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.
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- Passive Solar Design Overview – Part 1
- Radical Retrenchment - A Reference Model
- TOD:Campfire RSS feed
TOD:Europe
- Energy Policy: SER-2 [01] Introduction
- The Russian Bear?
- The Permanent Oil Crisis Conference in Amsterdam, January 21 & 22, 2009
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 9th January 2009
- 2009: Predictions for Australia
- The Bullroarer - Tuesday 6th January 2009
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
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
“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: Prof. Goose, Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Heading Out
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- 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
There is a lot of denial and baseless optomism in many internet forumns. Hopefully [I am not a doomer] there is an educational aspect to some of these interchanges.
The flip side is that a lot of very thoughtful people on TOD seem to believe that oil has mystical aspects that make it somehow totally irreplaceable in all aspects [fuel, feedstock and God knows what else] and then compound this by emotionally equating the peak in oil production with an absolute energy cliff.
Nukes. Solar cells. Windmills. Wave power? Run of the river hydro. Biofuels? Coal as a transitional thing.
More long haul freight transport by rail. Smaller more efficient cars. More than one person per car a lot more often!!!! Fewer truly pointless automobile trips. Sensible public transportation. Telecommuting. More bicyles. More walking. Better insulation. Swamp coolers. A couple of degrees on the old thermostat setting. A new thermostat with a timer. LED and compact florescent lighting. LED TVs versus plasmas and CRTs. Less bogus security and street lighting. Reduction in the number of devices that draw current even when not in use. Turning off switches when things are not in use. More reuse [think refillable versus disposable bottles -- and repair versus replacement.] More recycling where it makes sense. The list gones on and on. We are swiming in energy and wasting vast amounts that add absolutely nothing to quality of life.
Population control.
IMO to benefit from the true [but the otherwise potentially irrelevant] fact that "Humans are Smarter than Yeast" the only answer is education. State the facts. Will we experience a train wreck or a transition? I honestly don't know for a cetainty, but I am certain that it is possible.
My advice [probably gratutious but I sometimes enjoy restating the obvious]:-) Hold your ground ...you might convert a cornucopian ... but even if you don't you might convert some lurkers.
It's hard to not try to predict the future positive or negative, but just try to keep our options in view, and you've listed a bunch of my favorites.
I don't buy the 'Stone Age' predictions at all. We might see some chaos, but it'll be chaos by a people with an entirely different set of cultural tools than anyone in the past. Not necessarily better, just very different. Our technologies won't disappear, and neither will the various blendings of world cultures that now brew in cities together due to the migrations afforded us largely with oil's assistance. Who knows what wonderful and also hideous political concoctions will emerge as we move on from here, but there are certainly many many people who are, in fact, thinking about this, and will try to make the best of it with the great bundle of tools that we've grown up knowing about.
Bob
We have vast, untapped reserves in the form of conservation. My wife and I have been running our household much as you suggest, and we consume less than half the average amount of electricity per household in the US (avg. is about about 900 kWh, we're normally under 400) and I'm sure we have by far the lowest winter heating bills in our neighborhood.
By driving less aggressively, I gain at least 8 to 10% in fuel mileage, without spending a single cent on a new car, different fuel, or any modifications.
I plan to add a solar-powered attic fan to our house soon, to help reduce our A/C bills, and we already make good use of the ceiling fans in our living room and bed room to minimize the amount of A/C we need. (If you have a well insulated home, you can often run the A/C to knock down the temp on the really hot and humid days, then turn it off, leave the windows closed, and use a ceiling fan to stay comfortable for a surprisingly long time.)
Yes, all of these things will take some changes to our "lifestyles", and in some cases some up-front expenditures, but big friggin' deal. We'll adjust and we'll do much more than merely survive. It won't be a non-event like Y2K was (at least from the public view; I have a lot of first-hand experience with the behind the scenes stuff, and it wasn't easy or pretty), but the people, like Kunstler, who are predicting gloom and doom now will look nearly as silly as those, like Kunstler, who predicted gloom and doom then.
The air conditioning in my apartment has been broken for about a month now. I live in South Texas, and the daily temperature is already approaching 100 degrees. Right now, 10 PM, the thermostat in my house reads 93 degrees. I have the ceiling fan on, and a door open for some heat exchange.
Short of going out and buying 10 rotary fans, anyone have any suggestions for reducing temperatures, and thereby saving electricity when the A/C does get fixed, that are practical in an apartment? As it is, I fear I could be putting a drain on water resources just by replenishing the sweat. =D
Shading for windows if possible. Ask landlord about reflective film on windows.
Off the top of my head.
The reciprocal for those of us in the colder north: the house is too cold? Put on a sweater. Why heat/cool the rest of the space when you can heat/cool the person instead?
