Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on February 6, 2018

Bookmark and Share

The Bumpy Road Down, Part 4: Trends in Collapse

The Bumpy Road Down, Part 4: Trends in Collapse thumbnail
Bamboo in Winter

This time I’m going to look at some of the changes that will happen along the bumpy road down and the forces and trends that will lead to them. If you followed what I was saying in my last post, you’ll have realized that the bumpy road will be a matter of repeatedly getting slapped down as a result of going into overshoot—exceeding our limits, crashing, then recovering, only to get slapped again as we go into overshoot yet again.

Along the way, where people have a choice, they will choose to do a range of different things (some beneficial, others not so much), according to their circumstances and inclinations. Inertia is also an important factor—people resist change. And politicians are adept at “kicking the can down the road”—patching together the current system to keep it working for little while longer and letting the guy who gets elected next worry about the consequences.

Because the world will become a smaller place for most of us, we’ll feel less influence from other areas and in turn have less influence over them. There will be a lot more “dissensus”—people doing their own thing and letting other people do theirs. I expect this will lead to quite a variety of approaches, some that fail and some that do work to some extent. In the short run, of course, “working” means recovering from whatever disaster we are currently trying to cope with. But in the long run, the real challenge is learning to live within our limits and accept “just enough” rather than always striving for more. Trying a lot of different approaches to this will make it more likely that we find some that are successful.

Anyways—changes, forces and trends…and how they will work on the bumpy road down.

I’ve included the stepped or “oscillating” decline diagram from my last post here to make it easier to visualize what I’m talking about.

Energy Decline

Because I’m a “Peak Oil guy” and because energy is at the heart of the financial problems we’re facing, I’ll talk about energy first. As I said in a recent post:

“Despite all the optimistic talk about renewable energy, we are still dependent on fossil fuels for the great majority of our energy needs, and those needs are largely ones that cannot be met by anything other than fossil fuels, especially oil. While it is true that fossil fuels are far from running out, the amount of surplus energy they deliver (the EROEI—energy returned on energy invested) has declined to the point where it no longer supports robust economic growth. Indeed, since the 1990s, real economic growth has largely stopped. What limited growth we are seeing is based on debt, rather than an abundance of surplus energy.”

It is my analysis that there is zero chance of implementing any alternative to fossil fuels remotely capable of sustaining “business as usual” in the remaining few years before a major economic crash happens and changes everything. So the first trend I’ll point to is a continued reliance on fossil fuels. Fuels of ever decreasing EROEI, which will increase the stress on the global economy and continue contributing to climate change and ocean acidification.

Those who are mainly concerned about the environmental effects of continuing to burn fossil fuels would have us stop using those fuels, whatever the cost. But it is clear to me that the cost of such a move would be a global economic depression different only in the details from the one I’ve been predicting. Lack of energy, excess of debt, environmental disaster—take your pick….

It has been interesting to watch the governments of Canada and the US take two different approaches to this over the last couple of years.

The American approach has been based on denial. Denial of climate change on the one hand, and denial of the fossil fuel depletion situation on the other. “Drill baby, drill!” is expected to solve the energy problem without causing an environmental problem. I don’t believe that either expectation will be borne out over the next few years.

Our Canadian government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has made quite a bit of political hay by acknowledging the reality of climate change and championing the Paris Climate Agreement in the international arena. Here at home, though, it is clear that Trudeau understands the role of oil in our economy and he has been quick to quietly reassure the oil companies that they have nothing to fear, approving two major pipeline projects to keep oil flowing from Alberta to the Pacific coast and, eventually, to Chinese markets.

Yes, Ottawa has set a starting price of $10 a tonne on carbon dioxide emissions in 2018, increasing to $50 a tonne by 2022. This is to be implemented by provincial governments who have until the end of the year to submit their own carbon pricing plans before a national price is imposed on those that don’t meet the federal standard. It will be interesting to see how this goes and if the federal government sticks to its plan. Canada is one of the most highly indebted nations in the world and I wouldn’t be surprised if our economy was one of the first to falter.

