Peak Oil Theory

MasterChief096 · 2011-10-08, 02:39 PM

I've been researching the Peak Oil Theory for awhile now, and I want to know what some of my fellow PlanetSide fans think about it. I'm currently writing a fictitious novel about a possible outcome based on the world running out of oil, and want to some more opinions about it.

Where on this scale do you fall?

Alarmist ----------------------Middle Guy--------------------Nothing is Wrong

For those new to the theory of Peak Oil I will explain the different positions on the scale.

Alarmists - believe that sometime in the next 10-50 years the oil wells will run pump their last drops and our entire system of society will completely collapse, in essence being followed by a few phases of societal change.

Stage 1 would consist of mass panic. All of our agricultural fields (which are 100% dependent on petrochemical fertilizers) lose their ability to produce in such quantities. The trucks that transport agricultural products to processing centers have no fuel. These processing centers aren't receiving electricity to actually process due to their being no fuel for the power companies. The trucks that take food from the processing centers to the grocery stores have no fuel. The food never makes it to grocery store shelves. There would be looting and violence on an unbelievable scale, especially in heavily urban areas.

Stage 2 would be after a lot of people have died. Survivors return to old methods of subsistence farming, and take out measures to defend themselves from roving looters or people who might want what they have.

Stage 3 is when people actually start to form communities again, using technological methods more akin to the 1700-1800s before oil based machines and inventions replaced our old way of life. Its likely that no big city will ever be used again, due to its infrastructure having been completely damaged over the years, and the vast manpower and technological know-how needed to be able to repair it.

Middle Guy - Hardest of the three to explain. They can lean either towards alarmist or to the nothing is wrong category. Most of the time the middle guys have faith in human ingenuity and think that within 10-50 years we will have the means to completely remove ourselves off of fossil fuel dependency. I like to think of the middle guys as the optimists, and the activists as well. The people who spread knowledge about fossil fuel dependency and also the guys who change their life style habits a bit to conserve fossil fuels and to help our species move towards other sources of energy (scientists and researchers who are completely devoted to this fall here).

Nothing is Wrong - People way over here generally think we have enough oil to last hundreds of years more, or they adopt the mindset of "oh, well I'll be dead before this is ever a problem for me." Some of these people are politicians or businessmen who just can't fathom the economic and life style impact of trying to remove ourselves from fossil fuel dependency, which is completely understandable. There's also some people over here that have 100% faith that human ingenuity will save us eventually so there's no need to worry about it.

So for purposes of discussion, where do you fall. I'm not here to bash your beliefs about Peak Oil, I just want to become more informed on the opinions of others about myself.

My own personal opinion is that we need to be making a massive effort right now to make renewable energy more inexpensive and available to nations around the globe before its too late. Better safe than sorry. We're already leaving our children and grandchildren huge piles of debt, why do we have to leave them with a problem that has the potential to completely end the society we know of entirely?

The question as it relates to politics is how massive should the effort be. Obviously many people's life styles around the globe (but most primarily the United States with our consumption-based mindset) are dependent on oil, and the economic impact of diverting 100% of infrastructure budget to building renewable energy would completely destroy our economy and bring about collapse before we run out of oil.

What do you as people around the globe think the best approach is to tackling fossil fuel dependency, how fast do you think we should do it, or do you think there isn't really a problem at all? (If you advocate this view, please support with evidence.)

DviddLeff · 2011-10-08, 05:19 PM

As oil reserves run out we will see fuel prices rise, which will consequentially see price rises in all products due to transporting the products and their materials for their construction. We will also see corporate/diplomatic/armed conflicts kick off in countries that have rich oil supplies.

Before we found crude we used whale oil to provide us with liquid fuel, obviously there aren't enough whales left to provide us with oil again. However we are currently seeing biofuels being used more and more as an alternative "carbon neutral" source of energy for generators and engines. Now we could go totally over to biofuel for cars for example, which would mean that we would see more demand for the biofuel - which would earn farmers more money. This has an unfortunate effect of reducing the available food supplies as farmland transfers over to fuel production, which of course increases the price of food.

Now will this cause massive problems for the "average" person? Perhaps, but it really depends on how companies deal with the changes; will they actively pursue new technologies to make farming/vehicles/electricity production more efficient, or will they stick with the proven method?

Common sense says they must adapt or die.

Accuser · 2011-10-08, 06:36 PM

You should note that most products not only rely on petroleum for transport, but also require it as a component. Almost everything requiring plastics fit into this category.

Bad things will happen, but there are alternatives to petroleum fuels if society has to drop down to basic survival. America and other current net-exporters of food will likely adapt well enough, depending on how willing those with power are to divert resources from the wealthiest to those near starvation.

Countries with low food security now, or violent political instability now, will likely destabilize. And unstable governments often rely on military expansionist policy to unify the population and resolve resource deficiencies. Those which have their own petroleum resources to exploit will fare very well until new technologies are exploited which are economical in the face of high priced oil.

CutterJohn · 2011-10-08, 07:42 PM

Middle guy. Oil isn't just going to stop overnight. As we use up viable reserves, we'll turn to less viable reserves, and even less viable reserves. The price of oil will steadily rise, fostering the development of replacement technologies and alternate lifestyles. Not to say its going to be all roses.. It will be hard to wean ourselves off a power source so convenient. But its not the end of the world. There will be some wars, some panics, some food shortages, but overall we'll weather it fine.

Honestly we're fine on power. Coal will last several hundred more years, and we have the fissile materials for millions of years, not to mention the supplementation by renewable sources. We might not even really notice the switch, as there are several promising lines of research which could result in a viable gasoline replacement. Probably not as cheap, but cheap enough. Algae based biofuels, for instance. And battery research continues.. Honestly most people in the US could function fine with battery powered car for 95% of what they want to do.. Its that 5%, those long road trips they want to take, that make it unviable. Granted battery production leads to the issue of other material shortages, but unlike gasoline, you can recycle and rebuild a battery.

**Malorn** · 2011-10-08, 09:44 PM

Meh.

Baneblade · 2011-10-09, 06:26 AM

Well, petroleum is a finite resource. Even though it is technically renewable, it will definately run out before our thirst for it does. There is no valid reason for not exploring alternative fuels for the longterm.

Id say im about halfway between Alarmist and Middle. I know its a real problem, but part of me wants it to happen.

Mutant · 2011-10-10, 11:10 AM

Its not just oil to be thinking about:

peak gold was in 2002
peak tungsten in 2004
peak strontium in 2005
peak platinum in 2006

US Minerals Databrowser provided by Mazama Science: http://mazamascience.com/Minerals/USGS/

World Mineral Production Review by the British Geological Survey: http://www.bgs.ac.uk/downloads/start.cfm?id=1574

http://kauaian.net/blog/wp-content/t...eral_audit.jpg

Quovatis · 2011-10-10, 11:33 AM

We have enough oil for another 70 years or so. Even then, there will still be oil around, just harder to find. It will never simply "run out". The problem will take care of itself. As oil becomes more expensive, alternative energy will grow. A lot of liberals think if we really wanted to, we could get off oil in 5 or 10 years. That just won't happen even if we poured trillions into other types of energy. The technology just isn't there yet. There will be a slow transition away from oil that will take many decades. We have already started that path. But thinking there is some dire disaster where one day we'll wake up and simply have no oil is quite stupid, and will not happen. Like it or not, money is what drives technology, not ideals or politics. Once it becomes profitable, other types of energy will take off.

Wahooo · 2011-10-10, 11:45 AM

Necessity is the mother of invention. Until it is absolutely needed and a lot of the money and minds working on squeezing relatively small amounts of oil from previously termed low producing, low quality or poor sources we will be relatively stable with a slow increase in oil cost, thus costs of all things.
As the oil companies themselves feel the pinch, which will come but not for a while, they will start down the alternative energy roads rather than using their money and political clout to in some ways suppress some of it. When it is needed, there will be a huge jump in technologies.
Whether it comes before or after mass chaos in some 3rd world countries remains to be seen.

Geist · 2011-10-10, 01:41 PM

Like others have said, oil is not just going to disappear. Gradually, oil prices will go up and up and up, and once the average consumer stops buying oil based products do to cost, the oil companies will release their new, refined alternative resource and make loads of money. That's how it's worked in this capitalist country of ours for hundreds of years and I doubt it will stop any time soon. At the very worst, we'll be building a whole lot more steam powered trains and tracks to transport goods.

SgtMAD · 2011-10-10, 02:10 PM

have any of you ever stood on the floor of an actual oil rig or better yet ever worked on a rig?

I spent a good part of the 80's working the oil patch in the states,worked wildcat holes, production and holes drilled for the tax write off.

the idea that we are "running out" of oil is a lie being spread to justify the cost of a barrel of oil,the only thing that is running out is the estimated 40% of the oil in existing production holes that are have enough pressure in them to still force the oil out of the formations,that leaves over 60% of all the oil reserves that have been developed and "turned on" are still in the ground,it just needs to be extracted using more complicated measures(ala "fraking",pump jacks)some which have been developed and some are still on the drawing board.

the only reason oil is hovering around the $80-$100 range is rampant speculation which has nothing to do with supply and demand,its about the churn that the trading generates,the way to kill this BS off is to require that futures speculators be forced to take delivery of the oil futures they buy.

now for facts that really don't fit the "we are running out of oil" debate.

why are complex hydrocarbons found on Jupiter's moons? there aren't any dead oceans full of decayed animal and plant matter that is supposed to be required like all the oil experts here tell us.

how can you have hydro carbons and no lifecycle to create it?

there is enough hydrated ice on the bottom of the gulf of mexico to power all of the US's energy needs for the next 100 years,.this is ice formed on the sea bottom under the mud that has so much hydrogen in it that the ice actually burns

Geist · 2011-10-10, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by HtSgtMAD

have any of you ever stood on the floor of an actual oil rig or better yet ever worked on a rig?

I spent a good part of the 80's working the oil patch in the states,worked wildcat holes, production and holes drilled for the tax write off.

the idea that we are "running out" of oil is a lie being spread to justify the cost of a barrel of oil,the only thing that is running out is the estimated 40% of the oil in existing production holes that are have enough pressure in them to still force the oil out of the formations,that leaves over 60% of all the oil reserves that have been developed and "turned on" are still in the ground,it just needs to be extracted using more complicated measures(ala "fraking",pump jacks)some which have been developed and some are still on the drawing board.

the only reason oil is hovering around the $80-$100 range is rampant speculation which has nothing to do with supply and demand,its about the churn that the trading generates,the way to kill this BS off is to require that futures speculators be forced to take delivery of the oil futures they buy.

now for facts that really don't fit the "we are running out of oil" debate.

why are complex hydrocarbons found on Jupiter's moons? there aren't any dead oceans full of decayed animal and plant matter that is supposed to be required like all the oil experts here tell us.

how can you have hydro carbons and no lifecycle to create it?

there is enough hydrated ice on the bottom of the gulf of mexico to power all of the US's energy needs for the next 100 years,.this is ice formed on the sea bottom under the mud that has so much hydrogen in it that the ice actually burns

Well said. Not that I'm not saying it's not true, but could I get some sources, would love to read some of this stuff.

SgtMAD · 2011-10-12, 03:36 PM

you can google most all of what I said,its all out there for everyone to read.

Vecha · 2011-10-14, 12:11 AM

I'm just scared shitless thinking about it....

Don't know who to believe. Read "sources" from both sides of the argument....

Geist · 2011-10-14, 12:19 PM

Originally Posted by Vecha

I'm just scared shitless thinking about it....

Don't know who to believe. Read "sources" from both sides of the argument....

After all is said and done, even this is all about your opinion. Who do you trust, who do you think is more credible? I've decided that as long as there are options left to consider(alternate fuels, electric cars, etc...), we'll always adapt according to demand. Let's face it, despite greed being a 'bad' trait, it drives technological and societal advancement. Once something becomes too expensive, people change their lifestyles to adapt to it, and once oil companies stop making money off it due to no demand, they sell something else that people do want, that being alternate ways to drive their vehicles. It's what we've done for thousands of years, don't see why we'd stop now.