PEAK OIL: Going Mainstream

[jimbob]

Considerably unlike the US -- but also considerably unlike the rest of the UK.




I'd believe that. Six miles in London will get you more or less anywhere you want to be; in Banbury, Oxon, it won't even get you to the county offices. And if you're the sort of person who doesn't like the city life (i.e. you want to live in the suburbs, as much of the population seems to), but need to work where the jobs are, you'll need to commute.

A long way.




Possibly, but for much of the world, "making cycling less unattractive" would require major investments in infrastructure and even in weather control. London's actually a very nice place for cycling; the weather never gets that bad (summers are typically 25 or below, and it rarely drops below freezing in the winter). There is, of course, the everpresent rain, but you can deal with that with a light coat or an anorak or something.

Compare that with the 30cm or more of snow that even Washington DC gets on a regular basis (and DC is considered a "southern" town, and has the 35 degree summers to prove it). Further south, you can't cycle in the summer because you will die of heat stroke -- in many cases literally. Further north,... well, let's just say that its hard to pedal when you're buried up to your axles in snow.

For the major cities, there's usually a very expensive and underbuilt public transportation system. I don't need to tell a Londoner about how bad the Tube doesn't work --- but the London Tube is among the best in the world. Any city in the States would envy the Tube system,.... but where would the money come from to build it? (Even London couldn't afford it if it had to start from scratch.)

I've found some distributions for the US:


http://www.bts.gov/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/html/figure_02.html

This is 2003 data.


In good weather, and given appropriate (relatively cheap) infrastructure, a significant proportion of those journeys could easily be made by bicycle.

I am aware that the UK is more temperate than the continental US, or even the coasts, and people will still find cars convenient. I use one - just not to get to work.

For reference, my temperature range this last 12-months has been from -12°C to +31°C, and I'd accept that these are probably more than comfortable for many people, but then you also have to factor in the UK's inability to deal with 6" of snow (or 2-cm), which actually makes cycling about the quickest, and certainly the most reliable form of transport in snow in the UK. (25-miles 1100ft round trip in snow does take some effort though). I live in the Peak District and work in Manchester, for pretty much the reasons you outlined earlier. I cycle for purely selfish reasons, and regard my commute as time I'd otherwise wish to spend doing other forms of exercise, and which I don't have time to do.

 

[Nosi]

My 12.5-mile each way commute is longer than the UK's "average" distance of 8.7 miles and it does take a bit longer than driving would, but is reliable. About once a quarter, our road has bad traffic, and a car would be delayed by about an hour. I get a delay of maybe 10-minutes. I also look at it as my guaranteed daily fix of physical activity, which I had begun to miss in other commuting schemes.

I enjoy my commute and sometimes extend it on particularly fine days. In other words, some of that time is reclaimed as "leisure".

Where I live, cyclists take their lives in their hands literally. Before I got sick, I cycled, and I have been hit (in the tire at a stop sign) and nearly hit so many times I lost count. A brain bucket won't keep you safe against the careless sod in the SUV. This grimness includes roads with bike paths.

 

[JihadJane]

'Lloyd's adds its voice to dire 'peak oil' warnings
Business underestimating catastrophic consequences of declining oil, says Lloyd's of London/Chatham House report'

"One of the City's most respected institutions has warned of "catastrophic consequences" for businesses that fail to prepare for a world of increasing oil scarcity and a lower carbon economy.

The Lloyd's insurance market and the highly regarded Royal Institute of International Affairs, known as Chatham House, says Britain needs to be ready for "peak oil" and disrupted energy supplies at a time of soaring fuel demand in China and India, constraints on production caused by the BP oil spill and political moves to cut CO2 to halt global warming."

 

[soylent]

The average American commute distance is 16 miles.(one-way distance, figures from 2005), which is impractical by any non-mechanical means.

Not as impractical as subsistence farming. There's a broad range of fall-back options between subsistence farming and electric SUVs.

