Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

The 'Miki' Poll

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
Post a reply

What to do with Miki?

Poll ended at Thu 28 Sep 2006, 18:16:47

Give her a separate sub-forum?
10
No votes
Ban her ass...
14
No votes
Ask her to keep posts to 5000 words or less?
6
No votes
Give her a Congressional Medal of Honor?
18
No votes
Cave in like PMS?
2
No votes
Thank her for giving us hell...
16
No votes
 
Total votes : 66

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Fri 08 Sep 2006, 18:27:32

Yes Miki. You should definitely study this more. I know you said you don't want to be pointed at an intro, but you really should spend the time to read this site: http://www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk/
It will take you maybe an hour or two tops, but it will answer most of your questions: The science behind it, the role of alternative energy, the predictable human impacts, etc. It will change your life.

Then again you could take the blue pill, go back to your normal life, and try to forget that peak oil exists for a while.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby Miki » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 05:30:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nwildmand', 'i')t gets even better. now food prices will be directly tied to the price of oil as sowing, growing, fertilizing, harvesting, shipping, processing and then shipping again all use massive amounts of oil and energy.


Thanks for the explanation nwildman. I thought food prices were always tied to the price of oil. I don't know about the US, but in Lebanon and Peru whenever the oil prices would go up, the prices of almost everything else would go up with it.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')hat remains to be seen. im a doomer but i dont think about nukes that much.


I agree. I don't see how nuking others can contribute much once the oil is gone.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'i')ts also more like saying your nation will be rich because it can produce more food than it needs.


But if we go by that criteria, there are many nations (eg, many LatinAmerican countries) that produce more food than what they import. I don't know how they compare to the US, but I know most of their imports are not food.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'p')oor overpopulated places with no resources will bear the brunt of the overshoot correction.


Thanks to the industrialized countries that have irresponsibly abused their capacity to buy and use oil, without any regard to susteinability.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 't')he problem is the shear scale that is needed. there will never be the exponential growth required to offset the shortcomings of oil imports. oil has the most energy for its density and size. alternatives dont even come close.


Well, I am having a hard time understanding how all the governments of the world have not realized this before to plan accordingly. I mean, shouldn't the US be spending more money in agriculture and less in defense, if the situation is this critical?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'c')arter said we need to end our addiction to foreign oil. bush has said the same thing on a couple of occasions. the problem is scale. what is needed to replace oil is so mind boggling in size that most people can not comprehend it. that


OK, so you're saying that the US government is aware of this but they're not doing anything because this has no possible solution that can arrive on time and in the necessary scale?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'm')iki you should really study peak oil in depth. you need to really consider moving back to peru while you still can.


It's not me that I'm worried about. I could move to the US next month if I wanted to. I have a valid visa, enough money, and the qualifications to get a good job.

SPG: I'll check the website--thanks.

One last question: if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately? If I understood well, there are not many alternatives but to learn to save on oil, live without oil, and move to a fertile underpopulated area, right? So what are you discussing then?

Perphaps this situation is nature's homeosthatic process to end the contamination that is destroying the planet :).
User avatar
Miki
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri 21 Jul 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby azreal60 » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 09:17:36

LOL. I knew someone sooner or later would bring up peakoil to miki, and she would set her teeth into it.

Miki, I know peakoil can be a bit confusing at first.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ell, I am having a hard time understanding how all the governments of the world have not realized this before to plan accordingly. I mean, shouldn't the US be spending more money in agriculture and less in defense, if the situation is this critical?

if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately? If I understood well, there are not many alternatives but to learn to save on oil, live without oil, and move to a fertile underpopulated area, right? So what are you discussing then?


Miki, in the first statement your making a common mistake with regards to governments. People on boards like this have this impression of governments being all powerful beings. After all, if they can bomb your country back into the stone age, certainly the Force is on their side.

The problem is, governments are made up of individual people. People who, guess what, are about as or less intelligent than you and I are. So, if the average intelligence of a person in government service is on average less than a person posting on this board, how can you expect the government as a whole to deal with a problem so outside our normal parameters that even a very intelligent person such as yourself has doubts it exists?

Governments do not deal with things they are not forced to deal with. This is a pretty hard rule, most governments are reactive only. Peakoil, if it has happened yet, has not gotten to the point where it's obvious to a layman. Until that happens, most governments won't react. This is one of it's more interesting dangers, because it would be so easily blunted if we just did... The problem is we are Not just doing anything, and that's where part of the problem comes from.

What are we discussing? Well, one not everyone here believes peakoil works. Sounds silly I know, but if we didn't welcome disent, then we could hardly call ourselves credible.Two, those that believe in it argue it's degree constantly, and honestly to some degree the degree of it being bad is up to the entire world, so it's hard to predict.

The final thing we are discussing though is what to do. There is Alot of things involved in that simple 3 part sentence you made. We have a whole forum ( planning for the future) that is dedicated to those ideals.

As for myself, I've been trying to find land for a while now, to begin living sustainabily. The problem is the price of land in the US has gone up hugely since my youth. It's way out of the affordably range right now, and likely will be for a few years. I have a couple options, I can either wait for it to come down, or get some land in canada. Not sure which is looking like a better option, although if I do the canada route, I'll have to give up on my political aspirations and I'll have to do it soon. I don't think they'll be as all accepting of immigrants in the near future.
Azreal60
azreal60
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Madison,Wisconsin
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby Ache » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 11:51:03

Miki no te malgastes ni te cabrees con estos idiotas. Ain't worth the effort. Dale mas calor a los tuyos por alla.

Ya quite tu nombre del primer post ok. Sorry about that.


Perucha cuando se ponga la cosa dura en Libano te mudas para Peru que ahi si hay cama todo el mundo.

Te quiero Miki... Cuidate por el Libano ok.
User avatar
Ache
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 348
Joined: Sat 23 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby nwildmand » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 12:16:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'T')hanks for the explanation nwildman. I thought food prices were always tied to the price of oil. I don't know about the US, but in Lebanon and Peru whenever the oil prices would go up, the prices of almost everything else would go up with it.


good that you understand that. now think about the fact that oil for most of your life has been in a buyers market. now it is a sellers market with shrinking production(or will soon be). extrapolate what it will do to prices. think what everything will cost when oil hits 500 dollars a barrel (which it will). with no end to the shrinking production in site.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'B')ut if we go by that criteria, there are many nations (eg, many LatinAmerican countries) that produce more food than what they import. I don't know how they compare to the US, but I know most of their imports are not food.


they will feel rich because they have food. i feel latin america will do much better than europe.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildman', 'p')oor overpopulated places with no resources will bear the brunt of the overshoot correction.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'T')hanks to the industrialized countries that have irresponsibly abused their capacity to buy and use oil, without any regard to susteinability.


it is not our fault they got so overpopulated. they needed oil to do that in the first place and had no foresight to the consequences of peakoil. we will all die down to our carrying capacity.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildman', 't')he problem is the shear scale that is needed. there will never be the exponential growth required to offset the shortcomings of oil imports. oil has the most energy for its density and size. alternatives dont even come close.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'W')ell, I am having a hard time understanding how all the governments of the world have not realized this before to plan accordingly. I mean, shouldn't the US be spending more money in agriculture and less in defense, if the situation is this critical?

azreal covered this well. as for our spending? hell i havent a clue. if we spent more on agriculture i think it would just go to hiding the true cost of our food like it does now.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'O')K, so you're saying that the US government is aware of thi but they're not doing anything because this has no possible solution that can arrive on time and in the necessary scale?

pretty much so. the scale im talking is beyond the depths of most imaginations. the scenarios usually start with "take 2 large states" and cover it with windmills or solar panels. it is technically immpossible to do it. our only solution is getting back to the land.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'I')t's not me that I'm worried about. I could move to the US next month if I wanted to. I have a valid visa, enough money, and the qualifications to get a good job.

must be nice to be priveleged. :razz: . but can you grow a garden and preserve a years worth of food for you and your family? could you do it without electricity or oil? im not sure what your occupation will be but i remember you are a psychiatry major. a job like that wont pay postpeak when people are worried about essentials.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'O')ne last question: if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately?

peakoil is only now making it into mainstream media. many of the news economists dance around the subject but you can see it there soul. they dance around the truth when they speak on tv. peakoil.com is read by bigwigs all over the world. this is a place where the information can come together and be debated by people of better than average intelligence. im sure you have noticed you get a better than average debate here. this is a place that can help snap people out of complacency and help them to ease thier burden on the system and be less wastefull. this plus a litany of other reasons.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'I')f I understood well, there are not many alternatives but to learn to save on oil, live without oil, and move to a fertile underpopulated area, right?

quite right. im happy that i started out in a place that exports food and energy. most of my work was done before i started.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'S')o what are you discussing then?

absolutley everything. i read here for a solid 6 months before my first post. some people cry when they finally "get it". dont you think the end of the world as we know it is an interesting subject?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'P')erphaps this situation is nature's homeosthatic process to end the contamination that is destroying the planet :).

your catching on now. the realization of our situation can make a person very cynical. you have seen that with posters here and now you have some insight on why they are that way. they are not mean people, they just realize the futility of our impending global crisis.

the education you can get here may have a direct influence on whether you live or die. how many places can offer that?
User avatar
nwildmand
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 450
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby venky » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 13:59:03

There is another side of the story that I feel is not discussed fairly here PO.com. Peak Oil is a complex and fascinating subject, and there are many who people who while accepting that oil production will peak sometime within the next ten years, disagree with what will happen as a result of that with most of the posters here who are for the most mainly doomeristic.

A good blog is peakoildebunked.blogspot.com. Written by a former poster at this website.
I play the cards I'm dealt, though I sometimes bluff.

Only Man is vile.
venky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby venky » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 14:05:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ache', 'M')iki no te malgastes ni te cabrees con estos idiotas. Ain't worth the effort. Dale mas calor a los tuyos por alla.

Ya quite tu nombre del primer post ok. Sorry about that.


Perucha cuando se ponga la cosa dura en Libano te mudas para Peru que ahi si hay cama todo el mundo.

Te quiero Miki... Cuidate por el Libano ok.


I think this was the person who posted the first email. Dont understand spanish, but seems to say that we are all idiots and not worth the effort or something....... :evil:
I play the cards I'm dealt, though I sometimes bluff.

Only Man is vile.
venky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby lorenzo » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 14:39:10

It's good to see that this forum is sooo normal! Like any tight club, it feels very uncomfortable when rational people break the bubble. Miki successfully does so. Others have done so in the past and were banned or banned themselves out of boredom (done with it, move on to another club, any club will do).

This is all totally acceptable, totally normal, so normal in fact that it's ordinary!

The babble about Miki here is one of the best signs to prove that "Peak Oil" as it is being experienced and created here, is just another single-issue hobby club of no real importance to reality. Miki simply is one of those typical persons who show this fact to the outside world. A voice of reason amids the collective self-delusion of a group of hobbyists.


Randomly picking one of hers, but it happens to be a profound one:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')ne last question: if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately?


Something I've been asking many times. But as was to be expected, I never got an answer. Enough said. :-D
The Beginning is Near!
User avatar
lorenzo
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat 01 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 14:59:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', ' ')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'p')oor overpopulated places with no resources will bear the brunt of the overshoot correction.


Thanks to the industrialized countries that have irresponsibly abused their capacity to buy and use oil, without any regard to susteinability.

To a certain extent that is true. Many of those places are under a very heavy burden from predatory lending by organizations such as the IMF. However...I think a lot of the reason that third world countries have gotten themselves into the situation they are in is because they are chasing after the same unsustainable life that Americans are living. Certainly third world leaders have been instrumental in breaking up communal agriculture, turning the land over to agribusiness conglomerates, and forcing the displaced peasents into the commodity economy. To a certain extent too, I think that the peasents bear responsibility for chasing after the trinkets that global capitalism can bring them.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'W')ell, I am having a hard time understanding how all the governments of the world have not realized this before to plan accordingly.


To understand that, I think you have to understand the presidency of Jimmy Carter. For sure world leaders have realized this is a problem for decades. In the late 70's, Carter tried to put the US on a path to a sustainable energy policy. He put solar hot water panels on the roof of the White House. He tried to get America to reform it energy usage from the ground up. Operating under a sustainable energy policy requires a reduction in standard of living compared to what Americans are accustom to. The American public flipped out. Carter was the most widely unpopular president in recent history. The public let it be know that they were not willing to live within the constraints of what energy they could sustainably produce. What they wanted was neo-mercantilism: A military that was so powerfull it could go anywhere in the world and crush anyone that refused to give us their energy. One of Reagan's first acts as president was to remove the solar panels from the White House roof. When George Bush says "The American way of life is not negotiable," this is what he is talking about. The first mandate of the politician is not the well being of the country. The first mandate of the politician is to get re-elected. The American people absolutely will not tolerate being told they must tighten their belts and live sustainably. So American presidents do the only thing they realistically can. Steal other people's resources, and fiddle while the country burns.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'I') mean, shouldn't the US be spending more money in agriculture


I don't see how spending more money on agriculture would help this. Decentralizing agriculture would. Returning to the small family farms. But that runs directly counter to America's global capitalist agenda for the world.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('miki', 'O')ne last question: if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately? If I understood well, there are not many alternatives but to learn to save on oil, live without oil, and move to a fertile underpopulated area, right? So what are you discussing then?

Well...the Planning for the Future forum is just exactly that. People discussing the how-to's of moving to a fertile underpopulated area and live without oil.

As for the rest of the site....well....Did you ever get stuck in a traffic jam because of a wreck on the side of the road? It's not blocking traffic, but everybody wants to slow down and look. They want to watch the catastrophe. Discuss it even. That's more or less the gist of the rest of the site. To discuss how screwed we are. Also there's a few crackpots who like to discuss unworkable solutions to solve the problem. :-D

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'P')erphaps this situation is nature's homeosthatic process to end the contamination that is destroying the planet :).
That's the spirit! :-D
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby azreal60 » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 15:03:52

I'm not going to take a crack at spanish, as my understanding is elementary at best.

I'm confused lorenzo, this is the first time miki has actually talked about peakoil. Of the people who asked the questions, she's been among the most rational and least insulting person breaking thru to actually talking about peakoil. It might have been her country being attacked that brought her here, but her abililties give me great hope we've added another great poster who might add to the debates on peakoil.

And no one ever said Any of her questions where not valid. Nwildman answered alot of them quite well actually.

I guess the point is there are huge area's of leway with peakoil other than the simple fact of it. It's effects, of course that could be hugely different depending on 100's if not 1000's of factors. Why do you think we see so much debate on that topic here?

Venky, while I agree that this site is largely doomeristic, I would disagree that peakoildebunked is a good place to go for a counter viewpoint. I'm not even sure it's still working for one, and two, it goes way to far into cornecopia than I would give credit for it being realistic. I think just pay attention to what some of the people on this site are saying, and ignore the people who just latch on to popular opinion and agree with it. There are very rational people on here for both sides. And they make pretty good arguments for both sides. Listen well, and ask questions. A question asked shouldn't be answered with anything but all the information we can provide. It's how they are worded that normally got alot of scorn. I'm pleased to see Miki setting an example for how I wish all new peakoil posters followed. Of course, she kinda got roughed in on a totally different subject. She really can't be considered a new poster anymore I suppose.

Glad to have ya Miki. And nice to see some people I thought uncurably rude answer questions with, well, polite answers.
Azreal60
azreal60
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Sat 26 Jun 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Madison,Wisconsin
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 15:07:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'T')he babble about Miki here is one of the best signs to prove that "Peak Oil" as it is being experienced and created here, is just another single-issue hobby club of no real importance to reality.

Lorenzo, if you hate us so much, why do you keep hanging out here? Nobody forces you to log on here every day. Nobody forced you to make 1600 posts here. What gives? Is it just for the fun of trolling? Posting a bunch of stuff just so people will argue with you?
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby kabu » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 15:11:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('venky', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ache', 'M')iki no te malgastes ni te cabrees con estos idiotas. Ain't worth the effort. Dale mas calor a los tuyos por alla.

Ya quite tu nombre del primer post ok. Sorry about that.


Perucha cuando se ponga la cosa dura en Libano te mudas para Peru que ahi si hay cama todo el mundo.

Te quiero Miki... Cuidate por el Libano ok.


I think this was the person who posted the first email. Dont understand spanish, but seems to say that we are all idiots and not worth the effort or something....... :evil:

Ache's basically telling Miki not to worry about the idiots here, and for her to give her care to her people there. And when things get too difficult in Lebanon, for her to move back to Peru, because from there, the whole world will seem calm (cama suppose to = calma?).

Ache's got a point, too, but clearly Miki is trying to spread the word so that the world actually is a better place.
User avatar
kabu
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun 29 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby mekrob » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 15:36:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd if the rich nations will be OK because they produce their own food, then what's the need to nuke others?


Those aggressive nations (US, Israel, UK, etc) don't actually have to nuke other nations. But those nukes are a major bargaining tool. Not to mention that all nations with nukes have major standard armies with huge amounts of armaments lying around. With just standard armies, it's still possible to invade a nation, conquer or completely wipe out the people and leave the natural resources (oil) in tact almost completely for their use. Nuking will very likely not happen simply because it would be self-damaging; say if Israel nuked Palestine, then they're fucked with the radiation. If US nukes Saudi Arabia or Iraq, then how will they get the (contaminated) oil?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd what for if many of those others (eg, Lebanon) don't have oil or food to be stolen?


Then they'll have an awfully hard time getting by without oil or food, won't they?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd what is the aprox amount of time that this process would take?


I don't we're at peak oil yet, or if we are, there will be a long plateau, possibly a decade. In the June 12th edition of Oil and Gas Journal, there was a long list of about 200 major and megaprojects coming online in the next few years and peaking within the next 7-8 or fewer years. Those new supplies will add about 20 mpd of capacity, but during that time, depletion of current fields will take off about 20 mpd. Natural gas will add in a bit more, but it won't be enough to stave off peak oil forever.

Many predict that we will hit it by 2015. I'm in that category. With my basic research, I predict 2010 give or take a couple of years, and a pretty decent plateau (5-10 years) before we start to hit major depletion rate and begin our fall off the cliff.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd why isn't the US preparing its people for this? Cause stealing oil and food through war crimes won't be enough in the long term, right?


Remember Carter. He tried to get the message out. Had we heeded his advice, we could have been off of oil more or less and would need zero imports, even during hurricane season. But it was much easier to vote in 'Sun Shining' Reagan than deal with reality. The American people are the ones at fault. We now know that even Clinton and Gore knew about it, yet they did nothing because oil was so cheap then. There would have been mass riots in the US and he'd be thrown out of office and hated by nearly everyone. The policies never would have been enacted nor enforced.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')learer?

Yup

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ell, I am having a hard time understanding how all the governments of the world have not realized this before to plan accordingly. I mean, shouldn't the US be spending more money in agriculture and less in defense, if the situation is this critical?

The US government can only do what the people enable them. We are not run by benevolent dictators who know exactly what to do and when to do it. If the people don't want to give up SUV's, the government can't make them without having riots and protests.

It's not that there isn't a plan to make it a smooth transition, because any plan is better than no plan at all. Any plan will be regarded as a 'smooth transition'. Instead, there is simply no money to be made by telling people to sit at home, don't go to the movies, don't eat out, don't drive SUV's, etc. The people would suffer greatly and they wouldn't take too kindly to the US government doing that. Remember that the US was built on privacy and personal freedom from the government. Any act to deter oil consumption would wreck the economy and be regarded as an infringment upon our personal freedoms.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hanks for the summary Mekrob Smile. I did not understand everything though. If it's not about reserves, why can't they produce more oil?

I meant it's not necessarily about the size of oil reserves, but instead about the production rate of those reserves. Look at shale oil in the US. There's more 'oil' there than in the entire world yet no production rate because it will always been uneconomical. Look at the tar sands in Canada. There is 175 billion barrels of proven reserves. A 'field' of that size should produce at least 10 mpd maybe even 20 mpd at peak production, yet it only produces a tenth of that after 30 years of trying.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')omething I've been asking many times. But as was to be expected, I never got an answer. Enough said. Very Happy

Ever hear of getting the word out because maybe we aren't selfish bastards? Maybe we care enough about our fellow humans to try to let them know about what is going to happen so that then the world will be (a bit) better off.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')ne last question: if this is so inevitable, what are you guys discussing here so passionately?

When there was massive bombing going on all around you and you could have been killed any minute, why did you wait on the computer almost all day to type 30 posts a day?

Answer: To get the word out. To try to bring about a more peaceful ending.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o what are you discussing then?

Go to planning for the future in which there are plenty of discussions about the aftermath and how to deal with it; agriculture, poultry, trees, cows, etc. I don't imagine you've explored this site that much outside of the open discussion.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'n')ot quite true. just expect to get much poorer.

And how does that contradict what I said. So you think that poor nations have as high life expectancies as rich nations? A decline in wealth corresponds to a decline in life expectancy.
I want to put out the fires of Hell, and burn down the rewards of Paradise. They block the way to God. I do not want to worship from fear of punishment or for the promise of reward, but simply for the love of God. - Rabia
mekrob
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Fri 09 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby lorenzo » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 21:00:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'T')he babble about Miki here is one of the best signs to prove that "Peak Oil" as it is being experienced and created here, is just another single-issue hobby club of no real importance to reality.

Lorenzo, if you hate us so much, why do you keep hanging out here?


