Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.
Posted: Sun May 16, 2004 11:49 am Post subject: Feeling like it's fairly hopeless after this...
I had a conversation with my friend the other day about peak oil. While sipping his burger king fountain beverage and waddling down the sidewalk in his fast food chubbiness, he claimed that oil was being created every minute where ever there was any form of biological waste. I asked if he had any ideas what the geologic processes were that formed oil and he said that when plants and trees die, they eventually turn into oil. He stated that if you dug low enough anywhere, you would strike oil just beginning to form. I cut my next period class to continue arguing with him, and I couldn't make him budge, though he eventually shut up and now yells at me whenever I mention peak oil.
Question: Are we up against conspiring companies and theiving bureaucracies or pure ignorance? What is the source of this ignorance? Can we overcome it? If we overcome it, can we go further?
Joined: May 15, 2004 Posts: 253 Location: Southeast USA
Posted: Sun May 16, 2004 12:27 pm Post subject: How true
While I've found that my peers (preppy teens) nearly refuse to believe peak oil despite their 1300 SAT scores, my other friends who are just as smart, but don't buy into pop culture as much believe it much more readily as long as I have enough evidence. I guess it just depends on how much you have to lose from peak oil.
Pops, I thought I would add my two cents worth to this discussion.
I agree completely with the ignorance/self absorbtion/egotism/apathy/fear summary of your post. But there seems to be something that allows some people to " get it " over others. From my observation, the willingness to accept the truth about a subject has a lot to do with an individual's tolerance of pain. Whether it's the realization that your children face a difficult future, or just another reminder of your own mortality, peak oil acceptance will bring us great amounts of pain and hardship. Humans have a tendency to avoid pain and pursue pleasure - how does admitting that peak oil is real work within that framework ?
Joined: May 17, 2004 Posts: 1969 Location: Democratic People's Republic of Washington
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 3:58 am Post subject:
I highly reccomend that you advise your friend to read the book entitled "Hubbert's Peak, The Impending Wold Oil Shortage" by Kenneth S Deffeyes. Deffeyes used to be a petrolium geologist that worked for Shell, along with M. King Hubbert. He is currently employed as a professor of geology at Princton University. This book is very informative, and details exactly how oil and NG is formed, found, where to find it, and discusses alternative fuel resources. This book is very very well written, and I would reccomend it as a book for anyone seriously interested in Peak Oil. This book is 190 pages, followed by 14 pages of bibliographical references, and a 4 page index. It is very scientific in nature, and I would say it requires at least a 10th grade education to completly comprehend. It is a very informative book. This book is sorted under the catagory "Science/Geology". The ISBN of this book is 0-691-11625-3.
For a book that is as equally researched, but is "lighter" reading, I would reccomend that your friend read "The Party's Over: Oil, War, and the Fate of Industrial Societies" by Richard Hienberg. Richard Hienberg has been researching and writing about the energy supply problem and the issues invoved in them for approximatly 11 years. He is currently employed at the New College of California in Santa Rose, CA. The first half of this book is very similar to "Hubbert's Peak, The Impending Wold Oil Shortage", only not as scientific, and easier to read. The second half of this book confronts the myth of sustainablity, alternative energy resources, and the impacts of the future depletion of oil resources. The second half of this book is like a cold slap in the face from reality. This book is sorted under the catagory "Current Affiars/Environmental Studies". The ISBN for this book is 0-86571-482-7.
If your friend reads both of these books, and is capable of understanding exactly what the authors are talking about, he will realise the severity of the Peak Oil situation, and the best that can be done is to ease the transision to the new world that awaits humanity. Simply put, industrialized society in its current form is not sustainable in the long term. To ensure our current standard of living does not degrade, we as a society must reduce consumption, transfer over to renewable resources, reduce population to the 2B level that was on earth before the onset of the industrial revolution, and re-gain lost farming techniques. Every aspect of life will be affected, and the latest gas prices are only the start of the post-peak world. Welcome to the downslide.
Oddly, the civilisations that have been untouched by the industrial revolution will have the greatest chance of survival. Chances are, than the most impact will be felt in first world nations such as the United States. The higher the living standard is, the farther it has to fall to be in equalibrium with the earth as a whole. Less industrialisation means less change.
If you don't belive that 1st world countries will be more affected by this, consider how much of an impact $25.00/gal gas would have on the residents of NYC, Chicago, LA, or any other large city. The cost to fill a car similar to mine would be roughly $625.00 for one gas tank. Times this by 2 for the amount of gas I use per month, and that would be one hefty gas bill. My tank is 25 gallons. Now imagine a nation of 270,000,000 people having to pay $25.00/gal, but making no more than they do now. Along with the cost of gas and oil rising, so would the cost of energy, transportation, shipping, manufacturing, food, and everyghing else. The economy would literally come to a halt. There would be no food being grown, harvested, or distributed to the masses. There would be virtually no long distance transportation, there would be no raw materials to forge into salable goods due to the exorbanant transportation and mining costs. Lack of products would mean loss of jobs. Loss of jobs would mean people would not be able to afford the costs of modern living. The economy and nation would collapse to an irrecoverable point given the current energy reliance on petrolium. The US would quickly devolve into a 3rd world nation.
Now consider this exact same scenarion of $25.00/gal gas in some 3rd world country that has not seen industrialisation in any massive scale. I will use Bangladesh here. What impact would the petrolum costs have on a rural village of farmers on Bangladesh? Not much. The Oxen are not reliant on petrolium, nor is thier distribution system. Thier manufacturing is not reliant on fossil fuels either. All of thier energy is directly supplied by either the Sun, water diversion, animal power, or man power. Thier food transportation network is just the oxen, (or people) bringing in the grain from thie fields, and harvesting an animal once in a while for some meat. Thier housing is biult from natural materials that occur in the environment around them. Most of thier tools can be easily replaced by natural resources already plentiful in thier area. The major exception would be the wroght-iron plough, and Axe. Thier food source is only a couple miles away at maximum distance, so thier is no need for a heavy transportation infastructure. Most traveling is done in and around the village, so animal power and human power suffice pleanty. Rural farmers in Bangladesh would be virtually unscathed by the oil crunch.
So the question is, are we better off because we are "civilised", or are we actually in a worse situation? I suppose this depends on if you are looking at merely the present, or the future that awaits earth as a whole.
Most here have watched Jane Goodall's highly televised Gorilla studies.
To this day the part I remember most for what should be obvious reasons is when Jane started giving the Gorilla's way more bananas then they could ever eat or dare to eat. The Gorilla's hierachy fell apart at the seams very rapidly and social cooperation when out the window too. It was nothing but banana hoarding and constant fighting, zealously and well chaos.
Jane took away the plentiful bananas and after a while life went back to living on the edge and cooperation and social order was slowly restored again.
Damn if I don't see some similarities in this Gorilla experiment and human beings, the worlds most dangerous predators.
Joined: Apr 04, 2004 Posts: 579 Location: Western US
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 7:54 am Post subject:
I suggest apathy and a lack of education in regards to what oil actually is. I swear most peeps think it is just a liquid that you put in the car for lubrication and fuel.
Having just finished Hienbergs book, It's a good primer but there's nothing you can't find on the net. Thats not to say the book is without merit I'm just saying I had already seen most of the content on-line. From a personal aspect I thought Hienberg was kind of dry when compared to Deffeyes, But I am more technically/mechanically inclined, if that means anything. In reality I think they should be sold in a set, Deffeyes for the technical and Hienberg for the social.
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 9:02 am Post subject: Maybe hope
Cover of National Geo. here in the States and a movement like this 1 in Oz. Maybe we can finally start getting some traction in the mainstream. It's clearly too late to avoid a hard turn downwards (we should have started in the Seventies) but there might be time to avoid the worst IF this really does start spreading.
Concerned Citizen.
PS. I found the Aussie website in the very interesting comments beneath this followup to an article posted here recently.
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 7018 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 9:15 am Post subject:
I didn't have time to read all your links concit, but have too agree that the Nat. Geo. article is a good thing. _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Joined: Apr 10, 2004 Posts: 143 Location: Tulsa OK
Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 11:37 pm Post subject:
Leaf, look at some of the threads farther down about trucking. I think Missing Link and Pops both had one. High gas prices cost us money out of our pocket, but diesel fuel is vital to keep the US economy going. I think something like 70% of the cities in the US get everything they use by truck. If there are disruptions in the trucking industry the economy could crash. Then most people won’t care how much gasoline costs because they won’t have a job or money to spend anyway.
