# Let's Face It. The World As We Have Known It Is Coming To An End. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 24, 2010, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603 "2010-05-24T18:52:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/121 "2010-05-25T21:35:55Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > And given that we haven’t nailed down the design of the electric car or standardized fuel/power delivery system for it yet, we haven’t procrastinated on replacing its infrastructure a whit. Not nailing down a standard of some sort is procrastinating. > [@begbert2](#): > > I’m still not convinced it’ll get anywhere near that bad - and even if it does, it’s still a calamaty unrelated to peak oil or the peak oil timeline. Oil’s going to be getting scarce in a few dozen years, right? I don’t think that that’s _quite_ far enough out for the fields to be black and the oceans to have risen to WaterWorld levels. Well, Waterworld won’t happen; there isn’t enough water. We could lose quite a lot of land, but not all or even most of it. But having all the coasts and entire nations go under won’t be good. And we don’t really know how fast it can happen; it appears to be quite possible for the climate to shift radically in years, not decades under the right circumstances. If we pass over some threshold, we could well find the worst case scenario happening in a few years, not far in the future. As for the “fields turning black”; we are using up water left over from the last glacial period and destroying topsoil to feed ourselves; that isn’t sustainable. And climate change isn’t likely to be good for crops, especially if the cropland is under an ocean all of a sudden. And a lack of oil is likely to make things worse, by making transporting food harder and because it’s used to make fertilizer. None of this is necessarily civilization ending, but it isn’t likely to be much fun either. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/122 "2010-05-25T21:37:50Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] Not nailing down a standard of some sort is procrastinating. [/QUOTE] How would you nail down a standard when the technology is still working out the bugs and being developed? What good would the standard be when things are still in a state of flux, development wise? -XT ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/123 "2010-05-25T21:46:08Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > How would you nail down a standard when the technology is still working out the bugs and being developed? What good would the standard be when things are still in a state of flux, development wise? I was speaking of the delivery system; delivering electricity to point B from point A is a mature technology. But if we are ever to have a practical fleet of electric cars, they’ll all need the same sized plugs and so forth. Standardizing interfaces is a historical driver for technological innovation and adoption. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/124 "2010-05-25T21:50:51Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Not nailing down a standard of some sort is procrastinating. In the same sense that Shakespearean england was procrastinating by not laying elecrical wire, sure. Invention comes first, then comes a standards war, then the mutual agrement/government fiat/government semi-fiat-by-buying-into-it, and _then_ we can start putting off installing it everywhere. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Well, Waterworld won’t happen; there isn’t enough water. We could lose quite a lot of land, but not all or even most of it. But having all the coasts and entire nations go under won’t be good. And we don’t really know how fast it can happen; it appears to be quite possible for the climate to shift radically in years, not decades under the right circumstances. If we pass over some threshold, we could well find the worst case scenario happening in a few years, not far in the future. > > As for the “fields turning black”; we are using up water left over from the last glacial period and destroying topsoil to feed ourselves; that isn’t sustainable. And climate change isn’t likely to be good for crops, especially if the cropland is under an ocean all of a sudden. And a lack of oil is likely to make things worse, by making transporting food harder and because it’s used to make fertilizer. > > None of this is necessarily civilization ending, but it isn’t likely to be much fun either. The only part of this that has _anything_ to do with the current discussion is that the lack of oil will make transporting food harder and we’ll have to find alternative fertilizers. Let’s be succinct - I don’t believe that we’re going to run out of land, fresh water, _or_ food, and even if we do (and don’t find alternative solutions), I _certainly_ don’t think it’s going to suddenly happen in the next few decades, which is the period of time under discussion. Let’s keep ourselves to one speculative apocolypse at a time, thank you. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2010, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/125 "2010-05-25T21:52:04Z")
[QUOTE=DT] I was speaking of the delivery system; delivering electricity to point B from point A is a mature technology. [/QUOTE] But there are standards for the power infrastructure, so I guess I’m confused as to what your point was. > [@](#): > > But if we are ever to have a practical fleet of electric cars, they’ll all need the same sized plugs and so forth. Standardizing interfaces is a historical driver for technological innovation and adoption. Usually standards come out of some defacto standard that is generally adopted widely enough to come into common usage. IP is a good example of this. Right now, dictating a standard interface for electrical vehicles is putting the cart before the horse, I’d say…it’s the least of the problems that need to be worked out right now to get EV’s widely adopted and used. I agree that eventually a standard interface (and probably a standard battery, at least footprint and connection wise) is going to be necessary if we are going to go this route. I’m unsure if we ARE going to go the EV route at this point, and I don’t think it’s a matter of procrastination so much as a matter of not knowing which technology (or technologies) will eventually be widely adopted and become the next generation. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2010, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/126 "2010-05-26T00:05:16Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > As Yoda said, that is why you fail. > > You keep conflating “oil” with “energy”. Every time. You don’t seem to understand that peak oil means only that OIL production will decline. OIL. It says OIL right there in peak oil, so I don’t understand why it should be so difficult. Coal is not oil. Nuclear is not oil. Hydro is not oil. > > We aren’t facing any sort of shortage of coal. We aren’t facing any sort of shortage of uranium. We aren’t facing a shortage of hydro, although we’re pretty much maxed out on hydro. > > Oil is not used to produce electricity. Say it with me. Oil is not used to produce electricity. > > What do we use oil for? To power cars, busses, trucks, trains, and aircraft. Why do we use oil? Because diesel and gasoline and jet fuel are cheaper than any other alternatives. Why is oil so cheap? Because there’s so much of it. What happens when there’s not so much of it? Why, it’ll get more expensive. And if demand is inelastic, then it could get more expensive very quickly. And in the short term, we find that demand is pretty inelastic, which means price shocks. > > However, in the long term we find that demand IS elastic. > > $20/gallon is a good thought exercise. What happens when gas prices start increasing to such levels? Do people just pay? Or do they search for alternatives? > > Thing is, we use gasoline very inefficiently, in terms of people-miles/gallon. Single drivers drive their SUVs 60 miles a day back and forth to work every day. That uses up lots of gas. But people don’t think of efficiency in terms of people-miles/gallon, they think of it in terms of people-dollars/mile. They don’t care how much gas they burn to get to work, or to get to the store, they care about how much it COSTS (costs in terms of dollars, time, hassle, etc, sometimes even externalities). > > If you commute 60 miles a day in a 15mpg vehicle, you burn a certain amount of gas. But it’s possible to reduce that amount by lot. What if you moved closer to your work? If you lived 30 miles away, that’s a 50% savings. If you worked from home one day a week, that’s a 20% savings. If you carpool with a co-worker every day, that’s a 50% savings. If you bought a 30mpg vehicle, that’s a 50% savings. Add up all those savings, and you’re using 10% of the gas you used to use. So if you can afford to commute to work in the wasteful scenario when gas is $3/gallon, you could commute to work in the efficient scenario for the same cost, even if gas is $30/gallon. > > And the thing is, when gas is $20/gallon (or $10/gallon), electric vehicles are much cheaper to operate than gas vehicles. And if everyone switches to electric vehicles, what does that do to demand for gas? And when demand for gas goes down, what does that do to the price of gas? Well, I was going to write a response to **adhay** (thanks for that last response btw), but I couldn’t say it any better myself. This is a damn, fine, post and deserves to be quoted in its entirety. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2010, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/127 "2010-05-26T00:39:07Z")
> [@L. G. Butts](#): > > Well, I was going to write a response to **adhay** (thanks for that last response btw), but I couldn’t say it any better myself. This is a damn, fine, post and deserves to be quoted in its entirety. [quote] > [@](#): > > If you commute 60 miles a day in a 15mpg vehicle, you burn a certain amount of gas. But it’s possible to reduce that amount by lot. What if you moved closer to your work? If you lived 30 miles away, that’s a 50% savings. If you worked from home one day a week, that’s a 20% savings. If you carpool with a co-worker every day, that’s a 50% savings. If you bought a 30mpg vehicle, that’s a 50% savings. Add up all those savings, and you’re using 10% of the gas you used to use. So if you can afford to commute to work in the wasteful scenario when gas is $3/gallon, you could commute to work in the efficient scenario for the same cost, even if gas is $30/gallon. A lot of ifs there. How easy would it be these days for your avg joe to sell his house, buy a new one closer to work, trade his guzzler in on something more