70 comments on Jeff Rubin Talks about Oil and the Economy
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
70 comments on Jeff Rubin Talks about Oil and the Economy
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
- Thanksgiving Open Campfire Thread
- How Relocalization Worked
- How to Set Up and Run a Bicycle Repair Company
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
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 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
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
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- 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.
“So one may almost say that the theory of universal suffrage assumes that the Average Citizen is an active, instructed, intelligent ruler of his country. The facts contradict this assumption.”
—James Bryce (1909, 35)
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
I don't quite understand Jeff's optomistic comments either.
I have not read the book but I have heard him speek a few times now and he never makes the link between our finite resources and our finacial systems. If our financial systems are based on compound growth and compound growth is based on compound consumption of resources (especially oil) then with Peak Oil we have negitive growth and the steal mills all around the world will be shut down. I thought as a finacial expert this basic fact would be obvious.
Am I missing somthing hear or is everybody affraid to pull the fire alarm.
Why especially oil? I keep seeing people write that money is a claim on oil. First, oil is only one form of energy. Second, money is a claim on labor and resources (among them energy, among that, oil). I see no reason why oil is better than electricity for most uses other than that our current infrastructure relies upon it. That can be changed, given strong enough market signals and economic pain.
And even if all of the oil disappeared tomorrow, as devestating as that would be, it would not mean no growth. There is still growth, from a lower point, and thus a reason to lend.
Your position is one akin to telling investors in 1930 that there is no reason to invest money anymore since they will not earn back their previous holdings until the 50s. Which was true. Yet we still had capitalism in the 40s, right?
You're falling into the trap of sunk costs. That's what you're missing.
EXACTLY!!!!!!!We have algae and methane hydrates....The substitutes for petroleum...Relax...We'll be fine.
NNooooooooo.
We have Thorium Reactors coming, that will substitute for everything energy related.
Now I'l relax. Cause it's already too late.
A man after my own twisted heart!!!
Is it ever too late if we are still alive?
But true, no matter what you do...you will die!!!
The pool of investors is dynamic. That is, there are always new people coming in the front door and always old people leaving through the back door.
The new crop is not tainted with sunk costs and are the agents of change. By the same logic the resistance to change slowly dwindles as the sunk cost crowd retires from the picture.
We did still have capitalism in the 40s despite the Great Depression . . . but . . . we also had lots of oil. So debt, and growth, made sense, at least in the short run.
I agree that in principle we could see growth again after the Coming Great Crash, just not on the basis of oil. Suddenly there could be a boom in wind turbines, thorium nuclear plants, or adobe dung housing, or the alternative energy and materials of your choice. You are right there. But then the further question would be, is this what we want? Wouldn't we then run into peak steel, peak dung, or peak something else? Wouldn't a "steady state economy" (with appropriate population control) be a better system? And if that's what we want, then we don't we need to revise the debt system, which essentially encourages growth? Just a thought.
Keith
I totally agree that some company in Flin Flon Manitoba (sorry Flin Flon, I just like the name) won't make a go of it, will then need to close its doors and stop making widgets. Yes sunk costs will be lost and some capitalist will start something else elswhere but with oil in everything from plastic to perfume how long will that maker of stuff survive. Our capitalist society is heavilly based on the consumption of non esential stuff.
We need to start focussing on the needs and not the wants. I don't know the percentages but in my community of Invermere, B.C. I would guess 80% to 90% of ten people make a living in non esential services, including me and no one with a voice that people listen to is telling people to start doing usefull things.
Locally we have built community greenhouses, re established farmers markets, supported local aggriculture, and are teaching people how to be more sustainable but even in a small community of 3000 we are only preaching to the converted and the rest are happilly driving toward the cliff in a fog.
I just don't here any of our leaders (buisiness, political, or otherwise) telling people what they need to do to be prepared for whats comming.
I only hope it is a slow enough decent so that the uninformed can adapt. I started preparing for this 6 years ago and I am still not prepared but I am starting to get a greenish thumb.