Peak Oil...as dangerous as we think?

[Codeblue]

I am a student at Western State College in Gunnison, Colorado. Not many people know about us, but in the state we're known for being a very liberal, environmental school. Our Environmental Studies department holds a spring symposium every year in order to increase environmental awareness in the area. This year, David Orr was the keynote speaker.

David Orr is a well respected professor at Oberlin College in Ohio for those of you who don't him. His Environmental Studies deaprtment built their own building, which is entirely self sufficient. It uses no outside power sources, they recycle their trash and have their own compost heap. This year, the building is slated to begin operating off of 100% solar power. Currently, some of their power is gleaned from a gas generator, but no longer! Anyway, I went to his speech, and he was talking about peak oil. He didnt sound too worried about it.

It has made me question the validity of peak oil causing a crisis. I do believe that if Republicans remain in charge of this country, a disaster could well be on the way. However, things can begin to change now. Solar power is a viable solution. I'm not talking about huge solar plants...we don't need large power plants that provide power for everyone in the nation and are connected on a grid. Each individual home can use solar power...the house would be much more efficient and it would also protect us from terrorists.

Think about it. Right now, terrorists can easily blow up sections of the power grid and knock out power to every city in the U.S. But if each individual home had its own power source, and even large corps in skyscrapers can have their own power source...terrorists would have to go to each business, each home in order to disrupt power in the U.S. Much more efficient protection than building a military and invading other countries.

I don't think the problem of Peak Oil is now as serious as we think. THe technology exists to replace fossil fuels with hydrogen fuel cells, solar panels, windmills or any other alternative energy source. NASA has been using hydrogen fuel cells for decades to launch the space shuttles into space. The Netherlands obtains 20% of their power currently from wind farms. Dr. Orr presented us with an interesting concept. The Great Plains of the United States has more energy potential from wind than the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia could ever produce.

Many people are waiting for the government to do something about peak oil and change things. But we dont have to wait for the government...we can begin the change oursleves. Volkswagen is releasing a car next year that will obtain 200 miles to the gallon in fuel efficiency (I'll try to find proof of that. All I have now is Dr. Orr's word, which I highly trust). Do we even need cars? Some people perhaps, but for the most part...NO. We use cars simply out of convenience. PV panels in our houses, a small windmill to supply power to only your house. THere are already a number of options to begin change. We just have to quit waiting for the government to make the change for us. Because, even with a Democrat in office, that change will happen much too slowly to be effective.

Thanks for your time.

[Renew Deal]

1. Great post!!! And I partly agree.

I agree that if we act now we can avoid a crisis and possibly a catastrophe. I still consider Peak Oil a disaster waiting to happen for one reason. No one is doing anything to avoid it. I know we individually can make some personal changes, but it needs to be a societal change. The gov't needs to talk about it and talk about migrating to alternative fuels. Unfortunately Bushco will never do that. Neither will most republicans and anyone loyal to OPEC. Remember, OPEC doesn't want us leaving oil. They want to bleed us dry. That;s why they take efficiency patents and never release the technology.

Imagine what it would be like trying to get hydrogen cells, windmills, and solar panels after Peak Oil strikes. It will be impossible. Part of what sets the alarmists off is that we will be trying to do these things after all the oil is gone.

So your assessment is accurate, but as long as the gov't doesn't get involved, it is a disaster in the making.

[mhr]

2. In Large Southern Cities Like Dallas, Houston, And Atlanta

Cars are mandatory. One could not earn a living in any of these cities easily without a car.

Mass transit? Forget about it! Voters in these cities will never approve the bond funds needed to make a system diverse enough to handle the need.

Also, solar panels have a negative EROEI which makes them a poor choice for electricity at this time.

Other peak oil links here:

Websites of interest include:

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Home.html
http://globalpublicmedia.com/
http://www.oilcrash.com/running.htm
http://www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk/
http://www.durangobill.com/Rollover.html
http://www.asponews.org
http://www.gulland.ca/depletion/depletion.htm
http://www.dieoff.org/
http://www.oilanalytics.org/
http://www.greatchange.org/
http://www.oilcrisis.com/
http://www.after-oil.co.uk/
http://www.hubbertpeak.com/
http://hubbert.mines.edu
http://www.museletter.com/archive/cia-oil.html

Books:

Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil
by David Goodstein

The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies
by Richard Heinberg

Hubbert's Peak : The Impending World Oil Shortage
by Kenneth S. Deffeyes

The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight : Waking Up to Personal and Global Transformation
by Thom Hartmann

The Oil Factor: How Oil Controls the Economy and Your Financial Future
by Stephen Leeb, Donna Leeb

News Groups:

Energy Resources
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/energyresources/

Alas Babylon
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlasBabylon/

Running on Empty
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RunningOnEmpty2/

[Renew Deal]

4. Thanks for the links

[Codeblue]

6. Ok

Well first...solar panels are inefficient. I understand that. Most of the sunlight that strikes them is no harnessed and made into usable energy. Except, you know what? A house, running off of solar energy, will get by just fine. As I mentioned, Dr. Orr's building will be running on 100% solar energy by next year.

I'm sure there are public transportation opportunities in those cities, as with every major metropolitan area in the U.S. But you appear to be one of those Americans who is in love with their car. That's what the problem is with transportation in this country. Nobody can stand to give up their car. Where there's a will, there's a way. I'm sure one could find a job opportunity closer to their home so they wouldnt have to drive all the way across the city. Those are huge places. Jobs abound in huge cities. Maybe not jobs that will make you a filthy yuppie, but jobs you can live off of nonetheless.

[mhr]

15. Most People Have No Choice On The Job They Can Take

especially in this economy. If the job is 50 miles away one takes it. One takes what is available. It is as simple as that.

Do not assert that people are in love with their cars; that is an arrogant assumption. Personally, I despise having to have a car. Nevertheless in a place like Dallas, TX there is no alternative. That is the truth and a fact.

Before one makes "sweeping" generalizations about what is possible do some more research.

[Codeblue]

22. Dont tell me to do more research

Tell David Orr to do more research. He is the one who made all of these assertions that I am making here. He is a well respected environmentalist and has written many books on the subject.

Enough like minded people can change things...the civil rights movement taught us that as well as the women's suffrage movement far earlier. Instead of just accepting the fact that you must own a car in Dallas, try and change it.

[mhr]

29. You Are Incredibly Presumptuous, I Am An Electrical Engineer By Training

and have studied the fundamentals of many aspects of electricity and energy.

Just looking at the figures of merit for PV lets one know that it is no panacea. The marketplace prevails on costs and right now there is virtually no payback on PV in urban and suburban settings. So it matters not that there is a school building that runs entirely on PV. Most institutions could not subsidize the cost to install the system in the first place.

At some point in the future PV will become costs competitive with generated electricity. Until then it will require government subsidy to really get going.

Regardless, PV does not solve the transportation energy issues. Additionally PV does not solve the fertilizer related issues since fertilizers are made from oil.

[drfemoe]

33. Solar panels

won't be much help during a nuclear winter either, eh?

I'm surprised that any academian would propose that mass transit can solve this kind of problem. Busses and trains don't run on coffee beans, after all.

Has hemp oil ever been used to generate electricity?

[NickB79]

32. Jobs abound?

Tell that to the 2.5 million who have lost their jobs in the past 3 years, or the 360,000 who filed unemployment last year. Ever heard the phrase McJob? It's one of those shit-paying jobs that requires you to live paycheck to paycheck if you're lucky, with no benefits whatsover.

Look at it this way. I'm a recent college grad who's still looking for a job in his field. In the meantime I'm making $7.50/hr, 35 hrs a week at the same restaurant I worked at throughout college. In this smaller college town, rent is cheap for a decent apartment I share with 3 other people($275/mo each). I only have to commute a few miles to work and back. I can walk to a lot of local businesses to shop or go out to have fun with friends. I don't drink much so I'm not blowing $50 a night on drinks and shots like some other college friends of mine. I have no student loans to pay back. I am very frugal with my money and rarely splurge on myself. I get state-subsidized health care. Despite all this, my mom STILL has to help me out with bills from time to time. I've only managed to save up $1500 total in the past year despite pinching pennies. I still can't afford to get my wisdom teeth out because the state-subsidized health care (which is all I can afford) was recently modified to no longer cover dental. If it weren't for my family helping me out, there is no way I could get by on one job. Working two jobs and doing 60 hrs a week runs you ragged very quickly.

I guess the moral of my story is that many of the jobs you say abound in big cities do NOT offer livable wages, unless you are living out of your car or a cardboard box, and you never ever get sick or have an accident requiring medical care.