economical and spend a day week working at home on his factory job? I’m not the first person to think that what’s coming up needs to be addressed now. Here’s a little vid from TED. [http://dangerousintersection.org/2009/12/05/the-transition-to-post-oil/](http://dangerousintersection.org/2009/12/05/the-transition-to-post-oil/) > [@](#): > > The transition to post oil > > Post Carbon Institute Fellow Rob Hopkins gives us the hard facts that we are running out of oil and it is taking immensely more energy to extract the oil that remains. Can technology solve the impending crisis? How shall the transition proceed? This talk parallels many of the observations of Hopkins’ earlier paper, entitled “Searching for a Miracle,” both of which should serve as a wake up call for massive conservation efforts. We need to be “loving and leaving all that oil has done for us,” and getting ready for the transition: … Watch the video. Some European govts are already supporting the idea of local sustainability. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2010, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/128 "2010-05-26T15:49:18Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > I’m not the first person to think that what’s coming up needs to be addressed now. > Here’s a little vid from TED. > [http://dangerousintersection.org/2009/12/05/the-transition-to-post-oil/](http://dangerousintersection.org/2009/12/05/the-transition-to-post-oil/) > Watch the video. Some European govts are already supporting the idea of local sustainability. Putting aside the video for obvious reasons (heh), people here aren’t saying that the problem of peak oil shouldn’t be addressed. At _worst_ we’re saying that even if we _don’t_ address it, the free market inevitably will - one of the things the free market specializes in is dealing with scarcity of a particular resource, particularly in situations where you’re not worried when some people are priced out of the market for a specific good. Which we’re not in the case of oil, since people being priced out of oil will create a **GIGANTIC** market for alternatives, both speculative ones and existing ones. So yes, the free market will fix the problem, given time (and in the case of peak oil, we know for a rock solid fact that we have time, given the three trillion barrels of somewhat expensive oil shale that we can use during the ‘implement new infrastructure’ period). This is not to say that it’s a bad idea to promote oil alternatives. Nuclear in particular has been mentioned once or twice in this thread - I’m not sure you’ve noticed? Speaking of energy alternatives like nuclear plants and alternate trasportation solutions such as high speed electric trains is the very _definition_ of ‘addressing the problem now’. But admittedly it’s not the same as throwing up our hands and retreating to small farming communities and warming up the horses and buggys. The reason that _that_ solution isn’t being seriously entertained by most people is because it’s completely unnecessary and would be extremely stupid as a global, population-wide solution. Do you know many _people_ there are? Like, in cities? How much space would it take to put the entire population of New York in small farming communities? Oh wait, your plan is for all those people to _die_. Ah. Brilliant plan. We’ll get right on that. Though as a backup plan we’ll pass the second amendment so that before they starve, they can first raid and destroy your grandchildrens’ community, so that they die _too_ (and sooner). That’ll keep things fair, you see. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/129 "2010-05-27T12:15:44Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Putting aside the video for obvious reasons (heh), And they would be? > [@](#): > > … people here aren’t saying that the problem of peak oil shouldn’t be addressed. That’s a start. > [@](#): > > At _worst_ we’re saying that even if we _don’t_ address it, the free market inevitably will … I’ll let this poster from another thread address this. > [@SDMB is simply a safe place ...](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-is-simply-a-safe-place/540515/48): > > Can’t argue with a word of that. > > Main thing I’d add is that while solutions will be developed, and cost will be the motivator, the transition will be a lot more difficult for the citizens of those countries that don’t plan for a world where oil is suddenly a lot more costly than it is now. The European countries have already done a lot of prep by artificially pricing gasoline much more highly than we do via taxation, and having much better intra- and inter-city rail transit than we do. > > Here, it would be nice if we were already building subway lines like crazy, and connecting nearby cities with high-speed trains, so that when the price of gasoline and jet fuel both go through the roof, people can relatively painlessly substitute trains for most of their car trips and at least some of their air travel. But instead we’ll have a lag time of a decade or so while we’re building the infrastructure for people to use instead of suddenly-too-expensive cars. It’s gonna be a hard time for a lot of people. Ten years, maybe, were we to start today. By the time everything’s ready to go and given everyone’s need to make a good profit, I wish I had more fingers and toes… > [@](#): > > Nuclear in particular has been mentioned once or twice in this thread - I’m not sure you’ve noticed? Speaking of energy alternatives like nuclear plants and alternate trasportation solutions such as high speed electric trains is the very _definition_ of ‘addressing the problem now’. Speaking about them without there being the slightest possibility of your allowing us to bury nuclear waste in your backyard nor of the electorate sanctioning our getting out of our wars and doubling the price at pumps to pay for their construction, what’s the point? BTW, you have mail from the Pit, I’m not sure you’ve noticed. > [@](#): > > But admittedly it’s not the same as throwing up our hands. I have merely raised my hands in surrender to the inevitable while waving a bit to get your attention. > [@](#): > > … and retreating to small farming communities and warming up the horses and buggys So to speak. One low budget project the govt could put into being right now to make things better for a lot of people, regardless of how the oil thing comes out, would be in Detroit, the desiccated heart of our great auto industry. There, right now, they are reducing abandoned buildings to vacant lots. Detroit doesn’t have much of a growing season, I understand, but with a few govt built state-of-the-art organic green houses along with some education and the encouragement of local participation, we could take a lot of pressure off the local fast food convenience stores, which I hear are getting fewer and farther between there as we speak. > [@](#): > > … How much space would it take to put the entire population of New York in small farming communities? Note, I have not recommended moving to an urban area, nor have I personally done so. With some honest govt help now, Post -Oil Detroit [not quite an urban area these days but it’s the best domestic example of the corporate collateral damage inflicted on us all for profit] could be brought into near self-sufficiency. Me, I enjoy mountains and trees with my snow. > [@](#): > > Oh wait, your plan is for all those people to _die_. Ah. Brilliant plan. We’ll get right on that. The free market is already on it, please take your seats. I have no plans for death but I expect, on some level, It’s inevitable and It is going to be widespread. What I’ve been talking about is the immediate need to start doing things to minimize it. For me, it’s been a damn good ride. Born too young for Korea and, with a little hedging, too old for Nam, I’ve had the full, Big Oil ride. Big Macs and cheap gas, forever, unless I outlast Oil and have to settle for the occasional home grown chicken. I will simply ignore the rest of your post. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/130 "2010-05-27T12:26:56Z")
And this is why we can expect no real help from the govt. It just doesn’t suit the free market model. [http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25546.htm](http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25546.htm) > [@](#): > > May 26, 2010 “petrole” – An inconvenient reality. > > **12 years ago, the International Energy Agency (IEA) discovered that Peak Oil would threaten the prosperity and stability of our societies**. Yes, they knew it. While some IEA officials tried to inform the world about this game-changing event, it appears that others had different priorities. > > In 1998, the IEA team working on the influential World Energy Outlook (WEO) made a detailed and authoritative assessment about the future of oil production. The team was composed of the world’s finest energy experts, amongst whom Jean-Marie Bourdaire, coordinator of the study, Ken Wigley, Keith Miller and the man who would later become Chief-Economist of the IEA, Dr. Fatih Birol. > > By using confidential databases and sophisticated expertise, they reached a dramatic conclusion: **Peak Oil, the moment when global oil production starts its irreversible decline, would happen well before 2020, around 2014**. > [@](#): > > **Nevertheless, in 1998, the most influential member of the Agency, the USA , didn’t like at all what was coming from their study. A structural problem with oil as identified by the IEA team would undeniably question the sustainability of the current economic model**. During the study, the IEA team realised the extent to which economic growth was correlated to the availability of abundant and cheap energy. Hence, once oil production would stop to grow and tensions appear, economic growth would become far more difficult to sustain, if not impossible. The IEA team was effectively walking on eggshells. bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/131 "2010-05-27T15:05:06Z")
