<Playing detective with Saudi production numbersThe Oil DrumBringing the OPEC production numbers per well up to date>

96 comments on Saturday open thread

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Magnus Redin on December 17, 2005 - 11:18am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
Earnings and profit.

Ideas regarding earnings and profit seems to often fall into two different cathegories in this forum:

  1. Large scale, nuclear powerplants, society needs to change to rail transportation, coal to FT-diesel, etc.
  2. The world as we know it has ended, grow your own vegetables, learn to live withouth electricity and how to deliver your neighbours children.

  3. Is usefull for a politician and policymakers and people with lots of money to invest.  And it is usefull when thinking figuring out where to find employment. But its no good for starting a small business.

  4. Is a good hobby and good for survival in extreme scenarions but dosent give anything in the moderate scenarios.

I think manny of us could profit on peak oil business ideas that do not need billions or millions and can be implemented with a few people and then perhaps grow. This will also help with solving peak oil problems.

I have a few example ideas here, what do you think about them and can you add more?

Dispatching services run on internet to plan travel and freight. The hard problem here is generating trust so that strangers dare to share cars. There is probably a whole set of possible social ideas with pubs, clubs, etc to form and profit from the build up of the social capital that people will need more of. (This is not my skill.)

Better modularised and series produced equipment for converting houses to biomass heating. (My detailed ideas are specific for the Swedish market. )

Electronic car speed controllers optimised for minumum fuel consumption with a built in drive efficient guide for the driver.

Design portofolios for splitting standard types of McMansions into two or three apartments. Design portfolios for reshaping "wrinkly" styles into flatter more easily insulated styles. (I am not an architect. )

Micro plants for combined heat and power.

Get to wallmart, Ikea etc bus services with equipment for easy loding and unloading of bags.

We should be able to both prosper and do somthing to help with the peak oil problems.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sr on December 17, 2005 - 11:25am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You left out white nationalist ecofascism.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Magnus Redin on December 17, 2005 - 11:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Nationalistic fashism would work for generating social capital within a small group.  But it would become a hostile and for other people disruptive group. Not a good way to add to community building.

But it is important to know that faschism and other hate ideologies  can be usefull for some people. You idealy have to get to those people with better ideas before those who are receptive to them fall for them as easy solutions that for the short run makes their lives better.

It was wise of you to and an "eco". People have a harder time to recognice hate ideas when the are used togehther with "eco", "feminism", "god" or other ideas with positive values.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Will on December 17, 2005 - 12:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You lost me here. What is white nationalist ecofascism?
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sr on December 17, 2005 - 2:44pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Inevitable.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on December 17, 2005 - 7:02pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Apparently the poster is concerned about white Sierra Club members taking over the government.  This is about as likely as the White House being taken over by a herd of giraffes.  So this is what the old fashioned fascists that are presently running the US worry about?  I just snarfed beer through my nose!
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on December 17, 2005 - 8:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Actually, the neofascists have glommed onto peak oil, unfortunately.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on December 17, 2005 - 9:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
It's inevitable that all manner of quacks will sign up where they see the possibility of the present order changing, from the left and right and all the way around the back.  But we have far more to be worried about than them.  Given the source, the BNP debunking of the six points on the site you link to is done about as well as you could expect.  

Glomming Eco and Fascist together to imply that there is some real threat from ecologists is absurd.  Should we not talk about ecological issues for fear the ecologists will take over and force us all to wear Birkenstocks and eat granola while hugging trees?   There is more than enough threat from those who hold the reins of power now.  It is hard to imagine a crew that could have done worse, both by their actions and their inactions - and they're not done yet.  I'm not too worried about some imaginary monster under the bed - there are plenty of real ones at the door.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on December 17, 2005 - 11:13pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I don't think the phrase "white nationalist ecofascism" is intended to suggest that your typical environmentalist is a fascist. I think instead it refers to a particular ideology (to which I don't subscribe) that says, roughly, "There are too many people on the planet, the environmental problems and peak oil are real, not all these multitudes are going to live, people of different races will not be able to get on with each other once the post-peak stresses get extreme, we need to get all the non-<insert ethnicity here> out of <insert homeland here> and impose a fascist state, restrictions on childbearing etc, in order to reduce population down to a sustainable level and manage the powerdown." I think of William Catton (author of "The Rapid Growth of Human Populations"), as an examplar of this kind of thinking.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on December 17, 2005 - 11:56pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
And you may be right, but the "eco" part is not needed - adding it in there implies an agenda.  Taking advantage of some particular disaster (or making your own) in order to further a xenophobic hate filled agenda is not necessarily even fascism - good old-fashioned dictators do that.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
LevinK on December 18, 2005 - 5:27pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There is not an outright agenda for a genocide.

But one could argue that the anti-agenda of opposing nuclear power and actually almost all other achievmenst of modern industrialism that don't "fit", is a hidden agenda for genocide, or should I rather say extermination. I can't help the thinking that many people are welcoming the overshoot idea because it will get rid the nature from human species. My expectations are that if it gets to there we will become so desperate that there will not be a biosphere left after us.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Magnus Redin on December 18, 2005 - 6:01pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
At best it is naivety.

If most everybody was nice to his family and friends and sometimes a stranger it could all add up to a peacfull and nice world. (I do believe this, at least it gives larger and larger icelands of stability. )

If most everybody had some solar cells, a mini windmill and an earthhouse it could all add up to an enviromentally sound world withouth pollution.
Wrong!  People forget the infrastructure needed to produce all kinds of raw materials and products, the infrastructure needed for a wide range of culture and the number of people living in cities producing these things.

