Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on August 2, 2016
Heinberg: You Can’t Handle the Truth!
Movie buffs will recognize this title as the most memorable line from “A Few Good Men” (1992), spoken by the character Colonel Jessep, played by Jack Nicholson (“You can’t handle the truth!” is #29 in the American Film Institute’s list of 100 top movie quotes).
I hereby propose it as the subtext of the recently concluded Republican and Democratic national conventions.
At this point most people appear to know that something is terribly, terribly wrong in the United States of America. But like the proverbial blind man describing the elephant, Americans tend to characterize the problem according to their economic status, their education and interests, and the way that the problem is impacting their peer group. So we hear that the biggest crisis facing America today is:
- Corruption
- Immigration
- Economic inequality
- Climate change
- Lack of respect for law enforcement
- Institutionalized racism
- Islamic terrorism
- The greed and recklessness of Wall Street banks
- Those damned far-right Republicans
- Those damned liberal Democrats
- Political polarization
The list could easily be lengthened, but you get the drift. Pick your devil and prepare to get really, really angry at it.
In reality, these are all symptoms of an entirely foreseeable systemic crisis. The basic outlines of that crisis were traced over 40 years ago in a book titled The Limits to Growth. Today we are hitting the limits of net energy, environmental pollution, and debt, and the experience is uncomfortable for just about everyone. The solution that’s being proposed by our political leaders? Find someone to blame.
The Republicans really do seem to get the apocalyptic tenor of the moment: their convention was all about dread, doom, and rage. But they don’t have the foggiest understanding of the actual causes and dynamics of what’s making them angry, and just about everything they propose doing will make matters worse. Call them the party of fear and fury.
The Democrats are more idealistic: if we just distribute wealth more fairly, rein in the greedy banks, and respect everyone’s differences, we can all return to the 1990s when the economy was humming and there were jobs for everyone. No, we can do even better than that, with universal health care and free college tuition. Call the Democrats the party of hope.
But here’s the real deal: a few generations ago we started using fossil fuels for energy; the result was an explosion of production and consumption, which (as a byproduct) enabled enormous and rapid increase in human population. Burning all that coal, oil, and natural gas made a few people very rich and enabled a lot more people to enjoy middle-class lifestyles. But it also polluted air, water, and soil, and released so much carbon dioxide that the planet’s climate is now going haywire. Due to large-scale industrial agriculture, topsoil is disappearing at a rate of 25 billion tons a year; at the same time, expanded population and land use is driving thousands, maybe millions of species of plants and animals to extinction.
We extracted non-renewable fossil fuels using the low-hanging fruit principle, so that just about all the affordable petroleum (which is the basis for nearly all transport) has already been found and most of has already been burned. Since we can’t afford most of the oil that’s left (either in terms of the required financial investment or the energy required to extract and refine it), the petroleum industry is in the process of going bankrupt. There are alternative energy sources, but transitioning to them will require not just building an enormous number of wind turbines and solar panels, but replacing most of the world’s energy-using infrastructure.
We have overshot human population levels that are supportable long-term. Yet we have come to rely on continual expansion of population and consumption in order to generate economic growth—which we see as the solution to all problems. Our medicine is our poison.
And most recently, as a way of keeping the party roaring, we have run up history’s biggest debt bubble—and we doubled down on it in response to the 2008 global financial crisis.
All past civilizations have gone through similar patterns of over-growth and decline. But ours is the first global, fossil-fueled civilization, and its collapse will therefore correspondingly be more devastating (the bigger the boom, the bigger the bust).
All of this constitutes a fairly simple and obvious truth. But evidently our leaders believe that most people simply can’t handle this truth. Either that or our leaders are, themselves, clueless. (I’m not sure which is worse.)
Hence the political primaries generated lots of feelings (anger, hope, fear), but revealed or conveyed almost no understanding of what’s actually going on, what’s in store, or what to do about it.
Now, I’m not proposing that the two parties are equivalent. There are some substantive differences between them. And in dangerous times, hope usually yields better outcomes than fear and rage (though hope is vulnerable to disillusionment and recrimination, which in turn lead back to fear and rage). Some of the Democrats’ ideas may help as we embark on our Great Slide down the steep slope of the Seneca cliff: for example, a universal basic income (not in the Democratic Party’s platform but consistent with its ideals) could provide a temporary safety net as the economy enters its inevitable long nosedive. Democrats at least acknowledge the problem of climate change, though they have few plans to do much about it (on this issue, the Republicans almost literally reside on a different planet). Meanwhile the Republicans’ reflex toward tribalism and division has the potential to turn social relations between America’s historically dominant European descendants and the nation’s various other ethnic groupings into a seething cauldron of hatred and violence.