Joined: May 17, 2004 Posts: 1969 Location: Democratic People's Republic of Washington
Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 4:34 am Post subject:
Leaf wrote:
K_Semler, I feel has the issue pretty close on how I feel the outcome will be. The hope is to start downscaling on a massive scale and to start looking ASAP for alternatives even if they produce even 5% of fossil fuels. Also I would be inclined to start changing the infrastructure of the USA to a more localized type. We are just too dependant on the Auto…and I see the auto becoming a thing of the past. I don’t buy into the alternatives for this. I feel the remaining fossil fuels need to be used for heating and agriculture. So I agree America will pay a very heavy price for the consumers we’ve become.
Well, living with only 5% of net energy available per capita would be a very difficult situation indeed, I imagine a 95% energy loss would have an effect very similar to The Olduvai Theory. If you don't want to read all of that article, I will sum it up here.
The model for industrial civilisation represents a single, non reoccuring waveform. After industrialisation is attained once, it can never be obtained again. Once all the metals have been removed from the ground in the manufacturing process, and all non renewable resources have been depleted, the nessesary materials to continue on with industrial civilisation do not re-appear for millions of years. Even if a species surpasses the human race in the future as far as intelligence is concerned, since the nessesary materials to rebiuld the industrialised civilisation are not renewed, this means that industrialisation can never be obtained again. As the resources nessesary for maintaining industralised civilisation are depleted, so does industrial civilisation. After all of the petrolium and metals have been extracted from the earth, the "fuel for the fire" runs out, and this results in a collapse of industrialised civilisation.
I will also agree that the need to localise production and food services is a nessesary step to ensure the continuation of our present quality of life. Before the industrial revolution, the human race did just find producing all of thier food, and most of thier consumables locally. However, after the industrial revolution, the average distance that food travels before getting into your stomach is 1,500 miles. To ensure the survival of the human race as a whole, we must retern to this method of food and goods production volintarily, or Earth herself will force us to do so.
I will also agree to the national obesssion with the automobile. The united states consumes 25% of the world's petrolium resources, yet has just under 5% of the total world's population. To get this down to the person, this would mean that each person in the US consumes 00000000092592592592592592592592592592593% of the worlds energy resources produced anually. Fortunatly, I live where the ground is very fertile, and most nessesary goods are within a 25 mile radius. When I relocate to town, (14 mi away), all nessesary goods and services will be available within 2 miles of where I will reside. At present, the petrolum demand is not exceeding supply, but nobody knows how long this will be the case. Also, the price of gas where I live is now $2.239 per gallon. To fill up my car, it costs me over $50 USD. Not that I am complaining, At this point, I am just glad that there is plenty of gas for the economy to "keep on rollin'", and I imagine around this time in only 2 years time, I will be paying over $3.00/gal. I am betting on this as a near certanty.
Considering I only get 17.2 MPG, I intend to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle this fall, when the auto dealerships have thier annual clearence. As a long term solution, I intend to replace the car with a very fuel efficient vehicle also known as the bicycle. The only fuel that will be required to run this vehicle will be the food in my stomach. Can't get much more efficient than that. I also agree that "alternative" fuel resources for travel will provide little promise. The current trend for alternative fuel for the automobile is Hydrogen. As you know, there are no free hydrogen atoms anywhere on earth. Every single hydrogen atom that exists in nature is chemically bonded to somthing. Whether this other atom is oxygen, carbon, sulpher, chlorine, or other depend on the chemical composition, and the conditions under which they met. Since there are no hydrogen mines, it is nessesary to extract it from other compunds whether it is water, natural gas, oil, hydrochloric acid, supheric acid, etc matters little. The point that I am making is that energy is expended breaking the chemical bonds of the hydrogen with other elements. Because of the law of entropy, energy is lost when this "conversion" takes place. The energy is often lost to the surrounding environment in the form of heat, and oxidation. After the hydrogen has been extracted from whatever compound it naturally occured in, and is stored and ready for distribution, it is still nessesary to harness the energy from the combusting or compressing hydrogen to power the method of transportation. Energy is also lost in making use of this due to the law of entropy. When the hydrogen re-bonds with the oxygen in the atmosphere and creates pure water, (thus starting the cycle over again), energy is lost again in the chemical bonding. This is also due to the law of entropy. In short, even this solution will eventually result in the loss of energy. That one atom that went through all of the refinement, compresion, storage, combustion, and bonding will have lost energy 5 times before returned to the enviroment. Another problem lies with rapid mass transit. There is not one commercial airplane, sea going vessel, millitay vehicle, or locomotive currently produced, (or in existance), that can run off of anything other than fossil fuels. Just this one fact alone will severly change our modern globalised society.