Thxs for responding. Yes, I am a Doomer, but desperately trying to get people to prove me wrong by their aggregate actions. I am like Matt Savinar-- haven't yet seen sufficient proof to become more optimistic in my outlook-- yet would be highly appreciative, and greatly relieved to see massive planetary efforts at Powerdown and ecosystem reform. In short, still waiting to see if humans are smarter than yeast. Time will tell.
I think most people, even on forums like TOD, are not yet considering the full implications and ramifications of Peak Everything and Overshoot: it is so very much more than just Peakoil! When global warming, mass extinctions, mass migrations, topsoil depletion, water shortages, pollution, continuing population growth, growing militarism, and all resource depletions are taken into full consideration-- there is HELL to pay.
I believe that for humanity to even have a chance at a peaceful Powerdown: the current nine gallons/day American energy avg. should be rapidly heading to the Bangladeshi avg. of two cups of detritus/day within the first three years of the postPeak downslope, but the sooner the better. We can use all the natural daily biosolar energy we want [PV, wind, tidal, geothermal, etc] but we should be relentlessly trying to save ancient sunshine and our ecosystem for the Seventh Generation Ahead. Will we ever learn?
Yes, I strongly agree with you on population control: TRUE ROOT CAUSE--more time and worldwide taxdollars should be spent on this ESSENTIAL cultural change than anything else, but this is probably the least discussed governmental topic on the planet. AFAIK, only China has made an attempt of proactively limiting its numbers by questionable legislative fiat, instead of widespread education on the primary reasons to create a non-violent voluntary cultural change.
Consider my now numerous TOD postings on the need for the creation of biosolar habitats distinctly isolated from detritovore habitats, and protected by what I call the Earthmarines. TODers ignore widespread discussion because they are myopicly focusing on energy to the exclusion of the ecosystem. Hello Folks--the health of the ecosystem is far more important than maintaining the Energy Fiesta, even if we make great strides at Powerdown! I believe that both these forces must be tied together if we hope to have any reasonable peaceful mitigation in the days ahead.
Most of us can live without exuburant energy, but very few can live if we have eaten the last raspberry, goat, poodle, salmon, pigeon, rodent, and cockroach, etc on the planet. Recall the recent MSNBC posting on SST warming and coral reef bleaching-- sounds like a oceanic species Dieoff to me. More proof of suboptimal planning as we daily squeeze through the Dieoff bottleneck. Are we going to wait until there are no more fish, crabs, and clams in the stores, or are we going to get ahead of the game? C'mon People--times awasting.
So far, the bravest people on the planet, IMO, are the indigenous tribespeople throwing wooden spears at the more 'advanced tribes' in a futile effort at keeping them from raping their habitat of its resources. They truly understand the necessity of LARGE habitats to allow adequate space for other species. WE did too, at an earlier time, by setting aside land for national parks and forests. But now, because of increased headcounts, pollution, exurban growth, and increasing mechanized forays into these lands for visits and resource grabs-- the total 'freespace' for other species is declining.
Powerdown alone with our presently massive headcount is like setting up a huge patchwork of scattered one acre national parks--insufficient space and resources for the vast interlocking 'web of life' to strongly rebound and support harvestable biosolar human living--it requires a contiguous geographic area and drainage basin of sufficient size for sustainability and defensibility from being overrun. Ideally, it should include significant elevation variability so the myriad of species can shift according to the rising GH temperature, yet still retain optimal cross-specie interaction. As mentioned before, the biosolar secession of the NE & NW parts of the US, and Alaska too, would be a great initial breakthrough: "A small Powerdown step for Mankind, a giant leap for the Ecosystem". Never forget that the other species have to squeeze through the bottleneck with us too.
The Earthmarines will be dedicated to protecting the biosolars from being overrun AND protecting the other species in the habitat-- think Govt. treehuggers. Please contrast this idea to the sad African system where the corrupt officials, police, and militias are the worst offenders and polluters against struggling biosolar tribespeople and natural habitats.
Economic collapse due to decreasing net energy and global warming has already setoff human migrations--consider the massive influx and rising concerns over illegal immigration in this country. Google Zimbabwe, Haiti, Tanzania, and other third world countries suffering a brain-drain. Unfortunately for the poor people, most of them cannot migrate very far: no cars & no wealth means mostly dying in place and being abused by the worst societal elements. The sad first world response is indicative of the atrocious sentiment, "We see the rising floodwaters, secretly hoping the others drown".
Bob Shaw in Phx,AZ Are Humans Smarter than Yeast?
I think that you and I both see population the key problem as it makes all other sustainability issue more daunting.
I however do not believe that the absolute carrying capacity of the earth is much lower than [and might even be higher than] today if the goal is to jam in as many humans as possible. Quality of life is a much different question ... and the probablity of accidents escalates.
Logistics is a bitch. Our supply lines are too long and our options are narrowing.
Global warming? A good question, but one that is not IMO answered. All things being equal, the more greenhouse gasses the warmer average global temperatures will be. Have we reached some sort of a tipping point? I dunno. To the extent that we have choises, prudence would dictate that we avoid voluntatry participation in the great global greenhouse gas experiment ... but we have limitted options.
Notice that I did write "experiment." All things are not equal and nothing is static in terms of the factors that determine climates. There are major exogenous influences -- solar output is variable. There are both positive [self reinforcing] and negative [self imiting] feedback mechanisms impacting global temperatures.
Climates change. There have been pictures posted on this board showing a retreating glacier in South America over a time span that most of us can relate to. About 80 years IIRC. Very striking. How meaningful? IIRC ten thousand years ago the Matanuska [spelling] glacier covered what is now Anchorage. Is is now something like 80 miles from town.
The earth has been a lot warmer and a lot colder in the past and all we know for certain is that man caused changes in the level of green house gasses had nothing to do with those. If there are major man caused changes there will be winners and losers. Given a choice, would I but a ticket in this lottery -- hell no. I think that you and I can agree on that much.
Large biospheres & biodiversity. All for them. Population pressures and sprawl for the sake of sprawl are going to chop things up. Many on this board believe that exurbia and the miles strip malls that have popped up in the U.S. are doomed even without a rapidly declining population. If I live to see that I will not mourn their passing.
Regarding Zimbabawe, my brother spent a couple of years traveling through Africa in the 1970s. He regarded Rhodesia as it was referred to at the time with great hope. [Not so South Africa which he saw as very nasty political situation that was bound to get worse.] Based on his descriptions, in Zimbabwe, the whites were a tiny minority and were working to create a country that would be stable and prosperous through education and steady / slow change if only in sober recognition of demographics. Ian Smith might have been a racist, but he knew that the withdrawl of colonial power without a transition phase to majority rule would be a disaster. The West imposed an rigorous embargo and Zimbabwe ended up with Mugabe.
As to Haiti, add over population to a fabulous level of corruption. Outcomes so far have been much better on the other half of Hispanola in the Dominican Republic. Probably a cultural thing, I don't know. Maybe Don Sailorman, or some other resident economic sage of this board has some thoughts on what if anything can be done from outside. I don't so in that sense maybe I am a doomer.
What intervention from outside could do any good? None that I can think of. When Haitians strap together some inflated inner tubes and float away hoping to land on other shores, they know their odds of survival are perhaps fifty percent--perhaps even less. Nevertheless, for an ordinary person living in Haiti, such a choice is rational, because some chance of a decent life is better than none. Without remissions from overseas Haitians, even the current levels of misery would greatly worsen. As individuals, many Haitians are fine people, hard workers, honest and decent. But trapped as they are by population increase, environmental destruction, pervasive violence and corruption, Haiti is an unending horror story--and likely to get much worse as HIV infection spreads.
It is all to easy to speak glibly of "failed societies," and when TSHTF. To see what these concepts can mean, look closely at Haiti.
I think the obvious conclusion we can draw from peak oil, global warming, and possibly social security ... is that people as an aggregate do not trust mathematical models.
The can and do respond to environmental/economic changes that stare them in the face (70's and 80's fuel crisis), but I think it's apparent that they aren't going to change just because someone calculates that they should. Those of us with a little more numeric background find that frustrating. (Emotional pessimists just sign on to our cause because they are pessimists, not because they have a high degree of numeracy.)
So anyway, responses to peak oil and global warming will come when the problems are obvious. That may be happening already, in both cases. High gas prices and hurricanes, even if they do not have a 1:1 causality with peak oil or global warming to appear to have gotten the ball rolling.
We are starting to see policy response. I think this start is late enough that we will see some economic problems, but not so late that we will see major social disruption, starvation, and dieoff.
... and I don't think anyone has a model that can prove the pessimistic cases. The Hirsch report does project, model, that we will have troubles ... but I classify those as the moderate sort.
And don't worry about conservation. When the energy supply starts declining, everybody starts conserving, for sure. But why should they do that before it? Very large conservation would push the peak a little bit forward, but would not prevent it. For now efforts to increase energy efficiency will only increase energy consumption because of the energy-consuming investments they involve.
There is nothing much to do about the peak oil now. Tell other people? Why not, but they will know anyway when the peak comes. We cannot prevent the peak - it is impossible in the end. But shouldn't we do something? Yes, prepare politically and otherwise to cope the economical and social problems caused by an unprecedented development - sustained negative economic growth. They will not be any nice collapse or many interesting dramatic events - the real challenge is just the sustained and long, slow slide downwards. Have fun.