But Democrats’ inability to provide a credible response to the zeitgeist of imperial decline could play into electoral defeat or failure either this time around or next. Trump offers a politics of isolationism and the image of the Strong Man, which may better fit the spirit of the times. True, any intention to “Make America Great Again”—if that means restoring a global empire that always gets its way, and whose economy is always growing, offering glittery gadgets for all—is utterly futile, but at least it acknowledges what so many sense in their gut: America isn’t what it used to be, and things are unraveling fast.
Troublingly, when empires rot the result is sometimes a huge increase in violence—war and revolution. The decline of the British Empire was the backdrop for World War I, which led to an even bloodier reprise a couple of decades later. Today the foreign policy establishment in Washington appears eager to pick a fight with Russia, and Hillary Clinton has a track record of dangerous interventionism (she’s won the endorsement of neoconservative hawks—both Republican and Democrat—who pushed for the Iraq invasion of 2003). Trump, for all his rhetorical belligerence, seems perhaps a bit less bellicose internationally, though his eventual foreign policies are currently about as easy to read as a Rorschach ink blot.
Russia’s Vladimir Putin is playing a peculiar role in the current contest. Trump and Putin have publicly complimented one another (one can only speculate as to the motives on both sides), while Hillary Clinton hews closely to the neocon-formulated State Department line that Putin is a dangerous strongman who threatens his neighbors. In fact, it is the US and NATO that have surrounded Russia with advanced weapons, reneged on agreements, and instigated regime change in Ukraine.
The Western powers’ ongoing provocation and demonization of Russia is pushing the world closer perhaps to nuclear war than was the case even during some decades of the Cold War. Against this frightening backdrop Trump has proposed (perhaps jokingly) that Russia hack Clinton’s emails. For her part, Clinton gives no indication that she will ratchet down the anti-Putin rhetoric; just the opposite appears to be in store—both during the campaign and the next four crucial years, when we are likely to face another (perhaps much worse) financial crisis along with escalating international tensions.
Could “we the people” handle a bit more of the truth? One would certainly like to think so. As it is, the US and the rest of the world appear to be sleepwalking into history’s greatest shitstorm (a somewhat more geeky and less scatological way to describe it would be as the mother of all Dragon Kings). Regardless how we address the challenges of climate change, resource depletion, overpopulation, debt deflation, species extinctions, ocean death, and on and on, we’re in for one hell of a century. It’s simply too late for a soft landing.
I’d certainly prefer that we head into the grinder holding hands and singing “kumbaya” rather than with knives at each other’s throats. But better still would be avoiding the worst of the worst. Doing so would require our leaders to publicly acknowledge that a prolonged shrinkage of the economy is a done deal. From that initial recognition might follow a train of possible goals and strategies, including planned population decline, economic localization, the formation of cooperatives to replace corporations, and the abandonment of consumerism. Global efforts at resource conservation and climate mitigation could avert pointless wars.
But none of that was discussed at the conventions. No, America won’t be “Great” again, in the way Republicans are being encouraged to envision greatness. And no, we can’t have a future in which everyone is guaranteed a life that, in material respects, echoes TV situation comedies of the 1960s, regardless of race, religion, or sexual orientation.
Bernie Sanders offered the best climate policies of any of the pre-convention candidates, but even he shied away from describing what’s really at stake. The times call for a candidate more in the mold of Winston Churchill, who famously promised only “blood, toil, tears, and sweat” in enlisting his people in a great, protracted struggle in which all would be called upon to work tirelessly and set aside personal wants and expectations. The candidates we have instead bode ill for the immediate future. Given the absence of helpful leadership at the national level, our main opportunity for effective preparation and response to the wolf at our doorstep appears to lie in local community resilience building.
It’s the truth. Can you handle it?
63 Comments on "Heinberg: You Can’t Handle the Truth!"
Apneaman on Thu, 4th Aug 2016 11:08 pm
The Most Disturbing Climate Change-Events We’ve Seen Yet
“Dr. Charles Miller, NASA-Jet Propulsion Laboratory joins Thom”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNe5W_eHMtM
No need to worry, because the meltdown of the Northern high latitudes and Arctic can’t be stopped and the humans, due to their biologly, can’t stop either, so their daily actions will just bring it on faster. Don’t forget that the working scientists are giving you the most conservative estimate that they can given the data – which they are having a very difficult time keeping up with.”faster than previously expected” is the current order of the day. They don’t have a model that incorporates all the feedbacks. Methinks faster than previously expected will continue for at least as long as the humans continue forcing.
How much carbon dioxide is produced by burning gasoline and diesel fuel?
“About 19.64 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) are produced from burning a gallon of gasoline that does not contain ethanol. About 22.38 pounds of CO2 are produced from burning a gallon of diesel fuel.”
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11
Apneaman on Thu, 4th Aug 2016 11:12 pm
Boat, how long did you live in Russia for? Must be at least a few years to become such a self assured expert on Russia and Russian culture. Can you recommend a few good books on Russia for us ignorant lay people?
