So much for "peak oil"

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

I love a good metaphor.

If that's a Metaphor then I took 10seconds at bridgeday. Put your lesson plans down and read that again holmes

[JerryBaumchen 1,468]

Hi brent,

I am glad that we can produce more now than yesterday.

However, it is a finite source. I would recommend this book, THE LONG EMERGENCY by James Kunstler for more info on this.

An interesting side note: Here in the Pacific NW we get most of our power from the hydro-electric dams on the Columbia River. Yesterday's newspaper had an article about how the wind farms in this area were outproducing the hydro-electric system these last few days.

IMO that is a step in the right direction.

JerryBaumchen

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Hi brent,

I am glad that we can produce more now than yesterday.

However, it is a finite source. I would recommend this book, THE LONG EMERGENCY by James Kunstler for more info on this.

An interesting side note: Here in the Pacific NW we get most of our power from the hydro-electric dams on the Columbia River. Yesterday's newspaper had an article about how the wind farms in this area were outproducing the hydro-electric system these last few days.

IMO that is a step in the right direction.

JerryBaumchen

This book?

This book, (Long Emergency: Surviving the Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century by James Howard Kunstler, 2005, 307 pages) is a doomsday scenario of the possible eventual results of society's wasteful and extravagant consumption of oil and other fossil fuels. Kunstler correctly recognizes that overpopulation is also a cause.

"A book like this is sorely needed, but unfortunately, Kunstler has produced a book bloated with hyperbole and other errors. It also fails to back up most of its controversial assertions with references. It's a shame that a book on such an important topic will be rejected by many due to its obvious exaggerations and questionable conjectures."

[brenthutch 444]

Fracking and other modern recovery techniques have rendered his book obsolete.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Fracking and other modern recovery techniques have rendered his book obsolete.

fracking only delays the date, unless you can establish that the earth is generating more recoverable oil each year than we use.

[JerryBaumchen 1,468]

Hi brent,

As I mentioned, there is a finite amount.

As for the review that you quoted: That is one view, mine is different.

So there.

JerryBaumchen

[brenthutch 444]

Contrary to what many on this forum believe, I embrace technology and think that technology is what is going to be able to solve many of the challenges facing us. But industrializing embryonic technologies before their time is counterproductive, and ultimately harmful. Government should be supporting basic research in labs and universities, not wasting billions on solar panel and battery factories. It would seem that giving the rash of failures my position has been vindicated.

[billvon 3,120]

>Contrary to what many on this forum believe, I embrace technology . . .

It is easy to think you do not, since you regularly rejoice in its failure.

>It would seem that giving the rash of failures my position has been vindicated.

The technology works and the percentage of energy that we produce with renewable power is growing year by year. Green jobs are one of the few sectors of employment that continued to grow even through the recession. Even Romney has reversed his stance on this and now supports renewables.

Every energy industry, from coal to oil to nuclear to solar to wind, has failures you can point to. It is wiser (IMO) to look at the industry as a whole.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Contrary to what many on this forum believe, I embrace technology and think that technology is what is going to be able to solve many of the challenges facing us. But industrializing embryonic technologies before their time is counterproductive, and ultimately harmful.

These two sentences directly contradict each other. And seriously misses the difference between academic lab work and production on any measurable scale.

did you support the massive spending around the Apollo moon mission? That paid for a lot of research, much of which failed. The same is going on now.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Quote

Contrary to what many on this forum believe, I embrace technology and think that technology is what is going to be able to solve many of the challenges facing us. But industrializing embryonic technologies before their time is counterproductive, and ultimately harmful.

These two sentences directly contradict each other. And seriously misses the difference between academic lab work and production on any measurable scale.

did you support the massive spending around the Apollo moon mission? That paid for a lot of research, much of which failed. The same is going on now.

The Apollo missions were a proxy war between the super powers, thinly veiled as science. That is why the last missions were canceled because the war was won and there was no need for further spending. If it was for science we would have continued.