[Kylon]

So we've got some problems with Peak Oil.

Primarily-

Energy- Needed for everything
Fuel- Needed to transport almost everything(rail can be used sometimes).
Food- Natural Gas used to in the Haber-Bosch process to produce Ammonium, which provides nitrogen to plants, allowing us to farm the same land year after year.
Plastics, medicines, hydrocarbon derived products- They require oil.

Well I was thinking, for the short term, we could use alternatives.

For Energy- We could burn oil shale, and unrecoverable(negative EROEI) coal while it's in the ground, in order to produce large amounts of heat to power generators. It's environmentally damaging, but it's better than the alternative.

Fuel- We could use coal in a process discussed in topic,
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic39861-0.html
Where powering a car off of a wood stove is demonstrated. This method has been available since World War II when there were fuel shortages due to the war. We could therefore power most major vehicles necessary for society to function off of coal. Those being large semi-trucks, ambulances, police cars, farm equipment ect... The modifications are relatively simple and cheap to make. So an easy conversion of being powered off of gasoline to coal could make fuel for essential vehicles in society available at an affordable rate.

Food- To deal with the problem of nitrogen in the soil we could switch to a diet that's richer in legumes. Certain legumes fixate tremendous amounts of nitrogen, and don't require nitrogen based fertilizer. This of course requires extra energy, so in order to compensate for the needed photosynthetic requirements, we could simply cultivate larger amounts of land. We could plant other plants like corn with the beans, so that the corn could siphon off their nitrogen.

To read more about the nitrogen fixating properties of legumes.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Zm ... cd=1&gl=us

For the hydrocarbon derived products that we need, we could simply increase the use of coal power for cars, while redirecting the U.S oil reserves towards production of essential compounds(medicines) and plastics for higher end goods. I believe the market place can achieve this, as the cost of medicines isn't primarily the petrochemicals but rather the research and regulation.

For expensive plastic items(such as computers, or calculators) the cost wouldn't increase as the amount of plastic is very small. The energy cost is the primary concern there.


This would take care of the problems of peak oil(in the U.S) for the short term.

In the long term, the use of large scale production of breeder reactors would have to occur to permanently eliminate the problems of Peak Oil.

Combined with the extraction of hydrogen from distilled water via electrolysis, in order to use the hydrogen in the Haber-Bosch process. This would provide the ammonium based fertilizer needed for the future.

And in order to produce fuel, we would have to build an excess of breeder reactors to use the process in the New York Times article
"Scientist would turn greenhouse gas into gasoline"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/19/science/19carb.html

The same fossil fuel products produced by the process in the above mentioned article could be chemically modified and restructured to produce all hydrocarbon products needed(in theory), so long as you have the energy. This would allow us to permanently produce all the medicines, and plastics and other oil based products we want to produce.


Of course, none of this can occur without a few actions by politicians.

1. Immediate implementation of a policy that would provide a subsidy to farmers, police officers, medical hospitals, and truck drivers to retrofit their cars with the capacity to power off of coal.
Combined with a mandate that every gas station have coal available for sale.

2. Laxing of environmental policies on burning unrecoverable fossil fuels in the ground. This way the energy lost from having the coal supply redirected for powering vehicles would be compensated by burning previously unusable fuels.

3. Trade restrictions on coal exports. Coal exports would have to be heavily taxed, as to encourage the coal supply to stay in America, to prevent an American economic collapse.

4. Farmers would have to be given by the government education on the growth of self-fertilizing legumes. Tax subsidies would have to be removed for not planting on land. Tax subsidies could also be redirected so farmers to use less fertilizer and plant more beans, and fields that are part bean-part other crop.

5. The immediate act of scaling up of nuclear breeder reactors. Without nuclear breeder reactors or an equally abundant, cheap, and scalable power source there can be no long term survival of civilization. Some may rejoice in this prospect, but I should remind you, that should this come to pass you will most likely not be among the living.

If any of these mandates that I have listed above are not fufilled, or an adequate substitute policy to serve the exact function that the policy above states, then this plan for saving civilization long term won't work.

Without fuel, civilization will grind to a halt,

Without energy, civilization will grind to a halt, and nothing can be produced.

Without restrictions on sending our resources elsewhere, the U.S may quickly be impoverished, while big coal executives may amass huge fortunes and use their power to corrupt the government and enslave the masses, and without the intellectually free environment of a free society technology won't be produced that can save civilization from other crisises and future crisises.

On the bright side, a positive reaction to this could be a socialist revolution(as there is already a very strong and growing populist movement, and this would be like adding high grade explosive with lots of gasoline on the fire), leading to all fossil fuel and mineral deposits being nationalized by a populist government, because you don't need to own the supply to control it, you only need to be able to disrupt or destroy it, and once a coal mine fire gets going it's impossible to put out(making that coal mine only usable as a power source). A revolution like this could also lead to the elimination of much of the current leadership, and corporate corruption, and may cause the nationalization of other bodies(such as the media).



Without an increase in food, and the means to maintain the current supply, mass starvation- leading to mass riots and possible civil war could occur.

Without nuclear breeder reactors or an equally scalable, large supply of power, society in the long run is doomed.




What do you think?


Comments? Feed back?

[Kylon]

Why isn't anyone responding to or viewing my post?

[Pretorian]

Why isn't anyone responding to or viewing my post?

too many letters me thinks.
Here is a real Peakoil solution for you: Demand Destruction. Make all Americans drive bikes and eat rice&beans or nuke a few dozen cities in China , India and perhaps Japan.

[Plantagenet]

Of course, none of this can occur without a few actions by politicians.

A very astute summary, Kylon.....you've got some very interesting and useful ideas and you've grasped what the main obstacle to tackling the problems is as well.

[taizy8]

there's too many words for me to read at this hour of the night Kylon.

and I'm not an American so I don't want to say what needs to be done here. And I'm no expert so do not want to spout of on a forum like this.

cheers

[Kylon]

I'm glad y'all posted replies!

[hugh-wright]

Are you sure that it's possible to run a diesel engine (compression ignition) on coal gas?
The tractors and such like that ran on wood-gas generators were all gasoline engines (spark ignition) weren't they?
Most, if not all, heavy duty ICEs are diesel. What is the biggest petrol engine presently in use? Any idea?

[mos6507]

You missed a few important ones.

[municipal]

Why isn't anyone responding to or viewing my post?

Because it is moot.

There is no solution for peak oil.

Everything is going to caome apart in 2 years +/- a year and the solution will be to isolate and blame someone to distract the anger from citizens, without doing a thing for the problem.

I would be moving west and learning to live WITHOUT WALLY mart for a few years, you can survive until final international face slapping ensues then you are toast.

Alternative, die in the struggle for food a year or two early.

[Jack]

Scalability is the first issue. We have, at best, a few years before peak oil effects hit. That is not sufficient time to significantly retrofit the commercial fleet for coal usage.

In addition, retrofit of the commercial fleet is not an adequate solution. Continued economic viability implies that private transportation would also need to be retrofitted, or substantial investment made in public transportation. However, the upcoming years face restricted budgets at all levels of government. This suggests insufficient monetary resources to accomplish the foregoing.

The extensive use of breeder reactors suggests large investments over years, in addition to use of resources such as specialized steel alloys and concrete. This would occur in an environment of reduced budgets.

Ending exports of coal would effectively end the globalization experiment, and would cause an unsustainable increase in the trade deficit. Since the U.S. imports a great deal of oil, along with a variety of other goods and resources, such an outcome would be profoundly disruptive of the domestic economy. The dollar might well lose its reserve status. The possibility of trade wars would loom.

Finally, you mention a "socialist revolution", and I will suppose this is intended to mean a lawful, peaceful revolution at the ballot box. Quite possibly this will occur. And the populist choice will be for immediate needs - food, fuel, housing, and clothing. All of which will divert resources away from the long term goal of building large numbers of breeder reactors.

You might wish to stock up on hot buttered popcorn. It will come in handy, since there is no solution to peak oil.

[DomusAlbion]

You might wish to stock up on hot buttered popcorn. It will come in handy, since there is no solution to peak oil.

Of course there is a solution and a likely outcome, but it is one most people cannot/will not contemplate. Hence the large stock of buttered popcorn and I assume cases of some fine distilled spirits.

[Jack]

Of course there is a solution and a likely outcome, but it is one most people cannot/will not contemplate. Hence the large stock of buttered popcorn and I assume cases of some fine distilled spirits.

My compliments on your keen insights.

[TommyJefferson]

Of course, none of this can occur without a few actions by politicians.

That statement is fundamentally wrong.

The absolute WORST response to peak oil is to put fascist/socialist governments in charge of managing it.

That is an absolute guarantee of more waste and more death and suffering for everyone.

[evilgenius]

There are a few things we probably need to know if we are going to have this discussion. The first is probably, how many miles per gallon does the average auto need to perform at if we are going to use either all sustainable fuels or a combination of sustainable and non-renewable. No matter how high that number is it has to be known. You can work backward from there and figure out what will have to be dropped from the way we live. You can also begin to do a calculus of what other alternatives, like changing the ratio of public transport or freight rail additions, can be brought into the mix and which can't because of the strain on the system they would bring.

Next we will probably have to figure out if our financial system is going to be up to the task going forward. Will the financial crisis cripple our ability to deal with the challenges or will it be a bump in the road? Will the West be able to maintain its position of being able to outbid the rest of the world for what is left?

Finally we need to know at what point the expense of the military option becomes too much of an expense. When does it shipwreck the country and send it into the history books alongside the Spanish empire as a bankrupt institution fit, really, for teaching future generations about what comes with excess and not for ruling those it has charge of?

[Specop_007]

The absolute WORST response to peak oil is to put fascist/socialist governments in charge of managing it.

That is an absolute guarantee of more waste and more death and suffering for everyone.

And unfortunately that's probably exactly what we're going to get.

Thats because with our entitlement mentality and social programs when we cant get all the cool pretty toys we want we cry. And Dad (Our politicians) listen to us cry and give us our toys at the expense of our freedom.

[Kylon]

I'm glad I'm getting so many responses!



Even though the cost of retrofitting commercial fleets with coal burning engines would be expensive, it's much cheaper than trying to drill for more oil, pursue an oil war, or pay out cash to foreign governments for their oil.

Furthermore, I don't think there will be an easy transistion. Probably a lot of angry people, and possibly a Great Depression type economic environment.

Coal powers 50-60% of our power needs. Nuclear powers 20%. Then there is hydro(which I don't know how much that provides) and wind. We may have above 80% of our electric power needs during the transistion period. That means cutbacks. That means higher prices, but it also means that society can go on. The economy can go on. We may all be poor in the soup lines but most of us who are able and willing to work may be able to survive.

In time, with a switch to breeder nuclear and a mixture of renewables, we can power our civilization in a sustainable manner.

So my plan, although gloomy, offers a hope for a better tomorrow, even if that tomorrow is 20-30 years away.

Oh and by the way, I prefer a socialist government to a fascist government anyday. We are going to have freedoms curtailed no matter what. When faced with decreased funding for police, and increased demands on police forces, the only way to keep from failing their jobs and lettting the gangs run the place is to bend(or in some cases break) the law, and increase police brutality. In order to prevent police prosecutions, and to allow a small force to cover a bigger area legitimately, the government may authorize/legalize police brutality, intimidation, and invasion of privacy.

So this means that freedoms will be curtailed, and from there there is only one choice you have to make: Do you want your government completely run by corporations(fascist government) or do you want your government to be ruled, at least in part, in favor of the people with some accountability(socialism)?

Life is going to be miserable, but it doesn't have to end. We can avoid total collapse, anarchy, and death, and we can have a better future. It depends on what actions we take now. We can either have a progressively more miserable depression that turns into a new dark ages. Or we can have a great depression lasting the better years of many of our lives, to see our children live in a better world than we lived in.

It's really our choice.

[Jack]

I'll choose fascism every time. Truly.

[Cog]

I'll take fascism as well.

From the movie THE PATRIOT

"why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away?

[DomusAlbion]

We'll probably end up with fascism. At least for awhile, but the center will not hold and we'll break up into regional fiefdoms.

Feudalism will again dominate the land and our childrens' children will be serfs loyal to the local lord. And they'll all talk about the Golden Age long past when men road in horseless carriages and metal dragons soared above.

[Ludi]

our childrens' children will be serfs loyal to the local lord.

You would raise your grandchildren to be serfs?

To be honest, I am shocked and dismayed to read that from you.