Apneaman on Thu, 4th Aug 2016 11:18 pm
Thanks Grandpas, ya fucking assholes.
Melting ice sheet could expose frozen Cold War-era hazardous waste
“Date: August 4, 2016
Source: York University
Summary:
Climate change is threatening to expose hazardous waste at an abandoned camp thought to be buried forever in the Greenland Ice Sheet, new research has found. Camp Century, a United States military base built within the Greenland ice sheet in 1959, doubled as a top-secret site for testing the feasibility of deploying nuclear missiles during the Cold War. When the camp was decommissioned in 1967, its infrastructure and waste were abandoned”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160804141252.htm
We was just following orders.
makati1 on Thu, 4th Aug 2016 11:34 pm
Boat, I hope yah got the message in my comment before the page flipped. It will add to your infinite knowledge of Russia today.
Anonymous on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 12:10 am
ROLF, ‘free world’? Didn’t know people still existed that believe that, much less actually use the term.
Apneaman on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 12:32 am
Anchorage just experienced its hottest month on record
http://www.adn.com/alaska-news/weather/2016/08/03/anchorage-just-experienced-its-hottest-month-ever-recorded/
Planty, you should install a lift kit in your vehicle to avoid bottoming out on those new and improved, permafrost heave, Alaskan highways. Oh and don’t loiter around building that are tilting either.
CLIMATE CHANGE: HELL ON ALASKA’S FORMERLY FROZEN HIGHWAYS
Global thawing is threatening critical infrastructure
“The Alaska Highway’s roadbeds are melting.
“It’s the single biggest geotechnical problem we have,” said Jeff Currey, materials engineer for the northern region of Alaska’s Department of Transportation. “The Romans built roads 2,000 years ago that people are still using. On the other hand, we have built roads that within a year or two, without any maintenance, look like a roller coaster because they are built over thaw-unstable permafrost.””
http://www.constructionequipment.com/climate-change-hell-alaskas-formerly-frozen-highways
Once that Alaskan oil extraction slows enough the federal government will abandon the state like it’s a plague victim. Collapse – starts on the periphery and works towards the center.
Futilitist on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 12:56 am
Hey Apneaman.
I was recently permanently banned from peakoil.com for no apparent reason. I noticed that the same thing seems to have happened to you. I tried to leave you a comment on the Collapse of Civilization blog, but for whatever reason it would not post. Here is that comment:
Here is some more:
The Doomstead Diner had a lame thread on the Etp model that had gone stale for a year. So I jumped on. The result is totally surreal:
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,4287.15.html
I totally recommend reading the whole thing. Anatomy of a fake forum 101. LOL.
And over at ourfiniteworld, Gail tries a truly amateur hatchet job on the Etp model. At one point she “accidentally” refers to BWHill as BS Hill:
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2016/07/25/overly-simple-energy-economy-models-give-misleading-answers/comment-page-4/#comment-95368
For some reason, Gail is on the editorial board of Charles Hall’s peer reviewed journal that has asked BWHill to submit a paper on the Etp model. There is something very fishy going on.
I had to say something so I left this comment (my first ever on Gail’s blog):
https://ourfiniteworld.com/2016/07/25/overly-simple-energy-economy-models-give-misleading-answers/comment-page-4/#comment-95901
Futilitist says:
August 3, 2016 at 1:21 am
Hello Gail,
I have enjoyed reading your work for many years, but you are incorrect in your assessment of BWHill’s Etp model. It is quite apparent from your comment above that you simply do not understand physics and the thermodynamic model you are so intent on criticizing. Here is the most elegant, simple explanation I could find, by BW himself:
“The ETP model is the solution of a thermodynamic equation that gives the amount of energy on average it takes to produce oil, and its products. By subtracting that value from its energy content (exergy), the remainder is what is left over for the economy to use. When the remainder is no longer sufficient to pay for the oil, the price of oil must go down.”
~BWHill
The thermodynamic equation BWHill is talking about is The Entropy Rate Balance Equation for Control Volumes, which is a second law statement. It measures the heat and mass being removed from a control volume to derive the total energy used in the process. In the case of the Etp model, the heat removed is determined from the average well depth, the mass removed is the oil (and water cut), and the process is the Petroleum Production Process. The Etp function is a measure of the rising entropy in the Petroleum Production Process. All processes in the universe experience rising entropy.
As to some specifics, you said:
“I might note that in looking at energy used in extraction of oil, BS Hill looks at only US data, even though presumably he is trying to figure out world average amounts. With respect to oil wells drilled, he says: “More than half of the oil wells ever drilled have been drilled in the United States. Because the EIA has maintained records on the depth of most of the oil wells drilled there, it is a good proxy for average world well depth. It is assumed that the life span of the average well is 20 years. Past 20 years most wells are either shut-in, or their production has fallen to a small percentage of its original amount. A twenty year moving average is used to determine average well depth at time, year = #. The temperature of the reservoir is calculated from the earth temperature gradient of 1°F per 70 feet of depth.””
1. You refer to BWHill as BS Hill.
2. You claim the Etp model uses only US data. This is false and misleading. The Etp model uses world oil production data. But there is no specific data for average world well depth, which is needed as one of the inputs to the thermodynamic equation. To solve this, in this one case only, BWHill uses US well depth as a proxy. It is false and misleading to claim that the entire study considers only US data.
3. The quote you refer to from the Etp book is not “With respect to oil wells drilled”, as you claim. It is obviously with respect to determining the average world well depth, as I just explained. This is confusing and misleading.
As far as the correlation of World GDP/Cumulative Oil Production vs. your approach of focusing on World GDP/Total Energy Consumption, it really makes no difference at all. Both correlations are true. This is because energy is a zero sum game and the world economy runs on Total Immediately Available Energy at every given moment. When the energy available from oil begins to decline too rapidly, so does Total Immediately Available Energy. As Total Immediately Available Energy declines, so does the economy. As the economy declines, so does investment in alternatives. So it goes.
It all comes down to thermodynamics, Gail.
—Futilitist
I was a little surprised she even published my comment. But she actually answers back with more bullshit at length. My head is spinning.
So, yeah, big surprise. All the voices of doom online, from theoildrum to the Doomstead Diner to peakoilbarrel to peakoil.com are all actually soft pedaling doom for the Man. They have been from the start. Astroturfing. We never had a chance.
So it is good that we finally meet, Apneaman. Right before I was permanently banned for no apparent reason from peakoil.com, I happened upon one of your excellent posts there and noticed that you had been permanently banned some time before. I went back through your posts to see what got you banned, and I couldn’t find a thing that would warrent a ban. I want compare notes with you sometime about the goings on at peakoil.com. See if you can spot the “trolling” that gets me permanently banned:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1317773.html#p1317773
Here is what I think really scares them. They don’t want me to keep updating this graph:
[img]http://i1064.photobucket.com/albums/u363/Futilitist/Etp%20UPDATE_zpso4do1et2.jpg[/img]
—Futilitist
Brat on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 12:58 am
Expect real civil unrest to begin right after the elections, regardless who wins:
http://www.infowars.com/professor-claims-trump-is-inspiring-violent-civil-unrest-by-warning-of-rigged-election/
Apneaman on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 2:42 am
Futilitist, I got banned for using a swear word in a fake over the top rant – I was warned, so at that point I told the cunt to go fuck himself. Can’t fire me cause I quit. Any old excuse would do. They like their little exclusivity in the forum – makes em feel important N stuff. I was under the impression that the Collapse of Industrial Civilization blog was inactive. Guy who runs it, xraymike, is one sharp dude – he posts on reddit r/collapse now. RE, from Doomstead diner seems to waste half his time arguing with Guy McPherson when Guy McPherson is not even there. Methinks he doth protest too much. Futilitist, you should go have a discussion with James on http://megacancer.com/ He understands the Etp model, thermodynamics, etc – a real determinist. Keep updating your graph. It probably won’t make any difference, but do it anyway. I keep updating on AGW and the 6th mass and that makes no difference. It’s the end times and I don’t have anything else to do.
Futilitist on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 3:09 am
[b]PEAKOIL.COM CONSPIRACY!!![/b]
So, if anyone is interested. Peakoil.com is engaged in a coverup. When a thread reaches 25 pages (500 posts), another thread with the same title (plus part 2), is supposed to be created automatically. Then part 1 is locked. Well not this time.
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1317773.html#p1317773
The thread called “Oil prices will never recover” is now locked and no part 2 was ever created. The thread now drifts off the front page, out of site out of mind.
This was a very heated discussion up until a couple days ago. Many regular members were participating every day. No one has even mentioned that the thread is locked. Fake forum.
I made my first post on page 5 and I was mysteriously banned on page 21 or so.
Please check it out. Peakoil.com hates the Etp model and they will do anything to stop it!
—Futilitist
Futilitist on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 3:19 am
Hi Apneaman.
Thanks for the info. My banning was kind of expected, since they were all so pissed off at me. But I was being pretty nice when all of a sudden…
“Keep updating your graph. It probably won’t make any difference, but do it anyway. I keep updating on AGW and the 6th mass and that makes no difference.”
Yeah I know. Nothing can make any difference now. Actually, it never really could.
—Futilitist
marmico on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 6:25 am
You are a dickhead.
Futilitist on Fri, 5th Aug 2016 1:10 pm
Marmico,
Wow. You are gross. And you seem really pissed off at me. Good. It shows that I am very effective at getting my message out. I will take “you are a dickhead” as a compliment. Thanks.
—Futilitist