Joined: Jun 15, 2007 Posts: 565 Location: St.Albert, AB
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: Tackling the Cornucopians
I've heard an argument recently that ammonia production from electrolysis can create fertilizer...and therefore, we won't need to rely on fossil fuels to support the 6.7 billion people on this planet. I'd like someone to expand on this a little bit more. Especially Monte Quest.
Second, I've heard of non-rare metals being used to produce solar panels...how viable is this and how quickly can it be done? link
How about new oil production coming online versus depletion in our older elephant fields?
I want to know mathematically why a vast majority of the population will not be able to 'go-green' in time. I want it to be an insurmountable debate because the techno-corpian argument continues to come up and it's driving me insane.
How about nuclear?
Is it just me or do all the peak oil experts (Matt Simmons, Richard Heinberg, Kustler etc.) all agree that a powerdown is our best solution? I need some more input. Many thanks.
Last edited by Nicholai on Sun Jul 13, 2008 12:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 3372 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:39 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
China produces their fertilizer using coal primarily. US production has been shipped overseas, primarily to the ME, to take advantage of abundant NG supply - something with which you can put stranded NG to use. They have more NG in the ME than they know what to do with.
Regarding field depletion, peruse these documents:
What the depletion rate of the big Saudi fields will be, no one can say at this stage. The new article in Business Week lends credence to the theory that they're declining or on the verge of doing so, however, with new production merely enabling KSA to stay on a plateau for now.
Powerdown? That would be utterly incongruous coming out of the piehole of any modern politician. I don't think we have much of a choice, but Iraq and NOLA don't give me much sense of optimism. Seems far more likely that TPTB will just let things backslide irrevocably, since they represent first and foremost the desires of the wealthy.
Technofixes need to successfully overcome the logistic dilemma of maintaining BAU. Sure you can build EVs, can you have automakers selling 20 million a year in the US by the end of the decade? Who's going to install charging stations in parking lots? Where's the added juice for them coming from? There are stringent conservation measures that could provide for it - mandating conservation from industrial/commercial users, for instance, but will business interests allow for their implementation?
I see it far more likely for EVs to become a hated symbol of the wealthy in years to come. _________________ Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
I will not abide another toe.
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 1926 Location: kiwibush
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:41 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
Nicholai wrote:
I've heard an argument recently that ammonia production from electrolysis can create fertilizer...and therefore, we won't need to rely on fossil fuels to support the 6.7 billion people on this planet. I'd like someone to expand on this a little bit more. Especially Monte Quest.
Here is one link I've been offered: link
Second, I've heard of non-rare metals being used to produce solar panels...how viable is this and how quickly can it be done?
link
How about new oil production coming online versus depletion in our older elephant fields?
I want to know mathematically why a vast majority of the population will not be able to 'go-green' in time. I want it to be an insurmountable debate because the techno-corpian argument continues to come up and it's driving me insane.
How about nuclear?
Is it just me or do all the peak oil experts (Matt Simmons, Richard Heinberg, Kustler etc.) all agree that a powerdown is our best solution? I need some more input. Many thanks.
Is it possible to move, in a sustainable manner, the entirety of a 6.5 billion and growing, growth oriented, capital accumulating, resource disposing civilisation COMPLETELY to non-rare resourcing. I mean will the odd fix here and the odd fix there resolve the issue of depletion with the boundaries of the existing paradigm?
As I see it, the only yes answer to this would be the ability to mine the solar system and beyond. _________________ Bugger me, I hear oil's runnin out mate!
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:49 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
FArk the cornucopians and their cornography.
Prepare yourself, your family, and your friends.
Or those that will listen. _________________ "By the time individuals discover that remaining resources will not be adequate for the next generation, the next generation has already been born. " David Price
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
Nicholai wrote:
I've heard an argument recently that ammonia production from electrolysis can create fertilizer...and therefore, we won't need to rely on fossil fuels to support the 6.7 billion people on this planet. I'd like someone to expand on this a little bit more. Especially Monte Quest.
Cargoism: belief that carrying capacity can "always" be raised anew by further technological breakthroughs.
It cannot. Explained in detail ad naseum.
For the definite source, read Overshoot by William Catton. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12497 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 7:11 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS wrote:
For example, with population peaking at a certain point, estimated around 2050, are there really groups around ("cargoists" ) claiming it'll keep going up from there, for some reason?
Yeah, there are a bunch of people who apparently very sincerely believe we will find a new source of energy and colonize space. They really, really truly believe this, as far as I can tell. They see human expansion as infinite. _________________ No original ideas are contained in this post.
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 7:13 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS what makes you believe that 2050 estimate is anything more than self-serving career pandering. By then, those at the UN claiming such will be happily retired.
It's cornucopian denial to believe education, medicine, civil services we in the West enjoy will be available to the world's 2 billion poor. They will continue to procreate for personal and family insurance.
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 7:21 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS wrote:
For example, with population peaking at a certain point, estimated around 2050, are there really groups around ("cargoists" ) claiming it'll keep going up from there, for some reason?
No, there are cargoists claiming that it can go up from here.
It cannot sustainably. But it will due to overshoot momentum and then crash.
Currently, the population is heading for 13.4 billion in 60 years at 1.16% growth rate.
Projected to peak in 2050 at 9.1 billion, assuming we can continue to raise the standard of living in the developing countries, as has been the case over the last 40 years. Industrilaization and urbanization due to Demographic Transition lowers the fertility rate.
In the last two years, the growth rate has been rising, not declining.
Even if reached, 9.1 billion would be many billions over the sustainable carrying capacity estimated to be somewhere around 2 to 3 billion. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 1926 Location: kiwibush
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 7:26 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
pstarr wrote:
MattS what makes you believe that 2050 estimate is anything more than self-serving career pandering. By then, those at the UN claiming such will be happily retired.
It's cornucopian denial to believe education, medicine, civil services we in the West enjoy will be available to the world's 2 billion poor. They will continue to procreate for personal and family insurance.
And quite reasonably.
Let's not also forget that with the demise of the age of reason and increasing economic inequity, economic imperatives to procreate, usually underlined by religious irrationalism, will once again raise their heads.
The world of 2050, going by the current slide towards religious fundamentalism worldwide and with the fall of secular ideas, will I suspect, be a rather irrational, and insecure place. _________________ Bugger me, I hear oil's runnin out mate!
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
You guys do realize that people have been deriding "cargoism" and talking about overshoot for 200 years now, right? People have been predicting "the great die off" for decades and it still hasn't come to pass.
The reason ammonia is produced from natural gas is because it is cheaper and easier. In the near future this could be switched to electrolysis, and further into the future we can use the SI processes + high temperature nuclear reactors to make it.
In addition to that there is also genetically modified crops, although admittedly that is something of a wild card at the moment. It does have great potential to increase crop yields and allow them to grow in harsher environments than they normally would.
But I'll play along. Ok guys, about when is this "great die off" supposed to happen?
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 1926 Location: kiwibush
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:30 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS wrote:
pstarr wrote:
MattS what makes you believe that 2050 estimate is anything more than self-serving career pandering. By then, those at the UN claiming such will be happily retired.
Well, I haven't seen a competing product? So I take what the current level of "expertise" for what its worth?
I also don't assume that people of a certain retirement age make things up just because....they are of a certain retirement age?
pstarr wrote:
It's cornucopian denial to believe education, medicine, civil services we in the West enjoy will be available to the world's 2 billion poor.
I haven't seen anyone claiming this is possible or even desired. Whats the fun if everyone has the same standard of living...it would be nearly like....communism?
Where's the fun on living on a planet where the differences in standards of living are extreme, where entire resource rich regions such as the ME and Africa are destabilised by a variety of covert geo-political tools to ensure resource advantage and where the net result is the destruction of a pristine eco-system. On the other hand, a reasoned society based on some notion of equity and stewardship of the collective resource base strikes me as a highly desirable prize to pursue. _________________ Bugger me, I hear oil's runnin out mate!
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
americandream wrote:
MattS wrote:
pstarr wrote:
MattS what makes you believe that 2050 estimate is anything more than self-serving career pandering. By then, those at the UN claiming such will be happily retired.
Well, I haven't seen a competing product? So I take what the current level of "expertise" for what its worth?
I also don't assume that people of a certain retirement age make things up just because....they are of a certain retirement age?
pstarr wrote:
It's cornucopian denial to believe education, medicine, civil services we in the West enjoy will be available to the world's 2 billion poor.
I haven't seen anyone claiming this is possible or even desired. Whats the fun if everyone has the same standard of living...it would be nearly like....communism?
Where's the fun on living on a planet where the differences in standards of living are extreme, where entire resource rich regions such as the ME and Africa are destabilised by a variety of covert geo-political tools to ensure resource advantage and where the net result is the destruction of a pristine eco-system. On the other hand, a reasoned society based on some notion of equity and stewardship of the collective resource base strikes me as a highly desirable prize to pursue.
Sounds nice. Where can I sign up? _________________ ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:33 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
outcast wrote:
You guys do realize that people have been deriding "cargoism" and talking about overshoot for 200 years now, right? People have been predicting "the great die off" for decades and it still hasn't come to pass.
You won't even get one word of debate from me.
You are in the camp with those who think the moonlanding was a staged studio event. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:40 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS wrote:
pstarr wrote:
It's cornucopian denial to believe education, medicine, civil services we in the West enjoy will be available to the world's 2 billion poor.
I haven't seen anyone claiming this is possible or even desired. Whats the fun if everyone has the same standard of living...it would be nearly like....communism?
The UN bases it's projection on it coming to pass. Without it, population growth continues on..... _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: Re: Tackeling the Cornocopians
MattS wrote:
MonteQuest wrote:
Currently, the population is heading for 13.4 billion in 60 years at 1.16% growth rate.
Thats the mistake of assuming an unchanging growth rate...the growth rate is apparently changing, so if thats what the 13.4 billion number is based on, it is incorrect.
I have been studying population demography for 33 years. I do not assume anything of the sort.
Quote:
Works for me. Although it strikes me that if 40 years of increased standards of living gives us modern day Africa, we sure don't have to try hard to do it for another 40.
Your ignorance of the subject is showing. To reach 9.1 billion, we have to industrialize and urbanize the developing world through Demographic Transition. The rising standards of living in the developed world has lead to a decline in fertility rates.
Quote:
And its been declining for 15? Sounds like the trend is good for awhile yet.
Oh? Peak oil is in the far distant future? The SOL is going to continue to rise in the poor developing countries post -peak?
Not.
Quote:
Is there a particular link you've got for this number, or should I just search up some of the prior arguments for why that number may be good...or bad?
Read the threads I posted. _________________ A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
Live in Arizona? Check out: http://sustainablearizona.org and read my blog.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14Next
Page 1 of 14
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
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 
Where can I sign up?
