Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Aaron » Wed 30 Jan 2008, 18:16:18

From an earlier posting of mine...

It's what we don't know, that we don't know.

There are two basic reasons why peak oil is quite irrelevant... & here they are:

I'm a big fan of deductive reasoning... For those of you who don't know about deductive reasoning, it's that "scientific method" stuff you missed while flirting with each other during science class in school.

Here's how it works...

All pregnancies end. You are pregnant. Therefore: Your pregnancy will end. I don't need to know about your specific pregnancy, to know yours will end.

One of my favorite examples of this comes from William of Occam, many years ago. Willy said: "All things being equal, the simplest explanation, tends to be the right one."

Sounds reasonable... So...

Reason #1 - The GrandPa Factor

My grandfather was born in 1902 in Indian Territory, Oklahoma. He taught me many things during our time together... how to fish the lake with a cane pole... how to bet the inside straight... & how to live a fulfilling life.

But he taught me something even more important than the tiny treasures of a 6 year old boy... without even knowing he did it.

Through listening to his stories, & seeing his long life in a complete arch, one thing seems obvious... That for all our faults... people can be clever little buggers. Imagine watching your world go from horse, to steam, to cars... to the moon! Who could have predicted, back in ole '02, that men would play golf on the moon one day... the very idea would get you laughed right out the door back then.

And yet that is exactly what happened...

In fact, if I look back on our collective human history, I can see the same pattern... over & over again.

What seemed fantasy at the time, eventually came to pass. So let's go back & see what our friend Willy might say about this.

What seems more reasonable?

1) Humanity will hit a brick wall called peak oil, and suffer terrible, if not permanent destruction, because there isn't any viable energy alternative?

or

2) Humanity will repeat the same pattern it has for countless generations. Innovating in the face of crisis beyond the imagination of current thinking.

My own grandfather's life demonstrates this concept nicely.

While I can't tell you specifically what will replace oil... logic says I don't need to.

I only need to understand that if humanity fails to innovate our way out from under oil depletion, it would be the first such human failure in our history!

It's more reasonable to project that unforeseen developments, spurred by the pressure of rising energy prices, will meet our energy challenge in unpredictable ways... solved!

#2 - The M. Lynch Equation

The more complex any issue has become, the more difficult it is to predict the outcome. It's because the initial conditions are all but impossible to quantify accurately, and these specifics vastly affect the outcome. A tiny difference in beginning conditions, will radically alter the equation and how things play out.

This makes efforts at predicting peak oil, an exercise in futility. Given the vastly complex nature of the energy issue, efforts in prediction are of little use... the crystal ball has a crack in it.

So you can live in peak oil fantasy-land as long as you like, but given my two observations, you will be waiting a very long time indeed. In fact you may need to pass on your myopic belief to your descendants to carry on the charade.

The facts speak for themselves. Peak Oil simply cannot be predicted with any accuracy. So you might as well predict it will rain beer tomorrow.

And my grandfather's wisdom shows that all things being equal... we will innovate and prosper...

Always have...

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic17814.html
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby emersonbiggins » Wed 30 Jan 2008, 18:28:41

Extrapolating the future from the apogee of the Industrial Revolution seems disingenuous, especially given the level of noise signaling collapse within the system today. Yes, your grandparents and mine certainly saw more change within their hundred years than any other generation before, but such an occurrence is far, far from the mean of human civilization, which is destined for collapse, prosperity, decadence, and collapse again.
"It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."

George Carlin
User avatar
emersonbiggins
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun 10 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dallas

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Pops » Wed 30 Jan 2008, 20:18:42

Aaron wrote:And my grandfather's wisdom shows that all things being equal... we will innovate and prosper...l

Yea, your Grandpa was a wise man…

Since all things are not equal (as Grandpa knew) here is what I think:

If we remember what we learned over hundreds of generations and remember to combine that with what we have learned from this short era of cheap energy, we will indeed innovate.

