330 comments on Water in the Gas Tank
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
330 comments on Water in the Gas Tank
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
- What "Lower Consumption" Means
- Tricking and Treating the Future
- Meeting Energy Decline Part-Way - Potatoes?
TOD:Europe
- EROWI - energy return of water invested
- An interview with Stoneleigh - the case for deflation
- The Future of European Transport: iTREN-2030
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 - Saturday 7th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 30th October 2009
- Details of Solar Flagships Released
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
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.
“Of all races in an advanced stage of civilization, the American is the least accessible to long views… Always and everywhere in a hurry to get rich, he does not give a thought to remote consequences; he sees only present advantages… He does not remember, he does not feel, he lives in a materialist dream.”
—Moiseide Ostrogorski (1902, 302-303)
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
Great work. Im wondering how close we are to the what the engineers in SA know? Do they know a lot more? Details for more of the area probably. I suppose they read this :)
However, Iam personnaly convinced that we have some problem with oil production world-wide, to get enough product on the market. This year.
So, again, are we (TOD) gonna spend another day debating this and that of what is wrong or right above, or do we want to discuss some larger points. Like, should we inform more people about peak oil? How is that done? Is there a printable sheet to hand out/pdf to people, explaining the basics?
What will happen 2007 or 2008 if SA reduces output down to say 7 mbpd? Ideas?
"So, again, are we (TOD) gonna spend another day debating this and that of what is wrong or right above, or do we want to discuss some larger points."
You've got to be kidding? Yes, of course, the public should be reached. But SA peaking is not a large point? TOD has people who know about this stuff and can argue it. What could possibly be of greater interest? There's no conflict between the two goals.
Reaching the public is not easy when you have spinmeisters like CERA preaching rosy outlook into 2030 and beyond. The sad truth is that "jerkin yerkin" and his band of merry makers have far greater influence in a 2 minute intervies on MSM with the clueless public and policy makers in denial than two years of TOD. The public will not be ready for facing reality let alone a change until we hit a wall.
soleman and davebygolly,
Agree with your points, and to me, Stuart's work in an EXCEPTIONAL article, well worked arguement, and great documentation is EXACTLY the stock in trade of what TOD is and why, even when I get pizzed at some small point or another, I keep coming back.
As to Yergin and the CERA merry makers, the problem is worse than that: CERA could be easily dismissed if the EIA of the U.S. Department of Energy and USGS did not basically back him up. I once argued that they should have to go before Congress and testify under oath to thier assessments once and for all, and if they turn out to have based thier numbers on thin air, be held accountable for them. The EIA recent long term outlook gives fuel and energy costs almost across the board as being no higher out to 2030 than we have already seen:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/growth.html#prices
(!!!!)
Add to this the Saudi claims that they have it covered and ExxonMobil claims that there is no sign of peak anything and you see the problem. Those who accept the need for concern are having to persuade the public, investors, planners, etc. to bet against ALMOST EVERY MAJOR ENERGY POLICY INSTITUTION IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD. An uphill fight to say the least, and now almost impossible, due to bankers and policy makers sourcing the Department of Energy stats to get information, investment and funding for alternatives and mitigation will rapidly dry up.
General Motors now says that the plug hybrid car the "Volt" will possibly never be built. Volvo has essentially ignored its magnificant lithium battery electric car. Ford has done no further development on it's hydraulic hybrid truck/SUV which was developed in conjunction with Eaton Corp. and the EPA.
Why? If one assumes a petroleum price at or below $75 per barrel out to 2030, non of the above technology makes any sense to develop. It will simply not have a customer base.
Thanks Stuart Staniford, EXCELLENT ARTICLE, one for my "saved" file, as I have said before, if I have to accept someones numbers, I would accept yours long before I accept CERA, EIA, or USGS numbers, which are to me as screwed up as soup sandwich! :-)
(now, if we can resolve just how much oil is going to come on line from the Khurais field, the empty quarter, and offshore, we could get a clear picture of what is going to happen....until then, it's still a shot in the dark...:-)
PREPARE FOR ANYTHING.
Roger Conner Jr.
Remember, we are only one cubic mile from freedom
Hi Roger,
Thanks and
re: "...An uphill fight to say the least"
Did you see Richard Heinberg's essay about his experience talking to EU people? http://www.energybulletin.net/27278.html
It's hard to say, is my take on it. Uphill...yes. (or...no?) And...how steep? We don't really know, do we? (In fact, this seems to have a much greater uncertainty factor than any reserves discussion. Despite many people's firmly held opinions.)
re: "...It will simply not have a customer base."
In regard to policies though, such as stopping some subsidies and implementing others...for eg., ag reform. and better ag policies (as perhaps touched on above)...the "customer base" perhaps can be changed. Just as it has been manipulated in a real sense in the past.
This is a great article on water flooding.
If a field is rested for a decent period (no idea how long) in conditions where it has been producing with a significant and rising water cut, does the oil permeate to the top over time so that production can once again proceed from drier oil at the top?
If so, the Saudis, with so many fields must be able to do this, as Euan suggests, but maybe their ability to control the situation, as Stuart points out so eloquently, is "in decline" as well.
Saildog, you ask a great question and I am not sure of the answer. But I do have a couple of comments. "Resting the fields" is a term I have only heard on this, and other, forums. I have never encountered the term in any technical literature or on any book about peak oil or oil production in general.
The only thing I think resting a field might do would be if coning had occurred then shutting the field down for several years might mitigate the situation somewhat. That is oil from the sides of the cone might migrate in and push the cone down some but I am not at all sure about this. Just guessing I would tend to doubt that resting a field would help the coning very much.
But I would bet that it would not help the water/oil mix one bit. I think it would take decades, or even centuries or more for the oil and water to separate inside the reservoir.
However I would just love to hear from someone who does know what the hell they are talking about on this subject because I sure as hell do not. But never having encountered the principle anywhere except on fourms such as this, I tend to doubt that it is a widespread practice.
