Absolute must read.

0marTheZealot · Oct 5, 2004

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcras...dyInteriorPages_1_.pdf

This is Matt Savinar's latest book, available for free from now until the election. It documents Peak Oil and the economic, social, political, etc etc ramifications.

Trevelyan · Oct 6, 2004

Yeah I bought it awhile back... good call its now available free til Nov 2nd.

Todd33 · Oct 6, 2004

Give us the sales pitch...

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcras...dyInteriorPages_1_.pdf

This is Matt Savinar's latest book, available for free from now until the election. It documents Peak Oil and the economic, social, political, etc etc ramifications.

and omits any information about energy from other sources.

dnuggett · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: Todd33
Give us the sales pitch...

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

charrison, it gives informations on alternate energy sources. It explains why they are not viable.

Sales Pitch :

This book condenses many of the major points of the Peak Oil debate, how it will impact YOU specifically and details a possible course of events in the near future (10-30 years). It explains what Peak Oil, why the markets cannot solve this problem, implications of political and social and economic events and the like. While I don't agree with many of his points, it doesn't diminish the value of the book. Very thought-provoking.

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
charrison, it gives informations on alternate energy sources. It explains why they are not viable.

Sales Pitch :

This book condenses many of the major points of the Peak Oil debate, how it will impact YOU specifically and details a possible course of events in the near future (10-30 years). It explains what Peak Oil, why the markets cannot solve this problem, implications of political and social and economic events and the like. While I don't agree with many of his points, it doesn't diminish the value of the book. Very thought-provoking.

You are a fool to believe that oil cannot be replaced as a fuel source.

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

and you are a fool for thinking it can be.

explain how a multi-trillion dollar establishment can be transformed in a reasonable timeframe given that oil is still more profitable than any alternative can ever hope to be? or how agriculture can be revolutionized again to be weeded off petrol products in a reasonable timeframe? or how alternatives can be sustainable without the use of oil? there are alternatives to oil, it's just none of them are very viable.

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
and you are a fool for thinking it can be.

explain how a multi-trillion dollar establishment can be transformed in a reasonable timeframe given that oil is still more profitable than any alternative can ever hope to be? or how agriculture can be revolutionized again to be weeded off petrol products in a reasonable timeframe? or how alternatives can be sustainable without the use of oil? there are alternatives to oil, it's just none of them are very viable.

None of them are viable at the current price. At higher prices other alternatives become viable. Tar sands, shale, methane hydrids, solar, nuclear, coal gasification, conservation.

Just to name a few..

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

every single one of those alternatives requires heavy subsidization via oil in the initial stages of R&D, implementation and scalability. You also failed to mention how we can re-organize and re-structure a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure. I don't mean a step by step plan that has to be carried out, but a general idea that is feasible and workable.

And the whole point is that modern industrial civilization is built on cheap oil. Take away such a fundemental root and the tree withers. Oil used to extremely economical to use; 1 barrel of oil could be used to find 30-100 barrels (EROI, energy returned on investment). Most of the alternatives mentioned have EROIs in the range of .7 (making it a loser) to 3 or so. Oil right now has a 4:1 ratio.

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
every single one of those alternatives requires heavy subsidization via oil in the initial stages of R&D, implementation and scalability. You also failed to mention how we can re-organize and re-structure a multi-trillion dollar infrastructure. I don't mean a step by step plan that has to be carried out, but a general idea that is feasible and workable.

And the whole point is that modern industrial civilization is built on cheap oil. Take away such a fundemental root and the tree withers. Oil used to extremely economical to use; 1 barrel of oil could be used to find 30-100 barrels (EROI, energy returned on investment). Most of the alternatives mentioned have EROIs in the range of .7 (making it a loser) to 3 or so. Oil right now has a 4:1 ratio.

It is built on cheap oil, it does not require cheap oil. Cheap energy is nice, but not required. As enegy prices rise, adjustments and innovations will be made.

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

Explain in more detail please. I don't quite get what you are trying to say? Will we conserve more? Conserving more only delays the inevitable it doesn't solve the problem at hand. Innovations can't be scheduled, they happen fairly randomly. You can not ask for an innovation in 5 years. And again, it only delays the problem.

The source of the problem is the underlying notion of growth. Our monetary system is based on the assumption that growth will continue on for infinite. When that assumption is violated, there are dire consequences. Our economy needs to grow 3% a year, every year, lest we suffer a recession. A recession is still growth however, just at a slower rate. Imagine what happens when the economy actually declines or grows at 0%? We are heading into a crisis from which there is no avoiding. Eventually, something is going to have to give.

I'd also like to point out that often, recession follows a spike in oil prices. If a spike in oil prices can cause a recession, imagine what will happen when the oil isn't physically there.

http://www.theaustralian.news....7148%255E28737,00.html

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
Explain in more detail please. I don't quite get what you are trying to say? Will we conserve more? Conserving more only delays the inevitable it doesn't solve the problem at hand. Innovations can't be scheduled, they happen fairly randomly. You can not ask for an innovation in 5 years. And again, it only delays the problem.

The source of the problem is the underlying notion of growth. Our monetary system is based on the assumption that growth will continue on for infinite. When that assumption is violated, there are dire consequences. Our economy needs to grow 3% a year, every year, lest we suffer a recession. A recession is still growth however, just at a slower rate. Imagine what happens when the economy actually declines or grows at 0%? We are heading into a crisis from which there is no avoiding. Eventually, something is going to have to give.

I'd also like to point out that often, recession follows a spike in oil prices. If a spike in oil prices can cause a recession, imagine what will happen when the oil isn't physically there.

http://www.theaustralian.news....7148%255E28737,00.html

Recession is negative growth.

Innovation can be planned and is planned. You would no doubt be surprised that shell is largest manufacturing of solar panels. You would probably be surprised that wind farms are becoming competative in the electricity market. You would probably be surprised that we could easily power the country with nuclear power. You would probably be surprised that if gas went to 10/gallon or more, there would be alot less cars on the road and alot more buses.

While I have little doubt the oil age is coming to an end, I am not predicting a mass die off either. This guys arguments comes from a no single technology will be able to save us, he simplies tries his best to ignore the cumilitve effect of new sources, economic factors and conservation.

A couple examples that stood out in the article:
Gas stations are closing. While this is no doubt true, for every gas station that closes a newer nicer one with twice as many pumps opens up. The ability to deliver fuel has not be reduced.

The oil industry has few employees: GUess what, most industrys have few employees today than 10 or 20 years ago. Technology has made people more productive so few people are required to do the same job.
Auto companies are producing more cars with far fewer people today.

The entire book is filled with 1/2 truths like this.

Pers · Oct 6, 2004

this book scares me

IHateMyJob2004 · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: Pers
this book scares me

Bush scares me. it will be 4 years of the same if he is still around. Oil prices will continue to soar with that moron in office.

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

yep, it'll be a scary few decades regardless of who is in office. no matter how powerful the president is, he can not repeal the laws of thermodynamics and physics.

dnuggett · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004

Originally posted by: Pers
this book scares me

Click to expand...

Bush scares me. it will be 4 years of the same if he is still around. Oil prices will continue to soar with that moron in office.

You mean like from $10 to $38 a barrel under Clinton? In Nov 03 the Democrats staged a filibuster that doomed Bush's plan for lower oil prices. You have the Dems to blame.... not Bush.

Clinton got out of the hole when his passed.

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

this isnt about democrats and republicans. this is about supply and demand on a massive scale. there is no single answer to the problem.

Trevelyan · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
this isnt about democrats and republicans. this is about supply and demand on a massive scale. there is no single answer to the problem.

Correct...

Most people only only know about oil in terms of the gasoline they pump into their car. Sure, that's the first thing you notice when crude prices go up, but oil is also the biggest reason for our population boom this past century, since now we can make more food than ever before simply because of oil-based pesticides and natural gas based fertilizers, both of which supply is in decline/plateau.