[QUOTE=adhay] Ten years, maybe, were we to start today. By the time everything’s ready to go and given everyone’s need to make a good profit, I wish I had more fingers and toes… [/QUOTE] Instead of putting your energy into superstitious motions you should put some of it into learning about the subject. The oil isn’t going to suddenly go away. It’s going to become more expensive over time. As it goes up, currently untapped reserves that are either marginally or completely uneconomical (at the current prices) will become viable to tap, which will extend further our oil reserves. While that’s happening, new technologies ALREADY being developed and tested will become more marketable. Some of these technologies are already close to the point where they will become economically viable and competitive with the existing system. Others still need some development and research. The point you are missing (well, one of several) is that we aren’t going to suddenly start doing something to replace oil today and then the clock will start on the 10 year cut over. It doesn’t work that way except in totalitarian wet dreams. For the last several decades companies have spent billions in research and development on alternatives…and they continue to do so. They haven’t pushed the pace because there is no reason to push the pace yet…whatever they come out with will, initially at least, not be able to compete with cheap oil. However, as oil continues to rise those alternatives will become more and more attractive to people, and the manufactures will ramp up their production as people buy the things. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/132 "2010-05-27T16:12:14Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > A lot of ifs there. How easy would it be these days for your avg joe to sell his house, buy a new one closer to work, trade his guzzler in on something more economical and spend a day week working at home on his factory job? How easy will it be for the same guy to move to the country and become a subsistence farmer, like you recommend? Higher gas prices will take some adjustment, and not all of it will be pleasant. But there’s a level of unpleasantness in having to carpool in a tiny low performance efficient car and live closer to your work and have less disposable income due to higher prices for everything. And then there’s a level of unpleasantness of becoming a peasant subsistence farmer doing backbreaking manual labor from sunup to sundown. Give the guy a choice between the agony of carpooling and the inconvenience of subsistence farming, maybe he’ll suck it up and carpool. But that would require adjustment, and you’re convinced that no one will adjust their consumption habits until the day we wake up and the last drop of oil has been pumped out of the ground. Of course nobody is going to make changes fast enough to suit you, because the only changes you advocate are changes toward a 19th century subsistence farming economy. Since nobody is doing anything like that, and won’t do anything like that, you’re convinced that nothing can be done. As far as NIMBYism and nuclear power, well, what good do you think those nuclear power plants will do? Nuclear power isn’t gasoline! The only reason we’d need new nuclear power plants is if we replace our gasoline cars with electric cars, and you think that can’t happen. Look dude, if people are perfectly happy to turn their home cities into smog-choked deserts just so they can keep their precious cars, they’ll be happy to accept any amount of radioactive waste–if the alternative is giving up their cars, that is. If the choice is nuclear power+radioactive waste in the backyard+cars, vs no radiation+no cars+subsistence farming, which choice do you think Americans are going to make? ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/133 "2010-05-27T16:23:03Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Instead of putting your energy into superstitious motions you should … … instead comment on my post just above yours. Superstition on this thread is pretty much all about the illusion that our “free” market economy based on deregulating banks and industry works to lift global welfare. This has only seemed plausible to many because of cheap oil. I believe opinion on the subject is changing. At least in the minds of those willing to look at the facts. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/134 "2010-05-27T16:52:37Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > And they would be? That my computer doesn’t have sound. Unless your video was subtitled (I admit it didn’t check), it’s very likely to lose whatever coherence it had when it becomes people silently mouthing the words. I’m afraid that if it had any points in it worth making, which I doubt, that you’ll have to trascribe or paraphrase them if you want me to hear them. Or if you want anybody else to hear them either, really, because we all have better things to do than to do your homework for you. > [@adhay](#): > > Ten years, maybe, were we to start today. By the time everything’s ready to go and given everyone’s need to make a good profit, I wish I had more fingers and toes… We have **lots** more than ten years. Remember the oil shale? > [@adhay](#): > > Speaking about them without there being the slightest possibility of your allowing us to bury nuclear waste in your backyard nor of the electorate sanctioning our getting out of our wars and doubling the price at pumps to pay for their construction, what’s the point? People like their cars a _lot_. The obstacles will melt away. So start adressing these points that show that your entire position is absurd nonsense. > [@adhay](#): > > BTW, you have mail from the Pit, I’m not sure you’ve noticed. I’ll take a look - should be fun. > [@adhay](#): > > I have merely raised my hands in surrender to the inevitable while waving a bit to get your attention.So to speak. You can wave your arms all you like, but since it’s only inevitable in your imagination, it just makes you look silly. The idea of Detroit becoming self-sufficent without powered vehicles to ship things with is clearly absurd, by the way. There are more people there than you appear to think, and even if there _were_ magic greenhouses pumping out the output of large farms, there wouldn’t even be a way to get that food across the city to the majority of the populace! Stick with the small communes and you sentencing 99.999% of people to starving to death. It still wouldn’t work due to the communes being targets and massively outnumbered, but at least it doesn’t ignore vast spans of reality. (Besides all the reasons that peak oil wouldn’t end civilization regardless, anyway. Actually it seemse there’s a whole lot of reality-ignoring in your position no matter how you slice it.) > [@adhay](#): > > Note, I have not recommended moving to an urban area, nor have I personally done so. The people are _already there_. They have to be somewhere. Spread them out or kill them all, pick one. I see you’ve picked “kill them all.” Charming! > [@adhay](#): > > I have no plans for death but I expect, on some level, It’s inevitable and It is going to be widespread. What I’ve been talking about is the immediate need to start doing things to minimize it. A vote for **adhay** ’s plan is a vote for widespread death! Vote **adhay**! Yeah, there’s a rallying cry if I’ve ever heard one. > [@adhay](#): > > For me, it’s been a damn good ride. Born too young for Korea and, with a little hedging, too old for Nam, I’ve had the full, Big Oil ride. Big Macs and cheap gas, forever, unless I outlast Oil and have to settle for the occasional home grown chicken. ‘I’ve had mine, so we should all sit back and watch the rest of you die! While pretending that you won’t kill me and steal my chicken.’ > [@adhay](#): > > I will simply ignore the rest of your post. Giving up is easy, ain’t it? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/135 "2010-05-27T17:04:16Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > BTW, you have mail from the Pit, I’m not sure you’ve noticed. I looked and didn’t see it, unless you meant this: > [@SDMB is simply a safe place ...](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-is-simply-a-safe-place/540515/52): > > When you come up for air, do take a deep breath. , which doesn’t really merit a reply, if for no other reason than that it doesn’t make sense. If you had something else in mind, provide a link, please? Specific posts can be linked by copying the location in the ‘post number’ link in each post’s heading, or you could just link the thread if you made an entire thread devoted to me that I managed to overlook. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/136 "2010-05-27T17:07:02Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > … instead comment on my post just above yours. > > Superstition on this thread is pretty much all about the illusion that our “free” market economy based on deregulating banks and industry works to lift global welfare. This has only seemed plausible to many because of cheap oil. I believe opinion on the subject is changing. At least in the minds of those willing to look at the facts. You don’t seriously think that free markets didn’t exist until we started deregulating banks and industry, do you? Free markets predate regulation, banks, _and_ industrialization. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2010, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/137 "2010-05-27T23:35:08Z")
[QUOTE=adhay] … instead comment on my post just above yours. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > By using confidential databases and sophisticated expertise, they reached a dramatic conclusion: Peak Oil, the moment when global oil production starts its irreversible decline, would happen well before 2020, around 2014. Dude…seriously. They have been predicting Peak Oil (in caps) for decades now. It’s really unsurprising that someone is now predicting it to happen sometime between 2014 and 2020. Hell, they may even be right. So what? You don’t seem to be making even a marginal attempt to actually read what anyone is telling you in this thread, or to even try and attempt to address their points, simply ranting about corporate Amerika, big business, Kapitalizm (as you understand it which, frankly is about on par with my understanding of quantum physics) and Peak Oil(tm…aar)! Your cite is the standard ignorant Peak Oil rantage that I’ve seen in every single one of these kinds of thread for years now. It takes a few facts, distorts or conflates them, then attempts (badly) to string them together into a conspiracy laden glurge that is thrown together to attempt to support the world view and outlook of the author (who, like you, seems to be under the impression that the End Is Near!!). Oil will no doubt peak in production at some point. It might even be in this decade. That doesn’t mean that there won’t be any more oil, however…it will simply mean that the price of oil will go up. Everyone (and their dogs) knows this. It’s happening. The price of oil is steadily rising, with brief spikes upwards due to various dynamics in the oil commodities market (little things like the threat of war, hurricanes or other mishaps…stuff that panics or stimulates the market). I don’t believe that there is a single person in this thread who is NOT aware that the price of oil will continue to rise, that the resource will continue to become scarce, and that eventually oil production will peak. What isn’t going to happen is Peak Oil™…i.e. the end of the world and the retreat back to the 19th century, where we’ll all go back to horses and carriages and farming with two mules and a plow share. Even if oil production peaked yesterday that’s…not…gonna…happen. Billions of human beings aren’t poised on the brink of starvation while a few forward thinking visionaries (undoubtedly such as yourself) are ready for the crisis, poised to make their way in the Brave New World. That’s Peak Oil fantasy horseshit. > [@](#): > > Superstition on this thread is pretty much all about the illusion that our “free” market economy based on deregulating banks and industry works to lift global welfare. You really don’t have any idea of what a free market is, do you? I mean, seriously…you don’t have any more idea what or how a market works than you did about the writings of Lenin. Do you? And you are militantly unwilling to learn what one is…or really to debate this or any other issue. Are you? You want to simply assert stuff that you don’t have any idea about. As you say, Let’s Face It…that’s what every one of your threads is REALLY about, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > This has only seemed plausible to many because of cheap oil. Market based economics have little or nothing to do with ‘cheap oil’…which you would know, if you knew what a market was, or how it worked. But you wouldn’t know a market if it bit Lenin on the nose, would you? > [@](#): > > At least in the minds of those willing to look at the facts. _BOOM!_ :eek: -XT ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2010, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/138 "2010-05-28T10:56:26Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Dude…seriously. They have been predicting Peak Oil (in caps) for decades now. It’s really unsurprising that someone is now predicting it to happen sometime between 2014 and 2020. Hell, they may even be right. So what? … That’s what I’m asking you. > [@](#): > > You really don’t have any idea of what a free market is, do you? I mean, seriously…you don’t have any more idea what or how a market works than you did about the writings of Lenin. Do you? And you are militantly unwilling to learn what one is…or really to debate this or any other issue. Are you? You want to simply assert stuff that you don’t have any idea about. The free market in theory relies on supply and demand and honest competition among producers to determine fair market value. Great idea for a farmers’ markets where the consumer can walk around and make informed decisions based on quality and price. And if the farmer’s wagon breaks down, he can expect the wheelwright to get him back on the road for a fair price. It has been noted, however, when production becomes concentrated in a few hands and left unregulated by govt, there ain’t no such thing as a free market. Unless it’s govt sponsored corporate freedom to keep everyone entertained while they fuck us and destroy the environment. > [@](#): > > Market based economics have little or nothing to do with ‘cheap oil’…which you would know, if you knew what a market was, or how it worked. You must suppose that those petroplastic consumer goodies assembled by slave labor in China appear miraculously on the walls of Walmart within easy driving distance of your house. Does ‘cheap oil’ enter in somewhere? > [@](#): > > But you wouldn’t know a market if it bit Lenin on the nose, would you? And you, sir, might benefit by reading [Imperialism](http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/pref01.htm). > [@](#): > > _BOOM!_ :eek: > > -XT Oh, boom, boom yourself. Put away the drum. If you’re into percussion, I recommend the triangle. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2010, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/139 "2010-05-28T11:05:37Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > How easy will it be for the same guy to move to the country and become a subsistence farmer, like you recommend? You’re next. Which is to say that I will respond to your reasonable questions. It’s just been so difficult lately. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2010, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603/140 "2010-05-28T12:21:36Z")
You folks who are convinced that local action is unnecessary and think that “they” will come up with something, here’s the thread for you. > [@Future of fuels?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/future-of-fuels/541049/1): > > If at all possible to speculate on this, what is the most or at least a likely candidate for an alternative fuel or otherwise energy source in the future? What are we most likely going to be using instead of what we have? Of course it has to be cost effective, or just so high in demand that people would pay anything for it. It’s in GQ so, if you’re going to offer opinions there, you’ll be held to a higher bar. I must apologize for the tone of my OP. Once again I clouded the issue with my political rant and hyperbolic title. Some folks got no humor when it comes to mom and apple pie. Anyone who can see how local action now might save a lot of pain to many in the near future is welcome here. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lets-face-it-the-world-as-we-have-known-it-is-coming-to-an-end/540603.md?page=8)