Post #202,396
4/8/05 12:24:57 AM
|
The Long Emergency
[link|http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7203633?pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1111689845570&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.104|http://www.rollingst...ersion=6.0.12.104]
It has been very hard for Americans -- lost in dark raptures of nonstop infotainment, recreational shopping and compulsive motoring -- to make sense of the gathering forces that will fundamentally alter the terms of everyday life in our technological society. Even after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, America is still sleepwalking into the future. I call this coming time the Long Emergency.
Most immediately we face the end of the cheap-fossil-fuel era. It is no exaggeration to state that reliable supplies of cheap oil and natural gas underlie everything we identify as the necessities of modern life -- not to mention all of its comforts and luxuries: central heating, air conditioning, cars, airplanes, electric lights, inexpensive clothing, recorded music, movies, hip-replacement surgery, national defense -- you name it.
The few Americans who are even aware that there is a gathering global-energy predicament usually misunderstand the core of the argument. That argument states that we don't have to run out of oil to start having severe problems with industrial civilization and its dependent systems. We only have to slip over the all-time production peak and begin a slide down the arc of steady depletion.
---------
A terrifyingly plausible read.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,399
4/8/05 1:30:14 AM
|
Heh.
Nice to see this the same day that Saudi Arabia claimed they'd underestimated their reserves... --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
\r\n[link|http://www.shtuff.us/|shtuff]
|
Post #202,403
4/8/05 1:44:51 AM
|
I'm not convinced
I've seen plenty of estimates that bioenergy is doable at a price-point not too much higher than oil is today. Sure, he says that those estimates are based on the availability of fertilizer and pesticides, but I don't see that algae is so sensitive to pesticides, and fertilizer can be manufactured using biofuel. (It isn't a complete waste to do so - it is merely a chemical-based solar energy cell on a large scale.)
However should those projections fall through, then things will be ugly.
Well, they will be anyways for us, but for reasons that differ from the kind of global calamity that he's discussing.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #202,405
4/8/05 1:50:24 AM
|
I think I'm glad my folks live in rural WA
Now about that inheritance, Dad...
|
Post #202,465
4/8/05 12:46:19 PM
|
Agree on the agriculture angle
How much oil does agriculture require? You have to run tractors and farm equipment. Fertilizer problem can be solved by crop rotation and cultivation of nitrogen fixers. Farms I think can become totally self sustaining by dedicating 1/n farms to production of bio-diesel specifically for ag use.
This implies farming gets less efficient but will still beat 40 acres and a mule per family levels.
Transportation is the big worry. I think we will no longer be able to transport crops long distances like we do now. This goes to the point about suburban sprawl being the clinging vine that chokes the cities.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,469
4/8/05 1:08:30 PM
|
Interview on NPR
a farmer say that he can use up to 200 galon/day in season.
--
"Consider a perfectly spherical cow, radiating milk isotropically."
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002008.html|Language Log]
|
Post #202,472
4/8/05 1:15:30 PM
|
Not a particularly useful number
Sure, there's ploughing/planting season - lasts a couple weeks, harvest is busy, but there's a lot of down time too. Fuel use on a farm is spikey. Also interested in how many acres he works.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,474
4/8/05 1:17:11 PM
|
The farm sounded smallish - a family establishment
Yes, he said that the fuel use is drastically lower off season.
--
"Consider a perfectly spherical cow, radiating milk isotropically."
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002008.html|Language Log]
|
Post #202,475
4/8/05 1:21:32 PM
|
How big's the "farm"?
Today "farmer" tends to be a corporate size entity so 200 gallons may not be that much, and "in season" may be short depending on the crop. For sure though, rising fuel costs will greatly increase the cost of food.
On the plus side, many farms generate huge amounts of organic waste which can be put to much better use than it is today when economics shift.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,564
4/8/05 10:50:15 PM
|
Some numbers.
I don't know how reasonable they are. I'm sure it depends on the crops, the fields, etc. [link|http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/fossil-fuels.cfm|Here]: The Green Revolution increased the energy flow to agriculture by an average of 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture.5 In the most extreme cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more.6
In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994).7 Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:
\ufffd 31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer
\ufffd 19% for the operation of field machinery
\ufffd 16% for transportation
\ufffd 13% for irrigation
\ufffd 08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)
\ufffd 05% for crop drying
\ufffd 05% for pesticide production
\ufffd 08% miscellaneous8
Energy costs for packaging, refrigeration, transportation to retail outlets, and household cooking are not considered in these figures.
