[ki11ercane]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', ' ') We've brought this whole mess on ourselves.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'U')ranium supplies, like oil, are finite. It appears the earth only has about a 30,000-60,000 year supply of uranium, at current rates of consumption. That means peak uranium in roughly 15,000 to 30,000 years---and TEOTWAWKI even in France.

According to the NEA, identified uranium resources total 5.5 million metric tons, and an additional 10.5 million metric tons remain undiscovered—a roughly 230-year supply at today's consumption rate in total. Further exploration and improvements in extraction technology are likely to at least double this estimate over time.

Using more enrichment work could reduce the uranium needs of LWRs by as much as 30 percent per metric ton of LEU. And separating plutonium and uranium from spent LEU and using them to make fresh fuel could reduce requirements by another 30 percent. Taking both steps would cut the uranium requirements of an LWR in half.

Two technologies could greatly extend the uranium supply itself. Neither is economical now, but both could be in the future if the price of uranium increases substantially. First, the extraction of uranium from seawater would make available 4.5 billion metric tons of uranium—a 60,000-year supply at present rates. Second, fuel-recycling fast-breeder reactors, which generate more fuel than they consume, would use less than 1 percent of the uranium needed for current LWRs. Breeder reactors could match today's nuclear output for 30,000 years using only the NEA-estimated supplies.

uranium supply is finite....estimated at 30,000-60,000 years


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

[ki11ercane]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'U')ranium supplies, like oil, are finite. It appears the earth only has about a 30,000-60,000 year supply of uranium, at current rates of consumption. That means peak uranium in roughly 15,000 to 30,000 years---and TEOTWAWKI even in France.

According to the NEA, identified uranium resources total 5.5 million metric tons, and an additional 10.5 million metric tons remain undiscovered—a roughly 230-year supply at today's consumption rate in total. Further exploration and improvements in extraction technology are likely to at least double this estimate over time.

Using more enrichment work could reduce the uranium needs of LWRs by as much as 30 percent per metric ton of LEU. And separating plutonium and uranium from spent LEU and using them to make fresh fuel could reduce requirements by another 30 percent. Taking both steps would cut the uranium requirements of an LWR in half.

Two technologies could greatly extend the uranium supply itself. Neither is economical now, but both could be in the future if the price of uranium increases substantially. First, the extraction of uranium from seawater would make available 4.5 billion metric tons of uranium—a 60,000-year supply at present rates. Second, fuel-recycling fast-breeder reactors, which generate more fuel than they consume, would use less than 1 percent of the uranium needed for current LWRs. Breeder reactors could match today's nuclear output for 30,000 years using only the NEA-estimated supplies.

uranium supply is finite....estimated at 30,000-60,000 years


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

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', '
')My preps are about 20% for me and 80% for my daughter. She may not even take them. I can at least expire from this mortal coil knowing I tried.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', 'I')n my lifetime, it's hopeless. In my daughter's lifetime, it's probably hopeless. In my daughter's children's lifetime, it is hopeful.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', '
')
Thanks for reading my post. (which you didn't)

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')
The only reference to the USGS and someone picking a peak that I am familiar with is here

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/of00-320/

and I don't know if he's picking a peak or just referencing a peaker?

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')in stead of buying a new ipod for the kids, we'll save those dollars to cover the winters heating bill. But it certainly doesn't require depopulation as has been suggested by Ehrlich-Monte.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', '
')So S.O.S. please present the mother of all factual articles, papers, essays, or research that proves transitioning from cheap available energy to non-cheap available energy will have no negative effect on the economy, environment, society, culture, and at the same time not wipe out more than half of the planet's population. I'd like to read it please. Once I do I can go back to the way I was thinking pre "Peak Oil" discovery and not worry about what's coming.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Ahem...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Which in no way answers the question posed here.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o are you saying USGS information doesn't indicate Peak Oil will be "later"?

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Ahem...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Which in no way answers the question posed here.

On a lighter note... 85% of percentage measurements made on the Internet are made up on the spot.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')Link? Some link you say, vindicates your seemingly contradictory statements.

I'm all hyper-links challenged... educate us.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', ' ')WHY doesn't the USGS tackle the problem? ...
82 pages, for "Congressional Requesters" it says. And they've got fuel cell crap in there and comments related to all sorts of stuff like reserves and resources, and how uncertain everything is, and I couldn't find anywhere the phrase "and the USGS geologists are studying the issue as we speak and will release a study"...nada. Zip. My question is, WHY THE HELL NOT?

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Planetagenet', '
')
To estimate or even discuss "peak oil" you have to combine the estimates of recoverable oil resources with economic models of oil development, extraction, and consumption by society. That isn't part of the USGS mission statement. That task is what the EIA does.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Planetagenet', '
')
To estimate or even discuss "peak oil" you have to combine the estimates of recoverable oil resources with economic models of oil development, extraction, and consumption by society. That isn't part of the USGS mission statement. That task is what the EIA does.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')1. Please get your facts straight. It did not start with the USGS. Hubbert developed the peak oil model while working at Shell Oil.

[Grautr]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ki11ercane', 'I')n my lifetime, it's hopeless. In my daughter's lifetime, it's probably hopeless. In my daughter's children's lifetime, it is hopeful.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')1. Please get your facts straight. It did not start with the USGS. Hubbert developed the peak oil model while working at Shell Oil.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'n')ot clear to me that the USGS has had any involvement specifically in peak oil during the last 40 years.

In fact the USGS geologic appraisals of the oil resources in the Bakken Fm and other areas are generally criticized by the ASPO and others as being hopelessly over-optimistic, because they ignore basic economic considerations like the EROI.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'I')ts not clear to me that the USGS has had any involvement specifically in peak oil during the last 40 years.

In fact the USGS geologic appraisals of the oil resources in the Bakken Fm and other areas are generally criticized by the ASPO and others as being hopelessly over-optimistic, because they ignore basic economic considerations like the EROI.