At any rate, sometime in the next few years the economy is going to fall apart (point “c” in the diagram). As I’ve said, this may well be initiated by volatility in oil prices as the current oil surplus situation comes to an end. This will lead to financial chaos that soon spreads to the rest of the economy.

On the face of it this isn’t too different from the traditional Peak Oil scenario—the collapse of industrial civilization caused by oil shortages and sharply rising oil prices. But as you might guess by now, this isn’t exactly what I think will happen.

In fact, I think that we’ll see an economic depression where the demand for oil drops more quickly than the natural decline rate of our oil supplies and the price falls even further than it did in 2014-15. We won’t be using nearly so much oil as at present, so we will once again accumulate a surplus, and we’ll even leave some reserves of oil in the ground, at least initially. This will help drive a recovery after the depression bottoms out (point “e” in the diagram). Please note that I am talking about the remaining relatively high EROEI conventional oil here. Unconventional sources just don’t produce enough surplus energy to fuel a recovery.

But the demand for oil will still be a lot less than it is today and this will have a very negative effect on oil companies. Some governments will subsidize the oil industry even more than they have traditionally, just to keep to it going in the face of low prices. Other governments will outright nationalize their oil industries to ensure oil keeps getting pumped out of the ground, even if it isn’t very profitable to do so. Bankruptcy of critical industries in general is going to be a problem during and after the crash. More on that in my next post.

During the upcoming crash and depression fossil fuel use may well decline enough to significantly reduce our releases of CO2 into the atmosphere—not enough perhaps to stop climate change, but enough to slow it down. As we continue down the bumpy road, though, our use of fossil fuels and the release of CO2 from burning them will taper off to essentially nothing, allowing the ecosphere to finally begin a slow recovery from the abuses of the industrial age.

The other trend involving fossil fuels, as we go further down the bumpy road, will be their declining availability as we gradually use them up. Eventual our energy consumption will be determined by the local availability of renewable energy that can be accessed using a relatively low level of technology. Things like biomass (mainly firewood), falling water, wind, passive solar, maybe even tidal and wave energy. Since these sources vary in quantity from one locality to another, the level of energy use will vary as well. Where these sources are intermittent, the users will simply have adapt to that intermittency.

No doubt some of my readers will be wondering why I don’t think high tech renewables like solar cells and large wind turbines will save the day. The list of reasons is a long one—difficulty raising capital in a contracting economy, low EROEI, intermittency of supply and the difficulty (once fossil fuels are gone) of building, operating, maintaining and replacing such equipment when is wears out—to mention just a few.

Large scale storage of power to deal with intermittency will in the long run prove infeasible. Certainly batteries aren’t going to do it. There are a few locations where pumped storage of water can be set up at a relatively low cost, but not enough to make a big difference. And on top of all that, I very much doubt that large electrical grids are feasible in the long run (and I spent half my life maintaining on one such grid).

The FIRE Industries

The next trend I can see is in the FIRE (financial, insurance and real estate) sector of the economy. During the growth phase of our economy over that last couple of centuries the FIRE industries embodied a wide range of organizational technologies that facilitated business, trade and growth. Unfortunately, because they were set up to support growth, they were unable to cope with the end of real growth late in the twentieth century. They have supported debt based growth for the last couple of decades as the only alternative that they could deal with. This led to the unprecedented amount of debt that we see in the world today. Much of this debt is quite risky and will likely lead to a wave of bankruptcies and defaults—the very crash I’ve been talking about.

The FIRE industries will be at the heart of that crash and will suffer horribly. Many, perhaps the majority, of the companies in that sector won’t survive. In today’s world they wield a great deal of political power. During the global financial crisis (GFC) in 2007-8 that power was enough to see them through largely unscathed. This is unlikely to be the case in the upcoming crash, creating a desperate need for their services and an opportunity to fill that need which will be another factor in the recovery after the crash bottoms out. But of course there is more than one way it can be done.

In the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th posts in my ” Collapse Step by Step” series, I dealt with the political realities of our modern world, which limit what can be done by democratic governments. I identified a political spectrum defined by those limits. At the left end of this spectrum we have Social Democratic societies, which still practice capitalism, but where those in power are concerned with the welfare of everyone within the society. At the right end we have Right Wing Capitalist societies where the ruling elite is concerned only with accumulating more wealth and power for itself.

Since the FIRE industries are crucial to the accumulation and distribution of wealth in our societies, the way they are rebuilt following the crash will be largely determined by the political goals of those doing the rebuilding.

At the left end of the spectrum there is much can be done to regulate the FIRE industries and stop their excesses from leading immediately to further crises.

At the right end of the political spectrum the elite is so closely tied to the FIRE industries and so little concerned with the welfare of the general populace, that those industries will likely be rebuilt on a plan very similar to their current organization. A policy of “exterminism” is likely to be followed, where prosperity for the elite and an ever shrinking middle class is seen as the only goal and the poor are a burden to be abandoned or outright exterminated.(Thanks for Peter Frase, author of Four Futures—Life After Captialism for the term “exterminism”.)

In the case of either of these extremes, or anywhere along the spectrum between them, there are some common things I can see happening.

The whole FIRE sector depends on trust. In the last few decades (since the 1970s) we have switched from currencies based on precious metals to “fiat money” which is based on nothing but trust in the governments issuing it. This was done to accommodate growth fueled by abundant surplus energy and then to facilitate issuing ever more debt as the surplus energy supply declined. I don’t advocate going back to precious metals—what we need is a monetary system that can accommodate degrowth, of which a great deal lies in our future. Unfortunately we don’t yet know what such a system might look like.

It is clear, though, that the coming crash is going to shake our trust in the FIRE industries to its very roots. Since central banks will have been central to the monetary problems leading to the crash, they may well be set up as scapegoats for that crash and their relative lack of success in coping with it. People will be very suspicious after watching the FIRE industries fall apart during the crash and their lack of trust will force those industries to take some different approaches.

I think governments will take over the functions of central banks and stop charging themselves interest on the money they print. Yes, I know that printing money has often led to runaway inflation, but the conditions during the crash and its aftermath will be so profoundly deflationary that inflation will not likely be a problem.

The creation of debt will be viewed much less favourably and credit will be much harder to get. And of course this will make the crash and following depression that much worse. In response to this many areas will create local banks and currencies to provide the services and credit that local businesses need to get moving again.

During the last couple of decades there has been a move to loosen regulations in the FIRE industries, to let single large entities become involved in investment banking, business and personal banking, insurance and real estate. Most such entities began as experts in one of those areas, but one has to question their expertise in the new areas they moved into. In any case they became “too big to fail” and their failure threatened the stability the whole FIRE sector. Following the GFC there was only minor tightening of regulations to discourage this sort of thing. After the upcoming crash I suspect many governments, especially toward the left end of the political spectrum, will institute a major re-regulation of the FIRE industries and a splitting up of the few “too big to fail” companies which didn’t actually fail.

It is all very well to talk about business and even governments failing when their debt load becomes too great. But there is also a lot of personal debt that is, at this point, unlikely ever to get paid back. What does it mean, in this context, for a person to fail? What I carry as debt is an asset for someone else—probably the share holders of a bank. They are understandably reluctant to watch their assets evaporate, and I have to admit that there is a moral hazard involved in just letting people walk away from their debts. That feeling was so strong in the past that those who couldn’t pay their debts ended up in debtors’ prisons. Such punishment was eventually seen as futile and the practice was abandoned and personal bankruptcies were allowed.

One suspects that in the depression following the coming crash it will be necessary to declare a jubilee, forgiving large classes of personal debt. What might become of all the suddenly destitute people depends on where their country lies on the political spectrum. I wouldn’t rule out debtors prisons or work camps, the sort of modern slavery that is already gaining a foothold in the prison system of the United States.

If we were willing to give up growth as the sole purpose of our economic system, there are many changes that could be made to the FIRE industries that would allow them to provide the services needed by businesses and individuals without stimulating the unchecked growth that leads to collapse. I think we are unlikely to see this happen after the upcoming crash—we will be desperate for recovery and that will still mean growth at destructive levels.

I think the crash following that recovery will involve the food supply and still unchecked population growth and sadly a lot of people won’t make it through (more on this in my next post). Following that, it’s even possible that in some areas people may reach the conclusion that growth is the problem and quit sticking their heads up to get slapped down again. They’ll have to find a more sustainable way to live, but with it will come a less bumpy road forward.

Authoritarianism

In the aftermath of the next crash, I think we’ll see an increase in authoritarianism in an attempt to optimize the systems that failed during the crash—to make them work again and work more effectively. Free market laissez faire economics will be seen to have failed by many people. Others will hang tight, claiming that if they just keep doing yet again the same thing that failed before, it will finally work.

As is always the case with this sort of optimization, it will create a less resilient system, much more susceptible to subsequent crashes. And after those crashes government will be reduced to such a small scale affair that authoritarianism won’t be so much of an issue.

Fortunately, beyond authoritarianism, there are some other trends that will lead to increased resilience and sustainability. We’ll take a look at those in my next post.

The Easiest Person to Fool



94 Comments on "The Bumpy Road Down, Part 4: Trends in Collapse"

  1. Davy on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 5:37 pm 

    “Don’t kid yourself, Russia will carry on just fine after a western economic collapse.”

    sure greggie you are the expert.lol. You don’t have a clue what is coming for Russia but that is what you want emotionally.

  2. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 5:53 pm 

    Davy

    Dont argue with Greg he has zero evidence that it will be only a western collapse. We are all connected together! If the US falls the whole world economic is over! End of story!

  3. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 5:58 pm 

    greggiet,

    Lol at the western collapse. N America is within a few years of energy independence. If the world did untangle from one another the countries with FF would continue their move to renewables. We also have the tech for that. Yes Russia is in good shape other than they are next to India and China by way of land. The world of electricity, AI and robots are just around the corner. Russia is not a leader that I can see.
    Asia and Africa are the weak links of a collapse chain, the US one of the strongest.

  4. Anonymouse1 on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 6:05 pm 

    Be quiet, retard, seriously.

  5. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 6:26 pm 

    When most of Asia gets low on fuel they will walk to to Russia with their 5 gal can in one hand and Sharia Law on their mind.

  6. Mad Kat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 6:32 pm 

    Greg, I am sure that both Russia (and China) are planing for the future. The US plans for tomorrow, maybe. I see Eastern countries having a less painful decline than the West. AS you mentioned above, if you have less to lose, the fall is less noticeable/painful.

    Yes, there will be die-off everywhere, but it will be mostly the ones who have lived high and are obese, drugged, and unskilled for the future. In other words, mostly the West and their wannabees. Cut their JIT deliveries and see what happens. Or so it seems from my view of the world as it is today.

  7. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 6:51 pm 

    Mak,

    The US more oil than the EU, has more nat gas than the EU. Add China, Japan, India and many other small Asian nations to that list. Why is the west gonna decline before these countries?

  8. Mad Kat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 7:17 pm 

    Boat, do you ever consider more than guessed at number of barrels? That “oil” is still in the ground. It may never be recovered. Never. No profit. No oil. That is the capitalist way. When the dollar financial system goes down, and it will, that will end life as you know it in the US. The US has little resources left and imports most of what it needs from Asia, the ME, and yes, Russia/China.

    Europe has the same problem. Fast declining resources and a huge debt problem, not to mention a flood of refugees from the US wars of choice. Not to mention the US trying to start a war there.

    Meanwhile, Russia is still resource independent and will be for the foreseeable future. THAT is why the US is trying so desperately to gain control of those resources by any means necessary, including war. Desperation, not type of government/freedoms is driving the US insanity.

  9. TheNationalist on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 7:30 pm 

    I wish you lot would stop stating the obvious. I’m sorry Davy but Makati and Cloggies views are far from unusual know and they are in act growing in many parts.
    More and more Americans are waking up to the reality of the conflicts in Middle East and many now distrust the official policies and statements of their government. They are not extremists and whilst Cloggy is quite right on hte spectrum I wouldn’t say that is unusual anymore, sorry but we now live in the time of consequences as Churchill once said.
    Mastermind appears extremist too with his doom and gloom and yet his links are actually more “realist” than “extremist” when you look at them.
    I predict the polarisation in the West (and everywhere else) will only get worse. Sadly I believe science and reason will be a casualty soon as people retreat into religion, superstition and current social addictions like identity politics and virtue signalling. All worthless of course, but these fads may serve a purpose in that they appear to lessen their psychological suffering when faced with reality.

  10. TheNationalist on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 7:31 pm 

    *far from unusual and in fact growing now

    Apologies

  11. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 7:42 pm 

    Thanks Nationalist! I try to keep my mind skeptical and my sources sharp!

  12. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:01 pm 

    “yet his links are actually more “realist” than “extremist” when you look at them.”

    Most of ‘his’ links have been discussed here on this forum many years ago, and none of them come to the same conclusions that he has. That being said, you would be correct, the reports that he has linked to are mostly realist.

  13. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:09 pm 

    “You don’t have a clue what is coming for Russia but that is what you want emotionally.”

    I live in North America, I have absolutely no desire to live through an economic collapse, and have zero attachments to a foreign nation half way around the globe.

    Get your head out of your ass.

  14. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:16 pm 

    Yabut mm’s links paint many scenarios and different outcomes all in the name of science. Were gonna crash in 2018 to we’ll be pumping oil in the 40’s. Then reposts the disparity hundreds of times. That’s whacko shyt.

  15. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:20 pm 

    MM is a troll Boat. He obviously has nothing better to do with his life.

    And many of the reports that he linked to show humanity still producing oil in 2100.

  16. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:27 pm 

    Greggiet

    I won’t even go that far. Lol 2100 is to long a time ahead. Climate change might blow humans away by then.

    Check out that box I linked for Davy.

  17. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:29 pm 

    Just think if we had a few hundred thousand of these boxes sitting around for disasters.

  18. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:31 pm 

    Greg

    Every study is about our collapse of civilization. And none of them show us producing oil till 2100. They show oil available. But once we peak and go into decline world GDP will decline as well and cause a deflationary spiral and collapse. Keep lying to yourself though! You big fat pussy! LOL

  19. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:33 pm 

    Simple really….when the World Economy Collapses everything shuts down…the end… We’re talking about grids down all over the world and 7.5B people dropping like f*** flies in short order. The collapse will be absolutely horrible..There is no collapse or horror movie ever produced that has even come close to imagining what the collapse of BAU might look like. I’m talking about every corporation and every social program going bankrupt at once. I’m talking about people eating people. I’m talking about the Worst Catastrophe to ever happen in the history of mankind. Nothing has ever, or will ever come close..

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800914000615
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652617304225?via%3Dihub
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574335/
    http://sustainable.unimelb.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/MSSI-ResearchPaper-4_Turner_2014.pdf
    http://www.feasta.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Trade-Off1.pdf

  20. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:33 pm 

    “I won’t even go that far. Lol 2100 is to long a time ahead. Climate change might blow humans away by then.”

    Completely agree.

  21. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:36 pm 

    Existing oil reserves are scheduled to begin a catastrophic crash within 1 to 3 years. When it hits the economic and social damage will be catastrophic. The end of Western Civilization, from China to Europe, to the US, will not occur when oil runs out. The economic and social chaos will occur when supplies are merely reduced sufficiently….

    https://imgur.com/a/6dEDt
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v481/n7382/full/481433a.html
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421509001281
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151300342X
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236114010254
    http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/energy/the_challenges/peak_oil.html
    http://www.energybulletin.net/sites/default/files/Peak%20Oil_Study%20EN.pdf

  22. Boat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:37 pm 

    The emergence of battery and solar will keep getting cheaper,providing many more solutions and options.
    My current fav is industrial 4 hr battery to get rid of the ass on the duct curve for solar. We’ll see how Calif buys into the idea.

  23. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:38 pm 

    People always say again: We need to save our planet. No, we do not. The planet is going to save itself already. It always has done. Sometimes it took millions of years, but it happened. We should not be worried about the planet, but about the human species.

    -Dennis Meadows

  24. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:39 pm 

    ” We’re talking about grids down all over the world”

    The grid here isn’t going to go down anytime soon. Small, local, 100% hydro, that was refitted a decade ago. Should be just fine for at least another 40 or 50 years.

  25. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:39 pm 

    Boat

    Allow me to refute via peer reviewed science!

    UC Davis Study: It Will Take 131 Years to Replace Oil with Alternatives (Malyshkina, 2010)
    http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es100730q

    University of Chicago Study: predicts world economy unlikely to stop relying on fossil fuels (Covert, 2016)
    https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.30.1.117

    Solar and Wind produced less than one percent of total world energy in 2016 – IEA WEO 2017
    https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld2017.pdf

    Fossil Fuel Share of Global Energy since 1990 – BP 2017
    https://imgur.com/k7VecMq

  26. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:41 pm 

    Greg

    You don’t think your grid requires spare parts to be delivered to keep it operating? LOL

  27. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 8:56 pm 

    Future U.S. Oil Production Will Collapse Just As Quickly As It Increased

    https://srsroccoreport.com/future-u-s-production-will-collapse-just-quickly-increased/

  28. Mad Kat on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 9:36 pm 

    The Ps grid is over 40% renewables, like hydro, geo, solar and wind. It may hiccup but it will not go down 100%. That is only in the US where the grid is antique and FF dependent.

  29. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 9:47 pm 

    Madkat

    40 percent renewable s my ass..Your grid will crash and burn like all the rest without the spare parts and fossil fuels deliveries! Its going to be a catastrophe almost to terrifying to imagine!

  30. Cloggie on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 9:57 pm 

    “When I ask for references I mean ones that are not empty. Give me the wording calling for a 2025 collapse. Lol”

    The wording is on the title of Buchanan’s book, you unsufferable commie fool. And don’t tell me you don’t understand what “one giant Kosovo” means.

    But tell me prepper-Dave, are you also practising with guns and night-vision in the woods, like Darrel Cloud? B-b-but, isn’t that hate? That’s a fascinating country you are living in! Or are you relying on your one-way ticket into Italian safety? I thought that the ADL and SPLC had taught you that “diversity is your strength”!. I mean, it would be terrible if we can’t even trust people with stellar morals like the (((ADL))) and (((SPLC))).

  31. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 10:43 pm 

    More of your usual unadulterated BS MM.

    “Except for some extremely optimistic projections, most people inside and outside of industry predict that oil and natural gas production will be in decline before the middle of the 21st Century.”

    “After peak oil, in the latter half of the century, there will still be considerable oil (and natural gas) in the ground, but it will be so expensive to extract that other energy sources will be utilized.”

    http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/energy/the_challenges/peak_oil.html

    “ACT 21 studies address conceivable long-term security policy challenges that are to be met within a 30-year time frame whereas MTS studies address challenges that are to be met within a 15-year time frame.”

    The Bundeswehr report is an ACT 21 study.

    http://www.energybulletin.net/sites/default/files/Peak%20Oil_Study%20EN.pdf

    “Four critical countries (China, USA, Canada and Australia) were examined in detail with projections made on the state/province level.”

    “The Low and Best Guess (BG) scenarios suggest that world fossil fuel production may peak before 2025 and decline rapidly thereafter. The High scenario indicates that fossil fuels may have a strong growth till 2025 followed by a plateau lasting approximately 50 years before declining.”

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236114010254

    ” a serious topic for energy policy: how we respond to decreasing supplies of one of our most important energy sources.”

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142151300342X

    “Our conclusion is that the world faces an increasing oil supply challenge, as the decline in existing production is not only high now but will be increasing in the future.”

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421509001281

    “Climate policy: Oil’s tipping point has passed”

    “The economic pain of a flattening supply will trump the environment as a reason to curb the use of fossil fuels, say James Murray and David King.”

    https://www.nature.com/articles/481433a

  32. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 10:57 pm 

    More BS MM.

    “This research establishes a probabilistic theoretical approach based on market expectations reflected in prices of publicly traded securities to estimate the time horizon until the appearance of new technologies related to replacement of nonrenewable resources, for example, crude oil and oil products.”

    “The proposed market-expectations approach may allow policymakers to effectively develop policies and plan for long-term changes.”

    https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es100730q

    “Scientists believe significant climate change is unavoidable without a drastic reduction in the emissions of greenhouse gases from the combustion of fossil fuels.”

