Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Article: "'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load ..."

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

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 00:02:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'H')ey Zeke. Welcome to yesplease's world. He'll say anything to call attention to himself. He'll even admit to planetary limits if it will win his argument that there are no limits. Yesplease is a real piece of work?
You post stuff like this and I'm a real piece of work? :?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'N')ow Yesplease, you can ridicule these number but unless you offer something else (other than claims for authority and work you don't understand) then you'd better quit it. Okay? If you can't respond constructively, and discuss this in a mature manner than I will be forced to send you to your room without computer privileges. And without dinner. And then I will lock the door and gas you inside with Zyklon-B cyanide gas. Okay?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 00:07:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')here is no absolutely no evidence that contradicts Jevons.
That's true.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'E')very step toward conservation or efficiency has led to greater energy use.
That's false. Jevon's paradox is rarely seen wrt efficiency improvements. What's relatively common is the rebound effect, when the efficiency improvement isn't maximally effective but we still use less energy that we would have otherwise, but even that isn't seen in certain examples, appliance energy efficiency for instance.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')ith very few exceptions we have used more oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewable energy year to year.
And this increase in use is due to an increase in population and/or economic activity, not Jevon's paradox. They are different. Just because you do not understand the difference does not mean there isn't one.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'H')ow about you name a year when we didn't?
1983.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby zeke » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 01:15:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'H')ey Zeke. Welcome to yesplease's world. He'll say anything to call attention to himself. He'll even admit to planetary limits if it will win his argument that there are no limits. Yesplease is a real piece of work?


yeah...I guess you could call his a, uh..."creative" style of thinking.


z
User avatar
zeke
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 308
Joined: Fri 07 Dec 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby peripato » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 01:39:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')tudies, science, physics, etc... Why listen to what the rest of the world says when there's d00m to be had? :lol:
Most of the rest of the world thought that borrowing and spending like there was no tomorrow was a good thing, except for a few "chicken littles" who warned otherwise, and now the wheels have fallen off the economy. The moral here; most of the rest of the world are lemmings.
How very American! The rest of the world was living more or less within it's means while America and to a lesser extent other developed countries were spending beyond their means. This was noticed a while back. It was not the world, it was America and to a lesser extent other developed countries. The moral here; posters on this forum such can be lemmings, posting ludicrous statements w/o even bothering to verify them. How very American't. ;)

Money CNN - is that indicative of where you get your verification from? :lol: :lol: :lol: That explains a lot! :lol: :lol: Didn't anyone from there ever tell you that America, and those other developed countries you curtly dismiss, account for the majority of world GDP (nearly 80%)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... y_GDP_(PPP)
User avatar
peripato
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Tue 03 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Reality
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 01:57:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')tudies, science, physics, etc... Why listen to what the rest of the world says when there's d00m to be had? :lol:
Most of the rest of the world thought that borrowing and spending like there was no tomorrow was a good thing, except for a few "chicken littles" who warned otherwise, and now the wheels have fallen off the economy. The moral here; most of the rest of the world are lemmings.
How very American! The rest of the world was living more or less within it's means while America and to a lesser extent other developed countries were spending beyond their means. This was noticed a while back. It was not the world, it was America and to a lesser extent other developed countries. The moral here; posters on this forum such can be lemmings, posting ludicrous statements w/o even bothering to verify them. How very American't. ;)

Money CNN - is that indicative of where you get your verification from? :lol: :lol: :lol: That explains a lot! :lol: :lol: Didn't anyone from there ever tell you that America, and those other developed countries you curtly dismiss, account for the majority of world GDP (nearly 80%)?
You said most of the world, not most of the world economy. There is a difference between different words believe it or not. If you don't consider people who are in the poorer portions of the world part of it, well, that's very American too, but that still doesn't mean they aren't part of the world. :(

Edit- It isn't just CNN. The NY Times mentioned it, and even the WSJ acknowledges what China's savings rate has done, among many others. Like MrBill mentioned, people can only live beyond their means for so long.
Last edited by yesplease on Thu 08 Jan 2009, 02:04:38, edited 1 time in total.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby peripato » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 02:02:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'S')tudies, science, physics, etc... Why listen to what the rest of the world says when there's d00m to be had? :lol:
Most of the rest of the world thought that borrowing and spending like there was no tomorrow was a good thing, except for a few "chicken littles" who warned otherwise, and now the wheels have fallen off the economy. The moral here; most of the rest of the world are lemmings.
How very American! The rest of the world was living more or less within it's means while America and to a lesser extent other developed countries were spending beyond their means. This was noticed a while back. It was not the world, it was America and to a lesser extent other developed countries. The moral here; posters on this forum such can be lemmings, posting ludicrous statements w/o even bothering to verify them. How very American't. ;)

