Energy Descent

[rynnor]

Does anyone else think that the car will (once again...) be an object of luxury for the well off?

To an extent but the nature of the job market means that there will still need to be an economically viable way of commuting - probably electrically assisted pushbikes...

 

[old.user4556]

I discuss this with my colleague at work frequently; other than the skive factor, surely it would save a vast amount of cost by allowing working from home for those that can do so? The petrol saved (and thus oil) would be huge. We already have a vast number of offshore colleagues in other countries, so what difference does it make if I'm sitting at my laptop in the house, or in the office.

 

[old.Tohtori]

You DO know what oil and its by-products is used in don't you?

Yes I guess we could live without it if we were to go back to living like we used to (horses, bows and arrows, caves etc) but countless millions would die in the process.

Think Mad Max and then some.

Yes i know, but as said, we CAN live without it.

It's not the end of all humanity.

 

[old.user4556]

If you mean live by the definition of "not dead", then yes we can live without it. I think Trem means that modern life as we know it without oil will never be the same, thus not continuing.

We'd be living like the Amish.

Edit: I've just read that Trem alluded to that in his post .

 

[rynnor]

We'd be living like the Amish.

Nah - they are a parasite culture - their current form of life is only possible by interaction with the general culture around them.

They would be in a better position than most but they would still have to make big changes to live sustainably.

 

[Raven]

To an extent but the nature of the job market means that there will still need to be an economically viable way of commuting - probably electrically assisted pushbikes...

A lot of people could work from home. Most of my job could be done at home. I probably only really need to be in work 2/5 days a week. It's like that for a lot of people.

 

[Tom]

More people working at home would increase demand on domestic energy, which would offset somewhat the gains made in reduced levels of traffic.

A better solution would be for lazy fat bastards who don't need to drive (ie live less than 15 miles from work) to get on a bicycle.

 

[old.user4556]

I live 12 miles from work; I wouldn't even dream about cycling.

 

[Tom]

12 miles is nothing, 40 minutes to an experienced cyclist. That's less time than many people would take in a car.

 

[old.user4556]

You're absolutely right, it can sometimes take me 45 minutes in a motorway crawl.

 

[Trem]

12 miles is nothing, 40 minutes to an experienced cyclist. That's less time than many people would take in a car.

All well and good but you try it while doing the school run on your way to work.

 

[Tom]

Funny isn't it how a generation ago, "the school run" was an almost unheard-of phrase? Me and everyone I knew walked to school.

 

[old.user4556]

Do they not do school buses anymore? There were always numerous school buses when I was at school, very few people got a lift.

 

[Raven]

We got the bus. Though we drive past a school where all the parents seem to drive their little cherubs to school, funny thing is that it's in a housing estate when is pretty much its only catchment area. lazy fuckers.

 

[rynnor]

Hah - that reminds me of a kid in my daughters class who's mum objected to him going on a school trip to the local museum because they were going to walk there.

In the end they negotiated that she would drive him there and back

My kids get forced onto long walks - we got lost walking a few months back and they had to walk for 5 hours - I'm lucky social services arent after me

 

[Bugz]

A better solution would be for lazy fat bastards who don't need to drive (ie live less than 15 miles from work) to get on a bicycle.

Doesn't your job involve driving long distances? In which case, surely the counterargument here is that you could just get a local job and save on oil that way?

 

[old.user4556]

I don't wish to speak on Tom's behalf, but being self employed doesn't exactly make that easy, particularly when your clients are all over the country.

Mind you, driving Sulu's grandad's car isnt helping.

*runs*

 

[Raven]

Doesn't your job involve driving long distances? In which case, surely the counterargument here is that you could just get a local job and save on oil that way?

Camera pointing isn't really a local job for local people. You couldn't have someone who works solely in one place on the off chance they are going to be needed.

 

[Tom]

Doesn't your job involve driving long distances? In which case, surely the counterargument here is that you could just get a local job and save on oil that way?

So basically you'd like the television industry to not exist?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Lazy bastards should do what I do and drive a wankerbike!

Yeah, you heard me, all bikers are arrogant wankers.

No?? Oh gee, guess generalisation is from arse.

 

[Bugz]

So basically you'd like the television industry to not exist?

No - I'm saying your response is the blatant problem with scenarios like this: it is always someone else's battle to fight. The absolute importance of your job and the television industry isn't the question here but the relative personal gains people get from the way they use oil. Free countries suffer the drawback of a distribution of resources that isn't optimal as a result of this - so really the battle should be 'what can we do to reduce oil, rather than 'what should they do.''

 

[Will]

Lazy bastards should do what I do and drive a wankerbike!

Yeah, you heard me, all bikers are arrogant wankers.

No?? Oh gee, guess generalisation is from arse.

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Obvious troll is obvious.

Obviously you're wrong.

Rats ass to all who say "My way is the way it should be". Obvious point is obvious, but you go girl, you're contributing with your trolol post so much *big hand*

Didn't you have me on ignore anyway? Or are you following the old "i ignore you when it's convinient" way?

 

[Ctuchik]

So your making a point by calling everyone who rides a bike wankers?

That's trolling and you know it

 

[old.Tohtori]

Missed the last line of it then? Didn't understand that i'm not actually calling every biker a wanker?

 

[Tom]

No - I'm saying your response is the blatant problem with scenarios like this: it is always someone else's battle to fight. The absolute importance of your job and the television industry isn't the question here but the relative personal gains people get from the way they use oil. Free countries suffer the drawback of a distribution of resources that isn't optimal as a result of this - so really the battle should be 'what can we do to reduce oil, rather than 'what should they do.''

Nope, I've read this three times now and I still don't understand it.

 

[rynnor]

Joys of unpredictable renewables:

BBC News - Scots windfarms paid cash to stop producing energy

 

[SawTooTH]

Oh...My...God. Do people honestly still believe that "CO2 will end the world!"!"" shite? Fucking hell folks if you want a gas that causes "Global Warming", then look no further than water vapour, or methane. Both of which have far greater Greenhouse properties than plant food, yet aren't subject to the same mass hysteria.

Let's face it no one really gives a fuck if it's going to get a touch warmer, or if the Dutchies are going to have to build a slightly stronger damn, what this is really about is protecting our oil reserves, which is easy to do. Make electicity with nuclear power, move us around with oil, job jobbed.

Erm who's talking about global warming?

I'm talking about the end of the oil age. We're approximately 5-10years away and if you think the UK government is prepared then you haven't read much of the data thats out there.

 

[SawTooTH]

Prove that oil is running out, and it just isn't speculation? I don't know if I can prove that, but I think it's quite telling how insistent Iran is on acquiring Nuclear Power despite having the worlds third largest supply of oil.

As for the difference between the two, an ice age is something we pretty much can't do anything about but we do actually have options when it comes to oil, some of them wildly unpopular - but options nonetheless. An added bonus is that pretty much all of these options are universally good for the environment too - even if you don't believe in global warming I think you'd agree that smog-cities like Beijing and Los Angeles aren't exactly attractive.

Hubbert predicted the US would reach peak oil in '70 s, Uk peaked in 2006. Both US & Uk are net importers of oil. Current view is that the peak predicted in 2008 was delayed by about 5 years due to the money crisis. Actually a lot of this economic volatility can be attributed to reaching the oil production plateau, with oil prices rising as economies come out of recession due to increasing demand, to a point where they collapse back into recession, generally when oil gets to about $150 per barrel. This plateau will last about 5-10 years and then we go into economic free fall where money loses value. It takes 10-20 years to build a nuclear plant, not exactly popular after the Japan incident (built on 1960s tech). Still electricity doesn't provide fertiliser or replace all the plastics and components made from oil, so forget electric cars.

 

[SawTooTH]

People talk a lot about ANWR's estimated reserves but thats all it is. Discoveries of oil peaked a long time ago. The new fields being identified are small change. Iraqs oil for instance might last a year or two once Saudis oil is gone...and they are drilling off shore now so are probably past peak production, though they don,t provide data. Saudi currently provides 25 % of the world supply.

It doesnt take a big decrease in supply to cripple our economy, say 3-4 %. So when you look at the estimated decline, ending somewhere around 2030-40 with little economically viable oil remaining, remember that the fall comes way before that.