We are doomed! No...really...we are...

[Subdivisions]

You are not stupid. You know it's about the oil. Iraq is a "resource war". Iran will be also. We have built our civilization on a finite resource that has, as current events now suggest, "peaked". The balance between supply and demand has shifted. And there is no turning back. As the demand for oil and the oil-based products that our entire existance depends on increases, the supply will dwindle. And dwindle. Until we are forced to kill each other for a morsel of food. You know the time is coming.

I went to bed last night thinking that today I was going to conduct an investigation as to the status of our energy situation and post my report here on DU. However, from the first result of my first Google search, I found the very report I envisaged writing myself. Read it. And follow and read the links. And then decide for yourself. Are we, indeed, doomed? I fear we may be. And within most of our lifetimes. Certainly within mine and my children's.

My God. http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net">What have we done?

[Hissyspit]

1. I been walking around saying that for several years...

but I tend to be pretty pessimistic.

It's the global climate change, really.

[Deja Q]

9. So had I, and I'd been proven wrong at every turn.

So I'm tired of the "self-fulfilling prophecy" and getting on with life.

[shance]

2. I think more than anything its about greed and selfishness by those who only have had privilege

granted to them all their lives, and often without having to earn it.

As a result they are taking resources and things that do not belong to them. And everyone else seems to be footing the tab.

[Exultant Democracy]

3. Well you have joined a rather large team that has had prominent members for

thousands of years. They have all been wrong, historically speaking it is always a safe bet when you bet on the ingenuity and creativity of man.

In addition to all of the environmental issues big oil has also been holding back innovation, none the less modern science has many solutions already for the looming energy crisis and they are developing more all the time. The smart money says that you and your children will always have running electricity.

I for one can't wait till we are done with the whole dirty business and move forward with sensible energy.

[tbyg52]

6. I agree with you that energy solutions will be found

(I hear that Honda is working on thin, flexible solar panels--can't wait to be able to buy some!), but I dunno on the global warming. It's kinda hard to control an entire planet.

[Exultant Democracy]

10. Yes global warming is a big problem without easy solutions like energy

It is a blessing that all the easy oil is gone already.

[Deja Q]

11. Oh, no doubt somebody would create an analogue to photosynthesis...

Seems a simple enough concept; a friggin' tree can do it.

Where do I sign up? I'd be far more useful researching and fixing that than my current job. Well?

[tbyg52]

13. Yes, it's so easy Nature can do it,

But that doesn't mean *we're* going to be able to. It's not the processes, it's the size of the area to be controlled. How are we doing at stopping kudzu and fire ants?

Edited to add this link--what he said:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x88035

[Deja Q]

20. Maybe, but with all the pessimism, that won't help anything getting done either.

Emotions are far more powerful than we give them credit for.

[tbyg52]

25. I'm not against something getting done.

I just think anything except just stopping pouring goop into the air is going to have limited or unexpected results.

[Shine]

28. Yes, I fully agree.

Negative thinking gets us nowhere and keeps us stuck.

[Clark2008]

52. It's sad that an American company isn't doing this.

America is dooming itself, energy crisis or not, by not being innovative and continuing with our manufacturing tradition.

[Subdivisions]

33. Did you read the entire article? Including Page 2?

Well you have joined a rather large team that has had prominent members for thousands of years. They have all been wrong, historically speaking it is always a safe bet when you bet on the ingenuity and creativity of man.

The "ingenuity and creativity of man"? You mean like solar power? Wind power? Nuclear power? Hydrogen? Savinar does a good job of explaining (and providing corroborating sources and links) why none of these is the answer. And it all makes sense. With the exception of nuclear power, these sources at best will only support a fraction of electrical demand but they do nothing for the transportation sector. In fact, he states rather convincingly that those "alternative" energy solution inevitably end up expending even more energy to implement and maintain.

Our entire existance can be traced to one thing. Oil. Without it, our civilization, as we know it, ceases to exist.

[Exultant Democracy]

58. Well yes I did, but it seems clear that you didn't read my post or understand it

"The "ingenuity and creativity of man"? You mean like solar power? Wind power? Nuclear power? Hydrogen?"

If I had meant them I would have mentioned them. It is a sad state of affairs when people think that "ingenuity and creativity" boil down to trotting out the old and failed.

One thing that I do agree with is that "Oil. Without it, our civilization, as we know it, ceases to exist." and I for one can not wait.

[davekriss]

73. Be careful what you wish for

"I for one can not wait"

Hmmm. The carrying capacity of mother earth without the cheap energy kick of oil appears to be about 1.8 billion people. There are almost 7 billion now. If the "ingenuity and creativity of man" misses by a few decades, how many billions will have to die? When will we see the first "resource war" of this century? (I contend we've seen it already in Afghanistan and Iraq.)

[Exultant Democracy]

75. You are still betting against humanity

from a historical perspective that is a bad bet. As far as species go the story of man has been one of unprecedented success. As for a carrying capacity that number is meaningless, just a few years ago the supposed carrying capacity of earth was considered to be quite a bit less before the advent of dwarf wheat.

[sendero]

44. I partially agree with you..

... the problem is that real solutions will not be found and implemented until there is absolutely no other choice. So there WILL be a period of disruption during the transition. How long it will last or how severe it will be is anybody's guess, but the idea that there won't be one is nonsense.

[Exultant Democracy]

59. Brazil would probably argue with your assessment

their transition (which of course has not been finished yet) has been going very smoothly and there are no signs that it will cause any major disruptions. In fact the overall quality of life in Brazil will probably only increase as the transition moves forward toward completion.

[sendero]

67. It's pretty useless..

... to compare a country that uses a tiny fraction of energy per capita to us.

[Ezlivin]

70. "[M]odern science has many solutions already..."

You didn't read the article, did you?

If you had I believe you would not have made such a bold statement.

[kestrel91316]

4. Between Global Warming and Peak Oil, I have managed to worry

myself half to death. For the past few years.

I sure would like to go back to blissful ignorance.

[toddaa]

24. Hey, there's always Bird Flu

Just in case you start sleeping well.

[kestrel91316]

42. Yeah, I worried about THAT one for while, too, and then I hit

Worry Overload and said ENOUGH, ALREADY, kestrel!!!

[951-Riverside]

5. The only way to save ourselves is by killing off 30% of earths population

*drools while laughing maniacally*

[Deja Q]

7. 2 billion people?

Where?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

41. 2 billion people will die within the next two decades.

That in itself is easily achievable. The issue is that far more than that will be born.

[ends_dont_justify]

16. Heh

I'm suddenly reminded of Raz Alghoul ;)

[Deja Q]

8. Then let's end our existence altogether.

:crazy:

Why not give your morsels to me before you do so?

If people are so doomsday-centric at their jobs as they are here, how does anything get done and how do people have any friends left?!

Also, most people usually die. Nobody's immortal...

[Exultant Democracy]

12. Wait a second now...I'm gonna die????!!!!11!!!??? Nooooooo...

[Forrest Greene]

14. You're Standing On A Railroad Track

Approaching you at a high rate of speed, engine thundering, shaking the Earth, blotting out the sun, is a huge, powerful, unstoppable locomotive, pulling a train five miles long.

All you need do is step a few inches to the side, & the whole huge metal beast roars by, harmless.

We all start all over again every minute of every day, & it's never too late.

[ends_dont_justify]

15. Actually...

A long time ago there was a decision to remove power from the middle east by buying out all of their oil. Many larger nations have their own reserves, as does the united states. I'm not talking about the ANWR alaskan areas either. The united states could be a self sustaining nation on oil if it wanted to be, but it just never wanted to run out.

I'm not certain if I'm incorrect on my history, but a friend of mine into history informed me of this. This war isn't over needs or resources...simply greed and spite.

[brokensymmetry]

17. Yes, we are doomed.

No, there are no scalable solutions. The problem
is not electricity - the problem is cheap liquid
fuels. And they are in decline.

Global population will need to shrink to under
2 billion if we are to have any chance of sustainability.
My bet is that the coming crash will bring us down to
about 1 billion world wide.

I expect things to start getting nasty about 2010-2011.
They'll get worse...a lot worse...

By the way...it's easier to get through the day if you
chuckle at the SUV drivers.