I also agree that petrolium is too valuble to just burn as a method of propelling our transport vehicles. The only thing I disagree with is the nessesity to use it for heating. Natural Gas is also subject to Hubbert's peak, and currently production is just barly meeting demand. We almost ran out last year due to the tight constraints that natural gas production is in with demand, (search the CNN website for "natural gas" for reference). CNN was running news articles that the east may go cold and dark during the winter months because of the drain on the natural gas reserves and distribution network. A much better alternative for heating is efficient insulation, blankets, sweatshirts, and geothermal energy. Proper placement of windows, and appropriate cycling of blinds, (or curtains), will help improve the heating efficiency quite a bit. You will also save energy on your electrical bill by reducing the amount of artificial illumination, and using natural light when it is available. A much more nessesary use for petrolium is as feedstock for plastic. This is one of the largest consumers of petrolium in the industry. This is also the reason that plastic products will never bio-degrade in a century of time. Manufactured plastic is essentially a very long chain of hydrocarbons. Even the need for this could be reduced if you were to do one simple thing that would have very little impact on your life. This thing is bringing your own cloth grocery bag with you instead of taking the plasic bag that will enevitably thrown away, and sit at a land fill for 400 years. It would reqire a sacrifice on your part of about $5.00. This is because of the cost of the material required to sew the bags. However, this is a one time cost, and even somthing a simple as a re-used gunny sack will do, or even just taking the paper bag will help out emmensly, (trees are renewable, plastic derived from petrolium is not).
About the only area where it is very nessesary to continue at the present levels of petrolium consumption is agriculture. Diesel is needed to fuel the tractors, and Nitrogen, (extracted from methane most often), is needed to produce fertilisers and pestcides. My grandfather told me that before the farm got the first tractor, the average wheat yeild was only 40 bushels per acre. Last harvest, it was 624 bushels of wheat per acre average. Every year we get a better crop, and more bushels primarily because of a comination of factors Such examples include better use of fertilisers and pesticides, better rain, better crop management, better harvesting techniques, and newer machines. The time spent per acre has also been reduced dramatically over the last 60 years. My grandfather told me that when he was doing it with a team of horses and plow, the field across from my house would take 3 weeks to seed and plow. This year, that same field is plowed, seeded, and fertalised in only 2 days. The majority of the time is spent working the seed into the ground with the tractors. The actual seeding takes about 3 hours, and the actual plowing takes about 6 hours.
This is the only area that I know of where it will be actually nessesary to i]increase[/i] the amount of petrolium consumption. This is nessesary to feed the world's population, and the world's cattle. Every other aspect of modern society could at least avoid increase of the consumption rate. Most could infact reduce consumption. However, now it is too late to start the transition to continue on through the petrolium decline unaffected. At this rate, it will be like a rough truck ride through the harvest fields. If we would have been wiser and started the conversion process 20 years earlier, it would be a highway cruise to the new petrolium-free society. If we delay much longer, it will be like a Japanese Kamakazi pilot in WW2.
Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 7:15 pm Post subject: Why I've given up hope
My wife was dismisive at first but she has finally come around although she'd still like to know what I plan to do about it. SO I'm working on that cold fusion thingummy in my garage
But take a look at what happened when someone reviewed Goodstein's book on Slashdot. While some folks fought the good fight, it seems most folks are either ready to write this off as another Y2K hoax. Of course, if all the COBOL programmers handed been pulled out of mothballs and spent two years combing through old code, that might have ended differently.
ANyway, read if ya want and see why I'm just topping off the kerosene and learning how to pack saltpeter in the shotgun
Joined: May 21, 2004 Posts: 158 Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 3:11 pm Post subject:
notacornucopian wrote:
Whether it's the realization that your children face a difficult future, or just another reminder of your own mortality, peak oil acceptance will bring us great amounts of pain and hardship. Humans have a tendency to avoid pain and pursue pleasure - how does admitting that peak oil is real work within that framework ?
But if we acknowledge that there is a problem coming, and take steps to put a solution in place, we'll all be much better off in the long run.
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
