The relentless — and ever accelerating — rise in energy demand of oil extraction threatens to upend centuries of economic growth; with or without wind, solar and nuclear.
You hit a lot of nails on the head here, realities most people are completely unaware of. Good job. Speaking of Alberta tar sand oil, just wait until there's no diesel for firetrucks.
"The world’s population is more than three times larger than it was in the mid-twentieth century. The global human population reached 8.0 billion in mid-November 2022 from an estimated 2.5 billion people in 1950, adding 1 billion people since 2010 and 2 billion since 1998. The world’s population is expected to increase by nearly 2 billion persons in the next 30 years, from the current 8 billion to 9.7 billion in 2050 and could peak at nearly 10.4 billion in the mid-2080s."
Maybe, but I'm sure they are trying to slow it down a bit. Most Western countries are not having enough kids now to replace the populations, due to mainly financial reasons. You've not watched John Coleman or read Jaque Attali's regarding this?
Yes, there are a bunch of people out there that are worried about the fact that the White Empire is collapsing, and in the process, white people are becoming a smaller minority in the world population. I am thrilled to see that happening, as is anyone in the global majority (i.e. the "developing world", those "shithole countries").
Here is an example of someone else very happy with the end of White Empire.
I'm not sure where you got you "estimations". Hopefully not the wef scoundrels.
The projections are not for growth, but a falling population, even before this current madness.
Population is falling.
Regardless, it is God who is in control. Many times we have found vast new lands...He told us to go and fill the earth. It's not up to mere man to decide to extinguish the life God ordained. In fact, that's pure evil.
Where is the oil going to? Why produce so much if it's wasted? If we're set for it to expire, why are they sending the worlds poor to us? I'm sure I will have more questions, but those are a good start.
I think it was Art Berman, though it might have been Tom Murphy, who referenced Lawrence Livermore Lab's energy flowchart (https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/) showing that of the 100.3 Quads of energy sourced in the U.S. in 2022, 67.3 Quads--well over 60%--ended up as "rejected energy," or waste. There is no magical substance or technology that will produce 67 Quads, but conservation is available to all of us. As for depopulation, sadly, disease, famine, storms, and wildfires will wipe out many, many people, people whose creativity and handiwork survivors will miss.
You know, we have been given some excellent tools by the .go v folks. Some linked to cheena. No thanks, can't trust them.
One has to ask the question: why are "they" forcing the worlds poorest on a few countries that are highlighted as the problem?
Are they sending them here for nefarious reasons? Surely, we can trust them all? Wouldn't that jack up our usage too? Or they might like the rise in numbers there too.
I would say it may also tell you that you are the problem to eliminate. Ai is a ridiculous tool. People have no idea that it is learning from our everyday conversations online. Hairball harrari says machines will replace us. We are trying our replacements. Until you throw it away. No thanks!
If we discovered a free unlimited clean energy source... that would invite total disaster upon the world.... it would mean we would deplete all other resources rapidly .. and we'd quickly pave over the entire planet.
Simplicity. We've done it for so long, minus the last hundred years or so. Sure we can. But many institutions the rules demand growth of 2-3% every year.
Another great piece, B. Your writing has been essential to my recent evolution from merely climate aware to near-term-collapse-aware.
Side note: as I stood in the grocery store checkout yesterday, I was confronted with the latest Harvard Business Review. The featured article is, "Why It's So Hard to Keep Growing." Something tells me the article doesn't mention the real reason.
You provided no evidence that actual oil production is set to decline or even stagnate. Higher prices mean more fracking and unconventional oil, nothing more. The limiting factor we SHOULD be worried about is catastrophic warming; it will kill the economy and all of us long before oil starts to meaningfully run out.
Canadian tar sands extraction and extraction of similar extra-heavy "oil" from Venezuela depends on a large supply of gas nearby to generate steam to soften that glop. It has to be diluted with lighter hydrocarbons from extra-light oil or lease condensate (the volatile liquids which condense out of natural gas as it's compressed) to allow it to flow through pipelines and in/out of tankers or rail cars. It also requires considerably more energy to refine. I call that an energy subsidy.
