The Worst Large European Nation "post peak oil" YO

Tyler_JC

I don't know who will do the worst post peak...

But I do know that Norway and its 200 billion dollar oil profit trust fund will do quite well post peak.

Fuel will be sold in exchange for imports of food.

Hydroelectricity could easily provide all of the electrical necessities of a country like that and it has a very homogeneous population, no race/class riots there.

I agree with a previous poster who noted that Germany/Italy/France/Holland/etc. are all going to have roughly the same problems. It's crazy to think that Holland will have a fast crash while France maintains first world status. Instead of thinking of individual EU nations, think about blocs. Eastern Europe will have different problems than Western Europe. The British Isles will have different problems than mainland Europe.
_________________
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."

TorrKing

Tyler,

You are right, we will probably do all right for a while. But our population is widely scattered so food distribution is an issue of high costs. And the railway system is either very effective or modern.

The capital, Oslo has a large portion of immigrants, but they are probably better integrated than in France and Germany.

Also, if the people of Sweden, Finland or Russia start to experience problems, Norway's resources may seem like an easy picking. Which is probably true.

Worst, Germany. High population, much underlying political problems and a tradition for resorting to violence.

Torjus Gaaren

lorenzo · Fission Joined: Jan 01, 2005 Posts: 2092

Definitely the Netherlands and Belgium. I'm Belgian. I know both our economies are the logistical hub of Europe (and the world) and are entirely based on exports, imports, transport and services.

We have two of the world's largest ports (Rotterdam and Antwerp), and rely on transport to transit goods from Europe to the world and the other way around. Very few regions will be so strongly affected by the liquid fuels crisis.

Moreover, we have no petroleum ourselves, no serious wind potential, no land, and we're extremely densely populated.

-

Best off will be France and Germany. France because it has large renewables potential and because it is the world leader in nuclear. Germany because it has large renewables potential and because it is a strategic partner of Russia (with which it closes super oil and gas deals.) Germany needs Russia and Russia needs Germany. Both will treat each other preferentially.

-
Worst off outside Belgium & the Netherlands: definitely the UK. Because it has relied on gas and petrol for decades. Its entire economy has become dependent on it. Now it has become a net importer, and they won't know how to cope. They didn't prepare for the transition. So much so that it became clear recently that the UK faces an enormous energy gap.
Nuclear won't bring solutions (or not soon enough). Moreover, it doesn't have any real good land for the production of energy crops, unlike France and Germany.

Aerobar · Coal Joined: Nov 20, 2005 Posts: 12 Location: Paris

Hey, and what about Switzerland ? According to official figures, 85% of the Swiss electricity comes from nuclear and renewable (hydro) domestic sources. Plenty of fresh water, strong community spirit, decentralized economy... Of course its economy is strongly dependent today from the rest of the World today, but they clearly have some nice post-peak assets. And if things become very bad, they have antiatomic shields for everybody Wink

_________________
Have you ever watched an @aerobar film ?

elroy

On the other hand, our nations have been large traders ever since god knows when, well before the oil age, we're strategically positioned at the Rhine mouth and the Schelde. People will still need to trade, so we could take advantage of that.
_________________

malcomatic_51 · Heavy Crude Joined: Dec 24, 2005 Posts: 185 Location: UK

It's too complicated to make any meaningful predictions; it's not so much the existing resource situation as much as the effectiveness with which the polity responds to the challenge.

One theme that does appear promising has been noted in passing, to compare pre-oil population with current population. The UK fares well in this regard, since in 1900 the population was already almost 40 million. Although the urban area probably more than doubled in the last century, bear in mind that most suburban folk could grow food in their gardens if it came down to it. Never underestimate how adaptable people are , especially if there is a fun/creativity element involved.

France also fares well, having managed to support a population of 35 million at the time of Napoleon, rising to 60 million today (quite a lot of which would probably leave with PO). Germany also had a huge population pre-oil, of around already 50+ million at the time of the FWW.

