Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Peak oil; the peak of distraction, and a peek into everything.

Posted 7 years ago on Dec. 21, 2011, 4:45 a.m. EST by blazefire (947)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

When we look at the state of affairs, if terms of the decline of natural resources, something seems to jump out at me..... peak oil, is merely the tip of the iceburg.

For those that don't know, the word 'peak', defines a time in which we produce as much of a resource as is ever going to be possible. For instance with oil, peak is defined in a single well, when stocks drop below the point of easy access. At this point, the industry must develop alternative technologies, dig deeper, fill wells with water, etc, (which all costs extra $), this drives prices up, and, so demand lowers. A resource is said to have 'tipped', when peak production has passed. World resources are no different than a single well....and those resources, are peaking, all over the place.

Peak oil:

The military take on the matter...

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/18056

Has it been tipped?

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/World_Oil

But as I said....this is only the tip of the iceburg. When you look at the resources that we are so dependant upon, things become much more worrisome, such as our metals, which we are so heavily dependant upon:

Peak copper, not so worrisome, as we can melt it down and reuse it:

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Peak_copper

Peak lithium, used in batteries and complex electrical devices, causes a much greater concern:

http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2009/02/peak-lithium-will-supply-fears-drive.html

Or peak platinum, which is also utilised in high tech devices:

http://sciblogs.co.nz/physics-stop/2010/07/14/peak-oil-peak-platinum-peak-physics/

I won't go on with the metals, even though the list certainly does. Coal is set to peak in 15yrs, natural gas, is as much a debate as oil....REAL cause for concern though.....is our food and water...

Peak phosphorus, which is required for fertilizer and used by any farmer that isn't into permaculture:

http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/analysis/1801566/exclusive-scientist-urges-government-address-peak-phosphate-risk

Peak fresh water:

http://www.alternet.org/water/149711/peak_water%3A_what_is_it_--_and_are_we_there_yet

VERY concerning...

Peak fish, WORLD peak fish, passed in 1980...

http://www.pastpeak.com/archives/2006/02/peak_fish.htm

The list really just does go on and on, spend some time googling basic resources, and see what happens....

We're running out of everything, that is limited, which is everything. Stores of these resources are dwindling, and the only debate that seems to be had, is what to do over just a SINGLE aspect of this problem; a problem which is rather simple: Limited resources, are limited.

88 Comments

88 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ARod1993 (2420) 7 years ago

This pretty much means that we should have been pushing development of alternative energy sources (thorium-based nuclear reactors, solar, wind, geothermal, tidal power, hydroelectric dams, etc.) hard thirty years ago when we had to deal with the oil embargo in the 1970s. We're going to need to transition off of fossil fuels as soon as possible even if there's a high cost to doing so; our options are doing so in an orderly and voluntary manner or being left high, dry, and screwed when the stuff runs out on its own (or takes more than a barrel's worth of energy to pump out and refine a barrel). We're going to have a lot of catching up to do because of how late we started, but it should still be possible.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I agree.....however it must, must be attended to on a global platform. I know this sounds almost cliche (another is cliche's become cliches for a reason), but world peace IS the only answer. It always has been. Through unity, can we recognise the threat to humanity itself, and act.

Humanity needs IMHO to become self-aware.

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

No doubt. And on a technical level, equitable distribution and intelligent management of resources needs to be "institutionalized" for that to be achieved. Some sort of eco-socialism is the only way forward for a rational and healthy society.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Exactly. We have to recognise what already exists. It's only the collaboration that we're missing. All the solutions are there, theres simply no method of systemising them into the greater conciousness....it's a total paradox, where people understand inherantly what is 'wrong', but instinctively deny the possibilities of an alternative....

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 7 years ago

That's true and that would be nice, but if we're going to ask the rest of the world to do those things (especially the developing world, half of which sees environmentalism as merely an excuse to keep them down) we damn well better lead by example.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I think 'we' have already acheived the example. Unity. It really is just that simple. WE, all over the world, the 99%, need, need to band together, and figure our way out of this mess.....and I think 'we' need to do it soon...

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 7 years ago

The only way that's going to happen on an international scale is if we can get America to get its shit together. Appeals to internationalism aren't going to cut it with large groups of the population; once you bring that up all they're going to hear is either "blah blah blah Communism" or "blah blah blah bleeding-heart idiot" and they'll tune you out. If we present these things in terms of the American spirit of innovation and determination then you could probably sway enough people to get us moving. If we're honestly making an effort to move then we can actually push other nations in the same direction.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I think you are quite correct....and....I would table that a 'multi-faceted' approach is necessary, ie, from local to global, and everything in between. If world peace can be 'sold' (to use marketing speak), to Americans, or any nation, as being in 'the best interests of the nation' (as it of course already is), it can can garner enough support, to fuel more support.....Such a tactic would be IMHO, a move which would lead to those problems you mention, to being overcome. I would also point to chaos math (the butterfly effect), fractals, 6 degrees of seperation, and the 'power of one', as all good supportive evidence of the possibility....and surely even that is too great to ignore...

[-] 2 points by ilikeithere (3) 7 years ago

the us reached peak oil in 1970 the world in 2005- the price of oil from now on will be to high to sustain, our technical civilization. Global warming, caused us to pass peak food.
Its decades to late to do anything to fix the problem.
Physical laws will cause the worlds population to equal available resources-- resources wars will cause the world populating to equalize faster.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

That seems to be the direction we are all heading in......I think unity is the only way out for us now....either humanity acts, as humanity....or.....all you say will come quicker than we could imagine....

[-] 2 points by randart (498) 7 years ago

Too many people on the planet. Let loose the dogs of war, plague, and famine.

I personally think fresh water will be the biggest threat in the near future. Some cities are already recycling their waste water to the public. Just think, you might be living where you are drinking everyone else's waste. There is an old saying that goes, "Don't shit where you eat." Maybe we won't have a choice.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Hmmm....if the world is going to burn....so be it. But I will not simply fetch marshmallows. I will do all in my power to fix the problems, turn down the heat, and in the very last, preserve as much as possible...

[-] 2 points by 666isMONEY (348) 7 years ago

There was a good book about this in the 70's by Club of Rome called, "Limits to Growth," and then a few years before that, Paul Erlich's, "Population Bomb." Jimmy Carter warned about Peak Oil in the 70's and lost the election, Google, "malaise speech." Plutocrats have known about this for years but either ignored it or thought Science could save us -- kinda like a cargo cult.

Things can not go on as they are, life as we're living it is unsustainable.

Real change would require radical change of lifestyle.

No doubt there are people out there now thinking about spreading a virus to kill off a coupla billion and make it look like Mother nature did it.

The plutocrats have jets & yachts to escape when the SHTF.

If I could, I'd move to a more sustainable environment.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Yes.... I'm feeling a change coming, and I'm not certain as to the direction it will take....I believe we have only 2 options as a species, unity....or.....

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

unity or hegemony - that's how chomsky phrased it! i think you are on the money here - so does noam but seems to me that peace and unity (while a correct way of looking at the problem) will not sell very well - we need to start with small concrete steps that the farmers in kansas can get on board with - getting money out of politics etc - stephen leeb wrote a good book "game over:" -examining the peak everything issue and alt energies - here is noam - Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance is a book by Noam Chomsky published November 2003. It is a macroscopic view of United States foreign policy from World War II to the post-Iraq War reconstruction. The central focus of the book, as with many of Chomsky's political works, is the examination of the United States' political, military and economic motives, in comparison —often in sharp contrast— to its outward rhetorical support for democracy, the Middle-East peace process, free trade, and human rights. There is an examination of the differences between positions taken by the US government and the people of the world regarding a proposed invasion of Iraq. It also examines the doctrinal thinking of the Establishment in the United Kingdom and the US, such as in regard to propaganda use, centralised decision making and imperialism of Western powers from recent American invasions to the European empires.[1] Chomsky also analyzes what he perceives to be the selective application of the term "terror" to enemies of the U.S., while the actions of the U.S. and its allies are ignored.[2]

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I believe, that YOU are on the money my friend! In that we need to look at the idea of peace and unity, as a saleable product.

I remember an account of a marketing expert, claiming he could sell anything...including a rock. I remember it becaues he was successful.

If a rock can be sold....why not peace? What could the marketing guru's of the world do with that concept? What COULD be done with that concept? I think we CAN. Because we must.

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

selling peace to most people should be easy - the only ones who do not want peace are those in power

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Exactly. So, can 'we', not 'turn the tables', and use the sciences of marketing, economics and 'selling', to promote this most obvious of solutions. Imagine if occupy took this 'question' up as it's modus operandi.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

hey - i am with you - now the question is how to get to the point you are selling. i am saying that if you are talking to middle america peace and love may not be the best place to start - i don't think we need marketing - we need a just society with some equality and we will have peace. most people want a smaller military budget - most people do not rush off to war (defending the country is a different story) - my question is where to start - if you go on tv as the peace and love candidate i think you will lose and we need to win so where to start?

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

I say....that 'we', should make that very question go viral....a single change in attitude, from:

World peace would be great, but....

To:

World peace would be great, how....

Such a simple, fundemental shift in attitudes, is the basis for all that is required.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

what is the line - pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the spirit - you get it going and i am with you - i am afraid we are in for a longer fight but i will say this for your thinking - i was born in 1950 - in 1964 we all cheered when john wayne killed indians - by 1970 we cheered when custer got it. that change in consciousness did not take long and made a huge difference in the politics of the country - keep at it!

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Check that book out....it's a plan, a method and a system....I'd love to ask you to pass it on, and if I may be bold, to 'sell', the message on....

[-] 1 points by 666isMONEY (348) 7 years ago

I have yet to see a good book explaining the real reasons for WW2 . . . National Socialism was very good for the worker, no one wanted the Eastern European Jews in Europe (much like no one wants Muslims there today) and one of the NS Party Program planks was to abolish interest (what Hitler called "the Jewish banking system).

The War started when Hitler invaded Poland . . . guess it was okay that Stalin threw down the Iron Curtain.

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

i don't think ns was good for workers - they broke the unions etc - here is another bit of chomsky - Chomsky: Well, you know, the term "fascism" has taken on a special connotation. In the 1930s -- pre-Hitler, or before the real effects of Hitler were concerned -- it wasn't considered a particularly negative term. It was considered a notion of social organization. So for example, [President Roosevelt] was a great admirer of [Italian fascist leader Benito Mussolini.] That "admirable, Italian gentleman." American investors loved Mussolini. They poured money into Italian Capitalism.

Kilkenny: Wow

Chomsky: ...It was controlling the work force. It was orderly. It was running things. They were making plenty of profit. In fact, Fortune magazine had a story in the early Ô30s, which had a headline about Mussolini saying, ÔThe Wops are Un-Wopping Themselves.' (laughter) You know, the ÔWops' are finally getting things straight. They had a real, good fascist government. Chomsky: ...And pretty much the same thing was true with Hitler. The state department in 1937, I think, described Hitler as a moderate, standing between extremes of right and left. Sumner Welles, Roosevelt's main adviser, came back from the Munich Conference in '38, saying "Real Hope. We can really work with Hitler. He's kind of a good guy," and again, American investment shot up in Germany. The business classes liked him. It was even more so in England.

In fact, if you read back, the really serious political economists like Robert Brady, one of the best, kind of Veblenite political economists, he just described fascism as a tendency that the industrial world is moving towards, including the New Deal as an example. Coordinated state planning for corporate structures in the interest of business controlling things, and so on. In that sense, you could say, yeah, some kind of fascism is like an aspect of Capitalism. But what the term has come to mean now is storm troopers, extermination camps, other such things, aggression. In that sense, there's no reason to expect it. Counterproductive.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I've aid it else where in this thread but the bastardisation of language is very orwellian in nature, look at words and phrases like, conspiracy theory, facism, Taliban, or other, less obvious ones like 'natural', or 'organic'.....these and many others have shifted in meaning, to the point where the original one has been lost.

Here....check this read out....I think you will like it....please do pass it on!

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

A great post, blazefire. Very informative. You know, think tanks have been running these numbers for awhile now and have come to some ugly conclusions. The only real answer is the one being pushed by the elite and occasionally mentioned on this forum. It won't be pretty.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Thanx gnomunny! Hmmm....I believe the only way out is for humanity to unite...but I guess by now you've figured that out already, lol.

Each different culture, seems to have a different piece of the puzzle as we all do....I think the solution is to put the puzzle together.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 7 years ago

Indeed. Humanity uniting is probably the only way we'll survive this mess. It seems like this is happening, though, as evidenced by the emergence of OWS on the global stage. Let's hope we can keep building the momentum. If not, the elite will have their way, and I know my people and I don't fit into their world view.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Unity. Solidarity. Carpe diem. Omnia vincit amor.

[-] 2 points by Samcitt (136) 7 years ago

It's going to be interesting. This thing turned me off an idealistic path when I first discovered it because I don't think there is any way to save our species, at least the majority of it. I fear we've been walking a dangerous path for decades, maybe centuries. The path leads off a cliff however its a path we can't turn back upon either, we have to go forward and hope the fall over the cliff isn't fatal. But I fear it is.

Even if OWS succeeds and the world finds unity, I fear pure resource depletion will tear apart our threads of brotherhood and plunge the world first into war, then into death.

I have a question though: I feel the only true destiny for humanity would be to colonise space, at least on an interplanetary scale. If we lose the oil, will we ever be able to make escape velocity when we don't have Thorium breeder reactors or fusion? If not I fear we will become a terminally regressive species, a species with no new land to discover, explore and exploit. Consuming raw materials until we're back in the Stone Age.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Interesting that you should mention thorium....someone else mentioned it and I googled, and learned! Thnx!

I think the solution is not to be found in one thing, but in all things.... I think we (humanity) NEED to stand as such, and unite....I think this is the only way....

[-] 2 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

Good issues to bring up. We need to interface with the earth in a radically different way.

It's true we live on a finite planet and should treat it as such - which means scrapping the hyper-militant consumption capitalist growth model. Industrial capitalism is a perpetual waste, inefficiency, dissatisfaction and bad behavior machine.

I

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Thanx for the resonse! Yes, I believe you are right....permaculture and 'naturalistic, and puritinism', seems to be the only solutions....well....

I think wqe need to be as intergerated, as we already are. I think these issues, are the things we must face, and we must face them united.

[-] 2 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 7 years ago

Peak Thorium?? OH, in about 1000 years even if we start using it for 100% of our energy needs, right now.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Well I've googled it now, and thorium definately seems to at least a partially viable alternative. I personally believe that a true solution would be found, not in one solution, but in all....There are many alternative energies out there that are sustainable, and this is a good example, of a good step in that direction...

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 7 years ago

Yes I agree. Check this out

http://seekingalpha.com/article/261334-let-s-talk-about-a-realistic-energy-policy

and google Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube

and this:

http://www.mantegh.org/ammonia-powered-engine-developed-by-hec

Tidal, wind, solar, geothermal, and other technoligies, are now so prolific and varied in nature, that they could easily replace base load.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 7 years ago

Yeah, we still need a liquid fuel due to its energy density. The goal really is unlimited/cheap/safe electricity production because once you have that, you can create almost any type of liquid synthetic fuel that you want and if you can do that, we can design a fuel (whether synth gasoline or diesel) or something in between to run our vehicles with. Its almost a shame we do not have it now, the Germans ran those systems in the 30's and 40's out of necessity, they obviously worked. And the nano-tubes, we really could use some leaps forward in battery technology, I know MIT has a lot of good stuff in the pipeline, THAT is another thing FED GOV SHOULD be spending money on, can you imagine what say 1,10,100 BILLION would do for battery technology?

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Of course this only makes sense, problem is that doesn't make dollars. We've trapped ourselves with a redifinition of value.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Tell me about it!

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Hmmmm......very interesting.....

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 7 years ago

Peak water?

Water is a renewable resource - just not in Texasss

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Re: Water as a resource:

http://www.bluegold-worldwaterwars.com/

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 7 years ago

I was being a smart ass.

I have heard that where ever a community depends on glacial run off for example, they will face serious problems in the near future, and these considerations have been on the Pentagon radar for awhile.

And that is just one more angle on them pesky fucking repelicans -

they claim they are strong on defense - yet there is no global warming.

Yet global warming is on the Pentagon's radar as a source of international friction over things like food, and water. How then, is denial of Global Warming enhancing our defense?

them fuckin repelicans . . . .

the repelican party is DONE

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Ok.....so what do you think we should do re; our resources...? How can we circumvent the 'natural course of things'?

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

True.......however, the fact is of all the water we have on earth only 3% is available for use....the rest is locked up in the caps, the atmosphere, or (most of it) the oceans....all of which are unsuitable for human consumption. As industry expands, and pollution inergrates into watersystems, water which was once usable, simply isn't, anymore, and, it had been demonstrated to follow the same bell curve of a limited resource.....same with fish...

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Peak convergence my friends! It is where all the peaks intersect - Everything is peaking, and it will not get better. Peak oil, water, peak population, peak pollution, The end result, rationing, and control. This is the grand cycle, we are in age of Pisces, threshold of Aquarius. Every age since beginning has always resulted in peak convergence, and many will suffer in times ahead. Humans will be put to the test, killing over water, food, etc. Eventually like in Ancient Egypt people will eat each other in the last days. Once oil is low & so expensive, agriculture will peak, and famine will ensue. Farming depends on oil for fertilizer (petrochemical) and harvest (machinery) Without the fertilizer, we cannot produce. The food that will make it at the end will have so little nutritional value, we will starve to death even with a full stomach.. What happens after peak, a fall. All peaks rise, and fall - we are on the down side now..

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

Industrial agriculture only uses about 2-5% of total fossil fuel production(including transport). Not to say industrial ag isn't a time bomb setting to implode due to it's own excesses(top soil erosion and loss of biodiversity) but there is not problem with not having enough fossil fuels

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

The big problems with agriculture are water, and phosphorous, both of which are becoming, more and more scarce:

http://www.bluegold-worldwaterwars.com/

Check the link above to phosphorous, a key component of fertilizer. Also, note corrosponding US military activity, in Africa sorrounding those natural phosphate deposits.

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

Industrial agriculture needs to be dismantled for numerous reasons - mainly top soil erosion and loss of biodiversity. This damaging practices are driven by profit. Yes, certain items are depleting - we are at peak everything - but it boils down to resource/environmental management, which runs contrary to profit motive. We have to completely redesign our food systems. Agroecology/permaculture is the way forward.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

I couldn't agree more....working with our existing environment is clearly the way forward...

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

When we reach the lower side of peak, it will drive food costs through roof, making it even more expensive to buy the basics, costs are always passed onto you and me. So 2.5% may not sound like much, but take that 2.5% and increase its cost - do not forget packaging, labor in between, shipping/trucking, etc all the way to store, refrigeration, energy use @ store levels and you end up with exponential increases. Companies like Monsanto are destroying are farming heritage in the name of productivity and poison.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Yes....and Wallst, understands this, more, they track it, and plan for it, adding an exponential layer of growth to inflation. ALL major commercial enterprises understand, and plan for this situation, which to my mind echo's the 'fall of Rome'.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

And New Rome shall fall, as it did thrice before - As Rome, as British Empire, and as Egypt....IT is all the same....again and again....

We are at the threshold...America, a civilization...It appeared to have the most technology human has ever conceived... It is now they year 2200, lets go back to , 2012....The final era for homosapien.. America, had its claws grasping at the last natural resources on the planet...Libya, then Syria... This great nation was running low on other resources, as it wascarbon taxing its people into poverty, and attempting to conquer many nations...Then others interviened. Ancient records show Other nations called China and Russia were concerned. Then something went wrong. Two other nations called Israel and Iran, accidentally fired off nuclear missiles, which led to a chain reaction of nuclear explosions throughout the region. This radioactive piece of rock, carbon dated at approx 2013, shows decaying isotopes of plutonium 94...Dating back to the last detonation here on the desert land of the former USA. Our advanced shielding allows us to remain protected. Very many perished in this attack...not just from the explosions, radioactive isotopes, but nuclear winters that caused lack of sunlight and heat worldwide. People froze to death, could not find food as sunlight did not allow for vegetation to sustain life. Many sought shelter underground, in bunkers. People came back to the surface, and began to repair what damage had occurred many years later.......This is Discovery planet 2200 we will be back after these messages.....Man I hate ranting like this as it usually comes true....

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

"But didn't they see it coming?" The student said, and the teacher responded, "Yes! That was the paradox! They marched to their death, fully aware that it was coming, and many, even made money from it! They planned for it and calculated exactly when and how it would spread. Protests occured, but were quashed, and not too long after the world riots and the 'techwar' began. Can every one see this, this is how we used to get our water. It's called a tap." And the teacher holds up a pitted old tap...

At heart I'm an optimist.....I would propose solutions....I would, with all my heart forestall this vision...

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I had to...I am reading the pdf so I will get back to you....

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Thankyou. Mundus vult decipi. Carpe diem. Omnia vincit amor.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Ergo decipiatur; Christus nos liberavit

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Vox populi, vox dei, Gratia.

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

I think by the time we reach the lower side of peak oil the global economic system will be transformed. The market mechanism is too unscientific in assessing value. We are going to have to scrap it.

How many BTUs in $100 barrel? How much is left in reserves?

See where I am going?

It's a human collective SUBJECTIVE assessment of shot-term supply and demand dynamics. A contorting global economy will swing the price wildly in either direction until the whole system falls apart. So yeah, there will be very volatile price swings exacerbated by speculation and inflation/deflation fears in both directions up and down. Remember oil went from 147 to 35 in matter of couple months.

The fact is we use too much oil now and an incredibly and unnecessarily wasteful system where most of it goes to useless bullshit. We have a big opportunity to arrange ourselves in much more rational and equitable system - reality will demand it because of resource constraints. We are going to have to be strategic with the shit. Now the plan is to use huge amounts of oil to protect and control huge amounts of oil while trying to get the consumption economy going - we aren't too bright

Second, once we've gone off the plateau it's game over for the monetary banking system.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

We are on the other side of peak, about 1/3 of the way down. Based on rate of global consumption we have 25 years left till all is gone. But there are new reserves popping up all the time, but China continues to drink at fast rate. We do waste way too much, good thing my car gets in the 40s.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Hmmmm....I'm not so certain of that. I've read much about hidden oil reserves, that have been set aside for military use. As to the truth of this....who knows....but it certainly makes sense, enough sense that I am suspect of the figures, as they may very well have been tampered with.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Exactly, who knows - I speculate and spectate, and theorize....Well we cant trust the speculators that make $ on these figures anyways.....Again as you say, who knows; Here is another theory for you, use up everyone else's oil,(Saudi, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, etc) convert to green/solar/wind/alternate, and sell remainder we are "hoarding" and pretending to be out - to rest of world for top dollar and USA wins in the end??? Or let everyone else run dry and take over the world, oh wait we are doing that already.....I can tell you from the declared reserves vs consumption we are running low - but again that is DECLARED reserves......It is still a big ??? I just like the debate...Good points and have fun...

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Firstly please allow me to take the time to thankyou personally for being here. For participating in 'this', whatever 'this' may be. Unity, solidarity, carpe diem.

And yes, anything is possible in this 'game', in any case there are simply so many basic resources that are crucial to industry....that we simply take for granted. I think the real challenge of occupy, is found in this problem, and in the full 'encompass' of it......which is inherantly global in nature, and, being the optimist that I am, I would propose solutions, that are also....

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

I think this is the answer. And, with total humility, I would propose it as such. And I would ask you to pass it on, on the bearest chance of success...

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

Global consumption will precipitously drop when the debt bomb finishes exploding(i'd say we are 1/3 through that).

All that matters, in regards to continuing global capitalism, is the production level - we are still hanging on to a production plateau of about 86 million bbl per day if that goes down just 10% in the next say 7-8years - it would get smashed into bits.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

It is trending that way, so as it gets closer the brakes will be applied again. This will result in increase of oil cost. They are regulating the peak, by controlling the price. It will never Crash abruptly, it will be a bumpy ride down though and it is about to get even more bumpy.

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

It went from 147-35 in less than 60 days. That was pretty abrupt - there is a ton of things(jobs) that can and will be shed as the global credit system buckles. Volatility is the name of the game.

In the end we will have to distribute industrial resources in a new way. Even the German military said all market economies would collapse by the medium term(10-15 years)

Though, we do have plenty of oil but not for an irrational consumer economy where we ship fish from Canada to China to be cleaned then back to the US in refrigerated jets because, well that shows a systemic value problem

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

But did the price at the pump drop in the same ratio??? Where does all that money end up....I know we are toast, 25 yrs is a max figure, I mean we are shaking tar sand now that is how desperate it is. Burning natural gas to extract oil to create gasoline/fuel oil....Something is wrong with that... MAx figure for oil, economy collapse is imminent.

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

I agree economic collapse of the capitalist world system is, I'd say inevitable but not imminent. Still, why is it people can easily imagine the "end of the world" but not the end of capitalism?

btw - I'm watching "profits of doom" on the history channel with a bunch of peak oil theorists now

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Re 'imminent'. IMHO, we are at an imminent stage. The bullet has been fired, it simply hasn't made it's mark. We've built a 'house of cards', through our use of ALL resources. Sure when the price of oil goes up it's going to have a huge impact, but what about water? Does that not permeate all sectors, as oil does, but to a greater degree? Or phosphorous, or, or, or, or.....there are many cards in this house, and as each rises in price, that price is reflective, accross the board. The huge inflation that we are seeing, is nothing compared to the exponential effect of having 'so many cards', inflating all at once. We are holding on through the illusion of debt. From varying things I have read, 2012, will see the US dollar collapse, both domestically and as the world reserve dollar; this will be the 'final straw'.....and 'Rome shall fall'.....

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

I agree, we are a multifaceted global social train wreck with suicidal inertia.

Though it may be a bit heavy for some, it must be stated; capitalism is reaching its endgame. The growth requirement which capitalism has built into itself is now colliding headlong with the limits of the natural world, which provides all of the raw stock required by industry. Like an organism undergoing ketosis, the system is beginning to devour itself for sustenance. Governments create imaginary capital to patch over privately created black holes of debt, while financial institutions feast on the accumulated “wealth” of the poorer strata of western society by mechanisms like foreclosure, stagnant wages, increasing tuitions, increasing interest payments, layoffs, and every other conceivable and now commonplace “austerity measure.”

It is this amalgam of symptoms of collapse that the people of the “first” world are now experiencing. Of course, these first-worlders have lived on the backs of exploited peoples, animals, and land bases for generations, all too happy to consume to their heart’s content in a drunken orgy of self-righteous hedonism. (In their defense, the masters of capital did scar these people at birth with the brand of consumption, bombarding them day and night with self defeating advertisements and a ceaseless campaign of pro-authoritarian, anti-life propaganda.)

This monstrous architecture has not only built into an impossible growth requirement, but also a series of premises concerning the validity of hierarchy.

All these premises are starting to come crashing down.

The big question is do we have it in us for the "almighty turn around" and devise and completely new culture and socioeconomic system before industrial capitalism plunges us into a 1000 year dark age.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Yes.....We are marching to our deaths..... And should we falter in our courage to bring about the change required, then, we will witness an almost 'overnight', reversion of siad millenia of evolution and development.

At heart, I am an optimist, and would, with all my intent and strength forestall this grim vision.....

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 7 years ago

All we can do is try. I live my life in protest and revolt.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Carpe diem. Omnia vincit amor.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I don't necessarily mean imminent like, tomorrow - just that the writing is on the wall.....To me that means it is imminent in my and your lifetime.... It is incremental and will continue on this trend as it has...They will never throw a switch overnight, it will simply lead to another law, another bill, another act, another executive order, etc. The frame work is definitely in place. They are preparing for the worst and I can tell you in my gut it does not feel right...It seems that EVERYTHING is reaching peak, peak population, peak convergence, peak water, oil, etc... I cannot say exactly when or how, but at least 10 years from now we will look back and agree that most will come to pass; many will be comfortable with it if it is done slowly. Hitler moved too fast, they are simply moving slower - the end game is the same...

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 7 years ago

I drive a motorcycle ;) but who gives a shitakemushroom about the oil... How about the carbon emission? the ozone layer?

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Got one of those too, actually a dual sport. Mostly set up for off-road, I use for recreation. I also use to hunt out those secluded spots I have just in case SHTF.

As for carbon emissions, China gets a free pass and we wonder why its getting worse. The Ozone layer is healing, which actually traps in more CO2. It is a 50/50, they banned CFCs which helped increase CO2 factor on global warming. There are many factors sun is one, and ocean volcanoes emit several tonnes of CO2 , actually immeasurable. We will run out of oil before it matters and we will suffer with famine, and freeze to death in certain areas.

[-] 1 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 7 years ago

Well then I would have to say you might be wrong. A recent study on sciencedaily.com came out saying we were wrong about CO2 emission and the effects of the ozone layer. They are saying it is eating away at the ozone layer faster then we predicted. CO2 emission is up 40% in the last 20 years. I will link you when I find it.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Please send link, I am always interested in new info....

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I do not personally believe CO2 is the primary cause, just a factor amongst many. The GW fear mongers cite Human CO2, but there are many causes. The Sun is causing global warming on all planets. No SUVs on other planets....I was talking about CFC propellant and the ozone layer. It seems the story is so dynamic, that is why I never swear any allegiance to the GW/CO2 crowd..... I do not disgagree with you - see post above the last one for CFC

[-] 0 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

It's VERY worrisome...

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Have no fear, if you remain good to your brothers & sisters, and do not kill or hurt others you will survive to the next time. Worrying or showing fear will make you prey. Show no fear, stay below radar and you shall be fine. I have no stake in this anymore, the ones at top are under influence of darkness. Do what you can, and do the right thing only. Be good to yourself and others. The Beatles said it best "Let It BE" and "All you need is love" John Lennon , Imagine - they all tell the tail and can be helpful to all.

[-] 1 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 7 years ago

Dont forget bob marley!! =)

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I feel that music artists are "prophets" in disguise. I have always said "Expression of creativity is a message from the creator" I draw, and I tell you the things I have drawn are revealing....Bob Marley is another "prophet" I even consider George Carlin another "prophet" he may have been rough, but I think he was trying to get people to wake up.

[-] -1 points by afterforever (-6) 7 years ago

I have an idea. Maybe the people,the ones most concerned about these peak issues should lead by example.

Start by re-evaluating your life and resolve to live without cars,electricity(unless self generated),live without anything produced as a by-product of oil,fossil fuels,peak metals,peak anything. Hunt and kill by bow and arrow,cook by fire (if you have the carbon credits to build a fire). Live in a cave or other structure that doesn't use any peaked resources to construct. Make your clothing from plant or animal fur if you dare to piss off PETA.

Basically turn the clock back about 1000 or so years. You know,just like you Leftists keep accusing Republicans of wanting to do all the time.

If you're so concerned than lead by example.

Put up or shut up.

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

chomsky would tell you that living in a cave will not change the world - has the same effect as suicide so your idea is not a good one- what has changed the world has been mass movements often started by a few individuals (like blazefire?) - individual change while a good starting point will not do it - but i assume you know that and are just trying to throw bombs at good people

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 7 years ago

Ok.....wow. That seemed quite aggressive. I was wondering if it were possible to take it down a notch, by 'leading by example'.

Thankyou for being here and adding your voice to the collective one.

In terms of a response, I will say that in no place did I advocate doing....anything! I simply pointed out a truth. Do the research yourself! We most certainly are running out of the most basic of resources.....so.....if something is NOT done, ANYTHING.....then we will witness the fall of rome.

I don't want to shut up. I want to fix it. Simple. Change. Figure it out. Whatever it takes. Or PETA will end, cars will end, elecricity will end, water will stop.....What do you think would happen if the supplies of water ran out in a city? Like NY, or Singapore? Or Melbourne? How long do you think it would take for the people to pull the city down? There are 4, ONLY 4 days of supply in any given supermarket. Whats going to happen if supply runs short...by only lets say...a week?

YOU should be concerned. VERY concerned. It's your food, water and car too. It's your world as well.

[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 7 years ago

you are correct again - chomsky would tell you that living in a cave will not change the world - has the same effect as suicide