To give the reader an idea of the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture, production of one kilogram of nitrogen for fertilizer requires the energy equivalent of from 1.4 to 1.8 liters of diesel fuel. This is not considering the natural gas feedstock.9 According to The Fertilizer Institute ([link|http://www.tfi.org|http://www.tfi.org]), in the year from June 30 2001 until June 30 2002 the United States used 12,009,300 short tons of nitrogen fertilizer.10 Using the low figure of 1.4 liters diesel equivalent per kilogram of nitrogen, this equates to the energy content of 15.3 billion liters of diesel fuel, or 96.2 million barrels. There are huge advantages to using nitrogen fertilizers, especially for corn. The [link|http://www.calciumproducts.com/record_yield.htm|record] for non-irrigated fields is 442 bushels/acre. (Typical averages for the US are about 130 bushels/acre.) The [link|http://www.gocorn.net/mag_Fertilizer6.htm|usual recommendation] is about a pound of nitrogen per bushel so Francis Childs is using a lot of fertilizer. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #202,414
4/8/05 3:27:55 AM
|
This is the same "small is beautiful" crap . . .
. . I've been reading for over 40 years. I remember a "small is beautiful" book by one Kirkpatric Sale who proposed that local factories could switch from making bicycles (after enough bicycles were made for local consumption) to making light bulbs, and then to baking bread or something.
This is pure intellectual jacking off without the slightest hint of experience in the subject. This guy sounds a lot the same.
Further, Sale's "small is beautiful" book was at least 600 pages and could have easily been condensed to 40 pages or less and consumed one hell of a lot less energy and biomass - and wasted a whole lot less of my time. Idiot.
Yes, there will be major adjustments. No, they will not be anything like anyone expects. First of all, this country's energy consumption could be dropped by 50% in short order with minimal pain if the price went up enough - 75% with a little pain.
And energy? It'll be like when the Hunt brothers tried to corner the silver market. When the price went over a particular point, silver just ooozed out of the walls from everywhere and the Hunts got a margine call they couldn't answer (and a bunch of Saudi princes backing them got a lot less princely).
Yes, megacorps and the very rich they support will suffer, and many will crumble. Some others won't. If you're young, invest in railroads.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,438
4/8/05 9:18:05 AM
|
Which 75% is that?
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
|
Post #202,450
4/8/05 10:23:23 AM
|
That's for economics to decide.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,460
4/8/05 11:33:32 AM
|
How about listing your 75%
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
|
Post #202,468
4/8/05 1:07:50 PM
|
I am already about 50% of average American . .
. . so I'd only have to go around 25%. I could cut electrical usage to about 25% of current without any real pain and my water usage, while way below average suburban household (no lawn sprinklers) is kept deliberately high so I can give up the required percentage during drought without suffering. I could also reduce non-business driving substantially (and I already have a 30 foot commute).
I don't have to do all my share personally, because a percentage of savings in the public and business sectors will accrue to my acount. There will be substantial savings in the public sector (turning off street lights, etc.) and reduction in highway maintenance as truck traffic falls.
Transportation of goods will take more patience as airplanes and trucks yield to much less expensive rail, ship and barge. The energy to roll steel wheels on steel rails is a small fraction of the energy it takes to roll rubber tires on asphalt, the maintanance is far less and the latest locomotives use far less fuel the previous generation did.
Basically, savings and energy sources will be seeping out of everywhere once the cost rises sufficiently. Exactly where is impossible to predict now due to the law of unexpected consequences. New businesses will appear in unexpected ways as current businesses crumble.
It's difficult for one person to make the neccessary adjustment (though some have), but when the entire society starts adapting to the situation it'll be easier for the individual.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,483
4/8/05 2:07:32 PM
|
Adaptable to other power sources.
Transportation of goods will take more patience as airplanes and trucks yield to much less expensive rail, ship and barge. The energy to roll steel wheels on steel rails is a small fraction of the energy it takes to roll rubber tires on asphalt, the maintanance is far less and the latest locomotives use far less fuel the previous generation did. Trains and ships are also far more adaptable to other power sources. If oil prices really sky rocket, coal power may come back for trains and ships. Switching back to sail power might even become a viable option for deep water shipping. Though that would take very high energy costs before it balance out the increased crew costs and inherent uncertainty of travel speeds. Jay
|
Post #202,492
4/8/05 2:31:19 PM
|
Very, very high costs
As things stand now, shipping is significantly cheaper than any other transportation option. Therefore even when cars and trains are ruinously expensive, shipping may still seem fairly reasonable.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #202,501
4/8/05 3:06:19 PM
|
The future of shipping
Nifty article on some efforts to re-invent sailing ships.
