Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak oil=Swimming up stream, not the end of the world.

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL
Post a reply

Re: Peak oil=Swimming up stream, not the end of the world.

Unread postby cube » Tue 26 Apr 2005, 14:49:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('spot5050', '.')....

Dealing with PO will be like swimming upstream but wont be the end of the world.

....
And how many people here like to swim upstream? Anybody who wants to put their hand up feel free to do so. :-D

One effect that could be potentially more damaging then PO itself is how we react to it. If we all behave logically and rationally then yeah it might not be so bad....but of course I think we all know that "humans" don't behave rationally when their "creature comforts" get yanked from under their feet. Take a look at what's happening right now in the US. The cost of gas goes up 50 cents to $2.50/gallon and now everybody wants to tell their "sob story" on the 6 o'clock news. What's going to happen when gas hits $6/gallon?

It's a guarantee somebody/ something is going to get bombed to hell or sacraficed at the altar when PO hits. Just cross your fingers and hope the nukes don't get released lest we wish to live in a "Road Warrior" world.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby cube » Tue 26 Apr 2005, 14:58:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cammo2004', '.')...

Essentially, we'll be, process wise, sent back to the dawn of electricity. But with more advanced technology, we'll have far more efficient processes.

....
I'm getting an image of New York city in the 1920's but instead everybody has high speed internet access. Either that or an Al Capone style Chicago where the mob drive hybrid cars with machine gun ports and smuggle gasoline to the highest bidder in a world of "price controls on gas" created by the Federal government. 8)
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby linlithgowoil » Wed 27 Apr 2005, 11:38:24

nt
User avatar
linlithgowoil
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon 20 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Scotland
Top

Unread postby Doly » Wed 27 Apr 2005, 11:52:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('linlithgowoil', '
')im not sure jeveons (spelling?) paradox applies in a declining gross energy situation. its never been tested.


I think it has, for a brief time, in the 70s. And people did not consume more energy. Just look at the shape of the curve of oil production. Jevons paradox doesn't apply when there is less supply available.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby Crusty_Ass » Mon 13 Jun 2005, 16:26:42

Let me put my egg in this discussion's basket...

First of all, there are some good numbers available about increased efficiency.

The Exxonmobil 2004 Energy outlook takes a historical figure of 0.7% pa increase in efficiency.
Image

They also reccon that fuel efficiency can increase dramatically in the next 25 Years:
Image
Perhaps most interesting about this graph is that the US is 25 years behind Europe in fuel efficiency. Talking about advanced economies becomes a bit different then....

Another interesting graph:
Image
It clearly shows that hybrid vehicles are at current technology levels by far th best option, and it also clearly shows that efficiency-wise hydrogen-vehicles will never be as energy efficient. Current hybrid vehicles are already a better option than even the best future hydrogen vehicle. That's why people need to stop talking about hydrogen, it's part of the problem.

Mercani:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his won't happen of course, so probably we are headed towards a big crash. However, the problem is our stupidity not peak-oil !

Completely true. More exactly: The problem is that it is the oil industry that is holding all the strings of the world's governments. Expecting politicians to be smart is more stupid than expecting pigs to fly.

cammo2004:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') personally will have to worry alot less about Peak Oil than some (not having the ability to gain a licence, I'm forced to depend on PT).

Unfortunately that's a very shortsighted view of the issue. Peak Oil means higher prices not just for transportation but also for 99% of all consumer products, food, furniture, housing and public and private services. It can create inflation in such high figures that it would amount to hyperinflation. If you have to struggle to keep food on th table now, you will find it completely impossible to do when energy prices are doubled.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') personally don't think that Peak Oil is the start of a new Dark Ages. But I do believe that it will send us back a bit. Cities are sustainable, but not in their current form. European cities are closest to the ideal model, with high density and high levels of public transportation.

It will indeed mean the end of suburbia, possibly in a dramatic collapse if no measures are taken to mitigate the effect. And no measures are taken, nor are they in the planning.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')ass transportation, I believe will have a significant role in the realignment.

Absolutely, it will become insanely expensive to have private transport. You can also kiss globalization goodbye, because it will again become much cheaper to produce locally.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t's a guarantee somebody/ something is going to get bombed to hell or sacraficed at the altar when PO hits. Just cross your fingers and hope the nukes don't get released lest we wish to live in a "Road Warrior" world.

That's why I expect a major nuclear war in the next 20 years or so, most likely initiated by the old empire that doesn't want to adapt to new situations. It's not inevitable, it's just made more likely than not.

Doly:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')evons paradox doesn't apply when there is less supply available.
Exactly. With increasing energy supplies, as it used to be, Jevon's paradox will work because increased efficiency will affect purchasing power of the consumer in a positive way, allowing the consumer to buy more energy, thereby creating a greater energy demand. However, this used to be in a buyers market, it will now turn into a seller's market with an increasingly rarer commodity. And there's no such thing as a free market in energy. With dwindling supplies an increase in efficiency will allow the consumer to keep up the current standard of living more than it would without increased efficiency. If you have a supply of 60 Mb/d and a demand of 100 Mb/d you will not increase demand to for instance 120 Mb/d if you increase efficiency by say 20%. You will still have a demand of 80 Mb/d and a supply of 60 Mb/d, which is not enough. Jevon's paradox only works when supply is able to outstrip demand, and only when there's a truly free market, which doesn't exist.

spot5050:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')Q! That's exactly the point. If you use less the price should go down, but it doesn't because supply is decreasing faster.
Exactly.

Montequest:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his assumes that demand will always outstrip supply. If it doesn't, will people still use less when the price comes down due to demand destruction or increases in efficiency? Doubt it.
Demand destruction is really a euphemism for depression. I think that especially the consequences to our society and the world economy are rather more important than the academical notion that 'demand destruction' will lower prices. Reality is more important than hypotheses.

Aaron:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')evon guarantees that we will use every bit we can get our hands on.
No. Our energy dependence will garantuee that we will use every bit we can get our hands on. It is our real world energy-intensive way of living that will create a sustained demand, not some philosophical point of view.

jato:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou are saying by 2015 the world economies could be using only 58.8 million barrels per day and continue to grow and function somewhat normally!


I think, this issue aside, that it is precisely that part of economics that is fundamentally flawed. Just to sustain the status quo our economy needs to grow, at least according to current economic theory. As it is an axiom that we cannot grow our economy indefinitely purely because it is based on a limited resource, our Earth, all of economic theory is fundamentally flawed and can be thrown out of the window in one sweep.

There is NO closed-loop economic theory. Nil. If we don't hurry to develop one, we will make life very, very hard for all of us.


To put the efficiency/demand issue in a more absolute perspective, it is well known that the average US citizen consumes twice as much energy as the average EU citizen, at equal productivity and standard of living. Simply said, the US can halve it's energy demand outright just by adopting European standards and way of living. And even then, massive savings can be attained by increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles, investments in urban planning and public transport, and more energy-efficient household applicances and lighting.

The US citizen can easily save 75% of it's energy consumption without a decrease in the standard of living. Likewise, Europe can save still between 30 and 50% in the same manner without much fuss. Just forcing the auto industry to produce only hybrids is enough to curtail transportation fuel by 50 to 75%.

So, in short, a 75% reduction in energy consumption is easily doable, it's just not politically possible. Yet. As long as politicians remain insanely stupid and short-sighted nothing will be done unless forced to by reality.
User avatar
Crusty_Ass
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 13 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 13 Jun 2005, 16:43:06

Nice first post...

Can't wait to see more.
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston
Top

Unread postby Permanently_Baffled » Mon 13 Jun 2005, 16:46:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'N')ice first post...

Can't wait to see more.


I was thinking the same thing. His first post has more content than my 750 + :lol:

Man I feel so inferior.... :cry:

PB :-D
User avatar
Permanently_Baffled
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1151
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: England
Top

Unread postby Kez » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 12:54:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'E')xplain how you will keep this saved energy sequestered away from consumers so they won't consume it. Remember, this is about achieving a net reduction in energy use. Increasing the efficiency will make more energy available, thus lowering the price. Price goes lower, people consume more. Now, if you instill efficiency and raise the price at the same time causing demand destruction, then you get around Jevon's Paradox.


1. The federal government needs to install a tax on electric, gas, and water utilities for homeowners. It would be a sliding tax rate. For example, if your total bill was $30 or less, you would pay no tax. If it was $30-$40, you would pay an additional $2. The tax percentage gets worse the higher your bill goes (it would not be linear). People with monstrous mansions would have to pay more. They are wasting massive amounts of energy cooling off 12 bedrooms they never use. The numbers are just an example, I don't know what the real numbers should be.

The tax would only be on homes, not apartments or businesses. This benefits the people who are not wasting so much energy as the homeowners, and serves to not punish businesses.

2. The federal government should find a way to tax gasoline or new car purchases further. I'm not sure how to do that without crapping the economy. There has got to be a way to encourage public transportation or carpooling; maybe totally free public transportation, paid for by increased gasoline taxes.

3. The federal government takes this cash and throws a ton of it at the debt and spends millions of it on energy education. There are a ton of web-sites that have ideas to help you lower your electric bills, yet nobody for the most part cares because their bills aren't so bad.

This education would help make them aware, and the tax would help make them pay attention. I'm not one for raising taxes, but I really don't see any other way to get everyone's attention. Every time I turn around, there is a new gadget that everyone is buzzing about. Of course it is portable, wireless, and runs on batteries, and you've just got to get one. This can only continue so long, before people start paying attention.

The people that visit this site are aware of the energy/oil situation because we have taken the time to become educated. The tax on homeowners would get their attention, and hopefully many millions would become educated. There is no other way except through education, unless some miracle energy source manifests itself suddenly.
Kez
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri 06 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: North Texas
Top

Unread postby shakespear1 » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 13:17:10

I agree on the mansion and gasoline taxing. But the way our "government" operates that money will be further waisted on the Military. That is Wrong kind of energy generation :twisted:
Men argue, nature acts !
Voltaire

"...In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation."

Alan Greenspan
shakespear1
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Swimming

Unread postby agni » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 17:16:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('spot5050', 'I') spose the question is - 'how clever are we'? or 'are we clever enough'?


I would postulate that we are in fact the dumbest of all species. All others have the intelligence not to outgrow their habitat. We completely destroy our habitat to build McDonald's and shopping malls. Hard to get much dumber than that.


You seem to be under the impression that animals practise some sort of family planning or voluntary restraint to stay within their habitats. They don't. The only reason they do so is because of predators or resource crunch. There are many deserts created by introduced animals because they did not have predators.

-A
User avatar
agni
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby spot5050 » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 20:16:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Crusty_Ass', 'L')et me put my egg in this discussion's basket...

Lay that egg Crusty.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Crusty_Ass', 'T')o put the efficiency/demand issue in a more absolute perspective, it is well known that the average US citizen consumes twice as much energy as the average EU citizen, at equal productivity and standard of living. Simply said, the US can halve it's energy demand outright just by adopting European standards and way of living. And even then, massive savings can be attained by increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles, investments in urban planning and public transport, and more energy-efficient household applicances and lighting.

There's another way to look at the above; try following this logic;

- think about GDP per capita ie. the amount of wealth created per person.

- now think about the number of barrels of oil consumed per capita.

- lastly divide one by the other to get the amount of wealth produced per barrel of oil.

If you do the above excercise, you will see that we Europeans are not necessarily the good guys we think we are. We create roughly the same amount of wealth per barrel of oil as those gas-guzzling Americans.

