[Anthill]

Hi,

First post. Stalwart peak oil skeptic.

There is enough coal for the next 250 years. Canada has vast oil shale reserves. There is abundant natural gas.

Global warming is the extraordinarily dominant issue. Global warming not only affects every human on the planet, but every plant, every animal, every ecosystem. Al Gore didn't win the Nobel prize for carping about peak oil. He won it for global warming.

There are tens of thousands of scientists studying global warming (1,200 of them shared the Nobel prize with Gore). There are a handful of analysts, not scientists, writing about peak oil.

Words are meaningless without action. So the really interesting developments to watch are efforts to switch from fossil fuel consumption. Watch the smart money. The Google guys funded Nanosolar. Richard Branson (Virgin airlines, etc.) is spending $3 billion to develop new energy sources, including cellulosic butanol, the successor to ethanol. Silicon valley venture capitalists, the ones who funded Apple, AOL, Google and others in their startup phase, have invested over $20 billion in alternative energy startup companies.

The change over away from oil could happen much quicker than conventional wisdom. In the early 20th century, it only took 10 years to switch from an energy system based on whale oil to oil pumped out of the ground.

In spite of the large amount of activity in the private sector and state level, the last seven years have been awful with the Bush administration fiddling while the planet got hotter and hotter. But going back to the 1970s, the past seven administrations and Congresses have under invested in alternative energy research.

Of all the candidates, Hillary has best energy research program. She would invest $5 billion per year for 10 years in alternative energy research. Current investment is $1 billion per year. I've been interested in alternative energy research since my college days at Berkeley in 1979. At Berkeley a friend and I tried to convert my car to run on methane made from chicken manure. How times have changed.

Currently I have two friends involved in solar energy. One friend has a company that sells and installs solar panels. The other friend builds houses that have solar panels installed on the roofs. I've hooked both friends up with Nanosolar so that they can become distributors. I also registered my dad, an electrical contractor, with Nanosolar. Again, action, not dreaming about some unlikely disaster to come such as peak oil.

People like James Kunstler and the doom and gloom crowd are like intellectual jerk offs, except that they are not intellectuals. Kunstler is so pessimistic and nasty. He must be an awful guy to live with. My hunch is that he suffers from depression. In 1900, there were certainly guys like him carping about the scarcity of whale oil. But a guy named Rockefeller was quietly changing the world.

[basil_hayden]

Welcome, and boy do you have a lot of site reading to do.

[cipi604]

Anthill, what you have learned it's just learned, not necessarily true.

"There is enough coal for the next 250 years. Canada has vast oil shale reserves. There is abundant natural gas." This is what you learned. Guess again?!

[aflurry]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anthill', '
')There is enough coal for the next 250 years.
...
Global warming is the extraordinarily dominant issue.

[aflurry]

DP

[Carlhole]

The Debate Over Peak Oil

[align=center][flash width=425 height=350]http://www.youtube.com/v/uu1riEOkwT0&e[/flash][/align]

[wisconsin_cur]

the problem with anthill's math:

Link to a video of Bartlett's lecture on the exponential function.

{Imbedded video replaced by a link to protect people reading this forum at work - TheTurtle}

[Twilight]

People have been talking about alternative energy since the 1973 oil shock. If you can make some money on the back of it, that's cool. Choose correctly, and you can. So can electrical installation contractors, whatever the technology in fact. People who have a job there, thumbs up from me. More people with money are likely to experiment with off-grid living soon. If you can get some of their dollars in your pocket, that is admirable. I wouldn't count on much in the way of widespread scaling up of renewables though. Don't make that a necessary prerequisite for any decisions you make. Hang around here a while and you might be convinced as to why. Tying your fortunes to the success of the masses - not a good idea. Making a few bucks off subsidies and infrastructure capex while the going is good - that's more like it. Whatever you think of the likes of Kunstler, you have to ditch the notion that everyone is going to be a winner in this. That done, by all means secure advantages for yourself.

Oh, and global warming? Do not discount pragmatism. Look at the facts, the short-term national interest cards about to be played. The greens are going to lose, and badly.

