 | Biomimicry and Ocean Generated Energy: Are Humans Smarter Than Sea Sponges? | The Oil Drum | What If Gas Cost $100 a Gallon? |  |
| The Bullroarer - Monday 26th May 2008 | The Oil Drum: Australia/New Zealand | Oil Reserves: Where Ghawar goes, the rest of OPEC follows | |
42 comments on Future Scenarios: Mapping the Cultural Implications of Peak Oil and Climate Change
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
42 comments on Future Scenarios: Mapping the Cultural Implications of Peak Oil and Climate Change
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Contact
- anz at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
GAIA Host Collective
I've spent the last few hours reading through almost everything on the site and it has one of the best explanations of energy descent issues and possible responses I've seen, bringing together information from many sources plus some of his own recent analysis that I've not seen elsewhere.
I'd recommend having a strong drink to hand before reading section 3.4 on Net Energy Return. Snip: "… net energy return from fossil fuels including coal will decline so that the above calculation of humanity having about 40% of current net energy by 2050 may still be optimistic. A new evaluation of the net energy return of gas production in North America using a methodology developed by Cleverland and Costanza suggests net energy return is in the process of a collapse so severe that gas production in Canada will effectively fall to almost nothing by 2014 and that similar results apply to US production. The implications of some of this information is so shocking that the naïve and simplistic idea that we are running out of oil and gas (rather than just peaking in production) may be closer to the truth than even the most pessimistic assessments of peak oil proponents a decade ago." I had not thought of him as a doomer and he probably doesn't think of himself as one now, but it's a pretty bleak assessment.
...
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4561163a10.html
Watch the percentage drop to zilch when it comes time to decide where to put the thing :D
Haha exactly!
Did work experience once as a urban planner through uni it has to be the most frustrating job at times. So many people I met theoretically support all kinds of developments that may be useful for a post peak economy, such as in-fill development, rezoning, nuclear energy and even things as simple as later services on public transport. But as soon as they get wind of something that may effect them the very same people are vehemently against and prepared to start a rally.
The record hypocrite holder was the Town of Daylesford, there was a council meeting and the community was outraged that the council had never provided anything for the kids to do and they voted it top priority. So under instruction from council we proposed a skate park and play area, then the very same people kept fighting and fighting, pushing the location further and further to the outskirts of town, with lamo excuses like "oh it wont fit the area", "i'm scared of the increased crime it will bring" (pop 2,000 country town, not suburban Detroit). They suceeded in getting it so far from the Town center that it never got used at ALL, partly as there wasnt even so much as a paved footpath/road going out that far yet, and the kids wanted to stay in the town center anyway.
Grrr...!!!! so hard to make community based decisions, when so many people are blatant hypocrites! Especially when many of these decisions will be VERY VERY important for a post peak city (density, mass transit etc). This is what planners are up against, (in my country anyway). Main Issue is Density, if i could just get NIMBY's to admit they are pro sprawl thats one thing but to have them say "oh im all for density, just not this development its innapropriate" over and over even when its the most appropriate development since someone gaffa taped Paris Hilton's mouth shut. I think Bernie Ecclestone said once that Democracy doesnt work, i never thought i would say this but very very occasionally I have to agree.
(apologies for the anecdote (rant) day im having today)
Sure - 36% will consider nuclear power and then say no once they've understood the drawbacks.
I imagine if you asked the population "have you ever considered killing yourself ?" you'd get an affirmative answer from quite a large number of people too..
Meanwhile, another small, green country is also looking to go 100% renewables and avoid nuclear power entirely as well:
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/welsh-energy-drive...
Here's another beauty, describing the massive cleanup cost for one reactor in the UK.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/25/pollution.conservation
Apparently waste from some of the used fuel rods was accidentally pumped into the sea during the 1980s - how careless of them !
I'm sure nothing like that could ever happen again if we went and built thousands of nuclear reactors - unlike UK sites full of plutonium back in the 1980s, we have tight security everywhere nowadays...
On the plus side, the locals are now getting into tidal power - an industry of the future.
Which site are you talking about?
TOD or the Permaculture site?
Have you got a link to the reference you give - it would make things a lot easier.
Thanks
http://www.futurescenarios.org/content/view/24/37/
Near the bottom
If the analysis by Cleverland and Constanza that Holmgren mentions is correct, presumably it implies that within a few years gas importing countries will be engaged in the same sort of furious bidding war for LNG imports that we are now seeing for oil imports. Likely the impact on prices will be similar - a several-fold increase in a very few years.
Already happening: "Global demand is forcing LNG suppliers to divert tankers from Britain to countries happy to pay more"
Now wait just a gosh-durned minute!
"A new evaluation of the net energy return of gas production in North America using a methodology developed by Cleverland and Costanza suggests net energy return is in the process of a collapse so severe that gas production in Canada will effectively fall to almost nothing by 2014..."
I've been counting on that Canadian nat gas to ramp up tar sands output to make up for Mexico's decline in net exports!
Does this mean I'll have to "make other arrangements", and soon?
PLAN, PLANt, PLANet
Errol in Miami
GailTheActuary ran a piece on the TheOilDrum not long ago showing flat or growing NatGas production in North America over the next 15 years via unconventional production, particularly "Tight Gas".
The reference Holmgren gives for this view of declining North american gas ERoEI is http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3673, a guest article by Jon Friese, posted by Nate Hagens on 27 Feb this year. Friese's conclusion: "The natural gas industry has clearly been mounting a heroic effort to keep natural gas production on plateau in North America. This effort has raised costs dramatically. The EROI of Canadian production shows a rapid decline. Drilling statistics suggest a similar EROI decline is happening in the US. The falling EROI makes it impossible for natural gas production to maintain both low costs and current levels of production. It is clear that most of the reserves in the official forecast will never be developed."
Yeah production can grow or stay the same with declining eroi.. net energy return isn't production