[Licho]

I really don't see anything that disproves original "it's a myth" statement..

Energy is not equal to money, money are not equal to physical production and thus GDP is not equal to energy and physical production.

- Can production of physical things increase in quantity while energy supply and efficiency of use decrease?
NO

- Can GDP (measured in money) grow while production og physical things and energy use declines?
YES

There is no reason for economy and GDP to stop growing while energy consumption goes down. And there are numerous examples of it.

Aaaron, eastern european countries currently don't have any serious problems in terms of GDP growth or energy use, economies of Poland, Czech rep. Hungary and Slovakia as well as all 3 baltic states and Slovenia have stable growth far higher than current EU average and energy use is still lower than 1990 in some..
These economies maintained growth in GDP while energy consumption declined. Of course, different things are produced, but thats the point..
Post peak some physical transport/energy intensive things will be too expensive, so growth will happen in other sectors.. For example, instead of internal combustion car industry, growth will continue to happen in electronics, and high-tech industries. (Unless real depression hits whole world)

[tokyo_to_motueka]

Cuba is an impoverished nightmare supported by vice industries which compose their lucrative black market. Poverty is widespread, and living conditions 3rd world for most of it's population. And I don't have to google for that... I have been there and seen this "oil free" country myself.

Aaron,

unlike you i have not been to Cuba to see for myself what the state of their society/economy is in. so i have to rely on the hard data available.

UNICEF, "The State of the World's Children 2004" Table 1. Basic indicators

2002 Under-5 mortality rate:
(per 1,000 live births)
Cuba 9
Haiti 123
United States 8

2002 Infant motality rate:
(per 1,000 live births)
Cuba 7
Haiti 79
United States 7

1996-2002 Net primary school enrolment/attendance:
Cuba 97%
Haiti 54%
United States 95%

2000 Total adult literacy rate:
Cuba 97%
Haiti 50%
United States - (data not available for most OECD countries)

2002 Life expectancy at birth (years):
Cuba 77
Haiti 49
United States 77

so what you say you saw doesn't seem to stack up against the data.
Any ideas as to why this is the case?

i am not convinced Cuba is in as bad a state as you say when many of its social indicators (health, education) are much better than the rest of Latin America and on par with the US.

[jato]

Tab. Y 7: Electricity Consumption, 1970 - 1997 (TWh), UK

1970 208.7
1980 241.7
1990 284.4
1995 302.2
1996 314.3
1997 317.5


UK Natural gas consumption:



Transportation:



GDP:




Something is fishy here! The energy line is flat on the chart posted at the beginning of this thread:



However, all of the evidence I posted shows the UK using significantly more energy than in 1970.

[Aaron]

Cuba is an impoverished nightmare supported by vice industries which compose their lucrative black market

Drugs, prostitution & gambling...

The customs guy will not stamp your passport if you ask.

No problem

Actually it's been a couple of years since i was there, but I'll be there in a couple of weeks for a short visit and I'll report back on that.

This is a dictatorship.

I question the validity of these UNICEF figures.

So sure the Cuban example works if we don't mind turning the US into one big Las Vegas.

I should mention that I have a great fondness for the people of Cuba, Mexico and central/south America. I have found that there is little or no anti-American sentiment in these places, rather they don't like assholes who think they are better than they are.

If you visit Mexico and make no attempt to speak the language, stay at the Hilton and eat at TGI Fridays not only are you an ivory tower jerk off only tolerated because you spend money, but you missed the best part of traveling there.

When I visit Mexico I stay on a small coastal island off Cancun in a modest dwelling, eat with the locals at restaurants they frequent, make friends and hang out with locals, shop at their grocery markets, and avoid anyplace Paris Hilton might go. You will never find a more generous and friendly people anywhere.

I must say that after spending time with these real people, I find much of what passes for American culture offensive.

Many of these folks live more before noon than most Americans will all year long.

But Cuba as an example of a successful no oil society... please.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most Eastern European countries subsidize their nationalized industries which skews the GDP vs Energy numbers.

Licho & I have been arguing this point for about a year now, with neither side giving much ground. But after extensive googling it is clear that without these government subsidies the numbers would tell a very different story.

Same thing for Canadian Tar Sand projects.

It's only viable because of massive government subsidies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's a bit startling that some of us believe energy has little or no impact on GDP.

This is only true when energy is plentiful and cheap as it has been for 50 years running.

This is so obvious that I find it difficult to respond seriously...