[windbreeze]

18. The other day....

my husband and I both needed to go somewhere...so with a few changes in my plans, instead of taking two cars, we found we could take one...

on the way home...we talked about oil, crisis, etc., and I cannot tell you how many vehicles I saw with ONE person in them, big herkin trucks, suv's...vans, you name it...traffic was so bad, it took us about an hour to get to our turnoff which should have taken 10 minutes....perfectly awful..I'd have to move, before I'd put up with that traffic every day...I wonder what that freeway's going to look like, full of bicycles, or horses/buggies a few years from now...
wb

[Deja Q]

19. Well, I was brought up to fix the problems I caused. Called 'responsibility'.

Maybe, worldly speaking, those who bred the most should fix their own problems?

And you know that's not going to happen and they're going to want to kill us before we get a chance to kill them.

And since they haven't done that, maybe it never will.

Supposition leads to irrational thought, as I have just amply demonstrated.



And I would say under a billion, ultimately leading to 0 if nukes are truly used to their full potential...

[brokensymmetry]

32. Ahh, maybe.

And since they haven't done that, maybe it never will.

Supposition leads to irrational thought, as I have just amply demonstrated.


Maybe I'll successfully draw to an inside straight - but I wouldn't bet on it.

Maybe * will grow a brain - but I wouldn't bet on it.

Maybe humanity will be wiser and better than I expect.

But I'd rather bet on the inside straight.

[hogwyld]

65. Here's another one to perk up your day

Check out some of the doomsday 2012 websites. By 2010, I'm going on a year long drinking binge and try to wait out the fun...

[melody]

21. People who say "probably we'll survive" don't sell books or get attention

Unless we post in threads like this one, in which case, we'll be flamed.

[brokensymmetry]

76. Depends on who "we" is.

Does it mean humanity? Sure, I'll go with that. Humanity
will probably survive. Maybe just a billion instead of six
billion, though.

Does it mean you and I? Perhaps, for a time. Maybe for
a long time, since we're affluent enough to have computers.

Does it mean, essentially, everyone? Sorry, I can't go
with that assumption.

[melody]

79. Then don't

"Clinical depression is a very common illness that affects approximately 5% of the population at any one time."

Not all of us see dark futures as a challenge. Some of us live one step away from suicide at any one time. I
prefer optimistic pragmatism. To try to face a future with no hope is unthinkable. Some of us have to have
hope as a survival necessity.

[China_cat]

22. Oil will not be the death of the human population.

Not even wars over oil.

The wars that will more seriously affect the earth's populations will be the ones that are coming over potable water.

[havocmom]

23. DING DING DING!

While us peons worry about what the giant corporations are doing with oil, those giant corporations are buying up all the water, and THAT resource is dwindling too.

Between water rights and GM foods/seeds with kill genes, people will be totally at the mercy of
Board Room Greed

Soylant Green, it's what's for dinner.

[aquart]

26. We will be dead of so many other things first, don't worry.

Opportunistic diseases, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, heat, cold...

The survivors, as always in human history, will be the ones who band together to help each other survive.

[The Straight Story]

27. my reply:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x442584

[eagler]

29. There is a growing school of thought that oil 's NOT a fossil fuel

http://www.rense.com/general67/oils.htm

"To begin with, oil is not a fossil fuel. This is a theory put forth by 18th century scientists. Within 50 years, Germany and France's scientists had attacked the theory of petroleum's biological roots. In fact, oil is abiotic, not the product of long decayed biological matter. And oil, for better or for worse, is not a non-renewable resource. It, like coal, and natural gas, replenishes from sources within the mantle of earth. This is the real and true science of oil. Read all about it."

[GliderGuider]

31. Actually, that's a "shrinking" school of thought.

Abiotic oil has been throughly debunked by people who know what they're doing.

Try this: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/011205_no_free_pt2.shtml

[eagler]

34. There are many recent articles supporting the theory - so

what are we to believe?

[GliderGuider]

36. Believe the geologists and petrochemists.

The idea of abiotic oil has been fully discredited.

[eagler]

37. considering that most of the petrochemists are working for the oil industry

and that some old wells are producing again in places like Oklahoma and Texas - the issue is up for grabs.

[GliderGuider]

49. Many of the geologists work for universities

Those old wells are being brought back by tertiary recovery techniques like steam injection. There is no no evidence for the refilling of oil wells by abiotic oil. A belief in abiotic oil at this point amounts to wishing upon a star.

