People built civilizations for 10,000 years before petroleum came into widespread use. They did it -- why can't we?
They had massive public works like dams, they had machinery. We can too.
Our technology is currently based on oil and cheap energy. We need to re-design it now, while we still have the gift of fossil fuels.
If we manage to replace the vast amount of oil use with renewable technology the remaining oil can be used only to maintain the renewable infrastructure
EG if all the oil currently used in cars is replaced by wind generated electricity then all the remaining oil has to do is facility the operation, maintenance and replacement of wind turbines.
clv101 wrote:If we manage to replace the vast amount of oil use with renewable technology the remaining oil can be used only to maintain the renewable infrastructure
EG if all the oil currently used in cars is replaced by wind generated electricity then all the remaining oil has to do is facility the operation, maintenance and replacement of wind turbines.
I'm not saying this specific example is feasible... but one needs to remember that peak oil is only reducing supply. If our demand for oil shifts from being the primary energy source to being a minor facilitator to an alternative energy source it could last 100 years.
Also this is where the Heavy oils/shales/sands will have some use. We cannot in anyway produce enough to maintain the status quo but the vast reserves could give a steady supply over centuries which can be prioritised for the renewable energies we are using.
I agree that the population will head downwards , but what I cannot accept is that this will be by mass murdering anarchic starving societies killing each other scraps.
It is more likely that over the next say, 5 decades , PO will hit, economies will be screwed and then the birth rate will collapse everywhere(already way below 2 in Russia, Western Europe , Eastern Europe and US). The death rate will increase in the elderly will increase(particularly in winter).
I guess what I am saying is, that I believe in a more natural/steady population reduction(to around say 3-4 billion) rather than a worldwide anarchic slaughter, with armies of starving zombies eating others semi-decaying flesh etc
pkofsocal wrote:People built civilizations for 10,000 years before petroleum came into widespread use. They did it -- why can't we?]/quote]We will. And the population will also contract to the level 10,000 years ago.
Our technology is currently based on oil and cheap energy. We need to re-design it now, while we still have the gift of fossil fuels.
Many of the materiel needed to 'maintain' it [the current infrastructure] come from very far distances from areas which are likely to be affected by massive unrests.To guarrantee these materiel flow in time, you need armies to station in that area, and you need to ship things for the army. Same circle.
EG if all the oil currently used in cars is replaced by wind generated electricity then all the remaining oil has to do is facility the operation, maintenance and replacement of wind turbines. Nice theory. But can it be done? Unless it's actually been done, it's just pencil-pushing.
...If our demand for oil shifts from being the primary energy source to being a minor facilitator to an alternative energy source it could last 100 years. And after the 100 years are gone? Boom! Just what I said at the beginning, these measures will only delay things by a generation or a bit more.
Except most of them are located in remote areas. To extract them you need electricity and o-i-l. Back to square one.
It will happen whether you can accept it or not. They will not ask for your opinion, or mine, whether they can take their neighbor country's oil/biodiesel/hydro/whatever.
Sorry. the birth rate decrease will not do any good for those who are already born.
And how will you ship it back to England? By - guess what - oil tankers. Boom, back to square one.
Very nice. That does mean that if po hits by 2020 we can kiss about 80% of europe goodbye, right?
Except Europe's resource bases have been exhausted long ago.
pkofsocal wrote:PO has been NEVER experienced in human history. In other words, it's an entirely different ball game with no precedents
(other than what happened to the Natives after the buffallos ran out or what happened to the people of Rapa Nui(Easter Isl) after they cut all their wood).
pkofsocal wrote:>Bullshit! Just substitute oil for grain.
Sorry. There are some fundamental differences between famine and PO.
1. During famines, it was possible to ship food from other locations. But PO, by definition, means world supply is going down. In other words there are no places to remedy the shortage.
2. Famines only last a year or at worst a few years and then recover. PO is a permanent event, not a recoverable one. In other words no hope.
And the nuclear fuel comes from where? France doesn't produce uranium. It's shipped from great distances. Boom, back to square one. Wars and other turmoils will slow down the uranium transport, and France would join other countries in deep mud.
It is now, but it won't be sooner or later (and probably sooner).
Hundreds of years of coal? Most of the easily mined coals are already gone. You have to go very deep, using oil-powered drills, and process it with - guess what - oil.
Reread the history books. From ME, you have to pass through a nice waterway called the Suez Canal, which is located near to a very violent and volatile country (which actually occupied it once before).
Russia not far away? Sorry. Again the places where all these good stuff come from are located in remote areas, and without oil they are tough to move.
Which would benefit the regions lucky enough to use them, but not much more.
Whenever people run out of arguments..they end up calling insults.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests