Peak production is not the same as ‘running out’.
Of course not. After we pass the all-time global peak in oil production (assuming we haven’t already), we’ll still have enough oil left in the ground to last another 50 to 100 years. But after that point, every year it will cost more and more to pump less and less oil out of the ground. Gradually but surely we will find it impossible to run our economy based on an oil-dependent transportation system. That doesn’t necessarily mean our whole way of life will collapse, but it does mean that’s a very real possibility.
Yes indeed.
Additionally, it’s a higher price without any benefit. You don’t get additional utility out of the food, and some of that money you’ll spend on food might have otherwise been spent on things like movie tickets or a new pair of shorts or whatever. The economy will suffer.
Peak Oil, on its own, will have a negative effect on our economy.
I have no experience that enables me to speak with authority on this subject. Anything I say that isn’t backed up by some other credible source should be taken with a grain of salt or two.
And, new information comes to light on this topic daily.
I would consider Kenneth Deffeyes an expert, though. Matthew Simmons is another that I would consider an expert. Ali Samsam Bakhtiari is one more. Julian Darley, Noam Chomsky, James Kunstler, and a bunch of others are what I’d call second-tier experts, as they don’t necessarily have first-hand knowledge of the situation. Extremely well-read on the subject, but not necessarily an actual petroleum geologist with 20+ years in the field who has actually studied the very rock in Ghawar.
Me? I’m just some guy, you know?
I never really bought into the idea that fertilizer would be gone overnight. It never passed the smell test with me. Just because the fertilizer is made FROM natural gas doesn’t mean it’s going to disappear from the Earth forever the moment we peak. It’ll be around for years and years and years. It’ll just get increasingly expensive, and the total amount of food around will start to dip a bit. Every year it’ll get a little worse, but we’ll have time to adjust for quite some time. It’s the distribution of food that’ll be a problem. We’ve got millions of starving kids in different parts of the world today, and we’ve got fat dogs in the US.
Meat will become more expensive much more quickly than vegetables and fruits, I think.
I’m not so sure it’s complete tinfoil hattery, though. It only stands to reason that oil production will peak. How could it not? It’s a finite substance. There is only so much. At some point, we will max out on oil production, and then it will fall. It’s not an “if” to me.
Nobody’s saying that we won’t peak at some point. Even the EIA says we’ll peak at some point.
Also, if we continue to grow our usage of this finite resource, then at some point we will experience a time when demand outstrips supply. Same idea, and I don’t think anyone really takes the position that we will simply pump more and more out and that we’ll never, ever, slow down or peak. It’s just a really tough position to take.
I think most people that take the opposite position from mine simply think that it won’t happen until after they die, or at least so far out on the time horizon that it won’t affect them.
While both of the above statements may be true, they don’t really have anything to do with what will happen after oil production peaks.
Here’s a little extra material for all concerned. The first one is a short interview with Matthew Simmons. He sat on the energy policy board for GWB and is the president of the largest energy investment bank in the world. He’s an expert. This is a quick one, maybe five minutes or so in length.
http://www.peakoil.com/gate.html?name=Web_Links&l_op=viewlink&cid=13
Scroll down a bit, the link is in the middle of the page. Unfortunately, the link is some kind of virtual link and I can’t figure out how to copy and paste a direct link. :smack:
Next we’ve got Ken Deffeyes. It’s immediately apparent what his qualifications are once he begins to speak.
http://interface.audiovideoweb.com/lnk/nj45win9664/SPE/deffey.wmv/play.asx
Also see www.globalpublicmedia.com, it’s an excellent resource for many more videos.
Matt Simmons’ energy bank’s website has a lot of this information on it as well.
Do you own a car? If so, what make and model?
When you get your nursing job, how far away do you expect your job will be from your home?
What is the worst that could happen? Will I have to go back to dial-up?
Every few months or so, we get one of these “I am Nomad. I am perfect.” folks and then the truth squad comes in and pecks them to death like a gull with a red ribbon around its ankle. God, I love this place!
Your post implies that oil supplies any substantial electrical generation right now, or has in the recent past. If that is true, you are incorrect. This has been posted about innumerable times by experts on this Board for years.
You say that investors are “running to coal”. Coal already supplies between 45-55% of US electrical generation, depending on how you measure it. These running investors are rather late and stupid if they’re starting just now.
Coal will also hold out for more than “a while”, which implies lack of knowledge of US and world coal resources. The real problem is whether we can afford to liberate that much carbon.
Honda Civic
I’m hoping for no more than 5-10 miles, well within biking distance.
I’ve got an hour-long video for you to check out that goes very deeply into the subject of coal. I’m not going to go through it on this forum, he does it much better than I do. I’d highly recommend watching it all the way through. It’s very interesting, even if you disagree with his math.
Well, I certainly hope they do. I’m learning new things about energy every day. There’s a lot to learn.
With respect, how about just summarizing it to explain whatever points you were trying to make earlier. You must have had something in mind when you made the post, I’m just asking that you explain your exact points so people can read, then understand what you are saying.
I’ll give you the best and the worst.
Best possible case scenario is Richard Smalley gets his buckeyballs lined up just right and we make some nanotechnological solar panels that have some huge conversion/efficiency, and we figure out how to pipe the electricity along buckytubes with 0% loss as photons, and convert everything to electricity, free and plentiful for us and our children and their children. Utopia.
Worst case scenario is we’re actually past the peak, and we need that oil in Iraq really really bad, but the oil fields are so damaged that they’ll never even produce the 4.5 million barrels a day that we’re expecting, so we have to attack Iran next or our economy will implode. China comes to the same conclusion, and backs Iran. Could be WWIII. The middle class continues to disappear, dividing the nation into rich and poor, but poor becomes a whole new kind of poor, poor like Haitians are poor. Like Argentinians are poor. Well, at least we’ll have some demand destruction, and the rich will be able to drive their hummers for cheap.
Some think that as the Green Revolution unwinds, and as we lose our ability to transport food over long distances, and as fertilizers and pesticides disappear, that eventually our world human population will crash to maybe 500 million from the 6,500 million we currently number.
I don’t think we’ll go quite as far as that, though. I’m much more optimistic.
I’d love to, but it actually takes an hour to do it. Bartlett’s been giving that presentation for 20 years, and he’s done it over 1700 times. He’s a teacher and he knows how to get the material across the best way.
He goes over the amount of coal we have, how long it will last under many different sets of circumstances, and how the math works on the whole thing. He pulls apart a number of estimates published by financial magazines, government agencies, banks, etc. and just checks their math. He finds that the 400 years of coal, 200 years of coal, thousands of years of coal, etc. are just the result of bad math. He even uses their own numbers.
It’s very much worth the investment of an hour of your time. If you’re honestly interested in the topic, I would highly recommend it. I don’t think it’s important for me to try to summarize a very information-dense hour long presentation in a few paragraphs when it’s just a click away, and you get the information right from the source.
Oh, got the data for you.
The U.S. coal use for electric power generation is as follows:
985.8 million short tons in 2000; 964.4 in 2001; 977.5 in 2002; 1000.6 in 2003
total use 1084.1 in 2000; 1060.1 in 2001; 1066.4 in 2002; 1090.5 in 2003
Source: EIA
The U.S. generates about 33% of its electricity using coal. For many countries, the percentages are much higher. For example, Poland (an EU member) gets over 90% of its electricity from coal.
The number of electrical generators in the U.S. by energy source:
coal 1535 (capacity 313019 MW)
petroleum 1321 (36429 MW)
natural gas 3069 (208447 MW)
dual fired 3056 (171295 MW)
other gases 105 (1994 MW)
nuclear 104 (99209 MW)
hydro 4145 (99216 MW)
other renewable 1582 (18199 MW)
other 39 (638 MW)
So, we do get a portion of our electricity from petroleum. I don’t know what kind. Could be kerosene for all I know, or maybe diesel. But, it looks like it’s about a third the size of our nuclear or hydro, and it looks like about twice as much as all solar and wind put together.
Here’s the source.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epaxlfile2_2.xls
Plug: The Long Emergency, James Howard Kunstler’s new book on how the coming oil crisis will affect life in America, will be coming out in May from Atlantic Monthly Press. There are plenty of books on this topic out already, but, judging by Kunstler’s earlier books, I’m sure this will be a better read than any of them.
Man… as long as I have the Internet, I don’t care. The Haitians around here have phones.
Ok, peal_oil, I want to know what you think the most likely outcome of this situation will be. Do you think it will help or hurt America?