[CARVER]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'H')owever its a jump from that to saying we are all doomed, innovation is a fantasy and we should all give up and go and sit in a field. With the right attention there is still much that can be done (including negating climate change). However its not a question of if its possible, its a question of if we as a civilisation have the maturity not to give up, but to take the hard decisions that would enable a route to the future.

[FatherOfTwo]

[took out my beef on Aaron's nuclear argument, I don't want it to detract from my main beef with the bunk numbers]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')We lose over half the electricity we generate to the transmission process.

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CARVER', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', '.').. and most of all sane policies that encourage voluntary population reduction ...

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'Y')our die off is no solution. To return to that 'sustainable' population would require so many deaths that I think those scheduled for extermination might just notice. The result would be brutal, violent and destructive. We wouldn't have a civilisation left - it would be the sustainability of the graveyard.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', ' ')Yes, it is inevitable if all people are willing to do about it is sit expostulating their doomer theories.

Monte, how much has your ecological footprint reduced in all the time you've been posting here?

Because mine, the optimist that does not believe you, is likely to reduce pretty drastically soon. If the world has a soft landing, it's not going to be thanks to you doomers.

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CARVER', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', '.').. and most of all sane policies that encourage voluntary population reduction ...

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut you consistenly put out bunk numbers... shame shame.
(The oil sands are energy negative and unprofitable without subsidies is another doozie too... )
Stop!

[FatherOfTwo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut you consistenly put out bunk numbers... shame shame.
(The oil sands are energy negative and unprofitable without subsidies is another doozie too... )
Stop!

[Aaron]

To be fair it's not just the lines alone, which cause the loss.

Much is wasted converting the fuel to motion, & again at the end-point. But transmission itself accounts for a large percent of overall loss.

Sorry... not going to thread-jump for you.

And these "royalties" as you put it, exist why?

The reality is these companies receive 100% deferred depreciation tax schedules, and some serious public utility based services thrown in, amounting to literally billions in subsidy... very little of which will ever be seen by the public.

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

Not having performed any experiments or conducted research myself; I am forced to rely on the results others report.

All I can say is it seems widely understood that over half the energy resident in the fuels we consume, is in fact wasted as a result of us using 150-year-old technology to harvest, transport, & consume it.

[FatherOfTwo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'T')o be fair it's not just the lines alone, which cause the loss.

Much is wasted converting the fuel to motion, & again at the end-point. But transmission itself accounts for a large percent of overall loss.

[lorenzo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')New developments are often a jigsaw puzzle where a "body of discovery" is needed to make specific advances.

[Aaron]

Look, you seem kinda pissed off about me relating information I received about conventional energy technology.

I think we are violently agreeing here.

Except about these "subsidies".

This represents a gigantic investment in money by the various governments which sponsor these programs.

It's a little morbid that we are discussing how to strip-mine our land to get crappy hydrocarbons, as Greenland is sliding into the sea & other indicators that our carbon habit is changing the environment.

I have little doubt that you Landers are gonna release every greenhouse gas & carbon atom you can get your hands on.

But the EROEI is a joke.,.. compared to conventional oil.

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', '
')Nice image, but of course the "body of discovery" expands exponentially (currently it doubles each six months - you know the image: each six months we produce more 'scientific body' than *all scientific body produced before that time in the entire history of mankind*... each six months. I understand that for many people this is extremely difficult to imagine).

The Law of Accelerating Returns illustrates this fairly well.

[coyote]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'I') can believe we might have an ever accelerating pace of patents...

[garyp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('garyp', 'I') can believe we might have an ever accelerating pace of patents...

[FatherOfTwo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'I')t's a little morbid that we are discussing how to strip-mine our land to get crappy hydrocarbons, as Greenland is sliding into the sea & other indicators that our carbon habit is changing the environment.

I have little doubt that you Landers are gonna release every greenhouse gas & carbon atom you can get your hands on.

But the EROEI is a joke.,.. compared to conventional oil.

[gg3]

"Instead there is the tiniest fraction of a option that gives mankind a future. It involves fission, followed by fusion, coupled with renewables and most of all sane policies that encourage voluntary population reduction and pollution control. Its the tiniest fraction of a chance because it requires intelligent concerted action..."

That's pretty well on target. There's a small but nonzero chance we could build our way out of a dieoff via massive investment in nuclear, wind, and solar, including of course breeder reactors to stretch the suppy of uranium and plutonium until we can get thorium reactors online. And of course massive programs to get people to voluntarily reduce population and consumption.

But the larger probability is that we won't be able to turn around the enormous inertia of present arrangements, and we'll overshoot right over the edge of the proverbial cliff, and die off until there are fewer than 1 billion humans remaining.

Solving for energy does not automatically solve for water, food, industrial minerals, building materials, waste disposal, etc. etc. Thus just as we think we've overcome the limits in one place, we run right into them somewhere else: perhaps with a slightly larger population so there are more doomed souls looking forward to dying off.

There is no alternative to a drastic reduction in population and in consumption; the only question is how we get from here to there.

Voluntary reductions in either or both are about as likely as rescue by ETs coming down in UFOs.

Every other species that does what ours has done ends up in a dieoff.

The third option is some form of authoritarian regime, imposing sustainability with harsh limits on individual freedom, as the price for survival of society: a globalized version of Castro's communistic solutions to Cuba's own PO events.

Meanwhile for some of us (many of us here) the operative option will be self-imposed limits via rural community or urban relocalization, in the hopes of minimizing the impact on ourselves and our kin, of whatever happens to the world at-large.

But either way there is no avoiding the facts of nature: that we're way past the limits and overdue for what could, euphemistically, be called a "correction."

[MonteQuest]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', '
')Solving for energy does not automatically solve for water, food, industrial minerals, building materials, waste disposal, etc. etc. Thus just as we think we've overcome the limits in one place, we run right into them somewhere else: perhaps with a slightly larger population so there are more doomed souls looking forward to dying off.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he point is that the chances that breakthroughs emerge increase exponentially.

[Omnitir]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lorenzo', '
')Nice image, but of course the "body of discovery" expands exponentially (currently it doubles each six months - you know the image: each six months we produce more 'scientific body' than *all scientific body produced before that time in the entire history of mankind*... each six months. I understand that for many people this is extremely difficult to imagine).