http://green-man-2010.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
green-man-2010.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
talkpolitics2010-05-29 10:03 am
green-man-2010.livejournal.com) wrote in talkpolitics2010-05-29 10:03 am
Entry tags:
I have seen the future, and I doesn't like it.
Life after the oil crash.
Ok, last time, I went and pinned it on a vid that most people cannot read at work.
So I am letting y'all boot up something you can read quitely when you oght to be working :)
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
In case you have trouble reading graphs, this one has a Blue Peter style 'talk you through the implications' - complete with original sources, for those who wanna check.
It might seem like I am doom mongering , but I just want to say -
Let's put more into Planned Parenthood, make it optional, but make it a damned sight easier at home and abroad.
Let's have oil rationing, sooner rather than later. Let's also have everything rationed if it's made with oil.
let's try to be civilised about the few resources left and share them out among ourselves.
Let's start reducing consumption , reusing things and recycling more.
let's remember that civilisation as we know it will be over by 2050, if it lasts that long.
Ok, last time, I went and pinned it on a vid that most people cannot read at work.
So I am letting y'all boot up something you can read quitely when you oght to be working :)
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
In case you have trouble reading graphs, this one has a Blue Peter style 'talk you through the implications' - complete with original sources, for those who wanna check.
It might seem like I am doom mongering , but I just want to say -
Let's put more into Planned Parenthood, make it optional, but make it a damned sight easier at home and abroad.
Let's have oil rationing, sooner rather than later. Let's also have everything rationed if it's made with oil.
let's try to be civilised about the few resources left and share them out among ourselves.
Let's start reducing consumption , reusing things and recycling more.
let's remember that civilisation as we know it will be over by 2050, if it lasts that long.
no subject
That's the problem with Greens, it is always doom and gloom.
You know what will happen as the price of oil rises? Other technologies capable of providing just as much energy that we have available on the shelf today but cost more will become economically viable.
The first and most obvious is Nuclear which contrary to the propaganda is just about the safest technology invented by man. Hell this current oil leak in the Gulf is a far greater economic and environmental catastrophe than Chernobyl and the death count between oil and nuclear makes it a no brainer.
Then is Solar, both ground based and orbital based become more viable as does wind, tidal, and the various forms of geothermal.
Then for the other uses of oil, as I said yesterday given a sufficient supply of energy (i.e. electricity generated by Nuclear/Solar/Wind/Geothermal/etc.) the lubricants and plastics can be manufactured from the base elements.
No, the end of oil (which is guaranteed whether it is 5 years or 50 years or 500 years from now) will not mean a catastrophe or collapse of civilization (or at least it need not), it will however mean some severe economic constraints during the transition and maybe some isolated starvation in the poorer countries who lack the technological base to transform their economies rapidly but there will not be another dark ages caused by it and nor will there be a mass die off of humans.
no subject
But the Greens (and others) will try their hardest to make it happen anyways.
no subject
Pfffhahahahaha :-)))))
no subject
The fact I said it would happen does not make me responsible.
the fact that you ignored the possibility might make it yours, however.
no subject
no subject
After all, we advocate conserving these resources, not shutting down coal mines ourselves.
people talk about our opposition to Nuclear energy - but just remember that Uranium gets mined, and there is not an infinite supply of that, either?
So, if we scale back dependency on oil by investing in energy efficient appliances, by driving less and walking more -
How does this lead to a world shortage of oil?
no subject
The blunt fact is, that in order to sustain energy levels in order to keep society functioning, one would have to carpet the entire country with wind farms and solar panels, leaving little room for, well, much anything else.
By the by, all those solar and wind power generating devices require resources to be mined and used as well in their production and maintenance, if we're going to get that picky.
The only way to accommodate a switch and not carpet bomb the country with wind and solar farms, would be to turn the clock back on our standard of living (many things which are not simply mere conveniences or matters of choosing more efficient appliances, but critical systems we have come to rely upon), which I think is what gunslinger is alluding to, but he can correct me if I'm off base. Simply walking/biking more won't do it.
Wind and solar might do very well in niche energy markets supplying energy locally to less demanding regions, but as a complete changeover? Not gonna happen. There's where your riots and upheavals lay, and I wouldn't want to be a politician who successfully could be traced to such a changeover in the times that followed.
"let's remember that civilization as we know it will be over by 2050, if it lasts that long."
It's really pointless to make these predictions, given that making predictions like this is nothing new to mankind, and they have been one of the things we get wrong with the most consistency. You would think we would have learned by now.
Besides, we all know this is how and when civilization ends:
no subject
no subject
What happened then wa that power workers went on strike, and there were frequent blackouts.
Factories were only allowed to operate for 3 days per week.
in spite of this, production rose, as efficiency was held at a premium and people watched the meters more.
Reationing did not cause Englan collapse. Whether Americans could cope with being weaned off of Oil Sauce remains to be seen, but supply shortages in the past caused massive price surges in the past. We can expect more of them as we hit the downside of the bell curve.
no subject
Greens advocate grants to allow people to install solar panels on domestic homes, as well as installling similar devices in government and L.A. premises like schools and hospitals. this will slow down , but not stop oil consumption. It may not even stop it rising, but simply slow the rate of growth.
Rationing worked under the Heath government, when factories were only open 3 days a week, and also during WW2 when there was a war on. there is no reason why it could not work today when we start getting faced with major shortages.
America is already using more oil than it produces. It has not been able to rely on sunshine to make up the shortfall, it has imported oil from the Middle East. In future, it will have to compete, not just with Japan , but China and India too.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
Yes, we need to be cognizant that regardless of how much more oil advanced tech will allow us to pull from the ground it will run out and likely sooner than later (sometime in the next 50 - 150 years is most likely when it will start to get really hard to maintain production levels) and begin planning for it.
However, planning is not the same thing as saying "Oh everything we've been doing has been wrong, lets lock 99% of the populace into eternal poverty and go back to the 18th century while instituting draconian controls that will have the effect of killing off huge numbers of 'criminals' in the process", it is investing in new technologies and processes so that they are mature and ready to come on line when oil really starts to get scarce and adopting as many oil saving methods as possible now so we extend that date as long as possible.
no subject
And the population will need weaning off gradually. Eeven then , there may be panics, riots and so forth.
no subject
First the most obvious interim solution has been around for more than 40 years and has been proven far more safe and environmentally sound than Coal or Oil ever tried to pretend to be and yet the Greens oppose it at every turn.
Second there are a half a dozen technologies we have known exactly how to implement since the 60's but could not make them cost competitive with cheap oil, an equation which has been changing somewhat with advances in technology and will change further with more expensive oil.
My personal favorites are Ocean Geothermal and Solar Power Satelites.
Neither of these use new technologies and we have known how to do them for decades in both cases, what has held them back was engineering experience and cost.
The point is there are no "Starship" technologies that need to be developed and the lead time to develop and deploy the technologies at the scale needed is only on the order of 1 - 2 decades at most
(no subject)
no subject
processes so that they are mature and ready to come on line when oil
really starts to get scarce and adopting as many oil saving methods as
possible now so we extend that date as long as possible.
I cannot speak for American or Canadian Green Parties, but this is what we advocte in the UK, and over most of Europe where I know how local parties operate.
If you know different , I would certainly liike to see cites that show this.
Googling " Green Party Manifesto" would certainly help.
no subject
Hell they oppose Wind Power half the time because it might kill some birds.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
You can either cite your sources, or retract the statement.
Fail to do either and I shall complain to the Mods on this community.
no subject
no subject
What are they advocating , and how is it likely to end up with people dying as a result? if you can give me a link, I would appreciate it.
However, any quote you want to stick on the American Green Party has to be understood as representing people within that Party. conversations with on correspondent here is demonstrating that the British greens take a different stance on some social issues to our Canadian counterparts - even so, I would like to see where American Greens advocate policies that would lead to people dying.
no subject
no subject
Of course, the Green Party is concerned about the dramatic drop in Bee population - there is a darned good reason for that. If people did dissappear tommorrow, the plaent , and life on it would continue.
Without Bees , howeveer, pollination would become more difficult - there would be less fruit and veg, and that would lead to less food and many species including ours would experience starvation and population crash.
Farm animals too, come under the green remit. look what happened over Mad Cow Disease. We are what we eat, and if we don't look after our food well, we end up getting all sorts of things in our food chain.
So, while the Greens care for wildlife and foodstock, we are also concerned abou how their welbeing impacts our own.
Unless Gunslinger is prepared to respond to these points, and to the previous ocomment, I am putting in an official complaint. Greens are not killing people.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject