Oil shock - are we running out of oil?

Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
3,958
Reaction score
36
Peak oil is a myth - as is "global warming" search infowars.com - see link - get out of The Matrix now!!!! Just type in "oil" in the search field or "global warming" - Liars are ruling the world - global control is the their goal, through deceit!!! http://www.searchinfowars.com/
 

Cry For Love

Senior Don Juan
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Messages
299
Reaction score
6
Lets revive this thread. What do you guys think of peak oil, is it real? What will its consequences be?

Myth side: http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/peak_oil/index.htm
Supporters: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

The latter site does say that some of the optimism in this thread is simple-minded. The recently discovered oil reserves taking long to get online to be effective or being very technically difficult to get them working(ie having to drill in the open sea to 10000 feet below sea level).

Also nuclear energy and other alternatives are very oil-dependant in terms of getting them to function in the first place.
The other big problem will be the slow-down of trade in general. Goods cant be exchanged as the global transportation system slows down due to savage oil prices. That in turn will hamper the development of alternative transportation technologies, and with crappy transport, the globalised world will crumble.
Here's a pretty bleak outlook http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2984

And the sad thing is, people wont give a flying **** about it until the devastation is in their back yard (Ancient Rome is a suitable comparison).
 
Last edited:

Bible_Belt

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
17,046
Reaction score
5,678
Age
48
Location
midwestern cow field 40
If all the oil does disappear, people can still move goods by wood and coal-fired steam engines like they had 100 years ago, as well as by sail on the open sea as has been done since time began. These are crude technologies, but they do still work, and would work a lot better with modern engineering and science. The electricity that is powering my pc right now comes from a coal-burning power plant. The coal is moved by a train that burns oil-derived diesel fuel, but only 20-50 miles, and it is not that hard to make the train run off steam if there was an oil crisis. I don't think we would just drop into the dark ages. The world is full of energy. We are surrounded by it. The problem is our very rudimentary skill at harnessing the energy that is already everywhere.
 

speakeasy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
77
Bible_Belt said:
If all the oil does disappear, people can still move goods by wood and coal-fired steam engines like they had 100 years ago, as well as by sail on the open sea as has been done since time began. These are crude technologies, but they do still work, and would work a lot better with modern engineering and science. The electricity that is powering my pc right now comes from a coal-burning power plant. The coal is moved by a train that burns oil-derived diesel fuel, but only 20-50 miles, and it is not that hard to make the train run off steam if there was an oil crisis. I don't think we would just drop into the dark ages. The world is full of energy. We are surrounded by it. The problem is our very rudimentary skill at harnessing the energy that is already everywhere.
The issue isn't running out of energy, it's running out of CHEAP energy. It took the world from the dawn of time till around 1900 for the first billion in human population. It only took another 100 years for it to get to 6 billion. Do that math on that and you can see where we're going.

Cheap energy has allowed the population to grow at a parabolic rate. Mechanized agriculture has increased food productivity as well as food transport over long distances. It's possible to ship fresh fruits and meat in cargo jets across the world. Which why I can eat some Chilean grapes in winter and have a steak from Kobe, Japan. Cheap energy has made this all possible. As it dries up, the cost of food will go up. Those living off a dollar a day in the 3rd world are going to feel the most pain. Expensive food may be a nuisance for us in the wealthy countries, but in the poor counties, it means going without. We couldn't go back to using steam and wood power. If we did, the population would probably crash back the level we had at thta period in history because we won't have the energy to power the technology that has allowed the population to swell so large.

We may never actually run out of oil. It'll just keep getting gradually more expensive to the point that it becomes unaffordable. I think the short term trend of oil will be down since we are coming down off a bubble in commodities, and a stregnthening dollar, but the longterm projection will be up unless we start a massive conservation program or invest heavily in alternative fuels. One reason I am voting for Obama.
 

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,201
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
Weren't there 90 trillion barrels of oil found in the Arctic Shelf just a couple of months ago?


Peak oil is a myth - as is "global warming" search infowars.com - see link - get out of The Matrix now!!!! Just type in "oil" in the search field or "global warming" - Liars are ruling the world - global control is the their goal, through deceit!!! http://www.searchinfowars.com/
There is global warming. Its caused by the sun. Humans aren't helping though. However we have a minor influence on the climate, unlike most environmentalists claim.
 

speakeasy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
77
Alle_Gory said:
Weren't there 90 trillion barrels of oil found in the Arctic Shelf just a couple of months ago?
Do you have a link to that story? I follow news pretty closely and have heard no such thing.


There is global warming. Its caused by the sun. Humans aren't helping though. However we have a minor influence on the climate, unlike most environmentalists claim.
Most climate scientist disagree. The climate of the earth does go through boom and bust cycles over very long periods of time, but what we're seeing right now is happening so rapidly it's hard to say it's only a natural cycle.
 

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,201
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
speakeasy said:
Do you have a link to that story? I follow news pretty closely and have heard no such thing.
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1980

My bad. 90 billion.


The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil, 1,670 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of technically recoverable natural gas liquids in 25 geologically defined areas thought to have potential for petroleum.

The U.S. Geological Survey assessment released today is the first publicly available petroleum resource estimate of the entire area north of the Arctic Circle.

These resources account for about 22 percent of the undiscovered, technically recoverable resources in the world. The Arctic accounts for about 13 percent of the undiscovered oil, 30 percent of the undiscovered natural gas, and 20 percent of the undiscovered natural gas liquids in the world. About 84 percent of the estimated resources are expected to occur offshore.

"Before we can make decisions about our future use of oil and gas and related decisions about protecting endangered species, native communities and the health of our planet, we need to know what's out there," said USGS Director Mark Myers. "With this assessment, we're providing the same information to everyone in the world so that the global community can make those difficult decisions."

Of the estimated totals, more than half of the undiscovered oil resources are estimated to occur in just three geologic provinces - Arctic Alaska, the Amerasia Basin, and the East Greenland Rift Basins. On an oil-equivalency basis, undiscovered natural gas is estimated to be three times more abundant than oil in the Arctic. More than 70 percent of the undiscovered natural gas is estimated to occur in three provinces - the West Siberian Basin, the East Barents Basins, and Arctic Alaska.

The USGS Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal is part of a project to assess the global petroleum basins using standardized and consistent methodology and protocol. This approach allows for an area's petroleum potential to be compared to other petroleum basins in the world. The USGS worked with a number of international organizations to conduct the geologic analyses of these Arctic provinces.

Technically recoverable resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices. For the purposes of this study, the USGS did not consider economic factors such as the effects of permanent sea ice or oceanic water depth in its assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources.

Exploration for petroleum has already resulted in the discovery of more than 400 oil and gas fields north of the Arctic Circle. These fields account for approximately 40 billion barrels of oil, more than 1,100 trillion cubic feet of gas, and 8.5 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. Nevertheless, the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially unexplored with respect to petroleum.
 

Maxtro

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
3,207
Reaction score
31
Location
Kalifornicatia
Uh this doesn't sound too reassuring, "The area north of the Arctic Circle has an estimated 90 billion barrels of undiscovered." Sounds to me like it's a wild guess.

Either way, oil needs to stop being used. Solar, wind, water and perhaps nuclear power are the answer's.
 

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,201
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
Maxtro said:
Either way, oil needs to stop being used. Solar, wind, water and perhaps nuclear power are the answer's.
I'd go with Nuclear. More environmentally friendly if the materials are disposed of properly. And its very compact.
 

theunflushables

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
20
I think we need to figure out what Doc Brown did to the Delorian in Back to the Future II. He had it running on trash.
 

speakeasy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
77
fuzzx said:
I give the oil crisis 10 to 20 years maximum... think about it... 10 to 20 years ago the internet didn't exist for the masses. New technology can be made available very easily. It would only take that amount of time for an alternative to be discovered and mass marketed. Once one person finds a viable alternative and starts using it in their company, everyone will follow suit and there are A LOT of options open.

If you believe in flying saucers as aliens or just super advanced aircraft the point is someone has already discovered a cheaper alternative to fossil fuel powered jets and is using it (I've seen a couple in Mexico). I'm sure there is a very good reason for this 'crisis' occurring now. I was just reading an article about a guy who is building a jet that runs on converted plastic bags for fuel.

I really think it has more to do with squeezing every last drop of retirement money out of the baby boomers (for which the economy was built on).
You're defnitely right in that there are a lot of people with power that want to keep oil prices high. They have no incentive to build more refineries because the fewer, the more they can charge for gas and then say, "hey, refining capacity is at it's limit, we can't make anymore."

As for the UFO comment, well...we're a LOOOONG way from having THAT kind of technology to travel across the universe. But I see your point though. If "others" have done it, then it's at least possible.

Have you guy's looked at Iceland's energy policy? They are completely self-sufficient and use almost complete renewable non-polluting energy sources. They are leading the way into the future, though of course they are also lucky too in that they are in a part of the world full of free energy. Not everyone is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Iceland
 

Maxtro

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
3,207
Reaction score
31
Location
Kalifornicatia
Alle_Gory said:
I'd go with Nuclear. More environmentally friendly if the materials are disposed of properly. And its very compact.
I'm also leaning towards nuclear. I heard that most of the problems we had with it 50 years ago have been fixed. It's just that everybody is still scared of it.

A little off topic, but I'd like to see another attempt at a nuclear powered airplane. The project was scrapped in the 50's.
http://www.aboutnuclear.org/view.cgi?fC=Space,History
 

speakeasy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
2,780
Reaction score
77
That would be a horrible idea as far as safety. Imagine if those jets that went into the twin towers were filled with nuclear material instead of gasoline. Need I say more? Or forget any deliberate crash, what if a plane went down in a populated area and now you've got nuclear material spread all over the place. I doubt anyone could make a reactor strong enough to withstand the impact it would experience hitting the ground at 600mph.

I'm not crazy about because of the waste that will be lingering around for thousands of years. In my opinion, "clean nuclear" power is an oxymoron.
 

Alle_Gory

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 25, 2008
Messages
4,201
Reaction score
79
Location
T-Dot
speakeasy said:
That would be a horrible idea as far as safety. Imagine if those jets that went into the twin towers were filled with nuclear material instead of gasoline. Need I say more? Or forget any deliberate crash, what if a plane went down in a populated area and now you've got nuclear material spread all over the place. I doubt anyone could make a reactor strong enough to withstand the impact it would experience hitting the ground at 600mph.

I'm not crazy about because of the waste that will be lingering around for thousands of years. In my opinion, "clean nuclear" power is an oxymoron.
Dude. :rolleyes: Nuclear powered planes?

Nuclear powering the electrical grid. You can also power cars through batteries. Aircraft will be running off liquid fuels for a long time. The fuel meeds to be light, and high energy.

Also, nuclear doesn't produce much waste compared to other methods of energy "production". If its disposed of properly, like sealed at the bottom of a very, very deep mine in bedrock, then its perfectly ok.
 

Maxtro

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
3,207
Reaction score
31
Location
Kalifornicatia
LOL I'm not the one who thought of it. Theoretically a nuclear powered plane could be airborne for weeks. Of course it would need massive amounts of security features to prevent them from being passenger carrying nuclear bombs.
 
Top