Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Improving Peak Oil Credibility

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

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mcgowanjm » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 12:04:57

PO has credibility issues?

:twisted: 8O 8)

Want to talk about BP now? Magically doubling world oil reserves
in 1985(Still not revised down to my knowledge).
Before we leave that curve, though, I want to point out that a sudden jump of 300–400 billion barrels of oil in OPEC (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) reserves occurs in the late 1980s (see figure 3, left-hand graph, above). But there were no significant discoveries of oil in OPEC countries during that period. What happened instead is that OPEC changed its quota for how much each country could pump on the basis of what it claimed in reserves, and politicians discovered 400 billion barrels of oil without ever drilling a hole in the ground! This helps us to understand how undependable these numbers are for worldwide proven oil reserves.


http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/calte ... 8/oil.html

Recently convicted of homicide in the Texas City Refinery
Explosion?.

And like BigOil is some kind of NGO Charity. They'd be saving the Whales and Blue Fin tuna but the more charitable endeavor is
drilling for oil off Florida and ANWR. :oops: :roll: 8O
mcgowanjm
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri 23 May 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 13:31:05

AAA wrote:Most of you are much older


And I daresay, wiser.

AAA wrote:I am one of the few who are slowly changing their entire lives because I feel peak oil will be an issue.


Changing your life is going to require some inner-work as well.

Listen, when I first learned about peak oil doom, you know what I did? I drove off to Best Buy and kind of walked the grounds in a state of shock, mourning in advance for the death of advanced civilization. Then I went through a period of fetishizing EVs (bargaining). I look back on that and I realize how I'm in a very different place. I'm at more peace over the frills we'll one day lose.

It's helped me focus on the important stuff, which is to reconnect with the source of our real carrying capacity. We need lots of people doing this instead of placing ourselves at the mercy of industrial agriculture's failed stewardship of the earth. I know it sounds cliche', but it's true, and undeniable. Five years ago I never in my life thought I'd be outside building raised beds or going to take a class in apple tree grafting. But this is the kind of stuff we have to do.

To rationalize working in the oil industry by using the language of a drug pusher to a heroin addict is really dysfunctional. Those talking points are not going to encourage anything but continued dependence.

If you really think you're so much of a hero for doing what you do, enabling BAU, then you're much worse of an advocate for peakoil than the granola crowd you despise so much.

AAA wrote:I have accomplished more in the last 5 years then many of you have in the last 20 years.


There's more to life than superficial career accomplishments.
mos6507
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 13:47:39

mos6507,

This is why people discredit PO. You cannot use common sense and most of the time you are totally illogical and irrational.

mos6507 wrote:
If you really think you're so much of a hero for doing what you do, enabling BAU, then you're much worse of an advocate for peakoil than the granola crowd you despise so much.


Have you not listened to anything I have said? I have talked to literally over 100 different people about peak oil. I have an article published in an oil industry magazine that has over 17,000 subscribers in the US and Canada. I am currently writing a paper for an oil industry newsletter that is distributed to several hundred people. How many people have you told about PO? Or should I say, how many people have you talked about PO and scared off?

mos6507 wrote:There's more to life than superficial career accomplishments.


I am not talking about career accomplishments. I am talking about post-peak preps for a lifestyle without cheap energy. Pull your head out and comprehend what you read from other people’s posts.
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby davep » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 13:54:36

davep attacks me because I want to have 2 wood stoves in my passive solar house. I have seen hundreds of passive solar house plans and I don’t recall seeing 1 plan that doesn’t include fireplaces or wood stoves. When a winter storm hangs around and you don’t see sunlight for 8 days good luck trying to stay warm.


You attacked me, sneering that I mustn't know much about passive solar design. So I let you know otherwise. Deal with it.

It is true that you need a fireplace or other source of active heat in most (not all) passive designs, but if it is properly designed, one fireplace will suffice and even then it should be needed only intermittently in Winter.

Talking about having an endless supply of wood and two stoves, and a house of 3000 square feet is not really grasping the theory behind passive design.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby davep » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 14:01:09

Most of you are much older and don’t have to think about long-term planning. I am one of the few who are slowly changing their entire lives because I feel peak oil will be an issue.


What a load of bull. What is permaculture if it's not a long-term plan? I may have another forty odd years left. In that time, I hope to help shift the paradigm, along with many others of a like mind.

I’m not some hippie, organic purist, or radical environmentalist. I am just a regular guy who thinks PO is bad enough to take it seriously. You guys can attack me all you want but I have accomplished more in the last 5 years then many of you have in the last 20 years.


Why denigrate hippies/organic purists/environmentalists? What is a regular guy if it isn't someone who hasn't looked the current disaster in the face and had his blood run cold? You really need to look at the degradation that has been caused to the planet thanks to fossil fuel usage, and think of how we can get ourselves out of this mess by improving what we have degraded.

And what have you genuinely accomplished in the last five years apart from hoarding wealth?
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby SFDukie » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 15:32:22

Triple A
You hit the nail on the head. Type something here which challenges the orthodoxy in any manner (especially the orthodoxy as related to 9/11, moon landings, and other topics far from core relevance to peak oil) and all too often rather discussion of the assertions, one receives personal attacks and unrelated criticisms.
SFDukie
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed 10 Jun 2009, 18:19:58

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 16:20:25

davep wrote:You attacked me, sneering that I mustn't know much about passive solar design. So I let you know otherwise. Deal with it.


Maybe you should go back and read the actual dialogue. All I did was mention I planned on building a 3,000 sqft passive solar house with 2 wood stoves and you made some big deal that a house can't be called passive solar if you use wood stoves.


Then you contradicted yourself and said
davep wrote: It is true that you need a fireplace or other source of active heat in most (not all) passive designs


Get your story straight and get your head out of the books and look at what is practical and sustainable.

Common sense goes a lot further than book smarts.
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 16:29:07

I must confess to only reading the first and last pages of this dissertation as the sites being balky again and some of the pages won't display. But back to Shorts original point about improving the credibility of the site. Why should anyone care? Who profits if everything on the site becomes focused and believable? I suppose if the site becomes "The source " for oil doomers the advertisers will have a field day but do we the posters care about their fortunes? Peak oil will happen ,Or Not, with or without this site trumpeting its coming. At present it seems to be a much slower process then some have claimed it would be, but with the world population growing at its present rate I think enough shortages of various types will show up presently to get most peoples attention. In the meantime while we watch the government spend itself into bankruptcy I enjoy debating the eminent collapse of the worlds ice caps with the eco doomers. It is much more entertaining then contemplating what Iran will do once they get a working bomb and run short of drinking water.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 14897
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby davep » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 16:43:32

AAA wrote:
davep wrote:You attacked me, sneering that I mustn't know much about passive solar design. So I let you know otherwise. Deal with it.


Maybe you should go back and read the actual dialogue. All I did was mention I planned on building a 3,000 sqft passive solar house with 2 wood stoves and you made some big deal that a house can't be called passive solar if you use wood stoves.


I initially questioned why you would want to build a 3000 sq ft passive solar house. If you look back, I never questioned using a wood stove, just having such a big house using two wood stoves, with undending supplies of wood available.

Then you contradicted yourself and said
davep wrote: It is true that you need a fireplace or other source of active heat in most (not all) passive designs


Take a look back. I think you'll find that you're wrong. I never said you don't need a woodstove.

Get your story straight and get your head out of the books and look at what is practical and sustainable.

Common sense goes a lot further than book smarts.


Common sense is not building a 3000 sq ft so called passive solar house with two woodstoves. You're still attached to the MacMansion meme but intend to do so 'ecologically'. The whole point of passive solar is to reduce your energy consumption to the minimum. Having a 3000 sq ft house with as much wood used as (and far more materials than) a smaller conventional house is not passive solar, it's a cop-out to personal ambition dressed up as some kind of ecological gesture.

Oh, and my head isn't in the books. It's in my 10 acre property (paid for) where I have already gone some way to designing a genuine passive solar house that combines the classic passive solarr attributes with the many attributes of structural straw bale construction. That is 'practical and sustainable'. Your goal isn't.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 16:56:27

davep wrote:And what have you genuinely accomplished in the last five years apart from hoarding wealth?


