[Nicholai]

Iceland? Finland?

[namenick]

name nick,

just because China will not be able to run all of their new cars (the subject in pup55's post) does not mean that we will nor does it assume that we will win any resource wars.

It just means a) the Chinese won't and b) this will make them mad. One need assume nothing to come to that conclusion.

There are many ways that could work out (a shooting resource war(s) being just one) but it would be hard to assert such an eventuality with the same certitude as the fact that there are limits to the supply of fossil fuels.

Well considering that you wish to pursue the issue further, I would just add that there is no certainty that the Chinese will get mad because they don't have enough gas to run all their new cars. I think it much more likely that the Americans will get mad for that reason and the Chinese will largely not worry about it too much because they live without cars as it is. They're more likely to move around on vehicles which get 150 miles to the gallon or better. So in essence I see the US cutting back slightly in the next 10 years as the supply of oil is kept constant through oil wars and the Chinese upping their consumption to a small degree as they consolidate their future supply through countries which the US has alienated. I see the US has just closed a deal with the Saudis for billions of dollars worth of weaponry so there's little danger of losing them I would guess.

Really and truly cur, I am very interested in knowing what you Americans see for the next 10 years or so. I don't see drastic cutbacks on energy consumption but more likely a levelling off through necessity as the oil wars and political maneuvering bring in less of the requirement and sustaining the current level of consumption becomes difficult. That alone means huge changes for the US as more gluttonous consumers demand more. Those who can afford it will continue to drive their SUV's while those who can't afford it will have to make more sacrifices. After all, don't most Americans already think that the poor don't deserve to be looked after by the rich?

[Bas]

I cannot think of why Holland is so high on that list (there must be a mistake?) our distances are tiny and so are the cars, and we have loads of bicycles and good public transport on top of that we have higher gastaxes than the UK (I believe the highest in the world even?)

Probably it's because Rotterdam is a major petrochemical hub in which alot of oil is delivered and refined for re-export to Germany and also the US. I presume that the same goes for Belgium through Antwerp and that the real per capita consumption in both countries is much lower than suggested by the list and probably close to what other W-European countries consume.

[namenick]

Pixie- I appreciate your efforts but I fear that it is a futile task to try to figure out who the top 1 billion consumers are. I think you have succeeded in answering the question in the best possible manner already. For example, it is not really individuals in all cases who are sucking up the oil, it is industry in many cases and how would we ever be able to pin their consumption on individuals? Try to pin it on the individuals who benefit from those industries?

[lateStarter]

By 2022, we can expect to have to cut our oil use by at least a third.

It's not that we can't live that way, but do we know how?

Just follow the EU example.

People in EU countries have a very high quality of life but use much less oil. A good place for the US to start copying the EU would be by constructing a modern electric high speed train system connecting major American cities, and by building more light rail within the cities.

I agree with you that people in the EU have a much higher quality of life than folks in the US. Copy all you want, but it won't work in the US. Who in the US wants to take a high speed train from Cleveland to Memphis? Who is going to ride light rail in Baltimore?

You are just too spread out for this to happen unless the US evolves into a number of semi-autonomous regions. It was great while it lasted... Actually, I think that what you are suggesting will happen eventually by default (unless the US just started too late).

[Pixie]

Pixie- I appreciate your efforts but I fear that it is a futile task to try to figure out who the top 1 billion consumers are. I think you have succeeded in answering the question in the best possible manner already. For example, it is not really individuals in all cases who are sucking up the oil, it is industry in many cases and how would we ever be able to pin their consumption on individuals? Try to pin it on the individuals who benefit from those industries?

I agree. Within a society, not everyone benefits equally, but it is generally the society that uses the oil as a unit. Individual use is only a small piece of the puzzle. Besides, even that individual use is somewhat dictated by the society. Whether you are a top carnivore or a lowly peon, you use the resources and the system that exists around you. It takes an act of society to change that system.

[Pixie]

Just follow the EU example.

People in EU countries have a very high quality of life but use much less oil. A good place for the US to start copying the EU would be by constructing a modern electric high speed train system connecting major American cities, and by building more light rail within the cities.

You are just too spread out for this to happen unless the US evolves into a number of semi-autonomous regions. It was great while it lasted... Actually, I think that what you are suggesting will happen eventually by default (unless the US just started too late).

Agreed. We need to move in the direction that Plantagenet suggested, or we will move in a far worse direction. Another way to say this is, would we prefer to power down like Western Europe or like Russia after the USSR collapsed? The question is, do we have sufficient understanding of the problem to rationally make that choice, as a society. I think not. We are stuck in our paradigm, and we will have to collapse to a certain extent before we break that paradigm. At that point, we will understand the need for change, but we might not have the resources to do it.

That having been said, Europe can't pat itself on the back too much. Europe is more efficient and better prepared than the USA, but you're still going to power down. Fifty years from now, we're all going to have national energy budgets equivalent to Cuba's.

[Pixie]

I cannot think of why Holland is so high ... our distances are tiny and so are the cars, ... loads of bicycles and good public transport ... higher gastaxes than the UK ...
Probably it's because Rotterdam is a major petrochemical hub in which alot of oil is delivered and refined for re-export to Germany and also the US.... the same goes for Belgium through Antwerp ... real per capita consumption in both countries is much lower... probably close to other W-European countries.

I bet you're right. I noticed that too.

[Pixie]

Iceland? Finland?

It's sweet that you are such a loyal fano f Finland, Nicolai. I am a fan of Iceland. They're language is as close to Old Norse as it gets. Culturally, we owe them for the Sagas. I haven not yet been, but I hope to visit some time.

Finland: consumption=225,030
population=5,238,460
percapita=0.043

Iceland: Consumption=17,180
population=301,931
percapita=0.057

Very small countries, so a small percentage of world consumption, but high rates of per capita consumption. They too are among the top one billion consumers. Can't blame them--it gets freakin' cold there! And Iceland has no forests.

People who live close to the poles will really be in a pickle when the fuel runs out.

[Plantagenet]

People who live close to the poles will really be in a pickle when the fuel runs out.

Maybe....maybe not.

Population densities tend to much lower in northern countries, and education levels and the quality of life can be very high. The northern countries have certain benefits.

Iceland is rich in geothermal energy and plans to migrate to a hydrogen based economy.

Sweden and Finland make use of hydro power.

Canada is full of tar sands and oil and exports oil to the US

Norway is an oil exporter, and has a huge savings fund from its oil earnings...AND

Alaska is another oil-exporter, has just raised taxes on in-state production to bring in an extra billion a year in oil taxes, is moving towards building a natural gas pipeline to supply the lower 48, and has already saved about $35 billion in a state investment account.

[Pixie]

People who live close to the poles will really be in a pickle when the fuel runs out.

Maybe....maybe not.

Population densities tend to much lower in northern countries, and education levels and the quality of life can be very high. The northern countries have certain benefits.
...
Alaska is another oil-exporter, has just raised taxes on in-state production to bring in an extra billion a year in oil taxes, is moving towards building a natural gas pipeline to supply the lower 48, and has already saved about $35 billion in a state investment account.

I agree that Iceland has a plan, and I fervently wish them luck with that. Anywhere that has hydropower is in relatively good shape. But Norway and Alaska's savings accounts won't last long. Norway and Alaska have both passed their peaks for oil production. Every year from here on out, you can expect to produce less, and eventually none.

Distances between settlements are vast in Alaska and a lot of towns can only be reached by bush plane. Alaska is highly oil dependent for winter heating. What are you going to do in the winter when there is no more oil? You have vast forests, but slow growth rates. You'll burn through your wood quickly with the current population.

Only a tiny fraction of the state is farmable. There is a reason northern climes generally have lower populations. They have lower carrying capacities. Excellent fish runs, and lots of caribou, but you will not be sustaining the current population on those food sources for long. Just like everywhere else, Alaska is going to find itself cold, hungry and overpopulated when the oil runs low.

Finally, Alaska is not its own country. A lot of Alaska's last dregs of oil will be "exported" to the lower 48 for use in industry and military. That includes the ANWR, which I bet will eventually get opened up, but not until the US military needs it.

[Pixie]

Plantagenet, what's your expert rating for? What's your field of expertise? I need to know who I am arguing with.

[Plantagenet]

.... ANWR, which I bet will eventually get opened up, but not until the US military needs it.

The US military has no say over ANWR.

The new democratic Congress will never open up ANWR. The dems have blocked all attempts to allow oil exploration there for the last 30 years.

[Bas]

.... ANWR, which I bet will eventually get opened up, but not until the US military needs it.

The US military has no say over ANWR.

The new democratic Congress will never open up ANWR. The dems have blocked all attempts to allow oil exploration there for the last 30 years.

and all the while it becomes worth more and more.... I must say despite being quite green and socialist I wouldn't object to opening the ANWR....well, America could ofcourse strike a deal with Europe to burn less coal at least; you know who is willing.

[Plantagenet]

Hi Bas:

Maybe we could swap some Alaskan oil to Europe for some Russian natural gas?

[namenick]

PIxie asked:

Plantagenet, what's your expert rating for? What's your field of expertise? I need to know who I am arguing with.

Spending a lot of time posting on this forum. You can be one too.

[Pixie]

.... ANWR, which I bet will eventually get opened up, but not until the US military needs it.

The US military has no say over ANWR.

The new democratic Congress will never open up ANWR. The dems have blocked all attempts to allow oil exploration there for the last 30 years.

I'm aware. We've also always had plenty of oil to run our economy, miitary and all else. When the oil starts to run out, people will panic, and I think the politics will change. I'm not saying I am in favor of it. I am just saying that that is how I think things will play out. We're addicted to this stuff. When we can't get our fix, we'll make "compromises", just like any junky.

[Plantagenet]

PIxie asked:

Plantagenet, what's your expert rating for? What's your field of expertise? I need to know who I am arguing with.

Spending a lot of time posting on this forum. You can be one too.

Set your sights high and never give up and you too can accomplish great things.

[Pixie]

PIxie asked:

Plantagenet, what's your expert rating for? What's your field of expertise? I need to know who I am arguing with.

Spending a lot of time posting on this forum. You can be one too.

I can do this. I know I can! Actually, my frequency of posting will go down in three months, when I change jobs and get one that actually absorbs my interest. I like all y'all, but I do look forward to that change.

[Plantagenet]

I can do this. I know I can! Actually, my frequency of posting will go down in three months, when I change jobs and get one that actually absorbs my interest. I like all y'all, but I do look forward to that change.

You are doing great!

And in three months time, when the world economy collapses because of the effects of peak oil, you will be PO-aware and fully prepared to move off the grid, live lightly on the earth and/or do battle with hordes of starving zombies, depending on that day's events.