[Wildwell]

1. Electricity consumption has gone up due to more gadgets in the home: Washing machines, Electric razors, Food mixers, Dishwashers etc. These are not necessary for life, they reduce human workload. Imported goods also have a negative effect on ‘balances of payments’ trade deficits.
2. Gas consumption has gone up after a switch away form coal for Power stations and home heating. There’s nothing to say renewable energy and waste couldn’t replace this in the future. Most of the Gas fired power stations have been built in the last 15 years and are situated in the East midlands/East Anglia replacing coal fire plants in Yorkshire and the midlands.
3. Oil consumption has risen by the extra use of cars and planes. More holidays and less walking and cycling and the sudden ability to the ability to travel ‘at will’. This is not necessary for life and creates balance of trade problems and in the case of air takes money out of the country. It is a myth that all travel creates economic growth and in some cases (such as road congestion) can reduce it.
4. There’s nothing fishy about the line, in part it denotes the death of coal as a primary fuel of the UK. The relationship between the consumption of goods and energy use doesn’t necessarily mean a linear relationship been energy and GDP. Some goods are energy intensive to make and transfer and don’t necessarily generate more GDP than those less so. Some goods are bought on credit; therefore they create profits for financial institutions more so than those bought with liquid cash. There has been a heavy rise in credit in the UK in the last 30 years.
5. GDP does not necessarily mean everyone is better off, indeed in a capitalist economy most of the wealth is held by the top few percent of the population.

[Wildwell]

Cuba is an impoverished nightmare supported by vice industries which compose their lucrative black market

Drugs, prostitution & gambling...

The customs guy will not stamp your passport if you ask.

No problem

Actually it's been a couple of years since i was there, but I'll be there in a couple of weeks for a short visit and I'll report back on that.

This is a dictatorship.

I question the validity of these UNICEF figures.

So sure the Cuban example works if we don't mind turning the US into one big Las Vegas.

I should mention that I have a great fondness for the people of Cuba, Mexico and central/south America. I have found that there is little or no anti-American sentiment in these places, rather they don't like assholes who think they are better than they are.

If you visit Mexico and make no attempt to speak the language, stay at the Hilton and eat at TGI Fridays not only are you an ivory tower jerk off only tolerated because you spend money, but you missed the best part of traveling there.

When I visit Mexico I stay on a small coastal island off Cancun in a modest dwelling, eat with the locals at restaurants they frequent, make friends and hang out with locals, shop at their grocery markets, and avoid anyplace Paris Hilton might go. You will never find a more generous and friendly people anywhere.

I must say that after spending time with these real people, I find much of what passes for American culture offensive.

Many of these folks live more before noon than most Americans will all year long.

But Cuba as an example of a successful no oil society... please.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most Eastern European countries subsidize their nationalized industries which skews the GDP vs Energy numbers.

Licho & I have been arguing this point for about a year now, with neither side giving much ground. But after extensive googling it is clear that without these government subsidies the numbers would tell a very different story.

Same thing for Canadian Tar Sand projects.

It's only viable because of massive government subsidies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's a bit startling that some of us believe energy has little or no impact on GDP.

This is only true when energy is plentiful and cheap as it has been for 50 years running.

This is so obvious that I find it difficult to respond seriously...

Okay if it's obvious, please make the case for how cars increases GDP and their energy use as it's half of all UK oil consumption?

[Mercani]

It is clear that money is not equal to energy. Thus, GDP growth does not require energy growth. I agree Wildwell for the most part.

Most of the energy consumption is bacause of economic growth. Not other way around. If I earn more, I travel a lot, I waste a lot, etc.

There are many economic activities where less-energy intensive one is more vauable than the higher energy intensive one.

For example: organic farming.

You don't use fertilizers and pesticides. Thus you use less energy than non-organic farming. But organic groceries cost more than non-organic groceries. Growing the same amount of tomatoes uses less energy, but contributes more to the GDP.

[tokyo_to_motueka]

The customs guy will not stamp your passport if you ask.

this is purely for your benefit. so your non-dictatorial govt won't dictate to you about which countries you can and cannot visit.

I question the validity of these UNICEF figures.

could you be a little more specific about why you think the UNICEF figures are not valid?

So sure the Cuban example works if we don't mind turning the US into one big Las Vegas.

so the whole cuban population is part of the drugs, prostitution and gamblig industries?

it just seems to me that this dictatorship you are talking about does a much better job in health care and education than anywhere else in Latin America.

and it also seems ironic that Haiti, where US-approved coups are the name of the game, has such an appalling record in these areas.

[RdSnt]

There is a particular path that civilizations committ themselves to and they have a very strong momentum.
Can a sophisticated, high technology civilization live comfortably and sustainably on the Sun's gifts of energy. Sure, it is quite possible technically.
Can the present civilization (our current model of industry and lifestyle) convert to this new way of living. No.