It won’t look like the past nor the present…

But no future ever did…
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 30 Jan 2008, 21:36:23

Aaron there is a severe problem with Occam's Razor, which is very often ignored.

While it is nice to beleive the simplest answer is the most likely Occam was working towards the goal of irreducibility. IOW look at it from the viewpoint of physics and it goes like this, as the example I was taught way back when in college. Imagine you walk up to a pool table and find 10 balls in the pockets, nine numbered balls plus the cue ball. Can Occams razor explain how the ten balls got in the pockets? Sure, someone came along, grabbed the balls and rolled or dropped them into the pockets. Irreducible simple, isn't it? Except if you have ever played nine ball you know that in most cases the simplest explination is dead wrong, in most cases what happened was someone took a cue stick, used it to hit the cue ball and over the course of several minutes to many minutes ricochetted the numbered balls off the cue ball and into the pockets. In most circumstance more than one person was involed and all sorts of wild angles and unexpected collisions resulted over the course of time needed until all ten balls were in the pockets.

While in theory simple newtonian physics would allow you to predict the results of every shot in advance random variables intrude and make a quantum mess of everything.

The real world is irreducibly complex! Occam lived in a time when everything in the universe was viewed with a mechanistic world view, a viewpoint which is still very common today among economists, reporters and polliticians. A mechanistic world view leads to statements such as "the economy is heating up", or "The economy is slowing down" or "The population explosion will inevitably lead to a die-off".

The real world is not a machine where we humans can pull a lever or turn a valve to make it heat up, slow down, or crash/die-off. The real world is irreducibly more complex than our three pounds of brain augumented by all the computers we can build can grasp as a Gestalt where we know which input does what in a reliably consistent reproducible manner. Think back to that nine ball game, what are the odds you could play the game with exactly the same results repetition after repetition? If you manage two identical games in a row can you manage three, or ten, or a million? Now ask yourself how much simpler is a game of nine ball than the world economy? Hell I can't even make my own household budget repeat itself three months in a row, there are ALWAYS unforseen factors intruding!

I am a moderate because I beleive we will muddle on through as we always do. I fear we will soon be a fascist society and the ecosystem and humanitarian consequences will be depressing as all get out, but I also think humans as such will survive and go on with their lives for untold generations into the future. I beleive the only way we will get the 3-5 Billion human die off so many seem to crave is through nuclear and/or biological warefare on a world wide scale. Unfortuanately I don't know what specifically I could do to stop it, but moving to the back woods looks more attractive every day. The world is a dangerous place, always has been and so long as their are humans and other predators in it, it always will remain so. Once we beat the animal challenges nature put in our way we had to supply our own, I think Global Warming will challenge us quite a bit. I could be wrong. We could wise up and shift totally away from fossil fuel combustion, using our fossil fuels only as chemical feed stock. But I doubt it ;)
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby vampyregirl » Sat 02 Feb 2008, 03:32:54

I have posted about this in another thread but... the human race is not about to go back to living in the 1800s. It is our nature to progress, to go forwards not backwards. There is new technology emerging in the auto industry and other industries, its not going to become dominant overnight but give it time.
If some members of this forum had been around 100 years ago they would have said the ICE could never take over from steam. Today they are saying the new EV engines and hydrogen fuel cells have no future. Times change but people don't i suppose
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 04:00:00

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby skyemoor » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 12:27:15

I likely fall into no one camp as I see the potential outcome as a series of probabilities, i.e.,

No change = 1%
Mild recession, back to normal = 4%
Severe recession, resource contention, stabilizing at slightly lower 'standard of living' = 25%
Mild depression, some resource wars, moderately lower standard of living'= 25%
Severe depression, many resource wars, significantly lower standard of living= 25%
Long term crisis where civilization struggles to continue = 10%
Global collapse, back to subsistence for majority of population 10%

Civilization has never experienced worldwide resource production peaks, especially when there is nothing able to replace the depleting resources at anywhere near the level of consumption, hence extrapolating upon past experiences will resemble the expectations a yeast culture might assume while it continues to grow in a batch of fermenting beer.

