Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Fri 18 May 2012, 14:41:59

How is what Kunstler describes not globalism? Is the internet on for .1%? In every region of importance? 2 Ticks? A Ship comes by once in a while, or a train? With goodies from faraway lands? 2 more Ticks? Globalism.

Whatever happens to the planet, or the rest of humanity.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby ralfy » Fri 18 May 2012, 15:44:11

SeaGypsy wrote:
The gamers' if giving thought to the consequences; imagine their great grandkids living under a giant plexiglass solar collecter wizz bang unity networked supercomputer protoplasm world, with the rest of the world resembling a damp and poisonous version of Mars, think "Oh well, that's kinda cool!"

Meanwhile electricity based modules are going to dominate many aspects of the global economy, well beyond oil. With resource flexibility and all the billions going into carbon capture/ (recycle re-burn via algae emerges strongly at this point), the cards have essentially been shown.

After oil, the next seriously key resources are metals associated with electricity capture, storage and transfer. The energy to run through the equipment is going to be competitive up until there may be no live coral or anything with a spine in the ocean. I'm pretty sure, at that point, we are totally FUBAR. I think the science based on calcium accumulation in mollusk and reef species indicates global ocean death in the 100 to 250 year timespan from now. It is unknown what science may be able to achieve to alleviate or mitigate any of the most drastic effects.

The most serious thinkers seem to be suggesting nukes are the only backstop energy with a miniscule carbon footprint by comparison to any alternative, which may buy us enough time to sidestep absolute global disaster by carbonification of oceans and air.

Amazingly, central Australia may turn once again into a forest full of rivers.... mmmm....


Martenson discussed this idea in his video lecture, and I recall one report (probably mentioned in Energy Bulletin) that assessed the idea of business as usual with various sources of energy, and from what I gathered, the likely scenario is that we will use various sources of energy to survive, but it will not allow us to maintain the current global economy, which needs oil, either for most operations or as a start up.

There are many factors to consider. For example, for nuclear power, I think Martenson states that just to meet two-thirds of U.S. energy demands using nuclear power, one will need something like the total number of reactors worldwide. And that's just to meet two-thirds of the energy needs of less than 5 pct of the world's population. Of course, there should be various ways to lower energy and resource costs, but one should balance them with all sorts of problems that will crop up. This is important, as we did not do such when we started using oil.

Perhaps what's more logical is to look at something like ecological footprint and biocapacity, which considers resources in general:

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... _footprint

With that, we can argue that our ave. global footprint is around 2.7 global hectares per capita but our biocapacity is only around 1.8 global hectares, which means we are in overshoot. What makes matters worse is that the 1.8 figure was based on a population of 6 billion. An increasing population will lower per capita biocapacity. Pollution and climate change will lower that biocapacity further.

In addition, it's possible that the ave. global footprint will have to remain the same or even go up, which makes the deficit worse.

If we assume that an amount of time (not to mention significant levels of global coordination) will be needed to move from an oil-based to an electricity (and other)-based economy as well as oil and other resources needed for other sources of energy, then we'll probably need something like two decades to make that possible. If we want economic growth to continue, and given the need to create a buffer against various black swans (like war, the effects of climate change, epidemics, etc.), then we will require the equivalent of one Saudi Arabia every seven years or so.

Finally, given that this is a global endeavor (as it involves a global economy) and will likely involve the same corporations, governments, and military forces that have been operating the last few decades, then we should probably see how we did the last five decades or so and see the next five in light of that.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4796
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Fri 18 May 2012, 18:21:40

ralfy wrote:Martenson discussed this idea in his video lecture, and I recall one report (probably mentioned in Energy Bulletin) that assessed the idea of business as usual with various sources of energy, and from what I gathered, the likely scenario is that we will use various sources of energy to survive, but it will not allow us to maintain the current global economy, which needs oil, either for most operations or as a start up.

There are many factors to consider. For example, for nuclear power, I think Martenson states that just to meet two-thirds of U.S. energy demands using nuclear power, one will need something like the total number of reactors worldwide. And that's just to meet two-thirds of the energy needs of less than 5 pct of the world's population. Of course, there should be various ways to lower energy and resource costs, but one should balance them with all sorts of problems that will crop up. This is important, as we did not do such when we started using oil.

If we assume that an amount of time (not to mention significant levels of global coordination) will be needed to move from an oil-based to an electricity (and other)-based economy as well as oil and other resources needed for other sources of energy, then we'll probably need something like two decades to make that possible.