Ron Patterson
ron, i agree with you to an extent. my first reaction when i read about "resting" the wells here for the first time was relative to water coning. my experience is that if/when coning occurs, shutting in the well for a time will give an instantaneous improvement but for a very limited time.
however, the saudi's may be "resting" the wells to their benifit. 1) resting the wells has the same effect as production at a lower rate. 2) the combination of high porosity and permeability, reservoir stratification and steep dip may actually result in gravity segregation of the oil and water (some on here dismiss this idea out of hand). 3) during the shut in periods, water may "imbibe" into the lower porosity rock and displace some oil "into the fairway". imbibition is very effective in displacing oil, although limited to a few % of pore volume.
At least in Uthmaniyah, the Saudis explicitly have a bunch of wells on cyclic production, where they produce for 6 mos and then rest 6 mos.
Thanks, Stuart,
re: Do they say explicitly why? Or, do you know (for sure) why?
SPE 98847 saith:
Stuart, et all,
I thought you might be interested in this story. Though its use for oil fields may not work one day, it is interesting and its about "flow" of liquids and what forces can be used to act upon that flow
http://www.livescience.com/technology/070327_laser_jet.html
"Light is actually pushing onto us slightly. This effect is called radiation pressure," Zhang said.
This gentle pressure generated by photons—particles of light—ordinarily goes unnoticed. But the liquid used in the new experiment—a soapy mixture—has such an incredibly weak surface that even light can deform it. It created a phase change that's a bit like how shampoo turns to soap when you add water, the scientists explained.
The newfound technique might offer a new way to control the flow of fluids through channels thinner than a human hair for biomedical and biotechnological applications, the researchers said.
Quid Clarius Astris
Ubi Bene ibi patria
In US wells using pumps, resting a well might simply refer to allowing the oil to seep in and fill the borehole. I know a lot of stripper wells operate on a few days a week (or month) type of schedule. Like you, Ron, I don't how the 'resting' would affect a high-production water drive oil field like in KSA, which is obviously going to be quite different than pump driven stripper wells.
The same issue has come up with regard to the Russian wells that had several years of 'resting' before being put into high production again. I suspect it is a combination of geological factors such as oil migration (imbibing) and technological factors such as horizontal wells, etc. that brought about the second Russian peak.
Assuming that Russia starts reporting lower crude oil production this year or or next year, IMO it is very likely that we may see as much as a 50% drop in net oil exports by the current top 10 net oil exporters, within a five year period. Note that the UK went from exporting one mbpd in 1999 to zero exports (a net importer) in 2005.
In any case, I estimate, based on some assumptions, that net oil exports by the top 10 fell by about 8% from 12/05 to 12/06.
What to do? Start thinking about how you are going to feed your family. While we can hope, I don't expect to see any policy changes in the short term, especially as ExxonMobil and CERA are telling us that we don't have to worry about Peak Oil for decades to come.
I recommend ELP--Economize; Localize & Produce. I think that it is a very good idea to get joint venture groups together to buy small tracts of land for organic farms. I am going to expound on this in a planned article next week.
I think we're screwed too. But in the case of KSA, I can see them maintaining exports even in the face of declining production, at least for a time. Given a choice between money and a rioting population, I think they try the riots.
I think westexas's point about food is crucial. Most people COULD get to work (assuming they still have any) by foot, bicycle or public transport and just have to put up with the inconvenience and extra journey time. Most people COULD get by with a lot less fuel for heat, etc. than they use now, with insulation and tolerating lower temperatures. They COULD do without (be happier without?) the endless power-hungry gadgets they currently have. You can't do without food, in fact if life is generally harder you need more.
It's no coincidence that the theme of the 2007 Soil Association (UK organic farming body) conference was peak oil. In that conference, Richard Heinberg said that UK would need 10 million more farmers (or the full-time equivalent thereof) within 20 or so years. That's at least a quarter of the working age (18-65) population.
A few days ago somebody mentioned that most jobs in W. Europe and USA were to do with people moving making, selling, moving or marketing goods that were totally inessential for everyday life - and asked what would these people do when there is a peak oil induced recession and nobody is buying them. According to Heinberg the previous paragraph contains the answer. What young people aspiring to comfortable office-based jobs would think, when told they have to spend 10-20 hours per week doing manual farm work is another matter. It's an almost surreal prospect and as Heinberg says, growing food takes some skill so would be a formidable reeducation task.
I have been a grower for a wholesale nursery for 21 yrs and have had my own now for 6yrs now (27 years total). I cannot stress enough that it takes time to learn how to grow plants consistantly, even with a horticulture education. I maintain @ 3 yrs to know how to grow a crop, again the key word here is consistantly. Besides different genus & specie, each "cultivar" (cultivated variety) has different requirements, nutritional needs and is attacked by different insects and diseases. It would amaze you how specific certain insects are to what they like. Crane fly lays it eggs in - Bellium munitum. Root weavil lays its eggs in -Galium oderatum. Even if both plants and insects are in the same greenhouse.
Like credit ratings plants have a 3 legged "disease triangle". susecptable host plant, correct enviromental conditions(temperature, humidity), and the disease or insect.
Insects act as vectors(transmission) for disease by carrying spores on thier bodies as they move about.
Under perfect disease conditions and with a highly susceptable host plant it is almost impossible to control diseases - hence chemicals.
Chemical(including organic spray type controls) application can be done preventatively "if" you understand the necessary conditions, disease, and the plant.
I cannot, cannot stress enough that it takes time and paying attention. If you screw up one year you might not get the chance to learn from your mistake until the following year. Hopefully then you will have made the right decision or you might have to wait until the next year again.
IMHO it takes 3 years to be consistant(consistant as defined by me as low losses, high quality).
Best D
D,
I was only half kidding when I suggested to a friend of mine from Africa that we should have a "Reverse Peace Corps" plan, where African farmers come over to the US to show American college students sustainable farming practices. As I said last year, at some point we will probably see unemployed college graduates competing with migrant workers for agricultural jobs.
I think that a good line of business may be running classes on how to set up your own Victory Garden.
I have forgotten the exact numbers, but before the Soviet Union collapsed, I think that tiny private agricultural plots accounted for something like half of all food output, while accounting for something like 5% of the arable land.
There's a huge collection (1,849) of book learning online at Cornell U. called Core Historical Literature of Agriculture. I can attest from owning an 1911 set of the Farmer's Cyclopedia that there's a boatload of knowledge on how to farm without fossil fuels and chemical fertilizers.
That is a fabulous link. A gold mine...
Westexas-thx your continuing input. OK by me you might repeat items...how else can newcomers catch-up?