Yes it's awful isn't it. I had to sit down for a while to come to terms with it.

It is possible to do the above calcs for every country and it gives a very different perspective on "efficiency". Europe and the US are similar, but China for example is approx. half as "efficient", ie. it produces half as much wealth per barrel of oil consumed.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Crusty_Ass', 'T')he US citizen can easily save 75% of it's energy consumption without a decrease in the standard of living. Likewise, Europe can save still between 30 and 50% in the same manner without much fuss. Just forcing the auto industry to produce only hybrids is enough to curtail transportation fuel by 50 to 75%.

Great. But where did you get those figures? You've not just made them up have you?
spot5050
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 518
Joined: Tue 07 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Cheshire, England
Top

Unread postby Sparaxis » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 20:25:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he federal government needs to install a tax on electric, gas, and water utilities for homeowners. It would be a sliding tax rate. For example, if your total bill was $30 or less, you would pay no tax. If it was $30-$40, you would pay an additional $2. The tax percentage gets worse the higher your bill goes (it would not be linear). People with monstrous mansions would have to pay more. They are wasting massive amounts of energy cooling off 12 bedrooms they never use. The numbers are just an example, I don't know what the real numbers should be.


I think the California experience during our energy crisis of 2000-2001 with regard to demand reduction is instructive and we ended up with a pricing system pretty much like you are proposing here.

As for quick demand reduction, studies both by the California Energy Commission and the Lawrence Berkeley Lab showed that during the crisis period, consumer-reponse measures ALONE reduced energy consumption by 6%, peak demand by 8% and saved about 5 GW of load on the system (about 10% of the total). This was a period when blackouts brought home the message that the system was in crisis, pretty much the state we will probably have to get to to stimulate similar consumer response on the oil side. But it's a remarkable response, particularly when prices were capped so people were not given a price signal to respond to (the "high bills" at the time were actually from a spike in natural gas prices, which reached $18/million BTU in early 2001; electricity prices were frozen).

Afterwards, the utility instituted multi-tiered pricing. Based on your location and time of year, each consumer gets a base quota amount at the base price (now $0.12/kWh). If you consume 101-130% of your quota, the extra is priced at $0.13/kWh. 131-160% attracts $0.17/kWh, and so on. It really keeps you from leaving those extra lights on! Natural gas has the same quota pricing system now too.

I think to properly use utility surcharges, the money should not flow to a general fund, but should be added to the "Public Benefits Fund" that many states have to promote DSM. Here in California, that fund is slated to rise to about $2 billion this year--all sourced from our utility surcharges--and it can only be spent on measures to reduce demand, such as buying down the price of CFLs, rebates on efficient appliances, HVAC retrofits, and so on.

Crusty_Ass:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is NO closed-loop economic theory. Nil. If we don't hurry to develop one, we will make life very, very hard for all of us.


Very succinctly and well put. Post-peak-oil is a paradigm shift, an epochal discontinuity. Current economic theory cannot handle it because of this fundamental flaw you pointed out.
User avatar
Sparaxis
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed 27 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: California
Top

Unread postby turmoil » Tue 14 Jun 2005, 20:38:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is NO closed-loop economic theory. Nil. If we don't hurry to develop one, we will make life very, very hard for all of us.


I got one for ya: Nature. Things die, things live. Over time, usually a very long time, you have an increase in complexity. The problem with applying this to a human economy is that humans are not patient. We have only 100 years to live, at most. Nature on the other hand has the lifespan of the sun to develop.

So there you are. A perfect economic system: natural patience. But we don't have any because we are stupid monkeys. We hoard, we fight, and we still die.

