For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:30 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
It's down nearly 5%, as of recently, and given how much larger long-run elasticity tends to be, I doubt we'll see an increase any time soon unless oil's price drops.
Me too. That is reality, in a society that is already experiencing a recession. In different circumstances, sounds like oil would have had to have reached $200 or more to start affecting consumption (if peak didn't do it first).
It depends on who ya ask, although we're damn close no matter what. The difference in reactions came from lack of rationing IMO. Lead to a direct response that I don't think will be as peaky. In any event, according to estimates via TOD, we have a ~five years of plateau before we start seeing a decline.
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
Why do you think alternatives aren't as good/scaleable?
Joined: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1972 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:37 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
yesplease wrote:
It doesn't always take more energy. For instance, a Prius costs double what small pickup does, and uses half the energy. Double the share of GDP, but half the energy.
Not convincing. Does the Prius take half the energy to build? I'd heard it was more. If if it did take less, it's not the economy as a whole. For an economy to grow and manufacture all of the goods that are bought and supply all of the services it uses, then it has to use more energy to grow, aside from the hypothetical occasional efficiencies. Citing single possible examples of a more efficient car or an internet service, or a comparison of existing products doesn't cut it.
yesplease wrote:
Now, you contend that we could continue economic growth with reduced energy, but not for long. How long is that?
Well, I didn't contend that we could continue economic growth with reduced energy, you did. I conceded that it might be possible for a short while. The world economy, which is the only complete economy that I'm aware of (where the goods and services consumed are produced within the same economy), I think just about managed it for a year or two during the last main oil crisis, so a short while may be a couple of years. Perhaps with a concerted effort (good luck with that), that could be extended out by a few more years. No doubt there are examples of partial economies that have done better, but if the global economy can't do it, all economies would eventually suffer.
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 4:49 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
It doesn't always take more energy. For instance, a Prius costs double what small pickup does, and uses half the energy. Double the share of GDP, but half the energy.
Not convincing. Does the Prius take half the energy to build? I'd heard it was more.
It may take a bit more to manufacture, but at 10% of a vehicles overall energy costs, manufacturing won't hold a candle to half as much fuel consumption.
TonyPrep wrote:
If if it did take less, it's not the economy as a whole. For an economy to grow and manufacture all of the goods that are bought and supply all of the services it uses, then it has to use more energy to grow, aside from the hypothetical occasional efficiencies. Citing single possible examples of a more efficient car or an internet service, or a comparison of existing products doesn't cut it.
A good example of an economy as a whole doing more w/ less oil is Japan. A decline in the ratio of oil to GDP per capita for the past three decades. So... Not only is it possible on the micro scale, but on the macro as well.
TonyPrep wrote:
The world economy, which is the only complete economy that I'm aware of (where the goods and services consumed are produced within the same economy), I think just about managed it for a year or two during the last main oil crisis, so a short while may be a couple of years. Perhaps with a concerted effort (good luck with that), that could be extended out by a few more years. No doubt there are examples of partial economies that have done better, but if the global economy can't do it, all economies would eventually suffer.
I disagree, but it appears the only way we'll find out who has the better guess is through observation. _________________
Joined: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1972 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
yesplease wrote:
It may take a bit more to manufacture, but at 10% of a vehicles overall energy costs, manufacturing won't hold a candle to half as much fuel consumption.
It will during the first part of its life, until the extra energy has been recovered. But that wasn't my point anyway.
yesplease wrote:
A good example of an economy as a whole doing more w/ less oil is Japan. A decline in the ratio of oil to GDP per capita for the past three decades. So... Not only is it possible on the micro scale, but on the macro as well.
Not proven. As far as economies go, the only game in town is the global economy.
yesplease wrote:
I disagree, but it appears the only way we'll find out who has the better guess is through observation.
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:40 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A good example of an economy as a whole doing more w/ less oil is Japan. A decline in the ratio of oil to GDP per capita for the past three decades. So... Not only is it possible on the micro scale, but on the macro as well.
Not proven. As far as economies go, the only game in town is the global economy.
That's about as macro as we're gonna get short of actually testing the entire world economy.
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
I disagree, but it appears the only way we'll find out who has the better guess is through observation.
Indeed. So let's sit back and watch the fun!
I wouldn't exactly call it fun, but only time will tell. _________________
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:20 am Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
The US has also been more productive with its fossil fuel usage, just not as good as Europe and Japan who set the benchmark in my mind (2-3X better).
It seems that a common assumption in a lot of the flame-filled posts in this thread is that we're not going to change the "process" by which we live. I also didn't see where anyone has defined exactly what they mean by "core consumption". As a personal example, part of our "core consumption" involves providing heat for the house/family during winter months. We previously burned #2 oil but switched to a Tarm wood boiler a couple of years ago. The same service has been provided but the "process" by which it's been provided has changed. Not only have we saved a ton of money, pollution and resources, but the woodlot I use is being maintained and it's healthier too.
Personally, I think there's too many affluent people on the planet and that we've exceeded carrying capacity and I accept the work done by Meadows et al. This by no means implies that we can't make things better though - not perfect - just better.
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:35 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
yesplease wrote:
Nice to see you resort to ad hominems as usual.
Still haven't looked up that definition I see?
