[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joewp', 'A')s an aid to help people understand the lecture a little more, I created a calculator that will take the statement "[Some resource] will last us 500 years! [at current rates of use]" and shows how even a small percentage growth rate severely lowers the "500 years" life expectancy.

Click here

[joewp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '
')Unfortunately, some people don't want their illusions shattered. No matter how much the arguments stack up against them. The guy who believed in thousands of years of coal seems to have ignored my calculation.

[BigTex]

I would like to return to the issue of oil price increases dampening or blunting demand. Isn't this what happened in the early 1980s? Prices got so high that it stopped the increase in demand and consumption actually declined.

This point doesn't mitigate my overall agreement that we are doomed, but if oil went to, say, $500-$1,000 a barrel (in 2007 dollars), wouldn't that basically stop in its tracks industrialization in most developing countries, throw the world into a serious recession and limit oil consumption to those who could afford it (probably just the wealthiest countries), which would probably lead to a sustained net decline in consumption.

The societies making the shift from subsistence agriculture to industrial economies would get shoved back into subsistence agriculture. Other countries would simply collapse (like a lot of Latin American countries, for example). In the U.S., Amish people would be trailed by the paparazzi.

Perhaps I am just describing the downward slope on the peak oil bell curve, but it seems like price will stop demand growth, it's just a question of where the price needs to be to stop the demand growth. One way of looking at the price of oil in the last 25-30 years is to say that it peaked at $40 or so 25-30 years ago, and adjusting for inflation, has remained at or below that level ever since. If the inflation adjusted price of oil has remained constant or declined for 25-30 years, is it surprising that there has been no check on the increase in demand?

Another way of looking at it is to say that perhaps the real increases in oil prices haven't even started yet, and that $200, $400, $600 per barrel oil prices are not as far away as we would like to think (again, assuming 2007 dollars).

Think about it like this: If the price of oil had continued to rise at a 7% annual rate from the $40 level it was at 25-30 years ago, we would be somewhere between $160 and $320 per barrel today. As the professor notes, a 7% growth rate doesn't sound so scary.

I guess I am just coming back around to the idea that once you hit the peak and begin declining, demand will suddenly attempt to outstrip supply, which will trigger dramatic increases in price, which will ripple through all economic activity....then we begin the ride down the curve (as global warming, epidemics and wars continue to unfold).

Perhaps these will be the real four horsemen of the apocalypse--(1) rising sea levels from global warming, (2) some kind of bird flu epidemic, (3) endless wars over religion and resources, and (4) peak oil playing fiddle in the background.

Reminds me of the maitre de in Ferris Bueller's Day Off: "I weep for the future."

[Gazzatrone]

Although important, I've come to the conclusion that regardless of price, demand will always rise, as one growth constant has always gone hand in hand with growth consumption - Population Growth.

This in turn will lead to the dramatic horrors of Die-Off as when the oil that has sustained such a ppopulation stops.... Well its been said thousands of times here.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gazzatrone', 'A')lthough important, I've come to the conclusion that regardless of price, demand will always rise, as one growth constant has always gone hand in hand with growth consumption - Population Growth.

[killJOY]

I showed the DVD of Bartlett's presentation to my students last week. I still find it amazing.

During the screening, a group of young women at the back of the classroom giggled, ripped open bags of chips, and kept getting up to "go to the bathroom."

I had several evil thoughts that I'm not going to share.

[TonyPrep]

Although a sharp spike in price is likely to dampen demand, rising population is bound to increase consumption, from that low point. However, once oil actually becomes scarce, consumption will never be able to rise (ignoring slight bumps on the downslope). There is no real ceiling on what the price can be, once supply starts to decline. It will be the richest bidders who get to continue consumption.

There will be ups and downs, however. If prices rise too much, demand will go below supply level and prices will drop until they match. Up and down go the prices but always trending up, as supplies trend down.

[fireplaceguy]

There used to be one up here - now I can't find it. Is it time for new glasses or is it gone? Anyone? Thx

[I_Like_Plants]

There's an excellent multi-part one by him on YouTube but it's not easy to find - like most things about the 'net, you have to try to develop obsessive-compulsive disorder to find stuff.

It's on there though!

[pawn]

Video of Bartlett presentation

[fireplaceguy]

Thanks, all of you!

[gnm]

Are either of those the one where he is talking to a small classroom of students or is it the one where he is in a lecture hall. I have been trying to find the small classroom one for a while.

-G

[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', 'A')re either of those the one where he is talking to a small classroom of students or is it the one where he is in a lecture hall. I have been trying to find the small classroom one for a while.

-G

[I_Like_Plants]

Try going to YouTube and type in "Albert Bartlett" without the quotation marks.

There's a reason YouTube is so popular, most of the rest of the internet just does not understand video and can't get it to work worth a shit. Not pbs, not anyone.

It's in 5 parts, and I think he's talking to a small group.

never has an old guy with old-man fuzz on top of his head been so sexy!

[mos6507]

There is an old thread somehwere in which Monte invoked Al Bartlett again and again to push his cut-the-cord agenda, and I got so annoyed at his insinuation that Bartlett endorses cutting cords that I emailed him. Mr. Bartlett never replied, but he has in fact given recommendations, at least he just presented one that was posted on The Oil Drum, and although belated, I thought it deserved to be cross-posted here. Maybe then Monte or others like him will stop twisting Bartlett's words.

SO WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

The challenge of making the transition to a sustainable society is enormous, in part because of a major global effort to keep people from recognizing the centrality of population growth to the enormous problems of the U.S. and the world.

• On the global scale, we need to support family planning throughout the world, and we should generally restrict our foreign aid to those countries that make continued demonstrated progress in reducing population growth rates and sizes.

• The immediate task is to restore numeracy to the population programs in the local, national and global agendas.

• On the national scale, we can work for the selection of leaders who will recognize that population growth is the major problem in the U.S. and who will initiate a national dialog on the problem. With a lot of work at the grassroots, our system of representative government will respond.

• On the local and national levels, we must focus serious attention and large fiscal resources on the development of renewable energy sources.

• On the local and national levels, we need to work to improve social justice and equity.

• On the community level in the U.S., we should work to make growth pay for itself.

[coyote]

Bartlett's famous (or infamous) "right-hand column" listed some of the very unpleasant options that could, if we were inhuman enough to make them policy, help with the overall population problem. But I think it's clear, from watching his video, that Bartlett listed these not as a recommendation, but rather to illustrate the point of the ridiculously nasty situation we're in.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'â')€¢ On the community level in the U.S., we should work to make growth pay for itself.

[Dr. Ofellati]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'T')here is an old thread somehwere in which Monte invoked Al Bartlett again and again to push his cut-the-cord agenda, and I got so annoyed at his insinuation that Bartlett endorses cutting cords that I emailed him. Mr. Bartlett . . .

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dr. Ofellati', '
')Seems to me that these are too generic and too pie-in-the-sky.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Homesteader', '
')Second, who the he!! are you to correct Mos?

[eastbay]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dr. Ofellati', '
')It's professor Bartlett. Show a little respect.