Will the internet survive energy contraction?

[drkitten]

No Archdruid of Earth?

That's why TFian started this thread.

When Greer can find a seventh person somewhere in the world who agrees with the dribbling lunacy he spews, then they can fill that job. Until then, they've only got Greer and his six followers to fill the eight-person Druish yeshiva.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Big deal. Richard Dawkins is the (former) Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University, but I don't think I've ever seen him referred to by his full title outside of a book blurb.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the connection between science and modern Druidry or TFian's argument.

 

[TFian]

Well, I don't see why finding a second copy of something that's obviously wrong will help....

Because it's not? Read it before such a quick judgment.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...697758&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=ubuntu

 

[TFian]

Why. Why. Why. Why. Why do you keep referring to this man as "Grand Archdruid"? Are you part of some cult?

It's his full title. And that depends on how you define "cult".

 

[TFian]

That's why TFian started this thread.

When Greer can find a seventh person somewhere in the world who agrees with the dribbling lunacy he spews, then they can fill that job. Until then, they've only got Greer and his six followers to fill the eight-person Druish yeshiva.

Ha, his druid sect has a lot more followers than that. It's not a cult, but a legitimate religion.

 

[TFian]

~~~~~~~~~~~



Since when was what "most people feel" considered to be valid scientific data?



PEAK OIL: Going Mainstream


~~~~~~

Here's another good link on the Germen study. The Germen government is getting serious about peak oil, when will Jref accept it as reality?

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-09-02/german-military-study-warns-potential-energy-crisis

 

[TFian]

When I get my Master's degree, can I force people to call me master?

Massa' of what?

 

[PixyMisa]

Ha, his druid sect has a lot more followers than that. It's not a cult, but a legitimate religion.

There's no such thing.

 

[drkitten]

Because it's not? Read it before such a quick judgment.

Okay, I read it. It's "obviously wrong." Specifically, it contradicts real numbers.

 

[drkitten]

Here's another good link on the Germen study. The Germen government is getting serious about peak oil, when will Jref accept it as reality?

Almost everyone on the JREF accepts peak oil as reality.

What we don't accept is the idea that "peak oil" means empty freeways by next Tuesday or whatever the 16th level Ranger/Cleric has proposed.

"Peak oil" means that the amount of oil produced per year has peaked. We are probably at or near that peak now. The theory of peak oil suggests that the production curve is symmetric; that we will spend as much time on the downslope as we did on the upslope. The first oil well was 150 years ago -- the last will therefore probably be in 2160 or thereabouts.

"Peak oil" does not mean that we are running out of oil.

"Peak oil" also doesn't mean that we're even slowing our production of energy, since oil and energy are two different things.

 

[PixyMisa]

Almost everyone on the JREF accepts peak oil as reality.

What we don't accept is the idea that "peak oil" means empty freeways by next Tuesday or whatever the 16th level Ranger/Cleric has proposed.

Hey!

Ranger/Clerics are darn useful. (GOG.com are currently on a D&D spree.)

 

[drkitten]

Here's another good link on the Germen study. The Germen government is getting serious about peak oil, when will Jref accept it as reality?

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-09-02/german-military-study-warns-potential-energy-crisis

Further to above : have you actually looked at this study you cite?

I've not read the original (my German is very poor), but the English summary cited in your post says:

"some probability that peak oil will occur around the year 2010 and that the impact on security is expected to be felt 15 to 30 years later."

Aside from the fact that there is also "some probability" that I might start defecating marble,... this specifically gives the lie to the Gnome Ranger's predictions of empty freeways. Even the worst-case scenario they outline involves the collapse of democracy and the return of "planned societies," not a return to agrarianism.

And in particular, they're specifically discussing diplomatic solutions -- i.e., they are suggesting that the Germans should make friends with the Russians and the Arabs, in order to get favorable terms for purchasing oil. That's not a report that's worried that there won't be any oil -- that's a report worried about the price of oil and the need to obtain it on favorable terms. If they were really worried about no oil whatsoever, they'd be pushing for a greater investment in alternative energy sources.

So, basically, the German Government thinks the ArchFruitCake is stupid, misguided, and ignorant, too. In that regard, they think just like me.

 

[TFian]

So, basically, the German Government thinks the ArchFruitCake is stupid, misguided, and ignorant, too. In that regard, they think just like me.

What part of the report contradicts what the Grand ArhcDruid predicts?

 

[theprestige]

What part of the report contradicts what the Grand ArhcDruid predicts?

If the Grand ArchDruid predicts that oil prices are going to rise 15-20 years after the onset of peak oil, and that oil consumers should take steps to secure oil supplies at favorable rates before that happens, then why on earth are you even bringing his predictions into your argument?

I mean, oil prices rose a bit, a few years back. Those were some exciting times, sure, but you'll notice the Internet survived that "energy contraction" just fine. Also, surprisingly few millions of people died off as a result of that rise in oil prices.

That is the kind peak oil energy crisis the report talks about: higher oil prices, ten or fifteen years from whenever peak oil actually happens. If that's the same peak oil energy crisis your Grand ArchDruid talks about, then I imagine he's rather more against your argument than for it.

And to be honest, I almost think you deserve a monument or something in your honor: You may actually have managed to be more wrong than the Grand ArchDruid.

 

[TFian]

If the Grand ArchDruid predicts that oil prices are going to rise 15-20 years after the onset of peak oil, and that oil consumers should take steps to secure oil supplies at favorable rates before that happens, then why on earth are you even bringing his predictions into your argument?

I mean, oil prices rose a bit, a few years back. Those were some exciting times, sure, but you'll notice the Internet survived that "energy contraction" just fine. Also, surprisingly few millions of people died off as a result of that rise in oil prices.

That is the kind peak oil energy crisis the report talks about: higher oil prices, ten or fifteen years from whenever peak oil actually happens. If that's the same peak oil energy crisis your Grand ArchDruid talks about, then I imagine he's rather more against your argument than for it.

And to be honest, I almost think you deserve a monument or something in your honor: You may actually have managed to be more wrong than the Grand ArchDruid.

He's not so concerned about what happens in 15-20 years, but moreso 50-100 years. His predictions of a decline into an agrarian/ecotechnic future are likely to be realized.

As he says

Industrial civilization had its day in the sun [he writes] because, in a world where fossil fuel could be had for the digging or drilling, the industrial mode of production was more efficient than its rivals, and enabled the communities that embraced it to prosper at the expense of those that did not.

John Michael Greer, in his book The Ecotechnic Future, uses the analogy of a group of field mice who find one day that someone has dumped a huge pile of grain in a corner of their field. They eat it and multiply, until the grain starts to run out.

The fieldmice’s grain is the same as our discovery of cheap fossil fuels – as the moment of peak oil approaches, and as reports of ‘peak coal’ gain credibility. We are the mice. What happens next?

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

The fieldmice’s grain is the same as our discovery of cheap fossil fuels – as the moment of peak oil approaches, and as reports of ‘peak coal’ gain credibility. We are the mice. What happens next?

Since we are not mice but actually quite clever apes, having gotten a taste for grains, we decide to grow some.

By the way, you appear to still be using your own unique definition of "peak oil" - meaning "immediate depletion". I don't think even Greer makes that mistake.

 

[TFian]

Since we are not mice but actually quite clever apes, having gotten a taste for grains, we decide to grow some.

By the way, you appear to still be using your own unique definition of "peak oil" - meaning "immediate depletion". I don't think even Greer makes that mistake.

Is 50 to 100 years "immediate depletion"?

Also, we are not clever apes, we are no smarter than many different animal species. To suggest otherwise is speciest.

Btw, I have a question for you. Many here say electric rail is a substitute for petroleum based transportation. Yet, electric rail couldn't support the enormous masses that flood into the business districts of cities every day. Business districts which require SUBURBS so that people can commute there to work, because the city itself REQUIRES the INCOME to sustain itself economically!

 

[PixyMisa]

He's not so concerned about what happens in 15-20 years, but moreso 50-100 years.

Fair enough.

His predictions of a decline into an agrarian/ecotechnic future are likely to be realized.

Evidence?

As he says

But, like you, he can't present any evidence for his claims.

John Michael Greer, in his book The Ecotechnic Future, uses the analogy of a group of field mice who find one day that someone has dumped a huge pile of grain in a corner of their field. They eat it and multiply, until the grain starts to run out.

So?

A proper analogy would be if the mice noticed, well before the grain ran out, that the supply of grain was finite, and started securing alternative sources of food and taking steps to reduce population growth.

The fieldmice’s grain is the same as our discovery of cheap fossil fuels – as the moment of peak oil approaches, and as reports of ‘peak coal’ gain credibility. We are the mice. What happens next?

We adapt, as we always do. Civilisation continues.

 

[PixyMisa]

Is 50 to 100 years "immediate depletion"?

You predicted that the freeways would be empty by 2013.

What happened to that?

Also, we are not clever apes, we are no smarter than many different animal species.

Hasty generalisation from a single specimen.

Btw, I have a question for you. Many here say electric rail is a substitute for petroleum based transportation. Yet, electric rail couldn't support the enormous masses that flood into the business districts of cities every day.

Uh... What? That's a perfect situation for electric rail. Large dense populations travelling between well-defined points.

Business districts which require SUBURBS so that people can commute there to work

Which they can do by train. I do that. I've done that for 25 years. I take out my iPod, lean back, and relax. Or if I have some work to do, I have a nice compact 13" notebook that fits easily in my lap.

May I ask a couple of questions? How old are you, and where do you live? Just approximately - age group and general geographic area are fine, whatever you're willing to share. Because what you assume are universal truths simply don't apply to most of the planet and most of history.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

Is 50 to 100 years "immediate depletion"?

No, you just seem to use the term to mean the very last of a particular resource, that's all. In your example, as the mice are nearing peak grain, that's around the time that they'll have the most grain available to them for the least effort expended.

Also, we are not clever apes, we are no smarter than many different animal species. To suggest otherwise is speciest.

Don't worry, "clever", "smarter", "different" and... "Speciest"(?!) are just words. As such they have ever-shifting, subjective meanings attached to them, which means that we actually agree. Also, "apes" and "suggest".

Btw, I have a question for you. Many here say electric rail is a substitute for petroleum based transportation. Yet, electric rail couldn't support the enormous masses that flood into the business districts of cities every day. Business districts which require SUBURBS so that people can commute there to work, because the city itself REQUIRES the INCOME to sustain itself economically!

What a peculiar view of economy you have. It sounds like you believe cities are there for people to grudgingly travel to and sustain.

Before I answer your question about transportation (which I know little about except that I think we need less of it), could you tell me why you think people would do that?