First it’s not called “hoarding wealth”. It’s called preparing yourself financially so there is no dependency on others for money. Freedom from a working for money, freedom from debt, and the freedom to buy whatever I need/want to buy without worrying about money.

Major Accomplishments

Bought over 135 acres of hill country ranch land, free and clear (aka paid cash), for our future homestead which is almost 900 miles away from our current home in SoCal.

So far saved over 85% of my goal needed to be able to live off of interest/dividends at my current salary rate using 4% yield (which is quite a low yield but I like to be conservative). Barring any major financial catastrophe or major personal emergency then we should reach our goal in 7 years. This will allow us to maintain my current level of income without having to work for money or touch the principal investment. Since we will be greatly reducing our costs of living then we should be able to save money each month further growing our principal.

Random Minor Accomplishments
Cleared 60 acres of the flats and controlled burned
Drilled 2 Water Wells
3 3,000 gallon Water Tanks
John Deere 4000 Series Utility Tractor
1 Month Worth of Stored MH Food and Water
Vegetable Gardening for around 12 years
Organic gardening for 2 years
Seed Saving for 2 years
Growing fruit trees for 3 years
Composting for 3 years
Vermicomposting for 6 months
Raising fish for 2 years
Small & Big game hunting for 13 years
Fishing for more than 15 years
Skilled in butchering small & large game, foul, and fish
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby davep » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 17:14:59

AAA wrote:
davep wrote:And what have you genuinely accomplished in the last five years apart from hoarding wealth?


First it’s not called “hoarding wealth”. It’s called preparing yourself financially so there is no dependency on others for money. Freedom from a working for money, freedom from debt, and the freedom to buy whatever I need/want to buy without worrying about money.

Major Accomplishments

Bought over 135 acres of hill country ranch land, free and clear (aka paid cash), for our future homestead which is almost 900 miles away from our current home in SoCal.

So far saved over 85% of my goal needed to be able to live off of interest/dividends at my current salary rate using 4% yield (which is quite a low yield but I like to be conservative). Barring any major financial catastrophe or major personal emergency then we should reach our goal in 7 years. This will allow us to maintain my current level of income without having to work for money or touch the principal investment. Since we will be greatly reducing our costs of living then we should be able to save money each month further growing our principal.

Random Minor Accomplishments
Cleared 60 acres of the flats and controlled burned
Drilled 2 Water Wells
3 3,000 gallon Water Tanks
John Deere 4000 Series Utility Tractor
1 Month Worth of Stored MH Food and Water
Vegetable Gardening for around 12 years
Organic gardening for 2 years
Seed Saving for 2 years
Growing fruit trees for 3 years
Composting for 3 years
Vermicomposting for 6 months
Raising fish for 2 years
Small & Big game hunting for 13 years
Fishing for more than 15 years
Skilled in butchering small & large game, foul, and fish


Well done. But, if you have your place bought outright and can grow your own food, why would you need to continue to have your current salary yield? To a large extent, living sustainably and practically involves reducing your perceived dependency on the material goods that make us consumers. It's liberating.

As a proviso, I did tried achieving that liberation when I bought the current place, but didn't have enough capital behind me to get over the hump. So I'm back in work, but I've set myself a limit of two more years before I go home definitively and carry on my endeavours full time, this time with a more realistic approach.

Just be careful, because the pursuit of enough capital to make you safe can become a goal in itself, and it's a question of knowing when to stop before you become someone you don't recognise.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 17:49:08

davep wrote:Well done. But, if you have your place bought outright and can grow your own food, why would you need to continue to have your current salary yield?

Because I don’t think we will see a fast crash and there are many pleasures I would like to enjoy that require money. Like send our kids to college, international traveling, supporting local schools & charities, etc… I am preparing for the worst but hoping for the best.

If some new technology comes along and “saves the world” then I want to enjoy a golf at the local country club, fly to Vegas for the PBR Finals, and go flyfishing in western British Columbia, Canada.

davep wrote:To a large extent, living sustainably and practically involves reducing your perceived dependency on the material goods that make us consumers. It's liberating.


