 | Oilwatch Monthly April 2009 | The Oil Drum: Europe | Is the 2000 Watt Society Sustainable in Switzerland? |  |
98 comments on Interview with Colin Campbell
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
98 comments on Interview with Colin Campbell
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
User login
Personnel
Editors
Contributors
Peak Oil Primers
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
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
Vital Trivia
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I doubt that Peak Oil became clear to the greater public and to the politicians. The recession will create the illusion that lack of demand drove down not only consumption, but production also. The world is now producing 4 millon barrels less than last year, that gives enough leeway for 3 or 4 years of apparent production growth until hitting the geological restraints of the peak again. Widespread recognition of peak oil might be as late as 2012 or beyond. That would mean many years lost that could have been used for prevention of the worst.
Conclusion: The word of Peak Oik still has to be spread for quite a couple of years.
The Campfire approach of course has been covered on other websites - peakoil.com, LATOC, frugalsquirrels, etc. Does Mother Earth News have a forum? Copious amounts of discussion on self-sufficiency is out there, each site having members who bring particular specialties to the table. It would be great to collate all this info somehow, but seeing how it took unsolicited volunteer effort to provide a simple index for this site I don't know if anyone will step up to the plate soon. Where'd that index go anyway, André?
It's still around, being updated slowly in the background:
Best of the Oil Drum Index
http://www.postpeakliving.com/blog/aangel/best-oil-drum-index
westexasfanclub says,
"I doubt that Peak Oil became clear to the greater public and to the politicians."
That may be true if you are talking in terms of "peak oil" per se, but peak oil has an ally: Hysteria concerning global warming. I use the word hysteria intentionally, as the press and the global warming concerned are simply coming off the rails and burying a great deal of the media that the inteligentsia and the intellectuals see most (CNBC, PBS, C-SPAN's book TV, etc.)in the most horrifying stories concerning the drowning of whole nations as they go under the sea like Atlantis under the waves. I live in central Kentucky, and they almost had me believing we will soon be ocean front property until I regained some control of my senses! :-)
This creates an interesting double edged sword for those who want to see fossil fuel consumption come down over time:
-The peak oil crowd say it must come down because the supply is simply not available.
-The global warming crowd say that even if it is available it cannot be used because it will fry the earth.
Thus, game, set, match, if you accept these two arguments (and many folks on TOD accept both, and more folks are joining them daily, including the media). Saudi Arabia's deep concern that their product will be essentially outlawed in the upcoming years seems to have been very astute. We have already seen this in the OECD nations involving coal, where permitting for a coal fired plant is becoming so difficult that peak coal consumption has probably already occurred...jury is still out on India and China and other developing nations) Always remember that what people want, or THINK they want matters a great deal more than the technology.
RC
While I agree that there has been a lot of hysteria about climate change, that doesn't make me a skeptic. It is a real issue that must be reckoned with. I'm interested in the transition/permaculture approach that considers the multiple issues including peak oil, climate change, population, land use, etc, together, avoiding one dimensional solutions.
Game, set maybe but the match goes on.
Bottom line, for me it makes no sense to propose solutions that don't incorporate all the converging crises. It's the nexus of our time.
Regarding peak coal, where economics, politics and other above ground factors are concerned, isn't that akin to "peak lite?"
Hi Sterling925,
I strongly support your comment. And, I would add the important variables like the increased use of coal, nuclear, wind, solar, recession, depression, etc. And, all kinds of feedback loops.
I think we need a modeling effort like the ones being done for the Human Genome Project. I am frequently puzzled by peak oil predictions that seem one dimensional.
If I really believed that the peak was now or in the very near future, I would take some pretty drastic steps to prepare for this difficult time. But, I just not sure that the predictions being make in circles like TOD are a fair assessment of future events - I worry about bias clouding the research.
I need to make some important decisions for our family - the old car needs replacement, various energy improvements for our house are needed, investment choices, travel to Europe, etc. As we are folks of limited financial resources, we can't do everything - we need to make decisions that may well result in unplesant family hardships. We would like to be reasonably informed regarding the options for the decisions facing us.
So, the question is: how do we get valid scientific research and opinion regarding the supply of natural resources like oil and gas. How do we know what to expect in the next few years?
PO might not be felt for several years by folks wandering about the USA. I would think that a barrel of oil would be over $100 in the next few months. But, it could just as easily go to $10 if there is a large scalce disruption of some sort that destroys demand.
Some of us feel that the Nat. Academy of Sci. is needed to do a full-blown study about Peak Oil.
