I just watched a documentary on peak oil last night. It seems that we are in for some drastic lifestyle changes like it or not. The optimist in me sees the opportunity for a rediscover of a long lost sense of community through what very likely are rough times ahead.
this documentary seems like some kind of “leftist propaganda” before you notice commentators were frequently both oil industry consultants and, occasionally, advisers to the White house or prominent republicans. If those guys believe in peak oil, can it be otherwise?
I also found it on youtube if you are one of those who can stand watching film on a computer.
Crude oil is what is currently used for many products, but there are alternatives and it will all come down to price. Let’s assume they are right that oil supply has reached its peak. When the price of crude goes up it just means that innovation in alternatives will be made because the demand for the alternatives is higher and the price is then on par with the use of crude. A free market won’t allow a sudden end to our crude oil supply, because investors will save the crude with an expectation of the price going higher in the future making any price changes be gradual.
The real threat is how the governments react. They may try to enforce price controls or may use military force to take control of the crude oil supply. Both situations would result in a run in the oil supply and undermines the natural signals, to conserve and find alternatives, that happen in a free market. China and the US will probably be fighting it out for the oil.
Psst… most prominent Republicans are on the same side as the leftists. Both want more power and that means scaring the public into allowing the government to presumably save them.
‘May use military force to take control of crude oil’?!
May?
I’d say they most definitely already have!
You’re also assuming that oil producing nations (I’ve always wondered why it’s referred to as oil production when it’s most blatantly extraction. It seems to me a funny form of self delusion) have been telling the truth about the size of their reserves.
There’s plenty of evidence to the contrary.
Then there’s also the way in which oil reserves are calculated which often ignore the relative difficulty/viability of extracting the oil.
There’s also the trouble of the viability of producing sufficient energy for a growing population along with producing the food to support this bigger population as both rely on the same crops. There have already been riots in Mexico after an increase in corn prices since the USA, relatively modestly, increased the amount of their corn crop allocated to biofuel production.
Then there’s the conundrum that the increase in land needed to produce biofuels is actually contributing more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than it’s saving with the clearance of old growth forests for farming. Indonesia is now the fourth biggest co2 emitter for this very reason.
then, then, then.
We’re in a bit of a quandry to say the least and it all comes down to population growth and an economy dependent on growth in a world with finite resources.
A free market would take into consideration all the knowledge available, so even if they misreport it, the investors are essentially betting on what they think the supply is.
There is a whole bunch of ways to make motor fuel profitably, once the selling price rises. Diesel can be made from coal or tar sand. Both of which we have hundreds of years worth of supply. Vegetable oil costs less then 5 $ gallon etc.
There is already a compressed air car being made, that can be powered by electric compressors, and there is so many different ways of making electric power. There will be no crisis. No one could market an alternative to 2 $/gal gas, so these sources have had to wait to see their day. My crystal ball says increased efficiency of vehicles and a supply that stabilizes at around 4 $/gal. will make this an insignificant issue for the average consumer. In some ways it will be an improvement, reduced pollution, less road congestion with smaller vehicles etc.
If we gradually rationalize and develop alternatives to oil as the price slowly increases there will be no energy crisis yet. Just slower growth rates, and that’s not a big deal for the average consumer.
Energy is a significant hidden cost in many products. If the price goes up too quickly there will be a recession. That’s not the end of the world either but if at all possible it would be nice to avoid another Great Depression.
Last time the gas prices went up there was pressure on Bush to try to keep them stable. “Put an oil executive in charge and the oil price goes up”. Freezing the prices would only make them rise that much faster at a later. Reducing your dependency on oil is a much better way to handle the problem.
When the fossil fuels are gone the earth can support fewer people. Hopefully we won’t exceed the limit before we run completely dry.
We have supply for hundreds of years at the current level of consumption. In the scenario where billions of people around the world move towards western style wealth and energy consumption we won’t have as many years to switch completely to renewable energy.
Regardless how many years we have, I think it’s better to play it safe. It’s actually not that hard for the average person (westerner) to find energy savings without changing their lifestyle too much.
I think that may be the main factor in our chances for a “soft landing”. The potential for conservation in the US and Canada is tremendous. At the same time, our dependence is much greater due to the extent of suburban sprawl.
We can only hope. You don’t have to look at a graph of human population for very long to notice that something has gone very wrong.
“Back in Biology, we studied “k selection” and “r selection”. These were representational models for reproduction and the effects on environment. R selection is generally associated with mammals, such as rhinoceri, that reproduce with one or two offspring and balance within a given environment by limited stress on available resources. K selection, on the other hand, was akin to water fleas that reproduce without checks, consuming all resources available before dying out to reasonable numbers that can prolong the progeneration of the species. There are some scientists that believe that we are moving from “r selection” to “k selection” as a species and are doomed to consume all of our resources in a miasma of overpopulation that will make the oil shortage seem just an inconvienience in the scheme of starvation and disease that awaits us.” -sfg
You will be begging for gas to be that cheap in the not too distant future.
This planet can support a lot of humans and the real limit is based on how much energy we can collect from sunlight.
Getting off of fossil fuels may not be too difficult though. You’d have to look more into the numbers, but apparently we can replace oil for energy use by using 15% of the farmland in the US for industrial hemp.
It’s pessimistic and fatalistic beyond belief but it certainly does make some interesting points and present some thought provoking statistics. For example, the website claims that replacing all the internal combustion engine cars on the road in America would actually cause more damage than good because of the oil needed to produce those cars would put even more strain on the diminishing supplies. Also, most statements on this site link to the source of the information so you can evaluate some of the statements if you take the time to do the research.
I find it hard to believe that the situation is really as hopeless as this site claims, but it certainly does do a good job of convincing you of the importance of this issue.
Industrial hemp is not marijuana. And the US has been growing hemp since before the US declared it’s independence. In fact, the paper the independence was declared on is made from hemp. In about 2/3 of the history of the US, hemp was widely grown as a very valuable crop.
I know. I didn’t make the sarcasm obvious enough, apparently. Minor threadjack, but wasn’t hemp outlawed due to pressure from certain farmers due to the unfair competition, or something like that?
Well, looks like we won’t have to wait much longer to see how/if we can cope without cheap oil. The IEA historicly has released overly optimistic predictions of production. I hope this isn’t the case.
: