Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 26, 2015
Do we have 10, 20 or 50 years of oil left?
On today’s show: The Oil Alarm! Do we have 10, 20 or 50 years of oil left? The answers will make you reach for your garden trowel. We’ll talk about the failure of the modern oil state to think ahead and look out for itself, and Liam will introduce a new machine to help you get off yer arse and get into the garden!
23 Comments on "Do we have 10, 20 or 50 years of oil left?"
Apneaman on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 5:58 pm
It took a lot of fossil fuels to forge our industrial world. Now they’re almost gone. Could we do it again without them?
http://aeon.co/magazine/technology/could-we-reboot-civilisation-without-fossil-fuels/
Plantagenet on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 6:31 pm
Mr. Scheff believes that some mysterious entity is fixing the price of oil and gold, and thats why the price of these commodities has collapsed.
The man doesn’t even understand the concept of supply and demand—Mr. Scheff finds the world to be utterly mysterious and so makes up fantastical imaginary entitties who secretly “control” things.
In other words, Mr. Scheff is a classic conspiracy nut.
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 7:44 pm
I started to listen, but he was too monotone and no conflict/interest/storytelling in the clip.. And he didn’t really give the answer at the beginning, just blathered on with intro for several minutes.
toms2 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 7:48 pm
Apneaman:
“Could we do it again without them?”
http://bountifulenergy.blogspot.com/2015/04/civilization-would-rapidly-rebound.html
-Tom S
GregT on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:13 pm
Toms2,
1: What fuel do you propose that we use the second time around after we have exhausted the fuels that built modern industrial society?
2: What food source do you believe will continue to feed 7 billion plus people once oil is no longer available/ affordable?
3: How do you propose that human ingenuity/ technology will reverse the mass extinction event that we have already triggered?
GregT on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:22 pm
Nony,
“I started to listen.”
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why you are so ignorant of reality Nony. You only listen to what you want to hear. It’s no wonder that you’re so messed up.
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:28 pm
nah…just give me a transcript.
Plus, I gave the guy a chance. Even for a peaker, he’s just blathering. Someone like Martenson or Deffeyes or Berman is much more interesting.
toms2 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:38 pm
GregT,
“What fuel do you propose that we use the second time around after we have exhausted the fuels that built modern industrial society?”
Maybe this was more apparent if you read my quote in the context of the original article which apeanman was linking. The author of that article was claiming that we could use charcoal from fast-growing trees. Charcoal will substitute for coal in almost all uses and will work perfectly well inside of steam engines. In fact, charcoal is a _superior_ fuel. The British turned to coal only because the UK was becoming deforested.
There are also lower-grade fossil fuels. Appalachia still has lots of accessible coal.
“What food source do you believe will continue to feed 7 billion plus people once oil is no longer available/ affordable?”
If there were a catastrophe like the author of the original article was describing, then most people would die. I think more than 75% of the human population would die if all the tractors suddenly stopped working and all fertilizer production suddenly ceased, as a result of nuclear war or something. Still, it wouldn’t mean a permanent return to a medieval mode of life. The survivors would have the remains of an industrial civilization and could reconstitute industrial civilization relatively quickly, in my opinion.
“How do you propose that human ingenuity/ technology will reverse the mass extinction event that we have already triggered?”
I wasn’t proposing that. I don’t know what will happen to the ecosphere as a result of global warming. I can’t predict how badly it will be damaged. However, as long as enough of an ecosphere remains so that any humans survive, we are not returning to a medieval mode of life.
-Tom S
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:40 pm
Greg:
1. coal (some of which is readily available near the surface), wood, natural gas including biogenic gas. [read the comments at the original article.]
2. The hypothesis already includes a catastrophe that has presumably killed a lot of people. If the systems are not ready to handle the reduced population, more will die until this is possible.
3. Depending on what the catastrophe is, will affect how it is reversed. An asteroid will just be the earth healing. A nuclear war would mean avoiding the worst areas and deconning key needed areas (e.g. key industrial assets). Also, the motivation will be survival for the remaining people and rebuilding. Not cleaning things up like after the BP oil spill. Priorities.
toms2 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:44 pm
GregT,
“Perhaps this is one of the reasons why you are so ignorant of reality Nony.”
It’s just astonishing to me that you would call this stuff “reality”. This stuff is the silliest and most easily rebutted doomsday group ever. It has gotten all its predictions totally wrong, year after year. ALL of the doctrines of this group are wrong, except “the world is finite” which is useless.
People who actually understood transportation networks, the economy, and so on, could rebut everything from the peak oil doom movement in about 30 minutes. That’s why all experts just ignored it right from the beginning, because it was so obviously wrong to them.
