Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

A-Peak-alypse Now!

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

Is the peak now?

Poll ended at Fri 19 Aug 2005, 21:07:22

Yes
80
No votes
No
38
No votes
 
Total votes : 118

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Carrie » Tue 16 Aug 2005, 20:08:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jtmorgan61', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')imes past like in Ancient Egypt it would take many years to complete a city or a wonder...but the people would put in hard hours because they somehow knew their grandchildren would see these great cities and wonders...


You mean, because they were slaves and the rulers didn't care how many of them building the monument killed?

When will people wrap their minds around the fact that culture was *not* better in the old days, just more explicitly aggressive and smaller scale?


Not to get this thread off track, but it's a common misconception that the Egyptian monuments were built by slave labor:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he pyramids were probably not built by slaves because slave labour was not widely used in Egypt at the time. Peasant farmers, however, were required to spend a number of weeks working on construction projects. This provided the paid labour needed to build these gigantic structures. Since the fields were under water during the summer, wages earned in building the gigantic pyramids supplemented the family's income.

http://www.civilization.ca/civil/egypt/egca12e.html

They were sort of a "make-work" program for unemployed peasants, to keep them busy. Sort of like what happened during the Great Depression. :wink:

As for peak occurring now, I'm seeing more and more evidence that this could be it. The big question is, when do we start seeing the decline?
Carrie
News Editor
News Editor
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon 17 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: San Jose, CA
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Chris_B » Wed 17 Aug 2005, 03:48:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Leaf', '1')000 years from now people will look at westerners today as slaves "wage slaves


The average Canadian works 6 months of the year just to pay taxes. I say take the extra +20 billion dollars that the oil companies made this year, use that to help subsidize taxes.
i havent been following PO for that long, But the market is seeming peakish.
User avatar
Chris_B
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon 08 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Wallygator » Wed 17 Aug 2005, 10:52:52

I voted 'No' because it's not 100% clear that we are peaking in production. The sudden surge in oil prices doesn't necessarily mean that we are at the peak anymore than saying that we are definitely experiencing global warming because of the unusually hot summer(in Ontario that is). Conversely, our vigilance should not wane if and when prices start coming down. :)
User avatar
Wallygator
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri 18 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Doly » Wed 17 Aug 2005, 10:58:53

Maybe, but I think Colin Campbell's opinion on the matter should have some weight. He says the peak for conventional oil was last year.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby chrispi » Fri 19 Aug 2005, 12:45:29

According to one of my logistic models, there should be a rise in the price of oil just before Peak Oil, and then the price will skyrocket. The question is can this market signal be teased out from all the volatility? :(
"When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around."--The Police
User avatar
chrispi
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed 17 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Novus » Fri 19 Aug 2005, 13:14:09

It is not the rise in oil prices that tells me we are at peak but the inablity of market short sellers to create a stable floor. For even the most bullish shock there will be short sellers in the market who will attempt make the value go down. Market speculators make money by driving prices high and then driving them back down again when they esablish a floor they will then drive the price up again. That is how specilators make money. In the last two month market speculators have not been able to create a floor. There last attempt to short oil lasted only 4 days. That is a big problem. It means we have reached peak.
User avatar
Novus
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2450
Joined: Tue 21 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Mon 10 May 2010, 02:56:35

Recently it has come to my attention that when I point out that peak oil happened years ago, and use my references for who said it was so (Ruppert, Deffeyes and Simmons ), people pretend that peak hasn't happened not because it hasn't, but because the expected consequences weren't as earth shattering as expected.

I thought it would be interesting to bring back this blast from the past where quite a large majority of the voting members of this website ALSO believed that peak was an "alypse" of some sort as well, and I must assume that this "alypse" really meant that idiot consumers signing mortgage documents they didn't read, and greedy Wall Streeters pushing this nonsense for all they were worth, causing a recession, is the "alypse" to which they referred.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby vtsnowedin » Mon 10 May 2010, 04:36:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'R')ecently it has come to my attention that when I point out that peak oil happened years ago, and use my references for who said it was so (Ruppert, Deffeyes and Simmons ), people pretend that peak hasn't happened not because it hasn't, but because the expected consequences weren't as earth shattering as expected.

I thought it would be interesting to bring back this blast from the past where quite a large majority of the voting members of this website ALSO believed that peak was an "alypse" of some sort as well, and I must assume that this "alypse" really meant that idiot consumers signing mortgage documents they didn't read, and greedy Wall Streeters pushing this nonsense for all they were worth, causing a recession, is the "alypse" to which they referred.

Having a slow morning Short?
While not a total collapse the last five years have been anything but BAU and the present situation looks like it may very well go downhill in a big way this week. We now can choose between oil spills on the GOM, volcanoes in Iceland, debt crisis in Europe and America, A hung parliament in England, car bombs in times square and the always popular war in the middle east and in the +---Stan of your choice.
With all this before us and our leaders along with an ever tightening oil supply what could go wrong?
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby Homesteader » Mon 10 May 2010, 05:18:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'R')ecently it has come to my attention that when I point out that peak oil happened years ago, and use my references for who said it was so (Ruppert, Deffeyes and Simmons ), people pretend that peak hasn't happened not because it hasn't, but because the expected consequences weren't as earth shattering as expected.

I thought it would be interesting to bring back this blast from the past where quite a large majority of the voting members of this website ALSO believed that peak was an "alypse" of some sort as well, and I must assume that this "alypse" really meant that idiot consumers signing mortgage documents they didn't read, and greedy Wall Streeters pushing this nonsense for all they were worth, causing a recession, is the "alypse" to which they referred.

Having a slow morning Short?
While not a total collapse the last five years have been anything but BAU and the present situation looks like it may very well go downhill in a big way this week. We now can choose between oil spills on the GOM, volcanoes in Iceland, debt crisis in Europe and America, A hung parliament in England, car bombs in times square and the always popular war in the middle east and in the +---Stan of your choice.
With all this before us and our leaders along with an ever tightening oil supply what could go wrong?



Nicely put VT, very nicely put. +1
"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…"
Sir Winston Churchill

Beliefs are what people fall back on when the facts make them uncomfortable.
User avatar
Homesteader
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Economic Nomad
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby mos6507 » Mon 10 May 2010, 09:12:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')While not a total collapse the last five years have been anything but BAU and the present situation looks like it may very well go downhill in a big way this week. We now can choose between oil spills on the GOM, volcanoes in Iceland, debt crisis in Europe and America, A hung parliament in England, car bombs in times square and the always popular war in the middle east and in the +---Stan of your choice.
With all this before us and our leaders along with an ever tightening oil supply what could go wrong?




That's not what Shorty was talking about.

There is a problem of properly attributing cause and effect here.

I think a lot of peakers, not having seen the Mad Max future they expected, have simply broadened the definition of peak oil to such a degree as to make the term simply a wildcard for anything bad that happens on the news.

That's why I consider myself a "limits to growther" more than a "peaker". If you are going to step back and look at the broader trajectory of humanity, it is more complicated than just "peak oil". Peak oil, as powerful as it is, will not singlehandedly define the future. We face a future of a death by a thousand cuts, some of them deeper than others.

Where I diverge from shorty is that I don't think back-dating peak oil to 2005 and saying "gee, it hasn't been that bad" really accomplishes anything. Fixating solely on debunking peaker predictions of imminent doom ignores the underlying data driving limits to growth. Shorty seems to imply that if he can prove that we've already had peak oil, or multiple peaks, and the world didn't end, that we can have (at the worst) a gentle and controllable descent. If peak oil were in the future, then the hopes of doomers pining for Mad Max might still be realized, which would be too horrible to contemplate.

So this is really two sides of the same coin. Peakers who are hardwired to always see a hard crash one day from today are not really processing the data correctly, and shorty calling those types of people to task in no way invalidates the potential for peak oil to wreak havok that is every bit as bad as the doomers predict, but just NOT on anybody's schedule.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Mon 10 May 2010, 10:11:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')Having a slow morning Short?


Nah...just irritated by the revisionist history I see. And then people get cranky at me for noticing as though its MY fault, when in reality, peak oil was almost never called as a financial crisis kicked off by bad mortgages.

I'm sure there are plenty of other gems back in the past showing that the word "mortgage" wasn't even in anyones vocabulary back when peak was actually happening. Fortunately, PO.com doesn't regularly erase everything like latoc does to hide the evidence.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')While not a total collapse the last five years have been anything but BAU and the present situation looks like it may very well go downhill in a big way this week.


My prediction on a double dipper is public record. And I don't think that most, in 2005, when asked what post PO was like, would say, "well, you know, it sure won't be BAU!", a quantification which is vague enough to apply in every month, in every year, in every century, since the big peak oils in the 70's when we actually did have an energy crisis, versus whats going on today which people are trying to PRETEND is an energy crisis.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '
')We now can choose between oil spills on the GOM, volcanoes in Iceland, debt crisis in Europe and America, A hung parliament in England, car bombs in times square and the always popular war in the middle east and in the +---Stan of your choice.
With all this before us and our leaders along with an ever tightening oil supply what could go wrong?


Please....we've been spilling oil since before Spindletop, ever hear of Krakatoa or the Great Depression, wars in the Middle East were going on before America became a country and none of THAT had anything to do with peak oil either.

Why is it people have to pretend that NOW is special? Is it some innate human need to think only THEY live in interesting times?
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Mon 10 May 2010, 10:22:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')Where I diverge from shorty is that I don't think back-dating peak oil to 2005 and saying "gee, it hasn't been that bad" really accomplishes anything.


Well see there Mos, I don't have near your tact. It strikes me that a person, or even a group, which wants to pretend that some special event ( be it Rapture or peak oil ) will have these magical effects, when the event comes and goes, that person or group sure don't get the benefit of the doubt no mo'.

As far as what it "accomplishes", I'm not sure its designed to accomplish anything. Its simply a fact of the argument, and different peakers respond to it different ways based on their particular niche belief.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')So this is really two sides of the same coin. Peakers who are hardwired to always see a hard crash one day from today are not really processing the data correctly, and shorty calling those types of people to task in no way invalidates the potential for peak oil to wreak havok that is every bit as bad as the doomers predict, but just NOT on anybody's schedule.


You and I need to have a conversation Mos. You appear to place a value on peak oil, without regard for when it happens because you think the effects are smeared out across more time than others do. What is your historical perspective? How comfortable are you with what happened during the peaks of the 70's and did you experience them personally? ( I find that to be a key piece in determining the strength with which certain people think that now is somehow different ).
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby mos6507 » Mon 10 May 2010, 12:19:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')I'm not sure its designed to accomplish anything.


Which is why so many people consider you a troll. You're basically shooting fish in a barrel. You don't seem to have anything useful to add to the discussion. You're a one-trick pony with your "multiple peaks" hypothesis.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', ' ')Its simply a fact of the argument, and different peakers respond to it different ways based on their particular niche belief.


If you want to delve into the psychology of peak oil, by all means do. There is a wide field there to explore, as The Oil Drum, Peak Shrink, and others testify to. But try to be more nuanced than "nanny nanny nanny, neener neener".

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')How comfortable are you with what happened during the peaks of the 70's and did you experience them personally?


The 70s oil crisis and the cuban special period for that matter are NOT good analogies for global geological peak oil. I understand that's pretty much all we've got to work with, but any attempt to use those incidents to predict what peak oil will be like is flawed. Not entirely meaningless, but flawed.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Mon 10 May 2010, 14:32:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')I'm not sure its designed to accomplish anything.


Which is why so many people consider you a troll. You're basically shooting fish in a barrel. You don't seem to have anything useful to add to the discussion. You're a one-trick pony with your "multiple peaks" hypothesis.


It isn't a hypothesis, its just another historical fact, and "useful to add" is dependent on ones point of view.

If someone is trapped into the speculation of Peak=Doom, I consider it a critical counter proposal to mention that Peak<>Doom last time, which naturally leads to the question of why assume such a consequence this time?

And some people consider ANYONE a troll who doesn't toe the groupthink line. The owners of this website seem to be following the concept that a more even distribution of ideas is better than the usual "use the ban as an instrument to make us look like Latoc". JD gets labeled a troll as well, even had his own thread on the topic, and it certainly wasn't because he didn't hammer on more than a few of the myths in this debate. He was labeled a troll because he didn't drink the koolaid. And made no bones about it. If thats all it takes to be labeled a troll, you have to admit that the term is near meaningless. Its synonymous with "you won't buy my line of BS" for all intensive purposes.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
') But try to be more nuanced than "nanny nanny nanny, neener neener".


You are probably quite correct, certainly I draw less incoming fire over at TOD, and I attribute that to the enforcement related to crackpottery insertions and nonsensical relationships allowed to run rampant. Around here I feel more free to fight fire with fire when the Legions of Believers <in whatever> become involved in advocating their favorite scheme. If they can pitch their idea, seems reasonable I can pitch mine. Mine actually applies to the basics of the Peak Oil idea, versus some of the "Great Depression!" or "Its all Bernanke's fault!" type stuff we see over here.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shorty', '
')How comfortable are you with what happened during the peaks of the 70's and did you experience them personally?


