How much longer do we have for private motor vehicles? [Archive]

racefactory

14th July 2011, 20:50

As we pass the crest of peak oil production and consumption levels yet continue to grow; how much longer is the future of private motor vehicles as we know them?

I think people will look back at us wondering how absurd it was that all around the world people used to drive 1500kg and larger cars with a single occupant, often jammed in traffic, for a short distance. If you think about it, most of the fuel is used just to shift the car, not the person inside it.

With oil prices rising incessantly, emergency reserves being released and no replaceable solution in near sight, how long before daily private vehicles are a thing of the past? 10 years? 15?

I'm thinking this is going to be my last bike and it's going to see it all out to the end.

Brian d marge

15th July 2011, 02:55

Ive already covered my Arse ... Yes I know its an Enfield , but a diesel engine drops straight in ( almost ) ....and its rego'ed as a 350 ...

Was watching a doc on " A farm without oil " very interesting , top bloke said 2013 decline starts .. and by the end of the century , oil gone

So , While I may not be here , I hope to future proof my two kids ...if they ( the experts ) are right that is

Lets see the idiots in the beehive tax my potato crop !! now tricky dicky , will try and sting me on the rego , ..........but it isnt going to be as bad a CBR 1000rr ...

Stephen

James Deuce

15th July 2011, 04:56

Yes. The peak oil production myth. We've passed the easy to extract oil peak. The oil isn't running out it's just going to get more and more expensive to extract from the media the remaining oil stocks are suspended in. It isn't transport that's going to be most affected by rising costs, it's going to be clothing, food, electricity (though we use less oil than most for cheap electricity production) and just about everything else you use on a daily basis and take for granted. That's the killer. Not vehicles.

It's your lifestyle that will change dramatically, more so than the incidental ability to travel greater than walking distance where you want, when you want.

marty

15th July 2011, 06:30

sinfull

15th July 2011, 07:19

reliable links please for peak oil information. i am very interested in this phenomena.

http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Design/Gartman/D_Casestudy/ID38014_1_NoGas.gif

p.dath

15th July 2011, 07:51

I think it will be at least a generation before we see a serious shift in the way we live our lives due to the cost of crude oil rising.

fokky

15th July 2011, 08:53

OMG...is it 1978?Didnt the world bleat and panic then?''Oh no petrol is running out,lets cut our throats''As far as I can see
[the mobil over the road]there is still petrol today,worrying about shit that hasnt happened yet has never served me well:woohoo:

Scuba_Steve

15th July 2011, 09:19

I do find it funny tho, prices are higher than ever & oils still "running out" (50yrs later) yet we have more gas guzzling SUV's on our roads than we have ever had.

Banditbandit

15th July 2011, 09:24

1 We do not have the transport infrastructure to move people around without private vehicles .. and Auckland especially is hell bent on keeping it that way.

2 As long as it's more than 20 years I don't give a flying fuck .. I will be past 70 by then and probably won't be riding or driving ... if I'm alive.

rainman

15th July 2011, 10:14

how much longer is the future of private motor vehicles as we know them?

The vehicles themselves will linger on for a while I guess, but usage will drop for financial reasons, just like last time we had high prices - motorway volumes fell. And as noted below, the impact is not only the fuel but the secondary effects - employment, food, etc. If you double fuel prices I'll still be able to get to work, just that my work probably will have collapsed in the ensuing depression.

Yes. The peak oil production myth. We've passed the easy to extract oil peak. The oil isn't running out it's just going to get more and more expensive to extract from the media the remaining oil stocks are suspended in. It isn't transport that's going to be most affected by rising costs, it's going to be clothing, food, electricity (though we use less oil than most for cheap electricity production) and just about everything else you use on a daily basis and take for granted. That's the killer. Not vehicles.

It's your lifestyle that will change dramatically, more so than the incidental ability to travel greater than walking distance where you want, when you want.

I'm confused, Jim. You call this a myth but then quite succinctly restate the problem. Yes, the oil isn't running out, that hasn't been the view of credible peak oilers since forever. But, once irrefutably past peak, life does change quite a bit, and the PO community has been warning us to address this risk for ages.

reliable links please for peak oil information. i am very interested in this phenomena.

http://www.theoildrum.com/ is a good place to start but can get pretty technical. They had a introductory series somewhere which I'll try to find.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY is an hour long lecture that will explain lots and should be mandatory viewing for all humans.
Richard Branson: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/07/branson-warns-peak-oil-close
Fatih Birol, Chief Economist of the IEA: http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2011/05/05/the-world-has-passed-peak-oil-says-top-economist/. The IEA World Energy Outlook publications also point to some clear problems.
UK Govt PO Task Force: http://peakoiltaskforce.net/http:/peakoil.solarcentury.com/government-to-work-with-business/
There are some hysterical folks out there so by all means filter what you read. But it's pretty unambiguous that the problem is more here and now than in the distant future, and that the impacts will be severe.
Of course whether that makes anyone change anything is another matter. Look at the number of climate change deniers, despite the mounting evidence...

I think it will be at least a generation before we see a serious shift in the way we live our lives due to the cost of crude oil rising.

Why do you think this? The evidence isn't with you.

worrying about shit that hasnt happened yet has never served me well:woohoo:

Good ostrich impression! Wait... you actually think like that?

I do find it funny tho, prices are higher than ever & oils still "running out" (50yrs later) yet we have more gas guzzling SUV's on our roads than we have ever had.

Oil's not running out, there's about as much left as we've used to date. Problem is it's the hard stuff to get at, and also we can't grow our economies (much, or as easily) if we don't have growing supples of cheap oil. There's a good correlation between oil prices and recessions. http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2011/01/oil_shocks_and_2.html

As long as it's more than 20 years I don't give a flying fuck .. I will be past 70 by then and probably won't be riding or driving ... if I'm alive.

Do you have kids, or grandkids, or even know any kids you give a flying fuck about? Your expressed view is remarkably close to some components of sociopathy.

racefactory

15th July 2011, 10:28

Yes, it's not in the least about the stuff in the earth running out, it's about our ability to extract it at the rate we consume it. In other words, we can't now get it out of the ground as fast as we're burning it.

For many people here, for most of their lifetime supply has outstripped demand but now it's on the decline. I think we face great cultural changes- less materialistic, individualistic societies and a return to smaller, local communities where more meaningful relationships between people are restored. Since 1859 we have based our lives around this substance and now we will have to change. It's quite an exciting transition in history that I'm anxious to be part of.

Watch this Colin Campbell interview, he's the man. Great to listen to!

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SiJj06n58tU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Big Dave

15th July 2011, 10:29

I think the electric vehicle era will be pretty good.

Indiana_Jones

15th July 2011, 11:29

As long as I can still drink beer and listen to my LPs I'm happy :woohoo:

-Indy

Vacquer0

15th July 2011, 11:35

http://www.brammo.com/home/

Better than nothing.

James Deuce

15th July 2011, 11:45

I'm confused, Jim. You call this a myth but then quite succinctly restate the problem. Yes, the oil isn't running out, that hasn't been the view of credible peak oilers since forever. But, once irrefutably past peak, life does change quite a bit, and the PO community has been warning us to address this risk for ages.

It's nowhere near past peak. Speaking to my petrologist brother-in-law the issue isn't that we're runnin gout of oil. We find more and more of the stuff all the time, the problem is developing cheap, clean technologies to remove it from whatever medium it is stored in. We've most of the easily accessible oil fields mapped. The next series of explorations starting up is oil sands and shale bearing oil, both of which require very different methods to extract than the up until now free flowing stuff that can be pumped.

The Great Australian Bight is a massive oil field for instance, it's just that the oil is stored in shale.

The myth I'm referring to is that the oil is running out. It isn't, what may run out IF we don't develop the technologies to extract oil from these other media is supply. Supply will cease to match demand.

rainman

15th July 2011, 12:02

I think the electric vehicle era will be pretty good.

Yup, but it ain't happening terribly fast.

It's nowhere near past peak. Speaking to my petrologist brother-in-law the issue isn't that we're runnin gout of oil. We find more and more of the stuff all the time, the problem is developing cheap, clean technologies to remove it from whatever medium it is stored in. We've most of the easily accessible oil fields mapped. The next series of explorations starting up is oil sands and shale bearing oil, both of which require very different methods to extract than the up until now free flowing stuff that can be pumped.

The Great Australian Bight is a massive oil field for instance, it's just that the oil is stored in shale.

The myth I'm referring to is that the oil is running out. It isn't, what may run out IF we don't develop the technologies to extract oil from these other media is supply. Supply will cease to match demand.

Who is saying the oil is running out? That's just a strawman. Peak oil has always been about the peak of cheap and easily accessible oil (available at approximately current prices), not so much absolute peak hydrocarbons. Cost-effectiveness is mainly why old oilfields are abandoned - if economics says you can't extract from a field and make an obscene profit at current prices, then you'll find another field from which you can. And when you run out of those, then prices go up, at least until demand collapses (not generally a good thing in the absence of alternatives). When prices go too high the economy stops working, as we have seen. If demand is too low it means the economy isn't working, at least until we get a real decoupling between energy and economic progress.

And you do have an energetic limit too - if it takes more energy to get the stuff out of the ground than you get from what you're getting out of the ground, then unless you can substitute readily-available input energy to the process, you're screwed.

The issue is not insurmountable but is serious, and needs major work to get sorted (refer the Hirsch report from a few years ago). The problem is we are following the same pattern as we have done on climate change and are resorting to denial, which is not a prudent means of risk mitigation, and won't fix anything.

Big Dave

15th July 2011, 12:10

Yup, but it ain't happening terribly fast.

It is in some sectors - e-scooters will be plentiful in 3 years time. Yamaha alone plans to make millions of them.

Big Dave

15th July 2011, 12:12

The problem is we are following the same pattern as we have done on climate change and are resorting to denial,

And hey! The people whose wages are paid by the fossil fuel burning power generation companies deny this.

scissorhands

15th July 2011, 12:12

Cars should be sooooooo different already except for oil tycoons. Imagine the clean air for kids going to school if waiting traffic shut down their engines and crawled on electric. Shame

All that Toyota unsafe in the media 2 years back was a warning

steve_t

15th July 2011, 12:16

What ever happened to biofuel made from human excrement? There's definitely a lot of that flying around - an abundant, renewable resource :innocent:

bogan

15th July 2011, 12:17

I think the electric vehicle era will be pretty good.

I'm looking forward to it. Leave the oil for applications that really need it, like motorsports :D

Also, you guys are forgetting a big player which has just joined the mix
<img src="http://www.nbr.co.nz/sites/default/files/imagecache/article_image_full/New_Z_Site_Image.jpg" />
Z will take care of us :lol:

Indiana_Jones

15th July 2011, 12:29

I'm looking forward to it. Leave the oil for applications that really need it, like motorsports :D

Also, you guys are forgetting a big player which has just joined the mix
<img src="http://www.nbr.co.nz/sites/default/files/imagecache/article_image_full/New_Z_Site_Image.jpg" />
Z will take care of us :lol:

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/y7Yp2L6c2KM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

-Indy

Big Dave

15th July 2011, 12:35

As long as I can still drink beer and listen to my LPs I'm happy :woohoo:

-Indy

What do you think vinyl is made from?

Indiana_Jones

15th July 2011, 12:41

What do you think vinyl is made from?

lol i already own them though :D

But you make a good point, a lot of people forgot how much stuff is made from oil based products.

-Indy

Big Dave

15th July 2011, 13:00

Worldwide spatula shortages

Winston001

15th July 2011, 14:59

As we pass the crest of peak oil production and consumption levels yet continue to grow; how much longer is the future of private motor vehicles as we know them?

With oil prices rising incessantly, emergency reserves being released and no replaceable solution in near sight, how long before daily private vehicles are a thing of the past? 10 years? 15?
.

A thoughtful question.

Tell me: in humanity's recent history (say, 2000 years), when has technology failed to provide a solution? When has our quality of life ever fallen?

imdying

15th July 2011, 15:09

A thoughtful question.

Tell me: in humanity's recent history (say, 2000 years), when has technology failed to provide a solution? When has our quality of life ever fallen?Have we ever had the population up around 6 billion and climbing fast?

Brett

15th July 2011, 15:14

Screw it, if it is gonna run out, I am going to have some fun before it does. I will happily be upgrading my GSXR600 to a 2010 Yamaha R1, all going well will also be buying an Audi RS4 which is not exactly light on fuel either. I love my cars and bikes, they are more than just transport to me, so will happily spend discretionary income on them. If it runs out, well...bugger. That said, I agree that our current model for personal transportation is ridiculous. I had to drive 150km around town today which took me the good part of the morning and early afternoon. I WISH there was another viable means of transportation around town that I could utilise for menial day to day errand running.

Scuba_Steve

15th July 2011, 15:21

I think the electric vehicle era will be pretty good.
:killingme :rofl: just the laugh I needed for a Fri afternoon.

They already have plenty of alternatives ready to go should the time comes that oil is no longer a viable option, hell we can already artificially make a petrol replacement no engine or petrol station alterations needed

Brian d marge

15th July 2011, 15:29

It is in some sectors - e-scooters will be plentiful in 3 years time. Yamaha alone plans to make millions of them.

They are already available , and F,ing cheap ...I'm considering buying one for pottering around on

http://prozza.com/index.html

the cheapest one can be had for 80 000 yen NEW and 138 retail .....

ONE BIG PROBLEM ...................... Made in china , with Chinese errmm quality ( ie no lead in the battery one suspects !)

Me why am I future proofing ? not because of peak oil , or the environment ,,,( a little )

but I don't want to work !! ie be a slave to a process or system

Rousseau: said some thing like ... Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

Ill try my best to avoid, the system.

Spuds anyone?

Stephen

racefactory

15th July 2011, 15:30

Have we ever had the population up around 6 billion and climbing fast?

It's 6.7 billion but it's been slowing down ever since 1963.

racefactory

15th July 2011, 15:33

Me why am I future proofing ? not because of peak oil , or the environment ,,,( a little )

but I don't want to work !! ie be a slave to a process or system

Rousseau: said some thing like ... Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

Ill try my best to avoid, the system.

Spuds anyone?

Stephen

I'll drink to that. Fuck the system.

imdying

15th July 2011, 15:42

It's 6.7 billion but it's been slowing down ever since 1963.It's still a big number, unlikely to get smaller any time soon if you believe this (http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met_y=sp_pop_totl&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=world+population).

One hell of an impediment to tech saving our arse the population is...

rainman

15th July 2011, 16:26

When has our quality of life ever fallen?

Globally? Never. But the Romans are just the headline example of individual cultures that have collapsed.

Have we ever had the population up around 6 billion and climbing fast?

Exactly the point. Population is everything. Any farmer knows that you can't keep putting more animals in a paddock without eventually running against the limits of what it can carry. And, just like the paddock, the world is finite, if large.

hell we can already artificially make a petrol replacement no engine or petrol station alterations needed

Do tell.

(As long as you're not one of those "run your engine on water" nutbars. In which case I'll pass, thanks).

Me why am I future proofing ? not because of peak oil , or the environment ,,,( a little )

but I don't want to work !! ie be a slave to a process or system

Rousseau: said some thing like ... Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

Ill try my best to avoid, the system.

Have you come across this chap (http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/)? Sounds like you might like some of his work.

It's 6.7 billion but it's been slowing down ever since 1963.

Um, not really. The rate of change has been stable since a drop in about 1990, according to the data I had a look at. But it's still steadily growing in absolute terms, which is what counts.

And the earth ain't getting any bigger.

racefactory

15th July 2011, 16:39

So what we really need is a world war, then we'll be able to happily continue filling up our cars and bikes.

Scuba_Steve

15th July 2011, 16:43

Do tell.

(As long as you're not one of those "run your engine on water" nutbars. In which case I'll pass, thanks).

Water? na not on it's own ya gotta mix it 50/50 with sugar :innocent: :laugh:

Maybee not quite production ready, but POC ready at this stage.

"having first developed a means of storing hydrogen in microfibers that could greatly simplify the design of Hydrogen vehicles. But, perhaps even more impressive is a "synthetic fuel" the company is working on which is, essentially, pure hydrogen captured into microbeads. You know, like the kind that float in your shampoo and give your hair that extra lustre, but explosive. These beads can be poured into the gas tank of a car with an internal combustion engine (presumably suspended in some sort of liquid) and, with no modification, that car will run just fine. Best news is that this concoction costs just $1.50 per gallon"

rainman

15th July 2011, 17:12

"having first developed a means of storing hydrogen in microfibers that could greatly simplify the design of Hydrogen vehicles. But, perhaps even more impressive is a "synthetic fuel" the company is working on which is, essentially, pure hydrogen captured into microbeads. You know, like the kind that float in your shampoo and give your hair that extra lustre, but explosive. These beads can be poured into the gas tank of a car with an internal combustion engine (presumably suspended in some sort of liquid) and, with no modification, that car will run just fine. Best news is that this concoction costs just $1.50 per gallon"

Ah. I've heard about this microfibre/bead approach, and it does sound more promising than a big H tank in the car and a new engine. Wonder how well it will work with existing vehicles though? Would you run your bike on it? What sort of energy return does it get?

And of course H is not a source of energy, so you have to get it from somewhere first. Which is where the difficulties may creep in.
Wind or Solar - promising but not very efficient, and not nearly enough capacity out there now.
Nuclear - Fukushima. I mean, hard to ramp up quickly, and not much spare capacity. Long build cycles.
Coal - well, there's the inconvenient matter of climate change.

But I wish them every success and hope it works out. They may be part of the future solution, but I suggest they're not a drop in replacement. How quickly do you think a new tech like this could be rolled out on a global scale, and at what cost?

marty

15th July 2011, 19:22

bogan

15th July 2011, 19:34

Exactly the point. Population is everything. Any farmer knows that you can't keep putting more animals in a paddock without eventually running against the limits of what it can carry. And, just like the paddock, the world is finite, if large.

The key here is the farmer knows this, and controls breeding accordingly. It's ok though, as China takes over we can expect them to make a similar call.

Scuba_Steve

15th July 2011, 19:49

Ah. I've heard about this microfibre/bead approach, and it does sound more promising than a big H tank in the car and a new engine. Wonder how well it will work with existing vehicles though? Would you run your bike on it? What sort of energy return does it get?

And of course H is not a source of energy, so you have to get it from somewhere first. Which is where the difficulties may creep in.
Wind or Solar - promising but not very efficient, and not nearly enough capacity out there now.
Nuclear - Fukushima. I mean, hard to ramp up quickly, and not much spare capacity. Long build cycles.
Coal - well, there's the inconvenient matter of climate change.

But I wish them every success and hope it works out. They may be part of the future solution, but I suggest they're not a drop in replacement. How quickly do you think a new tech like this could be rolled out on a global scale, and at what cost?

well the research appears to be owned by Shell so roll out would not be a problem & their marketing it as a "drop in" replacement for 90% of vehicles. It'll be something like this that'll replace oil if the time ever comes. It's a shame I haven't seen anything more of the farmer effluent pond algae that could be used as bio-diesel that Canterbury uni (I think?) was researching, I thought it was all but ready to be used, & I could do with some cheap diesolium :D

rainman

15th July 2011, 21:24

i heard this week that there have been new natural gas reserves found within the USA mainland - the availability is now estimated to be more than 2000 trillion cubic feet. natural gas consumption in the USA is currently 22 TCF/year......world reserves are estimated at over 5000TCF

Not as easy to move around though, and there is the small matter of global warming. Also 40% is in Russia and Iran...

The key here is the farmer knows this, and controls breeding accordingly. It's ok though, as China takes over we can expect them to make a similar call.

As the old question goes: are human beings smarter than yeast?

Winston001

15th July 2011, 21:51

The key here is the farmer knows this, and controls breeding accordingly. It's ok though, as China takes over we can expect them to make a similar call.

Mmmm...the Chinese experiment on population control has failed. For one thing it only applies to Han chinese, not other ethnic groups, which effectively means only 36% of their population. Furthermore people don't like it or obey it so the population continues to grow.

Have we ever had the population up around 6 billion and climbing fast?

Agreed. I'm afraid I have a dark vision of the near future where we hit the wall and world population drops through war, famine, and disease. However there will still be plenty of people and they will have the advantage of technology to survive - and thrive.

Winston001

15th July 2011, 21:58

Globally? Never. But the Romans are just the headline example of individual cultures that have collapsed.

But that's the point: humans overall forge ahead and life gets better. The societies which fail do so because other more vigorous groups overwhelm them.

Just as an aside, the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly the Belgian Congo) is possibly the only current nation to be worse off today than it was a century ago.

Still getting rid of the Phlegm :D

Brian d marge

15th July 2011, 23:09

Have you come across this chap (http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/)? Sounds like you might like some of his work.

No I havent , but from the little I read seems ok, I can add this one http://opensourceecology.org/

and http://www.britchopper.co.uk/forum/

Im all right Jack .....a small milling machine is my one wish ... and a 3d scanner .....oh and the wife to listen ( to anyone /thing) ....

Stephen

Ocean1

15th July 2011, 23:18

But that's the point: humans overall forge ahead and life gets better. The societies which fail do so because other more vigorous groups overwhelm them.

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded- here and there, now and then- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people.

Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck."

Brian d marge

15th July 2011, 23:59

But that's the point: humans overall forge ahead and life gets better. The societies which fail do so because other more vigorous groups overwhelm them.
:D

Either Grey power is receiving the Viagra , or Mutton Exports will increase

Stephen

jonbuoy

16th July 2011, 00:10

I think the electric vehicle era will be pretty good.

Hybrids for sure, technology is only getting started. Some of the 0-60 times are getting towards the supercar leagues. Jaguars turbine diesel electric looks pretty amazing. Most new Cruise Ships and Mega Yachts are diesel electric as well. All battery is going to work for a while yet. Electric scooters are already appearing here.

racefactory

16th July 2011, 00:25

Mmmm...the Chinese experiment on population control has failed. For one thing it only applies to Han chinese, not other ethnic groups, which effectively means only 36% of their population. Furthermore people don't like it or obey it so the population continues to grow.

What? 36%? Where are you getting this from? Basically all the population are Han Chinese, the other 56 or so ethnic minorities are collectively small in comparison.

rainman

16th July 2011, 11:40

But that's the point: humans overall forge ahead and life gets better. The societies which fail do so because other more vigorous groups overwhelm them.

That form of social evolution only works in aggregate as long as it's individual components of the global society that are taking a beating. If the energy source underpinning all of our enterprise shrinks, then we all don't prosper, overall. Ironically it may be the clusters of more traditional, localised agriculture and trade that prove to be better adapted to the new world than our "modern" highly globalised version, but that depends quite a bit on climate change, I think.

Human civilisation will most likely continue, of course, but nothing says it has to be better than we have it today. It's entirely feasible that we almost all take a step or two back from where we are today. And by all, I mean, not as many of us as there are today.

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded- here and there, now and then- are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people.

Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as "bad luck."

Lay off the Ayn Rand, dude... it's not good for your mental health :)

Big Dave

16th July 2011, 11:50

Hybrids for sure, technology is only getting started. Some of the 0-60 times are getting towards the supercar leagues. Jaguars turbine diesel electric looks pretty amazing. Most new Cruise Ships and Mega Yachts are diesel electric as well. All battery is going to work for a while yet. Electric scooters are already appearing here.

Most of the freighters I've been on too. Big Pratt and Witney turbine running a generator in the funnel, cabled to big electric 'fans' with a long drive shaft, aft.

Ocean1

16th July 2011, 12:07

Lay off the Ayn Rand, dude... it's not good for your mental health :)

Heinlein?

Same dude who wrote: Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes. Remember this, it may allow you to make a friend of him. If not you can kill him without hate.

BMWST?

16th July 2011, 12:44

its much much more than just personal transport.Think of how farms will work,how heavy transport will work,construction etc etc,,,,it all depends on diesel

rainman

16th July 2011, 13:24

...without checking.

You must have a pretty good memory.. :)

Heinlein's an entertaining read, but in today's world he's a bit simplistic.

Of course it would be crazy to deny the role of motivated individuals in creating change. But then I also acknowledge that the optimal structure for maintaining strong and stable societies, able to weather much of what life chucks at us, is the small community. It's a proven pattern over millennia.

Too much focus on individualism only, with no value for the whole, is just unbalanced and does not recognise the whole story. Time we grew up and adopted a broader view. The tribe without a leader may be in trouble, but less so than the leader without a tribe.

Ocean1

16th July 2011, 13:45

You must have a pretty good memory.. :)

Not particularly, I googled what I did remember and just c/p'd the first return.

Of course it would be crazy to deny the role of motivated individuals in creating change. But then I also acknowledge that the optimal structure for maintaining strong and stable societies, able to weather much of what life chucks at us, is the small community. It's a proven pattern over millennia.

Too much focus on individualism only, with no value for the whole, is just unbalanced and does not recognise the whole story. Time we grew up and adopted a broader view. The tribe without a leader may be in trouble, but less so than the leader without a tribe.

Tribes. What we're evolved for. We don't have 'em any more. Tribes allow individual expression. They kill anyone that threatens them, stranger or tribe member.

We've got nations, they don't work that way and real humans find they don't work for them. No real problem, any organisation thayt fails to cull the dross and maintain the wall won't last.

It'll probably take me and you down with it, but what survives might work.

Winston001

16th July 2011, 17:08

What? 36%? Where are you getting this from? Basically all the population are Han Chinese, the other 56 or so ethnic minorities are collectively small in comparison.

The Chinese Government.

Less than 40 percent of the population is restricted by the family planning policy to having one child, a senior official with the National Population and Family Planning Commission said yesterday.
While popularly referred to as the "one child policy", the rule actually restricts just 35.9 percent of the population to having one child, Yu Xuejun, a spokesman with the commission, said in a Webcast on the government's website (www.gov.cn).

Woodman

16th July 2011, 17:16

Yeah I reckon we are headed to a more village based self sufficient future. How it is now is not sustainable, but hey what a ride we have had for the last 100 years or so yee fucken haa:woohoo:

superman

16th July 2011, 17:32

A thoughtful question.

Tell me: in humanity's recent history (say, 2000 years), when has technology failed to provide a solution? When has our quality of life ever fallen?

There was that huge copper shortage in the 1970s. Low and behold substitutes, and even better things came about such as fibre-optics.

rainman

17th July 2011, 07:42

There was that huge copper shortage in the 1970s. Low and behold substitutes, and even better things came about such as fibre-optics.

What do you think will substitute for oil?

davereid

17th July 2011, 09:08

There was that huge copper shortage in the 1970s. Low and behold substitutes, and even better things came about such as fibre-optics.

Yes, but your point is valid.

We will run out of copper, cadmium, and lithium to make our electric cars from long before we run out of the coal we will be using to charge their batteries.

New Zealand has a high percentage of electricity generated from renewable sources.

But every electric car that enters service will add demand that will be met from our non renewable resources, as the renewable ones are already fully committed.

And that electric car uses rare metals, dug up by a diesel powered digger, transported to to coal fired foundry in a diesel truck, and then delivered all around the would in oil powered ships.

The hybrid car is even worse. Just like the batteries in my laptop, by 5-7 years of age, they offer little storage.

They still weigh 500kg, so in NZ with an average fleet age of 13 years, a hybrid is likely to spend 2/3rds of its life as an underpowered petrol car carting around 500kg of unusable waste.

Maybe banning electric or hybrid vehicles would be a good first step in saving the planet.

Indiana_Jones

17th July 2011, 10:39

Yes, but your point is valid.

.............

Maybe banning electric or hybrid vehicles would be a good first step in saving the planet.

I've been thinking this for some time. People don't look at the bigger picture (only human I guess) and think they're saving the world by putting in less gas at the pump; Forgetting the fact that when the car gets wrecked it's gonna have a shit load of horrible battery crap to be dealt with etc

-Indy

Brian d marge

17th July 2011, 11:47

Yes, but your point is valid.

We will run out of copper, cadmium, and lithium to make our electric cars from long before we run out of the coal we will be using to charge their batteries.

New Zealand has a high percentage of electricity generated from renewable sources.

But every electric car that enters service will add demand that will be met from our non renewable resources, as the renewable ones are already fully committed.