Seems pretty futile to me, unless we can learn to deal with a return on investment that takes millions of years.
Last edited by turmoil on Wed 15 Jun 2005, 18:19:23, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
turmoil
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Fri 13 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Richmond, VA, Pale Blue Dot
Top

Unread postby ehv_nl » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 03:19:48

@Spot5050

A thing to consider on the subject of "cleverness" is this: Many of the worlds great inventions that changed the world (book printing, steam engine, wheel) where invented a few times before they had this profound impact. Take the steam engine, invented bij the Greek Hera in the first century BC, a fact didn't cause a industrial revolution. To me that clearly says there's more to it than cleverness, apparently.

Another thing: Men might be clever, but <i>groups of people</i> aren't at all that clever. I think you might be right saying that we might mitigate the first years of Peak Oil, but we <i>will</i> be far more vulnerable to war, famine and crisis, and history teaches that vulnerabilities will lead to crisis, given time.
User avatar
ehv_nl
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun 15 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby I_Like_Plants » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 05:37:23

Hm, so I'd pay that extra $2 in the winter, since I use electric heat, but not during warm months, since my electric bill is pretty low.

BTW the electric company where I am is offering a plan where if you can use 20% less this summer than you used last summer, you get a month's free electricity or some damn thing, I'm not sure how it works out. They're trying to get people to use less is the main thing.
I_Like_Plants
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3839
Joined: Sun 12 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Top

Re: Swimming

Unread postby JMR » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 14:34:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Grimnir', 'N')o they don't. All others will outgrow their resource base if allowed.


What's this "allowed" business? Populations of most organisms in mature habitat are near steady state. Things may ebb and flow a bit but there aren't the big burst and crash issues usually. Is that just because they are too stupid to subvert the constraints of their environment? Or is it that they are the smart ones for submitting to mother natures direction and we are the stupid errant children too pig headed to listen to our mother's direction? Modern society is a death machine, and we all just placidly climb aboard.


Could you just please kill yourself or move to the Outback or something? If modern society is so horrible then why are you on the freakin net all the damn time espousing your views on the rest of us?
User avatar
JMR
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue 31 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby jato » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 14:49:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')ould you just please kill yourself or move to the Outback or something? If modern society is so horrible then why are you on the freakin net all the damn time espousing your views on the rest of us?


For starters let me say that I am a big fan of modern society. It is all I know.

The problem is that it is next to impossible to "unplug" from our current system. Where can someone go to live for free? If I DID want to live away from modern society where would I go? With the government system of taxes (sales tax, property tax, vehicle tax, fuel tax, income tax, hunting tax, firearms tax, and everywhere a tax tax) where does one go to escape "the system"? Please tell me so that I can go there.
jato
 
Top

Re: Swimming

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 15:12:46

:lol: How's that for a delayed reaction?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Two months later, JMR', 'C')ould you just please kill yourself or move to the Outback or something? If modern society is so horrible then why are you on the freakin net all the damn time espousing your views on the rest of us?


Because I have one more month to go until I am done with residency. Until then I'm stuck in a filthy city surrounded by asphalt. As for killing myself, no thanks. Watching the fall of modern society will be great fun. Rather like watching an elephant step on an ant hill.

The major problem with escaping modern society is, as Jato pointed out, there are precious few places left to escape to. Modern society is hell bent on exterminating the natural world. It has nearly succeeded. From a human society standpoint, there is no where on the planet that one can go without being under the thumb of the US government. Every aspect of our lives is controlled by tens of thousands of pages of government regulations and millions of government bureaucrats. Freedom on this planet is extinct.
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby Triffin » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 15:40:03

Jato ..

On unplugging from the system ..
Check this thread ..

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic8558.html

Assuming one can afford a modest sailing vessel
and has the required sailing/navigating skills
There's plenty of nice palces to 'hang out' for
free .. Get a wind generator, some PVs etc and
off you go .. If the local environment gets too
boring or the natives too testy .. then raise the
anchor and head somewhere else ..

Triff ..
User avatar
Triffin
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed 23 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: SW Ct SW Va
Top

Unread postby jato » Wed 15 Jun 2005, 16:28:51

Image

Sorry Triff, it's not for me.
jato
 
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron