Don’t worry, just a little bump - $70 is just around the corner. Short traders just keep making those margin calls, mortgage the house if you have to. Fortunes await you! PO is for pansies and doomers. At $70 short some more ..... it is going back to $22 .... the world is awash with oil ........ reality has nothing to do with it, its all in those charts!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:09 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
So, why are you still using a computer?
So that I have a way to discuss these issues with others who are willing to discuss them.
Quote:
That's not part of your basic needs.
That is indeed true.
Quote:
People won't change their habbits of overconsumption because they don't want to.
They will if they are given cheaper, more efficient alternatives.
Once I get off grid and get my electricity from a home wind and solar setup, I am no longer consuming coal for electricity. My consumption of resources would have decreased dramatically. YET, I would still have electricity, still be able to run a computer, and even fuel an electric vehicle off of it(resulting in much less oil used and no need to purchase parts to maintain a complicated engine).
If I were to reduce the environmental impact of what I do to use significantly less resources, I would no longer be over-consuming in those areas, yet my sacrifice in living standard would be minimal(if any, some places improvements are to be had).
Americans are tired of paying what they are paying for transportation. If cheaper alternatives were made available to them, they use them(eg. mass transit. When light rail systems were widely available, most americans CHOSE not to have cars. They were torn down against the wishes of the American people in order to induce spending on cars/oil and grow the economy). They are tired of paying the amount of taxes they do. If our government stopped its military conquests for oil and got us using much less of it, Americans would be happy to reap the savings! Americans are tired of being overcharged for electricity by their utilities. If off-grid solutions were readily available and production scaled up so they were affordable and legislation not used to discourage this, they'd jump at the opportunity.
However, as a result of all this consumption reducing for the same living standard, those running the car companies, the oil companies, and the defense companies won't be making the money they do. No more private Leer jets and $10 million yachts for them. Why? Because we wouldn't be spending the money on their products to make them rich.
People will change their over-consumptive habits if they don't have to change their living standard. Is this possible? YES. Why isn't it being done? Industry and government has no desire to provide those viable solutions that will generate less revenue for THEMSELVES...
Our consumption of resources is much higher than is necessary for the living standard we have today. The consumer middle class is gullible and easily manipulated into spending and using more than they need to for their standard of living, and is outright denied alternatives that would interfere with their seperation from their hard earned dollar.
Quote:
I have a theory... that you'll get huge corporations and nations draining resources at extreme speeds because all things equal, there will always be a bias towards that kind of behaviour in humans. It's futile to do the blame game because "everyone" is part of it.
While everyone is a part of it, some people contribute more to the problem than others. If the 1st world were to magically disappear, mankind would no longer be consuming beyond what the planet can provide. Likewise, if those in the 1st world had available less resource-intensive methods of doing the same thing, they'd generate less money for the wealthiest people, and thus the wealth gap would contract and their ecological footprint would drop...
It makes sense then, to address the problem starting first with those who consume the most, and then work down from there.
The wealthiest 1% of the world's population controls 32% of the world's resources. The wealthiest 10% of the world's population(the top 20% is the consumer class) controls 71% of the world's resources. The top 1% controls about as much resources as the other 9% of one half of the consumer class, and the top 1% controls more resources than the bottom 90%[1]. Included in some of that bottom 90% are still some middle class.
Start with the elites first. It is inexcusable that 1% of the population is straining away 32% of the planet's resources, while the bottom 90% make due with only 29%! To put this in perspective, 65,000,000 people are consuming more of the Earth's resources than 5,850,000,000 people. Doom can be averted if this is changed.
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:48 am Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
People will change their over-consumptive habits if they don't have to change their living standard. Is this possible? YES. Why isn't it being done? Industry and government has no desire to provide those viable solutions that will generate less revenue for THEMSELVES...
Am I to understand you'll stop using your computer then, until you've used even more resources to install this personal electric grid of yours?
Furthermore, how many windmills and solar panels would you need to drive today's world? The entire vehicle fleet, electricity etc? What about people who want their plastics and other oil containing products? How much land would you have to clear for that? Can you replace that with solar panels as well?
Oil is the cheapest, most energy intensive thing we have. If people want to move away from oil, it's gonna cost them more.