A naive formula for building a civil society do not work for building an energised society. The wind mill and earth home people living on the countryside do need to care for a couple of 5 MW windmills each, then it starts to add up. But then it isent cute anymore and you can all day see that you are part of a larger technological society. svish svish svish

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
LevinK on December 18, 2005 - 6:20pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Like some other people have said the worst things on this planet have been made out of good intentions. When you think about it our resource and biosphere depleting, selfish and materialistic society is the logical result of the nobel idea of us people living a better life.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on December 18, 2005 - 11:05pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
If you accept that the present population was only achievable through large quantities of cheap, easily transportable energy (mostly petroleum, but also NG and coal), then you pretty much have to conclude that it cannot be sustained without a substitute of somewhat similar characteristics.  And a more equitable distribution would help, but I won't hold my breath.  If one cannot be found, or cannot be implemented quickly enough, then it is obvious that people would have to die (it does not take long for this to happen if sufficient food is not available, however temporary the problem might be).  Certain people will take the obvious next set, which is that by golly if a big part of the population must die, well then they should be the ones to decide whom!  I could not ever go there, I believe we have an obligation to help out those who live now, even if we are trying for a lower population in the future.  

Personally, I don't think the present population levels are sustainable, but I cannot imagine a process by which it will decrease in an orderly, controlled fashion.  In fact, "controlled" almost by definition means somebody decides who stays and who goes.  So I'm left with hoping we can find transitional energy sources and that our numbers will reduce naturally.  But I suspect that these will be environmentally disastrous, and that ol' Jevon's Paradox will probably mean that any such temporary respite will only allow people to keep on keeping on, thus negating the benefit.  Frustrating.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Donal on December 19, 2005 - 8:03am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I think the only sensible plan is to educate people about the problems of population growth (like ZPG back in the 60s), embrace birth control measures, then hope attrition will suffice.  Again, I'd also discontinue anything that looks like a financial incentive to have more children.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Peaknik on December 18, 2005 - 1:03pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
OMG, Stuart, you were driving me mad!! It's not William Catton, but William Stanton! For a moment I thought you were accusing William Catton (Overshoot) for being a Nazi!!!
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on December 20, 2005 - 2:45am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You're right - mea culpa for the name slip.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Engineer-Poet on December 18, 2005 - 2:51pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The major parties left a void.  Someone filled it.  This is a surprise?

What's really amazing is that Labor didn't grab this issue when they knew that their North Sea production was on the decline.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on December 18, 2005 - 6:11pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Well found that link, Stuart. But what, pray tell, led you to find it?

Actually most of the article is saying what we, here, are generally saying (without the in depth questioning, data and analysis). Where it differs is the long anti-jewish diatribe which occupies about half the article.

I personally think the BNP are racist filth and might be better converted into soap. But there are stupid bigots in this world and I think it is better they are aware of peak oil than not.

Peak oil can be hijacked by white neofacists or their like? That seems a silly concept to me, but, maybe, sillier things have happened, GW.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on December 17, 2005 - 12:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I don't see that same dichotomy, Magnus.

I want some investment in new nuclear plants, increased investment to make fusion power commercially viable as soon as practical, investment in clean coal implementation, improved mass transit etc. All these things will help ameliorate PO but I think we are running out of time to implement them.

Renewable energy supplies, local minigrids and generation, household generation are even more important IMO. They can be implemented more rapidly, on a more widespread and distributed basis, and should boost the economy more than the large scale projects above. Besides being more environmentally sustainable. I see woefully insufficient action on these, too.

Massive conservation efforts are essential. Increasing house and business insulation, improving vehicle gas consumption, using energy efficient appliances and lighting. Where is this initiative?

Some people are screaming at the politicians to get moving on all these before it's too late.

But I also say: the signs of enough being done in time look minimal, so: learn to grow vegetables, make yourself less dependent on fossil fuel energy, be prepared. These things will benefit you regardless of whether the outcome is dire or moderate.

Here's a set of links I sent to the DK mostly about local electricity generation...

The UK DTI Energy Group has just published a report on microgeneration that concluded "by 2050 micogeneration could potentially provide 30-40% of the UK's total electricity needs". I've not read the report yet, you can find it and related links here:
http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/detail.asp?ReleaseID=181382

The main DTI Energy site is here:
http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/index.shtml
That and the DEFRA (dept of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) site:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/
are worth scanning.

The UK Sustainable Development Commission has some microgeneration info:
http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/

They're planning a mini-grid in Ireland:
http://www.feasta.org/documents/landhousing/enliven.htm

The US DOE NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) has info:
http://www.nrel.gov/
The most pertinent to minigrids and the like are found here:
http://www.nrel.gov/learning/eds_distributed_energy.html
The whole set of links on left of that page are probably worth perusing as is the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy site:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/

Austria is a world leader in renewable energy use, this is the Austrian Energy Agency site (english version):
http://www.energyagency.at/(en)/index.htm
and its renewable energy section:
http://www.energyagency.at/(en)/projekte/ren-in-a.htm

This page about Upper Austria:
http://www.esv.or.at/esv/index.php?id=166&L=1
gives some background info and an impressive list of achievements since 1994.

Some other links which may be of interest:
http://www.cogen.org/index.htm  (CHP)
http://www.microgen.com/main2.swf  (microCHP UK)
http://www.whispertech.co.nz/index.cfm  (microCHP NZ)
http://www.est.org.uk/housingbuildings/communityenergy/  (CHP)
http://www.bwea.com/  (wind)
http://www.ewea.org/  (wind)
http://www.british-hydro.org/mini-hydro/index.asp  (hydro)
http://www.aepuk.com/need_info.php  (some UK electricity data)
http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/  (World Energy Council)
http://www.nef.org.uk/greenenergy/index.htm  (UK green energy)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.