Perhaps adapt Canada's view and pay well gollege students to do "manual labor that is valuable and productive...like planting zillions of seedlings [Canada's reforestation programs]. When did idea of manual labor become degraded? Who decides what is "skilled" and "unskilled"? Our food supply is victimized by narrow interests.
I dug, planted and harvested in a Victory Garden 1943-1947. The workability of that included full employment. No unemployment. So no hungry and desperate mouths to steal the fruits at night [except us little kids]. Very different now.
WT I can believe that with smaller plots of land. I know alot of farming includes the use of pre and post emergent herbicides. I have never found a herbicide yet that you can apply that will not stunt the crop you are trying to "save". "I want this plant to die right next to this plant I want to live and grow healthy" has never made sense or worked for me. I watched a $10,000 crop slowly die over 1.5 yrs using "recommended rates" of a particular pre-emergent herbicide. I haven't used them over plants since and do not recommend it. Boy was I mad, I'm not real popular with chemical co. rep's at trade shows.
The attention paid such as by the poster below on his peppers makes for bigger and better yield as skills are learned. Paying close attention to the plant and doing what it likes, and not what you like, is most of the battle.
I just made a similar realization. I tried raising a garden last year with minimal success. I made several mistakes, some of which I'm aware of, but some that I'm still trying to figure out. It struck me that when you only get one try per year, the learning curve is very long.
Lesson from first year:
Peppers like multiple days of >100*F. Herbs do not.
One good thing about global warming. My peppers and tomatoes will get better (I have an altitude problem)
I tried raising a garden last year with minimal success
I had the exact opposite experience. I basically threw a bunch of seeds down on some compost I had made and got huge, productive plants, no (and I mean not a one) insects, and no diseases. I basically didn't even have any weeds.
Of course that means I won't be able to grow a damn thing this year.
That style of gardening is no joke. I highly recommed all read the books of Masanobu Fukuoka of Japan. If you look you can find them in English.
His goal was to farm in the most natural way possible, with the least amount of effort, and the largest results.
In its particulars it is quite sophisticated but the basic story is this:
Throw some seeds around. Let the veggies grow like weeds.
In practice he uses "seedballs" so the seeds aren't eaten before they sprout. No tilling, no planting, no weeding, no chemicals, no fertilizer (except some natural compost), no pesticides. Just throw some seeds around, wait, and harvest. Mix up 100+ varieties of things you want to eat. If you toss this mix all over the place, the most appropriate plant will probably begin to thrive in the most appropriate place.
Since this technique requires very little work you can cover large areas with it. Then, even if your initial production is very low per acre, in total you can create large amounts of food.
In time Fukuoka was able to reach some of the highest yields in the world by any method, while doing almost no work. But this takes many years of fine-tuning.
I actually kind of practice this, without any refinements, and it is a valid approach - except for the insects. It would be interesting to see what his approach towards them was.
Picking off the potato bugs, and destroying any egg infested leaves works, for example, but it does take some time.
His approach was basically to leave them alone. After a while, a predator of the insects would appear. He said it was a different one each time. He was adamant that a generally inviting environment (no chemicals or pesticides) be maintained so that insect predators would appear.
He also found that the damage often looked worse than it was. In his case, he had "rice blast," which destroyed rice. His fields looked like a total loss but he found that yields declined only by about 30%. Not all the plants were affected and the ones that weren't tended to yield more because they had less competition.
One predator of insects on vegetables is chickens. He raised chickens, which ate the bugs and produced eggs.
If you look at plants in nature, in a forest or wild field for example, there are of course insects but the plants are usually healthy. He strove for this state in his "managed" fields.
Two of Fukuoka's Book:
* One Straw Revolution: The Natural Way of Farming.
* The Natural Way of Farming: The Theory and Practice of Green Philosophy.
are available at
http://www.soilandhealth.org/01aglibrary/01aglibwelcome.html
BTW, the above is a FANTASIC resourse.
If anybody knows forums for people practicing Fukuoka's methods, I'd like to know about them :-)
Try
http://fukuokafarmingol.info/farchive.html
Peter.
Most plants like moist yet well drained soil. 2nd to that is what you have discovered - sun. Location is big, you can kill or severely retard the growth of a plant with not enough or too much sun light. If you have a location for your peppers with reflected heat/light, be it off off concrete,a fence,a wall, or whatever that will help. 1/2 day of afternoon sun is very, very different to a light/heat sensative plant from 1/2 day of morning sun. Loose dark colored soils warm quicker than a light colored, dense, wet soil. Try placing white (plastic) buckets between plants to reflect light. Use a (plastic) milk jug with a small hole in it to 'drip' water plants- a great way to save water and reduce weeding. Built in handles makes for easy carrying.
I'm not a fan of (light colored) straw mulches. They might be good in southern climates but here in oregon we need warmer soil so I prefer dark mulches to collect as much heat as possible. Small differences I know but they do matter with some plants or locations.
Best D
@Bman
It takes several years to figure out gardening. Almost nobody gets good results the first year(s) but rest assured, you'll get better at it.
Have your soil analyzed at a laboratory while we are not (very far) over the peak. I had mine analyzed because cabbages and unions failed mysteriously and it appears micronutricients were missing. So I am adding volcanic stonemeal, compost and borax this year. From what I've heard this is a very common problem for soils that have been used a while for agriculture. Even the rules for organic farming allow for artificial micronutricientfertilizer to be added to the ground. Adding a lot of compost will probably prevent micrionutricient deficiency to a certain extent.
Re: borax,
Warning TOD readers use this extreemly sparingly! We inject ONLY .33 ppm(parts per million) to prevent deficiencies. We disolve 1 lb laundry borax into 5 gallons water and then take only 1 pt. of this solution injected into 1,000 gallons of water (= ratio 1:8,000)to get our .33 ppm. This stuff is toxic to plant life in the wrong concentrations.
Boron(borax) can be used to treat wood against wood boring insects or as a soil sterilant it all depends on the rate.
Get a soil test done. Most micro nutrient packages have boron already included.
That's right: Don't add borax if not explicitely adviced. I only do it due to advice on the grounds of soil test. It is a problem apparently typical for the sandgrounds I'm on.
My point was: Have a soil test.
@Bman
Second advice would be to start gardening for the love of it, not for peakoil scare. It greatly enhances the joy you get from it (You don't know happiness untill your first potatoe harvest), and joy is what you need for prefecting your skills in gardening.
My husband has been growing grapes, ornamentals, and food for many years and is considered to be one of those "green thumbs." But nearly every single day he runs across something he didn't anticipate or some new bug or disease that he has difficulty dealing with. It is a continuous learning process. I'm trying to wean him from chemicals, but it is very difficult. The best way to keep the chemicals and bugs down is to build a greenhouse that is capable of keeping out most pests, but that doesn't stop the diseases.
Anyone who thinks they can just wait until things get bad and then plant a garden to feed themselves is in for an unpleasant shock. Get started now and learn how to save seeds--it may someday save your life.
I couldn't agree more about starting now. A few years ago I posted a year-by-year time-line on another forum on just how long it takes to get even close to self-sufficiency. FWIW, figure seven years: 2 years taking appropriate classes and 5 years to get everything in place.
I've been gardening for close to 40 years including several as a certified organic farmer (small-scale) and I'm still learning stuff. One thing I've been doing for the past couple of years is converting all of our veggie growing area to Terra Preta/high carbon soils. I make my own charcoal from limbs leftover from firewood cutting.
How is the terra preta/high carbon soil working out? Pluses? Minuses?
Hi Cheryl,
I started with one raised bed (150 SF) 2 1/2 years ago. I first heard about Terra Preta on the Energy Resources forum and after doing more searching became intrigued by it. (FWIW, several of us have posted links on TOD so anyone interested can do a search.)
I was especially interested in its ability to hold phosphorous. My initial plan was to use winter wheat and grow it crop on crop since wheat won't head out without adequate P. I went out and bought 150# of mesquite charcoal at our farm supply, ground it (something I would never do again - messy!)and set up three sections. One was the control, one had 2.5% (by weight) and one had 5%. This test is still ongoing.
However, I began to add (and actually steal) charcoal from our wood heater to add to some other raised beds last year. Our crops looked the best we had ever seen until the wild pigs wiped them out. In any case, I was sold so, as I mentioned above, began using our unusable limbs to specifically make charcoal. Most of the limbs were 1 1/2" or less in diameter since I cut up bigger stuff to use in our wood cook stove.
In the past I would just make one big pile (usually 40' long, 6' high and 8' wide), light it up and be done with it. This year I made little piles that were about 5' high, 6-8' long and 4' or so wide. Since I don't have water where I burn, I raked the hot coals out and shoveled them into metal pails and popped on a lids. One fire yielded about 8# of charcoal This wasn't a lot of work but it WAS really hot. It also took a LOT more time. I will continue doing this and adding charcoal for the foreseeable future.
Again, I am absolutely sold on this! However, I think it is only viable for people like me who have wood to make charcoal. In one of the articles I read it indicated that the old Terra Preta soils had around 10% charcoal so it would cost an arm and a leg to buy it.
I'm only converting about 1,000 SF at this time. If society doesn't collapse in the next five years or so, I'll start converting our remaining beds that are terraced into a hillside. That's about another 1,200 SF. I'd also like to see what happens if I add it to the soil of our fruit trees, berries and grapes but that's long, long term.
Todd
Todd, that's great (and quite interesting/useful) info! As people read these things, I wonder if they start to really grasp how labor intensive small scale farming is...especially with minimal use of petrol and modern pesticides.
I'll print this out and also check out the links. It's amazing the wealth of info you can find on TOD.
We still have about 50 mac nut trees and Gary prunes them back every year, so we too have wood we can use. Unfortunately, we also have wild pigs here that love our mac nuts (as do the rats). Gary saw a huge sow and 9 piglets the other day up on the highway--not something most folks usually associate with Hawaii.
Mahalo!
Cheryl
Hi Cheryl,
Thanks for the always interesting glimpses of "Big Island" life.
re: "...(as do the rats).
Watch out for the rats. (partial :)) (If you read the link below, you'll see why.) Terry Hunt's work is on the complexity of eco-systems - or, the particular Easter Island one, anyway - and its failure...if you haven't seen this, you may be interested: http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/53200?full...
Well now, that's pretty creepy indeed. Rats are a big problem here--they not only eat the nuts, they love to nest in the roof overhangs. Since most of us rural folks are on catchment for water, having these nasty, incontinent critters contaminating your water supply is not good. Rats are a big source of disease on the islands--like leptospirosis. There is so much food everywhere that they thrive big time and if you add in the large number of dogs and cats that are fed outside and the problem just multiplies.
Americans have had it really good for a long time. The move to HI was my first exposure to anything like our ancestors may have lived. We are on catchment and need to keep our roof, gutters, and tanks clean. Whenever the power goes out, we lose our pump and running water. That means you can't even flush the toilet unless you carry buckets of water. And since there are no street lights, it gets VERY dark when the moon isn't out or the cloud cover is thick. But the darkness also makes for some astounding night skies and amazing lightning displays. The power does go out a lot during storms, and the satellite dish loses its signal multiple times per day.
Hi Cheryl,
Yes, night sky is so amazing. It's wonderful you have that.
I had no idea about the rat problem there. I'm curious what county health (or others) have to say/do about it? I wonder if it's worth doing some looking into it...? (Just trying to be helpful.) (I suppose the cats are afraid of them, too?)
Hi Aniya,
This will have to be my last post on this thread. My 3rd world DSL is just to slow to load and I don't want to make yet another pot of coffee.
The county health dept is pretty up on all of it and they do try to educate the public. But it appears a lot of the public doesn't want to be educated (like so many other things).
The one real stunner we found here was the number of cats and dogs. Most homes have 2 dogs, 3-5 isn't uncommon, and some are essentially kennels. Not only do the owners leave food outside (which the rodents love), but many of the owners don't clean up after their pets, and the worst ones seem to be the transplants from the continent. I guess they figure that if their dogs feces dried up in the desert and didn't cause a problem, then it is of no concern here.
