NationStates Jolt Archive

It's not really scary for the simple fact that we don't know how many people the world can support. With improving farm technology the world may be able to support another 10 billion. Poor nations would suffer of course, but the industrialized world could help out, if they'd get off of their heinies.

A whole bunch of scientists have looked carefully into this matter, and concluded the world is over capacity already. Improving farming technologies may help, but they won't solve the problem - particularly when you consider that something like 90% of nitrogen based fertiliser comes from fossil fuels. (strangely, a large portion of biologically active nitrogen in the soil actually comes from lightning strikes, but we have yet to harness this for fertiliser production.

Once we run out of fossil fuels, the population will drop. Hopefully slowly rather than violently, but it will drop.

As Squi points out below, we use fossil fuels for energy inorder to produce fertiliser. it does not become fertiliser. Sorry for not being clear on that point

I'm waiting for the oil supply to drop out and prices skyrocket. Oh wait....

I'm waiting for the oil supply to drop out and prices skyrocket. Oh wait....

:D

Now, my dad (who's a fanatic for the "The end of oil is NIGH, we're all gunna die" point of view) reckons we're all stuffed, because we needed to start developing alternative energy sources like ten years ago and the US didn't (I sau the US, because my country (Australia) probably couldn't afford to develop these technologies).

I still hold out hope we'll get fusion up and running though, what do you think?

I still hold out hope we'll get fusion up and running though, what do you think?We do have fusion up and running, although it is an inefficent power source it does a wonderful job of depleting population (fusion bombs). The problem with human detonated fusion power is that it doesn't seem to be viable, the heat is too great for normal fusion to be anything other than a bomb and cold fusion remains an unproven dream. But solar is fusion power from that great big fusion reactor in the sky and is the major source of power on the earth, so one could say that almost all power is fusion power but this is outside the scope of your terms.

As for fertilizers, there is a misspeaking/misperception here. Fossil fuels are not converted into fertilizer, instead they provide the power to create inorganic fertilizer (an energy intensive process). If aternative power is availible then fertilizer can be made using that power source, without an alternative power source we'll be cold, immobile and hungry instead of just cold and immobile. Actually producing the fertilizer isn't enough either, modern levels of population require a level of specialization which is only supportable with great ammounts of transport - megatons of fertilizer at the dozen or so major fertilizer plnts are useless unless they can be brought to the farmlands, and the crops harvested there are not going to feed many people unless they can be brought to the cities and other population hubs. Cheap transport is essential to maintaining modern population levels.

We do have fusion up and running, although it is an inefficent power source it does a wonderful job of depleting population (fusion bombs). The problem with human detonated fusion power is that it doesn't seem to be viable, the heat is too great for normal fusion to be anything other than a bomb and cold fusion remains an unproven dream. But solar is fusion power from that great big fusion reactor in the sky and is the major source of power on the earth, so one could say that almost all power is fusion power but this is outside the scope of your terms.

Sadly current solar power technologies would require the bulk of the worlds food growing land to produce enough energy, which is clearly not viable.

hehe, anyone else want to bring up an alternative? I can dubunk all of them.

Sadly current solar power technologies would require the bulk of the worlds food growing land to produce enough energy, which is clearly not viable.

hehe, anyone else want to bring up an alternative? I can dubunk all of them.

Fossil fuels are nowhere close to running out

Where's your source?

I have a simple solution... This is cruel and inhumane, but heck..it worked in the past!

You know how these countries insist on killing each other in Africa and the Mid-East, why not let them kill each other? It would mean fewer people to feed and fewer resources need. Screw international intervention! Keep your domestic laws, but, really, in an already over-populated world...meh... Don' mind me, I just believe that sometimes just letting them blow each other up is more productive than interfering.

Hmm...just a few points I thought I'd make.

-The sun shines on unarable land.
-There are large tracts of flat, unarable land.
-Arizona, New Mexico, etc. have huge tracts of unused, unarable land.
-It's really hot and rarely cloudly in places like New Mexico, Arizona, etc, which also happen to have huge tracts of unused land.
-Solar Power plants do not have to be built on arable land.

Fossil fuels are nowhere close to running out

Where's your source?

ooh heck, mostly my fanatical dad... I'll see what I can scrape up

this books good, I actually have a copy:
http://www.museletter.com/partys-over.html

I googled this just then and it mentions the peak production thing
http://healthandenergy.com/oil_crisis.htm

I won't post more since I have nothing specific and you're all capable of googling yourselves (I used "oil dwindling fossil fuels crisis" and found heaps)

I'm e-mailing my old man now for scientific papers & stuff.

I googled this just then and it mentions the peak production thing
http://healthandenergy.com/oil_crisis.htm

Peak production doesn't mean we're running out. It merely means we're using the resource faster than we can produce it.

Peak production doesn't mean we're running out. It merely means we're using the resource faster than we can produce it.

I could be wrong but doesn't peak production mean that we produced more in that particular year than we ever will again?

Thus once we pass peak production, we are running out. Particularly since we continue to use the resource faster and faster.

Sadly current solar power technologies would require the bulk of the worlds food growing land to produce enough energy, which is clearly not viable.But fossil fuel does come from the sun. Long ago plants lived which used the light from the sun to organize chemichals into more complex chemicals which got buried under the earth and degenerated into complex hydrocarbons which are fossil fuels. Aside from geo-thermal and nuclear power, power for humans comes from the sun - and even geothermal power is attributable to the gravity of the sun, so that's solar power too albeit even more indirectly.

I personally favor looking into an indirect form of solar power, wind power to run hydrogen cracking. Set up a bunch of windmill bouys out at sea to power simple generators running an electric current through the sea water (electrolysis) and storing the hydrogen gas. Send hydrogen takers out every so often to collect the bounty of the wind and every so often send a noat out to do maintenance.

Ok, here's the primary source for this stuff:

http://www.asponews.org/

additionally regarding the non-arable land comment - a valid point but the area would still be gigantic. I think I may have goten confused with my anti-ethanol argument (as we need to farm sugar to make ethanol).

However the resources required to both construct sufficient panels and store the energy for night time use are so huge as to make it an unviable substitute for oil.

I could be wrong but doesn't peak production mean that we produced more in that particular year than we ever will again?

Thus once we pass peak production, we are running out. Particularly since we continue to use the resource faster and faster.
One would think so, but no. The usual theory places peak production at the maximum production per person in a given year, and assumes that production of fossil fuels can never grow at the same rate as population growth. Other theories place it at the maximum production/use ratio and assumes that production can never grow as fast as use.

I personally favor looking into an indirect form of solar power, wind power to run hydrogen cracking. Set up a bunch of windmill bouys out at sea to power simple generators running an electric current through the sea water (electrolysis) and storing the hydrogen gas. Send hydrogen takers out every so often to collect the bounty of the wind and every so often send a noat out to do maintenance.

Hooray for the guy (or gal) that knows hydrogen is an energy store rather than a source (unless you happen to be the sun).

Wind has similar problems to solar. large surface area required and the power supply would be intermitent. Additionally most high wind land is either in use or difficult to access.

viability increases greatly if we could establish hydrogen infrastructure, but we have yet to do this.

You know it'd help alot if all the automobile firms decided to bring out the hydrogen/water powered car. But nooo, they refuse as it would effect the oil industry so much, so when we run out oil, they'll sell them at 10 times the price they could of done several years before.
You know I beleive man was doomed ever since he discovered fire, ever since then he's wanted nothign but comfort, heat, luxury and speed. and now ofcourse where so dependant on all the natural and un-renewable resources that once we run out of oil, the economy plummets, people become poor, and we all freeze to death because we forget what it is to survive independant of technology.

You know it'd help alot if all the automobile firms decided to bring out the hydrogen/water powered car. But nooo, they refuse as it would effect the oil industry so much, so when we run out oil, they'll sell them at 10 times the price they could of done several years before.
You know I beleive man was doomed ever since he discovered fire, ever since then he's wanted nothign but comfort, heat, luxury and speed. and now ofcourse where so dependant on all the natural and un-renewable resources that once we run out of oil, the economy plummets, people become poor, and we all freeze to death because we forget what it is to survive independant of technology.

Our very genes have forgotten. We never discovered fire, it was another species from which we are descended.

Even worse than energy....

Jokes are running out! :eek:

That's right! Scientists have estimated that 96% of the world's joke supply has been used up. It seems that the supply is just not replenishing itself as fast as demand burns them up.

But I have a solution! It's a three step process:

1) Have Presidential Elections every year. The more new presidents, the more new jokes. :D

2) More efficient use of jokes. Don't let dumb people ruin jokes. Kick them in the groin before they get to the punchline.

3) Encourage Sightgags. Don't wear belts.

Even worse than energy....

Jokes are running out! :eek:

That's right! Scientists have estimated that 96% of the world's joke supply has been used up. It seems that the supply is just not replenishing itself as fast as demand burns them up.

But I have a solution! It's a three step process:

1) Have Presidential Elections every year. The more new presidents, the more new jokes. :D

2) More efficient use of jokes. Don't let dumb people ruin jokes. Kick them in the groin before they get to the punchline.

3) Encourage Sightgags. Don't wear belts.

yeah yeah we've all heard that one before :D

yeah yeah we've all heard that one before :D

*kicks you in the groin*

ooh heck, mostly my fanatical dad... I'll see what I can scrape up

this books good, I actually have a copy:
http://www.museletter.com/partys-over.html

I googled this just then and it mentions the peak production thing
http://healthandenergy.com/oil_crisis.htm

I won't post more since I have nothing specific and you're all capable of googling yourselves (I used "oil dwindling fossil fuels crisis" and found heaps)

I'm e-mailing my old man now for scientific papers & stuff.

It has been estimated that the peak in world oil production will occur about the year 2020...world production of oil will be nearly exhausted by 2100.

- Edwards, American Assoc. of Petrol Geologists (AAPG) Bulletin, 1997


We are now close to having consumed approximately 50 percent of the total crude oil from traditional oil fields...

- Youngquist, Spending our great inheritence, Geotimes, 1998

Just from what is laying around the office and within easy reach...When I was questioning your call on fossil fuels, I was referring more to ALL fossil fuels. Coal will last for hundreds of years, if need be (hopefully not)

You know it'd help alot if all the automobile firms decided to bring out the hydrogen/water powered car. But nooo, they refuse as it would effect the oil industry so much, so when we run out oil, they'll sell them at 10 times the price they could of done several years before.
You know I beleive man was doomed ever since he discovered fire, ever since then he's wanted nothign but comfort, heat, luxury and speed. and now ofcourse where so dependant on all the natural and un-renewable resources that once we run out of oil, the economy plummets, people become poor, and we all freeze to death because we forget what it is to survive independant of technology.

If a company had a viable design for a water powered car, you'd better believe they would put it on the market. Why? They would have the market cornered and crush their competitors.

As far as oil companies go, they will survive - think about all the things that require oil besides cars (smacks head with plastic bottle). I would be as concerned about the future of these items...

Oil will not be used up because the market automatically adjusts. As supply of oil decreases the price increases (assuming constant demand). As price increases people switch to substitutes where available, and conserve and recycle when substitutes are not available (or are more expensive). Also, research goes into finding cheaper substitutes. There's no need to panic, I'm sure the 19th century had the same scare tactics when we were "running out of iron". Same analysis applies to all resources.

The big problem is not the increase in the population. But the distribution of the resources we have to day. Because a small portion of people in the rich country used a larg portion of the resources avaible power oil etc. So if evryone on earth spend as much power and resources as the Americans per person the world would be totally screwed. If they spend as much as the europeans the world would be a little less screwed but still totally screwed. So the two big question is how can a increase of living standard in the developing countries country happen without totally screwing up the world? And is the rich westernized countries willing to do there part by spending less and finding new more effective technology?
A negative sign towards the second question is the cars. Because it have been some process and you can now go around 10 kilometer on only 0,5 l petrol. But it is still oil that is burned and alot of it and a lot of people in the west choose to buy new cars that take 1,5-2,0 per 10 kilometers and drive their cars in situation there more enviromental alternatives exist.

Oil will not be used up because the market automatically adjusts. As supply of oil decreases the price increases (assuming constant demand). As price increases people switch to substitutes where available, and conserve and recycle when substitutes are not available (or are more expensive). Also, research goes into finding cheaper substitutes. There's no need to panic, I'm sure the 19th century had the same scare tactics when we were "running out of iron". Same analysis applies to all resources.

Yup, and the stone age didn't end due to a shortage of stones...

But there are so many benefits to scaring people - books, magazines, fame, government grants, etc

So the two big question is how can a increase of living standard in the developing countries country happen without totally screwing up the world? And is the rich westernized countries willing to do there part by spending less and finding new more effective technology?


While these right wing governments and corporations control everything, and capitalism is the dominating factor... No.

People are too self centred, lazy and short sighted.

What will happen is that the US Auto Manufacturing market will then be overrun by the super-efficient Japanese cars being developed right now - and then afterwards, Japanese fuel cell cars

Oil will not be used up because the market automatically adjusts. As supply of oil decreases the price increases (assuming constant demand). As price increases people switch to substitutes where available, and conserve and recycle when substitutes are not available (or are more expensive). Also, research goes into finding cheaper substitutes. There's no need to panic, I'm sure the 19th century had the same scare tactics when we were "running out of iron". Same analysis applies to all resources.
Actually it was whales, whale oil was the major energy crisis of the 19th century. Instead we discovered snake oil was an acceptable sustitute for whale oil and slowed down the depopulation of the whales.

Nuclear Power is the key, They are generally safer than coal plants.