For a very thorough look at the theory and the evidence (both pro and con) check out the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

[eagler]

72. wikipedia isn't a reliable source and to say that the theory has been

debunked is shortsighted. Due to the fact that so little is known about the inner workings of inner earth and the fact that oil companies have a habit of putting out false information plus the fact that we know bitumineous coal is abiogenic, I would say that the abiogenic theory needs to be explored further.

[Shine]

30. I'm sorry, but I just can't buy into that line of reasoning.

It only takes me down a path of Fear, Worry, and Resignation.

I choose to live in Hope. The kind of hope I often think about I understand above all as a state of mind, not a state of the world. Either we have hope within us or we don't. It is a dimension of the soul; it's not essentially dependent on some particular observation of the world or estimate of the situation.

Hope is not prognostication. It is an orientation of the spirit, an orientation of the heart. It transcends the world that is immediately experienced, and is anchored somewhere beyond its horizons.

It is this hope, above all, which gives us the strength to live and continually try new things, even in conditions that seem as hopeless as ours do, here and now.

[Subdivisions]

40. With all due respect, will all the hope we can muster

change the fact that oil is finite?

We can't rely on hope to actually FIX things. Only to make us FEEL better while we are burying our heads in the sand as the foundations of our civilization crumbles.

I can't just hope that those in charge of steering our destiny are the ones who are capable, willing, honest, philanthropic or trustworthy enough to manifest it. After all, look what BushCo has done to cover up both Peak Oil and Global Warming. Look at New Orleans. Are these the same people we must then depend on to bring us the hope you so desperately cling to? I don't think so.

[Shine]

46. Of course oil is finite, I'm not disagreeing with you there.

I am simply making the claim that I, personally, do not necessarily think we are consequently "doomed" because of it. Perhaps the "crumbling" you foresee is actually a much needed, yet painful laboring process as we birth something new, something better...something as yet unknown.

So much of our interaction with the world is shaped by our perspective, the point of view by which we interpret experience. In these dark times, we are challenged to find cause for hope, esp if we remember how much the odds are stacked against us.

The pace of environmental crises, global economic shifts and the menace of war and terrorism threatens to overtake our ability to respond. We're deluged with images and information, appeals, phone calls, and action alerts. AFter a while, what's wrong with the world monopolizes our attention. What's right, what warrants celebration, falls from view. At that point, our flying a banner of service to humanity while conducting a campaign of discouragement puts us at risk of becoming ambassadors of doom.

How do we make our children aware of injustice without implying that the world is irredeemably corrupt? We certainly don't want to mask our feelings. Being moved by the pain of others and by the damage done to the natural world is the foundation of conscience, of a sense of responsibility to something beyond ourselves. Conveying that to our children is our essential parental duty.

Demonstrating to my children, as well as to others, that I believe the gamble of engagement is worth the cost, and that's there's ample reason to remain hopeful no matter how troubling the world can be, is no simple task, granted. It can only happen if we take time to be alert to moments of everyday grace, especially opportunities to savor our connections to the community of life, because therein lies our sustenance.

That's how I manifest hope. :hug:

[Subdivisions]

51. As I said above, I can't just rely on hope, but

I do hope for the best, nonetheless. And I'll couple that hope with action and voice. Thank you for your succinct and logical response.

[GliderGuider]

35. The problem is much worse than just climate change and peak oil.

The Club of Rome wrote about "The World Problematique" in the 1970, and they're still writing about it today. I have an outline of the issues on my web site.

I do believe we need to have hope, and not let ourselves be paralyzed by despair. However, for hope to be effective we have to hope for (and work for) things that are both possible and helpful. In the face of a catastrophe as enormous as this one potentially is, it has taken me some time to figure out what I should be hoping and working for.

The answer has come from the work of a group of ecologists called The Resilience Alliance. They point out that any complex adaptive system, from a forest to a civilization, travels a repeated looping path, through growth, over-elaboration, loss of resilience, decline, loss of complexity, re-consolidation and regrowth. Given this understanding, and given that our decline is inevitable (and that things we do to prevent it will only make it worse), what should we try to do?

It seems obvious to me that the best thing to do is to look forward, past the decline to the re-consolidation phase. We should try to ensure that as many people, civilization structures, knowledge and resources (including other species) as possible are available to begin the regrowth phase. Humanity will not disappear, there are too many of us and our species is clever and resilient. However, the shape of the next phase of our civilization will depend in large measure on what survives the coming bottleneck. Hopefully we can bequeath to the future the knowledge, wisdom and resources our descendants will need to continue the good parts of the human legacy - even if they have to do it without oil or natural gas.

[Subdivisions]

38. A reversion to a rural 19th Century way of life, where

families farmed and raised their own food and livestock and sold the surplus for other supplies from the mercantile would be the dream scenario to me. But, we're still a long way from hitching-up our saddles and riding peacefully into the sunset.

[paparush]

47. Yes..and we lived to the ripe old age of 50...if we were lucky.

[Subdivisions]

53. Aye, and I bet it was a blissful 50 years compared to the

fear and stress we live longer with these days. But I suppose I can extract a reasonable point from your comment. We do live longer. Which actually only agravates the problem. But I digress.

[paparush]

68. I've been thinking about the 'Cradle of Civilization' Lately -

Look at a map of the middle east and the northern 3rd of Africa. Its all desert. All of the renewable resources are gone. Was this area once lush, green, and sustainable?

I'm wondering - Is this the inevitable outcome of human civilization? Can man exist in organized societies without hastening his own ruin?

The line from The Matrix keeps rining in my ears. Agent Smith says:


Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area, and you multiply, and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague, and we are the cure.

[ends_dont_justify]

77. If the quote holds merit, just remember...

A disease can be used against itself to create an anti virus ;)

and in referance to the 'live to the age of 50' remark...I don't see why we couldn't take current medical science knowledge and revert to a peacable system...rather than scale back, I think people could slowly make a return to nature....with all the benefits they have now to make it an easier trip. That in my mind is about the only way the entire world won't one day be the atlantic ocean or the middle east.

[gravity]

39. Peak oil will increase investments in alternative energies

and force people to conserve gas and other sources of energy. There will be some lifestyle changes and probably an economic recession, but I doubt its going to be a complete disaster. We'll adapt and move one.

Oil isn't going to deplete itself overnight.

[Subdivisions]

43. "Oil isn't going to deplete itself overnight."

May I respectfully ask: Do you completely understand the concept of "Peak Oil"? The oil doesn't have to run out. The problem is the ability of suppliers to meet increasing demands. The Law of Supply and Demand then kicks in. Then the issue becomes whether or not it costs more to transport food to your local grocer (or to transport/produce anything) than it's worth.

[gravity]

45. Supply and demand already dictate oil prices

thats why gas prices increase during the summer months, supply and demand.

Overall, there will be a declining aggregate supply of oil to use, with the law of supply and demand will determine where the gas goes. People who are willing to pay the most for it will use it, which ensures that it is used efficiently.

It's more than likely going to cause a recession adjusting, but we will adjust to the changing lifestyle. New alternative energy sources will be utilized too, since there will be an economic incentive to use them over oil.

[paparush]

48. That web site reads exactly like the pre Y2K Hysteria

[GliderGuider]

54. Please dig into the topic a little deeper. This isn't your grandfather's Y2K...

While Matt Savinar tends to be a little too emphatic for newcomers to the idea of Peak Oil, there is a lot of very serious research underlying his conclusions.

You could always try my web site - I try to steer away from Cassandra-style pronouncements, but will give you an idea of the scale of the problem(s). http://www.paulchefurka.ca

[paparush]

69. Hi - I don't doubt for a minute the scale of the problem. i don't doubt

that there will be seriuos consquences. what I don't like about the ATOC website is that it suggests very few alternatives. It does not acknowledge that we humans are driven to survive. It fails to accept that we can adjust, adapt, and overcome; that technology will drive change and change will drive technology. Fossil fuels are a way to buy us time; time to invent new ways to harness the abundant energy of the universe.

[GliderGuider]

74. I appreciate your optimism, though I don't share it.

The reason LATOC suggests so few alternatives is because there really aren't that many that we can roll out on a sufficient scale by the time we'll need them. Many of us are convinced that the human race is out of time. We could easily be coming up short by 10 billion barrels of oil per year by 2020 - just 13 years from now. Can we ramp up any combination of renewables fast enough? That is a metric shitload of energy - the equivalent of 600 billion gallons of ethanol per year, or a billion and a half gallons per day. We currently produce about 11 billion gallons of ethanol per year, and even that tiny amount is causing economic and ecological hardship.

There is only one energy source that could be rolled out fast enough to plug the imminent gap in oil production, but you won't like it (I sure as hell don't). It's COAL.

There's no question that we will keep beavering away furiously on solutions. However, just because humans are driven to survive doesn't make the survival of this particular human civilization or most of its members axiomatic.

[Akoto]

50. Doomed? No, I wouldn't say so.

As you've said, oil is a finite resource. There will eventually come a day when there's none left, or so little that we can't sustain our many oil-dependent technologies. I acknowledge that.

I certainly don't think it'll be the end of the world, however. Civilization lived (and indeed, thrived) for thousands of years prior to our dependence on oil. So long as the planet keeps chugging along, which is another issue, so shall we.

Humanity's greatest strength is its ability to adapt, imagine, and invent. We're tool makers. Eventually, out of necessity, alternative forms of energy generation will be conceived. Heck, they probably already exist. Once the oil companies have depleted their supplies, they'll probably monopolize the 'savior' solutions and continue making money.

The times ahead may be difficult, where energy and oil are concerned. There's no denying that. I really don't think the Armageddon talk is necessary or warranted, though. Not from this issue alone.

[Subdivisions]

56. For the sake of clarity, it is the industrial civilization as we

know that is "doomed". Of course humans will move on. But my focus is on the immediacy of our current situation. If you read that entire article, and I trust you did, it makes a very sensible case the Bush and Cheney have pulled the trigger on hostile takeover of oil states by the United States of America.

Iraq is a "resource war", which is killing our children, and which has been predicted since we in the US reached Peak Oil in 1970 and maybe even as far back as the Hubbert Peak.

Once Bush and Cheney, and by default us as a country, have wrested control of the Middle East's oil reserves, how long will it be before China, Russia, the EU or India make their own attempts at wresting the same reserves from us. How many of us will die? How many will die from famine? Disease? Homicide?

The times they are o'changin'.

[GliderGuider]

57. The problem is carrying capacity

Before the advent of oil, the planet supported less than a billion of us. That was in the 1800s. Most of the additional carrying capacity added since then is due to the direct or indirect use of petroleum. That means that if global petroleum production declines by 50% the number of people the earth can support will decline by approximately the same amount. The proportion may be somewhat higher due to our more efficient use of energy, but that advantage may be balanced by the fact that the underlying resource base (soil fertility, fresh water, ocean fish stocks etc.) has been eroded by our burgeoning population.

Realistic estimates say that our oil production could be down 50% by 2030. Production has peaked already, and the decline rates we will see in the near term go from very little over the next 3 years, to 2% per annum for the five years after that, 4% a year for the five after that, and possibly 6-8% per annum after that.

[ellisonz]

55. I deliver my response in video/song form.

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE

Snake Charmer

http://youtube.com/watch?v=C-AopsrNTfU

The fan video version has better quality sound.

Satellites and, pair of mirrors and, and a man without a home
With a horse, and a rider, and a clever, cunning killer
Silent in error and vocal in spotlights
Lying always sucking on a bottle of, that sweet, indulgent fluid
Oh greed oh yes oh greed oh yes!
Oh greed oh yes
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Your frienship is a fog
That disappears when the wind redirects
You!
Yes you!

Father's expectations, soul soaked in, spit and urine
And you gotta make it where?
To a sanctuary that's a fragile American hell
An empty dream
A selfish, horrific vision
Passed on like the deadliest of viruses
Crushing you and your naive profession
Have no illusions boy
Vomit all ideals and serve
Sleep and wake and serve
And don't just think just wake and serve
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Your friendship is a fog
That disappears when the wind redirects
You! Interested in you, interested in you
Interested in you, interested in you (to end)

[Bushwick Bill]

60. Welcome to peak oil.

Texas Explorer, there are really only two issues to debate about peak oil: (a) When will it occur? and (b) What will be the effects?

As another person explains, here is peak oil in a paragraph:

When is Peak Oil?

Fossil Fuels are Finite. Oil is a fossil fuel.

Peak Oil boils down to an argument about how much conventional oil will ultimately be recovered world-wide. How much oil we can eventually recover, determines how much oil we can consume; how quickly & for how long. The US Geological Survey, CERA & others predict around 4 trillion barrels recoverable, while others predict it's half that amount. The bulk of the difference between these estimates, are the OPEC "paper barrels", added to OPEC oil reserve estimates during the 1980's. Give or take some percentage, if these "paper barrels" actually exist & are recoverable, then total world oil reserves are closer to the USGS estimate. If not, then it's closer to the smaller estimate. Peak oil is really about these "paper barrels".

Paper Barrels = True (Peak around 2030)
Paper Barrels = False (Peak right about now)

Are they real?
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic25320-0.html


Everyone pretty much agrees that the world will peak when Saudi Arabia peaks. Evidence is piling up that Saudi Arabia is at or near peak.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2325/
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2331

As for the effects, LATOC there does a pretty good job. This isn't just about filling up your car. This is about feeding 6.5 billion plus people. I recommend that you and everyone on here watch this lecture by Dr. Albert Bartlett on exponential growth and hydrocarbon depletion. It is absolutely frightening.
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/461

I also recommend Dmitry Orlov's material.
http://www.energybulletin.net/23259.html

[krispos42]

61. Nuclear fusion. Now. Immediately

We need to spend billions of dollars a year on the next Manhattan Project to get a nuclear fusion power plant up and running in 15, or we are all doomed.

And once we have one, we have to go into mass production of these things immediately.

All other power sources are simply intermediate steps to an all-fusion power grid.

[Initech]

62. There is no question that this is a resource war.

But the big question I have is - WHY? Why did we get into this mess? And what have we accomplished? Was it all planned from the beginning? I'm starting to think it was. Clinton was made to look like an idiot so the Republicans would get elected every time. When they didn't get their way in '00, Bush stole the election straight out from under Gore's nose. When Bush's approval ratings were in the toilet the first year, it took one hell of a disaster to get him from zero to hero (after said disaster happened, you couldn't even breathe the words "George Bush sucks" without the freepers questioning your patriotism). That was so they could get shit like the Patriot Act passed to keep us all in line. It all seems like it was perfectly planned from the beginning - endless war which brings insane profits to asshole companies.

[BreweryYardRat]

63. Oh, spare us the paranoia and doomsaying, you half-wit.

We'll be gearing up for alternate energy soon enough. Ideally, in early 2009. We've already got the technology to produce electric cars (and have), the car companies are just sitting on their butts like a bunch of imbeciles.

The changeover's going to be somewhat rough, but's that about it.

[Ezlivin]

71. Funniest line ever! "We'll be gearing up for alternate energy soon enough."

That's like the Captain of the Titanic saying one hour after the ship struck the iceberg that "we'll soon deal with the leaks below deck."

Read the article and think about it. It is already too late to expect that alternate energy is going to rescue us and allow us to continue our present lifestyle unabated.

This is not "Chicken little"; this is a clear-headed assessment of where we are all heading, alternate energy notwithstanding.

[ends_dont_justify]

78. Is it really doomsaying if there really is doom? Or is it just observation at this point?

Even if we reel from the blow, the world still hates us....there's a lot on our plate to deal with and an entire world against us makes it much more difficult. Now would be a good time to let go of anger and bitterness that divides us and give in to a tolerance that can save us...

[hogwyld]

64. Time to liquidate everything of value

and try to wait out the wars and mass human extinction that is coming. Once the US, China, and India finish their resource wars, the humans should be down to about 1-2 billion.

[MadHound]

66. Yeah, this is old news. I realize it's a shock, but when you're done, let's move on,

And try to do what we can, both individually and collectively, to ward off this future. We don't need an oil based economy, not when we can supply all of our fuel needs with biodiesel, which is clean and renewable(and yes, you can make plastics out of various renewable sources too).

We can supply all of our electrical needs with wind power alone.

However it is a large fight, consisting of two parts, acting alone and acting collectively. Acting alone requires you to start fueling your life with petrol. If you've a house, put solar panels on it. If you have a house with land, put a wind turbine on it. Grow your own food. By a diesel vehicle and make your own biodiesel.

Acting collectively requires urging lawmakers at a local, state and even national level to take steps to get up off this oily addiction. For instance my nearby city has, by initiative petition and vote, forced the local power company to start using X percentage of electricity from renewable sources, increasing that percentage over the next few years until it is 100 percent. Write your Congressmen and demand a mandatory switch to diesel engines for all vehicles. There is plenty to be done, and no reason to despair yet.