Limits to Growth (revised)

[tothemax01]

Oh give me a break. Let me correct your sensationalist, melodramatic bullshit. Oil is currently used because it is the best energy source. This will not persist. Nuclear will replace it as the primary energy source. Uranium fission with a traveling wave reactor gives us more than enough time to get to the next step - nuclear fusion reactors. At that point, the limit to growth is literally 'the universe'. Chill out.

[pvisserandorra]

@tothemax01 Your basing that on the assumption that there is an endless amount of material to run reactors, and that the technology of fusion will happen some time soon. How is an industrialized society that uses oil to plant, fertilize, harvest, ship, package and cool products survive without oil? At the very least it will drive food prices significantly higher, and that will be fatal for billions of people.

[MarkProffitt]

This video ignores efficiency gains through technology. As Buckminster Fuller pointed out technology we are producing more and more using less and less.

Oil is great for transportation and use in different times of day. The energy used to get oil out of the ground does not need to be oil. So oil will still be pumped at less than 1:1.

New technology is increasing the amount of oil removed while using less energy to get it.

Thorium, geo-thermal, coal, thermal de-polymerization can replace oil

[linghun]

you are ignoring the fact that the amount of Solar energy that hits the Earth is 10,000 times greater than our current global energy consumption.

[panstriato2]

@linghun How much time does it take to remake energy infraestructure? How much do we have left?

[linghun]

@panstriato2 very complex question, but given exponential drop in solar panel prices, it might take 20 years before we go 30% solar, while on fossil fuels we have some 40 years. The transition can be done, even if (ESPECIALLY IF) there is an energy crisis, which would prompt more investments. Nuclear power, carbon sequestration, geoengineering, biofuels, wind power and hydro can guarantee our survival until the 22nd century easily.

[MillyVanillification]

@linghun What's widely ignored is the fact, that burning fuel needs more components than fuel alone. Its seems to be public opinion, that there is no oxygen involved in this process and the outcome is only one natural gas called CO2. Prof. Scheer stated that we should NOT burn our remaining reserves. So the 40 years are gone. Maybe we will have 10 years but not more. The energy consumption could easily be covered by geothermal powerplants. Solar and wind is not reliable enough and below 24/7.

[jmicucci5]

We (the US) need to change the way we live in order to sustain human life. It is obvious that we cannot generate enough renewable energy, with existing technology, to replace our current use. With the rest of the world trying to copy our lifestyle, the energy demand worldwide is only projected to increase. I have great concern for tomorrow.

[ShwangShwing]

War? In the end there will be no one to steal oil from.

[boundtogetdown]

i wonder how much energy a robot with a british accent uses

[jpd1235]

*LOL* Damn straight!!

[WolYou]

Still banned from public discourse. How true. Still people are talking about growth. In some way, the economists seem to be deluded idiots with no idea of maths. The current economy theory is a religion. Not science.

[kofothree]

war seems to be the only answer

[slipcurve]

Good summary, great video.

geenbeen : no, it doesn't work that way. Energy cannot be destroyed, but fossil fuels can. You see only a fraction of the energy around us (everything is energy actually) is usable for modern civilization. It's about usable energy, not just energy. You need more information, keep looking.

[geenbeen]

energy can not be destroyed . its immpossible to run out of resources because the human mind is what creates resources. the solution to "lack" if get government the hell out of the way!

[LastReplaySC]

well as soon as your car runs on a banana peel or by just standing in the moon light without the energy use of oil to create that car then let me know!

because you then have solved our future energy extraction problem. No GovT is forbidding you to find the answer and publicize your solution

[S1587915G]

@geenbeen

If you can find a way to break the laws of thermodynamics by recovering all the waste heat generated by any industrial process and turning that waste heat back into useable energy, then I'll buy what you said.

[MarkProffitt]

@S1587915G You don't need to break any laws of thermodynamics to recover wasted heat from industrial processes. It hasn't been cost efficient to bother with until recently and now that it is we are seeing that technology being implemented. And there is even technology being applied to cars which lose approximately 60% of their energy in heat. Efficiency is increasing faster than supply is decreasing, that is actually the natural of technological advancement.

[S1587915G]

@MarkProffitt There's a vast difference between improving energy efficiency and recovering lost heat from any physical process. And in fact one of the laws of thermodynamics states that you cannot achieve 100 percent efficiency.

If you can recover lost heat, that will mean that a cup of water sitting on a table can BY ITSELF become hotter and hotter, until it reaches boiling point. If you know of any actual example of such a thing, write back to me.

[ManicEightBall]

This video shows some really powerful and critical points.

Thanks.