Side note: Every few years, someone suggests building nuclear reactors in the tar sands to generate steam so the gas currently used for that can be sold elsewhere. The problem is that transporting heat directly wouldn't be very practical, given the distances involved, and electric heat would utilize the nuclear energy less efficiently. But even if small modular reactors were used, built off-site and moved periodically as required, I'd be surprised to find the energy payback worth the investment. And then there are the issues of maintaining them at remote locations and keeping a skilled workforce in place 24/7/365. And then the wildfires...
E nice if the powers that be would allow us to get energy from other resources like this from Twitter: Zimbabwean inventor, Maxwell Chikumbutso developed a technology which converts RADIO FREQUENCY to energy, but his patents were declined, because “they defy the laws of physics”👇.svg
You hit a lot of nails on the head here, realities most people are completely unaware of. Good job. Speaking of Alberta tar sand oil, just wait until there's no diesel for firetrucks.
I can understand the depop agenda now.
"depop"? Depopulation? Where do you get your facts?
https://www.un.org/en/global-issues/population
"The world’s population is more than three times larger than it was in the mid-twentieth century. The global human population reached 8.0 billion in mid-November 2022 from an estimated 2.5 billion people in 1950, adding 1 billion people since 2010 and 2 billion since 1998. The world’s population is expected to increase by nearly 2 billion persons in the next 30 years, from the current 8 billion to 9.7 billion in 2050 and could peak at nearly 10.4 billion in the mid-2080s."
Maybe, but I'm sure they are trying to slow it down a bit. Most Western countries are not having enough kids now to replace the populations, due to mainly financial reasons. You've not watched John Coleman or read Jaque Attali's regarding this?
No. Slowing will only collapse BAU. The best option is to do this https://www.headsupster.com/forumthread?shortId=220
What's BAU please?
business as usual.. civilization
Dear Markker;
Yes, there are a bunch of people out there that are worried about the fact that the White Empire is collapsing, and in the process, white people are becoming a smaller minority in the world population. I am thrilled to see that happening, as is anyone in the global majority (i.e. the "developing world", those "shithole countries").
Here is an example of someone else very happy with the end of White Empire.
https://indi.ca/israel-not-real/
Tickled,
Pintada
I love Indi! Thanks for sharing this.
He is wonderful, isn't he.
Actually, it's been on trend to be decreasing around the globe, except in Africa. I keep wondering what "tool" they are using
I'm not sure where you got you "estimations". Hopefully not the wef scoundrels.
The projections are not for growth, but a falling population, even before this current madness.
Population is falling.
Regardless, it is God who is in control. Many times we have found vast new lands...He told us to go and fill the earth. It's not up to mere man to decide to extinguish the life God ordained. In fact, that's pure evil.
"Lean not on your own understanding.."
Oh my Dog!!
it's worse than that.. it's extermination https://www.headsupster.com/forumthread?shortId=220
Fast Eddy Phone Home!
FE has no interest in engaging with people who insist we have walked on the moon and that helicopter batteries can be charged in -60C.
😞
A tour de force in the relation of peak oil facts. Congratulations sir.
Where is the oil going to? Why produce so much if it's wasted? If we're set for it to expire, why are they sending the worlds poor to us? I'm sure I will have more questions, but those are a good start.
Thank you B🙏
I like Art Berman's take on how an AI with super high energy intelligence will help us: "The AI will tell us to use less oil".
I'd add, it will also tell us to get our population down to reduce the coming suffering.
I think it was Art Berman, though it might have been Tom Murphy, who referenced Lawrence Livermore Lab's energy flowchart (https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/) showing that of the 100.3 Quads of energy sourced in the U.S. in 2022, 67.3 Quads--well over 60%--ended up as "rejected energy," or waste. There is no magical substance or technology that will produce 67 Quads, but conservation is available to all of us. As for depopulation, sadly, disease, famine, storms, and wildfires will wipe out many, many people, people whose creativity and handiwork survivors will miss.
You know, we have been given some excellent tools by the .go v folks. Some linked to cheena. No thanks, can't trust them.
One has to ask the question: why are "they" forcing the worlds poorest on a few countries that are highlighted as the problem?
Are they sending them here for nefarious reasons? Surely, we can trust them all? Wouldn't that jack up our usage too? Or they might like the rise in numbers there too.
I would say it may also tell you that you are the problem to eliminate. Ai is a ridiculous tool. People have no idea that it is learning from our everyday conversations online. Hairball harrari says machines will replace us. We are trying our replacements. Until you throw it away. No thanks!
If we discovered a free unlimited clean energy source... that would invite total disaster upon the world.... it would mean we would deplete all other resources rapidly .. and we'd quickly pave over the entire planet.
Thank you. Good article!
Great piece, as always. I think the very last sentence is of particular importance:
"Instead, finding one’s way back ashore could’ve proven to be a much better plan…"
In the end, the best option we have is some sort of new 'Back to the Land' movement.
Simplicity. We've done it for so long, minus the last hundred years or so. Sure we can. But many institutions the rules demand growth of 2-3% every year.
Another great piece, B. Your writing has been essential to my recent evolution from merely climate aware to near-term-collapse-aware.
Side note: as I stood in the grocery store checkout yesterday, I was confronted with the latest Harvard Business Review. The featured article is, "Why It's So Hard to Keep Growing." Something tells me the article doesn't mention the real reason.
Something tells me that one can only inj e CT so much junk into a population b4 they can't keep up w the skyrocketing prices and environmental impact.
When did we Institute the yearly rise in gdp? Why? By whom? Why I'd it so very important for those numbers to rise every year?
"I need a fix, 'cause I'm goin' down, down to the bits that I left uptown..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdvnOH060Qg
50 to 70% of diesel can be replaced by (abundant) natural gas via Eden Innovations OptiBlend duel-fuel kit, retrofitted onto existing diesel engines.
https://optiblendfuels.com/how-it-works/
You provided no evidence that actual oil production is set to decline or even stagnate. Higher prices mean more fracking and unconventional oil, nothing more. The limiting factor we SHOULD be worried about is catastrophic warming; it will kill the economy and all of us long before oil starts to meaningfully run out.
Canadian tar sands extraction and extraction of similar extra-heavy "oil" from Venezuela depends on a large supply of gas nearby to generate steam to soften that glop. It has to be diluted with lighter hydrocarbons from extra-light oil or lease condensate (the volatile liquids which condense out of natural gas as it's compressed) to allow it to flow through pipelines and in/out of tankers or rail cars. It also requires considerably more energy to refine. I call that an energy subsidy.
Side note: Every few years, someone suggests building nuclear reactors in the tar sands to generate steam so the gas currently used for that can be sold elsewhere. The problem is that transporting heat directly wouldn't be very practical, given the distances involved, and electric heat would utilize the nuclear energy less efficiently. But even if small modular reactors were used, built off-site and moved periodically as required, I'd be surprised to find the energy payback worth the investment. And then there are the issues of maintaining them at remote locations and keeping a skilled workforce in place 24/7/365. And then the wildfires...
E nice if the powers that be would allow us to get energy from other resources like this from Twitter: Zimbabwean inventor, Maxwell Chikumbutso developed a technology which converts RADIO FREQUENCY to energy, but his patents were declined, because “they defy the laws of physics”👇.svg
All their "mega tech" used to surveillance us and all the managers and marketing in jets flying around the world.
Always thinking we need to raise the gdp every year is also a culprit, as producing crap that goes back into the landfills also takes a lot if energy.
Surely, we all need to do better at monitoring what we use- what is neccesary and what isnt.
I have not had adequate words to describe this, but for a few years I've been trying to convey it. We'll done!