Money CNN - is that indicative of where you get your verification from? :lol: :lol: :lol: That explains a lot! :lol: :lol: Didn't anyone from there ever tell you that America, and those other developed countries you curtly dismiss, account for the majority of world GDP (nearly 80%)?
You said most of the world, not most of the world economy. There is a difference between different words believe it or not. If you don't consider people who are in the poorer portions of the world part of it, well, that's very American too, but that still doesn't mean they aren't part of the world. :(
Holy Fcuk - pass me a rope! We wuz wrong all along! It's actually places like Burkina Faso that we have to worry about first. Their economic performance counts for so much more on the world stage...
Last edited by peripato on Thu 08 Jan 2009, 02:09:34, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
peripato
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Tue 03 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Reality
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 02:06:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', 'H')oly Fcuk - pass me a rope! We wuz wrong all along! It's actually places like Burkina Faso that we have to worry about first. Their opinions count for so much more on the world stage...
It isn't about who we worry about first but who's responsible for what problems. Whine aboue Burkina Faso all ya want, but America's problems are America's fault, not something the rest of the world created. :roll:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby peripato » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 02:15:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', 'H')oly Fcuk - pass me a rope! We wuz wrong all along! It's actually places like Burkina Faso that we have to worry about first. Their opinions count for so much more on the world stage...
It isn't about who we worry about first but who's responsible for what problems. Whine aboue Burkina Faso all ya want, but America's problems are America's fault, not something the rest of the world created. :roll:
The US composed the monetarist/globalisation hymn sheet, and sold it to the world – Hello Doly! All the other shit pile countries decided to play along and along and along. The end of that symphony is now history.
User avatar
peripato
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Tue 03 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Reality
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 03:24:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'O')f course his paradox is apparent today. EnergyStar demanded refrigerators be more efficient and use less energy to cool the same amount of food. And so people now buy larger refrigerators reasoning they can afford more space, more cooling for the same cost. Plus they get to rationalize their greed as 'green.' Same goes for autos etc. etc.
That is not Jevon's paradox, that is the rebound effect. For Jevon's to be observed people need to, in the case of an EnergyStar fridge that uses half the energy, get a fridge that's twice as big. People just don't have that kind of room. In fact, according to the two studies cited, the rebound effect for appliances was 0%, meaning people didn't change the size of their fridge even if it used less electricity. That said, even if fridges were like other areas, where the rebound effect was ~10-40%, we still wouldn't see Jevon's paradox, which requires a rebound effect greater than 100%. In other words, if we saw more efficient autos that would, all things being equal, reduce gasoline consumption by 50%, and drove more to the point where we saw a 10% rebound effect, then we would still see a 45% reduction in consumption instead of a 50% reduction in consumption. Either way, we would still see a reduction in consumption. The only way we wouldn't would be if the rebound effect was greater than 100%, which is relatively rare.

Is it perfect? No. But it's still a reduction, and the vast majority of efficiency improvements result in them, even w/ the rebound effect. Seeing Jevon's paradox is relatively rare compared to seeing the rebound effect. The rebound effect is common, but in nearly seventy studies done on energy efficiency within the past few decades we have not seen Jevon's paradox.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'W')ith very few exceptions we have used more oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewable energy year to year.
And this increase in use is due to an increase in population and/or economic activity, not Jevon's paradox. They are different. Just because you do not understand the difference does not mean there isn't one.
You will make a larger fool of yourself if you attempt to argue that Jeavons was wrong. His is an accepted observation.
I'm not arguing that Jevon was wrong. I am arguing that we have not seen what he referred to recently. We have only seen the rebound effect, which still results in a reduction in energy consumption compared to doing nothing.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'H')ow about you name a year when we didn't?1983.If it wasn't for increased efficiencies, the consumption drop during that recession would have been greater.That is false. The rebound effect was less than 100% during those auto efficiency improvements.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I')t was precisely because of the Jeavons Paradox that people were able to drive as much as they did. What is your point?Again, Jevon's paradox is not the rebound effect. We have seen the rebound effect wrt automotive efficiency/driving. We have not seen a rebound wrt automotive efficiency/driving greater than 100% and as a result have not seen Jevon's paradox. If you spend a few minutes researching the differences between the two perhaps it will help you understand this.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 03:33:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('peripato', 'H')oly Fcuk - pass me a rope! We wuz wrong all along! It's actually places like Burkina Faso that we have to worry about first. Their opinions count for so much more on the world stage...
It isn't about who we worry about first but who's responsible for what problems. Whine aboue Burkina Faso all ya want, but America's problems are America's fault, not something the rest of the world created. :roll:
The US composed the monetarist/globalisation hymn sheet, and sold it to the world – Hello Doly! All the other crap pile countries decided to play along and along and along. The end of that symphony is now history.
Lemme guess, it's all because of Burkina Faso. :lol: :lol: :lol:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: News: Gwynne Dyer: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load