Stirling, I just hope we don't go 'peak beer' too soon.
I honestly hope you are right, ThatsItImout. But my concerns about the recognition of Peak Oil level with those about climate change. The actual economical situation hinders both efforts: The economic slowdown already reduces CO2 output and will make cost intensive measures like CO2 sequestration less attractive. Add sinking average global temperatures in the last couple of years (though statistically irrelevant), the sunspot minimum or a favorable hurricane season prediction etc... The critics of the greenhouse effect are already getting louder. (See Denninger today - my personal opinion here is totally discrepant to what he wrote)
'The critics of the greenhouse effect are already getting louder'.
westexasfanclub, I think it is very important not to confuse the greenhouse effect with global warming.
The former is a natural process produced by the interaction of solar energy and the Earth's atmosphere. Whereby, the amount of energy absorbed by the atmosphere is equal to the amount of of energy reflected back to space from the atmosphere and the surface of the Earth. This produces a natural temperature homoeostasis under which current life forms can exist.
The latter is an unnatural process induced by anthropogenic carbon, and other, greenhouse gas emissions. This results in an imbalance where the solar energy absorbed by the atmosphere is greater than the solar energy reflected back into space.
If you must use the term greenhouse effect it should be Anthropogenic induced greenhouse effect.
The world has gone into hothouse periods without anthropogenic forcings. This is because the GHE gets out of balance due to greater solar irradiance. It in no way implies homeostasis.
Cheers
I don't care what causes it. If I don't get my breakfast I am not happy.
I would imagine that at least some of the people out there who are vocal about fossil fuel use and its effect on global warming are fully aware of the peak oil issue and I would not be surprised if there are people out there who just want to get the PO message across, and think that joining in with the people who seek to limit greenhouse gas emissions is a better way to do it than to join in with the peak oilers.
Bend Over: Here It Comes (Carbon Taxes)
Jesus what a clod.
Denninger sure as hell hasn't got a grip on Climate Change or Peak Oil and their economic consequences (our economies are unlikely to continue BAU in either scenario, let alone both together), so it makes me wonder whether he really does understand finance - it looks to me like he doesn't understand the 'big picture' at all - no surprise though, the normal human response to such threats is denial!
In my experience failure to understand the interconnectedness of elements of our economies is a common failure of the so called 'experts' that advise our Governments and set policy, they understand a lot about a very little - the implication is they understand almost nothing about almost everything, beware, this explains a lot of what is happening today!
IMO in any proactive future personal plans assume the Government will be in denial until they can deny it no more - by then it will be too late to act to save yourself.
Can you quantify this with some examples? I see no hysteria. I see only people pretending reality ain't reality.
SLR (Sea Level Rise)? Everyone cried that the IPCC IV was "hysterical," but it has turned out to be way too conservative. Current published estimates are for around 1.5 meters by the end of the century. Privately, some scientists fear more.
Arctic Sea Ice? The lowest numbers have all occurred in the last five or six years. The heat is moving 900+ miles inland melting permafrost and forming thermokarst lakes. The number of such lakes is exploding. Methane emission readings are again rising. Methane seeps documented in Arctic waters. Lowest amount of multi-year sea ice this winter. If we have a warm, windy or stormy winter - or all of the above - you may see a new low. (Personally, I'm expecting a higher minimum than the last couple of years. Let's pray I'm right.)
Global temps? All ten warmest years have occurred since '98. (Again, privately, many scientists are starting to see +4C as unavoidable this century. That means devastation. Hysterical, eh?)
Antarctic? Widespread melting now documented.
Glaciers? Melting rapidly. Water problems starting to manifest.
Food? One word: Australia. Another word: drought.
And please keep in mind tipping points (bifurcations), which we have no way to anticipate. Much like Peak Oil, we won't be certain until we're past them. That's a very dangerous game to play with the massive force that is Nature. Remember: changes of 7C+ can happen in less than ten years.
Here's an article on a new paper on how GHG's help trigger tipping points. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090420121335.htm
These are all facts. If you ask me, the hysteria lies in the hysterics needed to pretend all is well by painting reality AS hysterics. Where is the hysteria? Specific examples with links, please.
Cheers
That explains everything :-)
It's not a matter of "want".
Little inconvenient facts, like law of conservation of mass and energy mandate that it WILL come down irrespective of what we "want".
This is the steep discount rate problem.
I find that I am always talking to other people's Limbic system.
They go "How is this effecting me here and now? Am I enjoying the process?" Grrrrrr.