Joined: May 19, 2004 Posts: 892 Location: San Francisco, California
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 8:59 pm Post subject: "permanent blackouts"
I keep hearing this prediction of "permanent blackouts" by 2012 or 2008. In the latest Olduvai revision, Richard Duncan has said that permanent blackouts will occur in the industrialized world by 2008. Apparently this prediction is repeated in Michael Ruppert's latest article (I'm too cheap to subscribe to FTW). Can someone who understands electrical grids better than I explain this? Are they so fragile that they could just collapse, never to return again, four years from now? How and why would this happen? Does "permanent blackouts" mean that after 2008, if I plug in my vacuum cleaner and turn it on . . . nothing will happen? Ever again? Really? And after 2008, unless I have a windmill or a solar cell on my roof, I can say goodbye to vacuum cleaners, stereo equipment, a refrigerator, or an electric coffee maker?
Can someone please elaborate on how this scenario would play out? Why won't PG & E be able to get the lights back on *at all* after 2008? Even in Iraq, they can get the electricity going some of the time.
Joined: Nov 21, 2004 Posts: 579 Location: ~170ft/lbs@0rpm (on my bike)
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:04 pm Post subject:
No, you won't be able to get the lights back on.
However, 2008 seems a bit soon. Regardless, the point is that any huge increases (like those from peak oil) in transportation and basic infrastructure costs will drive up the price of electricity, since coal is mined cheaply using cheap oil, and NG will most likely peak about a decade after cheap oil does...
so, if you have the price of everything going up, eventually it won't be financially viable to operate the power grid considering it's aweful efficiency and huge size. But there have to be quite a few other factors for that to play out....
Joined: Jul 21, 2004 Posts: 327 Location: Chicago, IL
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:06 pm Post subject:
I am not exactly sure I understand Duncan's logic, but as far as the United States goes, there might not be enough natural gas to produce electricity. There are some states where gas provides most thermal energy to produce electricity (the Northeast, California, etc). Given that there are only 4 LNG terminals in the U.S. and considering that 15% of U.S. imports from Canada mean around 50% of Canadian production, there will not be enough gas to go around. It seems the French with their 75% of nuclear electrical generating capacity will have the last laugh.
Joined: Jul 21, 2004 Posts: 327 Location: Chicago, IL
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:22 pm Post subject:
I think we will see a revival of nuclear energy. The French scientific magazine Science&Vie reports that their government has numerous designs ready to be implemented, including:
1) EPR (European Pressurized Reactor) that is resistant to core meltdown
2) hybrid reactors (reactors with accelerators that break down radioactive waste to render it nearly environmentally harmless by drammatically reducing half-life)
3) thorium reactors (thorium is three times as abundant as uranium and is much less toxic)
Joined: May 19, 2004 Posts: 892 Location: San Francisco, California
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:48 pm Post subject:
pilferage wrote:
No, you won't be able to get the lights back on.
However, 2008 seems a bit soon. Regardless, the point is that any huge increases (like those from peak oil) in transportation and basic infrastructure costs will drive up the price of electricity, since coal is mined cheaply using cheap oil, and NG will most likely peak about a decade after cheap oil does...
so, if you have the price of everything going up, eventually it won't be financially viable to operate the power grid considering it's aweful efficiency and huge size. But there have to be quite a few other factors for that to play out....
It's a bit of a brain worm. I find the "permanent blackouts by 2008" claim unrealistic and yet I keep coming back to it. And then the sensible part of my brain imagines that day in 2008. I wake up late because my clock radio doesn't go off. Then I realize there's no power. I turn on my battery-powered radio and hear that power is off all over the San Francisco Bay Area. So I don't bother going to work. My wife and I just hang around and eat as much of the perishable stuff in the fridge as we can. Six million people in the Bay Area do the same thing. We catch up on our reading. The sun shines. Life is good.
What next? Well, in my little fantasy, the power comes on in a few days because the big blackout allows stocks of natural gas, coal, and oil to build up to the point where they could get things running again. It seems to me that before you get permanent blackouts, you get sporadic blackouts for several years.
Last edited by johnmarkos on Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
How long do you think it will take to build one nuclear power plant? Remember this is 2004 so, hypothetically, if the grid fails in 2008 when will that nuclear power plant that is not even planned today at the end of 2004 take to come online?
I don't care if Richard Duncan is off by 10 years. There still will not be nuclear power plants on line in time.
So we are past the point of no return, which suits me just fine since this living being called earth is grossly infected with the fungus, mankind, and is in despatate need of a cure.
Joined: May 19, 2004 Posts: 892 Location: San Francisco, California
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 9:55 pm Post subject:
SilverHair wrote:
So we are past the point of no return, which suits me just fine since this living being called earth is grossly infected with the fungus, mankind, and is in despatate need of a cure.
Does that mean we have tiny humans between our toes?
Joined: Jul 14, 2004 Posts: 396 Location: The Motor City
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:17 pm Post subject:
Good point on the nuclear issue, SilverHair. In all of the peak oil material I have read over the last year, I think the estimates are that nuclear plants take approximately 10 years to build at a cost of $1 billion, not to mention use absurd amounts of oil, fresh water and or NG in the production. Also, thousands would need to be built, causing a run on uranium.
Joined: May 19, 2004 Posts: 892 Location: San Francisco, California
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:19 pm Post subject:
TrueKaiser wrote:
if i read that artical right it says a world population of 3.3 billion at 2k8. i wonder what happened to the other 3.1billion in the world today?
No, not world population, just the population of the industrial nations:
From the article (italics are mine):
"If that is true, then the population in the world's industrial nations, we argue, will go from about 3.3 billion in 2008 to about 0.9 billion in 2030, a net die-off of about 300,000 people per day in the 22 years from 2008 to 2030."
Not sure what he uses as the definition of an industrial nation.
Posted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:40 pm Post subject: Re: "permanent blackouts"
johnmarkos wrote:
I keep hearing this prediction of "permanent blackouts" by 2012 or 2008. In the latest Olduvai revision, Richard Duncan has said that permanent blackouts will occur in the industrialized world by 2008. Apparently this prediction is repeated in Michael Ruppert's latest article (I'm too cheap to subscribe to FTW). Can someone who understands electrical grids better than I explain this?
You don't need to understand electrical grids. All you need to understand is that Richard Duncan and Michael Ruppert are farking idiots.
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