Postby yesplease » Thu 08 Jan 2009, 04:26:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')he Rebound Effect and Jeavon's Paradox explain the same behavior and macroeconomic phenomena. Why do you persist on distinguishing the two, as if that somehow debunks peak oil? That is your agenda, is it not?
False. The rebound effect refers to an increase in efficiency that is not optimal, but also does not result in more energy usage than before all things being equal (emphasis added).
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wikipedia', 'T')he term rebound effect is used in conservation, energy economics and green marketing. It refers to the behavioral or other systemic responses to the introduction of new technologies, or other measures taken to reduce resource use. These responses tend to offset the beneficial effects of the new technology or other measure taken. While the literature on the rebound effect generally focuses on energy consumption, the theory can also be applied to the use of any natural resource. The rebound effect is generally expressed as a ratio of the lost environmental benefit compared to the expected environmental benefit when holding consumption constant.[1] For instance, if a 10% improvement in vehicle fuel efficiency results in only a 4% drop in fuel use, there is a 60% rebound effect.
So, we can see the rebound effect results in using less energy compared to no change in efficiency, as per the example from Wikipedia.

The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate/Jevon's paradox, results in greater energy consumption than before the efficiency improvement, as your link states (emphasis to quoted material added).
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')efinition and Implications of the Rebound Effect

The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate (sometime referred to as ‘Jevons paradox’) may be described as: those energy efficiency improvements that, on the broadest considerations, are economically justified at the microlevel lead to higher levels of energy consumption at the macrolevel than in the absence of such improvements.
Link
That is the difference between these two terms. The rebound effect in recent studies has overwhelmingly been less than 100% and we have seen a reduction in consumption compared to w/o the efficiency improvements. If we had seen a greater than 100% rebound that would be the Khazzoom-Brookes postulate, and we would end up using more energy, but in the nearly 70 studies done on this subject recently that has not happened.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'P')ractically these terms refer to the same phenomena. Conservation (unless mandated and controlled by a strong central authority, of course) will fail to achieve energy savings. Or mitigate peak oil.That is false. The rebound effect, which is what we have seen in the vast majority of cases recently, will still result in a reduction in energy consumption. The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate, being an example of the rebound effect greater than 100%, won't result in any drop in energy consumption. That said, the Khazzoom-Brookes postulate is relatively rare, and we have not seen it recently, while otoh we have seen the rebound effect, which results in a sub-optimal reduction in energy consumption compared to the maximal amount possible, but still results in a reduction in energy consumption. In recent history just about every mandated instance of conservation has reduced energy consumption compared to a situation where it would not have been implemented, as illustrated by rebound effects of less than 100% in nearly 70 recent studies as well as an average rebound effect of ~10-40%. While we don't see all the benefits of efficiency improvements, we see ~60-90% of the benefits along w/ a proportional reduction in energy consumption compared to a situation with no increase in efficiency.

Edited for errors
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load of horse manure

Postby kiwichick » Thu 09 Apr 2009, 20:55:43

anyone heard of david archibald westnet.com.au ?

he is predicting falling global temps due to a deep solar minimum

temps will fall 2degrees C in next decade!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User avatar
kiwichick
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2267
Joined: Sat 02 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Southland New Zealand
Top

Re: 'Peak oil' gloom probably just a load of horse manure

Postby Crazy_Dad » Sat 11 Apr 2009, 07:41:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kiwichick', 'a')nyone heard of david archibald westnet.com.au ?

he is predicting falling global temps due to a deep solar minimum

temps will fall 2degrees C in next decade!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Is he issuing shares? LOL
Crazy_Dad
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri 10 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Perth, Australia
Top
Previous
Post a reply

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests



cron