Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6547 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:26 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Just one tiny example of the real world effects of your original analogy about pen to computers can be seen in the large number of skilled craftsmen who worked in the printing industry whose trades were eliminated between 197x and 199x.
Their crafts, perhaps 8 or 10 or more steps in the process were replaced by computers and direct to plate printing. That was on the upslope and though some were able to transition to the new process, most simply had to find something else to do or they were lucky enough to retire.
The deal is that on the down slope there will be a huge loss of jobs across the entire economic spectrum and though there will be jobs in new technologies the fact is the economy will necessarily be smaller and the jobs fewer. It doesn’t take a college degree to realize each of those truck drivers who haul January tomatoes aren’t going to have the same disposable income when they are hoeing weeds in a tomato field. Spread that same effect across the entire GDP and you get an idea of where I am going.
And that is in the rich world.
Don’t get me wrong, we own a small farm where we raise cattle on grass, grow and store lots of our own food and could probably grow much more than we could eat. We don’t work at any other steady job and none more than a mile or 2 distant. Our life would get tough with no outside infrastructure whatsoever but we could get by; something not many can say.
I agree that here in the rich world most will probably get by through employing those things you mention and many more, but dealing with the unforseen consequences will be the tough part.
Just ask my son-in-law still in Iraq… _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:28 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
It's "Jevons Paradox" and it's the darling of the doomers. It's become their one hope in totally bumming themselves out.
But I don't think it holds. It makes an assumption of no decrease in the commodity in question. Simply says that if devices become more efficient then people will use those devices more.
Add in the decreasing supply of petroleum and Jevons falls on his butt. More efficient devices will mean that we can continue to use our devices as much (or almost as much) as we did before and not drain our wallets too fast.
--
Refrigerators. I'm off the grid, have been for ~18 years. I've been paying a lot of attention to refrigerator technology as it's my largest electricity draw.
About 15 years ago I looked for the most efficient refrigerator (aside from Sun Frost) that I could find. It was a 9 cu.ft. Sanyo. When I built my new house I replaced it with an 18 cu.ft. Kenmore.
Both pull about 1.2 kW on a hot day. That's a 2x improvement in efficiency in a decade.
Will people continue to maintain that rusty old inefficient refer in the garage where they keep an extra six pack or two?
Most likely not.
Will their lifestyle crash and burn? Will they riot in the streets? Will there be massive human die off during Superbowls?
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
"Just one tiny example of the real world effects of your original analogy about pen to computers can be seen in the large number of skilled craftsmen who worked in the printing industry whose trades were eliminated between 197x and 199x.
Their crafts, perhaps 8 or 10 or more steps in the process were replaced by computers and direct to plate printing. That was on the upslope and though some were able to transition to the new process, most simply had to find something else to do or they were lucky enough to retire."
And lots of middle manager and secretarial/clerk jobs disappeared at the same time due to the switch to computers.
How many good paying IT jobs were created at the same time?
I'm not suggesting that the transition will be painless. It will be incredibly painful for some people, even fatal, no doubt.
Do we have a choice with oil production on the decline and the globe heating up (and the air becoming worse)?
Don't think so.
Should we bury our heads in the sand or concentrate on the worst possible outcome?
Can't see the sense in that. Better to get busy softening our fall as much as possible and making a better future for those who will follow us.
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6547 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:30 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
BobWallace wrote:
How many good paying IT jobs were created at the same time?
Yea, a few guys I went to school with in the 70s got in with Apple, HP, Intel, etc and did great. I know of no one of the 40-50 year-old breadwinners who lost their jobs in the printing business during that time who did - though a rare few with good bosses were able to transition to the new processes.
Those folks were highly skilled, with a long time on the job and I doubt more than a small percentage ever regained the income they lost. And again that was during historical low oil prices and with a booming economy.
BobWallace wrote:
I'm not suggesting that the transition will be painless. It will be incredibly painful for some people, even fatal, no doubt.
So I guess this is just a rail against Jeavon and Doomerism in general, that’s cool. In my mind Jeavon works in my favor as folks start thinking about GW and PO they may keep the price lower than it might have been and since we are attempting to power down our own Little Bitty it only helps us.
As far as doom goes, I really have no idea except the economy and the population seems bound to shrink so we are trying to distance ourselves from both to the extent possible.