You know I don't hate you. It's simply my hobby too. I'm just playing the role of the dude who neurotically tries to go against the grain. I crave for attention. And I'm so glad I'm receiving it here. I love you people!

Seriously though, the only thing I don't understand, really, is the strange attitude of many here, the attitude of "there's nothing we can do", "it's inevitable", etc... IF this Peak Oil crisis were to have any significance, then it would show by the attempts to mitigate it and to do something about it. (What Miki says). But not very much of that happens here at this forum. That's why many seriously think this is just an obscure hobby based on a self-construed fantasy world. And there's reason to think so.
The Beginning is Near!
User avatar
lorenzo
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Sat 01 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby venky » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 21:25:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'T')he babble about Miki here is one of the best signs to prove that "Peak Oil" as it is being experienced and created here, is just another single-issue hobby club of no real importance to reality.

Lorenzo, if you hate us so much, why do you keep hanging out here?


You know I don't hate you. It's simply my hobby too. I'm just playing the role of the dude who neurotically tries to go against the grain. I crave for attention. And I'm so glad I'm receiving it here. I love you people!

Seriously though, the only thing I don't understand, really, is the strange attitude of many here, the attitude of "there's nothing we can do", "it's inevitable", etc... IF this Peak Oil crisis were to have any significance, then it would show by the attempts to mitigate it and to do something about it. (What Miki says). But not very much of that happens here at this forum. That's why many seriously think this is just an obscure hobby based on a self-construed fantasy world. And there's reason to think so.


Lorenzo, are you saying that because there are no visible efforts to mitigate Peak Oil and because the majority of people are unaware of it; that makes it insignificant? That is a fallacious line of reasoning.

The reason Peak Oil is not more widely known is that until very recently it was an internet based fringe movement and only now is moving into the mainstream. Even as late as early 2005, the fair price of oil was considered around $25-$30. And in the late 90's when oil sold at $10 /barrel, it was ludicrous to suggest that in the very near future oil supply was going to be constrained. I would suspect that even on this forum the overwhelming majority of people learnt about Peak Oil only sometime in the last 3 years.

By the standards of PO.com, I am quite the optimist. Infact, these days I would consider myself closer to John Denver's line of thinking rather than MQ; read my signature. But it is our inaction and ignorance on this matter that worries me; in that I fear that we might run slam bang into the nastiest of energy shocks before any serious action is taken to solve this problem; which despite SPG's characterization of us as 'crackpots'; I think this is a problem that can be solved in a matter of decades.
I play the cards I'm dealt, though I sometimes bluff.

Only Man is vile.
venky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Sat 09 Sep 2006, 22:11:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'T')he babble about Miki here is one of the best signs to prove that "Peak Oil" as it is being experienced and created here, is just another single-issue hobby club of no real importance to reality.

Lorenzo, if you hate us so much, why do you keep hanging out here? Nobody forces you to log on here every day. Nobody forced you to make 1600 posts here. What gives? Is it just for the fun of trolling? Posting a bunch of stuff just so people will argue with you?
He rarely if ever responds directly to things, SPG. He's like one of those types in the world who don't make eye contact. edit: well, reading down it seems he did reply. Hey lorenzo, your poll was written in a biased manner. I rewrote the questions for you to be less skewed.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Sun 10 Sep 2006, 02:58:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lorenzo', 'I')F this Peak Oil crisis were to have any significance, then it would show by the attempts to mitigate it and to do something about it. (What Miki says). But not very much of that happens here at this forum.

Ummm...this logic seems to me...well...flawed. So a problem is only significant if it can be fixed? By that logic, metastatic cancer is no big deal. (Or maybe it's only an important problem if you go through round after round of chemo and radiation in a desperate attempt to cure the uncurable?) The reality is that sometimes problems are just so big that they defy any sort of significant mitigation. Sometimes the best you can do is pray to whomever it is you pray to and hold on tight. Sometimes you just don't have any options, so you sing your death song and you die.

On a societal level, I think Peak Oil is very much like that. It is utterly unfixable. American and European society is unsalvagable. On an individual level, some things can be done to improve your odds. That's what "Planning for the Future" is all about.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby Miki » Sun 10 Sep 2006, 06:58:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mekrob', 'T')he US government can only do what the people enable them. We are not run by benevolent dictators who know exactly what to do and when to do it. If the people don't want to give up SUV's, the government can't make them without having riots and protests.


This doesn't make much sense to me.