Quote:
If the 1st world were to magically disappear, mankind would no longer be consuming beyond what the planet can provide.
For a brief moment, maybe, but a new first world would most likely quikly be established. Besides, magically disappear? Wouldn't that mean a change of habits? _________________ "Life is merely an orderly decay of energy states, and survival requires the continual discovery of new energy to pump into the system. He who controls the sources of energy controls the means of survival. "
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:55 am Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
Am I to understand you'll stop using your computer then, until you've used even more resources to install this personal electric grid of yours?
No. What will stop is the negative environmental impact of using that computer.(That, and I'll be employed by then and have money to work on my projects, thus lowering my computer use dramatically)
This 'personal electric grid' will pay itself off in savings in about 5 years, possibly less. Why so short of a time? I know how to design and construct a wind turbine from scratch, for starters. Wind turbines have an EROEI of around 30, and solar panels have EROEI anywhere from 8-30 depending on who you cite.
I won't be using any coal any longer or contributing to greenhouse gases for this specific case(except for the GHGs used in making these things, but those are less than a year's worth of current electricity usage for items that will last decades).
Quote:
Furthermore, how many windmills and solar panels would you need to drive today's world?
Depends on the size and rating of the windmills and solar panels.
Quote:
The entire vehicle fleet, electricity etc?
The entire vehicle fleet, assuming an average consumption of 0.4 kWh/mile from the outlet(representative of full size cars and small SUVs), if converted to electric, would show little change in extra electricity consumption because it takes about 8 kWh of electricity to refine/store a gallon of gasoline, that same 8 kWh of which will take a gasoline car converted to EV roughly the same distance as a gallon of gas would take the gasoline car.
The U.S. uses 4.062*10^12 kWh of electricity per year[1]. The average American drives 12,000 miles per year[2]. There are currently about 247 million registered passenger vehicles in the U.S.[3]
If all used an average of 0.4 kWh/mile from the outlet, and all vehicle miles travelled were done electrically with all cars converted over, 1.152*10^12 kWh of electricity would be needed to run the vehicle fleet. This is under a 30% increase in electricity consumption.
HOWEVER, the U.S. currently consumes 140*10^9 gallons of gasoline each year to run its passenger vehicle fleet[4]. This means that 1.12*10^12 kWh of electricity would be saved each year from not refining gasoline for use in motor vehicles, negating that increase in overall electricity consumption!
And on top of that, you've eliminated the 40% of America's oil consumption that is used to fuel its passenger vehicles[5]. Thus, your net energy use has declined dramatically for the same number of vehicle miles travelled in the same number of vehicles in the same type of vehicles! 40% reduction in oil consumption with no sacrifice by that one change alone is no insignificant matter. And there's even better, more efficient solutions, like mass transit to reduce the number of vehicles and vehicle miles travelled, along with more efficient vehicles.
Quote:
What about people who want their plastics and other oil containing products? How much land would you have to clear for that?
Depends on the plant, but I can pretty much garuntee you it will be about the same the current amount of land devoted to corn for ethanol production(ethanol production which would be unessessary if our cars ran on electricity and were no longer using gasoline)!
Plastics currently only account for only about 8% of world oil consumption[6] and more than half of our plastic use could be eliminated without any real sacrifices on our part(eg. paper bags at grocery stores, less packaging in consumer goods, ect.).
Quote:
Can you replace that with solar panels as well?
No, but you can replace it with biomass.
Quote:
Oil is the cheapest, most energy intensive thing we have. If people want to move away from oil, it's gonna cost them more.
Not true. Current EROEI of crude oil, is about 3:1. Wind is about 30:1, solar about 10:1, and biomass varies depending on source(eg. sugarcane ~4:1, hemp ~2:1). Crude oil merely has the highest profit margins, and therefore is the most beneficial to those making their money in energy. Joe Average doesn't share in those profits, and they indeed come from his own wallet.
The only reason moving from oil currently costs more is due to economies of scale and politics. Electric cars are going to be more expensive than gas ones if they are hand built while the gasoline powered ones can take advantage of the reduced costs of mass production. Hemp plastics and fibres are going to be more expensive than oil ones if you get arrested for growing it in the U.S. Sugarcane ethanol from Brazil is going to be more expensive than oil when it is tariffed in the U.S. so that it cannot compete with unsustainable corn ethanol being pushed by various transnationals or compete with the oil industry.
