# Have we reached peak oil and can we survive it?



## Robopop (Jun 15, 2010)

Some experts in the oil industry believe world oil production peaked in 2005 or 2007, even the most optimistic predictions go to only 2020. I have really been thinking about peak oil and sustainability lately, and I think the US is in for some VERY hard times in 5 to 10 years. I see NO efforts for oil conservation and it might be too little too late by the time people even begin to use alternatives in any significant way. 

My hope for the future comes from nanosolar and nuclear energy but we still need an oil based economy to make that transition, it would take at least a minimal of 20 to 40 years to make a transition on that scale and we only have 5 to 10 years from peak oil AT MOST. Our whole economy is based on unending growth and that is unrealistic with the finite resources we have, this includes water, coal, and other non-renewables too. At worst, our entire civilization could collapse and this has happen before to the Romans and the Mayans. 

We might have to go to a more localized lifestyle in the future and that's if we make a peaceful transition. I have been trying to factor peak oil into my career choice and future expectations. Maybe emerging technologies can get us out of this mess like nanotechnology, solar, nuclear, bio, geothermal, wind, and natural gas.

What do you think will be the implications of diminishing energy resources on gobalization, US economy, and your personal future?


----------



## hood (Jun 15, 2010)

I guess it's time for a change. This era in history is ending.

(Nah, not referring to Obama.)


----------



## On the road to Damascus (Oct 1, 2009)

*Transitioning out of the petroleum interval...*

Some ideas.....

YouTube - Rob Hopkins: Transition to a world without oil


----------



## Robopop (Jun 15, 2010)

One thing that most people in general do when forecasting is look at technological progression from a linear view, like technology progressing at a steady rate, but technology actually progresses at an exponential rate. Technology that might look decades away could become ready within a very short time, could this offset the effects of peak oil. I know alot of peak oil experts don't give much credit to technology tampering peak oil, but maybe their views on technological growth is linear and this would change conditions a bit.


----------



## Skewed (Jul 14, 2009)

The middle east running out of oil could be a very bad thing. Wars could start because of that. It is my understanding that the US really does have a lot of untapped oil reserves. If all the oil in the middle east is depleted and the US ends up being the only place with any significant reserves left, that could possibly paint even bigger targets on us if the rest of the world is struggling to get oil. The US has pretty much followed the philosophy of, lets use everyone elses oil up and then when it runs out, we will be the only ones with any left.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

remember peak oil doesn't mean no more oil, it means that production can no longer grow to meet demand. But then will demand keep growing? The reason we are so dependant on oil is because it is the most cost-effective energy source. It's also not used for just fuel, but is also used in plastics and lots of other things.

The price of oil will increase, making other energy sources more cost effective in comparison. That will cause the people who can switch to do so. So that means demand for oil won't continue to increase at the linear rate

And there have been big efforts and conserving, A lot more interest in using alternatives like coal or solar in homes. Hybrid cars, renewed interest in electric cars. Wind farms becoming more common. More reliance on rail for transport. 

Probably we'll see less reliance on plastics in packaging, things like that.

So most likely peak oil will force us to move to energry diversification. Something that every says needs to be done, but changes usually don't happen until they make economic sense. Peak Oil would provide the economic sense.


----------



## Skewed (Jul 14, 2009)

I think in some ways the industrial revolution was our downfall. Not that it was a bad thing, but I do not think we did our due diligence during that time to cover the cons like we did the pros. There was no forethought into the preservation of the resources.


----------



## Robopop (Jun 15, 2010)

Skewed said:


> I think in some ways the industrial revolution was our downfall. Not that it was a bad thing, but I do not think we did our due diligence during that time to cover the cons like we did the pros. There was no forethought into the preservation of the resources.


The problem with government policies when it comes to issues like these is that most politicians are only concerned about their own term, so they leave the future problems to someone esle. Add to that even if they did start sufficient policies another person with different political and economic concerns will take their place and the policies they started in their term won't see completion.


----------



## Skewed (Jul 14, 2009)

Robopop said:


> The problem with government policies when it comes to issues like these is that most politicians are only concerned about their own term, so they leave the future problems to someone esle. Add to that even if they did start sufficient policies another person with different political and economic concerns will take their place and the policies they started in their term won't see completion.



Which is why this country needs a leader that can actually unite and form a common goal for all.


----------



## NeedsNewNameNow (Dec 1, 2009)

Skewed said:


> I think in some ways the industrial revolution was our downfall. Not that it was a bad thing, but I do not think we did our due diligence during that time to cover the cons like we did the pros. There was no forethought into the preservation of the resources.


We've never been a particularly forward-looking species. Nor have our predictions of the future ever born out very well. I remember one of the early predictions was that pertroleum would be depleted by 1936 or something like that.


----------



## Abuwabu (Nov 25, 2009)

I think we have reached peak oil; some of us will survive it.

Just like the industrial revolution took 60 or 70 years, any post-industrial society will evolve over a generation or two. When oil reached ~$150/barrel last year, the price at the pump hit ~$4/gallon (I can't remember exact figures, sorry) and drivers in the US revolted by not filling up their vehicles as much. If the price of tomatoes in a super-market goes through the roof due to fertiliser and transportation costs people will just start growing their own on the porch. It's a slow come-down rather than an explosive event. However, the extent of civil unrest due to the ensuing food crisis is going to be ugly.


----------



## gravitycantforget (Oct 24, 2010)

peak oil - i used to believe it but now...no way jose! - the idea of peak oil was propsed by a scientist working for BP or Shell - simply it was and still is a fear based marketing ploy - create a false scarcity to keep prices high - I think current estimates are that we have at least another 300 years worth left- so its NOT a problem in out lifetimes or our childrens or their childrens...

Check out Greg Palasts book Armed Madhouse which has more of the info


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

it's not a matter of availability, it's a matter of price

there will always be some kind of oil available, but it may become so expensive that other means of obtaining energy and other products that are currently prohibitively expensive will become much more accessible


----------



## Achi (Mar 20, 2010)

The more I research the alternative energy sources that are being developed, and the amount and rate of advancements we've made in them, the more I think we'll be off fossil fuels almost entirely by the end of the next decade or two. Oil will go to the wayside like horse drawn carts did with the invention of the internal combustion engine.


----------



## sofort99 (Mar 27, 2010)

Not only is there significant doubt about "peak oil production", but there is an increasing amount of evidence showing support for abiotic oil production... that oil is actually produced by the mantle itself.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

The reason oil prices have gone up over the past couple of years has nothing to do with peak-oil as far as I'm aware; it has to do with speculators driving up the prices of oil.


----------



## bigtex1989 (Feb 7, 2011)

Short answer is: Doesn't matter and yes we can survive it. 

The United States oil reserves are near full capacity. Once the oil companies learn how to charge people for alternative fuels, I'm sure we will be seeing those types of "breakthroughs" in technology we all desperately need and want.


----------



## DarklyValentine (Mar 4, 2010)

Those _experts _are talking twaddle.
there are approx 100-200 years left of black gold. Proven Unproven Strategic reserves.

no-one votes for this (well except the greedy, insane, lobbyists, donaters, contributors etc lets just call em *bribes* eh, well it is a bought democracy is it not)
Why do governments allow this to continue is more feasible question/conundrum
or perhaps it is why do the people allow this to continue?

Survive most likely not. Curiously it will be those not dependent (tribes etc) on it that are more likely to survive, supposing we dont destroy the planet for them.


----------



## Michael82 (Dec 13, 2010)

It's not about the peak oil, it's about the environment.

Take a big city. Smell it.


----------



## Bote (Jun 16, 2010)

I guess I agree with the author that oil is an awesome energy source. Just look how efficient it is compared to other stuff. Howeva, we better start looking for a viable, though less efficient option. It wouldn't hurt if some people willingly chose not to drive cars and use other means of transport. Transitions are always slow, but they have to start.


----------



## Blocklos (Feb 22, 2011)

sofort99 said:


> Not only is there significant doubt about "peak oil production", but there is an increasing amount of evidence showing support for abiotic oil production... that oil is actually produced by the mantle itself.


I would love to see any citation for this you might have. I am interested in reading up.

I think we can absolutely survive peak oil as a species, I just don't think _most_ of the species can survive and certainly not in our current lifestyle. Oil production has artificially increased the carrying capacity of Earth and without it at affordable levels (or a suitable replacement) we are looking at a die-off event, in my humble opinion. Algae biodiesel is the only way I see the world pulling out of this one. Unless some real, honest to goodness innovation takes place and produces a new energy source.


----------



## LeafStew (Oct 17, 2009)

I saw in science show on the national tv that some scientist were testing in Ontario new solar panels that were much more efficient than the one before. They had multilayers that could capt different wave length to maximize the intake. I think they are near 30% uptake if I remember correctly.

As for energy companies 4 of the top 5 companies in the Global Fortune 500 are oil company (also 8 of the first 15 companies by revenue worldwide; 10 if you count that Volkswagen and Toyota are also in the top 15 and their product rely heavily on gas):
Global 500 2011: Global 500 1-100 - FORTUNE on CNNMoney.com


----------

