We cannot drill our way out of this oil crisis. Since 2000, oil companies working in the U.S. have doubled the number of wells drilled per year.
Although increased drilling has added new oil to the nation's supply, it has not done so fast enough to offset the terminal decline of existing fields.
We are going to have to import more of our oil. Period.
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:24 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
I have to agree with the preceding post, the socialism-lite so cherished in Europe makes the same fundamental assumptons on resource availability as are made by other systems. The differences are in the management of wealth allocation and distribution, but there is never any real question that the sources of this wealth could come up empty. In a resource crisis, you will see the exact same sense of entitlement come to the fore. It may be expressed in different terms, but the effects will be the same, people will feel deprived, angry, and will look for someone to blame.
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:16 am Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
btu2012 wrote:
In my opinion the global competiton for energy resources will be dominated by large players, such as the US, China and the
EU, in fact smaller independent players are likely to loose out due to lack of military, political and economic power.
I would throw in Russia, India, Aussies, Brazil and may be few others as well.
Quote:
Assuming that we survive the crisis somehow, we will still have a globalized world at least in terms of information. I do not believe that communication technology will regress, in fact I think
we will rely on it to reduce our transportation needs.
I have substantial difficulties to work out what city populations would actually do and how cities would be maintained in financially/economically collapsed world.
SuperInternet v.3.0 and 100 TB i-phone would not be of much use if you cannot provide continuity of food supplies, sanitation etc.
How would you provide adequate finance in the world with declining economical output?
Quote:
I think we will not have feudalism on small scales, but on a global scale (the overlord will be one powerful nation), and it will be a hight-tech feudalism though of course with a lower global population and not based on fossil fuels.
Atomic war is probably more likely then emergence of such "masternation".
My bet is that such a war would be launched just before one of nations managed to deploy foolproof ABM systems...
Large empires do not last long either as history of humankind shows...
If they don't succumb to external enemy, they will develop "many Czars problem".
Quote:
You seem to expect that there will be wholesale return to local polities as a result of PO, but I find that unlikely. Instead I expect the crisis to produce a new global hegemon, and for the reasons I mentioned I think this will not be Europe.
Hegemon replacement is a situation, where an atomic war can easily come. In any case Europe is not fit.
My view is that presence of current stockpiles of nukes will assure that "hegemon chair" will remain empty after American resignation.
Cross blackmail with nukes will be sufficient deterrent here.
Quote:
It is likely that we will see planned population control in the developed nations,
Very unlikely.
1. It would be war against current values.
2. It would be war on major religions.
In my view Nature (or war...) will deal with excessive population long before consensus within humanity in that respect is reached.
You would need a century (or many centuries...) long process before working consensus is reached. Nature will do faster (and better...) job.
Quote:
switch towards a controlled and rationed economy , independent of the stockmarket (it won't be capitalism in the current sense).
Again if you got there, you will get "equals and more equals problem" and initial socialism will quickly deteriorate towards feudal societies.
Quote:
The Mad Max scenario will only happen if we end up with nuclear war, however I think it more likely that the conflict will play out in much more insidious ways.
What about rampant environmental problems?
What about major pandemic disease?
Quote:
Regarding nukes etc, they are unfortunately the only option for any
polity (state or group of states) who wants to have a credible deterrent for the medium term future.
Correct.
Quote:
I think that the rich nations will make a major push towards nuclear energy and robotization (robots powered by electricity) including military robots, and towards large scale teleworking.
Btu
That is cornucopian fiction.
Some nuclear development here and there - yes, albeit it is far from clear, can nuclear power and renewables together maintain nuclear infrastructure working. Time will show.
Robotization - what would you need robots for, if you have too many peoples at the first place?
Military robots - peoples will came much cheaper and they will also be expendable in brave new world.
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 2:03 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
EnergyUnlimited: robotization of American forces will eliminate the key weakness in its operations: humans. Human stress, death tolls, soldiers going AWOL, reports of American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners and civilians, soldiers refusing to do certain missions - these are all things the Pentagon can do without. War is largely psycological now, and nothing has a higher morale than a machine. In fact, few things are more terrifying than the very quiet, very small drones that have been experimentally introduced to Afghanistan and Iraq. Oh, and did you hear about this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3571261.stm
Drone bombers would also be able to mobilise very quickly without the need to prep pilots, reducing intelligence leaks on rapid operations.
If America robotizes its army then it can also keep its wars away from domestic opinion too. No more soldiers coming back and complaining about what they had to suffer / who they had to kill. No more petitions from aggrevied families.
I don't think its fantasy as long as the public are slow to put pressure on America's militarism. I doubt limitation of oil is unlikely to affect such developments too. In times of crises, strategic sectors are always protected. If America, particularly, loses its military industrial complex, it loses all.
Last edited by Kaj on Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: Sep 24, 2007 Posts: 2537 Location: third from the sun
Posted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:05 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
I would throw in Russia, India, Aussies, Brazil and may be few others as well.
Agreed.
Quote:
I have substantial difficulties to work out what city populations would actually do and how cities would be maintained in financially/economically collapsed world.
Finance can be computerized and reformulated in terms of energy. Transportation can be reduced to the minimum necessary for agriculture and manufacturing. Cities can be delocalized (powerdown). The basic population mark for a city is about 100,000 under these conditions, with teleworking and intensive use of industrial robotics.
Quote:
SuperInternet v.3.0 and 100 TB i-phone would not be of much use if you cannot provide continuity of food supplies, sanitation etc.
.
You can with a reduced population. High broadband will be crucial for teleworking. I expect that every family will be given incentives to become self-sufficient in food, that's why they will work from home. A small city has much lower sanitation costs than a metropolis. Think a high-tech version of the Byzantine empire.
Quote:
Atomic war is probably more likely then emergence of such "masternation".
I think that the emergence of a master nation is a local attractor in global politics, not very sensitive to the parameters of the system. Atomic war will likely happen but it could be regional only. However even worse would be biological/nanotech war, for which the payoff/risk incentives will grow tremendously (I am considering a 50 year timescale).
Quote:
Very unlikely [about population control].
1. It would be war against current values.
2. It would be war on major religions.
China did successfully impose a one child policy, so I think that the West can too. In my opinion it is possible if the West moves toward authoritarian government systems, which is very likely given that this is a survival threat. You seem to be assuming that present-style liberal democracy will survive, which I think is unrealistic. I think "values" are overrated. The "war over values" is a luxury of an abundant society, people will have other priorities if survival is at stake.
Quote:
Again if you got there, you will get "equals and more equals problem" and initial socialism will quickly deteriorate towards feudal societies.
This refers to far post-peak. What I meant is computerized assessment of price which factors in ecological/resource costs. This can be implemented through a "moving tax" system. There will be a market but the pricing will be very different from today. This will make it very expensive to carry out operations with destructive ecological side effects.
I didn't mean anything like socialism, that idea is dead.
Quote:
What about rampant environmental problems?
What about major pandemic disease?
The only possibility to mitigate this is to voluntarily reduce the population. After the transition, the environment could
be partially cleaned using genetically modified organisms and nanotech. It will be very long term and expensive.
Quote:
That is cornucopian fiction.
Here we are talking far post peak (50 year timeframe).
I guess robotics is what you view as cornucopian (the other technologies are available now). I think robotics will be central in any transition to a low population world, not least because one would need efficient manufacturing in situ.
Robotics will most likely receive a major push over the next 20 years due to military and immigration control demand. Robotized manufacturing would reduce the need for transporting workers, transportation will be expensive (even
if electricity based) and will be reserved mostly for products and prime materials (not people).
Btu
PS: The future is an unfamiliar place. You must take into account all trends to get a picture of it. _________________ only the paranoid survive
Joined: Jun 15, 2006 Posts: 104 Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:43 am Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
mkwin wrote:
Kicking out the strongest military power, the financial capital of Europe and second strongest economic power in Europe - good idea.
Well...didn´t Northern Rock and the kidnapped soldiers in Iran debacle ring a bell at all? The fence sitting just makes it an awkward player. The infrastructure is worse than the US and yet it insists on it´s archaic imperial measurements and coin. The economic wonder is financed in the same brilliant way as the cousin. It´s a powder keg waiting to explode and guess who will pay the bail out then? Get back on track Britons. Kicking about third world countries doesn´t impress anymore. Join the team will you.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 2:57 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
btu2012 wrote:
Finance can be computerized and reformulated in terms of energy. Transportation can be reduced to the minimum necessary for agriculture and manufacturing. Cities can be delocalized (powerdown). The basic population mark for a city is about 100,000 under these conditions, with teleworking and intensive use of industrial robotics.
Again, keyword is how to convert finance in such a way without total ruin of existing system first?
100 000 per city & 200 - 400 cities like that in US. Looks neat and lean. Anyway majority of population in developed world is living in larger cities...presumably these are doomed...
Quote:
High broadband will be crucial for teleworking. I expect that every family will be given incentives to become self-sufficient in food, that's why they will work from home. A small city has much lower sanitation costs than a metropolis. Think a high-tech version of the Byzantine empire.
That is an interesting concept.
However I really cannot work out what purpose such teleworking would have and which goods/services could be actually delivered that way.
Most peoples would be already self sufficient in terms of feeding themselves, travel would be restricted by cost or by law (or by both...), etc.
I cannot imagine high tech items being routinely manufactured over the phone. BTW I am aware of 3D printing.
Nevertheless I cannot imagine working economy assembled in that fashion.
Quote:
I think that the emergence of a master nation is a local attractor in global politics, not very sensitive to the parameters of the system. Atomic war will likely happen but it could be regional only. However even worse would be biological/nanotech war, for which the payoff/risk incentives will grow tremendously (I am considering a 50 year timescale).
1. Why should we have a lousy local atomic war, not a proper global one?
2. Biological war. Could easily develop into nuclear one.
I even think that nuclear war may be an answer to entirely natural pandemic event, especially if there are suspicions that someone had dropped it...
3. Nanotech weapons. Straightforward way to "grey goo" if designed to tackle humans and straight forward route to Stone Age if designed to tackle some important construction materials like steel or concrete.
That would be universal Stone Age for all, time given.
Quote:
China did successfully impose a one child policy, so I think that the West can too. In my opinion it is possible if the West moves toward authoritarian government systems, which is very likely given that this is a survival threat. You seem to be assuming that present-style liberal democracy will survive, which I think is unrealistic. I think "values" are overrated. The "war over values" is a luxury of an abundant society, people will have other priorities if survival is at stake.
How successful China's policy might be, it remains to be seen.
At the moment they are getting 1.7 - 1.8 kid per couple, immense social problems, unknown number of officially nonexisting children etc. They may well give up shortly...
They will need more consumers to fuel growing economy soon...
I don't assume indefinite continuation of liberal democracy but I do assume that all out atomic war would take a precedence over implementation China alike 1 child policy in Christian or Islamic world.
Quote:
This refers to far post-peak. What I meant is computerized assessment of price which factors in ecological/resource costs. This can be implemented through a "moving tax" system. There will be a market but the pricing will be very different from today. This will make it very expensive to carry out operations with destructive ecological side effects.
I don't know why such assessment would have to be computerized.
In any case there would be competing programmers at the first place and various nations would argue about scope of parameters to be included in your software...
Quote:
The only possibility to mitigate this is to voluntarily reduce the population.
Again, what about war, hunger, pandemic disease....
Quote:
After the transition, the environment could
be partially cleaned using genetically modified organisms and nanotech. It will be very long term and expensive.
Again cornucopian pipedream about humans "repairing" the planet.
It will be most probably impossible task.
Nature will clean herself, sufficient time given.
Quote:
Here we are talking far post peak (50 year timeframe).
I guess robotics is what you view as cornucopian (the other technologies are available now). I think robotics will be central in any transition to a low population world, not least because one would need efficient manufacturing in situ.
Technology (including robotics). is additional consumer of energy.
It may not be applicable when human labor is to cheap to bother about.
Quote:
Robotics will most likely receive a major push over the next 20 years due to military and immigration control demand.
Any ideas about robotized immigration control?
Too cornucopian for me.
Quote:
Robotized manufacturing would reduce the need for transporting workers, transportation will be expensive (even
if electricity based) and will be reserved mostly for products and prime materials (not people).
My greatest problems with robotics are that we are trying to apply non existing technology to perform unnecessary tasks.
Again it may be cheaper to transport workers than construct, maintain and apply robots unless you are after very large production volume (eg you have a large consumerism driven society to support such undertaking).
I think, you are secretely a Cornucopian who is grasping last straws of hope in attempt to save high tech world.
There is a slim chance that such vision could succeed (provided that a number of not yet existing technologies will prove viable), albeit I would not bet my money on it.
Collapse with gradual retardation of knowledge and technologies is far more likely outcome IMO.
BTW. I believe that we will manage to keep electricity, basic sanitation and medical skills etc.
However I am explicitly skeptical about prospects of bright future of IT.
Joined: Sep 24, 2007 Posts: 2537 Location: third from the sun
Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:04 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Again, keyword is how to convert finance in such a way without total ruin of existing system first?
By introducing VAT components which price in all externalities (resource usage, ecology, social impact, population impact). A fancy form of taxation. Parts of the current system will have to transform or be ruined indeed.
EnergyUnlimited wrote:
Anyway majority of population in developed world is living in larger cities...presumably these are doomed...
Only very few larger cities could survive. Most of them will have to be scaled back and delocalized.
Quote:
I cannot imagine working economy assembled in that fashion.
Mostly an economy based on agriculture and services. Robotic/nanotech factories with remote product planning. Services performed remotely (legal, medical etc).
Quote:
Why should we have a lousy local atomic war, not a proper global one?
Because of Mutually Assured Destruction.
Quote:
How successful China's policy might be, it remains to be seen.
It did achieve most of its targets albeit imperfectly. The west can do better (through better education, legislation and enforcement).
Quote:
I do assume that all out atomic war would take a precedence over implementation China alike 1 child policy in Christian or Islamic world.
Quite possible. But I choose to wish to believe that I might hope that you are wrong.
Quote:
I don't know why such assessment would have to be computerized.
To keep pace with the (online) market.
Quote:
various nations would argue about scope of parameters to be included in your software...
It would be decided by law, the software would be trivial.
Quote:
Nature will clean herself, sufficient time given.
Might take millenia without help.
Quote:
Technology (including robotics). is additional consumer of energy. It may not be applicable when human labor is to cheap to bother about.
Cheap human labor cannot sustain a knowledge society. If we fail to use robotics to maintain manufacturing, we'll descend into a dark age and loose most current knowledge.
There will be sources of energy such as renewables, thorium reactors etc. The population will be low, labor won't be abundant.
Quote:
Any ideas about robotized immigration control?
Too cornucopian for me.
You are already beginning to see it and it's frightening rather than cornucopian.
Quote:
Again it may be cheaper to transport workers than construct, maintain and apply robots.
Robots are much more productive at repetitive manufacturing tasks and they work on electricity. Bringing workers for their manual labor would be a waste of resources. Remember that in such a society the population is already low and most physical labor goes into agriculture.
Quote:
Collapse with gradual retardation of knowledge and technologies is far more likely outcome IMO.
I agree --- but it's worth trying for a better outcome.
Quote:
I am explicitly skeptical about prospects of bright future of IT.
IT could be as basic as electricity within 50 years. But we won't have a consumer gadgets industry like today. Something more sturdy and with much longer usage cycles.
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:44 am Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
Will energy and food issues encourage us to become more nationalistic, as some nations are better adjusted to Peak Oil than others and don’t want to share? It’s quite possible – but I think that would be a big mistake.
PO, energy security and world food prices are cross-Europe issues and should be bringing us closer together – any other approach is wasteful, may cause mass migration within Europe, and prevents us negotiating with the world and organizing from a position of strength.
If Europe does become closer, with Peak Oil pressures encouraging us to become more localized as well, I see the nation state’s role being squeezed or even withering away.
Joined: Mar 07, 2007 Posts: 267 Location: Holland, United Kingdom (of the seven Netherlands)
Posted: Fri May 02, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
I think Energy will play an important rule in the future expansion of the EU. Turkey is a strategic nation that provides access to middle-east and central asian energy.
The Ukrain will be another candidate, perhaps not so much for fossil fuels, but more for it's ability to provide food and biofuels.
After that I see possible EU expansion in northern africa. The EU needs at least one of the North-African countries as a strategic partner for its solar thermal energy. This could be Marocco, Algeria or Tunesia. Neither country is ready to join the EU without political reform, but there is a lot to gain.
In the long term the EU could expand all the way into central asia after Turkey has joined. This could provide central asian countries the security and stability they require to boost their economic development and provide the EU with further energy security.
The EU will expand to become the leading power in the world.
Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:05 am Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
Gerben wrote:
The EU will expand to become the leading power in the world.
Yep,
It will be wonderful world, driven by Romanian machinery, secured by German police who enforce Turkish human rights standards.
It will be ruled by Greek politicians implementing Algerian justice system and Italian currency, perhaps with Swiss precision.
It will draw its energy from British oil fields, it will rely on Spanish food and it will enjoy Ukrainian Social Security service.
Dutch brothels will provide all the entertainment with French prostitutes serving European MP-s and Eastern European ones - all remaining folk.
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:33 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
Well the Irish just rejected the Lisbon treaty (which was going to replace the failed attempt to get a constitution).
This is a pretty big blow for the European project and it will likely take at least a few years to recover the momentum.
The constitution and the treaty were both intended mainly to get more streamline in European decision making, which is badly needed if Europe really is going to have agency in the world.
However, the skepticism from various peoples (France, Ireland, Britain, Denmark) probably comes from the anti-democratic nature of the EU, also badly in need of reform (and therefore a bigger priority). The Commission needs to be made demonstrably accountable: then maybe they will get more enthusiasm from the reluctant publics.
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
The future is hidden under the dark veil of time as always.
Corporate powergrab just failed again and the fight against his enslaving heads rising again continues.
There are my views on the possible future from the inside of EU.
In political scale I predict populist nationalism rising hand-in-hand with greens and big shifts coming towards EU to become a trade union again instead of multicultural sheeple herd. There will be more rioting from immigrants trying to defend themselves against nationalists shaking hay out of them. Watch Sweden.
There will be more issues related to climate change and fresh-water availability. Positions of Northen Europe strengthen and this will lead to some shifts in political power. Northern Europe - Scandinavia - has still very stong national identity and it will not be in their interest to have majority of EU citizens to decide what they should do. This will be another step leading back to pure trade union.
If things are going bad enough some Easten European states will deflect from EU to join again later with Russia on their side and at very different terms. Some former soviet bloc countries being head-on allies of US of A will be in total mess and will be later when their decoy job is done sold to wherever offers the best offer.
errorist, from Estonia. Economic growth in here just dropped from ~8% to 0.4% in 4 months and we have huge economic crisis looming. Estonia is head-on US ally on state level and nobody (exept ~30% of population being leftover russian colonists) here loves russians...
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
errorist wrote:
There will be more issues related to climate change and fresh-water availability. Positions of Northen Europe strengthen and this will lead to some shifts in political power. Northern Europe - Scandinavia - has still very stong national identity and it will not be in their interest to have majority of EU citizens to decide what they should do. This will be another step leading back to pure trade union.
I think such a development is inevitable. Despite the ideals of some, an ethnically defined nation is the basic political "unit" that's likely to remain intact when the going gets rough. Those who pay taxes to a state and obey its laws naturally expect the state to promote their interests. Strategic alliances between nations may arise when interests converge, and cultural similarities can help somewhat with this, but in the end it's every country for itself.
errorist wrote:
errorist, from Estonia. Economic growth in here just dropped from ~8% to 0.4% in 4 months and we have huge economic crisis looming. Estonia is head-on US ally on state level and nobody (exept ~30% of population being leftover russian colonists) here loves russians...
Kas ei teiel siiski ole mone kivioli? (Isn't that what oil shale is called in Estonian?) At least oil shale will grant you some cushion to fall back on when the energy crisis has set in. And I don't think your resources are large enough for Russia to grab them, as they have so much coal etc. themselves. Anyway, it's pretty sad how the Soviet occupation left as legacy those non-integrated Russians in your country. A while back some pro-Russian Finnish journalist accused Estonia of oppressing them and promoting negative "myths" about the Soviet occupation... _________________ "It seems inconceivable that a society so bold as to put men on the moon can't overcome such a prosaic problem as finding something other than oil byproducts to run our cars on. From this holy font all cognitive dissonance flows."
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:05 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
Fredrik wrote:
Kas ei teiel siiski ole mone kivioli? (Isn't that what oil shale is called in Estonian?) At least oil shale will grant you some cushion to fall back on when the energy crisis has set in. And I don't think your resources are large enough for Russia to grab them, as they have so much coal etc. themselves. Anyway, it's pretty sad how the Soviet occupation left as legacy those non-integrated Russians in your country. A while back some pro-Russian Finnish journalist accused Estonia of oppressing them and promoting negative "myths" about the Soviet occupation...
Yes we do have oil shale... but... quess what happens to country with 1M citizens when some resource it has costs A LOT OF MONEY? This oil shale is robbed (russians do not need it - it will be west this time to plunder this country) and quickly. There is a strong debate right now between enviroment protection groups/locals and corporate-supported goverment. I do not see other possibility than open protests (goverment just legalized taser here and reforming force structures , everybody who is against them gets labeled pro-russian...) so we'll see what will happen. There is other disturbing development - goverment is preparing laws to start cutting down forests throwing out enviromental and local needs (50% of territory is [or at least was lately] forested). Those prepared laws and changes are protested in courts, corruption charges filed and so on. This was a great relief that Ireland refused EU powergrab - therefore our constitution still holds and we still have a little legal possibility to stop thieves. Our goverment is hijacked.
This is somehow no-news to me because I with many others predicted this kind of developments before joining EU and were against it... but... shiny things can make people blind.
Oil shale in estonian is põlevkivi. Põlevkiviõli means oil made from shale. Selling this oil on world markets doubled price on home heating here some years ago (2005 if my memory still works).
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:20 pm Post subject: Re: Fellow Europeans, what's the future of the EU?
A government can rob their people of a national resource for only so long, before it gets overthrown as the situation and its consequences becomes too obvious to everybody.
I wish you Southern cousins hea onn teie voitluse. _________________ "It seems inconceivable that a society so bold as to put men on the moon can't overcome such a prosaic problem as finding something other than oil byproducts to run our cars on. From this holy font all cognitive dissonance flows."
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
, everybody who is against them gets labeled pro-russian...) so we'll see what will happen. There is other disturbing development - goverment is preparing laws to start cutting down forests throwing out enviromental and local needs (50% of territory is [or at least was lately] forested). Those prepared laws and changes are protested in courts, corruption charges filed and so on. This was a great relief that Ireland refused EU powergrab - therefore our constitution still holds and we still have a little legal possibility to stop thieves. Our goverment is hijacked.