Added: 1 month ago
From: MrEnergyCzar
Views: 455
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (22)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I am curious: do those who take peak-oil (which was in 2005) very seriously

    also tend to take Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) seriously as well, because peak-oil "activists" are more rational and scientific than the apathetic majority?

    I can imagine a future of stupidity burning through oil, leaving populations stranded and starving, whilst also continuing to burn coal for electricity, causing even worse global warming.

    We must act now to punish those who would force this on us.

  • @mphello probably less than half of peak oilers subscribe or worry about global warming because peak oil has more immediate negative effects on the way most people live....

  • @MrEnergyCzar I agree, the large negative effects of "running out of oil" (by which of course I mean the EROI drops below. etc etc etc.. I don't want to have to keep qualifying that all the time) will be felt sooner than AGW, but the effects of AGW are already felt now, and the damage will be even worse if we don't act ASAP and aggressively to get as MUCH of our energy off fossil fuels as possible, and also low total energy consumption.

  • @mphello I hear you. Until it effects americans day to day life as powerful as peak oil recessions, job losses, high gas prices, etc... it will be a hard sell. Gas prices are rising, people look at the most painful issue before all others. It's unfortunate of course.

  • @MrEnergyCzar It will be their own stupid fault when radicals react with even STRONGER demands to outlaw meat, outlaw breeding, and end fossil fuels.

  • @MrEnergyCzar -

    IMO

    debating if MMGW is distracting - it's a moot point compared to peak oil.

    We simply have no choice about moving away from fossil fuels, since they will deplete.

    As soon as you talk about MMGW it becomes a debate on whether or not it's a proven.

    i think if we had ever increasing energy we could compensate for the effects of MMGW anyway... it's always about energy first and foremost.

    Finally I find it extremely frustrating when I opposing views mistake one for the other

  • 1 way or another the economy will have to return to a realist growth rate. An economy based on consumption beyond immediate survival needs was doomed from the start. Realistic expectations should be never characterized as lower expectations.My understanding is thatEurope has kept it's petroleum consumption level since the '73 embargo.

  • @waswestkan thanks for the comment. I don't see how there can be any sustained growth of any number if cheap conventional oil is in decline...the alternatives or unconventional sources to offset the conventional oil decline won't be cheaper and won't have the same EROEI... as you know they also can't do as many great things as conventional oil can do...

  • @MrEnergyCzar All the more reason to get aggressive on overpopulation and meat-eating: the 2 biggests wastes of energy. Breeding animals for meat is torture and murder. Meat and having kids need to be outlawed. I have lobbied my politicians and friends for this since 1980.  I have NO sympathy for the starvation of those who ignore this advice.

  • yes, what do you think about thorium? even though it is not a liquid portable fuel. It won't stop peak oil, but it would be a great intermediary energy source before we finally get to fusion

  • @sciencegirl1 It's more stable and abundant, China is building some but we won't even build many reactors of any type until it's too late, no long term planning anymore....

  • What do you think about thorium?

  • Nice intro, but you might considering getting a stereo mic, it would make the audio improve.

    Im in my 20's and debt free, but its hard to buy a flat or a house without taking up a loan. Trying to save up money while renting is hard enough... A regular new apartment costs $350 000.

  • question for next session: Why doesn't the highly developed nations develop new energy solutions together. And pull a lot of recourses to develop cold fusion faster and more efficient?

    Are they not conserned about the future?

  • Great video as always. Lowering expectations was a great comment and being debt free is one of the most satisfying , freedom giving ways to live. ;) c

  • Some people say the answer is abiotic oil

  • @javime99 Even if abiotic theory was correct, then in order for it to of any advantage to us we would need to be extracting equivalent to or less oil than was being replenished.

  • what about hho gas from water powered engines?

  • People seem to be moving to the cities. I think this is because of the higher gasoline costs and there seem to be more jobs in the cities. I would suggest before moving to a new state or city to check out their debt situation some states and municipalities are having sever financial problems.

    From what I've learned about tar sands, while there may be a lot of it, the infrastructure required is such that it will be produced at a snails pace and costs will always be high.

  • @thoughtchallenge Quality comment as always Thoughchallenge....  you should check out the Tar Sands Documentary, can't remember if it's on netflix or not but it's basically a giant mining operation up there after they strip away the mature Boral forest....

  • Sweet intro graphics MrEnergyCzar...wow.

  • @NetZeroHome I agree, that is one sweet intro!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more