The 70s oil crisis and the cuban special period for that matter are NOT good analogies for global geological peak oil.


I agree with you. But peak oil has been determined to NOT be geologic, even Monte came around to that conclusion prior to leaving. I am happy to argue either side of this issue of course, I am a FIRM believer in understanding all sides of an issue prior to advocating any particular position.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')I understand that's pretty much all we've got to work with, but any attempt to use those incidents to predict what peak oil will be like is flawed. Not entirely meaningless, but flawed.

I agree with you here as well. Hubbert, basically, got lucky by picking one of the few areas, and phases of fossil fuels, which generally tracked his profile. The application of that to everything which followed in the mistaken belief that it was universally applicable is where the flaw comes from. IMHO.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby vtsnowedin » Mon 10 May 2010, 19:10:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', 'R')ecently it has come to my attention that when I point out that peak oil happened years ago, and use my references for who said it was so (Ruppert, Deffeyes and Simmons ), people pretend that peak hasn't happened not because it hasn't, but because the expected consequences weren't as earth shattering as expected.

I thought it would be interesting to bring back this blast from the past where quite a large majority of the voting members of this website ALSO believed that peak was an "alypse" of some sort as well, and I must assume that this "alypse" really meant that idiot consumers signing mortgage documents they didn't read, and greedy Wall Streeters pushing this nonsense for all they were worth, causing a recession, is the "alypse" to which they referred.

8) Oh I think I read this correctly!!!. Shorty is making light of the housing collapse. Obviously he is not in foreclosure. I know real people who (foolishly you will say but that was the only deal they could get) had a sub prime mortgage just before oil went to $145. when it got to $145 the number of customers coming through the door and the tips they paid dropped like a stone and soon one of the couple was laid off. Soon after they lost the house and are living with grandma.
Not your problem you say but their mortgage was bundled into a CDO that your retirement fund bought or was bought by a firm that had CDS's on it so when it went toes up YOU lost.
Nothing to do with oil you say but if they had to put all the spare cash in the gas tank you couldn't go out to eat and stayed home and ate hamburger helper and that means your friendly waiter/waitress lost their job.
When we come to the cliff not all of us will fall off at once. The people with the sub prime mortgages for what ever reason are in the group that is standing with their toes hanging over the edge. Don't think because you heard their screams all the way to the bottom that you won't be next.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby mos6507 » Mon 10 May 2010, 19:54:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')It isn't a hypothesis, its just another historical fact, and "useful to add" is dependent on ones point of view.


No it's not. "Multiple peaks" is an oxymoron. There is ONE global peak of oil production and there only ever will be. Once we're firmly on the backside of the curve, there isn't going to be some magical second wind.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')If someone is trapped into the speculation of Peak=Doom, I consider it a critical counter proposal to mention that Peak<>Doom last time, which naturally leads to the question of why assume such a consequence this time?


Because there was no last time. A temporary dip like the 70s oil crisis is not an instance of peak oil. Hubbert never predicted global peak oil for the 70s. He predicted it around the year 2K, which has been offset in time by the 70s oil crisis, hidden by the credit crisis and unconventional oil.

Certainly aboveground factors can break up Hubbert's curve. The oil crisis was one. The credit crisis is another (since I'm on record to downplay the oil spike's impact on demand destruction). Some interpolation will be necessary in order to draw out Hubbert's curve, but in the end, it will reveal itself.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')And some people consider ANYONE a troll who doesn't toe the groupthink line.


You can differ all you want as long as you present a reasoned argument. Even JD makes a better case for his position than you do. He's armed with a more diverse array of facts than you. And he's more capable of rebuttal. JD was kind of helpful to have around. You are not because all you ever do is repeat the same stale argument over and over again and not really engage in a fully fledged debate.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')peak oil has been determined to NOT be geologic


In what way?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')I agree with you here as well. Hubbert, basically, got lucky by picking one of the few areas, and phases of fossil fuels, which generally tracked his profile. The application of that to everything which followed in the mistaken belief that it was universally applicable is where the flaw comes from. IMHO.

What is your theory here? Unconventional and renewables will "save" us? Is this the Michael Lynch, WSJ position?
mos6507
 
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Tue 11 May 2010, 00:26:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', ' ')Don't think because you heard their screams all the way to the bottom that you won't be next.


My preps have spanned parts of two centuries and 5 decades now. I heard the screams before some people around here were BORN, and have never forgotten. Undoubtedly some who are newbies now, and heard the screams you talk about, will learn the same lesson I did so many years ago and be motivated, as was I, to make certain that they are in a position of maximum flexibility when this all happens the next time.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: A-Peak-alypse Now!

Postby shortonsense » Tue 11 May 2010, 01:02:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')It isn't a hypothesis, its just another historical fact, and "useful to add" is dependent on ones point of view.


No it's not. "Multiple peaks" is an oxymoron. There is ONE global peak of oil production and there only ever will be. Once we're firmly on the backside of the curve, there isn't going to be some magical second wind.


Of course there is only one TRUE peak. The interesting part is...peaks can be decades apart, so getting all hysterical over any PARTICULAR peak is ridiculous. And because they can be huge distances apart, we'll be (as I have mentioned this estimate in the argument thread ) a decade or two in before we can really be sure there isn't another one around the corner. You know my thoughts on this, I don't hide them.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')If someone is trapped into the speculation of Peak=Doom, I consider it a critical counter proposal to mention that Peak<>Doom last time, which naturally leads to the question of why assume such a consequence this time?


Because there was no last time. A temporary dip like the 70s oil crisis is not an instance of peak oil.


In the years immediately after 1979, it wasn't a TEMPORARY dip. The President was claiming we were "running out" (a euphemism for peak which has been used in 3 different centuries now), laws were passed to force compliance, to subsidize conservation of specific fossil fuels, and incentivize others. Its only temporary because they were WRONG that time as well...so now....we do it all over again.

You can devalue the time if you'd like, but it can't go without challenge. Even the lousy EUPHEMISMS were the same...ever check out the Brit Site "Wolf at the Door"?

http://www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk/

He's only recycling something that someone with much better credentials was claiming....37 years earlier.....

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... lf-is-here

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')Hubbert never predicted global peak oil for the 70s. He predicted it around the year 2K, which has been offset in time by the 70s oil crisis, hidden by the credit crisis and unconventional oil.

Which is perfect evidence for why peak has less to do with geology and is actually an economic issue. Hubbert wasn't saying it in 1956, but he was by the time the 80's rolled around.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')And some people consider ANYONE a troll who doesn't toe the groupthink line.


You can differ all you want as long as you present a reasoned argument. Even JD makes a better case for his position than you do.


If historical facts aren't good enough for you, or those who continually mistake peak for an event in the future (yet again), I can do no better. Historical evidence does not require speculation, conjecture or wild arm waving. It just is. Works better than an argument most any day of the week.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')peak oil has been determined to NOT be geologic


In what way?


Hubbert himself said that economic effects change the profile of production. Therefore, it is not a geologic profile, but subject to the whims of economic theory.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonsense', '
')I agree with you here as well. Hubbert, basically, got lucky by picking one of the few areas, and phases of fossil fuels, which generally tracked his profile. The application of that to everything which followed in the mistaken belief that it was universally applicable is where the flaw comes from. IMHO.

What is your theory here? Unconventional and renewables will "save" us? Is this the Michael Lynch, WSJ position?

No saving is required. Do the following. Make a spreadsheet which contains as a starting point the current estimates of crude oil used, natural gas, nukes and wind and tide and all that stuff.

Decline the oil at any particular rate which you think is reasonable over, say, a multi decade time span. Now, take the current growth rates of non renewables, natural gas, nukes, everything else. Decide how much total energy growth is required to get to the desired point in the future, personally I used the most recent per capita energy numbers, turns out we need perhaps as much new energy as we expect new people by 2050, call it a 50% increase.

Now decline the energy from the oil, while increasing, or keeping stable, the various energy we get from other systems.After you have completed this particular exercise, and balanced these two systems against each other, the basic conclusion you come to is that even at much smaller growth rates than the renewables and such are currently increasing, the expected result under almost all conditions arrives at the same place that this study did for Europe:

http://www.evwind.es/noticias.php?id_not=5505

In the meantime, unconventionals are real game changers because natural gas is a much better fuel than crude:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... itorsPicks

and of course its not like we don't have plenty of crude oil sitting around which has been ignored in favor of the hard, deep oil:

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2386

and don't even get me started on the fuels my kids will be using in their energy mix:

http://geology.com/usgs/alaska-gas-hydrates.shtml

Throw in conservation even a child understands, and the change to a more electrified form of transport for suburban housewives, and its like....there isn't anything left we even need oil FOR. I've said it before, I'll say it again, oil is already obsolete...it just doesn't know it yet.
User avatar
shortonsense
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 03:00:00
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests



cron