    “The historical record indicates that the supply of fossil fuels has consistently increased over time and that their relative price advantage over low-carbon energy sources has not declined substantially over time. Without robust efforts to correct the market failures around greenhouse gases, relying on supply and/or demand forces to limit greenhouse gas emissions is relying heavily on hope.”

    https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.30.1.117

    Shows a continued increase in all energy sources through 2040.

    https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld2017.pdf

  33. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:00 pm 

    Greg

    After peak oil the global economy will collapse! The reason is you can’t increase global GDP with a oil supply shortage! so all that oil on the back side of hubberts peak will stay in the ground forever!

  34. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:02 pm 

    Greg

    Nobody gives a shit about the stupid climate! OMG the cows are farting methane! LOL Gloabl warming is just another tax scam!

  35. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:20 pm 

    None of your repeated links in anyway supports your assertions of doom and gloom.

    You are either a regular garden variety troll, or you have the reading comprehension of a gnat.

    Neither points to the most minuscule semblance of intelligence.

  36. GregT on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:23 pm 

    “Nobody gives a shit about the stupid climate!”

    At least 3 of your above linked reports are entirely about concerns for the climate if we don’t stop burning fossil fuels.

  37. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:29 pm 

    Greg

    You can’t increase global GDP with a permanent oil supply shortage! Duh..Which will cause a limits to growth economic collapse..Duh.

    Now go kick rocks you old crusty boomer!

  38. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:31 pm 

    The End of the Oil Age is Imminent

    Recently, the HSBC oil report stated that 80% of conventional oil fields were declining at a rate of 5-7% per year. This means that there will be an oil shortage of ~30 million barrels per day by 2030 and ~40 million barrels per day by 2040.
    http://www.scribd.com/document/367688629/HSBC-Peak-Oil-Report-2017

    What is mentioned far less often is that annual oil discoveries have lagged annual production since the 1980s.
    https://imgur.com/a/6dEDt

    Now, this problem has nothing to do with the recent decline in the oil price, which started in 2014. This has been an on-going problem for the past 30 years. Now, the IEA is predicting oil shortages by ~2020 due to declining exploration.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/iea-says-global-oil-discoveries-at-record-low-in-2016-1493244000

    Here, the IEA blames this problem on the low oil price. But, this problem started in the 1980s. The problem is geological: we are running out of conventional cheap oil. Shale and tar sands are not the answer, either. Those resources are far too expensive, compared to conventional oil, because the global economy is based on cheap conventional oil. Expensive oil is not a replacement for cheap oil.

    Based upon the HSBC report and the IEA, the End of Oil Age will start around ~2020: there will be a dramatic economic depression due to exhaustion of cheap oil. This will cause a global economic collapse.

  39. MASTERMIND on Wed, 7th Feb 2018 11:35 pm 

    Greg

    You are just a coward who can’t handle the conclusions…like a little child who has to be told ‘Everything will be alright don’t cry”….Even the scum fuck Nationalist agreed with me! So kick rocks!

  40. GregT on Thu, 8th Feb 2018 12:06 am 

    “Based upon the HSBC report and the IEA, the End of Oil Age will start around ~2020”

    Based upon the HSBC report there could be oil supply shocks starting around 2020. There are numerous ways for governments to manage such shocks. And I’ve been reading all about the 5-7% annual reduction in supplies for over 20 years now.

    I would posit that an economic collapse would be the direct result of fiat currencies that are loaned into existence, created out of thin air, with interest attached. That would be the main reason for the need for infinite exponential growth.

  41. GregT on Thu, 8th Feb 2018 12:08 am 

    I came to many of the same conclusions as you have, two decades ago MM. Around the time you were in grade 3.

  42. peakyeast on Thu, 8th Feb 2018 5:32 am 

    @Mastermind: Its not the cow farts that is the problem – its their burping.

  43. Darrell Cloud on Thu, 8th Feb 2018 11:10 am 

    For the record, me and mine are not running around in the woods playing army. I am a collector of military hardware. The fact that I can outfit a light infantry company must be adjusted to the fact that most of the weapons I could supply are nearly a century old. A squad or two would be shooting black powder relics from the Indian wars.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *