Peak Oil and the Decline of America

[-Z-]

As I said before, are many different, reliable, renewable, dependable, easily accessible, great, wonderful, useful, nice, good, fruitful energy sources other than fossil fuels.

No one is denying that except perhaps the unheard invisible debater in Maxis head.

What is clear and evident to anyone who looks past the fact that there are plenty of other ways to produce energy is that None of these other ways are nearly as efficient as Fossil Fuels.

Energy input to energy output for fossil fuels has been a catalyst for human development and the maintenance of industrial society for many decades now.

As Oil production around the globe becomes more costly due to the decreasing amounts of easily accessible Oil deposits, its price will steadily increase, resulting in a huge decline in development and maintenance of the infrastructure we have already developed.

In coming decades once the energy required to obtain Oil approaches and then exceeds the energy obtained from its retrieval, it will become a luxary energy source, and we will be dependent upon renewable energy, which is much less efficiently obtained.

You can look at the most simple of facts and make your judgments from those like our friend Max, or you can make a rational decision on your opinion based on in depth research on actual energy consumption ratios taking into account retrieval costs, and other such factors.

If you Live In the world of Max Logan, where a rock and a piece of cement are exactly the same thing, then I suppose U have little to worry about, and you can simply claim that anyone who opposes your ideas are ignorant.

Otherwise it might be an Idea to think about how the industrial revolution has changed human society so drastically, and for the sake of the generations to come, spread the word on peak oil.


I am not a conspiracy theorist, I simply feel it is important that we all understand what is happening in our generation, and how it is so drastically different from the past.

Perhaps sometimes I go overboard and talk like it is the end of the world... clearly it is not, but someone has to counter the overly complacent attitude of the masses.

Perhaps some time in the future we will discover an alternative energy source that can stack up to fossil fuels in terms of efficiency, but we have no such technology now available to the world.

If you want to stick your head in the sand like Max, then that is your choice.

I feel that its important to try to leave the world a better place than when u came into it.



Z

[Max Logan]

Dunno where you conducted your in depth research. No one is denying the importance of Oil. But to claim it has global impact on our future is just populism.
In a few decades Oil will drop importance, simply because of technological advancement. 200 years ago, coal was the mayor power broker. Now It`s Oil. In a few decades it`s gonna be another means of power.

Take ships for example:
Man-Wind-Coal-Oil-Nuclear-...

Cars:
Oil-Gasoline-Hydrogen/Electricity/Gas-...

Electricity:
Coal(fossile burning)
Hydro energy
Wind
Those red water floating things...forgot the English term for them. Tide 'something'


You can always try and single out one mayor player, but you can`t ignore other factors besides those you`ve taken in account - efficiency and power output. You need to look deeper, as you said, make a in-depth research. Try looking at market development, companies future tactics, technology advances, infrastructure.

But you can always buy what mass media tells you and make a global oil conspiracy and blame it all on USA. It`s cool, everyone does it. But it doesn`t make the argument valid. It`s just popular belief.. If you consider yourself a researcher, you should avoid what press sells, and avoid global conspiracy theories

[esco]

Max is right, couldn't have said it better myself.

One thing I can add is, as you said the price of oil will continue to increase which in turn will make alternative energies more competitive. As that happens market forces will drive funds away from oil related investments/products and into alternative energy. Which will continue forcing prices to increase on oil until one form of energy comes out as the next source of energy for humankind. It might not even be invented yet who knows, the amount of money spent on research and level of organization for all types of crap is unprecedented in any other time. It's just as likely that a pharma company manages to accidently stumble across it. Your just working yourself up for nothing, despite what some people might think humans are very resourceful beings. They work even better on under pressure

[-Z-]

I haven't heard any major or local news organization talk about Peak Oil frankly...

How can you say everyone is talking about it, and call it popularism when no one is talking about it, and its not a popular subject...

And Esco you say hes "right on" about this?

Yes there are a lot of viable energy sources that can replace Oil now. and yes as Oil increases in price, alternative energy will be uses more and more.

But that does not make any of the alternatives cheaper, or more efficient!

What I am trying to say is that due to the lack of an energy source as efficient as fossil fuels, global production will plummet (we can not just keep producing the same amount of product, maintenance, and structure at 3x the price as we did b4).

We will no longer be able to grow, in fact we will face decades of industrial and societal contraction.

Energy is key. We take it for granted.

"No one is denying the importance of Oil.
But to claim it has global impact on our future is just populism."

... This just seems more than slightly contradictory to me.

Oil is important, yet has no impact on our future.

pass the pipe over here Max, I want some of that!

Z

[Max Logan]

1. How can you say everyone is talking about it, and call it popularism when no one is talking about it, and its not a popular subject...

2. We will no longer be able to grow, in fact we will face decades of industrial and societal contraction.

3. "No one is denying the importance of Oil.
But to claim it has global impact on our future is just populism."

... This just seems more than slightly contradictory to me.

Oil is important, yet has no impact on our future.
Z

1. populism=/=popularism

2. industry will stop? now that`s interesting. I assume the investments in research and technology are all wasted? I wonder why Norway keeps spending billions on hydro power and improving it. Why USA and Japan bother so much with alternative energy. And what I don`t understand, is how alternative energy market, despite global recession is improving more then other industries. You probably know something mayor industrial countries and companies don`t know

3. Oil IS important. In FUTURE there will be little need for oil, as it`s just not productive enough, assuming we plan to advance space flight and new technology.