Watch the smart money, you said. By the sound of it, your friends are the smart money. What they are doing isn't bad, but you have misunderstood the reason why it's a good move. Saving the climate might fall under personal motivation, will certainly stimulate demand, but is not why their strategy is likely to pay off.

For that, read on. Beware the obvious nutcases and trolls, for they are legion. But there is a message for you here if you listen, and you are not going to like it. Global warming is the odds on favourite, but it is not the only horse in the race.

[dorlomin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')-Coal-to-liquid (CTL) technology failed the Germans in WWII and the South African during apartheid. There is little evidence that it returns net positive energy.

[Montxo]

what an incredible comparation between whale oil and petroleum!

A switch from an energy system based on whale oil to oil pumped out of the ground?? Are you joking??

There was no such switch. Petroleum multiple use was revolutionary, as its absence will be.

[threadbear]

I'm not actually that worried about running out of energy, more about what cheap energy of ANY kind, will do to the ecosphere. Hopefully Peak Money is going to provide a brake on run-away consumption.

Nanosolar sounds interesting.

From Carhole's flick: Hirsch -"We're going to have to move to a whole different kind of vehicle!!" OHMYGOD! We're all going to die!! I'm with the bearded guy. Peak oil, as a horror story, is a bit of a fairy tale for old farts afraid of change.

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')here are the Nukes when you need them?

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Anthill', 'T')here is enough coal for the next 250 years. Canada has vast oil shale reserves. There is abundant natural gas.

[TheDude]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'D')on't forget that both Germany and South Africa already had an infrastructure built with cheap petroleum and their experiments with FT only lasted a few years.

[vfr]

Anthill"]Hi,

First post. Stalwart peak oil skeptic.

There is enough coal for the next 250 years. Canada has vast oil shale reserves. There is abundant natural gas.

Global warming is the extraordinarily dominant issue. Global warming not only affects every human on the planet, but every plant, every animal, every ecosystem. Al Gore didn't win the Nobel prize for carping about peak oil. He won it for global warming....



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********


"If the public does think briefly about future oil supplies, the question usually asked is, "How long will oil last?" This is the wrong question. Oil will be extracted in some insignificant quantity perhaps 200 years from now. The critical question is: When does the peak of world oil production occur?" ~ Richard C. Duncan

The World Coal Institute estimates world energy reserves as follows:

"At current production levels coal will be available for at least the next 155 years compared to 41 years for oil and 65 years for gas."

http://www.worldcoal.org/pages/content/ ... ?PageID=21

Even though this was written a few years ago and it is based on 'current production and consumption' it gives the same haunting message to the generations to come.

We may not exactly see the end of our free flowing energy as we know it - but some of our descendants will in the not so distant future. This is the legacy they will inherit from us. But before the energy dries up completely massive changes in our world will have taken place.

Our population has grown to levels where it has passed the point of no return for supporting a sustainable human population as we know it today when it comes to their energy demands.

And leading the pack of over consumers is the USA.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_o ... onsumption

Consumption is ingrained in us and we know no other way. And even if we wished to amend our ways, how could all our retirement funds take the hit? America is built on borrowed money, spending and consumerism.

And what does all that consumerism lead to?

It leads to the mess we are in now and the bigger mess the world will be in once India and China pick up momentum to copycat the envious lifestyle that they have held in high esteem as the 'American Dream'

You see, the problem is not with the earth having enough land for all its people - the problem is with earth providing ad infinitum for all the needs the people crave.

The more people born, the more heat is produced from their life and all their cravings, As such, the warmer and more polluted the earth gets and the more energy they all use and the earths resources are depleted.

Fueling the problem of consumption is the games the Federal and World banks play with interest rates. They manage the economies in ways to fuel consumption and mask the real trend. Witness the recent cries for Federal bankers to lower interest rates...so the stock market can go up...fueled by spending of the consumer.

It is drug habit that Greenspan got us hooked on and we just can't get away from.

Our economy is not based on sustainable health - it is based low interest credit to encourage compulsive spending, debt and living a life of constant consumption with a 'disposable mentality' when it comes to durable goods.

All this consumption to artificially fuel our economy to make our retirement funds only go up contributes to more and more global warming and the depletion of our natural resources. Then the governments juggle the numbers to make the inflation figures seem artificially low, so everyone's retirement portfolio will make them happy so they will continue to buy and consume more...and on it goes....IT IS ALL WE KNOW

You see, no other animal destroys its environment except mankind. We are the only ones that do not accept and live within our comfortable means. We not only debt with our finances we debt with our environment. What we are borrowing in terms of petroleum, coal and natural gas takes millions of years for nature to make. Yet we are using it all up in just a few hundred years...we can never pay it back.

Actually humanity faces much bigger problems than climate control. The massive problem facing the world in the not so distant future will be that of peak oil as we are rapidly running out of ALL fossil fuels as well as uranium, food and water.

And in the long run, global warming may be good for us. You see, we wont have much fuel to heat our homes, so at least we wont freeze to death as much in a warmer climate.

Have you ever thought about how much of our life is dependent on natural gas for cooking, heating and hot water?

How many of our homes are set up for efficient heating with natural methods such as wood, pellet, passive solar?

My house is not.

I never gave this subject any thought until I learned about peak natural gas. And by then it was too late.

My house is as far as it can be from the 'ideal house' that can be heated my natural methods. And to make maters worse, I live in the NE US, where it gets plenty cold.

Do you know that much of your life is dependent on natural gas outside its use as an energy source?

We will run out of natural gas, just as we deplete our crude supplies in the near future.

http://www.amazon.com/High-Noon-Natural ... 1931498539

Natural gas is a raw material in many of our products we depend on.

Almost all the helium we produce comes from natural gas.

Propane, synthetic fertilizers, ammonia?

They are totally dependent on natural gas.

Our population boom was fueled by synthetic fertilizers made from natural; gas. Once the gas dries up so does the fertilizer and a shortage of fertilizer equals a shortage of food.

Natural; gas is also used as an energy source to produce steel, glass, paper, clothing, brick, electricity

http://www.enotes.com/how-products-ency ... atural-gas

http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/2003 ... tgasn.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts ... TISUSEDFOR

From this list we can see that we are still massively depend on crude for our non sustainable lifestyle.

There is no replacement for crude...crude is in the details of our life.

So even if we all stop driving we will just be postponing the inevitable that our artificial way of living is going to change in the not so distant future.

A partial list of products made from Petroleum (144 of over 6000 items) One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest (over half) is used to make things like:

Solvents Diesel Motor Oil Bearing Grease
Ink Floor Wax Ballpoint Pens Football Cleats
Upholstery Sweaters Boats Insecticides
Bicycle Tires Sports Car Bodies Nail Polish Fishing lures
Dresses Tires Golf Bags Perfumes
Cassettes Dishwasher Tool Boxes Shoe Polish
Motorcycle Helmet Caulking Petroleum Jelly Transparent Tape
CD Player Faucet Washers Antiseptics Clothesline
Curtains Food Preservatives Basketballs Soap
Vitamin Capsules Antihistamines Purses Shoes
Dashboards Cortisone Deodorant Footballs
Putty Dyes Panty Hose Refrigerant
Percolators Life Jackets Rubbing Alcohol Linings
Skis TV Cabinets Shag Rugs Electrician's Tape
Tool Racks Car Battery Cases Epoxy Paint
Mops Slacks Insect Repellent Oil Filters
Umbrellas Yarn Fertilizers Hair Coloring
Roofing Toilet Seats Fishing Rods Lipstick
Denture Adhesive Linoleum Ice Cube Trays Synthetic Rubber
Speakers Plastic Wood Electric Blankets Glycerin
Tennis Rackets Rubber Cement Fishing Boots Dice
Nylon Rope Candles Trash Bags House Paint
Water Pipes Hand Lotion Roller Skates Surf Boards
Shampoo Wheels Paint Rollers Shower Curtains
Guitar Strings Luggage Aspirin Safety Glasses
Antifreeze Football Helmets Awnings Eyeglasses
Clothes Toothbrushes Ice Chests Footballs
Combs CD's Paint Brushes Detergents
Vaporizers Balloons Sun Glasses Tents
Heart Valves Crayons Parachutes Telephones
Enamel Pillows Dishes Cameras
Anesthetics Artificial Turf Artificial limbs Bandages
Dentures Model Cars Folding Doors Hair Curlers
Cold cream Movie film Soft Contact lenses Drinking Cups
Fan Belts Car Enamel Shaving Cream Ammonia
Refrigerators Golf Balls Toothpaste Gasoline

Americans consume petroleum products at a rate of three-and-a-half gallons of oil and more than 250 cubic feet of natural gas per day each!

http://www.beloit.edu/~SEPM/Geology_and ... _need.html

Now, peak oil may all be a conspiracy, just a cruel trick on the consumer to line the pockets of industry with more money...only time will settle this debate

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/peak_oil/index.htm

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel ... entid=2097

http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2007 ... -peak-oil/

http://www.energybulletin.net/4466.html

I always tell the proponents saying peak oil is a conspiracy and think that we have an unlimited amount of oil, natural gas, coal, uranium...actions speak louder than words.

We can look at Hubbert's prediction of the USA's peak.

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

He was exactly right.

We can look at global oil production and see what the general trend is.

Look at the UK and other countries like the US that had been energy exporters in their heyday. Now they are all energy importers.

See:

http://www.oilcrashmovie.com/

We can look at the trend in drilling to see how deep we have to go to find oil. How many big finds are being made?

We can look at the quality of crude being produced.

Is it light sweet crude or high sulfur, heavy, hard to refine crude?

The light sweet is just that 'light' and is on the surface of the oil pool. Whereas the less desirable heavy sulfated crude is on the bottom of the pool. Does the phrase hitting the bottom the barrel mean anything to you?

Lately we have been putting much of our hope in the tar sands of Canada.

When we have to get the oil out of the sand and shale it sounds like we are hitting the bottom of the barrel again. Even talk about getting our gas from refining bitumen coal.

Now, some people say we are saving the light sweet crude for national defense and using the foreign oil and tar sands first. I don't know, I have no inside information about that claim.

We get about 15% of our natural gas from Canada. That 15% amounts to 50% of the natural gas Canada produces. The US sucks down more energy than any other country...no one can come close to us.

Our demands for natural gas are on the rise, just as our demands are for all fossil fuels. Once demand outstrips production we are headed over Hubert's peak in any number of areas besides crude. We can see peak production issues in natural gas, uranium, food or water, just as we will see with crude oil.

It is an easy task to see how much oil is produced in the world. But finding the 'exact peak date' for world oil production is hard to pinpoint. (see peak oil section)

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

For one thing, some countries production are erratic and they are not transparent with their real production and discovery data.

Also oil production is not an exact science and still requires a little luck. We may find a lucky hit down the road that brings in a gusher to distort some of the figures.

No one knows the exact peak date for world oil production, but we do know that time will come in the not so distant future. But finding the peak is not hard problem once we can look back on it by a few years....but we need some time to do it...again, only time will settle this debate.

"If the public does think briefly about future oil supplies, the question usually asked is, "How long will oil last?" This is the wrong question. Oil will be extracted in some insignificant quantity perhaps 200 years from now. The critical question is: When does the peak of world oil production occur?" ~ Richard C. Duncan

Check out:

Twilight in the Desert: the coming Saudi oil shock and the world economy
by Simmons, Matthew R.

It is a well written book examining 12 of the key Saudi oil fields and the exaggerated claims of remaining crude reserves of Saudi Arabia.

Also see:

http://www.worldoil.com/INFOCENTER/STAT ... production

http://hubbert.mines.edu/

http://www.mnforsustain.org/duncan_and_ ... The%20Peak


You still have some valuable time left to prepare for what awaits you down the road.

We are in the 'Indian Summer' of a carbon based world. Don't wait until the winter sets in to start work on your preparedness efforts.






Take care,


V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
Futurist
Urban Homesteader

[vfr]

Why don't we do anything about global warming...because we can't.

No one can stop global warming my friend. You are deluded to think otherwise.

To do anything substantive would cause a financial and population backlash of unimaginable proportions.

And what we could do, even with drastic measures, would not cure global warming but only slow things down.

In addition, there is no one global entity to control all the green house gas emitters. China and India (CHINDIA) plan on adding more dirty coal burning electric plants to feed their burgeoning economies.

Yes, we have Kyoto, but...the largest polluters of green house gasses have exempted themselves from it.

"As of June 2007, a total of 172 countries and other governmental entities have ratified the agreement (representing over 61.6% of emissions from Annex I countries). Notable exceptions include the United States and Australia. Other countries, like CHINDIA, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement."

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

We can't start wars over green house gas like we do oil...even then we would have to go to war right here at home before we point fingers at other countries.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3143798.stm

As far as foreign wars, many of these newly rich nations seem to be in a war of sorts to see who can build the biggest and the tallest. Well, the bigger the building is the more energy it takes to power it and the more green house gas is given off to pay for the ego behind the monstrosity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ta ... _buildings

Thoreau once said when people invited him to dinner they 'put their pride' in how fancy and expensive a meal they could make. Whereas he put his pride in how simple and inexpensive a meal he could make.

Where do we put our pride?

We surely don't put it in living within our means and in balance with nature.

In the US, 93.2% of our electric comes from non renewable, greenhouse gas producing methods.

If we are looking to hydroelectric and renewable sources, 4.46% of our electric comes from hydroelectric and 2.34% comes from renewable energy production.

Out of this 2.34% of renewable sources, an undisclosed portion still contributes to global warming despite its prestige of being a 'renewable energy source' as it involves the burning of wood, black liquor, wood waste, municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, tires, agriculture byproducts and biomass.

Only a fraction of the 2.34% of renewable electric energy that is produced comes from geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic energy, and wind.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricit ... pates.html

Lets say we decided to turn off the coal fired plants for 25% of a 24 hour day to save some fossil fuel.

Saving 25% seems to be a modest proposal.

So they shut the coal fired plants down for 6 hours during peak daytime operation.

And lets say we don't care that all the frozen food in the markets will thaw out and the refrigerated foods will spoil.

And lets say the workforce will sacrifice their jobs for the 6 hours every day while the electric is shut off.

And we put up with the gridlock and accidents from not having traffic lights and the doctors and hospitals all shut down.

And people just hold their noses over the backed up sewage that cannot be processed when the electric is off.

The real problem with trying to implement even a modest 25% fossil fuel saving plan is this - it just can't be done.

Coal fired plants are not of the nature to be turned off and turned on with the flip of a switch.

If a coal fired plant was turned off and completely cooled down it would take many days to bring it back online. If a coal powered plant was shut down even for 6 hours, it would take between 12 hours to bring it back to operational capacity.

In addition, when the plant is started back up, all the fossil fuel that is consumed in the startup does not make electric, it just goes to bring things back up to speed. And during startup, the plant operates at lower temperature and produces more pollution at those lower temperatures. And if that is not enough, startups of that magnitude send out power surges that destroy transformers and cause grid problems.

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

Well, if saving 25% from the coal plants does not seem feasible, what about going to the American public?

Can we cut back on GNP by 25%?

Cut back on utility use at home by 25%

Cut back on driving by 25%?

Cut back on consumption whether it be food or hard goods by 25%?

Cut back on interstate trucking by 25%?

And cut back in all related areas that use energy by 25%?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

The 'public' gets their underpants in a bind when the GNP declines at all...even when it is still in the positive numbers.

They start a panic in the stock market when the GNP is +1%, so how can it survive a -25% GNP drop?.

And as for cutting back on our demands...well it goes against the American dream.

And even if America decided to cut back 25%, that is only a drop in the bucket, as the rest of the world is ever increasing their demands on the environment and would soon make up for such a small decrease in greenhouse gas and fossil fuel depletion.

Are you starting to see the folly of thinking mankind can stop global warming, when mankind is built on such a ludicrous foundation?

There is no 'simple or easy answer' to this issue nor is there even a 'not so simple and hard answer' to our dilemma.

The world is in a death spiral. It is just how we have built our world over the years.

It would be one thing if we all reverted back to rural living, burning trees for fuel and housing and living within our comfortable means allotted to us by nature, as our ancestors did back in the day. But seven billion people can't burn the trees!

Our planet is overpopulated in terms of what the planet can sustainably support. The more people born, the more heat is produced from their life and all their cravings, As such, the warmer and more polluted the earth gets and the more energy they all use and the earths resources are depleted.

While I cannot deny the wisdom of promoting life as many religions profess and personal freedom the USA is built on, sometime we must accept the lesser of two evils if promoting life turns into being more destructive to life than 'not promoting' it.

It then becomes a decision whether to choose between the 'greater good for the whole' or the 'greater personal right for the individual'... and the whole be damned. (Whole meaning entire human population of our planet.)

For instance, on a farm if the plants are planted packed like sardines (or 'packed like sushi' as they say in Japan) the plants do not flourish.

In nature, trees that are overcrowded weed themselves out by nature's decree. But if man forced the trees to not weed out and forces crowding the trees may die from disease due to a forced and unsustainable growth plan.

So it goes with how our planet is evolving...a sad but exactly true statement.

The scary thing is CHINDIA is just starting to bloom with their demands for fossil fuels We haven't seen anything yet with the meteoric rise of gas, energy and over consumption.

In China the per capita car ownership rate is 40 car owners per 1000 persons. In India it is much lower, running 8 cars per 1000 people. As these two giants evolve more of their population will want cars...in India, they are making a $2500 car as well.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/05 ... car_o.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20394364/

But what can one say about the problem unless people just cut back reproducing?

Everyone has a desire to have some sex stimulation and through that stimulation comes more and more people. And everyone has a desire to keep warm when it is cold or to keep cool in the heat or move about the earth and wear clothes. And it is from all those desires that global warming fueled through the expenditure of fossil fuels takes place.

But the sad reality is even if people cut back having babies, we are only delaying the inevitable and that alone will not fix the problem. It can be compared to men stuck underwater in a crippled submarine. The more they move around, the quicker they run out of air and die. The less they move, the longer they can live...but the end result is the same.

Now maybe some genius will come up with a replacement for petroleum, natural gas and coal to meet all out needs. But it is unrealistic to think we can grow enough corn to fuel all the trucks, airlines, cargo ships, cars and other needs we humans have in addition run all the power plants and factories, heat and cool our homes.

What is in store for us in the not so distant future?

Without energy our country is open for takeover ... no jets...no tanks...no transport on the ground or in the air. Luckily we will still have nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers as long as the uranium holds out. But the jets on the flattop all use jet fuel. All the supplies for those subs and carriers petroleum dependent. So long before the crude dries up the government must 'secure a supply' of crude for it own needs.

Other countries such as Russia that have a good supply of crude may not be so kind to keep on selling it to us and we need a 'local and continual' source somewhat within our borders. You see, jet fuel as well as gasoline deteriorates and cannot be stored indefinitely. So we must always be producing some of it to replace the stale stuff to supply the military. But, that's why we elect politicians to deal with these troubles

As our world changes and our drug supply dries up, things will only get worse. And the bigger the city - the bigger the hellhole it will become. And this time RIGHT NOW is the defining moment as to whether most of our population will die off or not in the crisis that awaits us in the not so distant future.

When it comes to the future, I see people living in miniature houses (the lucky ones that survive that is, after all most of the population died off long ago from starvation, freezing to death or from the riots) with roofs shingled completely with solar material.

They drive up to their house on an electric scooter that is recharged from their solar roof. If they are higher up the totem pole they may have a solar golf cart. But in either case, luck must still be on their side for without the sun shinning to charge it, their transportation sits idle. (Not much lead left to build big batteries...China gobbled it all up, so we have to make due with very small storage cells.)

They work for the government and in exchange the government feeds and clothes them from their warehouses. You see, we have become a sort of 'Communist Democracy' for without that bold leap and a desire 'to put our country first' Russia or China would have stepped in to acquire some new real estate.

The warehouses are fed from government owned coal fired steam locomotives. Diesel dried up long ago, so it was either wood or coal to fuel the trains. It did not take our government long to realize this. the electric plants only had to shut down sporadically for 8 months so until they could build the first of a large fleet of steam locomotives.

This was a 'slight' government oversight. They never figured that the coal fired power plants were fed with 'diesel powered' locomotives. They kept concentrated on the prediction that we had a hundred of years of coal left, but were oblivious as to how that coal is delivered to the power plant. But all these changes have some bright spots in them. As the coal producers were able to hire many more workers to manually mine coal, as the diesel powered mining equipment sit idle from lack of diesel fuel.

Now some of the states or bigger cities had the foresight to build one or two electric rail trolleys for public transport. Your only problem is getting to the main road to catch the trolley and then it is a straight ride to the government warehouse.

What happened to Private industry & Money?

Money is nothing more than stored energy. But since the crude dried up, the 'real energy' behind the money has vanished...and so did private industry. What about the coal mines...all government owned. If you want to eat you work..it is that simple.

So, what is money good for nowadays...to wipe your ass?

Not really, the government supplied toilet paper works better than that.

Martha Stewart syndrome died out long ago, now people are happy to eat rice and beans and get a clean glass of water to drink.

After all, the government can't afford to fool around decorating everyone's house, they can hardly produce enough food to keep a fraction of the population alive. Yes, tractors, reapers and farming is very crude intensive...but no one bothered to think about that as they continued to squander the worlds petroleum resources.

On a positive note, since most of the population died off from 'natural causes', the government does not have to worry about passing 'population control' any longer. They tried to get that universally opposed program passed for many years, but the public just would not go for it...too UN-American...goes against our religious upbringings...too controversial and all of the rest. We can still hear the cries now...Communist!...Atheist!...Baby Killer....Hitler....Impeach the President!!!!

Such objections are only subjective and prejudicial states of mind. As such, all problems related to 'controversial subjects' such as this are problems created in the mind...the mind of ego based, prejudicial man. If you find yourself being distracted with such thoughts as 'too controversial' just ask yourself if the proposed controversy is true, false or I don't know?

This introspective method may help you become truth based and not ego based. You will have made a 'choice divorced of need'...you wont 'need your ego' to support the truth...the truth will be able to stand on its own.

But nature helped us humans out with that hard decision - for nature does not discriminate nor find the truth too controversial or provocative or opinionated to be true. And in the end, nature settled the dispute of population control with even handed justice of 75% of our population dying off, ever reminding us all that nature does not bow to man...it is always man that bows to nature.

But, people hold no grudges against nature and are more in harmony with nature and enjoy a simpler life nowadays. People pick pine needles from trees to make their tea, since there is no jet fuel to import any Darjeeling tea or coffee. Once in a while people are able to kill a bird, a rat or cat to supplement their diet - so we still can find a place of gratitude in our life for such gifts.

Of course one problem still haunts the world?

The last remaining buckets of crude will soon be gone and they have still not found out how to make the tires for the solar powered golf carts and scooters without that critical ingredient of crude oil?

http://www.coaleducation.org/lessons/twe/mcoal.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed ... ric_Car%3F

http://www.amazon.com/Out-Gas-End-Age-Oil/dp/0393058573

http://www.amazon.com/Hubberts-Peak-Imp ... 0691116253

http://www.lastoilshock.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Resource-Wars-Lan ... 0805055762

http://www.amazon.com/Long-Emergency-Co ... 0871138883

http://dieoff.org/

http://www.crudeawakening.org/





Take care,


V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
Futurist
Urban Homesteader

[vfr]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cipi604', 'A')nthill, what you have learned it's just learned, not necessarily true.

"There is enough coal for the next 250 years. Canada has vast oil shale reserves. There is abundant natural gas." This is what you learned. Guess again?!

[EnergyUnlimited]

vfr,

These are very good posts of yours.
There are only minor points of technical nature, what I could question here and there, but your overall logic is brilliant.

Incidentally it is also my stand.
1. You cannot change our behemoth system and put it or right path because it is far too late.
All that due to magnitude of task required and enormous system inertia built in.
2. For the reason stated in 1 above it is worthless to try doing it.
That may sound antisocial, but it is only pragmatic observation.
3. Nature will clear our crap in most efficient, humane and uncontroversial way possible.
4. There is a good chance that better society will emerge few centuries later, after dust settled down, but it is also possible that some form of feudalism will come back and will be here to stay.

So one can say that total ruin is the only realistic future of our current global civilization.
Process of catabolic collapse is already setting in.

All what one can try to do is to help him/herself, his immediate family and attempt some action on the very local level.
This will by no means "save" him, but at least personal survival chance will be increased, so he get more time to observe the progress of events unfolding.