[Wildwell]

There is a particular path that civilizations committ themselves to and they have a very strong momentum.
Can a sophisticated, high technology civilization live comfortably and sustainably on the Sun's gifts of energy. Sure, it is quite possible technically.
Can the present civilization (our current model of industry and lifestyle) convert to this new way of living. No.

Well you don’t know that and nor do I. The world is in a perpetual state of change. This is very much a psychological question as much as anything else, but people do adapt, eventually. Oil production is not going to suddenly end, so some of the effects maybe unnoticeable, but obviously some will be. A lot of the problem is people thinking they have a right to things like car travel., cheap factory food and so on.

As it’s already been proved, the question of energy and economic growth is not directly related. The fact is you can capitalise anything and de-capitalise anything. I think a few ‘peak oilers’ need to take some lessons in basic economics.

[Aaron]

The customs guy will not stamp your passport if you ask.

this is purely for your benefit. so your non-dictatorial govt won't dictate to you about which countries you can and cannot visit.

Exactly... to allow me to continue to support the vice industries without my government knowing about it.

could you be a little more specific about why you think the UNICEF figures are not valid?

I am sure that no governments or reporting agencies would ever fudge the numbers. Why would they?

I'm sure the UNICEF goon squads canvas the country collecting these figures directly from the population.

This is "spin" pure & simple.

Does Cuba handle public healthcare better than some others?

Evidence we have seems to support this.

That's a far cry from Cuba is doing fine without oil so we can as well. The truth is that absent the vice industry income, Cuba would collapse into an economic nightmare.

You don't use fertilizers and pesticides. Thus you use less energy than non-organic farming. But organic groceries cost more than non-organic groceries. Growing the same amount of tomatoes uses less energy, but contributes more to the GDP.

The disconnect we have is how cheap energy conceals the reality.

You cannot grow the same amount of tomato's without cheap energy.

Please consider how cheap energy makes all this possible.

Fish don't know they are swimming. The water is their world and always has been. My saying that cheap energy is the predicate for the economic growth we enjoy is endemic to western societies at this point, and is so tightly woven into the fabric of industrial technologies it has become all but invisible to most of us.

How do cars add to GDP?

In the same way everything else does...

The inner lining of the beer can purchased by the auto workers wife.

The little shoe string plastic wraps on his kids shoes.

The glue on the back of the "Save our Troops" bumper sticker on her Hummer.

everything

If they purchased it with money you paid them for cars & fuel, then you are supporting GDP through this matriculation process.

All I am saying is if you want to run a machine... it takes fuel.

Some kind of fuel.

Oil is simply an excellent fuel which is transportable, energy dense, and has traditionally come squirting out of the ground under it's own pressure.

As oil becomes more expensive, everything which depends on this commodity becomes more expensive.

Hydrocarbons, beginning with coal, have enabled us to perform a great deal more "work" than had ever been possible before.

To argue that our ability to perform "work" is not related to economic prosperity and GDP is a pipe dream I afraid.

TANSTAAFL

[Wildwell]

So if we loose the car and oil industry everything goes down the pan? Very naive comment that and very US centric.

Have you any idea how many railway workers were made redundant in Britain in between 1930 and 1990 because of cars? Have you any idea how many coal miners were made redundant because of oil?

And who benefits from oil. Russians, Arabs? And before any one says governments in tax because of car use have you any idea how much congestion, pollution, accidents cost and have a negative effect on GDP?

Take a journey between town A and B. There are 5 different people and each person has $10 to spend when they get to the other end.

Person A rides a bike.

Person B rides a horse.

Person C takes a train and works on his laptop and the internet on the way.

Person D takes a car

Person E takes a plane and does his paperwork.

All theoretic. Now calculate the energy cost, generated GDP and external costs. Have fun. You see it's not that simple and anyone that thinks energy is directly related to GDP is either stupid or is playing games. Personally I think much of this rhetoric is a US based fear, but then the US is a fearful nature hence the pill popping and gun waving. I wonder how much the petro dollar plays in all of this?

Likewise you can capitalise on anything, some things in some circumstances are free then they no longer are free or the price rises. Take child care, sex, personal services, spring water, and writing, art...the list is endless. Conversely, some things can be de capitalised: Charity work, entertaining, gardening, walking instead of taking a car and so on.

[Aaron]

So if we loose the car and oil industry everything goes down the pan? Very naive comment that and very US centric.

No...

You asked how cars & fuel add to GDP and I explained that.

Read this:

For a country like the United States, there will be an outsized impact. This economy, and the business models of its individual enterprises, has been built on the assumption of readily available and low cost fuel. Both assumptions are now false. Depletion induced oil shortages will occur. Higher fuel prices are inevitable. Decreasing transportation flexibility translates into higher production and distribution costs. Just-in-time delivery will gradually migrate to local warehousing operations. Production will move closer to the consumer. Inventory costs will increase. Retail consumer traffic patterns and buying habits will change. Food costs will go up. The list of probable change is very long. Oil dependent enterprises will be forced to make significant changes to their business model

– or perish.

Ronald R. Cooke

Then we can discuss the ramifications.

[tokyo_to_motueka]

I am sure that no governments or reporting agencies would ever fudge the numbers. Why would they?

I'm sure the UNICEF goon squads canvas the country collecting these figures directly from the population.

This is "spin" pure & simple.

i would have thought it was quite hard to "spin" the number of baby and child deaths per year, but maybe i am being naive.

anyway, if you simply don't believe the UN social statistics then you are down to anecdotal evidence, which is not very reliable either...

[Aaron]

I am sure that no governments or reporting agencies would ever fudge the numbers. Why would they?

I'm sure the UNICEF goon squads canvas the country collecting these figures directly from the population.

This is "spin" pure & simple.

i would have thought it was quite hard to "spin" the number of baby and child deaths per year, but maybe i am being naive.

anyway, if you simply don't believe the UN social statistics then you are down to anecdotal evidence, which is not very reliable either...

Fair enough... and I have not personally canvased the country either.

But I can tell you that there is a healthy, multi-billion dollar vice industry there.

And no shortage of desperately poor people.

Places in Florida have literally become Little Havana in the past decade.

And governments always "spin" the truth. All governments.

It's simple human nature...

"Put your best foot forward", is just saying that we lead with our best stuff.

We spin our image.

When was the last time your were introduced to someone, and you greeted them by saying, "Nice to meet you... I have been convicted of murder."

[Wildwell]

So if we loose the car and oil industry everything goes down the pan? Very naive comment that and very US centric.

No...

You asked how cars & fuel add to GDP and I explained that.

Read this:

For a country like the United States, there will be an outsized impact. This economy, and the business models of its individual enterprises, has been built on the assumption of readily available and low cost fuel. Both assumptions are now false. Depletion induced oil shortages will occur. Higher fuel prices are inevitable. Decreasing transportation flexibility translates into higher production and distribution costs. Just-in-time delivery will gradually migrate to local warehousing operations. Production will move closer to the consumer. Inventory costs will increase. Retail consumer traffic patterns and buying habits will change. Food costs will go up. The list of probable change is very long. Oil dependent enterprises will be forced to make significant changes to their business model

– or perish.

Ronald R. Cooke

Then we can discuss the ramifications.

Decreased waste in transport may mean less external costs, less energy, more productivity, more money; more speed in some cases, the list goes on. Transport dictates geography and geography dictates transport. Remember this doesn't happen overnight, people might have 50 years to adapt, but that's how things work anyway.

Britain doesn't have a car industry anymore, our last mass production factory closed last week, so all the money is going abroad in to the pockets of foreign automotive and oil executives. Why should we care?

[Aaron]

Remember this doesn't happen overnight, people might have 50 years to adapt, but that's how things work anyway.

And I say that's wishful thinking.

MRE Depletion

[Wildwell]

Remember this doesn't happen overnight, people might have 50 years to adapt, but that's how things work anyway.

And I say that's wishful thinking.

MRE Depletion

So you say. Monte, Matt Simmons and yourself ought to get out of your SUVs and smell the coffee. Lets' use the energy on food production instead.

And where's all this money going? The top few percent. 50% of the UK live on 6% of the wealth.

[Aaron]

Now WW... did you even read the linked thread?

So you say. Monte, Matt Simmons and yourself ought to get out of your SUVs and smell the coffee. Lets' use the energy on food production instead.

A certainty.

And as embarrassing as it is... I do drive an SUV. (6 cylinder 2wd Cherokee).

But I bought it 6 years ago for cash, as I have every vehicle I have ever owned. I don't approve of useless debt, so I carry none. How many car owners here don't have car payments?

From above linked thread:

Quote:
PO is not a ponctual event but a slow and long slide toward more expensive energy.


Matt Simmons & I disagree.

We believe that OPEC and most oil majors are full of crap, and have been over-producing their fields to maintain production for decades.

Simmons oil pyramid is an excellent representation of how vulnerable the world is to oil shortages.

With no new giant discoveries in sight, over 25% of ALL oil comes from 14 fields...

14

Experience with MRE wells clearly shows that rapid extraction = rapid terminal declines.

If SA is telling the truth, we are probably good to go, since we have decades and decades of gradual declines in oil production.

If not, then we can expect massive declines in the near future from some number of these 50-60 year old MRE oilfields.

[Wildwell]

'And as embarrassing as it is... I do drive an SUV. (6 cylinder 2wd Cherokee)'.

It's all coming out now folks! Hang your head in shame man, think of the young children you are denying meals in the future!