Example - the problem nowadays with space flight is that there is no real energy source. Oil takes too much of an amount and it weights far too much. This is the reason long distance space flight is a problem. Oil is just not efficient enough

[-Z-]

1. populism=/=popularism

2. industry will stop? now that`s interesting. I assume the investments in research and technology are all wasted? I wonder why Norway keeps spending billions on hydro power and improving it. Why USA and Japan bother so much with alternative energy. And what I don`t understand, is how alternative energy market, despite global recession is improving more then other industries. You probably know something mayor industrial countries and companies don`t know

3. Oil IS important. In FUTURE there will be little need for oil, as it`s just not productive enough, assuming we plan to advance space flight and new technology.

Example - the problem nowadays with space flight is that there is no real energy source. Oil takes too much of an amount and it weights far too much. This is the reason long distance space flight is a problem. Oil is just not efficient enough

I did not say anything about industry stopping.

alternative energy is growing in use because fossil fuels are becoming more expensive to obtain and refine. There is a direct correlation between the rise in alternative energy use and the expense of fossil fuels, this is my entire point.

And I agree Fossil fuels are not efficient enough for space travel, but they are the best we have atm.

If your ideas that a new source of energy, more efficient (or at least as efficient) as oil is found in abundance and is easily accessible, then my ideas are all incorrect.

There may be at least a short recession while the entire world switches from Oil to this new source, (many new fixtures and infrastructure will need to be built to accommodate this new energy source, unless it can run on the same machines as Oil)But life could go on as usual.

I feel that no such energy source exists at this time, because I have not heard of any promising sources.

Nuclear fusion would be awesome, but we have no been able to obtain that for any length of time.

My ideas in this thread are based on what we know now, not on unproven theories.

I am not here to bash any unproven theories, it would be great if they were proven... but frankly I have not even heard of any ideas for an efficient source of energy to replace oil, that come to mind except nuclear fusion.

All of the sources such as Geothermal, tidal, wind, solar, hydrogen, ethanol, all pale in comparison to the efficiency of oil.

Z

[esco]

Bro like I said your just worrying about nothing, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...box-innovation

I'm not saying thats going to be the solution, but there are dozens of solutions being brewed up.

If you want to worry about something, make it something like the diminishing amount of drinkable water around the world.

[-Z-]

drinkable water is easy to make as long as u have a reliable source of energy, and a reliable source of energy to create the machines to filter it.

Energy is key to everything.

Z

[-Z-]

Bro like I said your just worrying about nothing, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...box-innovation

I'm not saying thats going to be the solution, but there are dozens of solutions being brewed up.

If you want to worry about something, make it something like the diminishing amount of drinkable water around the world.

The Bloom Box? Seriously?

lmao
getting energy from Oil = BURN IT

getting energy from the BlOOM Box = SOFCs take a hydrocarbon fuel and split at very high temperature (perhaps 600 degrees C) into hydrogen and carbon. The carbon combines with oxygen to make CO2 and the hydrogen reacts with oxygen from air to make water. This later process causes electrons to flow through the ceramic electrolyte and generate a usable current. The crucial problem is making the cell robust, cheap and durable at the high temperatures experienced in the cell.

Ceramic Fuel Cells has numerous partnerships with large utilities around the world interested in taking its products into local markets. Its product turns about 60% of the energy value of natural gas (largely methane in the UK and Europe) into electricity, making it more efficient than all but the best combined cycle power stations. The remaining energy – residual heat – can be used to provide domestic hot water or, in theory could be used to offer space heating or energy conversion to air conditioning in summer. The carbon dioxide savings are substantial, even if grid natural gas is used. Ceramic Fuel Cells, and probably Bloom, can also use synthesis gas ('syngas') from super-heating wood in the absence of air or can even split liquid ethanol made from agricultural wastes. In theory, a SOFC can use low or zero carbon fuel and offer huge greenhouse gas savings on fossil fuel combustion. SOFCs can also be used for grid balancing. When demand is high, the grid operator will have the ability to remotely increase power output of domestic fuel cells and turn it down when the wind turbines on the hilltops are spinning fast. Ceramic Fuel Cells has successfully demonstrated this feature of its technology.

The problems with SOFCs, probably including the Bloom Box, are well known. The fuel cells burn out and have to be replaced by professional engineers. Ceramic Fuel Cells talks of the units needed to be switched every two years though the company hopes this will improve to once every four years. The cost of the units is high. Ceramic Fuel Cells has mentioned a figure of about £2,000 ($3,000+ ) for a machine that can continuously develop 2 kilowatts of electric power but I think this number is highly optimistic and the true figure is likely to be several times this level for some years to come.

In most circumstances, the Ceramic Fuel Cells device will also need to be supplemented by a conventional domestic heating boiler. These machines are so efficient that they do not generate enough heat to keep even a well insulated house warm. The average UK house uses a running average of about 4 kilowatts of heat during the six month heating season while the Ceramic box only provides about 0.5 kilowatts.

The UK government's new feed-in tariffs provide a substantial incentive for householders to install SOFCs in domestic homes. Ceramic Fuel Cells has made great play of the attractiveness of this new subsidy. Provided its power plants work at even approximately the price suggested Ceramic Fuel Cells will find a ready market in the UK. The Bloom Boxes, which appear to be aimed at office buildings and go up to 100 kilowatts, will not benefit from this subsidy.


hmmmm which is easier...


Z

[-Z-]

.

Humanities Source of vitality is dwindling, with no current clear direction to replace it.

But don't worry, no big deal.

lmao

Z