[link|http://www.newscientist.com/channel/mech-tech/mg18524881.600|http://www.newscient...ch/mg18524881.600]
[link|http://alt-e.blogspot.com/2005/02/hybrids-hybrid-boats-hybrid-ships-and.html|http://alt-e.blogspo...id-ships-and.html]
THE coming of steam sent the world's great sailing fleets into decline. The internal combustion engine finally finished them off. So it would be a strange twist of fate if the age of sail was resurrected by what amounts to a child's toy.
For several weeks last summer, a team of German engineers sailed back and forth across the Baltic Sea playing with a large inflatable kite. The engineers, from the Hamburg company SkySails, were testing the potential of high-tech kites to pull a ship across the ocean by hitching a ride on winds high above the waves.
----
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,507
4/8/05 3:32:16 PM
4/8/05 7:38:58 PM
|
I have recollection of a Japanese freighter like that.
Sometime in the late '70s or early '80s there was a research program in Japan on using sails on large freighters or tankers as an assist. I haven't been able to find it in Google though... [edit:] [link|http://www.dcss.org/speedsl/current_sail.html|Here] is a little information on previous attempts. [link|http://www.vims.edu/GreyLit/SeaGrant/vmrb14-3.pdf|This] also discusses some earlier efforts: Although certain larger vessels just over 200 feet in length are experimenting with sail-assist (the 3,000 DWT Greek cargo ship MINI LACE and the 1,600 DWT Japanese motor tanker SHIN AITOKU MARU -both discussed at the conference), the most immediate adaptation of the concept seems to be better suited for smaller vessels. Overall investment to either retrofit or design and construct really large vessels for sail assist would be so great, most conferees agreed, as to limit a quick response to the sail-assist alternative.
However, Wind Ship Development Corporation's award-winning retrofit sail design for the MINI LACE appears to be providing the vessel enough fuel savings that a reasonable payback period will result. A paper with pictures is [link|http://www.nmri.go.jp/trans/Staff/fujiwara/ISOPE03_fujiwara.pdf|here]. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #202,522
4/8/05 6:04:32 PM
|
It is natural that German interest in sail continues . . .
. . because they were far more successful at it than any other country. Most late 19the century saling ships caried about 800 tons at about 4.5 knots. The largest of the German sailing ships caried 8000 tons at about 11 knots and needed a smaller crew.
Whereas the clipper ship Cutty Sark (900 tons capacity) made one trip a year around the world downwind all the way (thus is not credited with a Cape Horn passage - you had to do it upwind), the Germans routinely went from Hamburg to Valpareso Chile around the Horn both ways. One German captain was in Valparaso three times during the same year and two trips a year was routine.
The English had a policy (outside of wartime) of having channel packets "accidently" ram German sailing ships to disable them whenever they could.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,529
4/8/05 6:31:10 PM
|
More successful than everybody except the US
[link|http://www.bruzelius.info/Nautica/Ships/Clippers/Flying_Cloud(1851).html|http://www.bruzelius..._Cloud(1851).html]
Flying Cloud was the most successful sailing ship ever - breaking the record around the horn on her maiden voyage despite being dismasted *twice* enroute. Her maiden voyage paid for the vessel. She broke her own record 3 years later which stood until 1989 and then it required a high tech light weight catamaran with no cargo capability.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,545
4/8/05 7:34:20 PM
|
Cargo capacity? Reliability?
The clipper ships were fast, it is true, built for the gold rush. As in this case, the survivors were cut down because they were too fragile. They were not practical for general trade because they required too large a crew and too much maintenance and didn't have enough cargo capacity. Basically they were oversize yachts. Most were scrapped after only a few years and others were used mainly for special runs.
Average late 19th century German freighters hauled over 5 times the cargo with about 1/2 the crew and were still not that far behind in speed (though their voyages averaged much longer distance). The record for a Cape Horn passage (40 south to 40 south upwind) was set by a freight hauler at 4-1/2 days (average for British and American ships was about 2 weeks). The logs were examined carefully by other German captains because it was taking them 5 to 6 days on average.
The safety record was vastly better than either the British or American shipping, with ships lost very seldom and crews lost almost never. Crews were well paid and well fed. The objective of American captains was generally to run out of food completely several days before arrival at the destination.
The German advantages were gained by great size, all steel construction and winching systems by which 2 boys could tack a freighter in just a few minutes - and a 100 year statistical study of where the strongest winds could be found at various times in the year, because that's the winds these ships were built for.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,548
4/8/05 9:46:35 PM
|
Stats are here
This is all I could find on the German ships. The very largest (Flying Cloud was not the largest of her class, but was notably the fastest and arguably the most commercially successful as she paid for herself more than ten times over).
[link|http://www.caphorniers.cl/preussen/ships_valpo.htm|http://www.caphornie...n/ships_valpo.htm]
The \ufffdPREUSSEN\ufffd (PRUSSIA) was launched in Geestem\ufffdnde in 1902. This vessel had a displacement of 11,150 tons and her hatches could hold 8,000 tons of nitrate (62,000 sacks). This quantity of nitrate was sufficient to fertilize 40,000 hectares of land or provide gunpowder for a whole German army corps.
The \ufffdPREUSSEN\ufffd was entirely steel built, and has been the only entirely square-rigged sailing ship. She measured 133.5 meters long and 16.4 in breadth. She carried 48 sails with a surface of 59,000 square feet. Her mainmast measured 68 meters and utilized 13,000 meters of steel cable. Winches, hoists and pumps were worked by mechanized winches and she was possibly the first vessel of her class equipped with wireless telegraphy.
Compared with Flying Cloud:
L/B/D: 235 \ufffd 40.8 \ufffd 21.3 (71.6m \ufffd 12.4m \ufffd 6.5m). Tons: 1,782 om.
Interestingly, The \ufffdPREUSSEN\ufffd seems to have only survived 13 voyages.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,560
4/8/05 10:33:55 PM
4/8/05 10:37:26 PM
|
Preussen was rammed by an English channel packet . .
. . (almost certainly deliberately) breaking enough rigging to make it difficult to handle and it was driven onto a sand bar. It was carrying a load of pianos for South America at the time.
The ship was so large and heavy tug boats sufficient to pull it free were unavailable. I do not know if the pianos were salvaged.
I have one book which includes a story by a young sailor who later became a writer. He was on a ship that normally traded from England to Africa, but cargos were scarce so they took a cargo to Argentina.
On the way back they had a week of absolutely perfect wind, the most the ship could stand up to. A white object was spotted on the horizon behind them which at first they though was the Sydney mail steamer, the only thing they knew that could be coming on that fast. 2 hours later it had disappeared over the horizon in front of them.
As the ship passed, the crew, completely unaware of this class of ship, just stood by the rail in stunned silence. It was like a ghost ship with only one person seen on deck, and looked like it was out for a Sunday sail on the sound - obviously not strained to the limit as their ship was.
Their ship was carrying 800 tons at about 5-1/2 knots. Preussen was carrying 8000 tons at about 15 knots.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,577
4/9/05 12:03:02 AM
|
Thanks, I've got a new sailing topic to read up on
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,554
4/8/05 10:11:03 PM
|
even more interest in lighter than aircraft
although a zepp isnt nearly as fast as a jet, the cargo capacity is much higher and a lot less fuel to push it around.
thanx,
bill
All tribal myths are true, for a given value of "true" Terry Pratchett
[link|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/|http://boxleys.blogspot.com/]
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 48 years. meep
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #202,578
4/9/05 12:07:13 AM
|
Here's a wacky twist on that
[link|http://www.gizmag.com/go/3060/|http://www.gizmag.com/go/3060/]
The "Gravity-Plane", as Hunt Aviation likes to call it, uses gravity's dual properties - buoyancy which creates an upward motion in order to gain altitude, and gravity acceleration which creates a forward and downward gliding motion. The two motions combined form the heart of Hunt's new gravity powered technology, a technology that will most certainly make for a much healthier and cleaner environment. While everyone can understand the downward motion of the "pull of gravity", it is buoyancy that many people do not realise is a force of gravity. A force which when harnessed properly makes sustained flight possible.
--------
Basically a big airship/glider which floats up and then glides down.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,581
4/9/05 12:26:28 AM
4/9/05 12:39:52 AM
|
Old friend on that page
[link|http://www.gizmag.com/go/2504/|http://www.gizmag.com/go/2504/]
Oh, and a comment about the gravity plane. This sounds like the same concept being considered for a submersible to be sent to the moons of Jupiter. It would use the bouyancy of the water to rise and coast, similar to the description of the gravity plane.
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
Edited by drewk
April 9, 2005, 12:39:52 AM EDT
|
Post #202,595
4/9/05 5:11:37 AM
|
Yup, Doug Marker
had/has some connections to the project.
Still waiting for my ride at Santa Rosa airport. Sometime.
But I think [link|http://www.gizmag.com/go/3280/| this] is where we motorcyclists would gravitate. Just a matter of time...
|
Post #202,502
4/8/05 3:09:41 PM
|
Re: Which 75% is that?
My S2000 gets 20/25. The Honda Insight(another 2 seater) gets 60/66 which would drop my transportation energy use to 1/3rd what it is today. While not 1/4th, it's quite close and I suspect will get even better as battery technology improves(like the recently announced [link|http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/batteries/oxyride.asp|Oxyride]).
Fluorescent bulbs use 33% the energy of incandescent. LED traffic signals use [link|http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=traffic.pr_traffic_signals|10%] the energy of traditional traffic lights, I suspect white LED lights for the home will be similiar.
Heating and Cooling are the tough ones to cut back on. I suspect we'll be keeping internal temps higher in the summer and lower in the winter than we currently do.
[link|http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm|EnergyStar] shows lots of other ways to cut back,
Darrell Spice, Jr. [link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass]\n[link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #203,574
4/16/05 12:42:30 PM
|
Info on white LEDs
[link|http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2005-04-14-led-lighting_x.htm|LED evolution could spell the end for light bulbs] Just this week, researchers at the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y., said they had boosted the light output per watt of a white LED to almost six times that of an incandescent light bulb, beating even a compact fluorescent bulb in efficiency.
The current generation of mass-produced white LEDs is not as effective. It's about twice as good as a light bulb of the same wattage, but the energy savings aren't enough to overcome the major drawback of being expensive.
...
But development is brisk, and the Department of Energy has estimated that LED lighting could cut national energy consumption for lighting by 29% by 2025. The total savings on U.S. household electric bills until then would be $125 billion. Darrell Spice, Jr. [link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass]\n[link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #202,480
4/8/05 1:58:37 PM
|
Just because people have been predicting doom forever...
doesn't mean that it won't happen soon.
But it does incline one towards justified cynicism.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #202,435
4/8/05 8:43:02 AM
|
It depends
I think the results of going over the peak on oil production depends heavily on how sharp the decline is. If the decline is slow enough then it won't matter a whole lot any time in the next couple of generations and will we develop the technology to avoid the problem. The slow increase in price will motivate a lot more feul efficency, but that is about it.
At the other end of the spectrum, we can imagine that all of the oil producing bodies of the planet are exaggerating their reserves and that availability of oil at any price will become difficult much quicker then expected after the peak. This is the Mad Max scenario, where we don't have enough time to adapt and things really fall apart.
From what I have heard and read, the reality will be someplace in between, but lean more towards the first then the second. There is actually a lot of oil that can be extracted if the price is high enough. This will insure that we don't run out of oil for things where oil can not be easily replaced.
However, the price is going to climb enough to cause some pain and begin to change the way we live. Hybrid cars are going to be popular at some point. As the price of gas goes up, you are going to see people begin to pull back into the cities to limit the distance they have to travel. That will have a lot of consequences, not all of which are bad.
Jay
|
Post #202,449
4/8/05 10:22:10 AM
|
$5 gasolene = SUVs join dinosaurs.
Except, of course, for Governor Arnold's stable of Hummers. Hybrid cars are already popular in Los Angeles - I see plenty of them every day - mostly Toyota Prius, some Honda.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,454
4/8/05 10:50:24 AM
|
We have hordes of people whose mission in life is to
ensure the price rise is smooth. They are called commodity traders. The price will start rising years before regular people on th street understand why it's going up. The traders will laugh all the way to the bank.
--
"Consider a perfectly spherical cow, radiating milk isotropically."
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002008.html|Language Log]
|
Post #202,447
4/8/05 10:15:53 AM
|
I dont think it's so terrifying
Our choices are to adapt or die. We'll adapt. So we'll ride bikes, grow our own food, and be more involved in our communities. That's a good thing. We'll learn to get along without all this useless technology we think we "need". Instead of the Apocalypse, this will be our wake up call.
|
Post #202,452
4/8/05 10:37:23 AM
|
Food is going to be expensive . .
. . but few will be able to grow their own as housing becomes more dense. It will get expensive enough to change land usage decisions though and more will be grown close in to the markets.
Organic agriculture will become the norm, since current organics growers are developing economically successful methods that depend far less on oil.
All in all, though, there will be a lot less to spend on toys and travel, so expect jet skis, aircraft, off-road vehicles and a lot of expensive electronics to decline rapidly.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,453
4/8/05 10:44:23 AM
|
Electronics may go up.
All in all, though, there will be a lot less to spend on toys and travel, so expect jet skis, aircraft, off-road vehicles and a lot of expensive electronics to decline rapidly. Expensive toys that you have to travel to use will drop, as will travel as a hobby. But I expect electronics may actually go up. More people will be telecommuting, which means more computers and high bandwith in peoples houses. And what entertainment people can afford will be stuff they can keep and use around their now smaller houses and apartments. One of the reasons the Japanese spend more on electronic gadgets is that gadgets are little things that can be kept in an apartment easily. As oil prices go up, the US will be heading in that direction. Jay
|
Post #202,470
4/8/05 1:11:05 PM
|
Yes, but $3600 'big screens' entertainment centers . . .
. . will probably suffer in favor of more modest units as the cost of food eats into disposable income and the cost of manufacturing electronics increases.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #202,473
4/8/05 1:16:37 PM
|
Actually, I would expect purchases to increase
as mobility is curtailed.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,481
4/8/05 2:02:08 PM
|
I'd expect the opposite
Decreased mobility reduces suburbs leads to increased population density and therefore less space per person. Less space makes bulky items less attractive.
I'll bet those $3600 screens are less popular in NYC than in LA.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #202,491
4/8/05 2:27:35 PM
|
Probably talking about different points on the same curve
It has been shown that when fuel prices rise and/or employment gets tight (recent couple years of depression), people begin to shift disposable income to home entertainment options (video games, dvds, etc) from things like vacations, restaurants, and movie tickets. So I think that will be the first trend, but it will likely be transient because, as you note, eventually they will have to downsize their living space as well and then small goodies will supplant large goodies.
"Whenever you find you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" --Mark Twain
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." --Albert Einstein
"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses." --George W. Bush
|
Post #202,494
4/8/05 2:33:22 PM
|
I think the big screens will still sell
but they'll be plasma and LCD that hang on the wall.
Darrell Spice, Jr. [link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass]\n[link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #202,498
4/8/05 2:43:31 PM
|
I dunno about that...
..plasma TVs are horrendous energy hogs....
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #202,503
4/8/05 3:11:00 PM
|
LCDs driven by white LEDs
Darrell Spice, Jr. [link|http://spiceware.org/gallery/ArtisticOverpass|Artistic Overpass]\n[link|http://www.spiceware.org/|SpiceWare] - We don't do Windows, it's too much of a chore
|
Post #202,495
4/8/05 2:35:52 PM
|
Could argue the other way as well.
$3600 flat screens that you can mount on the wall (or project onto a wall) take less volume in a room than a 30" tube sitting on a stand. So they might become more popular.
Whether expensive, giant TVs become more or less popular as oil prices increase is a bit of an open question. Especially since one would expect them to become cheaper over time even if fuel prices increase (the manufacturing plant costs would be amortized, etc.), and since HDTV is eventually going to be the major broadcast format in the US.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #202,756
4/10/05 9:55:32 PM
|
Another reason for gadgets.
The Japanese also go into miniaturization, especially in Tokyo. Why? So they can use them on the train.
Wade.
Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
| |
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please
| -- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne. |
|
Post #202,765
4/10/05 11:16:43 PM
|
Yes, and their manufacturers used to be totally mystified .
. . that they couldn't sell their gadgets in the U.S.. They finally deduced that Americans like gadgets that do just one thing and do it so simply you can throw the manual out with the packing materials. They've made progress, but they're not there yet.
Of course this just reinforces the Japanese stereotype of Americans that prevailed during WWII. When an American newspaper published the news that the Japanese Purple Code had been deciphered (and certain people were severely disciplined for that), the Japanese rejected the news as a deception, because "Americans aren't smart enough to do that" and continued using the code, resulting in some distress.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