Just how that plays out is anyone's guess so I don't blame folks for going with what their gut tells them. At any rate it is going to be very interesting. _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 3372 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 1:28 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Hi Bob, read some of your comments at the Oil Drum topic ...To Grandmother's House We Go: Peak Oil Is Here. You'll get much more of a hearing there for anything in the realm of optimistic; I see someone has brought up Jevon's Paradox, now read up on Carrying Capacity, which the most prolific poster here insists means we either reduce our numbers voluntarily, or starve. Lack of fertilizer will simply mean less food, no two ways around it - in his estimation.
Like you I believe there are viable solutions to solving that, but I'm also not a number cruncher (neither are you are by your admission) and aren't cut out to debate how many watts of extra grid capacity we'll need, etc. Wouldn't advise going into the fray without some of that at your disposal - there are some here who do, and they butt heads with the Doomists big time. Best just to take it all in and form your own opinions/prognostications. _________________ Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
I will not abide another toe.
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6547 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 2:37 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
TheDude wrote:
You'll get much more of a hearing there for anything in the realm of optimistic;
I don’t know Dude, it seems to me there are lots of optimistic though aware folks around here.
Simply because some of us aren’t of the number-crunching/ new-technology-will-fix-us ilk and are learning to use the skills we have in the face of a problem with unforeseeable consequences doesn’t make us all hostile to the topic at hand.
Granted there are a few around here that ride their pale hobby horse into the ground but by and large it seems there is more in the way of doing something about PO here than at any other PO related site I have visited; notwithstanding how many times someone posts the same argument about pond scum and such.
Talk about when and how bad and what someone else might do are only flagellation after all.
Talk about what I did and how it worked seem more the order of the day, but that is just me. _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12497 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:14 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
BobWallace wrote:
Should we bury our heads in the sand or concentrate on the worst possible outcome?
Can't see the sense in that. Better to get busy softening our fall as much as possible and making a better future for those who will follow us.
You're preachin' to the choir, Bob.
However
Some of us lean toward the doomeristic because we don't see anyone besides ourselves "getting busy softening our fall." _________________ No original ideas are contained in this post.
Joined: Dec 11, 2005 Posts: 430 Location: albuquerque
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:59 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Quote:
The problem will be that, unlike in the old days, we are/will be way over carrying capacity for non-industrial agriculture without fossil fuel supports. And coal will quickly become less than 1 for EROEI if you can't use giant earth-moving equipment to level mountain tops.
supporting article.
Quote:
Coal miners consume millions of gallons of diesel annually to run their mining equipment. If the price of oil and petroleum products rises significantly, companies will face millions of dollars in added costs.
Peabody, based in St. Louis, consumes about 105 million gallons of diesel annually, according to its quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in August.
Massey has said it consumes about 55 million gallons of diesel each year.
"It's not how you get into these things that counts, it's how you get out of them that matters."
Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 3372 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:30 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Pops wrote:
TheDude wrote:
You'll get much more of a hearing there for anything in the realm of optimistic;
I don’t know Dude, it seems to me there are lots of optimistic though aware folks around here.
Not denying they're here, it's just I don't think they have much of a voice.
Quote:
Simply because some of us aren’t of the number-crunching/ new-technology-will-fix-us ilk and are learning to use the skills we have in the face of a problem with unforeseeable consequences doesn’t make us all hostile to the topic at hand.
My take is that the Oil Drum (TOD) gives more of a voice to macro-scale solutions to our problems; rarely do I hear talk about personal planning like you get here, they're more into building wind/solar/light rail. I think the economics discussions here are excellent and quite enlightening; if only I knew something about finances! And as I'm intimating, the threads on personal planning are solid stuff.
But we have a very vocal contingent here who are quite committed to Doom. Look at the reaction Graeme gets to every post he makes announcing some new breakthrough, or any contribution that's remotely optimistic or suggest ways of mitigating declining energy.
Quote:
Granted there are a few around here that ride their pale hobby horse into the ground but by and large it seems there is more in the way of doing something about PO here than at any other PO related site I have visited; notwithstanding how many times someone posts the same argument about pond scum and such.
My wish is that things were a bit more balanced. The forum format is better than a blog like TOD for specific inquiry; I think we could use a few more subdivisions, perhaps a forum for planning on the large scale. I'm with Zardoz for opening a Tinfoil CT forum too - see them elsewhere. We have two monstrous 9/11 topics, after all.
Quote:
Talk about when and how bad and what someone else might do are only flagellation after all.
It's almost a bizarre new take on creative writing.
Quote:
Talk about what I did and how it worked seem more the order of the day, but that is just me.
With ya there. "Walden III, by Pops." _________________ Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
I will not abide another toe.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
"Lack of fertilizer due to peak oi..."
"Several factors mitigate the threat peak oil poses to fertilizer production. The first is simply that the relevant peak is not oil, but natural gas. Natural gas production will also peak, but the peak is generally thought to come about 10 years after the oil peak (see e.g., here which buys us some time. Second, hydrogen does not have to come from reformed fossil fuels at all. Hydrogen can be made by electrolyzing water, using electricity from the greenest of sources, like wind or solar."
"Most potassium (K) is recovered from underground deposits of soluble minerals, in combination with either the chloride or sulphate ion."
We've got a problem with rock phosphate supplies dwindling, but that's aside from PO. We may have to look to other sources, oil or not.
Bone meal is a good source of phosphate for agriculture but we would have to change the way we process waste bones. At the moment we're "cooking" them to get out the maximum amount of usable material. We might have to divert some of the stuff from the pet food route and into our soil.
(Enough bone meal available? Don't know. Rock potassium is yet another peak substance problem that is looking us in the eye._
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6547 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:18 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
We agree for the most part Dude. To be honest as far as macro solutions - or analysis either for that matter, I have a hard enough time getting my little brain around what is gonna happen on, and what to do about, my little farm; let alone the entire globe!
I have come to view those who shoot down any news or arguments of partial solutions like Bob here is presenting the same as I see those who maintain the status will be at least quo, if not better, simply because that is what we have always experienced. Especially when those same folks don’t seem to be doing anything but typing.
Anyway, sorry Bob, I’m not really sure what the topic of the thread is but I am way off from the topic of the forum so I am gonna hush!
_________________ Make a plan and work it:
Joined: Mar 12, 2007 Posts: 1004 Location: As close as I can get to the beginning of the pipe.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:40 am Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Pops wrote:
I have come to view those who shoot down any news or arguments of partial solutions like Bob here is presenting the same as I see those who maintain the status will be at least quo, if not better, simply because that is what we have always experienced. Especially when those same folks don’t seem to be doing anything but typing.
I will use Pops' comment as an opening to apologize to Bob for being a bit pissy in my confrontational opening statements in this thread. It is not my typical style; I truly believed that this might be the aforesaid "friend" who is extremely buttheaded about the topic of peak oil, to the point of maybe not being a friend anymore. You are much more aware, Bob, and are clearly doing a bunch of cool things about it. Lo siento, senor.
Joined: Nov 08, 2005 Posts: 261 Location: The Maple State
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:07 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
Quote:
It's "Jevons Paradox" and it's the darling of the doomers. It's become their one hope in totally bumming themselves out.
But I don't think it holds. It makes an assumption of no decrease in the commodity in question. Simply says that if devices become more efficient then people will use those devices more.
Add in the decreasing supply of petroleum and Jevons falls on his butt.
Yes the problem of Jevons Paradox regarding energy use with increased efficiency can be ignored because of the disaster of Peak Oil.
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: The Laws of Thermodynamics - Chatting after the lecture.
BobWallace wrote:
"Lack of fertilizer due to peak oi..."
"Several factors mitigate the threat peak oil poses to fertilizer production. The first is simply that the relevant peak is not oil, but natural gas. Natural gas production will also peak, but the peak is generally thought to come about 10 years after the oil peak (see e.g., here which buys us some time. Second, hydrogen does not have to come from reformed fossil fuels at all. Hydrogen can be made by electrolyzing water, using electricity from the greenest of sources, like wind or solar."
"Most potassium (K) is recovered from underground deposits of soluble minerals, in combination with either the chloride or sulphate ion."
We've got a problem with rock phosphate supplies dwindling, but that's aside from PO. We may have to look to other sources, oil or not.
Bone meal is a good source of phosphate for agriculture but we would have to change the way we process waste bones. At the moment we're "cooking" them to get out the maximum amount of usable material. We might have to divert some of the stuff from the pet food route and into our soil.
(Enough bone meal available? Don't know. Rock potassium is yet another peak substance problem that is looking us in the eye._
The best source for both of these is the bedrock and the soil. After all, that's where it came from before industrial ag took over.
The process would be long without the use of dynamic accumulators (plants that do the equivalent for other minerals that legumes do for nitrogen). Composting and or mulching with these (generally) taprooted plants enables you to get the minerals where they're needed without having to rely on external sources.
It just takes a few years to improve degraded soils. So get moving...
I do wish people would stop blathering on about peak resources for ag. There are sustainable intensive techniques that can deal with it, not all of them being labour intensive to maintain. _________________ All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think we become. - Buddha
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