Quote:
MonteQuest wrote:
Post-peak efficiency gains will cause any demand destruction due to price to be reversed as it will lower price relative to what it would have been without the gains.
It doesn't matter what efficiency does post-peak, we can't increase use past whatever it is at peak.
Troll. Never implied we could. But efficiency gains will keep demand right up to the limits of supply. _________________ 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: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1972 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:39 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
yesplease wrote:
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A good example of an economy as a whole doing more w/ less oil is Japan. A decline in the ratio of oil to GDP per capita for the past three decades. So... Not only is it possible on the micro scale, but on the macro as well.
Not proven. As far as economies go, the only game in town is the global economy.
That's about as macro as we're gonna get short of actually testing the entire world economy.
As macro as we're going to get, shows nothing, if that economy is not self contained. Otherwise, energy consumed by the products and services used in that economy could be consumed in another economy. Individual economies are embedded in the world economy. If world energy consumption declines, there is scant evidence that the world economy could grow for more than a couple of years.
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:40 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
kublikhan wrote:
Back to my original post, how much of American driving is "got to have
No, how much of American driving is necessary for the 56% of GDP that comes from consumer spending?
People drive to places so they can consume. _________________ 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: Sep 25, 2005 Posts: 1972 Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:42 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
Frank wrote:
I also didn't see where anyone has defined exactly what they mean by "core consumption".
I think it was defined as that consumption below which we would see significant damaging effects on the economy (and, so, society). It could also be regarded as that consumption which people and companies would find it extremely difficult to reduce.
Joined: Oct 06, 2006 Posts: 1011 Location: was rwwff
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:33 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
No, how much of American driving is necessary for the 56% of GDP that comes from consumer spending?
People drive to places so they can consume.
I wonder about something... The US has built a world that is absolutely awash in dollars; as end user activity decreases; those dollars must go somewhere, and there isn't a large enough governmental sink for them.
The only thing that makes sense to me is that the dollars will go to ever escalating prices of a falling quantity of imported materials, namely oil. That gives an outflow of dollars from the US, which a foreign corp can either sit on, or use to purchase US exports, or if they are brave, US fixed assets.
And what do we see currently? Rapidly rising prices on a currently stable quantity of material import; and rapidly rising prices on some of our primary export commodities, ie, grain.
Hmmm. Doesn't look like "will happen sometime in the future."
Looks like *NOW* to me. The big question is.. what will get squeezed, I'm not sure we know. People suggest fast food, recreation, casual shopping; but I think those are ingrained behaviors, and without conscious intervention, people will continue them. Expensive clothes, new cars, home upgrades, I think may be the real losers; medium ticket items that Joe Consumer has to think about for some time before committing to, now thinking, "well, maybe NEXT month/year..." _________________ Yes, we are. As we are.
And so shall we remain; Until the end.
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:41 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MonteQuest wrote:
yesplease wrote:
Nice to see you resort to ad hominems as usual.
Still haven't looked up that definition I see?
Wikipedia wrote:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.
Calling someone a troll instead addressing the subject at hand is an ad hominem argument. Granted, you can mix and match, calling someone a troll and addressing the topic too, but that doesn't result in personal attacks that aren't ad hominem arguments.
MonteQuest wrote:
Troll. Never implied we could.
That's true, you didn't imply it, you stated it.
MonteQuest wrote:
But in oil and gasoline use today, I think efficiency gains will always increase overall use.
Post peak, it doesn't matter what efficiency does, it can't increase use by definition. Would you please stop w/ the personal attacks? _________________
Professor Membrane wrote:
Not now son! I'm making...TOAST!
Last edited by yesplease on Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 1:45 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
TonyPrep wrote:
yesplease wrote:
A good example of an economy as a whole doing more w/ less oil is Japan. A decline in the ratio of oil to GDP per capita for the past three decades. So... Not only is it possible on the micro scale, but on the macro as well.
Not proven. As far as economies go, the only game in town is the global economy.
That's about as macro as we're gonna get short of actually testing the entire world economy.
As macro as we're going to get, shows nothing, if that economy is not self contained.
It doesn't have to be self contained, it just can't offload energy consumption, like you said, onto other economies.
TonyPrep wrote:
Otherwise, energy consumed by the products and services used in that economy could be consumed in another economy. Individual economies are embedded in the world economy.
What energy consumed were you referring to specifically, wrt Japan's economy?
TonyPrep wrote:
If world energy consumption declines, there is scant evidence that the world economy could grow for more than a couple of years.
There's also scant evidence that it would decline for more than a few years. _________________
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:24 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
yesplease wrote:
Calling someone a troll instead addressing the subject at hand is an ad hominem argument.
Troll, no, it's not. It is in response to your troll-like tactics, not your argument.
Quote:
MonteQuest wrote:
Troll. Never implied we could.
That's true, you didn't imply it, you stated it.
I did not say "use would increase past whatever it is at peak". I said:
Quote:
Post-peak efficiency gains will cause any demand destruction due to price to be reversed as it will lower price relative to what it would have been without the gains.
_________________ 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: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: Re: Powering Down to Core Consumption
MattS wrote:
Apparently maybe 15% and thats it.
Seems reasonable, 85% reduction in unnecessary travel.
I say we begin work advocating this as a solution immediately.
Lay everyone off, eh? Close most businesses? _________________ 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.
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
