B. Carfree

For my entire life I have been living with an estimate that the oil runs out, or at least the cheap oil is all burned up, by 2020. I've always taken such an estimate with a grain of salt since it is notoriously difficult to make accurate predictions, especially about the future. Now I see that maybe there is more to this estimate than I thought.


This article by a local university faculty member makes some interesting points on the subject.https://www.eugeneweekly.com/20140220...oint/game-over

Assuming this turns out to be accurate, that's a lot of missing oil on the market in a very short time. I don't see how we can absorb such a supply shock without many more people driving far fewer miles than they are at present. Also, as with all supply shocks, there will be price shocks. Considering how many people are either one paycheck away from trouble or who are smart enough to realize that wasting money on gasoline (or replacing their car with a coal-powered version) is just the sort of reckless decision that can put them in financial difficulties, I think the car-free/car-light community is about to get a bit crowded.

gerv 

My own presumption is that there's a race to 1) run out of petroleum or 2) degrade the environment so badly that a market for petroleum (or anything else probably...) just won't exist.

Actually I'm betting on the latter.

SevenSpokes

I'd think it'd be neither of these options (though, certainly possible). I think it will be a slow, steady decline, with countries beginning to engage in conflict over energy sources. Oil won't dry up all at once overnight, but prices will slowly climb, markets will tilt to unstable, food prices will increase as a result of being a commodity nearly 100% trucked cross country, and so forth. If we were smart, we'd be investing every dollar we could into renewable energy sources. Just imagine how much more advantageous our position would be in the world, both politcally and militarily if we were free from oil; or even half as free as we are now.

My bet though; we won't be. Me, I'm investing in solar, cold frames, and bike tubes.

Ekdog

I couldn't agree more. Good post.

I've been trying for years to get the other flat owners in our building to let me put up a solar panel or two for heating water, but they keep turning me down. They claim there's no space on the roof for such a thing, even though many of them have satellite dishes up there which take up just as much space. So I have to keep relying on a fossil fuel, propane, to heat our water.

RPK79

https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2013/12/02/Next-North-Dakota-5-States-About-Go-Oil-Boom

Spld cyclist

Predictions of impending shortages have been wrong too often. I wouldn't bet on this one. Of course, I would love to see us transition to a future with far less fossil fuel use, but I'm just not counting on a rapid change in oil supplies or prices. A long slow decline in supplies may occur at some point.

fietsbob

they'll start de paving to refine the Bitumen, and Coal, into oil to run the Tanks to suppress the revolt .
of the masses..

Or like .. Elysium move to a space based gated country .

wahoonc

From my reading and general understanding, it isn't so much that we "run out" of oil, it is we have gathered all the low hanging fruit and it is going to get more and more expensive to extract, which will drive the price higher and higher. Unfortunately too many economies (especially the US of A's) are built on cheap energy sources, therein lies the problem.

Aaron

Roody

A couple points about these "new" petroleum sources (which have actually been known for decades):

1. If we burn that much more oil, the planet will literally be uninhabitable. This is just a plain fact, much as the wing nuts of America deny it.
2. I believe it takes about an equivalent amount of energy to get that oil out of the ground, as is obtained from the oil itself. Where does that energy come from?

(Your link is jacked up, so I'm responding to other articles I've read about these oil formations.)

MEversbergII

A good book to check out along the lines of this subject is "Green Illusions". Started me rethinking the "Green Energy Future".

M.

B. Carfree

Prior to 2008 I might have agreed that this is how it will go down. However, now that we have seen what happens when global demand approaches global supply, it looks like we will see a very rapid increase in energy prices when this happens again (which it is almost certain to do if we don't convert to other energy sources). Part of the reason appears to be a lack of storage capacity for oil. We tend to use it about as fast as it is pumped and the system is set up as a "just in time" delivery system. That's all well and good, until demand threatens supply limits. In fact, had the banksters not broken the economy just as the rise in oil prices was heating up, we might have seen a very interesting peak price that could have broken the economy on its own.

If we see another surge in energy prices, I don't think anyone will be surprised to see another surge in cyclists like we saw in 2008/9. I hope to see more people recognize the downsides of our fossil fuel dependence before then and take action to reduce it, but I'm certainly not optimistic.

Roody

Do you have the time to give a short synopsis?

Roody

I admit that I'm more pessimistic now than I ever have been. The deadline for taking effective action to mitigate climate change is rapidly approaching, but almost nothing is being done.

Machka 

Nor will it be.

And isn't this really a discussion for P&R?

Roody

It's a discussion that can easily be avoided by those who aren't interested.

Machka 

Who's not interested?

But there's a right place for everything.

ro-monster

This is exactly the kind of discussion that belongs here. It's what this subforum exists for, and the fact that we talk about these topics is why I read LCF before any other part of the forum. P&R is where threads get sent to die. The only people who post there are those who can't seem to grasp the difference between discussion and argument for the sake of argument.

Ekdog

I strongly agree.

maxine

It is? From what I've seen here, I don't think everyone who is car-free/lite and/or posts on this sub-forum is doing so out of concerns about oil drying up. Some people are broke; some people just want to simplify their lives and minimize material possessions; some fell into the car-free life through unforeseen circumstances and found they like it; some are motivated by health concerns . . . etc. etc. etc.

RPK79

From what I've seen this subforum is mostly for the LCM posters with political agendas while everyone else who is LCM and not political about it just post in the commuter or utility forums.

Roody

I agree.

One main reason I'm carfree is because of pollution and climate change. I enjoy "talking" about this topic on this forum. By any objective standard, pollution is very relevant to carfree living. For many of us, it's not just a discussion topic, as on the cynical P&R forum, but also an issue that we try to do something about in our daily lives.

Anybody who is not interested in pollution can select from many other subjects discussed on this forum. For every thread about climate change and other pollution, there are probably 50 threads about other topics. These topics range from cargo bikes to hauling refrigerators to what people did on their lunch hour, and many others.

So I'm sure that those interested in carfree living can find a wide variety of threads that they will enjoy. It really isn't necessary to ruin the experience for those who have different interests than you do.

Ekdog

No, not everyone, but some of us are concerned about it and it's one of the reasons we are car-free/light. There are other topics that I don't find as interesting, which isn't a problem. I simply don't participate in those threads. It's really quite easy.

Roody

Have you ever started a thread on a topic that does interest you? Not that I recall. By not starting threads yourself, you are giving the power to drive the discussion to me and a few other people who are willing to make the effort.

MEversbergII

Sure!

Green Illusions is a book written by an engineer who had worked in, if memory serves, coal power. He's not an advocate of coal production anymore and had been "into" alternative energy sources until he started doing serious research which lead to him believing we're going about this the wrong way. He, like I, is in the reductionist camp. He goes over the pros and cons of the various energy sources, including both "Green" and "Conventional". He points out a lot of disadvantages with each, ranging from the obvious (sun doesn't always shine, no infinite source of coal) to less often spoken of (wind turbines are gargantuan, oil-consumptive to produce, fragile and LOUD, solar panel production produces some heinous byproducts) to the more obscure (limits of price reduction, short lifespan of things i.e. solar). He does point out upsides to each, however, so he isn't a Negative Nelly the whole time.

Basically, his advocacy is more for reducing power demand through various means. He's a proponent of Complete Streets and speaks highly of cycling as a means of transit, which is right up our alley. Overall he wants us off coal and (unless I'm misremembering) even Uranium nuclear due to how destructive they are (ever seen a uranium mining operation?), but to temper the "green" solutions with significantly reduced demand. We're just not all going to be able to live like suburban Americans anymore. He also skirts the issue of population reduction, which is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

If you're interested in reading it, shoot me a PM.

M.

Roody

I agree that reduction is the biggest "wedge" when it comes to reducing carbon pollution. Reducing waste and increasing efficiencies are closely related strategies. I do think renewables are another wedge, but I agree that they are overvalued by mainstream environmentalists. I used to be big on nuclear, but safety and public acceptance are serious problems.