# The planet has run out of oil **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 15, 2001, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474 "2001-11-15T05:27:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Max\_the\_Immortal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/6de8d8/32.png) [@Max\_the\_Immortal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_the_Immortal)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/21 "2001-11-15T14:51:07Z")
Crafter\_Man is correct. Virtually all of the the world’s current daily petroleum consumption is used by cars and heating systems. There will likely come a day (decades from now) when petroleum will become too expensive (due to scarcity) to use in the internal combustion engines of cars. Petroleum will be used primarily to manufacture plastics and pharmaceuticals. Remember, methane is abundant and can, if necessary, be used to make heavier petroleum compounds, and therefore petroleum products. Besides, northern Alberta’s oilsands contain several times more oil than Saudi Arabia. When oil becomes scarce, Syncrude will likely still be extracting oil up there. ---
**Author:** ![Futile\_Gesture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f05b48/32.png) [@Futile\_Gesture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Futile_Gesture)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/22 "2001-11-15T15:08:35Z")
It’s a fact that meat is a **very** inefficient way of converting energy from our primary source, the sun, into something we can use personally. It is also a lot more resource hungry than vegetable and grain crops. If everyone on the planet was to attempt to emulate the meat-rich diet of Western countries there would be many more empty stomachs than there already is. Not entirely sure how this fits in with oil resources though. I guess the argument is that rearing livestock requires more heat, transportation etc. ---
**Author:** ![dreamlab](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8dc957/32.png) [@dreamlab](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dreamlab)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/23 "2001-11-15T16:51:12Z")
Okay, so if cows, pigs, etc. were no longer slaughtered for food, then we would no longer need to use fuel to support the farming and slaughter of these tasty critters. But somehow, we would still need to replace the protein lost by not eating the animals, which means more protein rich vegetables would need to be grown, which means more land would need to be fertilized, more insecticides would need to be sprayed, more irrigation equipment would need to be operating during low rain periods, more harvester machinery would be needed, and you’d still have to haul the darn things off to market, which is what you’d do with the animals anyway. Seems to me more fuel would be consumed by not eating the animals. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/24 "2001-11-15T21:09:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Max the Immortal \* > \*\*Besides, northern Alberta’s oilsands contain several times more oil than Saudi Arabia. When oil becomes scarce, Syncrude will likely still be extracting oil up there. \*\* How do you arrive at this? From the [EIA](http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/table81.html): > [@](#): > > Saudi Arabia Crude Oil Reserves, Jan 1, 2000: from 261.4 to 263.5 billion barrels. From what I said up above, the Athabasca Tar Sands have between 280 to 330 billion barrels worth, but must extract it at an energy efficiency of only 20-30%. Note that in both places we are talking economically recoverable reserves. Comments? ---
**Author:** ![Gaspode](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/aeb1de/32.png) [@Gaspode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaspode)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/25 "2001-11-15T21:38:57Z")
**Futile Gesture** , please read the thread I linked to above. Everything you just said has already been thoroughly debunked, with the necessary cites. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2001, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/26 "2001-11-15T22:28:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Futile Gesture \* > \*\*It’s a fact that meat is a **very** inefficient way of converting energy from our primary source, the sun, into something we can use personally. It is also a lot more resource hungry than vegetable and grain crops. If everyone on the planet was to attempt to emulate the meat-rich diet of Western countries there would be many more empty stomachs than there already is. > > Not entirely sure how this fits in with oil resources though. I guess the argument is that rearing livestock requires more heat, transportation etc. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Gapode_Futile Gesture, please read the thread I linked to above. Everything you just said has already been thoroughly debunked, with the necessary cites.