<DrumBeat: June 2, 2009 The Oil Drum DrumBeat: June 3, 2009>
<EuroElections 2009 : ALDE The Oil Drum: Europe EuroElections 2009 : Greens-EFA>

171 comments on The Fifth Problem: Peak Capital

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Ugo Bardi on June 3, 2009 - 12:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Oh, boy.... so often I find myself confronting this unbelievably naive argument: "we'll just dig deeper". Do you realize how expensive it is to dig holes miles long? Besides; go back to your geology books. "Ores" are the result of the combination of geological and biological factors and these interactions take place at or near the surface of the planet. Even if you could dig a 50 miles deep hole, you won't find anything interesting in there.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dezakin on June 3, 2009 - 8:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Removing overburden is expensive, but we aren't exactly penetrating down to the mantle and exhausting all the lithophilic ores anytime soon.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
metalman on June 3, 2009 - 10:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Lithophilic ores are a small subset of useful metals. In any case, by definition ore is only "ore" if it can be mined at a profit (positive ROI); you appear to be talking about mining metals at a loss, irregardless of cost. Running out is generally irrelevant for metals; affording to be able to mine or recycle them is relevant, and peak capital (affordability) is the subject of this thread.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dezakin on June 4, 2009 - 8:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

you appear to be talking about mining metals at a loss, irregardless of cost.

You appear to be constructing strawmen. Stop.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

171 comments on The Fifth Problem: Peak Capital

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version