So yes, we could pull through, after significant suffering and reshuffling, though it will be a new 'normal' that we stabilize at. If we manage to create a global sustainable lifestyle, the population will still have to be at a much reduced level. If we don't create such a lifestyle, the population will end up at even a greater level of reduction.

I've worked most of my career infusing new technology into the marketplace. I've seen most new technology wither on the vine, though sometimes that was due to poor marketing or whims of the consumer. I've heard countless promises by vendors that vanish in a puff of smoke when their masterpieces are put through the test wringer. Due to the vast resources or new breakthroughs required to replace current consumption levels, whether it's lithium in LiON batteries, or the right microbes for cellulosic ethanol, keeping lifestyles at the levels enjoyed by the middle classes of the developed nations is extremely unlikely.

Can we reduce our driving resource requirements via carpooling, vanpooling, scooters, biking, telecommuting, high efficiency plug-in hybrids, etc? Yes, though there seems likely no other way around it, and there certainly will be much kicking and screaming all along the way, with the search for guilty rarely being recognized in the mirror.

One of the wild cards in the mix will be resource conflicts, with regional nuclear war a distinct possibility. If so, a limited nuclear winter of 3-8 years would greatly reduce the population to a tiny percentage of its former self. Note the conflicting mitigations between moving away from the equator to flee global warming vs. staying near the equator to lessen the effects of 'years without summers'. A global nuclear war would make such a population number even tinier, perhaps to the point of eventual extinction.

What are the chances? I certainly don't know, but will make some assumptions and move forward from there. If we compare our current civilization posture with the Voyage of Life series by Thomas Cole, we are approaching the third painting, though this construct could be applied at many times during the birth, growth, and struggles of any nation state. Now it applies to the world at large (and quite possibly will numerous times in the future).

<b>Childhood

Youth

Manhood

Old Age</b>


Most moderates will expect the outcome to resemble yet another allegorical layer within the 4th picture, though I will point to the array of possibilities mentioned at the beginning of this post.

So I guess that makes me a fence-sitter...

P.S. These images do not do justice to Cole's original works of art, whose important details can be viewed at the US National Gallery of Art.
http://www.carfree.com
http://ecoplan.org/carshare/cs_index.htm
http://www.velomobile.de/GB/Advantages/advantages.html

Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur

He that lives upon hope will die fasting. --Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
skyemoor
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Appalachian Foothills of Virginia

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 14:03:57

Good points all.

The real world is irreducibly complex!


"...you might as well predict it will rain beer tomorrow. "

Same/Same yes?

It's just not useful to make predictions in such a complex environment.

It may well be that peak oil is perfectly valid... but since it can never be "proven" in any meaningful way... it's irrelevant.

If you can't predict when... or what the outcome will be... just how useful is your prediction?
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby skyemoor » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 15:37:05

Aaron wrote:Good points all.

The real world is irreducibly complex!


"...you might as well predict it will rain beer tomorrow. "

Same/Same yes?


Nay, my good man. Raining beer has no natural science explanation. Resource limitations do.

Aaron wrote:It's just not useful to make predictions in such a complex environment.


Indeed, predictions must be made, lest we follow the examples of many other cultures chronicled in Jared Diamond's "Collapse".

Aaron wrote:It may well be that peak oil is perfectly valid... but since it can never be "proven" in any meaningful way... it's irrelevant.

If you can't predict when... or what the outcome will be... just how useful is your prediction?


What you are referring to is the <i>precision</i> of the prediction. The movement of the planets (and many of their moons) can be predicted with considerable precision. The number of infant sea turtles hatched this year that make it to reproductive age cannot, though we can use numerous trends (e.g., historical counts, counts of predators, environmental measures, etc) to come up with an approximation. It all comes down to the quality of the data and the analysis. Will it be a 2% decline 3 years into the slide, or will it be 8%? So the relevance concerns the uncertainties surrounding the selection of mitigation and adaptation approaches to the actual decline. Do we hunker down and rid ourselves of fuel-guzzling machines, while planting fruit/nut trees and sizeable gardens, or do we head for the provisioned retreat in the hills to ride out the deadly chaos?

Not knowing the impact can lead people to hesitate about the best course to take, with the result being the same as a deer entranced in headlights.

BTW, what is a doomer doing in the moderates forum spouting weak cornucopian platitudes? Trying to stimulate discussion, looking for the depth of the moderates' reasoning, or both?
http://www.carfree.com
http://ecoplan.org/carshare/cs_index.htm
http://www.velomobile.de/GB/Advantages/advantages.html

Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur

He that lives upon hope will die fasting. --Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
skyemoor
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Appalachian Foothills of Virginia

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Pops » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 16:19:30

skyemoor wrote:
Aaron wrote:It's just not useful to make predictions in such a complex environment.


Indeed, predictions must be made, lest we follow the examples of many other cultures chronicled in Jared Diamond's "Collapse".

I gotta agree with Sky.

Everyone makes predictions everyday; my shower will run, my car will start, my job will be waiting, and there will be food at the market.

Like the 3 Card Monte dealer used to say: Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances.

To mangle some cliches (as I like to do):
Though all plans go out the window with the first bullet, a failure to plan is only a plan to fail - without a goal and gauge of success, how does one avert failure?


Which makes me think, Mr. Chum, I don’t believe I have seen your Assessments and Plans – aside from the whole Reapers Inc. thing…



[sub]I liked that Mr. Chum bit so much I gotta give myself a[/sub]
:lol:
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 16:45:15

BTW, what is a doomer doing in the moderates forum spouting weak cornucopian platitudes? Trying to stimulate discussion, looking for the depth of the moderates' reasoning, or both?


The forum seemed lonely.

Mr. Chum


I used to be nicknamed "Chumley" actually.

And the first person to guess where that obscure name comes from wins.

Anyway, don't we think it's glib to say, ":
Not knowing the impact can lead people to hesitate about the best course to take, with the result being the same as a deer entranced in headlights. "


In the absence of better estimates, aren't we just wildly speculating about unknowable future events?

My beer example was meant to equate the level of predictive capability in peak oil... about as accurate as predicting the physically unlikely beer shower.
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 17:11:12

There's a book I read recently about the people who've survived catastrophes where others died. What you are eluding to is one of the big points that came up repeatedly in the book. People tend to predict the future based on their own experience. Most of the time that works well for us. Generally history does repeat itself. Sometimes, though, unprecedented things happen. Most of the time, if a cop tells you to do something, it's a good idea to do it. If you happened to be in one of the WTC buildings on 9-11-01, and you followed the cop's orders to evacuate to higher floors, you died. If you were able to critically analyze for yourself and decide to go down the stairs, in many instances you lived to tell about it. Hikers, kayakers, climbers often face difficult weather and do just fine. They tend to build up a degree of complacency such that when really dangerous storms blow up, they assume they'll be fine...but sometimes they aren't. People in New Orleans face hurricanes almost every year. Many of them didn't take Katrina seriously and died. It was an unprecedented occurrence. Every storm before it, they'd lived through and been fine. That one was something no one had ever seen before.

They trick is not whether unprecedented events will occur. Certainly they will. The trick is that they are rare and predicting them is hard. Thousands of people have incorrectly predicted the end of civilization, but eventually somebody will be right. The trick is figuring out who is right and who is full of baloney.

Peak Oil seems to me like quite a legitimate problem. I realize statistically that the chances of this being the correct theory about the end of civilization are pretty low. I'm definitely not doing a fill the bunker full of ammo and canned goods and wait for the coming of the zombies deal. I am trying to position myself such that if its right, I'll be ok, and if it's not, well that's ok too.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Pops » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 17:16:00

Wasn’t Mr. Chumley a walrus on some TV show?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Aaron » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 17:20:56

Pops wrote:Wasn’t Mr. Chumley a walrus on some TV show?


wow... u win.
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Pops » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 17:28:35

smallpoxgirl wrote:I am trying to position myself such that if its right, I'll be ok, and if it's not, well that's ok too.

The definition of a moderate in my book.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby skyemoor » Mon 04 Feb 2008, 23:11:32

Aaron wrote:Anyway, don't we think it's glib to say, ":
Not knowing the impact can lead people to hesitate about the best course to take, with the result being the same as a deer entranced in headlights. "


glib /glɪb/
–adjective, glib·ber, glib·best.
1. readily fluent, often thoughtlessly, superficially, or insincerely so: a glib talker; glib answers.
2. easy or unconstrained, as actions or manners.
3. Archaic. agile; spry.

No, because significant uncertainly often precludes initiative in planning and execution. Unless one is 'spry', 'easy', or 'unconstrained', as in vacation cornrows. :wink:

In the absence of better estimates, aren't we just wildly speculating about unknowable future events?


Ok, how did Daniel Yergin get ahold of Aaron's login?

Again, I will refer you back to my discussion of precision above.

My beer example was meant to equate the level of predictive capability in peak oil... about as accurate as predicting the physically unlikely beenr shower.


Again, no comparison. Beer showers are a figment of some lush's imagination (or the unfortunate result of profusely gregarious behavior at a fraternity soiree) whereas resource limitations have been empirically demonstrated (the US peaked, North Sea peaked, etc).
http://www.carfree.com
http://ecoplan.org/carshare/cs_index.htm
http://www.velomobile.de/GB/Advantages/advantages.html

Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur

He that lives upon hope will die fasting. --Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
skyemoor
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Appalachian Foothills of Virginia

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Aaron » Tue 05 Feb 2008, 17:50:13

No, because significant uncertainly often precludes initiative in planning and execution. Unless one is 'spry', 'easy', or 'unconstrained', as in vacation cornrows.


Is a straw-man made from corn-rows?

:)

Again, no comparison. Beer showers are a figment of some lush's imagination (or the unfortunate result of profusely gregarious behavior at a fraternity soiree) whereas resource limitations have been empirically demonstrated (the US peaked, North Sea peaked, etc).


Predicting the peak of Brent Crude is like predicting it will rain... about the same accuracy rate.

Predicting global peak oil is likely as accurate as predicting beer rain.

In other words totally unpredictable, unprecedented, and without merit.

...some lush's imagination


Just what are you implying?

Lush indeed... that's 4 rich folk... I'm a drunk.

And it did rain beer once... I was there... we all sang songs about Jebus and it rained & rained. And we were drunk on the love of HawkMan... & beer.

And acid.

Sex.

I rest my case.

- The BreakFast Club
The problem is, of course, that not only is economics bankrupt, but it has always been nothing more than politics in disguise... economics is a form of brain damage.

Hazel Henderson
User avatar
Aaron
Resting in Peace
 
Posts: 5998
Joined: Thu 15 Apr 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Houston

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby skyemoor » Tue 05 Feb 2008, 18:43:55

Aaron wrote:
...some lush's imagination


Just what are you implying?


That someone OTHER than you might harbor the possibility for such an event. This would be a lush's wet dream (yes, yes, of course...)
http://www.carfree.com
http://ecoplan.org/carshare/cs_index.htm
http://www.velomobile.de/GB/Advantages/advantages.html

Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur

He that lives upon hope will die fasting. --Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
skyemoor
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Appalachian Foothills of Virginia

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby IslandCrow » Wed 06 Feb 2008, 09:18:34

Rather than argue with Moses' brother, I would state my process.

I got interested in Peak Oil through the ASPO site, and got all excited about WHEN it would happen

I then soon realised that the data was not that good and so the actual dates were the best estimate that could be made at the time (I have to provide yearly budgets for a number of organisations and I know how hard it is to just approximate what will happen in the next 12 months).

Once I realised that knowing the date of PO was extremely unlikely, unless in the proverbial rear-view mirror, I next realised that what the most important thing was how people would react to it. This is where it becomes impossible to predict the whole picture. However, by concentrating on small areas we can get some idea of what to do now.

So, while I think a lot of the arguments for WHEN are irrelevant, there is a lot of relevance in looking at some of the smaller details, such as: food prices are most likely to rise, and I have a little bit of land so what should I do to grew as much food as I can.
We should teach our children the 4-Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Rejoice.
User avatar
IslandCrow
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Mon 12 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Finland

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby skyemoor » Wed 06 Feb 2008, 12:49:52

PO may be best envisioned as a metaphor;

There is a village tucked under the foot of a large cliff. One day, a geologist who has devoted all 35 years of his professional life to the study of such cliffs showed up, and spent the next 2 months studying the cliff, taking samples and reviewing existing geological data from prior State surveys. At the end of that time, he presented his findings at a town hall briefing, wherein he stated, "The cliff above the town is unstable, and will cascade down over the town, flattening every building. I don't know the exact time that it will fall down, but predict with some certainty that this will happen within the next 5 years, though it could be tomorrow. I've seen several such cliffs fall down and this cliff, while larger than the others, has the same predictable characteristics". He stayed for a question and answer period, and left the next day, promising to answer any questions that might arise via phone or email. A builder showed up later the same day, showing plans for a new expansion of the town, and brought in his confident, well-dressed geo-technical engineer, who dismissed the report of the geologist, claiming that the cliff would stand for generations. The builder pushed for rezoning rights to property he held, so that he could build a new subdivision within the fall area of the cliff. He promised bountiful, well-paying jobs to those who needed work and confidently guaranteed there would be continued prosperity for the town for the foreseeable future.

The townspeople were stunned and confused. Some began preparations to move, even though home values were volatile. Others put it off, thinking that there could be plenty of time, even if the geologist was right, and they could make some cash for a new truck and HDTV in the meantime. Others simply could not believe that the cliff would fall; after all, it had stood there when their grandparents first settled the area, and surely it would continue to stand for generations to come.

(to be continued...)
http://www.carfree.com
http://ecoplan.org/carshare/cs_index.htm
http://www.velomobile.de/GB/Advantages/advantages.html

Chance favors the prepared mind. -- Louis Pasteur

He that lives upon hope will die fasting. --Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
skyemoor
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Sat 16 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Appalachian Foothills of Virginia

Re: Why Peak Oil may prove irrelevant (REDUX)

Unread postby Pixie » Thu 07 Feb 2008, 12:54:36

vampyregirl wrote:I have posted about this in another thread but... the human race is not about to go back to living in the 1800s. It is our nature to progress, to go forwards not backwards. There is new technology emerging in the auto industry and other industries, its not going to become dominant overnight but give it time.
If some members of this forum had been around 100 years ago they would have said the ICE could never take over from steam. Today they are saying the new EV engines and hydrogen fuel cells have no future. Times change but people don't i suppose


Like yeast cells, it is our nature to grow until we run out of feedstock. At the end of the Roman Empire, it probably did not seem like it was our nature to progress. During the Black Plague, it probably did not seem that either progress or population growth was inevitable. During the Chinese famines (pick one), it probably did not seem like population growth was inevitable, either.

It's funny. I'm either a moderate doomer or a doomeristic moderate. I believe we are headed toward something that could be called a collapse, and at the same time, I believe we will muddle through it. I agree with Aaron that it will be unpredictable, and I agree that 100 years from now, we will be using methods we can't now imagine working. I also believe that 100 years from now, we will be using far LESS energy per person than we currently do, and that the population will be far smaller. I consider my view a hopeful one, but not one that is free of suffering. Of course, history also teaches us that no time in human history has ever been free of suffering.

We grow, we suffer, we collapse and we recover. That is the lesson of history and even more of archaeology, going back 12,000 years.
Just another tofu-munching bike-riding Rambo(/Rambette)
User avatar
Pixie
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Oregon

Next

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests