[deMolay]

A very well thought out argument spelling out how Peak Oil means starvation. http://home.entouch.net/dmd/agricultureandpeakoil.htm

[copious.abundance]

Source

[JJ]

Source

haha, oilfinder you remind me of my neighbor. he doesn't believe in PO and believes in unlimited resources. here is a piece of an email he just sent me:

With all do respect...We aint even begun to tap the earths resources. You cant apply math if the information keeps changin...I believe this way of life can end but its not because we have somehow EXHAUSTED the earth of its resources. Thats just not true. We have only tapped a minute portion of the earth resources and many of them replenish themselves and are only now out of our reach or some environmental bullshit keeps us from goin to get it. There is enough oil in the Gulf of Mexico for generations after generations to consume...These scientists plug in what they think they know and some computer model makes guesses. We will run out of food but it aint because the earth is overpopulated or tapped out !. Its because power comes from control of food and water !! People will die off because of evil power hungry assholes not the depleation of resources...

[kpeavey]

from the above link:

Conclusion

Peak oil represents a grave threat to our food supply, in my opinion. Few are aware of how important the petroleum industry is to the agricultural revolution in which we live. This is why I am currently trying to buy a farm. Consider this, prior to the agricultural revolution, estimates of hunter-gatherer population sizes, based upon anthropological data show that humans were quite few in number.:

"Measures of world population size on the eve of the transition to agriculture, some 12 000 to 10 000 years ago, come from estimates of the maximum population density that this way of life could sustain. These generally range from 5 to 10 million people, and the highest figure--calculated on the assumption that the world was 'saturated' with hunter-gatherers --is only 15 million." (Landers, 1992, p. 402)

Agriculture based only upon animal energy allowed the human population to grow to about 750 million by 1750 (Cavali-Sforza, 1994, p. 68). Peak oil will do several bad things to the world's energy supply. It will force us to use coal, and if one uses coal to replace oil, because coal will be used at a faster rate, the US turns its 200 year supply of coal into a 44 year supply (assuming that there really is a 200 year supply to start with). This implies that by the end of this century, we will no longer have fossil fuels with which we can foster global warming. Nor will we have fossil fuels with which to run our tractors and we will return at the very least to the 1750s. Going back to an animal-energy based economy means that approximately 5/6ths of us must die. The post fossil fuel world, lacking some new energy source, will consist of not many more than 750 million souls. What an ugly century this will be. While there are some long-shot grasps-at-straws possible replacements for fossil fuels, the political turmoil resulting from mass starvation may preclude their development and implementation.

This paper assumes the carrying capacity of the planet is the same as it was in the 1700s. It is not. Human activity and development, along with pollution qnd species extinction have degraded tha carrying capacity of the planet. I could get into the homogeneity of crop species and their dependence on fossil fuels and mechanized agriculture, but we've gone down that road in other threads.

The paper is laid out well and draws a conclusion along the same lines as many others, but paints an optimistic picture. 5/6 of a civilization does not die off peacefully.

[VMarcHart]

With all do respect...We aint even begun to tap the earths resources. You cant apply math if the information keeps changin...I believe this way of life can end but its not because we have somehow EXHAUSTED the earth of its resources. Thats just not true. We have only tapped a minute portion of the earth resources and many of them replenish themselves and are only now out of our reach or some environmental bullshit keeps us from goin to get it. There is enough oil in the Gulf of Mexico for generations after generations to consume...These scientists plug in what they think they know and some computer model makes guesses. We will run out of food but it aint because the earth is overpopulated or tapped out !. Its because power comes from control of food and water !! People will die off because of evil power hungry assholes not the depleation of resources...

Sadly, JJ, your grammar school dropout neighbor is not alone.

Two weeks ago at the wind energy conference, an "elite" --white, male, college educated, mid 40s, etc-- told me global warming, climate change, peak oil, etc, are the biggest hoaxes ever.

Sure, the planet has huge reserves, and we can keep living this exeburant life for a long time, but for how long?

Did you watch Frontline's Poisoned Waters?

[Ludi]

Did you watch Frontline's Poisoned Waters?

Potable water and living oceans are just environmental bullshit.

[JJ]

Did you watch Frontline's Poisoned Waters?

Potable water and living oceans are just environmental bullshit.

my neighbor is really pis&ed at me for believing such nonsense (he was an Austin cop for ten years and just got back from two years in Bagdad working for Blackwater, "doing beer runs from Mosul to Bagdad for my employer, mostly. If a family got closer than a hundred yards, we lit them up..."

this comment was echoed by a kid who just got back from Bagdad (a marine) who went to high school with my kid. He has been hanging out at my house. He said he doesn't know how many families they killed. He said he knew all about the depleted uranium they were using, but he was more concerned with the mesothelioma everyone in his platoon was coming down with, from training when they punched out asbestos walls with no face masks. HOOO-RAAAAH

Besides Ludi, I don't have time for this stuff. I've gotta sell my land in the Philippines so I can buy some of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Paci ... bage_Patch

[VMarcHart]

Did you watch Frontline's Poisoned Waters?

Potable water and living oceans are just environmental bullshit.

Did something get lost in translation?

[wisconsin_cur]

Source

OF,

Your response would appear to accept the idea that we have reached "peak oil." Your charts would only be relative to this conversation if you did. Is this true? If peak oil is still in the future, as I thought you had argued, then the charts are meaningless.

[Southpaw]

Don't mind oily his reign of terror on the peakoil comunity will come to an end soon. Once his propaganda bullshit about algae, and shale gas are hugely exgagerated you won't see him here anymore.

but it might take a while before he realises it. slow brains you know.

[copious.abundance]

OF,

Your response would appear to accept the idea that we have reached "peak oil." Your charts would only be relative to this conversation if you did. Is this true? If peak oil is still in the future, as I thought you had argued, then the charts are meaningless.

People have been saying we're running short on oil for decades. During those decades, when we were supposed to be running short on oil, production of the grains I showed has nonetheless increased. That is all you need to know.

[wisconsin_cur]

It must be nice to not need to construct a meaningful position of your own but to only have a position based on "people have been saying for decades..." It then allows you to go around, without regard for any real world facts or concern for limits and talk about how people have been saying the same thing forever. I wonder if you have ever read the little disclaimer on investment vehicles: Past Performance is No Guarantee of Future Results?

Of course we know that we did not reach peak oil in the past but this thread is that when peak does happen in the real world it will be followed by a decline in the availability of food. Do you have an opinion about that? Or perhaps you would like to observe that people have been afraid of running out of food for a long time as well?

It is a good thing that they were, since this lead to advancements, that kept them from running out of food. It also a matter of being worried about being broke that helps me be financially responsible and a fear that my children will pick up certain words at too early an age that keeps my language clean. It is a fear of orphaning my children that helps me drive defensively. Just because a result does not manifest itself does not mean that it was not perfectly logical to be concerned and work to mitigate that potential future.

If more people were worried about running out of oil, perhaps we would be able to extend the plateau a little farther and make real progress in adapting culturally to a system less dependent on fossil fuels. But of course most people are not afraid, at least not afraid enough to do anything truly useful. They are aided in this psychological holding pattern by justifications offered to them from those who cannot be bothered to form their own opinion based on facts and reasonable estimates of limits. They have simplistic slogans like, "People have been worried about this forever and it has never happened." "Drill Baby Drill" and "Eat, Drink and be Merry and laugh at those worry-warts." And so they are able to placate their worries a bit longer and do not have to face facts or the reality of limits.

We all remember (or at least we should) what happens to the one who is not afraid of that of which he should be.

[Ludi]

It is a good thing that they were, since this lead to advancements, that kept them from running out of food.

In a way it hasn't been such a good thing, because the "advancements" of the Green Revolution gave us a population in overshoot, which we won't be able to support without cheap and abundant energy, and continued efforts to support this enormous population will damage our long-term chances at survival as a species.

Stable populations don't run out of food. We might want to be more concerned with achieving a stable population than with feeding a growing one.



http://www.ishmael.org/Education/Writin ... tate.shtml

[deMolay]

This is a very simple argument to settle. For those who are not farmers here, go to your nearest commercial big farmer and ask him what his food production currently is, with all the oil related inputs. Herbicides, Pesticides, Fertilizer, Diesel Fuel, Mechanization. Ask him what it would be without all of the above inputs to his operation. You will get an eye opener.

[wisconsin_cur]

You are correct Ludi, from that perspective it has not been "progress" but a matter of delaying the day of reckoning. I would say that a healthy fear but without an appreciation for limits lead us to this place and time. What we need is both fear and an appreciation of limits to create responsible alternatives.

My main point with oily is that the fear he mocks has been the catalyst for the increased abundance that he uncritically embraces. He has benefited from the fear he mocks and will suffer deprivation from the limits he ignores.

[Ludi]

What we need is both fear and an appreciation of limits to create responsible alternatives.

100% agree.

What Oilfinder seems to be saying in many of his posts is "there have never been limits before, therefore we need never seriously consider limits."

[Quinny]

IMO the thread is stating the obvious.

I really don't understand why OF finds the time to visit this site and post so often. It's a bit like me going to the Young Conservatives or BNP just so I can give an alternative viewpoint.

Having said that - I do go to my local pubs and end up regularly arguing against racists - but then again PO.com doesn't sell beer!