The least comfortable solution that is still a step up from subsistence farming is to find an appartment closer to work(say 8 miles) and commute in a pair of shoes. Sucks but not as much as subsistence farming. Some fraction of people can't physically do this, and would have to move into some crappy little appartment or living space of some description right next to where they work.

The next step up is a bicycle. Most people can do 16 miles in under an hour without really suffering too much; but it sucks when you have to ride in the rain or in blazing heat.

The next step up is probably an electric bicycle, which are quite popular in China, or a small scooter of some description. Rain still sucks but heat isn't as much of a problem when you don't have to pedal yourself.

The next step up is probably a dingy, overcrowded bus-commute. Even if it's not electric at first, it's still a huge reduction in oil use to have a large busfleet running only the essential lines at the essential times(i.e. little or no joyriding, bus doesn't run unless its half-full or better; time-table dubious and ad-hoc if you want to do anything other than commute to work at peak times).

The next step up would probably be tramlines and trains that run most of the time even when not full. There's a lot of time, effort and infrastructure required to support this, but it can be electrified without any batteries, which may be a huge advantage.

The next step up from this would probably be tiny, single-seat, highly aerodynamic "cars" with a lightweight roll-cage and air-bags. With the huge savings in oil they wouldn't have to be electric for quite some time; but they could be made hybrids with an electric drive-train so that they could be retrofited to all electric at a later date.

The next step up from this would probably be full-sized 4-seater electric cars(which nonetheless stubbornly remain at a vehicle occupancy between 1 and 2).

The next step up again would probably be electric SUVs or hydrogen powered flying cars or whatever.

 

[soylent]

A brain bucket won't keep you safe against the careless sod in the SUV. This grimness includes roads with bike paths.

It will if the very few people can still afford a car and those who do are forced to drive really slow to reduce fuel consumption.

 

[Nosi]

Not as impractical as subsistence farming. There's a broad range of fall-back options between subsistence farming and electric SUVs.

The least comfortable solution that is still a step up from subsistence farming is to find an appartment closer to work(say 8 miles) and commute in a pair of shoes. Sucks but not as much as subsistence farming. Some fraction of people can't physically do this, and would have to move into some crappy little appartment or living space of some description right next to where they work.

Before this, I would recommend telecommuting, which some offices are doing. We are also seeing solutions such as "Go To Office" being promoted.

The next step up is a bicycle. Most people can do 16 miles in under an hour without really suffering too much; but it sucks when you have to ride in the rain or in blazing heat.

If bicycles had a canopy or umbrella, that would protect against the heat/rain.[B/]

The next step up is probably an electric bicycle, which are quite popular in China, or a small scooter of some description. Rain still sucks but heat isn't as much of a problem when you don't have to pedal yourself.

I'm seeing scooters proliferate.

The next step up is probably a dingy, overcrowded bus-commute. Even if it's not electric at first, it's still a huge reduction in oil use to have a large busfleet running only the essential lines at the essential times(i.e. little or no joyriding, bus doesn't run unless its half-full or better; time-table dubious and ad-hoc if you want to do anything other than commute to work at peak times).[/QUOTE]

We've a commuter bus that takes us to Phoenix daily here. People use it to beat paying parking at the air port.

The next step up would probably be tramlines and trains that run most of the time even when not full. There's a lot of time, effort and infrastructure required to support this, but it can be electrified without any batteries, which may be a huge advantage.

The next step up from this would probably be tiny, single-seat, highly aerodynamic "cars" with a lightweight roll-cage and air-bags. With the huge savings in oil they wouldn't have to be electric for quite some time; but they could be made hybrids with an electric drive-train so that they could be retrofited to all electric at a later date.

I'm seeing little tiny mini-cars in my home town. They're funny as hell to look at.

The next step up from this would probably be full-sized 4-seater electric cars(which nonetheless stubbornly remain at a vehicle occupancy between 1 and 2).

The next step up again would probably be electric SUVs or hydrogen powered flying cars or whatever.

 

[aquitaine]

The average American commute distance is 16 miles.(one-way distance, figures from 2005), which is impractical by any non-mechanical means.

It's also well within the 300 mile range of a modern electric car.


Many doomers thought it was all over a few years back when oil spiked up to $140 a barrel, what they didn't count on was people did something that the doomers had been saying for years couldn't be done: they stopped driving so much, resulting in falling demand. Now we will very shortly have all electric cars.

 

[JihadJane]

Now we will very shortly have all electric cars.

Highly unlikely!

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peak oil alarm revealed by secret official talks
Behind government dismissals of 'alarmist' fears there is growing concern over critical future energy supplies

 

[ThunderChunky]

Anything that is made from oil (including oil itself) can be synthesized artificially given enough energy input.

The sun alone provides orders of magnitude more energy than all of humanity is projected to use for decades to come.

The combination of all non-oil fuels only need to increase at a rate high enough to offset the decline in oil production per year + what is required for growth.

Oil is still really cheap.

 

[MikeMangum]

Lithium Air batteries potentially approach the energy/weight of gasoline so they should not be significantly harder to get into remote areas then gasoline is now. For some applications like farming where you need to refuel on the fly swapping batteries may not be an option.

Li air batteries do not 'potentially approach the energy/weight of gasoline'; you are off by an order of magnitude. Literally.

Lithium air battery^WP

When fully developed these batteries are expected to exhibit practical specific energies of over 1000 Wh/kg[7] (3.6 MJ/kg).

That is an extremely high specific energy for a battery. For reference, the specific energy of gasoline is 45-47 MJ/kg.

 

[JihadJane]

The combination of all non-oil fuels only need to increase at a rate high enough to offset the decline in oil production per year + what is required for growth.

How's that increase going?

 

[lomiller]

For reference, the specific energy of gasoline is 45-47 MJ/kg.

most of which turns into heat...

in any case your own wiki link says:

In practice, oxygen is not stored in the battery, and the theoretical specific energy excluding oxygen is 11140 Wh/kg, or 40.1 megajoules per kilogram. Compare this to the figure of 44 megajoules per kilogram for gasoline

the practical limit for both is ~1/4 of that

 

[ThunderChunky]

How's that increase going?

Has oil started to decrease?

 

[MikeMangum]

In good weather, and given appropriate (relatively cheap) infrastructure, a significant proportion of those journeys could easily be made by bicycle.

You don't have children, do you?

 

[jimbob]

In good weather, and given appropriate (relatively cheap) infrastructure, a significant proportion of those journeys could easily be made by bicycle.

You don't have children, do you?

Did you look at the rest of my quote, and the graph (spoiler for brevity - but the qualifying factors are important in showing my position)

I've found some distributions for the US:


http://www.bts.gov/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/html/figure_02.html

This is 2003 data.


In good weather, and given appropriate (relatively cheap) infrastructure, a significant proportion of those journeys could easily be made by bicycle.

I am aware that the UK is more temperate than the continental US, or even the coasts, and people will still find cars convenient. I use one - just not to get to work.

For reference, my temperature range this last 12-months has been from -12°C to +31°C, and I'd accept that these are probably more than comfortable for many people, but then you also have to factor in the UK's inability to deal with 6" of snow (or 2-cm), which actually makes cycling about the quickest, and certainly the most reliable form of transport in snow in the UK. (25-miles 1100ft round trip in snow does take some effort though). I live in the Peak District and work in Manchester, for pretty much the reasons you outlined earlier.

I cycle for purely selfish reasons, and regard my commute as time I'd otherwise wish to spend doing other forms of exercise, and which I don't have time to do.

I do have school-age children.

I also drive a car when it is more practical, but I commute by bicycle, because it is more practical for me - It takes about the same time, and I don't feel the need to spend time in a gym, or jogging, so I have more time with my kids.

If you notice what I said, and the graph, I said that given appropriate infrastructure, and good weather, a significant number of journeys that are made by car could be made by bicycle.

This obviously doesn't cover all short journeys - but it does include a significant proportion of them. With 29% of journeys being under 5-miles, and appropriate infrastructure, a lot more of these could be made by bike. Electrically assisted bikes could raise this proportion and the distance - Whilst cycling for pleasure, I saw someone using an electrically assisted bicycle up the Mam Nick road in Derbyshire, which has about 500 ft of climb in a mile. This was well within the capabilities of the bike.

Unlike the Segway, which is a solution in search of a problem, electrically assisted bicycles could be practical - not for me, given my commute distance, and average speed.

ETA: A fair number of children at my kids' primary school either walk or cycle to school.

 

[jimbob]

In good weather, and given appropriate (relatively cheap) infrastructure, a significant proportion of those journeys could easily be made by bicycle.

You don't have children, do you?

How did you draw that conclusion from what I said?

 

[MikeMangum]

How did you draw that conclusion from what I said?

Ok, let me rephrase that...

You don't have children that you have to take to school on your way to work, pick up from daycare on your way home from work, and then take to basketball practice, do you?

It would be rather difficult to find a place to put the groceries if my daughter was already balanced on the handlebars.

 

[jimbob]

Which is why I said "significant" number of journeys.

 

[drkitten]

Which is why I said "significant" number of journeys.

What you're ignoring is that people tend to purchase (and use) equipment based on more than a merely "significant" number.

Let's say that once every two months, I need to drive 500+ miles to visit relatives. (That's not far from the truth). Let's also say that twice a week, I need to drive 30+ miles to and from my weekly poker game, that twice a day I need to drive 10+ miles to/from work, and that four times a day I need to run some errand of two miles or less.

I'm going to buy a single vehicle with a 500+ mile range, which excludes electric cars. I can't really afford two cars, and the additional cost and hassle of renting a gasoline vehicle every two months would be more than the savings I'd incur from owning a single (electric) vehicle.

But once I've got the gasoline car, it is available for all my trips; it's easier and faster to drive the two miles to the hardware store and I have more cargo capacity available. It's also more comfortable, especially when the weather is particularly cold, or hot, or rainy.

 

[jimbob]

What you're ignoring is that people tend to purchase (and use) equipment based on more than a merely "significant" number.

Let's say that once every two months, I need to drive 500+ miles to visit relatives. (That's not far from the truth). Let's also say that twice a week, I need to drive 30+ miles to and from my weekly poker game, that twice a day I need to drive 10+ miles to/from work, and that four times a day I need to run some errand of two miles or less.

I'm going to buy a single vehicle with a 500+ mile range, which excludes electric cars. I can't really afford two cars, and the additional cost and hassle of renting a gasoline vehicle every two months would be more than the savings I'd incur from owning a single (electric) vehicle.

But once I've got the gasoline car, it is available for all my trips; it's easier and faster to drive the two miles to the hardware store and I have more cargo capacity available. It's also more comfortable, especially when the weather is particularly cold, or hot, or rainy.

I agree with you about electric cars. And the 500+ mile range is a red herring if it takes too long to recharge, or the range drops dramatically in cold weather, or when the battery gets old. You need a "reasonable" range, and a reasonable time to refuel.

I'm talking about routine use of bicycles or walking for routine short journeys where there is an appropriate level of infrastructure.

This is not a vast extravagance, indeed, on the UK's cycle to work scheme (tax break) my bike more than pays for itself every month.

Monthly outlay of about £30, monthly cost of public transport £100 or monthly cost of petrol £75. Bicycle fully depreciated over 12-months.

I will need to pay an extra amount at the end to purchase the bike from my employer (probably about 25% of the list purchase price of £650) but it is still worth it.


If my commute was shorter and flatter, a cheaper bike would have done.