Peak Oil & Climate Change (merged)

by **AgentR** » Fri 13 Feb 2009, 15:21:13

I think you might be laboring under the mistaken impression that if we stop producing CO2 from fossil fuels that (A)GW will stop.

It won't.

There is no science to suggest anything more than a moderation of the effect.

In contrast we have decades of oil left and more than enough inclination to level every mountaintop full of coal that exists. We're gonna burn it all.

Peak Oil can make the GW problem much worse simply because people will use less and less efficient sources of energy to keep the game rolling just a little bit longer.

by **TheDude** » Fri 13 Feb 2009, 15:40:44

Kjell Aleklett has suggested, or pointed out I should say, that the expectations for FF reserves built into many of the climate models are very much on the high side: Global warming exaggerated, insufficient oil, natural gas and coal | Energy Bulletin.

I agree with him, but we're living with a changing climate at the moment nonetheless. I'm more concerned about the possibility of deindustrialization leading to decreased global dimming, yielding full fanged climate change. This is an angle I haven't seen examined in detail yet. Perhaps all those Chinese factories closing will bring some new data.

by **Tanada** » Mon 25 May 2009, 03:05:43

Discovery Channel wrote:May 11, 2009 -- Forget peak oil -- a series of new estimates of the world's coal supply suggests reserves may be vastly overestimated, and if the planet isn't running on a majority of alternative energies within the next few decades, we could be facing an unprecedented global energy crisis.

On the flip side, a dwindling supply of coal could also throw the breaks on global warming, some argue.

Common knowledge about coal is that major producing nations like China, the United States and Australia, have enough to last hundreds of years, far beyond the reach of oil, which may already be in its twilight years. But worldwide coal production could plateau as early as 2025, according to one new estimate, and a growing group of scientists are concerned that fossil fuel supplies may begin dwindling by mid-century.

From LINK

by **rattleshirt** » Fri 29 May 2009, 13:46:54

Tanada- I hope they(IEA) are as wrong about the timing of the coal peak as they seem to be about the oil peak. Then just maybe we have a chance of some places staying decent.

by **Bas** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:21:50

and some candy for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSkx34M3XtY

by **Tanada** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:27:21

I picked climate change because I think power down or reduce/reuse/recycle will gets us through PO to the less well lit but still livable world. Climate Change on the other hand is the 900 pound Gorilla that is gonna kick out civilization into itsy bitsy bits if we keep poking it with sticks like GH gasses and particulate pollution.

by **bratticus** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:37:14

Bas wrote:and some candy for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSkx34M3XtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08Zc17YQzdk

by **bratticus** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:44:16

BTW when you go on Global Warming forum sites are they full of Peak Oil loudmouths or is it just the other way around?

by **Bas** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:52:11

What can I say but America.......tries to be hopelesly behind with the rest of the world.

by **eastbay** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 20:58:06

Interesting too Bas is the rest of the world strives so hard to emulate the USA. Cities across the globe appear pretty much the same these days as cities across the USA.

Fascinating.

by **Bas** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 21:01:13

no Eastbay, it is the US that still tries to emulate oldstyle European politics while thats obsolete everywhere but in the US.

by **hardtootell-2** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 21:54:29

Tanada wrote:I picked climate change because I think power down or reduce/reuse/recycle will gets us through PO to the less well lit but still livable world. Climate Change on the other hand is the 900 pound Gorilla that is gonna kick out civilization into itsy bitsy bits if we keep poking it with sticks like GH gasses and particulate pollution.

You could be right. On the other hand wild cards such as middle eastern war could easily and quite likely endanger our energy/food security with a rapid onset and generations long duration.
In an area of increasing population, dwindling resources, generations of hatred and lotsa arms...

I agree that climate change has the potential to really decimate A LOT of species, including our own. Just the rise in sea levels will lead to inevitable conflict (see above). Climate change is scary because it is so hard to deal with. Even if one is wealthy, a worldwide drought or a series of Katrina like hurricanes can really upset the order of things.

by **mark** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 23:22:20

Climate change is a hoax. pay attention to the science, not the hype. Peak oil is a symptom... figure out what and you'll have answered one of life's biggest questions. We'll all be the better for it, eventually.

by **eastbay** » Fri 10 Jul 2009, 23:28:54

Bas wrote:no Eastbay, it is the US that still tries to emulate oldstyle European politics while thats obsolete everywhere but in the US.

Not in any places I've lived. The world is becoming more and more USA like all the time. Everywhere ya go it's US TV, US products, US sports, US this and US that. Even nearly universal support for US wars!!!

The primary US accent is preferred too. I see no one here copying anything political, social, cultural, or commercial from Europe.

by **essex** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 04:50:54

mark wrote:Climate change is a hoax. pay attention to the science, not the hype. Peak oil is a symptom... figure out what and you'll have answered one of life's biggest questions. We'll all be the better for it, eventually.

Amen to that. Warmism like the fascism and communism that preceeded it will have its brief day in the sun.

by **Arthur75** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 05:00:41

Voted peak oil, quite clear to me

As for AGW, whether a hoax or not, one thing for sure is that we are doing much more harm to the environment independently of it (for species extinction for instance), will peak oil make the matter worse or better ? Not sure ...

by **vtsnowedin** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 07:27:42

No vote from me. The real choice should be the human population. Oil is just a resource. Eliminate the people problem and there would be no need for any oil. Climate change is a worry because it has the potential to reduce our resources, both food water and biodiversity. Remove the people problem and a changing climate will effect no one and people will certainly stop contributing whatever factors they have been to the problem.
Nope people are the problem. Climate change and or peak oil will be what fixes the people problem in ways that we aren't going to like very much.

by **Daniel_Plainview** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 09:23:26

Re: What is more urgent, Climate Change or Peak Oil?

The key word is "urgent." Peak oil is more urgent because it's ~99% likely that PO will cause significant die-off within a few decades; whereas AGW is far less certain both as to time frame and magnitude.

by **bratticus** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 10:37:37

Alien invasion is more urgent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Spr5YFfrnA0

by **Ludi** » Sat 11 Jul 2009, 10:46:39

vtsnowedin wrote: Remove the people problem and a changing climate will effect no one

That's right, if there aren't any people, no people will be affected by climate change.

Same with peak oil. No people, no peak oil problem.

Get rid of people, all problems solved.