-Tom S
Apneaman on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:49 pm
From Tom S’s fantasy response article.
“in my opinion, It would be FAR easier to industrialize the second time, despite fewer and worse fuels.”
“As long as a few textbooks survive and those textbooks describe how to build such engines, then industrial civilization would bounce back fairly quickly.”
OK Tom it’s as simple as that huh? What happens when you great great great grand kids say fuck that pussy efficiency bull shit , I want a Coal Rolling 11 mpg Ford 350 cause it make me feel like I have a bigger dick! Yee Haw! Fuck them Lib-Tards!
GregT on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:52 pm
Tom,
“The British turned to coal only because the UK was becoming deforested.”
Think about that one for a moment.
“The survivors would have the remains of an industrial civilization and could reconstitute industrial civilization relatively quickly, in my opinion.”
Are you proposing that any ‘survivors’ of such a scenario would be keen to do it all over again? Or do you not think that they would have learned a valuable lesson? Don’t get me wrong here, I would tend to agree with you. Human beings may be intelligent, but we collectively aren’t very smart.
“However, as long as enough of an ecosphere remains so that any humans survive, we are not returning to a medieval mode of life.”
I would agree with this statement as well. No need for medieval life. There are still tribes of indigenous peoples around the globe living sustainably as hunter gatherers. The Earth will provide, as long as we respect the natural systems that give us life.
We are not in control of nature. We either live within natural boundaries, or we face extinction. It appears very likely that we have already gone too far.
toms2 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 8:54 pm
“Think about that one for a moment.”
I am not disputing that humans repeatedly disrupt the environment. Even hunter-gatherers probably disrupted the environment by hunting megafauna to extinction. I am only disputing that a collapse of civilization and return to an earlier state is imminent.
-Tom S
Apneaman on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:07 pm
Fantasy Islanders
“We have now entered the post-economic Triangle of Doom period TFC Charts, (click on for big); the triangle has outlived its usefulness, the oil – credit markets have broken down. What remains is relentless decline … as resources along with purchasing power are annihilated.”
http://www.economic-undertow.com/2015/04/26/fantasy-islanders/
rdberg1957 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:07 pm
If we are at or near the peak, then no, collapse is not imminent. We have more oil available than at any time in our history. However, we are not finding more conventional oil. So far it appears that conventional (land-based drilling) is in decline. Fracking has resulted in increased US tight oil production. Oklahoma also has many times more earthquakes than it ever had before. Do we have trouble in front of us because of what energy sources are available? I believe so because of the constraints that resource limitations, climate change, and environmental degradation. Do we have a good way of predicting when seminal events will occur? No. There have been a lot of errant predictions by Hubbert type analysis. It is also true that CERA has many bad predictions re: oil price as well. I am not sure if anyone has a theory which makes good predictions.
rdberg1957 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:08 pm
..and environmental degradation create.
GregT on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:13 pm
Toms2,
How do you define imminent?
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:32 pm
“What happens when you great great great grand kids say fuck that pussy efficiency bull shit , I want a Coal Rolling 11 mpg Ford 350 cause it make me feel like I have a bigger dick! Yee Haw! Fuck them Lib-Tards!”
I will be so fatherly proud…
GregT on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 9:57 pm
“I will be so fatherly proud…”
????
I thought you were a girl?
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 10:07 pm
No tits on my back, big guy. Try elsewhere.
Nony on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 10:11 pm
Natgas 1month ahead futures trading below 2.5!
MAY 2015 2.473 21:56:19 CT 26 Apr 2015
http://www.cmegroup.com/trading/energy/natural-gas/natural-gas.html
Damn, it feels good to be a cornie.
Davy on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 10:15 pm
Greg, I am not sure it is worth responding to Tommy two’s doom bashing. He is not making sense with the basics of science and system dynamics. The NOo at least can connect his dots within his BAUtopian delusions. Tommy two lacks basic scientific understandings. Tommy Two go back to school please.
Makati1 on Sun, 26th Apr 2015 11:03 pm
When oil goes, so goes civilization as we know it. And, no, the Age of Petroleum will end when the consumer cannot afford it, not when it is all gone.
Charcoal? Give me a break! The forests of the world would be gone in a year or two max! Fast growing? Weeds grow fast but trees could never keep up with demand.
Coal is so deep now and such poor energy quality that it is fast approaching wood in net energy content.
Natural Gas? What is the NET energy AFTER it is used to make all of the systems structure necessary to support it’s own recovery and distribution?
The utopians are out in full denial these days.