Your first quote of Martenson does not undo my argument. Do I have to keep saying I am not talking about 'continued growth/ BAU' but about the existence of an economic continuum only? The second part is an obvious component of mainstream discussion.

The bolded paragraph shows what you and many others are missing.
The reason electric has to be the dominant component is that it is redundant/ already in place. We don't have to do anything to make what is already there possible.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 19 May 2012, 02:49:56

SeaGypsy wrote:
Your first quote of Martenson does not undo my argument. Do I have to keep saying I am not talking about 'continued growth/ BAU' but about the existence of an economic continuum only? The second part is an obvious component of mainstream discussion.



That is my impression taken from this post:

peak-what-the-future-is-electric-t64898.html#p1117237

That is, rather than a "rapture by mass starvation" we will have a "neo-eco- renaissance society." In short, BAU by other means.

My apologies if you meant something else, but I always saw "Renaissance" in light of the rise of science and technology coupled with industrialization that followed in Western history.

I don't see the second part as a component of "mainstream discussion," as I don't see such discussions in mainstream news and commentaries, only the belief that we need more nukes, that they can easily replace oil, and that no additional problems will arise from such.


The bolded paragraph shows what you and many others are missing.
The reason electric has to be the dominant component is that it is redundant/ already in place. We don't have to do anything to make what is already there possible.


Now, that's part of mainstream discussion, i.e., the magic of electricity, i.e., it is "already in place" and we can easily use it, never mind the fact that electricity isn't a source of energy and still involves various resources. Never mind lag time, the need for coordination, and other problems. We can easily solve those in our imagination.

With that, I'd like to think that I and others aren't missing anything. If any, we're actually adding to your thread what is missing.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4796
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sat 19 May 2012, 03:25:51

Maybe we aren't really arguing, just speculating consequences of commonly held perceptions of reality. I am speculating the end of global fiscal sharing, but reinforcement of global fiscal trade and block distribution. In other words, the world splitting rapidly into a have and have not situation. Where have not is Mad Max/ Somalia/ Isolation from the rule of law etc. Where have is like industrial China.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 21 May 2012, 10:18:42

I think "have and have not" will take place internally rather than externally. That is, various armed groups will take control of regions, preying on civilians, both locally and abroad.

In this case, the Chinese government has managed to control its population for several decades through draconian means, but now more are demanding better conditions, leading to increased consumer spending. This in turn has prompted greater pressure to take control of resources in other countries through financial means. Meanwhile, the military is becoming stronger, and may soon turn on the population if unrest grows stronger. The government, meanwhile, has to ensure that the military will not turn on such, even as it borrows and spends more to appease the population.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4796
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby Pops » Mon 21 May 2012, 13:12:32

ralfy wrote:I think "have and have not" will take place internally rather than externally. That is, various armed groups will take control of regions, preying on civilians, both locally and abroad.

Ralfy, I usually agree with most of your posts but I disagree with the regression to armed tribes theory in the US – if that is what you meant. I know, armed (whatever) is a pretty dominant theme in the American psyche but the reality is usually more mundane law and order or at worst, oppression. Whenever there is a ownership interest present, there is usually a formal peace keeper of some kind. It's been that way right across the country since the beginning, as soon as there is any sort of community there is a LEO and rudimentary justice system. Granted the LEO ain't always Marshal Dillon, sometimes he's Little Bill or worse, Boss Hog, but still, we just don't have much of a tradition of "armed groups" running things for any significant period.

And I think that is a big part of the reason I agree for the most part that Business will continue, as it pretty well has since before memory. The new Usual will be just as usual as it ever was because we all have have a tendency to ignore the changes right in front of our nose and pretend everything is usual until the unusual can be christened the "Good Old Days".

Take the labor force participation for example, it's lower than it's been in 30 years and continuing down, older workers are working longer and middle aged workers aren't, to me this seems like a big deal but it gets little attention and in fact papered over with terms like "long term unemployment".