This is by design. OUR LEADERS DON'T WANT US MOVING AWAY FROM OIL BECAUSE IT WILL SHRINK THE GDP, EVEN THOUGH IT WILL BE A NET BENEFIT TO YOUR AVERAGE PERSON.
The GDP contraction will mostly come from the top.
Our leaders support unsustainable and impractical measures like corn ethanol and hydrogen fuel cell cars so that they LOOK like they're trying to move away from oil, when the reality is that they are playing a role in suppressing viable alternatives to oil and refusing proposals that would result in conservation of resources.
It's all about money, and how to get us to pay as much as possible.
Quote:
For a brief moment, maybe, but a new first world would most likely quikly be established. Besides, magically disappear? Wouldn't that mean a change of habits?
That statement was used to illustrate a point: our overshoot is conditional. If those consuming the majority of the resources consume a lot less of them, then there is not only enough to go around for everyone, but we would also be no longer consuming more than the Earth can supply.
The 1st world is largely the culprit, and it could easily reduce its resource consumption by more than half for the same living standard, thus reducing the damage done and possibly bringing us out of overshoot.
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4387 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:33 am Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
My doomer score just fell another 5%.
I've been neglecting to factor the electrical cost of producing gasoline into my calculations.
Instead of making corn ethanol, we could make corn plastic.
We can't grow enough corn to make a serious dent in our gasoline usage because gasoline is 40% of our oil consumption.
But surely we could grow enough corn to replace at least a fair portion of the oil we use to make plastic, no? _________________ "www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:39 am Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
My doomer score keeps rising. A transition will still take time to achieve. _________________ The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the old growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder. ~Thomas Jefferson
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:20 am Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
The_Toecutter wrote:
Industry and government has no desire to provide those viable solutions that will generate less revenue for THEMSELVES...
...Start with the elites first. It is inexcusable that 1% of the population is straining away 32% of the planet's resources, while the bottom 90% make due with only 29%! To put this in perspective, 65,000,000 people are consuming more of the Earth's resources than 5,850,000,000 people. Doom can be averted if this is changed.
What I sense in you is that you still have hope that the system can be coaxed into working. I think you'll find that posting your personal idea of "Plan B" online is not going to bring the world any closer to adopting it. You are preaching to the converted. There are already a ton of diplomats, scientists, books, movies, and rock concerts pleading with the world to do something.
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:42 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
I think you'll find that posting your personal idea of "Plan B" online is not going to bring the world any closer to adopting it.
I'm already well aware of this. I post this in order to contradict those who say that there is nothing that can be done, because that simply isn't true.
It is, however, my opinion that nothing is likely to be done until this process is completely irreversible. _________________ The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the old growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder. ~Thomas Jefferson
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 3:34 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
I post this in order to contradict those who say that there is nothing that can be done, because that simply isn't true.
Nothing can be done. It is simply an exercise of fantasy to assume away the first world, or that people will change their behaviour to put in large new systems to take down resource depletion. It simply can't happen.
How are you gonna get soil to start pumping up new corn for plastics while at the same time producing more and more food for tp uphold the standards of the growing first world while the soils are pushed more and more to the brink of depletion? How are you going to get up all those windfarms and solar panels when you already have so many soil/forest problems, as well as shortages of silicon and platinum? _________________ "Life is merely an orderly decay of energy states, and survival requires the continual discovery of new energy to pump into the system. He who controls the sources of energy controls the means of survival. "
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:29 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Quote:
Nothing can be done. It is simply an exercise of fantasy to assume away the first world, or that people will change their behaviour to put in large new systems to take down resource depletion. It simply can't happen.
The consumption associated with a first world living standard most certainly can be reduced. Just from the electric car example, Americans would reduce their oil consumption by at least 40% switching over, without a noticable increase in total kWh of electricity consumed. Think of what this does for GHG emissions, smog, and think of how many less wars would be fought. Then there the huge reduction in vehicle maintenance and all of the components and services this entails.
And people would not have changed their behavior to any large degree(even though this should be encouraged).
Quote:
How are you gonna get soil to start pumping up new corn for plastics while at the same time producing more and more food for tp uphold the standards of the growing first world while the soils are pushed more and more to the brink of depletion?
Corn is one of the worst crops to grow in terms of soil depletion. For plastics, we'd be much better off growing hemp, which is extremely slow in regard to soil depletion and in fact can help soil restoration in areas where erosion is commonplace. Hemp can be grown in areas where other crops cannot, including deserts.
There are better crops than corn for making plastics. Time to get the agribusiness lobbyists, petrochemical industry, and politicians to step out of the way of progress.
As for food production, organic farming methods can actually have similar yields to those reliant on petrochemicals.
It just doesn't have a huge chain of industries involved and therefore is not as conducive to more economic growth...
Quote:
How are you going to get up all those windfarms and solar panels when you already have so many soil/forest problems, as well as shortages of silicon and platinum?
1) The footprint on the land a bunch of large HAWTs have is less than 1% of land area.
2) Solar panels can be placed on rooftops in urban areas without encroaching on land. Areas where solar panels are most suitable tend to be completely unsuitable for farming and tend not to have any forested area nearby.
3) Silicon and platinum shortages are actually a real and significant concern. Polycrystalline silicon is most often needed for photovoltaics, but windmills can be built without either platinum or silicon. Silicon is one of the reasons that the acceleration in production of photovoltaics has slowed, but there are plenty of varieties of photovoltaics that don't use silicon(eg. G24i) that will be reaching the market if they can get the capital for mass production. _________________ The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the old growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder. ~Thomas Jefferson
Joined: May 18, 2006 Posts: 3901 Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
The_Toecutter wrote:
Quote:
I think you'll find that posting your personal idea of "Plan B" online is not going to bring the world any closer to adopting it.
I'm already well aware of this. I post this in order to contradict those who say that there is nothing that can be done, because that simply isn't true.
It is, however, my opinion that nothing is likely to be done until this process is completely irreversible.
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
TTC wrote:
"3) Silicon and platinum shortages are actually a real and significant concern. Polycrystalline silicon is most often needed for photovoltaics, but windmills can be built without either platinum or silicon. Silicon is one of the reasons that the acceleration in production of photovoltaics has slowed, but there are plenty of varieties of photovoltaics that don't use silicon(eg. G24i) that will be reaching the market if they can get the capital for mass production."
I don't mean to sound completely dense, but isn't silicon one of the most common elements of the earth's crust. Aren't there deserts full of the stuff? Isn't the problem more with getting it into the right form? It seems to me that the problem with platinum, where there is a real resource crunch, is very different from the issue with silicon, which there is lots of, but not in an easily usable form.
But I am not as well read in these issues as I should be. Did I miss something obvious (it would not be the first time!). Please educate me further.
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4387 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
dohboi wrote:
TTC wrote:
"3) Silicon and platinum shortages are actually a real and significant concern. Polycrystalline silicon is most often needed for photovoltaics, but windmills can be built without either platinum or silicon. Silicon is one of the reasons that the acceleration in production of photovoltaics has slowed, but there are plenty of varieties of photovoltaics that don't use silicon(eg. G24i) that will be reaching the market if they can get the capital for mass production."
I don't mean to sound completely dense, but isn't silicon one of the most common elements of the earth's crust. Aren't there deserts full of the stuff? Isn't the problem more with getting it into the right form? It seems to me that the problem with platinum, where there is a real resource crunch, is very different from the issue with silicon, which there is lots of, but not in an easily usable form.
But I am not as well read in these issues as I should be. Did I miss something obvious (it would not be the first time!). Please educate me further.
There is a shortage of polycrystalline silicon production capacity.
But the world is building more capacity.
And the silicon crunch should end in the next year or two.
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
Thanks, Tyler. I thought it was something like that.
So does that mean I should wait a couple years before buying a solar array? Might not the unwinding economy also unwind the development of this important industry?
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4387 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 7:34 pm Post subject: Re: Lovelock says Eat Drink and be Merry, for we are all doo
dohboi wrote:
Thanks, Tyler. I thought it was something like that.
So does that mean I should wait a couple years before buying a solar array? Might not the unwinding economy also unwind the development of this important industry?
If you live in the US, inflation might overtake the decreasing cost of solar power so it might make sense to purchase it now.
But I honestly don't know. _________________ "www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 3 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
