A moment of zen
Over at Life After The Oil Crash, the tone is quite serious. But the collected news on peak oil is always appreciated. So when I saw this item, it took me a minute.
Special Report: The Truth About the US Economy
Over at Life After The Oil Crash, the tone is quite serious. But the collected news on peak oil is always appreciated. So when I saw this item, it took me a minute.
The elections in Iraq have left me flush with unwarranted optimism. I've been anti-this-war from the very start. I woulda voted for Howard Dean. If this is what it was all about, an election in which a moderate percentage of Kurds and Shia vote for candidates whose names were kept secret until last week - well, the price was terribly high, but it is what we have.
Gregg Easterbrook has written up an interesting review of Jared Diamond’s latest work, Collapse over at the New York Times:
‘Collapse’: How the World Ends
Generally, a positive tone is struck even though Easterbrook disagrees with the conclusions Diamond comes to in ‘Collapse’, and ‘Gun, Germs, and Steel’.Now, I think Easterbrook is on point in his criticism of Guns, Germs, and Steel. However, more pertinent to peak energy are some of his concluding arguments regarding ‘Collapse’, which I mostly disagree with. Given that they present a common mainstream response to peak energy doomsday scenarios, let's take a closer look.
Excerpts below in italics, followed by my comments:
CUT! What moony nonsense. Strangely, it is the closest I come to agreeing with Mr. Easterbrook in his concluding remarks. Been a science fiction guy since I were a wee scooter. Speed of light is a bit of a barrier, but it certainly isn’t impossible that we expand out into the galaxy. Slowly. One way ticket, only 50 more years of deceleration. What a great use for all that nuclear waste.
We humans need to solve the problem of living in this solar system.
Declining oil means we need more energy, or less people will exist.
I’m speculating, of course.
Show me the energy.
Update:
Over at Bouphonia, Philalethes has written up a devastating critique of this same article. My take on Easterbrook's article is facile and reactive puffery in comparison...
Over at TheCorrection, interesting stories are being unearthed.
Turns out, Riverbend shortly will be releasing a book with her blog as the source. Spotted on thoughts on the eve of the apocalypse.
Riverbend, the “Iraqi Girl Blogger”, is on my shortlist blogroll for a few reasons. One being she writes well, better than most Americans. In English. Doubtless her Arabic is poetry.
Thaw sees grass take hold in Antarctica
It often seems as if there is no government action on any of the real, pressing issues of the day. Sometimes, I get together with a group of my semi-bohemian technocrat hippie friends and we try and figure out just why that might be. Then we drink some wine and eat some pizza (we don't lack for class) and lurch off to our domiciles.
Spotted by J. Moe -
Update on the China post regarding the potential large oil discovery in Bohai Bay. I finally found some analysis here, but note I had to pull the info out of the Google cache because the orginal article appears to have been scratched off the hard drive. So an extensive quote seems in order:
Exploration teams have found the Bohai Bay Basin in the innermost gulf of the Yellow Sea may contain 20.5 billion tons of reserves, with 9 billion tons already proven, according to the China Daily.
Analysts said while the discovery was good news for China, questions remain about whether that will lead to actual large-scale production.
"The amount is substantial," said Michael Lee, analyst at UOB Kay Hian (Hong Kong) Ltd. "But the question is actual production, in terms of technology as well as cost effectiveness."
The paper quoted the president of a research institute linked to China Petroleum and Chemical Corp. as saying the basin's total oil resources could potentially sustain the country's energy needs for some time.
There you have it, with all the keywords highlighted to go find it yourself. Key phrase, emphasis mine, is cost effectiveness. In other words, is the energy cost to extract this bounty of oil less than the amount of energy produced, leading to a net postive? And how is the overall reserve picture affected by the actual net production?Evidence that our post petrol future may be smellier, but in a good way...
So, we have it on authority: We are wasting time worrying about peak oil.
The most infuriating thing about the looming economic crisis the United State is presently enmeshed in?
The defining problem for peak energy is not this moment in history, when we sit flush with oil, natural gas and stupidity.
These ruminations can be stressful, because modern agriculture is significantly dependant on oil, without which yields drop precipitously. The corollary is that if crop yields fail, human population will crash in direct proportion.
I ran across one person who is working on the issue of sustainable agriculture while watching a bioneers (goofy name - thanks, feckless liberals) presentation on public access television. Someone introduced Fred Kirschenmann, and an unassuming gentlemen walked up and began his presentation.
He started with the usual litany of problems – declining oil, soil degradation, high cost of industrial farming squeezing out the private farms and so on. Took about five minutes. I was hooked. He didn’t waste time defending peak oil or even explaining it, just took it as a premise.
Then he waded in and started taking swings at the assumptions of industrial farming, and correctly framed the debate. That is too say:
Spotted on Mobjectivist...
That outright facsism is taking root in America is obvious, if you can believe such a thing.
From Energy Bulletin:
A co-worker recently pointed out to me Cuba's recent discovery of an oil field with 100 million barrels. He then wanted to know if that was a sufficient amount for us to invade Cuba. Ha! What a cynic. When we invade Cuba, it will be to spread democracy.