Image

I know there is an ongoing fantasy that the left is going to come try to take the guns and property of the God fearing and there'll be this big showdown (or the race war/secession/MadMax Gas War/etc) but the boiled frog says different. What is happening right in front of our eyes is simply percieved as usual right up to the point it can no longer be ignored.
If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.
-- Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 17642
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby Revi » Mon 21 May 2012, 13:24:34

I think the future is electric, but just for a small percentage of the population. Most of the rest of us will be sitting in the dark. There will be enclaves of people living a late 20th century existence, but there will also be a lot of areas like Detroit, where industries flourished in the 20th century, but died and are still marginally inhabited. I heard someone talking about a town here in Maine that used to have shoe manufacturing, a paper mill and other industries, and now has none of them. The place is hanging by a thread. That's very typical for a lot of places in the US nowadays.
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby Timo » Mon 21 May 2012, 13:32:54

Pops wrote:
ralfy wrote:I think "have and have not" will take place internally rather than externally. That is, various armed groups will take control of regions, preying on civilians, both locally and abroad.

Ralfy, I usually agree with most of your posts but I disagree with the regression to armed tribes theory in the US – if that is what you meant. I know, armed (whatever) is a pretty dominant theme in the American psyche but the reality is usually more mundane law and order or at worst, oppression. Whenever there is a ownership interest present, there is usually a formal peace keeper of some kind. It's been that way right across the country since the beginning, as soon as there is any sort of community there is a LEO and rudimentary justice system. Granted the LEO ain't always Marshal Dillon, sometimes he's Little Bill or worse, Boss Hog, but still, we just don't have much of a tradition of "armed groups" running things for any significant period.


Pops, sing the US National Anthem and ask yourself if you still feel the same way. The National Anthem of this country is predicated on military struggle and military might. This nation was founded on that principle. Factor in the NRA, Stand Your Ground, gun rights paranoia, and the vast arrays of political extremism going on now in this country, i honestly don't see Ralfy vision as going overboard at all. I hope you're right, and he/she's wrong (sorry Ralfy), but in my book, all bets on the future of this world are off when we're faced with any number of potential economic cataclysms. Along those lines, one of my professors in college (the history of North America, from the city planners perspective) told us that the US would eventually break apart. Those states that can support their citizenry, in terms of education, health care, food, shelter, job security, etc... will become destinations for the rest of the nation who's citizens want hose personal benifits for themselves. In order to preserve those qualities, those states will have to close their borders, just like what we're doing now with Mexico. Some states will have too much dead weight with unemployed, malnourished, ill-health, welfare-dependent, etc... and will choose to export that weight to other states to relieve themselves of that burden. I'll refer back to that standard, tired old cliche about not happening in my lifetime. Well, i sure hope not, but the way things are going, maybe.
Timo
 

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby Pops » Mon 21 May 2012, 14:53:45

Could be Timo, you make a good argument. I certainly have no crystal ball but I've planned for the worst as best I can (including a scenario like you imagine) so I can only hope for the best at this point.

I have no doubt that there are certain factions who might like to have secession as an excuse to do a little bit of house cleaning but the main problem (for them) is that they aren't a contiguous unit - the differences in ideology are at the boundaries of the weakest political units, cities and counties, not states. It is conceivable that my county in SW MO might join forces with equally poor and inbred areas of the surrounding states to some end but I'm not sure what.

I think the larger roadblock to the coalescing of separatists is – as was said upthread, there is not simply one problem. So where you might flee to escape GW may be a different place than if you are running from PO and that may be a different place altogether than where you might run if you are an economic refugee. Of course as time goes by those problems and others will combine and coalesce and express into who knows what form so I'm not sure there will ever be a clear choice of a have and have-not region for any length of time.

Just as really closing the border with Mexico right now would trap a bunch of illegals in the US who are trying to deport themselves. LOL

Intolerance is probably about the most prevalent human trait and there is no doubt many people would rather not look at anyone who is not pretty well a mirror image of themselves. It happens all the time that some larger event releases people to act out their long held hatreds using guns or machetes or clubs. It isn't that I think "ethnic cleansing" or just simple vengeful hate is below us, we're perfectly capable and as you point out it is stock in trade for many politicians and "entertainers", lots of folks in fact are probably praying for the day.

Still, I don't see the payoff at this point for a large part of the population. For them it's extend and pretend first, last and always, it's just a recession after all...
If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.
-- Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 17642
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby ralfy » Tue 22 May 2012, 02:09:01

Pops wrote:
Ralfy, I usually agree with most of your posts but I disagree with the regression to armed tribes theory in the US – if that is what you meant. I know, armed (whatever) is a pretty dominant theme in the American psyche but the reality is usually more mundane law and order or at worst, oppression. Whenever there is a ownership interest present, there is usually a formal peace keeper of some kind. It's been that way right across the country since the beginning, as soon as there is any sort of community there is a LEO and rudimentary justice system. Granted the LEO ain't always Marshal Dillon, sometimes he's Little Bill or worse, Boss Hog, but still, we just don't have much of a tradition of "armed groups" running things for any significant period.

And I think that is a big part of the reason I agree for the most part that Business will continue, as it pretty well has since before memory. The new Usual will be just as usual as it ever was because we all have have a tendency to ignore the changes right in front of our nose and pretend everything is usual until the unusual can be christened the "Good Old Days".

Take the labor force participation for example, it's lower than it's been in 30 years and continuing down, older workers are working longer and middle aged workers aren't, to me this seems like a big deal but it gets little attention and in fact papered over with terms like "long term unemployment".

Image

I know there is an ongoing fantasy that the left is going to come try to take the guns and property of the God fearing and there'll be this big showdown (or the race war/secession/MadMax Gas War/etc) but the boiled frog says different. What is happening right in front of our eyes is simply percieved as usual right up to the point it can no longer be ignored.


To add to what Timo wrote, I think what is happening in the U.S. involves control of the populace through the law and what is essentially a worthless dollar used for consumer spending (which also distracts the populace), with government and the military constrained by the vote but also propping up that dollar while large businesses sell goods purchased through credit (which they also provide), and those goods remaining cheap as long as the military and government can use various forms of power to influence or control other nations. Although it is true that more people are armed, they are also relatively helpless against better trained police and military forces, many of whom have vehicles and weapons for which small arms are useless (even as various police and military personnel obviously have loved ones who are part of these communities).

In addition to the reference to a "pysche," perhaps one can find some insight in some of the points mentioned here:

Article:

http://dont-tread-on.me/?p=4874

Video:

http://dont-tread-on.me/?p=14867

It will probably not involve large-scale riots similar to those in other countries (except maybe in a few cities), will not involve most people, and will not be the worst worldwide, but may involve just enough people to affect most.

The situation, of course, is already as bad or worse in various parts of the world, and for some, have been for decades.

In which case, we may see various forms of control (from the use of credit to appease a population, as seen increasing wages in China) to control by the military (as seen in Egypt) or various armed groups (e.g., Libya), which will at the very least make an "electric future" difficult, if not impossible.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4796
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby Pops » Tue 22 May 2012, 07:03:14

Americans I think, are very conformist (even in our pretend "individualism") and accepting of authoritarianism by any other name. We are still Puritans under our Ralph Lauren and we - especially my generation - are anti-science, magic-believing and zealously paternalistic, so an ever more authoritarian government in a constant state of one kind of war or another is almost a given.

From your link Ralfy:
I am hopeful that this collapse will actually be the beginning of something really great for mankind. With the collapse of the dollar, those that were lured into a senseless narcissistic consumer lifestyle will be forced to come to the understanding that instant gratification is not why we are put on this earth.

Projecting our wishes onto the future – remaking it in our own image sorta speak is a common malady, I'm as guilty as anyone and really try to keep it in mind when adjusting the focus on my crystal ball. Every advocate of "collapse" or US "balkanization" has at heart some version of the same ideal, which is: teaching the wayward a lesson, smiting the sinners, wasting the wasters – in short, giving Karma a helping hand. And of course, Karma is always on our side!


Oh yeah, The Future is Electric (sorry Gypsy) whatever the primary energy source (of course eventually it will be solar – as in photosynthesis) there will be some kind of economy, some kind of trade and for each generation I'd guess it will seem like BAU. What was will always seem like the Good Ol' Days and "The Future" will always be when the wayward get their comeuppance.

:lol:
If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide.
-- Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 17642
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Tue 22 May 2012, 17:43:37

Magical thinking and the 'Just God' syndrome are the main things the USA has in common with Jihadist Islam. In both systems madness prevails, paranoia and delusions of being 'in control'. I think you are correct that each generation sees it's own malady as normal.

I am pretty sure the next phase change revolves around ethics, rather than technology. A big chunk of the developed world is being put out to pasture. Productivity shifts endlessly towards lowest cost. It becomes ever harder for service based economies to balance (justify) consumption. At one extreme we have the 6 by 12 hour week common in the developing world, with $10 a day as 'living wage' and very few worker entitlements. At the other we have a culture of expectation of high consumption with inter-generational debt for the lack of actual productivity. Wages have been and will continue to level globally, in real terms. The pain of peak oil has barely begun. Americans are balking at $4 - $5 a gallon, which is ridiculous considering what is likely to happen to consumer liquid fuel prices over the next decade.
Germans are balking at having to prop up the south and most of the rest of Europe. Australia just cancelled it's international aid budget to scrape past the post of balancing the books next year, in the midst of the biggest mining boom in our history. Wealthy regions and countries are reconsidering alliances and the cost of redistributive policies. It is becoming normal to have thousands of children starving to death daily whilst being preoccupied with our own economic issues.