[amazona]

51. without a car you won't be hired

Pick up the classified ads for New Orleans or another large southern city. For even a minimum wage job, you will find this statement: Must have reliable transportation. This is code for "must have your own car." Without a car, you don't get hired. It is not a matter of not getting a yuppie job. You can't even get a job saying "fries with that." In a car culture, employers feel that if you don't have a car, you have a serious problem (drugs, drink, etc.) or are just plain congenitally unreliable and cannot be expected to get to work on time.

[rustydad]

49. Exactly right MHR

It's truly depressing to find so much lack of awareness of the peak oil and gas issues here on DU of all places. I admit it is a very nuanced issue with many facets and various scenarios that may or may not play out.

Some things are certain though. Natural gas has peaked on this continent and in order to reduce consumption prices have and will continue to rise. This will affect negatively the chemical, fertilizer and electricity markets as well as others. All those new gas fired power plants are going to be mighty expensive to run.

Oil is being used world wide four times as fast as new supplies are found and developed. Because reports from oil exporting countries as to remaining oil is mostly smoke and mirrors no one can say for sure if we are at peak world wide but my bet is that we are.

Read my lips folks NOTHING CAN REPLACE OIL as the most important energy source we have ever had and are now about to have in smaller and smaller quantities. Hydrogen is a cruel hoax. Unless we can scoop it out of one of the solar systems gas giants and somehow get it down to earth it ain't gonna happen.

And while it is true that the world is not running out of oil anytime soon that does not negate to reality of economics. Every barrel produced after peak will cost more because of two important functions. The oil is harder to get out of the ground. Deeper wells, offshore deep wells, new high tech drilling, water injection, all cost lots of money to do. The user pays more, period. Add to that dynamic the dynamic of market driven prices, that is in a sellers market the barrel of crude goes to the highest bidder (think China, Europe, India, Asian Tiger States, along with the inflation runaway oil prices will create and wallah, the perfect storm. Bob

[Indiana_Dem]

3. Thank you for giving your input!

I think if everything goes like you and David Orr and me, then we'll be okay. I don't see the rest of the U.S. following our plan, however. What did he say if we don't change our ways? Is it still going to be alright?

[Codeblue]

9. He did say what will happen...

if we dont jump into action now. He of course did not say it will still be alright. Quite the contrary. He mentioned the terrible side effects of not changing our ways not only as far as Peak Oil, but also the 2.5-10 degree temperature change we can expect on our planet if we continue to consume fossil fuels for the next ten years at this rate.

[Renew Deal]

11. Have you seen this new movie?

It's coming out soon. It should be cool.

www.thedayaftertomorrow.com

[Codeblue]

23. Yeah I want to see that

[Renew Deal]

5. 200 mpg VW is tough to find.

I have done some google searches. It appears that there is a car that will get 239 mpg but it looks like a lot of speculation.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=volkswagen+%2B+239+mpg

[Codeblue]

8. I didnt know for sure about that anyway

Thanks for that. In the meantime, we atleast have cars that can get 70-90 mpg.

[NJCher]

7. $750

A student of mine did a paper last semester on how a family put together a power system that involved solar and a few other technologies. They managed to do it for $750. It meets 100% of their home power needs.


Cher

[Codeblue]

10. Yes

I heard somewhere about a guy who converted to complete solar electricity in his home. His electric bill each month totaled to a whopping 4 dollars.

[mhr]

17. Details, Details, Details

That is very, very, very hard to believe. The current state of the art for home power systems can be found here: www.homepower.org .

Typically, systems for home use that would replicate what one uses from the grid cost many thousands of dollars. Now if this family was a group of hermits that used no power at night, had no computer or TV, never washed a bit of clothes, etc, etc, etc - maybe.

$ 750 to replicate modern home power consumption, hardly.

[Nihil]

19. Any home power system info for the UK?

Thanks for your link mhr but do you have any for UK-based organisations please?

I'm specifically interested in solar-based systems - both heat exchange
arrays for heating and photovoltaic arrays for low power devices - that
could supplement rather than totally replace the grid electricity supply.

I've had a look at www.homepower.org (heavily US-centric) and the
wolfatthedoor.org.uk site (UK but stats-oriented rather than advisory)
and wondered if you might have other links to hand before I wade into
the Google morass ...

Thanks,

Nihil

[mhr]

20. Sorry, I Don't Have anything For The UK - I'd Have To Google For That Too

eom

[Oggy]

40. The Organisation

I work for has some useful stuff about Renewables, Energy Efficency etc, including some bits on PV. It may not be exactly what you are after, but we are acknowledged as the UK's leading authority on many of these issues.

Link:-

www.est.co.uk

[Nihil]

41. Thanks

Will have a flick through this a bit later!

[Dead_Parrot]

50. Try here...

http://www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/infosyst/other_services.html#energy

Friends of the Earth get a bit "out there" sometimes, but they do link out to a few companies doing renewable energy... might be worth a look...

[Nihil]

56. OK - Ta!

Will give it a go.

[NJCher]

21. I thought it was crazy, too

But he cited his sources. I'll see if I still have his paper on my hard drive and if I do, maybe I can track it down via his MLA citations. Might not be immediately but I will bookmark this thread and come back to it. Swamped with work right now.


Cher

[Codeblue]

24. In Gunnison county

where I live, many people use solar power. TVs and computers are unnecessary. We dont need Tvs and computers to live, they are just little extra things that we use out of convenience.

Secondly, if you had read my original post, you would know that a college in OHIO of all places has a building that runs entirely off of solar power. A building where classes are taught. No artificial light is used unless it's cloudy or night, because the sun provides enough light. They use computers, overhead projectors, they have water fountains and all the other amenities a college building would have. Using solar power is quite feasible.

However, I have no more reason to debate with you, as I can see your mind is already made up about Peak Oil and the...obviously...impending doom that humans face.

[NickB79]

28. Computers are very neccesary

There are many people who work from home via Internet access and telecommunication that would be impossible without computers. As Peak Oil hits and transportation becomes more and more expensive, I would think that far more businesses will begin to employ people from home through greater use of computers.

[Codeblue]

27. So I just read an article at homepower.org

The one that debunks the myths of renewable energy. Well it seems that solar living does not mean giving up any conveniences...such as computers, TVs and DVD players. Small wind turbines can also create electricty for individual homes.

You can use solar hot water panels like many here in Gunnison do to use the sun's heat for producing your hot water and PV panels to obtain your electricity.

PV panels payback the energy used to make them in 2-4 years and can continue producing energy for 25-30 years before replacement is necessary.

We also have the option of microhydro plants. Small dams that do not impede fish migrations and water flow significantly like large scale dams such as Hoover.

http://www.homepower.com/files/HP100_32.pdf

read all about it at that link...you'll need adobe reader or some other program to read pdf documents, but for those of you who can read it, it's really quite interesting.

[mhr]

30. They May Pay Back The Energy But Not The Cost, Their Is A Difference!

eom

[Dissenting_Prole]

34. Renewable energy DOES require conservation

The average North American houshold will have to cut energy consumption by about 75% in order to utilize solar electricity. That means 4-8kWh per day, as opposed to 30-36 kWh.

PV panels may pay for themselves in 2-4 years, but a basic solar-powered system will cost $10,000-20,000. I doubt anyone would pay out that much to a utility company for electricity in a four-year period. When you factor in the complete cost of an off-grid system it is clear that renewable energy is not cheap.

As far as microshydro plants go, that's great if you have a stream in your backyard. Most of us don't.

Solar/wind energy is doable. It's just not scalable.

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

[hunter]

39. My sister paid more than $10,000 to get utility power to her house...

The existing power lines didn't seem that far away, but that's what it cost her about fifteen years ago. Nowadays solar or wind is looking very good wherever electric utility service doesn't already exist.

BTW, much of the existing rural and semi-rural electric service in the United States was originally subsidized or installed by government agencies.

[saltara]

12. the paradigm

This "peak oil" paradigm is making its way into the mainstream but where is the debate? When I first read an article about peak oil, it had a mesmerizing quality as a sort of explanatory key to underlying global politics. I became uneasy, though, because it made me feel very resigned and "dead-ended." Your post really made me want to make an effort to learn more about the alternatives. Where to begin? Can you recommend some books or websites? Thanks again!

[mhr]

16. See The Posted Links

By the way, no one is saying that we will categorically run out of oil anytime soon. However, it will become ever more expensive as scarcity drives up the price.

The net effect for most people will be learning to do with less than they did before. Fewer car trips, fewer vacations, fewer luxuries, etc.

Eventually, one will see replacements for some of the oil and gas currently used. However, there are few "good" replacements for the oil used in transportation. People will have to use more public transportation, personal transportation (walking, bicycles), and car pooling or the equivalent.

[Codeblue]

25. I can't remember the name of the book

but of course, I recommend David Orr's new book. It talks not only about the environment, but about politics as well. You should also look into Oberlin College's environmental studies department, as they are leading the way in alternative energies and energy efficient buildings.

[Old and In the Way]

13. If we'd subsidize Alternative/Renewable like we subsidize Oil/War,

we'd increase jobs and national security at the same time. Democrats should reduce the Defense Budget by 30% and invest the savings in saving America.

[NJCher]

14. would get a lot of support

Even relatively conservative people that I know in the midwest would go for this idea.

The upper midwest would stand to benefit tremendously through harnessing power from windmills. A proposal from a Democrat that would benefit that area would carry a lot of votes that would formerly have gone to bush.


Cher

[treepig]

18. a different danger of peak (or any) oil

it blows up real good:



and tends to make a mess of the environment:






so, if the peak oil (as refer you refer to it) is real - thank god and good riddance.

[Codeblue]

26. I've thought about that

If Peak Oil happens, then yes, oil would pretty much be done for in human civilization. But then, what about the massive wars and nuclear fallout that are supposed to follow the Peak Oil crisis. Far worse I'd say...

[treepig]

31. yeah, sure enough

but what you mention is more of a human nature/stupidity problem - rather than a technology problem.

have a look through the following site, it nicely summarizes the fact that plenty of options exist (or could exist with a bit of investment, say $166 billion worth to pull a figure out of my ass):

http://www.cea.fr/gb/publications/Clefs44/contents.htm

[jmcgowanjm]

36. Estimate of oil burned in GulfWar1-6GB's n/t

[peachy]

35. It's not that simple

It's hard to run a farm tractor on wind power. Most of the fertilizers used in conventional agriculture are also fossil fuel based.

The strength of our economy depends on cheap oil, until the corporate powers are overcome we will be compelled to fight for every drop.

By the time we start to retool on a large scale for a renewable energy society many of the components we will need will become prohibitively expensive to produce and distribute.

Some of us, those who recognize the problem and prepare for it, can insulate ourselves by preparing our homes and our own lives - reducing our own impact. But I'm afraid we are in for dark days ahead. Unless the general public gets its head out of its ass - don't hold your breath for that.

[jmcgowanjm]

37. Everything is based on growing the economy

The instant peakoil is here, we'll know it.

We've already subsidized the Nuclear Project
with $5.5Trillion. Look what we've got from it.

From Citigroup Management on Bloomberg:
We have less than 1% lower oil inventories
now than this time last year.

He said it like it was a good thing. But this is exactly
how peakoil has been described.

1-2% less every year.

"They (Saudi Arabia) went from 360 billion barrels of
proved reserves to double that number without any new oil
being found and no increase in rigs," Simmons said.

For example, in the early 1970s, four of the world's largest
oil companies - Exxon, Chevron, Texaco and Mobil -
estimated the Ghawar oil field, which is the largest oil field
in Saudi Arabia, to have 60 billion barrels of recoverable
oil, Simmons said.

Ghawar has now produced 55 billion barrels, which means
it should be at the end of its life, Simmons said. But Aramco,
the Saudi national oil company, now says the field has
125 billion barrels of oil left to produce, Simmons said.

"If that were true, it means that four companies with the
single best people working on this missed Ghawar's
reserves by a factor of three," Simmons said
skeptically.

Our system needs maximum flexibility, but increasingly
the opposite is occuring.

The Suburbs will start crashing first.

http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/

[Dogmudgeon]

55. What crashes first

I'll quibble with a small point: "The Suburbs will start crashing first." I don't think that will be so.

The economy will crash first.

Domestic, "residential" uses of energy account for maybe 10-15% of all energy use; with more-efficient appliances, that could easily be cut in half, or even by a factor of four.

But industry runs on energy, too, and it takes the lion's share of the oil. And here is the central reality of "Peak Oil" or peak-anything-else -- the economy needs to grow at about 2.5% just to keep out of a depression. Our economy requires growth. When the price of oil starts to climb, and suppresses economic growth, if we do not have a way to convert to a low-growth economy, the financial world will collapse.

Economic survival would be easily possible with 0% growth, or even an economic contraction, but would require that dreaded "socialism", basically a command-and-ration economy. If residential needs can be met with 15% of the energy we use now, that means the energy economy can crash back by 85% -- in theory.