That is a misconception about sustainable living. Most people rid themselves from those material goods because their lifestyle is not sustainable mainly because of financial reasons. Sustainable living is different than frugal living or green living.

Bill Gates could live sustainably in a 20,000 sqft house with a $2 million solar array and 2,000 acre windfarm .

davep wrote:Just be careful, because the pursuit of enough capital to make you safe can become a goal in itself, and it's a question of knowing when to stop before you become someone you don't recognise.


We have a clearly defined plan and goal in mind. If we hit that certain dollar amount early then we move to the homestead early. If we don’t hit until 5 years past our goal then we wait 5 years then move.

It is a goal that is measureable and has a defined end amount.

Money is a means to do things...not a means in itself.
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby AAA » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 19:09:19

Here is an example of what I am talking about in a half-way decent thread about peak oil.

Your one and only pstarr....

pstarr wrote: Shorty what motivates you to take this abuse? Money, sexual favors? personal sexual satisfaction, strange sexual appetites? Strange sado-masochistic rituals? Ear-hair pulling? Baby stoppers. Baby food jars. Baby nipple rings. Diapers? yeech!

What is in this for you anyway?


Thanks for fighting the good fight and building credibility in yourself and the PO community.
How can Ludi spend 8-10 hrs/day on the internet and claim to be homesteading???
User avatar
AAA
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed 12 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 19:15:15

AAA wrote:This is why PO has credibility issues.

[b] Ludi attacks me because I want to have a family.



Wow, that was an "attack"? 8O

What a mean bitch I am.
Ludi
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 19:18:13

AAA wrote:Sustainable living is different than frugal living or green living.



That's probably a different meaning of the word "sustainable" than many people use.
Ludi
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 20:57:41

AAA wrote:I have talked to literally over 100 different people about peak oil.


Big deal. I'm still waiting for you to tell us all what exactly you SAID.
Last edited by mos6507 on Fri 26 Mar 2010, 21:07:27, edited 1 time in total.
mos6507
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 26 Mar 2010, 21:04:33

AAA wrote:Vegetable Gardening for around 12 years
Organic gardening for 2 years
Seed Saving for 2 years
Growing fruit trees for 3 years
Composting for 3 years
Vermicomposting for 6 months
Raising fish for 2 years
Small & Big game hunting for 13 years
Fishing for more than 15 years
Skilled in butchering small & large game, foul, and fish


Congratulations, you're one of those organic hippies!!!!

Image

Oh, the horror!

I take it you keep all of this fringe behavior to yourself when you talk peak oil with "normal" people? You wouldn't want to give them the wrong idea. Better to stay in the 3 piece suit and pass out your oil company business cards so they will take you seriously.

Image
mos6507
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Sat 27 Mar 2010, 07:37:19

<<<<< hijacking alert>>>>>>

I was thinking it might make more sense to build a smaller house and a guest house, so you don't need to heat so much space if people aren't using it. If you're going to have a passel of chillins, I guess you'll need that space, but won't it be crowded when the visitors come?
Ludi
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Ludi » Sun 28 Mar 2010, 14:43:13

This is the kind of comment that discredits po.com:

americandream wrote:Mate, these maggots in capitalism ain't gonna change. Not now, not ever. We need another Stalin and a purging Revolution to remove these pus balls.



Not me hinting around that having a mess of young-uns might not be the most responsible thing to do.

:|
Ludi
 

Re: Improving Peak Oil Credibility

Unread postby Loki » Sun 28 Mar 2010, 16:10:05

Ludi wrote:This is the kind of comment that discredits po.com:

americandream wrote:Mate, these maggots in capitalism ain't gonna change. Not now, not ever. We need another Stalin and a purging Revolution to remove these pus balls.



Not me hinting around that having a mess of young-uns might not be the most responsible thing to do.

What's wrong with advocating genocidal tyranny? Seems credible to me... :roll:
A garden will make your rations go further.
User avatar
Loki
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3509
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Oregon

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 248 guests