NationStates Jolt Archive

Well I went to www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net and I honestly believe It won't happen that soon. What say you NSG?

do you mean http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

I'm investing in canned goods and shotguns. :)

I am honestly unfussed. Humanity will adapt, as it always does.

do you mean http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Yeah... Err... Sorry

As far as petroleum goes, we're pretty much set to replace that. We have hydrogen. The only reason we still use petrol is because of those oil barons in the ME and the asses in the oil industry.

I'm a bit more concerned about plastics, though.

I am honestly unfussed. Humanity will adapt, as it always does.

How will humanity adapt? I honestly think we're headed for another dark age. Though I could be wrong.

How will humanity adapt? I honestly think we're headed for another dark age. Though I could be wrong.

What are the other big uses for oil, besides petrol and plastics?

As far as petroleum goes, we're pretty much set to replace that. We have hydrogen. The only reason we still use petrol is because of those oil barons in the ME and the asses in the oil industry.

I'm a bit more concerned about plastics, though.

Plastics, Construction, nearly everything uses petrol. Even if we do move towards hydrogen, the reprecussions of peak oil will be a major hit on our lifestyle.

Microchips, Concrete, Everything uses oil.

How will humanity adapt? I honestly think we're headed for another dark age. Though I could be wrong.
Well we're already trying things out with electric vehicles etc., so I don't think that a lack of cheap oil is going to kill us, not that we won't be 'finding' more and more of the stuff as happens when the economy looks in trouble.

"Oh no err IBM is losing money"
"Aye but we just found 93 billion litres off the coast of Brazil"
"Hurrah!"

Microchips, Concrete, Everything uses oil.

Microchips use oil? I thought that was primarily based on sand...

Well I went to lifeafterthecrash.net and I honestly believe It won't happen that soon. What say you NSG?
If I get increasingly despondent I would have no lifeafterthecrash from a 10-story building. If a terrorist gets to me first I would have no lifeafterthecrash of the plane.

Well we're already trying things out with electric vehicles etc., so I don't think that a lack of cheap oil is going to kill us, not that we won't be 'finding' more and more of the stuff as happens when the economy looks in trouble.

"Oh no err IBM is losing money"
"Aye but we just found 93 billion litres off the coast of Brazil"
"Hurrah!"

Hurrah Indeed. The fact that oil has much needed uses besides fuel means peak oil would cause severe reprocussions.

Microchips

That would fall around the same area as plastics.

Concrete

Never heard that one before.

Hurrah Indeed. The fact that oil has much needed uses besides fuel means peak oil would cause severe reprocussions.
Yeah, once again, there's plenty of the stuff out there. This is some ENIGMA type shit going on.

"Right there's a fair bit of oil over there"
"Yeah save it for a while"
"Alright"

*something bad happens in the world markets*

"Right time to send a boat and maybe fly a helicopter over that bit of sea and declare a new find"
"Alright"

That would fall around the same area as plastics.



Never heard that one before.

It's in the link.

Yeah, once again, there's plenty of the stuff out there. This is some ENIGMA type shit going on.

"Right there's a fair bit of oil over there"
"Yeah save it for a while"
"Alright"

*something bad happens in the world markets*

"Right time to send a boat and maybe fly a helicopter over that bit of sea and declare a new find"
"Alright"

Could be, but the fact that Saudi Arabia and ARCO have over-reported their oil reserves leaves me with some doubt.

As far as petroleum goes, we're pretty much set to replace that. We have hydrogen. The only reason we still use petrol is because of those oil barons in the ME and the asses in the oil industry.

I'm a bit more concerned about plastics, though.

Hydrogen is essentially a battery, not a fuel source.

As for things that use oil, there's plastics, fertilizers, pesticides, medicine, lubricants, paint, synthetic fabrics, detergents, make up, dyes, and synthetic rubber.

Plastics, Construction, nearly everything uses petrol. Even if we do move towards hydrogen, the reprecussions of peak oil will be a major hit on our lifestyle.

Hydrogen is not an energy source.

It's in the link.

The article doesn't mean to say that oil is needed directly to process and make concrete, but that the equiptment, by and large, uses oil.

Romans invented concrete without oil. It could still be made without it.

The article doesn't mean to say that oil is needed directly to process and make concrete, but that the equiptment, by and large, uses oil.

Romans invented concrete without oil. It could still be made without it.

I had thought maybe he meant asphalt, but apparently not. You definitely don't need oil for concrete, any heat source will do.

Hydrogen is essentially a battery, not a fuel source.

Seems to drive cars alright.

please look at post about hagnin

Seems to drive cars alright.

So do batteries.

Seems to drive cars alright.

I think the point is, where do you get hydrogen from?

The problem with that is that it only really concentrates on conventional sources. It pays lip service to non conventional oil, i.e oil shales which, yes provide less return and cost more than standard oil but given that the current technology is geared towards conventional oil extraction that's not surprising. within hydrocarbon fuels it also ignores the potential (albeit still only potential rather than proven) of methane hydrates http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/title.html (Just search for "methane hydrates" or "methane clathrates" if you want more info).

It's analysis of renewables is also grossly dismissive of geothermal power, conventional geothermal energy is very limited by geography but hot dry rock (EGS) geothermal is not and, again has massive potential. (sorry, article is wiki) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_dry_rock

I realise that neither of these directly affects use of petroleum in plastics and such (although arguably it would be possible to produce long carbon chains from methane hydrates). They would however both have the effect of taking the strain of energy production away from oil, thus freeing it up for production of goods.

you' know if its not one thing thats going to destroy civilization its another (may I point out that like last month it was "ZOMG depression")

er anyway...

markets will adapt as will government both in keeping the highways running and the lights on etc etc

its like getting crazy in the 1800's about London getting full of horse crap by the 20th century (jokes aside that is)

www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

ignoring the late 90's website trying to sell me stuff go to the bottom pic (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Archives2008/Paul.jpg)

I think the point is, where do you get hydrogen from?

Oo I know. Steam Reformation of Methane from a biomass fermenter. Of course you could go the whole hog and use the produced syngas in a Fischer Tropsch reaction to make synthetic petrol which is also useful for other things. Lot of effort though. Stick with the hydrogen if all you're going to do is burn it.

It'll never happen. One of the major problems I have with the PO community is that they view oil in sacred, reverent terms as if it's the energy source given by God himself and nothing else can ever replace it...I swear, it's like they're praying to the gods Brent and Cushing with every post. The truth is, energy sources have replaced each other in the past and will continue to do so, and oil possesses no unique qualities that cannot be duplicated, synthesized, or otherwise replaced with (often superior) alternatives.

Seems to drive cars alright.

that has nothing to do with the classification of something as "fuel source" or "battery". A battery can drive a car, too.

A battery is something that stores energy. A fuel is something which can be burned (or otherwise changed) to produce energy. To get hydrogen, we must extract it from water or some other process. We must use energy to do this.

Burn oil (fuel) -> produce electricity -> seperate hydrogen from oxygen in water.

The hydrogen stores the energy produced by burning the oil. Using the hydrogen does not produce new energy, but releases the energy stored. It is a battery.

Burn oil (fuel) -> produce electricity -> extract new oil

The new oil contains new energy, not energy stored by the extraction process. It is a fuel.

The truth is, energy sources have replaced each other in the past and will continue to do so, and oil possesses no unique qualities that cannot be duplicated, synthesized, or otherwise replaced with (often superior) alternatives.

So what do you think will replace fuel oil in the transport field then? It's the biggest source of fuel consumption after all. Can't be hydrogen, solar or just plain batteries, since they're less efficient than oil.

Never heard that one before.

I think he means asphalt.

So what do you think will replace fuel oil in the transport field then? It's the biggest source of fuel consumption after all. Can't be hydrogen, solar or just plain batteries, since they're less efficient than oil.

Electricity and biofuels most likely. Oil's efficiency has been plunging over time due to the growing intensiveness of its production, which means its energy efficiency compared to other sources has also declined. The cost will eventually exceed the benefits and as a result oil will be displaced by alternatives, ultimately being rendered obsolete by technological and economic factors.

Of course, the energy efficiency of any source is utterly meaningless. If one source is more economically efficient than another, it will be used regardless of its relative energy efficiency. That's what determines the energy mix first and foremost, not the sources themselves; if the economics are there, we can meet our needs with any source. Generally, it also stands that the less efficient sources are far more abundant, especially renewables and long-term concepts like fusion, further strengthening their long-term position. Solar power might be far less efficient than oil, but considering the Earth receives more energy from the Sun in 24 hours (net of albedo effects) than all of the fossil fuels ever consumed in all of recorded history, it's quite a strong position.

I'm personally still waiting for peak oil, let alone the oil crash. Just like the end of the world, those dates keep being shifted back further and further and never seem to come to pass (although they're having a field day with the current recession, as is expected...maybe we'll get an economic boost from their survival shelter spending).

Electricity and biofuels most likely. Oil's efficiency has been plunging over time due to the growing intensiveness of its production, which means its energy efficiency compared to other sources has also declined. The cost will eventually exceed the benefits and as a result oil will be displaced by alternatives, ultimately being rendered obsolete by technological and economic factors.


Hmm, that would depend on emergent alternative energy technologies catching up to replace the net energy demand that currently is in demand and doing that catching up in enough time to support the market shifts that will happen when the oil decline eventually happens. Even if it becomes economically cheaper to do so, if the net energy produced by one source is inferior in terms of output compared to another, the market will definitely suffer.

To draw an example, say aircraft fuel stops being economically feasible. That puts an end to most forms of current air travel. Certainly, the market will adapt, but I suspect it will suffer in the process since the current alternatives will be less capable in terms of performance.


Generally, it also stands that the less efficient sources are far more abundant, especially renewables and long-term concepts like fusion, further strengthening their long-term position. Solar power might be far less efficient than oil, but considering the Earth receives more energy from the Sun in 24 hours (net of albedo effects) than all of the fossil fuels ever consumed in all of recorded history, it's quite a strong position.


I won't dispute the net energy received by the sun exceeding that of oil, but the question remains as to whether that net energy can be harnessed effectively. I know the industry is making gains, but it's very limited as far as I know, especially when considering the land usage when competing against living space and agriculture.

Of course there's the big draw of an orbital SBSP, but the feasibility of that one isn't certain yet IIRC.

that has nothing to do with the classification of something as "fuel source" or "battery". A battery can drive a car, too.

A battery is something that stores energy. A fuel is something which can be burned (or otherwise changed) to produce energy. To get hydrogen, we must extract it from water or some other process. We must use energy to do this.

Burn oil (fuel) -> produce electricity -> seperate hydrogen from oxygen in water.

The hydrogen stores the energy produced by burning the oil. Using the hydrogen does not produce new energy, but releases the energy stored. It is a battery.

Burn oil (fuel) -> produce electricity -> extract new oil

The new oil contains new energy, not energy stored by the extraction process. It is a fuel.

So what? How many oil power plants are there actually out there? Most would be coal. And if it actually came to the crunch, we have nuclear.

So what? How many oil power plants are there actually out there? Most would be coal. And if it actually came to the crunch, we have nuclear.

Coal is a fossil fuel, and just as limited as oil (and much less useful). Nuclear fuel is just as, if not more, finite, and again, much less useful.

Coal is a fossil fuel, and just as limited as oil (and much less useful). Nuclear fuel is just as, if not more, finite, and again, much less useful.

Isn't there meant to be ridiculous amounts of uranium available?

I'm investing in canned goods and shotguns. :)

You quote that movie every time someone posts a thread about the end of the world...

...I would think you would be a majority shareholder in these companies by now. :tongue:

I think the point is, where do you get hydrogen from?

*sigh* I knew this day would come...

Okay. When a mommy hydrogen and a daddy hydrogen fall in love, they get special feelings... the daddy hydrogen puts his....

what?

Fission requires rare and dangerous fuels, though I think there's a lot of room for development in breeder reactors and such to make it much more worthwhile than coal or gas plants. Whether we have reached 'peak production' yet or not, and what the significance is (infrastructure adaptation vs Mad Max), the fact remains most of our energy sources are non-renewable, depending on strategic resources. I think there's a lot to be said for space exploration for things like uranium, and setting up a basic interplanetary economy of sorts. It would be nice to eventually not have the whole human race dependent on Earth - all eggs in one basket, a basket to which we can realistically imagine a great many real threats nowadays. At least to our existence. We have to spread our space-seed into the cosmos, like that one guy in Silence of the Lambs, only into space instead of Jodi Foster's face.

Physic nuts will be the next great fuel.

Hurrah Indeed. The fact that oil has much needed uses besides fuel means peak oil would cause severe reprocussions.

Can't oil be made from coal? After PO, that process can be the stopgap until the next astounding technological innovation is made. The important goal right now must be to construct extremely powerful computers and artificial intelligences. AI will be able to invent new technologies much faster than the biological human brain can...

What are the other big uses for oil, besides petrol and plastics?

Electricity comes to my mind. Also tarmac.

Can't oil be made from coal? After PO, that process can be the stopgap until the next astounding technological innovation is made.
Petrol can be made out of coal (the Germans used that process till the end of WW2 iirc, and it's a better petrol that the petrol one gets from crude oil). Though:
1.the process uses a lot of energy
2.coal isn't infinite (and everyday the request for coal rises).

The important goal right now must be to construct extremely powerful computers and artificial intelligences. AI will be able to invent new technologies much faster than the biological human brain can...
No. You're mistaking "artificial intelligence" for "deus ex machina".
Also we don't need to invent new technologies about energy. We have already a lot of useful technologies we choose not to use - because of private interests, social inertia etc.

Can't oil be made from coal? After PO, that process can be the stopgap until the next astounding technological innovation is made. The important goal right now must be to construct extremely powerful computers and artificial intelligences. AI will be able to invent new technologies much faster than the biological human brain can...

See my earlier post except replace "methane from biomass fermenters" with "coal"

I am seriously worried about peak oil. Say what you like, our entire society is dependant on Oil. Transport faster than sail, plastic, electricity, safe water, technology and information.... all require oil to function one way or another. And as of yet and for the forseeable future, we do not have any replacement. Oh, there are theories, ideas, but nothing that we could actually use for at least 20 years, and by that time, resources and information required for it may be damn near inaccesible. Oh, and Hydrogen is so often used as a miracle fuel, but it isn't. Energy is required for it's manufacture, and to make it on a scale large enough to satisfy demand would require massive amounts of power - power we simply don't have even now, let alone after oil

The mass price drop in Oil says that its going nowhere anytime soon...:(

The mass price drop in Oil says that its going nowhere anytime soon...:(

Remember early summer last year, when people were saying the record-breaking stock market figures were surefire indicators that there'd be no crash in our time?

Petrol can be made out of coal (the Germans used that process till the end of WW2 iirc, and it's a better petrol that the petrol one gets from crude oil). Though:
1.the process uses a lot of energy
2.coal isn't infinite (and everyday the request for coal rises).



yes but there is a lot more coal in the world then oil.
Also the US has the largest reserve of coal in the world (and the US's is largely higher grade coal). So I am all for the next standard being petrol from coal and the US becoming the new UAE.

yes but there is a lot more coal in the world then oil.
Also the US has the largest reserve of coal in the world (and the US's is largely higher grade coal). So I am all for the next standard being petrol from coal and the US becoming the new UAE.

Sounds good to me, combined with more fuel efficient vehicles, we'd be all set for a while down the road...

Sounds good to me, combined with more fuel efficient vehicles, we'd be all set for a while down the road...

and we can embargo fuel to the Mideast until they recognize Israel.