But the world is a big, complex place, and the big energy users are going to fight until blood runs in the marketplace for their "share" of the oil.

In the USA, we are lucky -- we get about 20% of our energy from water power, and about 10% from nuclear power, which would prevent a complete collapse. In other countries, oil dominance is near-total. We also produce more than enough food for our people with minimal petrochemical fertilizers; in other countries, without those fertilizers, farming collapses.

China is the most vulnerable of all the countries. It is growing rapidly, its petroleum demand is rising by 25% per year, and when the prices start to rise, it will hit a concrete wall. But it's also early enough in its industrial development that it can change with less pain than most other countries. I just don't think that the power elite in China will let that happen without a fight.

Just to say, "there will be horrible wars over oil" is overly simple. But the demand for energy will drive the next century as much as the flood of energy drove the last one.

--bkl

[lutherj]

38. Peak oil is better than the alternative, it seems to me

At least with the peak in oil production civilization has the opportunity to adjust and make the transition to a different life-style. If we could burn all the oil at ever-increasing rates until the last drop is pumped from the ground, we would really be in trouble. We would literally wake up one morning to find all the oil has run out.

[Dissenting_Prole]

43. You're still not getting it

"At least with the peak in oil production civilization has the opportunity to adjust and make the transition to a different life-style."

The problem is that we need to be making that transition now, not once the slope of depletion is confirmed. it is not the end of oil that will cause catastrophe, it is the gap between supply and demand.

"We would literally wake up one morning to find all the oil has run out."

Actually, that would be preferable, since we would all be in the same boat....no energy for anyone.

What will happen, is that we will literally wake up one morning to find that there is not enough oil to go around. Some will have, some will not, both locally and globally. Then we'll be in trouble.

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

[zonmoy]

42. alternate power

"I don't think the problem of Peak Oil is now as serious as we think. THe technology exists to replace fossil fuels with hydrogen fuel cells, solar panels, windmills or any other alternative energy source."

hydrogen fuel cells dont actually make energy they are fueled with hydrogen that has to be manufactured using energy that has to come from some other source.

Also can these alternative power sources really power all the needs of a planetary population that is growing to at least 8 billion.


Also what are these power technologies made with. when plastics, which are made of oil, become expensive will these technologies become too costly to build.

[Codeblue]

44. OK

It looks like many people have given up and just accepted the fact that Peak Oil is coming and 90% of the world's population is going to die.

Well now that I've seen the feedback from everyone here, I believe Peak Oil can not and will not be averted...again. Thanks everyone for giving up hope of finding a solution to Peak Oil. It's no wonder we're facing this crisis.

[fedsron2us]

45. I am sorry that you feel the feedback has been so negative.

Peak Oil is a key issue for mankind and does need to be taken seriously. Unfortunately, a large number of the discussions devoted to the subject attract 'career' pessimists and misanthropists. Many of them actually appear to relish the collapse of civilization and look forward to 90% of their fellow human beings being culled in a massive "die-off". The DU threads are not too bad in this regard but there are other sites that display a worrying tendency for a kind of Malthusian fascism. It has been suggested rather cruelly that, if all the hot air generated by these individuals could be harnessed, there would be no energy crisis at all. I would advise you to follow the example of your tutor and concentrate on finding practical solutions to the problem. In the end that is likely to be the greatest service to the world.

[hatrack]

46. Accepting geological reality is not "giving up"

I mean, that's kind of like getting depressed about sunrise, or bumming out over gravity. There's nothing we can do about the fact that there's only so much oil in the ground, and that an even smaller amount of that total makes sense to extract, in both economic and thermodynamic terms.

Given an economic system premised on an endless cycle of growth, one which rests on the availability of ever-larger amounts of cheap fossil energy, it doesn't really matter whether the peak comes next year or in ten years. Whatever new finds may come, the endless (and by its inevitable logic, essential) growth of the world's economy will quickly devour however many billions of barrels that have yet to be economically extracted. Energy demand growth projections for China alone in the next ten years are astounding and, frankly, chilling. I believe the odds are very good that we will see the peak in our lifetimes.

What counts on the individual level is what we can do to change our own lives - learning to garden (which is lots of fun anyway, and the food tastes better!), using public transportation (when available) or driving a fuel-efficient vehicle, screwing in some compact flourescents, looking into ways to cut household energy expenditures, like installing a ground-loop, woodstove or renewable energy systems - there is a lot of information out there for ideas like these and many more besides.

What counts on a wider level is bringing this issue up with friends, family members and others, letting people know that this is a real problem and something that's going to have to be faced.

One thing I can guarantee is that no politician - R or D - is going to get up in front of the American public and say that the "American Dream" of more and fancier stuff forever and ever and for low, low discount prices (which sadly seems to be the most commonly accepted incarnation of the American Dream at the moment) is no longer operable. At most, some might concede that there are some problems at some time in the future - but not before the wolf is obviously at the door, when gas is going for $4 a gallon for three years running and spot shortages of natural gas begin to appear. Politicians never respond to any but the most obvious crises, and there is nothing obvious about this one, particularly given the opaque nature of reserve data, particularly in the Middle East.

A transition to a low-energy world is inevitable. A voluntary adjustment to prepare for that transition is possible, but it will be unpopular, expensive, inconvenient and require real sacrifice. It will also produce a political environment in which all kinds of Magic Answer Men will solve all our problems if we just vote for them - and their ideologies likely to be composed largely of resentment and "patriotic" appeals to "our way of life". Given most Americans' distaste for expensive, inconvenient sacrifice, I'm not terribly optimistic on the political front.

We're on our own.

[Codeblue]

47. I understand completely

I don't see any major country switching so far too renewables. But the problem I've seen in this thread is that since people know Peak Oil is coming at some point in the future, it seems like they arent going to bother even switching to renewables themselves. They will continue to drive gas guzzlers and use exorbitant amounts of energy at home, just because no matter what they do, Peak Oil is going to happen.

These are the same people that say we need to take better care of our environment and reduce air pollution by switching to renewables. Yet they do nothing because there is an impending doom for mankind. It vexes me, and the hypocrisy of it all is quite disgusting.

I thank you for being intelligent and not hypocritical about it and can only hope that more people like a few people on this thread will show up in the coming years.

[Maurkov]

48. I disagree with the analysis

Hubbert curves are real, however, looking at their behavior in the US and in Venezuela does not help us predict their behavior in Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Why? Because when the US and Venezuela reached their peaks, there was still an ocean of oil over there. Our depleted reserves didn't affect the global price of oil. When SA and Iraq reach their peak, the price of oil will rise.

The definition of "reserves" is hinged on the market price. As the price goes up, the amount in reserves goes up. Oil that could not be extracted at a profit now can be. To be flippant, we will never run out of oil; we just won't be able to afford it anymore. What that means is that applications that require oil will be able to get it. Applications where there is a cheaper substitute will use the cheaper substitute.

One problem is net energy. At some point, it requires more energy to extract the oil than can be reclaimed from it. Oil becomes an energy sink. Again, applications that require oil are going to be able to get it, but only by injecting more energy from other sources into the system.

That segues into the next problem: Where will this other energy come from? This is where environmentalists (and I count myself as one of them) need to make some hard choices. Which alternative energy sources have the least downsides? Cases can be made for and against all of them, but when we're talking about an alternative to shedding 90% of the human population, I think we can make some sacrifices. Nuclear power will probably fill in everywhere that wind, hydro, and solar can't meet the need. Biodiesel will be used where energy density is important (like transportation).

This will not be painless. There will be environmental degredation as we exploit every available energy source. Energy is an input into everything, so increasing energy prices will trigger widespread inflation. But then high energy prices will encourage conservation better than a month of Earthdays. It's regressive, but it will work where nothing else has. Most people will suffer a loss in their standard of living. Most people will not die off.

[Renew Deal]

57. I don't think you get it.

I am not sure what others are saying, but here is what I'm saying. The gov't will not admit to peak Oil. That means they will not do anything about it. It takes gov't leadership to beat this thing. What are they doing to beat it? Nothing

[Dissenting_Prole]

52. What do Freepers say?

Just curious....

What are most of the Freepers saying about Oil Peak? Are they clued in? In denial? Content that the Bush junta are doing what needs to be done about the problem?

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/

[Renew Deal]

53. Mainly denial.

They also say that we will have alternatives when we need them. Yeah, it's that easy. :evilfrown:

[Codeblue]

54. Yep

Complete denial. They are in love with oil pure and simple. Wouldn't be able to survive without their big gas guzzling SUVs.

I was there on Earth Day and they were actually talking about celebrating Earth Day by eating a spotted owl, chopping down trees and buying gas guzzlers. It was disgusting.