American Empire, Lifestyle, & Peak Oil Theory

Big Smoothy · 04-11-2008, 12:54 AM

IMO, the days of "cheap" oil are over and the American government, industries, and people will have to adapt. For the American empire (and any empire) to continue to expand, and promote its political, economic, and military interests oil will have to be affordable. Hubbert's Peak Oil Theory was correct in the United States. There is some debate today about whether we have enough oil for 40 more years or 100 years, worldwide. But when the cost of extracting it hits a certain point, profits are less, or even negative, and production, extraction, and refining stops.

Empires cannot continue since 1900 without affordable oil. Germany, and Japan, realized this in World War II.

Comment and opinions?

Quote:

End of the world as we know it
You might feel fine, but high oil cost, scarcity mean American Empire is about to come crashing down

Guy R. McPherson
University of Arizona professor
Apr. 6, 2008 12:00 AM
Peak oil spells the end of civilization. And, if it's not already too late, perhaps it will prevent the extinction of our species.

M. King Hubbert, a petroleum geologist employed by Shell Oil Co., described peak oil in 1956. Production of crude oil, like the production of many non-renewable resources, follows a bell-shaped curve. The top of the curve is termed "peak oil," or "Hubbert's peak," and it represents the halfway point for production.

The bell-shaped curve applies at all levels, from field to country to planet. After discovery, production ramps up relatively quickly. But when the light, sweet crude on top of the field runs out, increased energy and expense are required to extract the underlying heavy, sour crude. At some point, the energy required to extract a barrel of oil exceeds the energy contained in barrel of oil, so the pumps shut down.

Most of the world's oil pumps are about to shut down.

We have sufficient supply to keep the world running for 30 years or so, at the current level of demand. But that's irrelevant because the days of inexpensive oil are behind us. And the American Empire absolutely demands cheap oil. Never mind the 3,000-mile Caesar salad to which we've become accustomed. Cheap oil forms the basis for the 12,000-mile supply chain underlying the "just-in-time" delivery of plastic toys from China

There goes next year's iPod.

In 1956, Hubbert predicted the continental United States would peak in 1970. He was correct, and the 1970s gave us a small, temporary taste of the sociopolitical and economic consequences of expensive oil.

We passed the world oil peak in 2005, and we've been easing down the other side by acquiring oil at the point of a gun - actually, guns are the smallest of the many weapons we're using - paying more for oil and destroying one culture after another as the high price of crude oil forces supply disruptions and power outages in Third World countries.

The world peaked at 74.3 million barrels per day in May 2005. The two-year decline to 73.2 million barrels per day produced a doubling of the price of crude. Later this year, we fall off the oil-supply cliff, with global supply plummeting below 70 million barrels/day. Oil at merely $100 per barrel will seem like the good old days.

Within a decade, we'll be staring down the barrel of a crisis: Oil at $400 per barrel brings down the American Empire, the project of globalization and water coming through the taps. Never mind happy motoring through the never-ending suburbs in the Valley of the Sun. In a decade, unemployment will be approaching 100 percent, inflation will be running at 1,000 percent and central heating will be a pipe dream.

In short, this country will be well on its way to the post-industrial Stone Age.

After all, no alternative energy sources scale up to the level of a few million people, much less the 6.5 billion who currently occupy Earth. Oil is necessary to extract and deliver coal and natural gas. Oil is needed to produce solar panels and wind turbines, and to maintain the electrical grid.

Ninety percent of the oil consumed in this country is burned by airplanes, ships, trains and automobiles. You can kiss goodbye groceries at the local big-box grocery store: Our entire system of food production and delivery depends on cheap oil.

If you're alive in a decade, it will be because you've figured out how to forage locally.

The death and suffering will be unimaginable. We have come to depend on cheap oil for the delivery of food, water, shelter and medicine. Most of us are incapable of supplying these four key elements of personal survival, so trouble lies ahead when we are forced to develop means of acquiring them that don't involve a quick trip to Wal-Mart.

On the other hand, the forthcoming cessation of economic growth is truly good news for the world's species and cultures. In addition, the abrupt halt of fossil-fuel consumption may slow the warming of our planetary home, thereby preventing our extinction at our own hand.

Our individual survival, and our common future, depends on our ability to quickly make other arrangements. We can view this as a personal challenge, or we can take the Hemingway out. The choice is ours.

For individuals interested in making other arrangements, it's time to start acquiring myriad requisite skills. It is far too late to save civilization for 300 million Americans, much less the rest of the planet's citizens, but we can take joy in a purpose-filled, intimate life.

It's time to push away from the shore, to let the winds of change catch the sails of our leaky boat.

It's time to trust in ourselves, our neighbors and the Earth that sustains us all.

Painful though it might be, it's time to abandon the cruise ship of empire in exchange for a lifeboat.

Guy R. McPherson is a professor of conservation biology at the University of Arizona.

Link: azcentral.com | Phoenix Arizona News - Arizona Local News

**Biggly** · 04-11-2008, 03:53 AM

Actually the price of oil hasn't gone up much in terms of gold, though it's tripled in terms of dollars.

That tells you more about dollars than it does oil.

B.

brogers · 04-11-2008, 06:14 AM

There's plenty of oil offshore and in oil sands/shale to last us a long time. The hippies in congress won't let us drill for it though, unfortunately. I'm not sure if Oil Shale is economically viable yet, but if it isn't yet, it will be soon.

vader · 04-11-2008, 07:12 AM

oil shale is viable now,the reason they (oil companies ) haven't gone after it before is because t would cost....over 65$ a barrel or something like that.
Well thats not prblem anymore now is it with oil being 110$ a barrel.
We just need to quit being a unch of pussies about and start drilling for our own oil.
I'd kill puppies and ALL of the whales in the ocean to get the oil price back down to 2$ a gallon.

**IainDaniel** · 04-11-2008, 07:15 AM

How about you start utilizing other technologies for energy. Good fucking lord we aren't in the stone ages anymore.

Change isn't a bad thing.

BigDyl · 04-11-2008, 07:28 AM

Alternative energy is the future. I don't have to tell people like Maniclion though.

Unfortunately Big Oil would rather make slash and burn profits, destroy the environment, and look for corporate welfare rather than put a very concise effort into developing alternative energy.

If there was more of a joint effort between large corporations, and the government, incentives, and expenditure for it, alternative energy could be feasible, efficient, and our most valuable exportable resource.

**IainDaniel** · 04-11-2008, 07:42 AM

Buyers have the power. Until they start making the request, nothing will change.

BigDyl · 04-11-2008, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

Buyers have the power. Until they start making the request, nothing will change.

I disagree. People will continue to buy gas until it's 100 dollars a gallon, and eventually society will crumble without ever giving thought to the alternative energy idea. As long as people make alot of money, it won't change.

**IainDaniel** · 04-11-2008, 08:01 AM

Your statement just supported what I said.

As long as buyers continue to buy oil based products it will continue to be that way. Supply and Demand pretty simple.

danzik17 · 04-11-2008, 09:27 AM

Actually with recent developments by NanoSolar, there is a chance that within a decade the buildings in populated areas will be able to generate nearly all of their own power.

The other thing is that whether Americans like it or not, we have to go to nuclear power - we just plain don't have the resources to continue using oil like we have been. I just hope that people realize this while we still have access to the oil that we will need to build the initial wave of nuclear power plants.

BigDyl · 04-11-2008, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IainDaniel

Your statement just supported what I said.

As long as buyers continue to buy oil based products it will continue to be that way. Supply and Demand pretty simple.

I guess I disagree with that fact that it's all on the people. I think corporations have to take the first step. They are the ones that introduce technology.

**IainDaniel** · 04-11-2008, 10:01 AM

Technology has been introduced. The buyers have shown no buying power, so it isn't economically sensible for a company to drop money into it.

danzik17 · 04-11-2008, 10:17 AM

Iain is mainly right. Consumers aren't addicted to cheap oil, they're addicted to cheap energy. We will gravitate towards whatever can give us that. Once solar or wind power can generate better returns than oil you will see huge demand for that.

The only reason we haven't gone nuclear is because it is perceived as dangerous, which really isn't true. Chernobyl only happened because the plant operators were basically morons and were conducting tests on obsolete equipment that shouldn't have been done even if it was brand new.

JB20 · 04-11-2008, 11:49 AM

I read in the Wall Street Journal that the oil companies can produce 100 million barrels of oil a day until 2100.

**dg806** · 04-11-2008, 12:16 PM

Look who wrote the article........an Oil exec. Now he wouldn't have any interest in the price of oil increasing now would he?

maniclion · 04-11-2008, 12:59 PM

George Washington Carver and Henry Ford had the answers way back when, they had been experimenting with Soy and peanuts for plastics, bio-diesel, inks, adhesives and many other petroleum alternatives. Not to mention Rudolf Diesels plans to use bio-fuels in his original engine designs. Everyone is just too hard headed to make the switch they believe they can continue scraping by with shittier and shittier forms of oil it's like Mad Max the whole world could be destroyed and they'll still keep fighting over little pools of oil. They could have the choice of either using the last drop of fuel to produce a bunch of solar electric modules or keep their car running for a week and they'd choose to run their car for the week rather than have solar modules that'll power their homes for 25-30 years.......I had a dream one night that we had gotten to the bottom of the barrel and Germany ahd sold us 20 oil tankers full of solar panels but since we had waited so long the tankers ran out of fuel half way across the Atlantic and were dead in the water while millions of homes slowly started to
blackout and heaters in areas where they still relied on petroleum based fuels......

Zaphod · 04-11-2008, 01:41 PM

Oil demand in the US has actually dropped in the last few months, courtesy of prices.

lnvanry · 04-11-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danzik17

Actually with recent developments by NanoSolar, there is a chance that within a decade the buildings in populated areas will be able to generate nearly all of their own power.

The other thing is that whether Americans like it or not, we have to go to nuclear power - we just plain don't have the resources to continue using oil like we have been. I just hope that people realize this while we still have access to the oil that we will need to build the initial wave of nuclear power plants.

The US doesn't use oil for electricity, which is what nuclear tech produces...as far as electricity supply in the US, I don't think we have a problem, since the US has the largest coal reserves in the entire world.

We'll make the shift from oil and fossil fuels to renewables when it becomes profitable...its going to be a slow process, but it will happen in the next 50 years IMO. The abrupt shift in energy source usage would result in severe economic damage IMO.

brogers · 04-11-2008, 02:19 PM

Nuclear plants can be used to make hydrogen for fuel-cell powered cars though. Which, I personally think, is the next big step we need to make--become a hydrogen economy rather than an oil based economy. Once that step is made, we gain about a 3-fold increase in energy efficiency with our vehicles, because electrical motors are 90%+ efficient, while internal combustion is just ~30%. And the only exhaust is pure water, which the tree huggers will love.

danzik17 · 04-11-2008, 02:27 PM

Can't believe I'm doing this but brogers is right Ivanry.

I should have worded my post differently - we can't keep relying on oil for energy. Gasoline/Oil is just a storage medium for energy, just like batteries or hydrogen. Nuclear energy can be used to either create that hydrogen or to charge batteries to run our vehicles - I don't know which way is more efficient at this point.

My point is that we need to do this conversion while we still have access to the oil that we will need for the initial investment. After that, then we can use the new energy and machines to create more. The initial ones are the most crucial - without those, civilization actually could collapse if we were unable to get the oil to create them.

danzik17 · 04-11-2008, 02:29 PM

Besides if we were to become energy independent, we would be able to give a big "fuck you" to the Middle East and let them tear themselves apart or whatever they want to do.

maniclion · 04-11-2008, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lnvanry

The US doesn't use oil for electricity, which is what nuclear tech produces...as far as electricity supply in the US, I don't think we have a problem, since the US has the largest coal reserves in the entire world.

We'll make the shift from oil and fossil fuels to renewables when it becomes profitable...its going to be a slow process, but it will happen in the next 50 years IMO. The abrupt shift in energy source usage would result in severe economic damage IMO.

Hawaii uses oil for electricity about 78% for Oahu's power stations, with the sun shining most of the year solar has become the best option for making the trade off, we are installing 20-30 systems everyday for solar thermal hot water and 3-6 electric systems a week from 12 modules residential to 200 module commercial jobs. We have a bill in the works right now to make Solar Water heating mandatory on all new single family homes built after 2010, the state has mandates on how much of the states electric usage will be from renewable sources by 2020 and the feds have a lot of big jobs on the military bases and base housing...renewable energy has been almost doubling in demand since I started working in the industry in 2003.....We still are decades behind Japan and Germany.

maniclion · 04-11-2008, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brogers

Nuclear plants can be used to make hydrogen for fuel-cell powered cars though. Which, I personally think, is the next big step we need to make--become a hydrogen economy rather than an oil based economy. Once that step is made, we gain about a 3-fold increase in energy efficiency with our vehicles, because electrical motors are 90%+ efficient, while internal combustion is just ~30%. And the only exhaust is pure water, which the tree huggers will love.

You'll never please the earth muffins trust me, I deal with them on a daily basis. They'll complain that the water exhaust will cause run-off issues or that we're flooding the planet or some shit, they already complain the solar electric module production causes pollution and that wind turbines eat birds.....

maniclion · 04-11-2008, 02:41 PM

As far as nuclear goes you can thank Bush and his buddies for causing the Terror Panic that makes people more scared that a nuke plant in the neighborhood will get bombed or a plane flown into and kill everything for 100 miles.....

danzik17 · 04-11-2008, 02:52 PM

Didn't know you did that stuff.

Just out of curiosity, how much do you think it would cost to do a full solar panel installation with a device to separate hydrogen/water for energy when the sun isn't shining like in the winter?

I read about some guy doing it, but he never quoted any costs.

04-11-2008, 03:53 AM	#2
Biggly Nerd Moderator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Borneo Posts: 437 Blog Entries: 1	Actually the price of oil hasn't gone up much in terms of gold, though it's tripled in terms of dollars. That tells you more about dollars than it does oil. B.
	Biggly Bodybuilding Software "The sensation of hunger can often be alleviated and even mitigated entirely with the consumption of food.[citation needed]" Wiki

04-11-2008, 06:14 AM	#3
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,241	There's plenty of oil offshore and in oil sands/shale to last us a long time. The hippies in congress won't let us drill for it though, unfortunately. I'm not sure if Oil Shale is economically viable yet, but if it isn't yet, it will be soon.
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,241

04-11-2008, 07:15 AM	#5
IainDaniel My Role Model Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 15,151	How about you start utilizing other technologies for energy. Good fucking lord we aren't in the stone ages anymore. Change isn't a bad thing.
	Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it. Michael Jordan

04-11-2008, 07:42 AM	#7
IainDaniel My Role Model Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 15,151	Buyers have the power. Until they start making the request, nothing will change.
	Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it. Michael Jordan

04-11-2008, 08:01 AM	#9
IainDaniel My Role Model Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 15,151	Your statement just supported what I said. As long as buyers continue to buy oil based products it will continue to be that way. Supply and Demand pretty simple.
	Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it. Michael Jordan

04-11-2008, 07:12 AM	#4
vader Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: USA Posts: 192 Photos: 18	oil shale is viable now,the reason they (oil companies ) haven't gone after it before is because t would cost....over 65$ a barrel or something like that. Well thats not prblem anymore now is it with oil being 110$ a barrel. We just need to quit being a unch of pussies about and start drilling for our own oil. I'd kill puppies and ALL of the whales in the ocean to get the oil price back down to 2$ a gallon.

04-11-2008, 09:27 AM	#10
danzik17 Gender: MALE Elite Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,769 Blog Entries: 5	Actually with recent developments by NanoSolar, there is a chance that within a decade the buildings in populated areas will be able to generate nearly all of their own power. The other thing is that whether Americans like it or not, we have to go to nuclear power - we just plain don't have the resources to continue using oil like we have been. I just hope that people realize this while we still have access to the oil that we will need to build the initial wave of nuclear power plants.
	Ron Paul 2008 Journal: Boom goes the dynamite

04-11-2008, 10:01 AM	#12
IainDaniel My Role Model Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 15,151	Technology has been introduced. The buyers have shown no buying power, so it isn't economically sensible for a company to drop money into it.
	Obstacles don't have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don't turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it. Michael Jordan

04-11-2008, 10:17 AM	#13
danzik17 Gender: MALE Elite Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,769 Blog Entries: 5	Iain is mainly right. Consumers aren't addicted to cheap oil, they're addicted to cheap energy. We will gravitate towards whatever can give us that. Once solar or wind power can generate better returns than oil you will see huge demand for that. The only reason we haven't gone nuclear is because it is perceived as dangerous, which really isn't true. Chernobyl only happened because the plant operators were basically morons and were conducting tests on obsolete equipment that shouldn't have been done even if it was brand new.
	Ron Paul 2008 Journal: Boom goes the dynamite

04-11-2008, 11:49 AM	#14
JB20 Heavy Metal Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: School, work, or the gym Posts: 37	I read in the Wall Street Journal that the oil companies can produce 100 million barrels of oil a day until 2100.

04-11-2008, 12:16 PM	#15
dg806 Guardian of The Homeland Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Charlotte NC Posts: 16,937	Look who wrote the article........an Oil exec. Now he wouldn't have any interest in the price of oil increasing now would he?
	www.sbmuscle.com

04-11-2008, 12:59 PM	#16
maniclion Catalyst Elite Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hawaii, selling munitions for the war on EcoTerror Posts: 17,402 Photos: 10	George Washington Carver and Henry Ford had the answers way back when, they had been experimenting with Soy and peanuts for plastics, bio-diesel, inks, adhesives and many other petroleum alternatives. Not to mention Rudolf Diesels plans to use bio-fuels in his original engine designs. Everyone is just too hard headed to make the switch they believe they can continue scraping by with shittier and shittier forms of oil it's like Mad Max the whole world could be destroyed and they'll still keep fighting over little pools of oil. They could have the choice of either using the last drop of fuel to produce a bunch of solar electric modules or keep their car running for a week and they'd choose to run their car for the week rather than have solar modules that'll power their homes for 25-30 years.......I had a dream one night that we had gotten to the bottom of the barrel and Germany ahd sold us 20 oil tankers full of solar panels but since we had waited so long the tankers ran out of fuel half way across the Atlantic and were dead in the water while millions of homes slowly started to blackout and heaters in areas where they still relied on petroleum based fuels......

04-11-2008, 01:41 PM	#17
Zaphod Registered User Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Michigan Posts: 36	Oil demand in the US has actually dropped in the last few months, courtesy of prices.

04-11-2008, 02:19 PM	#19
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,241	Nuclear plants can be used to make hydrogen for fuel-cell powered cars though. Which, I personally think, is the next big step we need to make--become a hydrogen economy rather than an oil based economy. Once that step is made, we gain about a 3-fold increase in energy efficiency with our vehicles, because electrical motors are 90%+ efficient, while internal combustion is just ~30%. And the only exhaust is pure water, which the tree huggers will love.
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,241

04-11-2008, 02:27 PM	#20
danzik17 Gender: MALE Elite Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,769 Blog Entries: 5	Can't believe I'm doing this but brogers is right Ivanry. I should have worded my post differently - we can't keep relying on oil for energy. Gasoline/Oil is just a storage medium for energy, just like batteries or hydrogen. Nuclear energy can be used to either create that hydrogen or to charge batteries to run our vehicles - I don't know which way is more efficient at this point. My point is that we need to do this conversion while we still have access to the oil that we will need for the initial investment. After that, then we can use the new energy and machines to create more. The initial ones are the most crucial - without those, civilization actually could collapse if we were unable to get the oil to create them.
	Ron Paul 2008 Journal: Boom goes the dynamite

04-11-2008, 02:29 PM	#21
danzik17 Gender: MALE Elite Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,769 Blog Entries: 5	Besides if we were to become energy independent, we would be able to give a big "fuck you" to the Middle East and let them tear themselves apart or whatever they want to do.
	Ron Paul 2008 Journal: Boom goes the dynamite

04-11-2008, 02:41 PM	#24
maniclion Catalyst Elite Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hawaii, selling munitions for the war on EcoTerror Posts: 17,402 Photos: 10	As far as nuclear goes you can thank Bush and his buddies for causing the Terror Panic that makes people more scared that a nuke plant in the neighborhood will get bombed or a plane flown into and kill everything for 100 miles.....

04-11-2008, 02:52 PM	#25
danzik17 Gender: MALE Elite Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Connecticut Posts: 1,769 Blog Entries: 5	Didn't know you did that stuff. Just out of curiosity, how much do you think it would cost to do a full solar panel installation with a device to separate hydrogen/water for energy when the sun isn't shining like in the winter? I read about some guy doing it, but he never quoted any costs.
	Ron Paul 2008 Journal: Boom goes the dynamite