I think it's going to become very ordinary to be hearing about failed states and breakaway regions/ rebellions, coups. Increasingly it will become more difficult for governments to extract sufficient value from the populace to maintain essential services or their own positions. Grid based electric systems have some advantages more subtle than being able to accept multiple sources without adjustment. It's propagation serves the extractive industries (the primary source of credit) development sector (banking & building) and the requirement for economically viable citizens/ businesses to be hooked up to the grid (price control on primary productive resource).
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby ralfy » Wed 23 May 2012, 01:50:18

Pops wrote:Americans I think, are very conformist (even in our pretend "individualism") and accepting of authoritarianism by any other name. We are still Puritans under our Ralph Lauren and we - especially my generation - are anti-science, magic-believing and zealously paternalistic, so an ever more authoritarian government in a constant state of one kind of war or another is almost a given.

From your link Ralfy:
I am hopeful that this collapse will actually be the beginning of something really great for mankind. With the collapse of the dollar, those that were lured into a senseless narcissistic consumer lifestyle will be forced to come to the understanding that instant gratification is not why we are put on this earth.

Projecting our wishes onto the future – remaking it in our own image sorta speak is a common malady, I'm as guilty as anyone and really try to keep it in mind when adjusting the focus on my crystal ball. Every advocate of "collapse" or US "balkanization" has at heart some version of the same ideal, which is: teaching the wayward a lesson, smiting the sinners, wasting the wasters – in short, giving Karma a helping hand. And of course, Karma is always on our side!



I don't agree with the conclusion, and I don't think it negates the five points given.


Oh yeah, The Future is Electric (sorry Gypsy) whatever the primary energy source (of course eventually it will be solar – as in photosynthesis) there will be some kind of economy, some kind of trade and for each generation I'd guess it will seem like BAU. What was will always seem like the Good Ol' Days and "The Future" will always be when the wayward get their comeuppance.

:lol:


If "each generation" means only around 15 pct of the global population (that which earns around 10 to 20 dollars or more daily and are responsible for over 60 pct of personal consumption), then to have what "will seem like BAU" is possible. The bad news is that this minority may be relying on more of the 85 pct to spend more (a critical aspect of a global capitalist system, which is what we mean when we refer to BAU). In which case, what "will seem like BAU" will likely require, as the IEA puts it, the equivalent of one Saudi Arabia every seven years in order to maintain global economic growth.

The implication, then, is that we will certainly need more than just sources that provide electricity to have BAU or what seems like it, especially given other factors, like shortages for other resources (such as fresh water), increasing human population, and the long-term effects of climate change. In which case, future will certainly be electric (and anything else), but it won't be BAU or what appears to be the same.

And if we include more factors like incidences of greater conflict (as seen in the last few decades involving a Cold War and two global wars), the effects of three factors (peak oil, climate change, and what is essentially a debt-ridden global economic system) on local economies (as seen in what is happening in the U.S., Europe, and other regions), lag time (as seen in the first article I posted), etc., then the outlook worsens.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4796
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby pstarr » Wed 23 May 2012, 12:23:35

I search in vain for a discussion on the difficulty/impossibility of practical EV use in real world. It seems discussions of EV-ICE substitution assume a very limited specific application, regular suburban commuting characterized by,

--a fixed route,
--during a specific time frame,
--of regular duration/distance,
--within a built-up infrastructure full of charging potential.

This is not the real world, only the one populated by internet hobbyists and cornucopians. The predictable regular commuting route, and the critical availability of emergency charging does not exist in most places, i.e. rural areas where resources (food, timber, minerals, oil) and cross-country transport occur. Poor countries. Dangerous neighborhoods.

Liquid petroleum is incredibly energy dense, such that a forty-pound five-gallon jerry can may be backpacked to a stranded truck in the woods for retrieval. The same can not be said for a 1,000 lb. battery pack. EV will remain a niche product for white-collar workers with time and opportunity, AAA membership and congenial neighbors ready and willing with a charge. For the rest of us I see bikes, mules, and donkey carts.
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27069
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Wed 23 May 2012, 20:35:10

The answer there is clear in urbanization statistics worldwide. I think the master plan is that only the elite will be driving around independently in any kind of vehicle, whilst everyone else will be walk/ cycle to rail transit. We will know reality has bitten when highways start losing lanes to rail. The fact that governments are still madly building roads shows that idiocracy is still the law of the land.
SeaGypsy
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 9106
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby seenmostofit » Wed 23 May 2012, 21:11:39

pstarr wrote:I search in vain for a discussion on the difficulty/impossibility of practical EV use in real world. It seems discussions of EV-ICE substitution assume a very limited specific application, regular suburban commuting characterized by,

--a fixed route,
--during a specific time frame,
--of regular duration/distance,
--within a built-up infrastructure full of charging potential.

This is not the real world, only the one populated by internet hobbyists and cornucopians.


And, according to GM, 75% of the American commuting public who can use their EV for their daily commuting needs. Extending your logic, this means that 75% of the American commuting public are internet hobbyists and cornucopians. Well... 8O ...if you say so.
seenmostofit
permanently banned
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon 02 Apr 2012, 11:19:50

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby pstarr » Wed 23 May 2012, 22:54:55

seemstobeShorty wrote:And, according to GM, 75% of the American commuting public who can use their EV for their daily commuting needs.

Then why did GM kill the electric car?

wiki wrote:Who Killed the Electric Car? is a 2006 documentary film that explores the creation, limited commercialization, and subsequent destruction of the battery electric vehicle in the United States, specifically the General Motors EV1 of the mid 1990s. The film explores the roles of automobile manufacturers, the oil industry, the US government, the Californian government, batteries, hydrogen vehicles, and consumers in limiting the development and adoption of this technology.
Maybe GM knew something then that they forgot now?

But of course that is not my point. I would argue that neither EV's or ICE's are possible in the post-peak future. And that only a massive government intervention (such as a Manhattan Project II) will move us from personal into mass transport. I wouldn't expect a BAU Republican troll such as yourself to appreciate the subtleties of that argument.

Keep on trolling, Shorty.
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27069
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby seenmostofit » Thu 24 May 2012, 05:47:48

pstarr wrote:
seemstobeShorty wrote:And, according to GM, 75% of the American commuting public who can use their EV for their daily commuting needs.

Then why did GM kill the electric car?


Bad marketing strategy. They didn't realize the car efficiency market would prove so lucrative to Toyota, and let the green street-cred go to the Japanese. They are now trying to correct that mistake, and based on the product, are doing pretty good. The problem being, everyone else is now jumping into the fray as well, and what could have been a near decade long head start is now just another one of the crowd. They seem to have learned from their mistakes pretty well however, judging by the product they created.

pstarr wrote:
But of course that is not my point. I would argue that neither EV's or ICE's are possible in the post-peak future.


How can you argue that when they are here already? It is like trying to argue that cars will never replace the horse and buggy, after it has already become historical fact?
seenmostofit
permanently banned
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon 02 Apr 2012, 11:19:50

Re: Peak What?/ The Future is Electric.

Unread postby pstarr » Thu 24 May 2012, 10:37:34

seenmostofittheMO wrote:
pstarr wrote:
seemstobeShorty wrote:And, according to GM, 75% of the American commuting public who can use their EV for their daily commuting needs.

Then why did GM kill the electric car?


Bad marketing strategy. They didn't realize the car efficiency market would prove so lucrative to Toyota, and let the green street-cred go to the Japanese. They are now trying to correct that mistake, and based on the product, are doing pretty good. The problem being, everyone else is now jumping into the fray as well, and what could have been a near decade long head start is now just another one of the crowd. They seem to have learned from their mistakes pretty well however, judging by the product they created.
there was no toyota EV in 1996. There isn't today either.

seenmostofittheMO wrote:
pstarr wrote:
But of course that is not my point. I would argue that neither EV's or ICE's are possible in the post-peak future.


How can you argue that when they are here already? It is like trying to argue that cars will never replace the horse and buggy, after it has already become historical fact?

I would be very surprised if any EV succeeds in a scale necessary to mitigate the loss of petroleum. (So far it hasn't. The driving miles lost to petroleum decline and price increase have not been made up by EV or NG vehicles) You have made a Fallacious Argument to the Future.
Image

One might have predicted the thirteen Saturn V moon rockets would someday go on to be the commuter plane of the future. But one would have been wrong.
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27069
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 17 guests