But this is the tropics, and the feces are a huge problem. They stay warm and moist, and the minute the hit the ground the parasites are entering it. It's pretty gross, but they have a huge problem with dog dung flies here. They lay their eggs in the feces and feed and hatch in it (along with everything else). Then the other parasites attach to the feet of the flies and they transport the parasites everywhere. They get pretty thick, especially in the summer. All you have to do is have one land in the right place and voila, you have a parasitical infection. It is next to impossible to avoid unless you just don't go near the garden areas. When you are surrounded by thousands on a daily basis, you are going to get something. We did. The dog dung flies also like to land on mucous membranes, which is a direct route for infection. They love wounds, and will land on them and actually rasp away scabs. Very nasty critters, but you can't talk reason to most of the dog owners as they are in denial. Does that sound familiar?
I suspect that when the economy crashes, some of these folks (many are on public assistance) will not be able to support so many pets and the problem may rectify somewhat over time. I hope so as the dog dung flies had to be one of our biggest disappointments. There was one other, but I won't get into that now. It's also about dogs and what many owners let them do INSIDE the houses. Buyer beware.
I agree about the long learning curve. The first year I put some seeds and plants in the ground and had a great crop. The next year I was plagued by Japanese beetles, and a groundhog and a large limb which had fallen after a high wind storm and crushed several of my heirloom tomato plants. I just checked my fruit trees and the deer have eaten many of the branches this long winter. Who knew they would eat branches of apples, pear and plum trees? Now, I have to add yet another fence to keep them out. I'm just lucky to have started in time to be able to run to the hardware store and spend yet more money on items shipped from the other side of the world so I can keep the rats on long legs with white tails away from my fruit trees. The greenhouse is on order (20x48 feet) and I will be following Eliot Coleman's Winter Harvest which is low-tech winter gardening (I live not far from Kunstler despite my account name). I've gotten the canning down pretty well, and sauerkraut too, which is healthy and awesome tasting. Also, food dehydration is coming along. After drying some orange peels I made some pretty effective tooth powder for just pennies. As I read Stuart's wonderful post about Saudi Arabia I'm thankful I started when I did. It takes time, commitment, money, patience, intuition and a sense of humor to grow food!
I use almost zero chemical sprays. The few I use are nontoxic and mostly a light powder dusting for cabbage worms.
I think you might be speaking more of greenhouse conditions than gardens out in the open.
My gransparents also raised huge gardens and never had the least bit of chemical sprays.
I have been gardening for 55 years(at ten I had to help on the farm in gardening,picking tobacco worms,digging potatoes and so on). I raise fruit,berries , corn,potatoes,beans,cabbage,cucumbers,beets,cantaloupes,tomatoes
,eggplant and the list goes on and on.
I see it entirely different than you do. Granted it takes time to learn the essentials of gardening but not that long.
If you spend and hour each morning and an hour each evening ,in your garden, then you learn fairly rapidly.
In each part of the country(USA) certain varieties do better than in other locations. This is the stock that the hardware stores in the country carry. Such as black-seeded simpson leaf lettuce. I found none in N. Carolina but we grow it profusely here in W. Ky. Same with peas(crowder,blackeyedm,etc)...Mississippi Pink Eye Purple Hull are the best for my climate and soil. It took me one trip long ago to find this out. I stick with it now.
A very simple trick. Shove tobacco sticks in the ground around the garden(a pole about 5 feet long) the bluebirds and others will light on them and then fly down to harvest insects.
Tomato worms? You simply pick them off. For cabbage lopers you put netting over the plants.
This is not rocket science. We(mankind) has been doing this for a very very long time.
You are likely scaring a lot of folks with this comment. Just go buy so Ruth Stout books or peruse old Mother Earth News. Its not that hard. It is very hard work but hey...better than paying money to sit on an exercise bike and watch Oprah.
Airdale...not being pissy about it..just saying the way it is for me and all the rest of the folks here. Maybe in California of New Yawk its different. I don't live there. I live where the soil is very rich and the rain is plentiful.
NOTE: This whole thread should have been on a drum beat and not going OT on a subject topic. Sorry Stuart. I posted before I realized it. The subject of gardening I doubt will ever be a Subject on TOD but thats why DrumBeats exist.
Hi airdale,
Thanks, and at risk of adding tangent length to Stuart's post...
re: "The subject of gardening I doubt will ever be a Subject on TOD but thats why DrumBeats exist."
Well, perhaps you could write up a short article and see if the editors would run it? It looks like it would generate interest and comments. It could well tie in to ag/energy policy and other issues, as well. Many people might have ideas. (I know I have some I'd like feedback on...)
Hello Aniya,
Due to my recent prolonged trip to N. Carolina I am way behind on my planting and time is very short. If your climate is like mine and with the nice dry spell we are in , you should have seed potatoes already in the ground, onions in,greens ditto and the corn as well, cucumbers too. Peas and beans can go later.
Many large rowcrop farmers here have already started with corn. The rest are running like mad.
Usually here we get a small window of good dry weather then it starts with the spring rains and you might not get another chance until quite a bit later. Earlier crops always beat out of a lot of the insects. When the deadly heat of July and August arrive you want to have already put up much of your produce and not be out sweating in the garden. The ground then gets fairly hard to deal with unless you water a lot and mulch. I had all mine done by July last year.
Every ones climate varies and dictates a lot of what must be done and the timing. One size doesn't fit all. Therefore I can't postulate too much for various regions.
In the older days we had a different environment. Free ranging chickens ate a lot of insects. Animal manure was plentiful. Child labor was there, now its almost a crime to have children work at home doing chores. Everyone pitched in and now you can't even ask others to help. Pretty hard for one man or one woman to put out a large garden yet I do it and in fact this year two. You have to almost love it. If you find it menial labor..well too bad. Its very healthy in fact and the results are extremely healthy food.
Good luck...again sorry for being OT but I wished to give you an answer. My advice. Start a smallish plot and grow it each year. Make some compost heaps. Find a source of good mulch(moldy hay,etc). Cruise the countryside and when you see a nice garden stop and talk and ask those tending it. Talk to those who set up roadside stands. Take a soil test of your soil. Amend it with lime as need be. Bring up the fertility. Poor fertility will kill you. Buy a wood chipper/mulcher and collect leaves/deadfall and brush to make mulch. Never bag and throw away your lawn clippings.
On and on it goes. Make some cold frames. A nice small cheap greenhouse of the south side of your house. Get an early start or grow in the late fall in the greenhouse. Can and preserve everything you grow. Canning jars packed via a pressure canner will keep a long time. Tomatoes if waterbath canned need to have lots of acid to can else must add some, like lemon juice or citric acid. Hybrid tomatoes many times do not have enough acid. Read up on botulism and processing. "Putting Food By" is a very good book to have. A water bath canner , a means of dehydrating , and a pressure canner is very nice to have. You can even use these over wood fires. Canning fruit is quite easy and keeps well. Also think of saving your seed. It might become very very precious. Let some plants go to seed then. I understand many hybrids will produce 'true to form' ..as per what others have told me. I know Jet Star tomatoes do and they are hybrid I believe. Not sure of the acid but many can them or make tomato juice. Bad canning can make you very ill so here in the south we cook our green beans a long time.
If you are thinking of freezing produce then consider what you will do when the grid starts to falter. A good root cellar to prevent freezing in the winter is nice and many here still use them. Just a hole in a bank in its simplest form.
This is not rocket science. We(mankind) has been doing this for a very very long time.
You are likely scaring a lot of folks with this comment. Just go buy so Ruth Stout books or peruse old Mother Earth News. Its not that hard.
This says it all. You just saved me a long comment. People on TOD tend to way overcomplicate things.
SS must be wondering what the hell this has to do with water and oil mix in KSA oilfields! But I see this food issue as one of the most critical effects of peak oil, especially if you live in a country like UK which imports much of its food, and where people are used to buying any fresh fruit or vegetable in any month. Look at articles on how Cuba coped with cut off of its oil supply and you will see that most are about food.
Also, like many things to do with peak oil and localisation, knowledge that may be vital in the future is being lost as the people who practiced home food growing and other manual crafts, grow old without passing the knowledge to a younger generation who don't seem interested. As many above have said, it takes time to learn these things so start now while possible failure only means a few extra trips to WalMart, rather than a hungry winter.
Also, a side effect in Cuba was that with so much physical outdoor work and eating more fresh veg, people got fitter and healthier and had less need for high-tech health care.
Hi doctorbob,
re: "SS must be wondering..."
My guess is Stuart understands a little about shock (hands over eyes, peeking through fingers)...
Poor SS - maybe we wil create "future" oil in our backyards. I'm not trying to scare people it just trying to train people to grow plants that do not have experience has been eye opening(!)
I think that we may tend to forget how much we know until you try and teach someone else who doesn't have years of garden/farming history. Whether we like it or not we are looking to be training the "nentendo generation" not the summer field labor that my generation was.
I think it is all to easy to think everyone has had similiar experiences. I suspect that the percentage of people with gardening experience is many times smaller that it was 30 yrs ago. If the comments I get from retail garden centers are any indication of plant knowledge there is going to be a big learning curve. Seriously asked questions -"Do I have to water this"? This climbing rose blooms on old wood- "Well my fence is new how long do I have to wait"? The leaves on my trees all fell off whats wrong with them (ITS WINTER? maybe??) Must have come from so calif.
IMHO You will be very popular if you know alot about gardening.
While I don't disagree with ELP, I think it won't suffice. There has to be a political response to all this. That "no man is an island" was never truer than today. A hostile government will defeat all efforts at individual or even group suvival no matter how rational on their own terms. We do not have a gov't that is interested in the survival of its citizens -- to put as diplomatically as possible. So long as politics is the province of big money we are totally screwed.
Isent big money ultimately a fairly large number of people who uses, controls and works with the wealth? They ought to want to live in a functioning society.
Like Krupp under Hitler?
Hi Magnus,
I appreciate your point here
re: "They ought to want to live in a functioning society."
A proposal - let's assume "they" do - (since "we" do) - and go from there.
That is indeed my assumption. And I try to figure out how to get things to become better or at least less worse if times get tough.
Like my friend the Chimp says, move. The US government is not the one you want to have to face when this stuff starts to happen...best to be somewhere else.
WT I value your contributions here a great deal, although I have just recently gotten a UN resolution passed which bans all references by yourself and other interested parties to HL for the next four weeks ;)
That said, I need to call you on this quote. It is pretty darn dramatic to say oil exports from the major countries declined nearly one tenth last year. First off what are the assumptions you are making and secondly, put simply, where did we get the oil we burned last year? Maybe I am missing something basic here, that's fine, however, there was not to my knowledge a decrease in oil consumption worldwide. There was, if I am correct, a very slight decline in oil consumption in the US in 2006 versus 2005. I don't have figures but I wonder whether there was a net decline in oil consumption by oil importing countries as a whole 2006 vs. 2005. I realize you are looking at a month vs. month comparison so the total average decline year over year might be on the order of 4% but are you saying all of this decline has so far been made up by drawing down stocks in oil importing countries? That, at first glance, seems a pretty dramatic drawdown, and if that isn't the case, well, at some point consumption has to jibe with oil available for export, correct?
I think the key is the "top 10". There are still quite a few exporters. Also, many of the poorer countries saw major demand destruction due to cost, so that makes up for some of our demand.
See my posts on Nepal it looks like Nepal is going to self destruct because of oil rght now. Expect Bangledesh then wealthier countries like India. Peak Oil or the effects of it are like a rapidly spreading cancer by the time we see it in the US it will be too late to save the patient.
If prices get worse this year expect millions of peak oil refugees to leave Nepal within the next two years. Most would be headed for India which will have its own problems.
Also Pakistan will probably destabalize as oil prices put pressure on its economy. The intrinisic problem is fuel shortages and the resulting high prices can rapidly take out a economy and destabalize a region.
I think you will see the effects a lot faster then most people think.
Ckupp and Memmel,
I can't find good figures on total exports. However, from previous discussion:
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/10/5/215316/408
http://www.energybulletin.net/22213.html
http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2006/12/debate-on-oil-exports-part-ii.html
I think one can conservatively assume the top ten exporters account for at least 70% of exports. So if in total they declined 8% last year we would need about a 20% increase from non top ten producing nations to maintain exports if there were no increase in demand (which there was).
Nepal's oil consumption is less than 1/40th of the United States. Moreover, the major oil consuming nations (US, EU, Japan, China, Russia, India) are fairly transparent in their oil consumption data and to my knowledge none are reporting serious demand destruction. Rather some are increasing consumption and/or putting oil into strategic stockpiles.
So if exports did not significantly increase 12/05-12/06 and there was not significant demand destruction where did the oil come from? The only explanation I can see is a draw down in stocks. I am not familiar enough in this area to guess if this is possible.
I happen to agree with WT, SS and others outside this board that we have likely seen peak oil but my guess is WT jumped the gun on saying we have seen an 8% decline in exports 12/05-12-06. If that happened, just commonsensically, I'd think we would be in a world of hurt.
Nepal drew down their stock if you read the stories.
And borrowed a lot of money they cannot repay. If you google you will find India itself is having problems most blamed on demand few are looking into supply.
It takes time for the vast web required to move oil to deplete. Its not one tanker load missed its two in a row.
Its like the little game that makes words or a picture where one of the tiles is missing. Most people are sliding the tiles around every now and then the come across the empty spot but are able to slide a new tile in place.
With Stuarts post its possible to look at articles from around the world and know that we have a tile missing.
Here is a NG block sliding
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IC24Df01.html
and here
http://www.france24.com/france24Public/en/administration/afp-news.html?i...
Obviously some will succeed and some will fail.
We need to start noting the failures.
Assumptions: (1) 2005 to 2006 increase in consumption by the Top 10 was the same as 2004 to 2005; (2) Crude + Condensate = About 85% of Total Liquids.
I then compared the 12/06 EIA production numbers by the top 10 to the 12/05 production numbers (C+C). Based on the above assumptions, net oil exports by the top 10 fell by 8%. Note that this is month to month. Average year over year would be lower, probably around 3% to 4%. Note that some smaller exporters are showing increasing exports.
IMO, forced conservation is moving from poorer regions like Africa to richer regions like the US, China and the EU. Just look at gasoline prices on your local street corner. Welcome to forced conservation. It's just moving up the food chain.
If you just do some back of the napkin math a 4% loss of oil imports to a 100% oil dependent country would be 365*.04 = about 14 days supply. This number would be less depending on the amount of indigenous production, as long as indigenous production is not dropping as fast as imports. So for the US you would have 14*.75 or about 10 or 11 days lost oil supply without a drop in domestic production.
Perhaps this amount could be made up by demand destruction in poorer areas. What is disturbing is that if the US market is not getting the signal that there are 8% less exports than last year due to stock drawdowns/demand destruction in other areas and in the mistaken belief that production is not constrained, when stocks become low and demand destruction is no longer another part of the world's concern we are not facing a 2% shortfall we are facing a 10 or 15% shortfall. That could be some "Hello Dolly" for the markets.
Put another way, if SA is lying and what they should have said for the past say 6 months is we are producing flat out as much as we can we can't give you more supply, oil would likely be over $100/barrel. If stocks are being drawn down while believing production can be increased in future, we will be further along the downslope of depletion when the fact that production can't increase can no longer be denied.
As I easily tend towards more dramatic, pessimistic scenarios perhaps one might also more optimistically argue that the C+C that you looked at is also becoming a less significant component of total liquids as various alternatives are being developed. Or that the market is right and we are not supply constrained at this time.
On a completely unrelated note I stumbled on some of Mahatma Ghandis views on issues perhaps not unrelated to those discussed here at TOD
http://www.tinytechindia.com/oil.htm
I found it interesting, he sounded a heck of a lot like those wide eyed, long haired, sandle toe types I've seen a lot of here. Seriously, I was just astonished how he cut through things and defined some 80 years ago the issues such as greed, lack of local autonomy, violence, and exploitation of the poor as the issues which we are facing again now.
Cheers,
PDM
My simple Export Land Model:
http://static.flickr.com/97/240076673_494160e1a0_o.png
5% Annual decline rate + 2.5% annual increase in consumption = 50% drop in exports in 4.5 years, from 1.0 mbpd to 500,00 bpd.
Note that the UK went from exporting one mbpd in 1999 (presumably peak exports) to net importer status in 2005, so they probably crossed the zero net export line in about five years.
In the exporting countries, I think that we will see two phases:
Phase One: Rising cash flow from export sales, even as exports fall, because of rising oil prices.
Phase Two: Falling cash flow from export sales, as exports continue to fall, because rising oil prices can't offset the export decline. At this point, the countries have to decide between meeting domestic demand versus export demand, thus the prospect of poor Mexicans having to reduce their oil consumption in order to continue oil exports to the US.
I don't want to read overly much into one data point but here is a rather disturbing coincidence
"U.S. Oil Supply Drops by 900,000 Barrels Last Week; U.S. Inventories 4 Percent Below Last Year"
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070328/oil_inventory_report.html?.v=1
Hello P,
re: "If stocks are being drawn down while believing production can be increased in future, we will be further along the downslope of depletion when the fact that production can't increase can no longer be denied."
I just thought I'd make note of this sentence.
Hey Aniya,
Thanks. As someone with absolutely no work or academic experience in this area I can sure spin a good yarm. Let's hope it ain't true.
PDM
"So, again, are we (TOD) gonna spend another day debating this and that of what is wrong or right above, or do we want to discuss some larger points."
I think proponents of PO are faced with a version of the chicken/egg problem: Without good information, it is hard to persuade people there will be a crisis. Unfortunately, it will probably take the crisis to generate good information. Helping improve current information is why these articles and debates are important, though I think that a bit too much vitrol is spent between people who are basically on the same side.
In an effort to have more ways of informing people about Peak Oil, I put together an "Oil Quiz", together with answers. I have also included some questions for discussion at the end, if teachers want to use it in a high school or college class.
A link is
http://gailtheactuary.wordpress.com/
This is the first time I have mentioned the Quiz in a public forum. I would be interested in people's feedback.
This is very good.
The economist in me wants to argue with 6 - the export land question - I think this is true in the short term, but over the long term I am not sure that governments can maintain this in the face of loss of cash flow. I expect they will for military etc - but not for everyone. - Still I think your answer is the correct one for the short answer.
I am also more optimisitic about question 8, but don't have good answers to your very good points. My answer is something like given a choice between solving these problems and TEOTWAWKI we will solve these problems, but of course that is only a 2% decline. Faster declines I am not sure about.
Despite my nickpicks, It is excellent.
I nominate this for some kind of semi-permanent link at the top of TOD. Irrespective of any very small nitpicks that might be addressed in that process, it seems like a good tutorial summary/introduction to me. Oh, and it's very refreshing indeed to get a clear picture without having to cope with a certain sort of combative testosterone-induced eschatological hysteria that's become all too common in the comments around here.
Okay, I'll go take some extra estrogen to balance out that alpha female piece...:-)
Most of the questions are true/ false; questions 4 and 12 are multiple choice. The answers I provide are one or more paragraphs, with graphs.
The items are
.
The link again is http://gailtheactuary.wordpress.com/
Perhaps use Dick Cheney's own figures? [1999 London speech]:
...Exxon-Mobil will have to secure over a billion and a half barrels of new oil equivalent reserves every year just to replace existing production. It’s like making 100 per cent interest discovery in another major field of some 500,000,000 barrels equivalent every 4 months or finding 2 Hibernias a year.
...finding and developing enough oil to offset our 71 million plus [[now abt 84]] barrel a day of oil depletion, but also to meet new demand. By some estimates there will be an average of 2% annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead along with conservatively a 3% natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from?
...Governments and the national oil companies are obviously controlling about 90% of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies.
...Oil is unique in that it is so strategic in nature.
...The degree of government involvement also makes oil a unique commodity .
...It is the basic, fundamental building block of the world’s economy. It is unlike any other commodity.
Awesome! :o)
Agreed.
Gail, this link is going directly to my blackboard site at the University of Southern Maine.
thank you.
This is a really excellent quiz. Way to go!
Kibbitzing :-)
How about if for No. 6, instead of true/false, the choices were
* less than 5%
* 5%
* more than 5%
. duplicate
Hi Gail,
A few comments. I know if I sent this to family they would probably make it through the questions, but when they reached the answers their eyes would glaze over at the long comments. Maybe as a web document you could put the answers with a short one sentence explanation and then have a link to the longer explanation. Or one link that expands the answer section. I could see this format working as a class handout though.
Best,
Mark
Gail,
This is really good and its clear you spent some time putting it together. My only issue is with question 10. The other questions are really more easily verifiable. But as regards question 10 who knows what the first five years of an oil shortage will look like, what the "necessary changes" may be and what can happen in five years. One can quote various predictive experts but really who knows. Otherwise I think this is quite impressive.
How about this version of #10: Once it is clear that oil production will start to decline, we will be able to make any necessary adjustments. It will just work itself out. (Agree/Disagree)
The answer to your question is "true" because it literally will work itself out... just not in the fashion that most of us would like. Thus I do not find your suggestion compelling.
I am not sure what to suggest but I do like Gail's better at the moment.
Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett
.
.
That is great. Top notch work. Best of all it can serve to get people thinking.
Wow, that's just a fascinating article. Thank you.
You know the most persuasive argument sometimes is just presenting folks with evidence... and NOT making an argument.
I've been following the issue for a while now and I still don't know (and neither do you) whether we're in for mere recession and economic turbulence accompanied by gradual readjustment to a new paradigm.... or civilizational collapse.
Efforts at prophecy are useless. But facts and factually based analysis like this can open people's eyes. This article is just the kind of brick in that wall that is needed.
The great mass of people will think something is up when they feel the effects in their pocketbooks, and not a minute before.
Until then we can scream and yell to our heart's content about the peak oil "issue", and it will make not a bit of difference.
Just hang out, enjoy the ride, and find what satisfaction you can in knowing that you saw something big coming a few minutes before most folks did.
Stuart, excellent work, as usual. Clear, concise and detailed. I too think that Fractional Flow has been trying to steer us in the right direction, whilst doing his best to cover his tracks. Anyway, it appears we're going to find out one way or another relatively quickly. It's impossible to believe that Cheney and the Pentagon don't have access to this kind of information. The national security implications of this kind of data are substantial. It would be interesting if someone like FF in the US military could turn up and give a few hints too!
Fractional_Flow might very well come to be the Deep Throat of PO....(follow the Sw!, follow the Sw)
I have noticed a number of oil-field savvy folks have popped by lately (past 2 weeks or so) and dropped some very provocative posts.
Until recently I have been on the fence, weighing the merits of the two camps that frequent TOD, i.e. Peak is now vs. not-yet but soon, the evidence and analysis that has recently come out is astounding in its scope and implications.
Thanks to all replies to my top statement. That was great to see, and what i was looking for. A nice thread. Thanks for your contribution!
I got the hint about the farming/garden stuff, and I am into at least my second growing season (potatoes, tomatoes, some cabbage (got the last broccoli in december ! last year). I *could* 2008 move to the countryside (Europe). That seems like a general recommendation. Mum grew 80x20 m potatoes for our family every year when I was a kid.
Thanks for the comments about presenting facts if someone asks, that works better than arguing, convincing and propehtizing. You are correct. It doesnt work to push the theme, I have "worked" on my brother for about 3 years to understand ecology and the concept of sustainability, and it just starts to bite. Lately I have added peak oil as the whip to get us there (with a vengeance, sadly, perhaps).
The quiz I sent to my friends, as it also plays with the "can you figure this ones out?" competition. I should get some questions back. Great. And ofcourse the "peak oil credo" from this weekend.
Dont forget to use the PhD thesis (readable) from Sweden at
http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_uu_diva-7625-1__f...
for facts especially the section on hubbert method was clear and shows how ans when it is used (I thought). 3 Mb.
Take care out there!
Most people will react when they pay more for fossil fuels. Only a very small part of any population is able to act on independently-arrived conclusions. Maybe a good thing, too, since many such conclusions, probably most, are wrong.
People will believe the most ridiculous nonsense, however, when they feel the price action supports the story, as the price is taken as a "consensus." The best example is the late 1970s, which were a time of cheap and plentiful oil (just look at the production rise) but price rises due to monetary inflation ie a depreciating dollar. When the Fed took its foot off the gas pedal in the early 1980s the entire oil industry found out how cheap and plentiful the oil really was.
The market for crude oil is not very efficient and is easily manipulated. There is a lot of inventory out there -- the US's SPR alone can deliver 3mb/d for 200 days -- and changing the futures price is peanuts.
Lastly, I would say that there is good reason for a "lets all become farmers" approach but Peak Oil is not it for at least a few years.