To say that we can replace oil with alternative, renewable sources that now account for less than 1% of all the energy supplied in the world is ridiculous and simple-minded. It takes ten years and a massive investment of oil and money to build a single nuclear reactor. Wind is probably the most promissing, but it doesn't solve the problem of us simply NOT having the time nor the willingness to make the investment in it now before we can't.

I fear that our government (WITH the support of the people) will sooner go to war to get more oil than take a cut in our energy-use (and therefore economic wellbeing) while we try to transition to other sources of energy.

Oil is the best energy source we have. Period. There is nothing we know of that is better, and to say that switching to a much less easily transported, much less efficient fuel will not be without a huge hit in our economy is ignorance, simple as that.

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

^^^^^^^^

bingo.

dahunan · Oct 6, 2004

knowing what we now know about Peak Oil ... would you support the war in Iraq if it was to secure oil for the future of America?

chess9 · Oct 6, 2004

I agree with Charrison. OUCHEEE!

Anyway, if we keep eating ourselves into obesity this generation is going to die at record rates and traffic and air pollution will decrease significantly. Populations will drop and we will all be able to own a house on 5 acres for $100K.

Or, something like that.

On a more serious note, you cannot even PRETEND to predict what technology will bring at this stage in our highly advanced technology based culture. For all we know we could all have transporters in 5 years.

Don't forget, this is America. We do the impossible.

-Robert

0marTheZealot · Oct 6, 2004

highly advanced technology? we do have some bits and pieces of technology that are high tech. oil has made up that backbone of high tech.

for the problem to be solved, imo, we need to do several things:

1. abolish the current monterary system. our monterary system is only useful for infinite growth. we live in a finite, albeit large, world. once we hit the ceiling we wont ever recover in our current state. we should adopt a steady-state system with zero to little growth.

2. start the move towards alternatives now. i dont mean wholly adopt them, but set a goal of increasing usage from alternatives, including coal, nuclear and natural gas, in all facets of life from transportation to electricity.

3. overhaul the lobby and pac system. it is doing us more harm than good right now.

4. reduce comsumption and conserve like crazy. don't offset reduced consumption with more consuming. this is what happened in the past. as we became more energy efficent, we used more energy.

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
highly advanced technology? we do have some bits and pieces of technology that are high tech. oil has made up that backbone of high tech.

for the problem to be solved, imo, we need to do several things:

1. abolish the current monterary system. our monterary system is only useful for infinite growth. we live in a finite, albeit large, world. once we hit the ceiling we wont ever recover in our current state. we should adopt a steady-state system with zero to little growth.
as long as there is population growth, there is going to be economic growth. The current predictions have the world population starting to decline in the next 30 years or so. The US would be at near zero population growth if it was not for immigration. As countiries prosper, family size tends to shrink.

2. start the move towards alternatives now. i dont mean wholly adopt them, but set a goal of increasing usage from alternatives, including coal, nuclear and natural gas, in all facets of life from transportation to electricity.

Much research has been done and is being done. Turning coal into gas is something that we have been able to do for at least 50 years. Solar power will likely be very big in the next 10 -20 years.

3. overhaul the lobby and pac system. it is doing us more harm than good right now.

4. reduce comsumption and conserve like crazy. don't offset reduced consumption with more consuming. this is what happened in the past. as we became more energy efficent, we used more energy.

I would guess electrical consumption is headed downward right now, because of technology. New houses that built today are very energy effecient as compared to ones built 20 years ago.

The picture is not nearly as bleak as you have seen it painted.

charrison · Oct 6, 2004

Originally posted by: chess9
I agree with Charrison. OUCHEEE!

Anyway, if we keep eating ourselves into obesity this generation is going to die at record rates and traffic and air pollution will decrease significantly. Populations will drop and we will all be able to own a house on 5 acres for $100K. Or, something like that.

On a more serious note, you cannot even PRETEND to predict what technology will bring at this stage in our highly advanced technology based culture. For all we know we could all have transporters in 5 years.

Don't forget, this is America. We do the impossible.

-Robert

:Q:thumbsup:

:beer:

Absolute must read.

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Lifer

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Elite member

Golden Member

Lifer

Lifer