Once the Europeans get over the shock of the crisis they face, I think they'll do OK. Europeans are deeply committed to peace, having done more than most to prove the futility of war as a solution. There is a highly educated technical culture and a large installed park of infrastructure. We might have to buy back some factories from the Chinese Most of Europe has low debts and a mature culture of accepting personal restraint for the societel good. UK is the clear exception, but we'll likely get bailed out, as they know they can't just let us sink. But the debt situation will enormously disadvantage UK in the early years of PO.

The worst cases will be those countries that are only just getting by now, the places where the 2 billion living at subsistence level live. I don't think their future can be a happy one and I suspect even advanced countries will have their work cut out to save themselves, let alone try and save several billion poor souls. Pretty chilling stuff.

Put it this way, I don't think people have starved to death in the UK since about the Napoleonic wars. That contrasts with those countries that are seeing starvation now.

TorrKing

The countries faring best will be the ones that manage keep their agriculture alive the next years. Bear in mind that you have to get the seeds to sow from somewhere and livestock may not reproduce fast enough to meet demand in a crisis. Lots of people will starve in most western countries, that is certain. I am tired of everyone telling me that a proper agriculture can be resurrected in a few years. That is simply impossible.

Here I list requirements when building agriculture:

1. Areable land (generally no problem)
2. People to break the soil (no problem, but it would be easier with tractors)
3. The knowledge of how do agriculture successfully with little or no pesticides and fertilizers (A huge problem, considering that most people today couldn't keep a cactus alive)
4. Enough seeds to invest into sowing and enough livestock and means of redistributing them both (Without enough animals and grain locally there will be nothing to start the food production with and people tend to eat sow grain and livestock in a crisis. This may be the biggest problem of them all)
5. Good storage facilities and redistribution (Storage: no problem if you know how to preserve the food and keep rats away, Redistribution: will become more and more expensive and eventually virtually ineffective)

The fifth factor isn't crucial, but it is essential if we are going to keep something that resembles today's standard of living.

Lets hope the crisis kicks in as soon as possible, given the latest WTO agreement. In 2013 there may be no agriculture left in Western Europe.

Torjus Gaaren

Starvid

Well to all you starvoholics: there has not been any starvation in any democracy. Ever.

And this is not because of hydrocarbons. There has not been any starvation in Sweden since the 19th century. Why? Trains can move grain. Go figure.

So just drop the silly die-off because of food shortage. It's just not credible.
_________________
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

EnergySpin · Fission Joined: Jun 25, 2005 Posts: 2381

TorrKing

Starvid

Well, my whole extended family on my mothers side are farmers, so I might have picked a little here and a little there.

I do not need to be selfsufficient. I have farmers to make my food. Modern society means specialization.

What it boils down to is: can the farmers continue to produce food? And well everything points to a resounding Yes!

Fertilizer? Make it from air and electricity.

Tractor diesel? Food production is among the highest marginal value use of oil, so don't worry. The market will allocate fuel in a sensible manner (at least in the industrialized world).

Food tranportation? We will do it the same way we have done every time we lacked food since the Norrland famine of 1880: train transport. Electric trains.
_________________
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

Permanently_Baffled

The stats back up what starvid is saying.

UK agriculture uses 0.7% of the total energy mix in the UK(source : NFU , NSO and DTI)

UK agriculture uses a poultry 10 million barrels of oil PER YEAR to run tractors, combines etc etc.

UK agriculture requires a poultry 1% of current natural gas consumption to maintain current fertilizer consumption. You can also make fertilizer from coal, go ask the Chinese (40% of their fertilizer comes from coal)

Europe has massive surplus agricultural capacity. France for example has 3 times the food producing capacity as the UK with the same population. Germany, Spain and Italy also have more capacity than their populations require. On top of this , you have falling populations!

If we all starve to death it will be because of war or a chain of monumental f*ck ups.

The biggest issue will be moving the stuff about, (rail?), and employment for the masses, not the capacity to make enough food IMO
_________________
Peak Oil? crap Happens !

Starvid

I think if we could move food around in big enough volumes in the late 19th century (with steam trains) to avoid starvation, we can do it today.

Die-off is a silly theory which is backed by zero fact, atleast in the industrialized world. The Africans manage to starve themselves even if there is cheap abundant oil.
_________________
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

elroy