\*\* Meat eating bioligist here. Actually **Gaspod, Futile Gesture** is correct. There is a marked decrease in efficiency as one rises in trophic levels. Plants convert about 10% of the solar energy that hits them into usable energy. Primary consumers (cows) only process 17% of the total energy of the plants they eat, or 1.7% of the available solar energy. Secondary consumers and up (meat eaters) only process 4.5% of the available energy from the trophic level below them. Thus, a man eating a cow would harvest 0.0765% of the available solar energy versus 1.7% if he ate the wheat itself. That’s a big difference and backs up **futile gesture** when he claims that meat is “innefficient”. Here’s a cite: [http://www.ultranet.com/~jkimball/BiologyPages/F/FoodChains.html](http://www.ultranet.com/~jkimball/BiologyPages/F/FoodChains.html) …But he’s wrong if he thinks meat is a cause of world hunger. Hunger is currently a problem of distribution rather than production, so the “innefficiency” isn’t really a problem. In fact, cows are good for the distribution part - you can make them walk for miles. Grains don’t walk. Hmm, maybe I’ll grill a T-bone and watch the Louisville game tonight. - **Beeblebrox** * * * The waiter approached. “Would you like to see the menu?” he said, “or would you like to meet the Dish of the Day?” “Huh?” said Ford. “Huh?” said Arthur. “Huh?” said Trillian. “That’s cool,” said Zaphod, “we’ll meet the meat.” ---
**Author:** ![Gaspode](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/aeb1de/32.png) [@Gaspode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaspode)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2001, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/27 "2001-11-16T00:39:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Beeblebrox \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Futile Gesture \* > > \*\*It’s a fact that meat is a **very** inefficient way of converting energy from our primary source, the sun, into something we can use personally. It is also a lot more resource hungry than vegetable and grain crops. If everyone on the planet was to attempt to emulate the meat-rich diet of Western countries there would be many more empty stomachs than there already is. > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by Gapode_Futile Gesture, please read the thread I linked to above. Everything you just said has already been thoroughly debunked, with the necessary cites.\*\* > > Meat eating bioligist here. Actually **Gaspod, Futile Gesture** is correct. … Meat eating biologist _here_ as well, and one with training in animal nutrition. Actually \*\* Beeblebox\*\*, **Futile Gesture** is completely wrong. You’ve fallen into the common trap of assuming resources equates to human utilisable resources. This is a common ‘misrepresenation’ told be vegetarian and vegan groups. Most meat is produced using resources that aren’t available to humans. Areas that are too seasonal or infertile to crop are given over to grassland. These can only be utilised by grazing animals. Waterways and rice paddies are given over to crustacean and fish production. Again resources not utilisable for humans. Chickens, pigs and dogs eat scraps humans can’t tolerate. Aquaculture facilities utilise harvest trash. Most of the worlds beef, goat and lamb is produced free range in regions that, for climatic regions will not support cropping. Ref. “Without a doubt most of the worlds rangelands could never support any agricultural system other than grazing and would thus be lost to human agriculture” Westoboy, M 1979/1980. Elements of a theory of vegetation dynamics in arid rangelands. Israel J. Bot 28:169-94 Or “Climatic effects dominate both the ecology of the plant community and animal production system. Despite the large impact of grazing on the land, these factors reduce the number of management options available and virtually no other productive use of these lands is possible.” Wilson, AD and Harrington, GN. 1984 Grazing Ecology and Animal Production. Management of Australia Rangelands. Cmwlth. Govt. Printing Service.” In these regions ruminant production is not only the most efficient but in fact the _only_ means of " converting energy from our primary source, the sun, into something we can use personally." To suggest that meat is an inefficient way to convert wheat bran, grass, acacia leaves and other indigestibles into food is an outright lie. The huge areas of grassalnd in Africa, Australia, North and South AMerica, Asia and Europe would all be lost to human food production. Your argument is the same simplistic one that vegetarians fall for. It’s perfectly correct from a thermodynamics point of view, but it requires an assumption that grain husk, baggasse, stubble, acacia leaves, grass, mud, carrion and lichen all be edible by humans. This is of course complete rot, but they are edible to animals and animals are edible to people. Meat production is the most efficient way to convert these unutiliseable resources into food. The only other option would be transporting them to industrial plants for fermentaion and reconstitution into ‘Soylent Green’. That is definitely not efficient. Efficiency isn’t just input - output. It’s useable input - useable output. With meat we get a hypothetical 0J usebale input - 50J of useable output. With plants we get 5000000J of useable input - 500J of useable output. Which is more efficient? As for “If everyone on the planet was to attempt to emulate the meat-rich diet of Western countries there would be many more empty stomachs than there already is.” If you had followed the link I provided you would have seen this: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Apollyon \* > Interesting. From FoodFirst Institute: > > > [@](#): > > > > Our research at Food First shows that there is enough food to feed everyone in this world: 4.5 pounds of food per person, per day, around the world. The problemis not one of production but of access and distribution: 78% of countries reporting child malnourishment export food. > > [snip] > > India… where 800 million hungry live…the number of the hungry and malnourished has been steadily rising, though India is faced with an unmanageable food glut. From a food grain surplus of 10 million tons in 1999, the stocks have multiplied to 42 million tons. Instead of distributing the surplus among those who desperately need it, the government either wants to find an export market or release it in the open market. The suggestion that more people would be hungry if everyone emulated a western diet is completed unfounded. Many of the poorer areas of the world are largely dependant on grazing animls for their very survival. WIth countries with starvation problem exporting food and meat hungry western nations destroying excess food I want to see the basis fot that staement. BAsed on facts in eveidence it’s absolute tripe. ---
**Author:** ![kniz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c37758/32.png) [@kniz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kniz)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2001, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/28 "2001-11-16T05:06:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ethilrist \* > \*\*In other words, the fuel costs per acre of cows is much greater than the fuel cost per acre of corn, because the cows also need acres and acres of corn… \*\* Problem is that we humans will not (perhaps cannot) eat the corn that cattle and hogs eat. We can grow lots more of that kind of corn and store it easier than the corn humans eat. ---
**Author:** ![Genseric](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Genseric](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Genseric)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2001, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/29 "2001-11-16T07:07:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE \* > > G’huh? \*\* I was making a comparison. The quoted passage… > [@](#): > > - the world’s known oil reserves would last 13 years if every human at a meat-centered diet. > - the world’s known oil reserves would last 260 years if every human no longer ate meat makes as much sense to me as this old joke… > [@](#): > > What’s the difference between an apple and an orange? > > A telephone pole, because a motorcycle doesn’t have any doors. In other words I am like the archetypal science-fiction robot, when logic fails. > [@](#): > > Does not compute! Does not compute! Smoke boils from ears, shudders to a halt and collapses. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2001, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/30 "2001-11-16T17:29:58Z")
**Gaspode** , _read_ next time. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gaspode \* > You’ve fallen into the common trap of assuming resources equates to human utilisable resources. \*\* No, no I didn’t. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gaspode \* > Your argument is the same simplistic one that vegetarians fall for. It’s perfectly correct from a thermodynamics point of view \ \*\* This is GQ. I have no “argument” and yes, I was correct regarding the thermodynamics. Please do not make a straw man out of me, and _read_ what I write. I implied this: > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Gaspode \* > The suggestion that more people would be hungry if everyone emulated a western diet is completed unfounded. Many of the poorer areas of the world are largely dependant on grazing animls for their very survival. WIth countries with starvation problem exporting food and meat hungry western nations destroying excess food I want to see the basis fot that staement. BAsed on facts in eveidence it’s absolute tripe._\* when I wrote this: > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Beeblebrox_…But he’s wrong if he thinks meat is a cause of world hunger. Hunger is currently a problem of distribution rather than production, so the “innefficiency” isn’t really a problem. In fact, cows are good for the distribution part - you can make them walk for miles. Grains don’t walk. \*\*I ain’t your straw man. \*\*\*READ ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2001, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/31 "2001-11-16T18:58:57Z")
While this thread is more about animal use of resources than oil, I did find another source of information that might have been twisted around regarding “when we’ll run out of oil”. I found a chart ( 10.2 in World Resources 1992-93, developed by two UN groups on development & environment and published by the [World Resources Institute](http://www.wri.org)) of ‘fossil fuel’ energy resources using data from 1987. It’s very clearly detailed where the numbers come from. They report the resources in Petajoules, using fixed conversion factors. Then they give R/P ratio, which is the number of years the reserve would last at 1987 production rates. The most important thing is that these are _proven_ resources, i.e. known deposits that could be put to use at the time. It should be noted that the primary purpose of the chart is to compare production rates & resources in developing and industrialized countries. The first line shows the world R/P ratio. For petroleum, it’s 40 years. For coal (combined), it’s about 400 years, and I don’t recall natural gas (I think around 120 yrs.) Then it’s broken down by developing countries, by OPEC countries, by non-OPEC exporting, by importing, and finally industrialized, which are further broken down by OECD/non-OECD & regionally. For North America (US & Canada) the ratio is 10 years for petroleum, and similarly for most of the OECD regions the value is around 15 years. So, _if_ the United States had quit all exporting, and restricted extraction entirely to proven deposits of petroleum, and continued production at the same rate as in '87, we would expect to have stopped production due to lack of oil by now. These ‘X number of years of some resource’ do not mean everything that some think they do, of course. They were intended primarily for comparison between countries. While I seriously doubt that reserves could be found for thousands of years, I would expect that continued growth rates would make petroleum un-economical within 200 years. Although I hope that a peak would occur within 50 years, more for environmental reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Futile\_Gesture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f05b48/32.png) [@Futile\_Gesture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Futile_Gesture)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2001, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/32 "2001-11-17T20:24:42Z")
**Gaspode, Beeblebrox** , guys. This is not Great Debates, this is GQ. What my previous post said was facts. Meat is a very inefficient source of energy. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the greater number of conversions the energy goes through the greater the inefficiencies. Grains and vegetables obviously offer a more direct route to the original solar energy source. As for the idea that the lifestock is somehow providing access to energy stores that would otherwise be under utilized (i.e. scrub grassland), well this is a romantic idea, but a million miles from most modern intensive farming methods. The fact is lifestock consumes grain that could otherwise feed people, or consumes feed grown on land that could have otherwise have grown grain for human consumption. The western diet **is** more meat intensive than most others and this is achieved through intensive farming. Just because traditional farming methods can raise livestock on land that would otherwise be useless is besides the point. Yes, this is an efficient use of the resources available. **But they could not raise the required livestock to match western consumption levels using these traditional methods.** They would require grain for feed, which could only come out of other people’s mouths. Therefore, as I said, “If everyone on the planet was to attempt to emulate the meat-rich diet of Western countries there would be many more empty stomachs than there already is.” That is not saying that meat production is the cause of world hunger. Distribution is the fault. But if we had perfect distribution you can be certain that us in the west would be eating a whole lot less meat, having given the rest of the world their share. Put simply; the planet can not provide its current population with prime steak everyday. Is this so hard to believe? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Mick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/838e76/32.png) [@The\_Mick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Mick)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2001, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474/33 "2001-11-18T07:21:16Z")
I really don’t care, personally. After the oil’s gone, at least we won’t be dependent on the Arabian Oil Shieks anymore. They’re developing the feul cells, the hydrogen-powered cars. My uncle tests Chrysler’s cars at the proving grounds, they’ve already got a Dodge Caravan completely powered by electricity(completely silent engine, BTW), they’ll get the feul cells going soon. For now, I continue to eat red meat and will not stop. I’m a hunter-gatherer, why shouldn’t I? Besides that and getting somewhat off-topic, what else could cows be used for? These dumb creatures have been known not to run from fire, for goodness’ sake. They might as well be food to us smarter beings. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-planet-has-run-out-of-oil/93474.md?page=1)