[cipi604]

I don't know where to put this subject so I try here.

We have an article : http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-energy24-2009oct24,0,3902427.story

and I whould like to have some thoughts about it.

Obama says U.S. must win clean-energy race

Reporting from Washington - President Obama, citing a global competition for development of clean-energy alternatives to oil, insisted today that the United States must win that race and called on Congress to enact legislation also intended to curb climate change.

"The nation that wins this competition is going to be the nation that leads the world ," Obama told an audience at one of the nation's premier research universities in Massachusetts. "And I want America to be that nation -- it's that simple."

Obama praised "a legacy of innovation" that "taps into something that is essential about America."

The word clean. You can have clean energy in our way of doing things, but a clean civilisation not. Clean civilisation today is an oxymoron. If we really mean clean , we have to scrap pretty much of the industry, and I don't think women will want that.

This civilisation is a totally waste of time and resources. We're not smart enough. It will happen in the future to think different, but not before we go into the road to Olduvai gorge.

Leads... now if you think more about it, why does always the president of USA says that the world needs a Leader, that the world needs USA to lead the world?! Just because Obama wants it? He's not my president, and I don't want that the world to have a leader. We almost had one , Hitler.

IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. If it was that simple mister president, every idiot on this planet whould be a scientist, or an engineer and whould innovate the heck out of those damn atoms out there. But we are just a few because it is HARD, and because not even those who we call smart are not yet smart enough to understand that any technical fix into the future is not the solution. We don't have a just in time solution for this one, at least not technical, plus that this civilization doesn't need a bail out, let it fail!

It is essential for America to change the way things are going now , because if we had enough oil or an oil equivalent, soylent green whould be the menu of the day.

If anyone around here still believes that we can handle peak-oil like the flu H1N1 just because our leaders say so, it's going to ride the train of horror.

This is the real thing. We won't have a bumpy plateau, but a steep decline like Cantarell, technology helps suck it faster, and people on top of it fight like ants.

Under 60mbpd , maybe as soon as 2015 our main problem will be, what we eat?! It's that simple.

So I wish good luck to ya all! ...and do what the president tells you.

[mos6507]

Geez, if Obama upsets you, I can only imagine how you'd be reacting with McCain and Palin drilling, baby, drilling.

[cipi604]

Geez, if Obama upsets you, I can only imagine how you'd be reacting with McCain and Palin drilling, baby, drilling.

lol

[eastbay]

Geez, if Obama upsets you, I can only imagine how you'd be reacting with McCain and Palin drilling, baby, drilling.

+1 Funny stuff mos.

[cephalotus]

The word clean. You can have clean energy in our way of doing things, but a clean civilisation not. Clean civilisation today is an oxymoron. If we really mean clean , we have to scrap pretty much of the industry,...

cradle to cradle
from M. Braungart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_to_Cradle

[Arthur75]

cradle to cradle
from M. Braungart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_to_Cradle

But such perfect close loops are effectively impossible to realize, we always increase the entropy, take iron ore for instance, not only do you most often need new ore in order to make quality steel (most recycled one goes into reinforced concrete rebars), but also quite a lot of it goes away (is dispersed) as rust every year (forgot the figure but far from negligible)

[Arthur75]

True. But at least it would (could? maybe could?) allow us extend the party, depopulate to a reasonable level, and develop a lighter footprint on the planet.

Yes we for sure have quite a big margin and optimizations possible (if we are not in a kind of explosion at geological time scale), let's see !

[davep]

cradle to cradle
from M. Braungart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_to_Cradle

But such perfect close loops are effectively impossible to realize, we always increase the entropy, take iron ore for instance, not only do you most often need new ore in order to make quality steel (most recycled one goes into reinforced concrete rebars), but also quite a lot of it goes away as rust every year (forgot the figure but far from negligible)

True. But at least it would (could? maybe could?) allow us extend the party, depopulate to a reasonable level, and develop a lighter footprint on the planet.

Do stop banging on about depopulation, please. Who is using all the oil? It's not the masses in Africa.

[yesplease]

But such perfect close loops are effectively impossible to realize, we always increase the entropy, take iron ore for instance, not only do you most often need new ore in order to make quality steel (most recycled one goes into reinforced concrete rebars), but also quite a lot of it goes away (is dispersed) as rust every year (forgot the figure but far from negligible)

Do you have any sources for those statements?

[Pretorian]

cradle to cradle
from M. Braungart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cradle_to_Cradle

But such perfect close loops are effectively impossible to realize, we always increase the entropy, take iron ore for instance, not only do you most often need new ore in order to make quality steel (most recycled one goes into reinforced concrete rebars), but also quite a lot of it goes away as rust every year (forgot the figure but far from negligible)

True. But at least it would (could? maybe could?) allow us extend the party, depopulate to a reasonable level, and develop a lighter footprint on the planet.

Do stop banging on about depopulation, please. Who is using all the oil? It's not the masses in Africa.

whats oil got to do with it? There are no other damage from overpopulation aside of oil consumption?

[Arthur75]

But such perfect close loops are effectively impossible to realize, we always increase the entropy, take iron ore for instance, not only do you most often need new ore in order to make quality steel (most recycled one goes into reinforced concrete rebars), but also quite a lot of it goes away (is dispersed) as rust every year (forgot the figure but far from negligible)

Do you have any sources for those statements?

On the steel and iron ore aspects, got that from a guy working in the industry, looking for sources on the web, it looks like he might have been a bit negative (but most sources come from the steel industry ), basically the point is that there are many different steel alloys, so that to master the process and alloy you want to get, you often need to start with new ore, the case for many parts in cars for instance, but for quite a lot of usage this isn't so important (rebars or cans for instance), so that steel remains one of the most recycled material.

About rust, cannot find a source either !

[mos6507]

Do stop banging on about depopulation, please. Who is using all the oil? It's not the masses in Africa.

Carrying capacity involves more than just oil.

[davep]

Do stop banging on about depopulation, please. Who is using all the oil? It's not the masses in Africa.

Carrying capacity involves more than just oil.

But our current phantom carrying capacity is the preserve of fossil fuels, is it not?

[rangerone314]

Under 60mbpd , maybe as soon as 2015 our main problem will be, what we eat?! It's that simple.

So I wish good luck to ya all! ...and do what the president tells you.

I dunno... eating...

How many gallons of gasoline/diesal does the average farmer in the US use per acre per year, and how many acres are farmed?

Someone on here quoted a 8.5 gallon or such per acre per year, but I can't vouch for how accurate or inaccurate that may be.

Divide that by 365. I don't think we'll be seeing a really high number.