1-Being in a democracy doesn't mean lawlessness. Just like there are laws that curtail unlimited freedom in order to prevent people from abusing each other, there are other special situations in which a nation needs to sacrifice freedom in order to prevent an even worse damage to their rights. I mean, it is obviously better to go through some inconvenience today than to starve tomorrow, right?

I could understand it if the actual catastrophe was to come in 200 years. People usually don't care if they'll be dead when the consequences actually take place. But you're talking about decades. If that is the case, either those alive today or their sons and daughters will be the direct victims.

2-If there's an impending emergency situation, people need at least to be warned. I doubt Carter talked about the emergency in the terms you guys are using here. Otherwise it would have been all over the news.

3-Bush is currently curtailing civil rights that are much more important than the "right to posess an SUV". If that can be done for security reasons, why can't much less be done to prevent starvation?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ny act to deter oil consumption would wreck the economy and be regarded as an infringment upon our personal freedoms.


I'm still not getting it. According to you guys, the economy will be wrecked anyway and it will happen quite soon. What's with the Carpe Diem philosophy when the situation is this severe and impending (ie, an emergency)?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here's more 'oil' there than in the entire world yet no production rate because it will always been uneconomical. Look at the tar sands in Canada.


And back to my main question, how can it be "uneconomical" when starvation is the alternative option?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')ver hear of getting the word out because maybe we aren't selfish bastards? Maybe we care enough about our fellow humans to try to let them know about what is going to happen so that then the world will be (a bit) better off.


This makes sense if you are offering some palliative options. But if there was very little that could be done to alleviate the consequences, wouldn't it be a bit sadistic/masochistic to endulge in discussion of these tragic events? I mean, what is the need to start suffering today when one will suffer inevitably tomorrow. It just increases the amount of time one spends suffering while not achieving anything else in the process. You know what I mean?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen there was massive bombing going on all around you and you could have been killed any minute, why did you wait on the computer almost all day to type 30 posts a day?

Answer: To get the word out. To try to bring about a more peaceful ending.

Well, for many reasons: out of indignation, out of frustration, in the effort to achieve some justice, in the effort to raise awareness of the truth, in the effort to move people to do something, in the effort to prevent future abuses,...It is also a matter of integrity to me, etc

And I'm not saying you guys are not doing something laudable in spreading the word to alleviate future suffering. I'm just confused about whether such alleviation is possible. Some of you seem to imply it isn't. And that's why I start wondering what's the purpose. You know what I mean?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')o to planning for the future in which there are plenty of discussions about the aftermath and how to deal with it; agriculture, poultry, trees, cows, etc. I don't imagine you've explored this site that much outside of the open discussion.

No, I have seen that section, and I can see from many posts even in OD that many of you are planning for the future. But again, many of you also seem to imply that no planning will result in meaningful gains for most of the world (even most of the rich nations), and that is what I find confusing.

I think that's what Lorenzo was trying to say too: that it is strange that the people in power in all the world are not doing anything; and that *some* of you seem to be more focused on discussing the morbid aspects of it, than in expressing your concern or coming up with ways to alleviate your suffering and that of others.

Some of you (eg, Jack) even use this PO thing as an excuse to defend and promote psychopatic attitudes. Those people will only make it worse when it all happens. When I was living in Peru, we would learn about ways to protect ourselves during an earthquake. One of the most important things was to walk fast instead of running and pushing others to escape first, because many more people died when people tried to step over others to escape first. The psychopatic attitudes only increase the number of people affected.
User avatar
Miki
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri 21 Jul 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby venky » Sun 10 Sep 2006, 08:32:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') mean, it is obviously better to go through some inconvenience today than to starve tomorrow, right?


Well, if we knew for certain that we were going to starve. If you have followed even a little of the Peak Oil debate (you have seen pretty divergent attitudes on this thread itself between Lorenzo and myself and the other posters); you would have seen that we cannot even agree on a date for when Peak Oil will happen, let alone what is going to happen after that. While the consensus date amongst independent geologists and others who have studied the problem is around 2010-2015. But the official government position and that of the prominent energy agencies is that Peak Oil is in no way imminent, infact it may not happen until the 2030's. Now while my personal opinion is that those who subscribe to such a view are dangerously wrong; but these people are well qualified, have a powerful voice with government policy; infact they pretty much set the government policy on energy.

You asked earlier, that if this is such a critical issue why is nobody doing anything about it. That is the most difficult question for a person who follows Peak Oil to answer, because on the face of it that seems obvious that if it were imminent and serious everyone should be talking about it. But unfortunately I think this is actually the reason why I think Peak Oil is potentially so dangerous. This is because we have no reason to expect a peak until after it happens.

There have been examples of this in the past; US oil production peaked quite suddenly in 1971; as late as 2000 experts were predicting continued growth in the North Sea; the British North sea peaked in 1999. Ofcourse there are experts who try to warn that a peak is imminent; like geologist M K Hubbert (the father of Peak Oil, sort off) successfully predicted that US oil production would peak in 1971 way back in 1956. He was ridiculed and dismissed at the time, but he turned out to be 100% right. My point is that when you have so many experts at the highest level saying that we have no reason to worry about a peak till 2037; well you cant blame the government if they decide to listen to them instead of a handful of independent geologists who are retired for the most.

But things are changing. Peak Oil is getting more and more mainstream coverage. Recent signs dont look good. Some critical giant oil fields seem to be in decline. Inspite of record prices oil production has essentially been flat since early 2005 ( But I think its more for political reasons as opposed to a peak, which I still think is around 2010-2015). And I agree with Mekrob, there is no way an American President could ask Americans to give up there SUV's and expect to remain in office.......especially as you well know:), Americans are generally speaking rather ignorant.

Well, this post is longer than I intended. But I am somewhat passionate about the subject:). But I dont agree with the doomeristic attitudes of most of the posters here, as you may have seen earlier in the thread. I think that what is most likely is that we are going to enter a period of economic stagnation, perhaps even a contraction or depression as a result of an energy shock far greater than one of the 1970's; but I think we will recover in a few decades due to restructuring and a ramping up of alternative sources of energy. Ultimately, mankind will face a reckoning as we push against the fundamentals limits to growth in a finite planet and the consequence of our careless ways with energy in the past like global warming. But I think that is relatively far in the future.

I dont believe our modern industrial society is going to collapse as a result of peak oil alone, but I do think we are in for a pretty rough ride. I understand why you are sceptical; after all there are crackpots all over the world predicting doomsday for a variety of reasons. Moreover peak oil is an extremely complex subject, which does require a period of study to grasp (On the other hand it is relatively easy to grasp a few points on a site like this lifeaftertheoilcrash.net and become a doomer :) , but spotting the flaws in the doomer logic take some subtlelity ) Maybe you might think its not worth the effort; then you will just learn about it when the majority of the population will; sometime like 2010-2015.

P.S. And Jack is pretty much a psychopath.....he just uses Peak Oil as an excuse :-D
I play the cards I'm dealt, though I sometimes bluff.

Only Man is vile.
venky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 819
Joined: Sun 13 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The 'Miki' Poll

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Sun 10 Sep 2006, 12:03:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', '[')
And I'm not saying you guys are not doing something laudable in spreading the word to alleviate future suffering. I'm just confused about whether such alleviation is possible. Some of you seem to imply it isn't. And that's why I start wondering what's the purpose. You know what I mean?

many of you also seem to imply that no planning will result in meaningful gains for most of the world (even most of the rich nations), and that is what I find confusing.

I think that's what Lorenzo was trying to say too: that it is strange that the people in power in all the world are not doing anything; and that *some* of you seem to be more focused on discussing the morbid aspects of it, than in expressing your concern or coming up with ways to alleviate your suffering and that of others.

What's the purpose? Good question. Miki. I have a question for you: when nwildmand mentioned that Lebanon is in danger because of the prospect of scarce energy, did that make you worry or did you think, no, this is nothing to worry about because if it was, the world would be sounding the alarm, not just these peakoilers who seem so odd? As to your question, it's obvious that there are many different attitudes to Peak Oil. For most people it's, "go away, don't bother me with this." For people here, it's about as diverse as it can be. We have people trying to mobilize proactive responses, we have people who don't think that will work or it's too late and they are just trying to build an ark. We have people who don't think an ark is neccessary and we have people who don't think an ark will do any good. And we have people who think along any one of these lines on any given day but can't make up their minds. (I'm in the latter group) Many of us have researched this extensively to try and get at the truth somehow. But it is not possible to do becausee the future is still to come. The fundamental idea: this world is built to run on cheap energy, it can't function without cheap energy, cheap energy is disappearing, therefor we are in trouble. This seems incontrovertable to me. That's why I'm here, plus the carpe diem thing. This is an interesting place to hang out while waiting to see what is really going to happen.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests



cron