[dgs212]

To quote Jim Anchower, "I know it's been a long time since I rapped at ya..."

Anyway, I've been thinking a lot lately about earth, humanity, etc. Specifically, I'm worried about the finiteness of nonrenewable resources and the huge, impossible to overstate impact fossil fuels have had on increasing the carrying capacity of the earth for humans.

Things like this worry me. Anyone else? Is anyone else concerned that global oil production will peak in the next 2 to 17 years? Is anyone else concerned that once oil runs out, the remaining sources of nonrenewable resources (i.e. coal, natural gass, fissile material) are both more scarce than oil and not as efficient a source of energy?

Personally, i don't think there's a "technological" fix for this. At most we (humanity) might delay the onset of global starvation (or exacerbate it by allowing for an even greater increase in population that a new energy technology affords). We'll have to develop a social fix, i.e. population management. Terrible. Truly tragic. I seriously wonder how long we have left on earth.

It get's me to thinking about Carl Sagan's postulate that there exists some threshold point in the development of any potential intelligent life. At this threshold, the life form possesses the technological capacity to annihilate itself. How often does intelligent life make it over this threshold?

(sorry so long...I've been saving up my posting energy for a day when I'd really need it)

[macvillage.net]

Dozens of Economists, scientists, and even a few politicians have said this since the late 70's. But a Giant Energy Crisis would be the best thing that could happen to the US.

The US is to dependant on a very limited, hard to get energy source. When other alternatives, which would provide to be cheaper, more efficient, plentiful, and safer are only an arms reach away.

If forced, most believe that the US isn't far from alternative energy sources that would be better. Problem is nobody wants to front the money without a safety guarantee. If forced... it would happen relatively quickly.

Advantages would be cleaner, efficient (cheaper), more accessible energy.

As suggested more recently on a talkshow, some of these cheaper alternative energy sources can be spread out more, making the "power grid" as we know it less vulnerable. Turning it from a grid powered by a few points, to a P2P network. Thousands and thousands of power sources. Even if dozens fail. There are thousands more to replace it. Rather than use single digits. The redundency that creates is very beneficial.

Lower energy costs make manufacturing cheaper (energy in several parts of the US have caused companies to literally close down factories and build factories overseas).

More reliable energy sources within the US remove the diplomatic and political constriants currently in place.

Lastly, most alternative energy sources being investigated today are much safer, and less obtrusive. Nobody wants a coal power plant buring outside a community. But a few solar panels on an empty lot (for example), is quite a bit safer, and more inviting. Such panels could in theory be placed in unobtrusive places such as beside public roads (land already owned by state's in many cases). Renting rooftops of buildings, etc.

An energy Crisis would be bad for the imediate future, but a blessing to long term well being of the nation. The current system is pretty faulty, and really can't be made to the level of perfection that the US ideally needs. It's just fundimentally impossible. You can't build enough powerplants to provide true redundency and enough power, without sacrificing. Our dependency on black gold will always harm us.

Sadly, the US has been on the brink of alternative sources for a bit more than 20 years now. That last step has yet to be taken because nobody sees the need to risk it.

Importing goods is a great thing. But not when there is a 100% dependency on it. A strike by only 1 labor union can bring the nation to it's knees. Instability in 1 oil providing nation can cause serious instability in US industries.

And it's all completely unnecessary. And overpriced.


Perhaps one day, the US will lead the way to alternative energy. Personally, I think it will most likely be a smaller Europian country, or an Pacific Island who starts it.

[Uday's Carcass]

Oil dependence sucks. It is one of the worst things for America, economically and in the security/foreign policy realm.

I look forward to the day when we can say 'adios' to combusting for propulsion the liquified carcasses of dead plants and animals.

[quandarry]

in 1970 the forecast was only 30 years of known oil reserves left. that meant by the year 2000 there would not be one drop left. recently i've heard the exact same thing...30 to forty years. all shortages have been man made not by actual supplies in the ground.

i've also heard that the real oil supply known and unknown may well be good for another 100 years....

[dgs212]

Let me start by saying that I'm not at all concerned about the US or its specific residents, concerns, government agencies, or corporations being able to exist into perpetuity. The problem of energy crisis renders all these illusionary aggregations totally null.

That being said, let me clarify a bit. I'm not a geologist, so I can't say exactly when non-renewable energy sources will run out. It might be next year (doubtful), it might be 50 years from now (more likely, but still speculative). It might take a century or two (almost certain). The point being, by their very nature, non-renewable resources will run out. That it might not be for 3 or 4 generations is no excuse to ignore the problem now.

Unless the energy supply is renewable, it has to run out eventually.

Can renewabes step in to take up the slack? The general scientific consensus is, sadly, no. The methods available are simply not efficient enough to make up the difference, even if the earth were one giant solar-collector. While it is possible that we may discover or invent some form of renewable energy source, we would be much better served by actively seeking solutions to this problem rather than keeping on as always, hoping for some last minute deus ex machina. Don't you think?

[quandarry]

necessity is the mother of invention. as long as there is cheap oil there is no reason to pour huge amounts of money into alternatives and there are alternatives known and unknown...all my life i've been scared shitless by the doomsayers and forecasters...not anymore.

there may be a rough road ahead but nothing should come easily or we become complacent...

we will be alright and our descendants will be alright...their lives may be completely different than yours, there will have to be give and take to balance things out among the inhabitants of this planet....but they will be alright.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by quandarry:
necessity is the mother of invention. as long as there is cheap oil there is no reason to pour huge amounts of money into alternatives and there are alternatives known and unknown...all my life i've been scared shitless by the doomsayers and forecasters...not anymore.

there may be a rough road ahead but nothing should come easily or we become complacent...

we will be alright and our descendants will be alright...their lives may be completely different than yours, there will have to be give and take to balance things out among the inhabitants of this planet....but they will be alright.

Problem is that now is already a bit late to develop alternatives.

It's impossible to say exactly when we will be unable to get oil for economical, political, geological reasons. It could be next year, could be 50 years.

Now is the time, that we should be developing the alternatives, that have been waiting for years.

[Uday's Carcass]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Problem is that now is already a bit late to develop alternatives.

Now is the time, that we should be developing the alternatives, that have been waiting for years.

Do you even put any effort into your posts?