Powering Down to Core Consumption

ReverseEngineer · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jul 16, 2008 Posts: 1731

Let's try to cut out the personal arguments here and analyze the situation without resorting to ad hominem argument. Whether or not you like somebody else's viewpoint or whether you think they are a "troll" or some other pejorative is a pointless exercise, it devolves a debate quickly.

Look at the obvious, first the supply-demand issues with oil. Higher pricing HAS to shave demand, people simply can't afford to pay those prices, on ALL things, from the way they live in their houses to the way they move about in society to the products they buy and the way they spend on the food budget. While its easy to go to Mickey Ds and buy a Burger, its ridiculous to pay that when you can buy the same food at half the cost at the supermarket. So people will eat out less, drive less and so forth. All of which cuts consumption quickly, and so given you have a fairly fixed rate of production of oil, the inventories increase and then for a while at least the price on the oil drops. Rebound effect.

You see the effect most obviously and first in the housing market, this is WHY the real estate market is dropping so fast. So lots of folks lose equity, and the banks that extended the credit are in deep trouble. Massive loss of Paper Wealth here, and a massive over supply of a product we can't afford, aka the Suburban House and SUV Transportation system. Is this in and of itself the End of Civilization as we Know It? Hardly. Its just a terrific economic contraction, but the fact is that simply doubling up inside the houses and using half the cars instantly brings the doubling of prices back into balance, and the stressors on the oil supply are relieved in this way.

It doesn't do much for the Job Market of course, because with fewer consumers of the products there are fewer jobs in the economy. This is the economic aspect of the downhill slide. However, with the actual consumption of oil temporarily reduced, you then can hit the job market with a socialization, set lots of folks to work on Government Projects similar to the WPA of the Roosevelt administration. In Al Gore's paradigm here, you take all your unemployed construction workers and set them the task of building Windmills across the Midwest. Gotta do something with all those unemployed folks anyhow, and this would be as good a choice as any, not that you really can totally fulfill the electric needs of the CUREENT population this way, but in 20 years after its all built and half the population is dead, you probably got enough power going there to keep the lights on anyhow.

The oil isn't GONE yet, its just about halfway gone. So, still extant here is enough oil to start a rebuilding of infrastructure to maintain a smaller population base. How much smaller? That is a tough question to answer, but I doubt it needs to shrink back down to the 1 Billion or so of the days before Big Oil, relying strictly on Horse and Buggy and Animal/Human labor to pull agricultural plows. I would make a guess that a 2/3 reduction down to 2 Billion people would be supportable eventually.

The main problems lie in the dislocation through the period of many people who simply will be put out of work and become homeless. Inevitably, this causes conflicts inside large cities and an overall restricition on trade through society, but eventually this works itself out as enough people die off and there is excess production and energy capacity for those who are left standing. It does not have to happen instantly, in fact its unlikely that it will, it will happen in fits and starts, in some ways similar to the trip up the Peak Oil curve, but different of course because shrinkage is tougher to deal with than growth. Hurts more of course.

Many variables will come into play as the society shrinks, not the least of which is the Wars for Resources which already are in full swing. At any point any of those wars could spin out of control, and as long as there are thermonuclear weapons around, the potential exists to destroy the earth as habitable for ANYBODY. However, Mutually Assured Destruction kept us and the Soviet Union from pulling the plug on this one during the Cold War, and really it behooves nobody to drop the bomb on anybody else, you lose the resources you are aiming to get this way.

So, long term here 2/3 of the population Dies Off, but really this can take a good 50 years to happen as the economy shrinks downward and all you end up with here is a smaller worlwide population of people who live in a more sustainable fashion. Its OBVIOUSLY possible to have 1 Billion people on earth WITHOUT Oil, we did it for a couple of Millenia, it clearly could be done again, and a bit better the next time round since we at least learned a FEW things during the Reign of Big Oil.

Peak Oil doesn't end society in and of itself. It only changes the NATURE of society. What can end society is Thermonuclear warfare, or such a rapid use of what oil is left such as to completely pollute the biosphere. Both those outcomes are possible also, but in the absence of those, a simple trip back down the curve of Peak Oil just rebalances Humanity with Nature, living a different sort of life than we live right now.

ReverseEngineer

MonteQuest

ReverseEngineer · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jul 16, 2008 Posts: 1731

<Simple trip? Welcome to the forums. You have much to learn.>

Learning is a process for all people throughout their lives. Some of us however do not have so much hubris as to think we know it all, or speak as though we do. This does not seem to be your problem however Smile

You are remarkably condescending here, and I don't appreciate it, nor I think do some others here.

First off, far as China is concerned, clearly the reduction in demand here will be followed by reduction in demand in China. What is China's economy based on? American Consumerism primarily, that is what all those Chinese workers are doing in low paid jobs over there, producing trashy goods for Americans with disposable income to buy. Reality check, Americans are rapidly running OUT of disposable income, therefore those Chinese factories have to close, therefore they stop burning up oil. Chinese fed themselves on human labor to the tune of a billion of their own population, they could do it again assuming the flooding through the Guanzou and Guanghzhi provinces doesn't completely wipe out their rice crop, and it won't any more than the flooding in the Mississippi River Valley will wholesale destroy our corn crop. It will take a toll no doubt, but it won't immediately destroy civilization.

Chinese Oil demand is quite dependent on the American Economy, actually they are somewhat better off on a population level since rice cultivation is less dependent on oil than corn cultivation is, less in the way of mechanized farming, less in the way of fertilizer, more in the way of human labor, which the Chinese have plenty of.

Why do you think Inflation is rampant in the Chinese Economy? They have the same problems we do, just monetary policy there is handling somewhat differently, but not to much better effect than the policy here is doing. they are equally screwed in the downslope equation of oil, at least on the economic growth aspect.

Insofar as where the energy comes from and the nature of the permanence of the economic contraction, I'm not arguing that point. I AGREE, a contraction of a permanent nature is necessary and unavoidable, just we don't agree on the nature of the contraction and how it might play out. You don't get any mroe energy from fossil fuels than is extant, that is a fixed quantity, ever reducing as it is burned up. What you DO get is persistent demand reduction as the population contracts, and so depending on which one leads the equation at what times, you get periods where energy supercedes demand in some of them. During such times, people obviously gotta figure out other means of producing power, and actually there are many ways to do this on small scale. Big scale its a losing proposition, but small scale we got a long way to go in maximizing energy collection. Will we ever be able to duplicate the massive amount of collected energy of a few million years of fossil fuels? Hardly possible, but the fact is that in 1750 before Oil plenty of people lived on earth, society existed then and so it will after oil disappears. Just not quite the SAME society as we have now, but REALLY, is that so bad? This society has so many things wrong with it its not even funny, so it needs a cleansing Smile

Really Monte, you need to get off your high horse and stop treating everybody else on the board as though they are nincompoops. You have a certain spin on the outcomes, its a plausible one, but its not the ONLY plausible outcome by any means. Too many variables here for anyone to know absolutely how it plays itself out.

Will the population decline? Clearly. Will there be economic dislocation? Clearly. Will humanity inevitably turn into a hell hole with no hope of survival? Not so clear at ALL. Your spin paints a very negative picture, and it could play out that way, but it does not necessarily have to be so. You really ought to try lightening up a little and reviewing your history some. Empires rise and Fall, paradigms change, but generally speaking there are some survivors to rebuild from the ashes of a prior civilization. We do have the capability of utterly wiping ourselves off the face of the planet, but unless we completely lose it and start tossing Nukes at each other, its unlikely we devolve so far as to completely annihiliate what we have built so far. There won;t be the easy energy in the future, but that is not to say the energy isn;t there to use. The Sun Rains down plenty every day, and will do so for the next 4 Billion years or so. Whoever survives the mess we are in just has to figure out how to collect it better, and since even with primitive technology it was possible to feed 1 Billion people, my guess would be we could do the same in the future for 2 Billion.

Rough times ahead, no doubt. But it does NOT have to end in Human Oblivion. That is your spin, and I just do not buy that one. Maybe you neede to LISTEN better, and learn something also.

ReverseEngineer

BlinkBlink

ReverseEngineer · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jul 16, 2008 Posts: 1731

I have not read Monte's posts for 2.5 years, only the posts he has made here in this thread. He takes a condescending attitude toward anyone who has not been on the board as long as he has, and speaks as though he knows all, and everyone else has " a lot to learn". We all have a lot to learn, and we all will if we listen and don't treat others as though they are imbeciles. I grant I am new to the board and have plenty to learn, but CLEARLY Monte does NOT know it all, and he should stop making deprecating comments towards others which make his spin the dominant one on the board. It trashes other viewpoints, its just not good debate.

ReverseEngineer

kublikhan

mos6507

MonteQuest

MonteQuest

MonteQuest

MonteQuest

MonteQuest

ReverseEngineer · Light Sweet Crude Joined: Jul 16, 2008 Posts: 1731

[quote="MonteQuest"]

MonteQuest

MonteQuest