215 comments on Sunday Open Thread
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
215 comments on Sunday Open Thread
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Considering the many productive uses of petroleum, burning it for fuel is like burning a Picasso for heat.”
—Big Oil Executive
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
1) The amount of knowledge that "erupts" here is significant. At present there is no way to capture the key elements of a debate or expose them to later critique. Development of a "project" page, or an resource composed of "working papers" would avert transitional loss of intellectual capital.
2) We often see the invocation of the "technological fairy," some technological fix which, if immediately applied, would resolve everything. The recent debate on Fusion power is one example. It would be just as worthwhile to identify technological dead ends as it would be to identify possible lines of solution.
3) EROEI is a valuable concept. I had not seen this applied outside of anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer practice until I came to TOD. It would be worthwhile to do formal EROEI studies on such topics as fuel ethanol so that they can be revealed as bogus soluitions if that is in fact what they are. Such a resource would help prevent public bamboozlement and pork driven political decisions.
4) The availability of working papers would help prevent us from reiterating the exact same debate six months later. Xaxat recently provided an image which perfectly illustrates this lack of progress here:
http://www.gilbert-garcin.com/chrono/photos/photo_1999_4.php
5) The compiled working papers would be available for public distribution as PDF or similar. This would help communicate the issues to a broader public.
6) If a working paper indicates a solution that may be of economic significance then the co-op could coalesce around it. It would also be helpful to provide economic studies that highlight the technical, economic, or social roadblocks to a possible solution. Another reader may be able to innovate around those roadblocks and transform a "dead end" into a viable solution. I am taking for granted here that our bottom line is a search for viable solutions rather than individual economic return. Both would be nice.
7) The working papers repository would provide a collection of studies that TOD might rework into publication form for general sale. This would both get the word out and provide economic sustenance to the TOD project.
8) I am sure that there is an item 8 and equally sure that some other TODder has it on the tip of their keyboard. :-)
Against point #2 you can't rule out a dead end except in rare occasions (alchemy) some things are possible even though thought otherwise. I might be wrong fusion might not be possible but at this point I think it is not proven so.
Also If TSHTF the panels are on your home their yours.
I see my paper as the missing section/addendum to Hirsch's paper.
Best Hopes,
Alan
Alan -
The amount of work you have done is impressive. But a lot of it is scattered through a wide range of posts. Having the information formally gathered in one place would be very helpful. My locality is seeking to expand light rail. Being able to educate myself, and/or provide a comprehensive, accurate resource to other concerned parties would be invaluable.
I note that the NA car dependency arose in part due to the citizens blind acceptance of a development path espoused by vested economic interests. The entire US Inter-urban railway system was abandoned and in many cases this was due to oil or tire interests purchasing and then shutting down a potential competitor.
Cheers!
Please eMail with where you are from, how much you want to get involved, some idea of any technical background, etc.
Best Hopes,
Alan_Drake@Juno.com
The Gas Diffusion process plant in the Manhattan Project almost didn't work because they couldn't get a filter that had the right size and range of holes to separate the two isotopes by their different relative velocities.
The technological fix to make it work was development of a way to make a filter with very small holes. I've heard from a family member that that technique was what started the Pall Corporation. You've probably seen their filters behind your plant, if you run a plant.
A napkin with some writing on it is the difference between a dead end technology and something that changes your world.