinite growth. Technology can come up with real solutions, but they don't involve continued growth.
What can technology do to technology solve overpopulation?
War, disease, pestilence, famine, or sterilization. But for whatever reason, nobody likes these solutions.
Aren't there any nicer solutions?
Sure and here are some examples:
* Technology that reduces fertility (cell phone over your testicals)
* Sending men and women for years of study instead of growing a family
* Sending people to war
* Creating economic conditions where families cannot thrive (husband and wife work)
But what about the Green Revolution?
The green revolution succeeded in turning fossilized sunlight into food. Now topsoil and the fossil sunlight is running out. The world is producing less and more expensive food every year.
But what about permaculture?
Permaculture is a great solution for a limited population. Until the population becomes one that can be supported without the fossil sun, pressure will mount ensuring a reduction in population.
But what if every roof had a windmill or solar panels?
There isn't enough rare metals for every roof to have solar panels. But what if every roof had wind? If there were enough materials for batteries and copper, eventually that system would face a limit too. For example, there isn't enough copper in the world for the "third world" to have as developed an electrical grid as the first world countries. Just look at copper prices. Wind only blows when it blows. And lets not forget about the oil we eat. Solar panels and windmills can't provide cheap petrochemicals.
Overpopulation is the problem, and it means there are too many people eating up the few resources the world has to offer. Oil offered us free energy, as the oil age ends what ever energy we can get we will have to work harder for in a harder world. Whatever that means, it's hard to imagine it's something good.
Last edited by steam_cannon on Wed 28 Nov 2007, 03:42:09, edited 2 times in total.
-
steam_cannon - Expert
- Posts: 2859
- Joined: Thu 28 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: MA
Re: Is "Peak Oil" really that bad?
by MonteQuest » Wed 28 Nov 2007, 03:10:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lighthouse', ' ')You honestly believe that we have reached carrying capacity of this planet? On what data are you basing this assumption.
United Nations
Link
Leading pherologists
http://eco.gn.apc.org/pubs/smail.html
Fifty-eight of the world's scientific academies
http://www.interacademies.net/?id=3547
14 studies
http://www.ilea.org/leaf/richard2002.html
Not an asumption.
Carrying capacity is around 2 to 3 billion.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
-
MonteQuest - Expert
- Posts: 16593
- Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Westboro, MO
Re: Is "Peak Oil" really that bad?
by steam_cannon » Wed 28 Nov 2007, 03:40:33
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')Not an asumption.
Carrying capacity is around 2 to 3 billion.
Those are good studies MonteQuest, however I suspect they may be too optimistic. We might maintain 2 to 3 billion with good management. But climate change will only increase droughts and reduce food production. So 2 to 3 billion may be be what the Earth could support in the past but not necessarily in the future.
')Not an asumption.
Carrying capacity is around 2 to 3 billion.
Overpopulation can cause big trouble...
Warmer Earth may slash farm yields
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16042134/
America’s Breadbasket Moves to Canada (2006 Article)
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/1 ... to-canada/
James Lovelock: “We are on the edge of the greatest die-off humanity has ever seen,” said Lovelock. “We will be lucky if 20% of us survive what is coming. "
Fiddling with figures while the Earth burns
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 751509.ece
Climate Change “Three Times Faster Than Worst Predictions” (2007 Article)
by the US National Academy of Sciences
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/06 ... faster.php
Global Dimming and extreme climate change
"But perhaps the most alarming aspect of global dimming is that it may have led scientists to underestimate the true power of the greenhouse effect."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4171591.stm
Whatever the case, considering the huge challenges facing mankind it's reasonable to assume a reduction in population will be in the cards. Ukraine for example has been under economic pressure from Russia keeping a tight reign on their supplies of natural gas. This tight economic environment has resulted in a slow dieoff of Ukraines population. And Russia's own economic troubles liked to energy has them in a similar slow dieoff situation, with their "population in freefall".
Hopefully, we will have a similar slow dieoff where people drink lots of vodka, plays lots of tetris and forget to have kids. But it may not be so smooth and the real problems are really only getting started...
-
steam_cannon - Expert
- Posts: 2859
- Joined: Thu 28 Dec 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: MA