And that electric car uses rare metals, dug up by a diesel powered digger, transported to to coal fired foundry in a diesel truck, and then delivered all around the would in oil powered ships.

The hybrid car is even worse. Just like the batteries in my laptop, by 5-7 years of age, they offer little storage.

They still weigh 500kg, so in NZ with an average fleet age of 13 years, a hybrid is likely to spend 2/3rds of its life as an underpowered petrol car carting around 500kg of unusable waste.

Maybe banning electric or hybrid vehicles would be a good first step in saving the planet.

Small diesel .....Enfields! yeah!

Stephen

superman

17th July 2011, 12:29

What do you think will substitute for oil?

Bio-fuel? Well the amount of land needed to produce enough supply of bio-fuel is very wasteful...

Synthetic fuel is made from coal? We still have lots of coal... there we go. :yes:

bogan

17th July 2011, 12:39

Bio-fuel? Well the amount of land needed to produce enough supply of bio-fuel is very wasteful...

Synthetic fuel is made from coal? We still have lots of coal... there we go. :yes:

Or hydrogen, the separators powered by orbital solar power generators. Just send some up with the next space shuttle :facepalm:

avgas

17th July 2011, 13:21

As we pass the crest of peak oil production
Got a reference on this......because if its OPEC your a fool.
We have barely touch 20% reserves......

rainman

17th July 2011, 13:42

Bio-fuel? Well the amount of land needed to produce enough supply of bio-fuel is very wasteful...

Synthetic fuel is made from coal? We still have lots of coal... there we go. :yes:

Last time we played around with ramping up biofuel, food prices shot up, there were food riots in lots of places, and a whole lot more people than usual starved. Not really an option.

CTL is a maybe if you exclude a) the associated environmental destruction/climate change issues, and b) the time to ramp up the CTL plants. Not an option if we have already peaked, basically. But something we (humanity, not NZ) might well try.

Or hydrogen, the separators powered by orbital solar power generators. Just send some up with the next space shuttle :facepalm:

Hydrogen isn't an energy source. Unless Cella or similar come up with a workable option as discussed up-thread, there is no distribution facility. How long do you think it would take to build and deploy orbital solar powered electrolysis units, and at what cost? :)

Of course you could do the electrolysis on earth but then you have the problem that sunny places are usually dry, so moving water to them or hydrogen away become not insignificant logistical challenges. Some expense involved, certainly.

My favourite replacement: efficiency. There's a lot of waste we can wring out of the system while we actively work to build some alternative options.

Ha! Who am I kidding? We'll ignore this until it becomes a bigger crisis, just like we always have.

Ocean1

17th July 2011, 16:48

Hydrogen isn't an energy source.

Then neither is any other chemically convertible fuel asset.

Allow me: The largest planet in our system is literally made of hydrogen. I’d say that implies no shortage of energy, least of all to transport it.

Now, what technology are we missing to make it happen?

Hint: not a very big number.

bogan

17th July 2011, 17:01

Hydrogen isn't an energy source. Unless Cella or similar come up with a workable option as discussed up-thread, there is no distribution facility. How long do you think it would take to build and deploy orbital solar powered electrolysis units, and at what cost? :)

Of course you could do the electrolysis on earth but then you have the problem that sunny places are usually dry, so moving water to them or hydrogen away become not insignificant logistical challenges. Some expense involved, certainly.

My favourite replacement: efficiency. There's a lot of waste we can wring out of the system while we actively work to build some alternative options.

Ha! Who am I kidding? We'll ignore this until it becomes a bigger crisis, just like we always have.

Who said it would be used as an energy source? Simply use it as energy storage, beam down some concentrated sunlight to somewhere there is heaps of water to convert to hydrogen. They did some testing a while ago, but some dudes Aston Martin got blown up so it's been put on the backburner I think.

rainman

17th July 2011, 20:51

Then neither is any other chemically convertible fuel asset.

What I mean is there is no handy place where you can simply drill it out of a hole or mine it our of some seam, unlike current fuels. There are no large H deposits just waiting to be hoovered up - it's less than 1 ppm.

Not to say you can't produce hydrogen and burn it, but electrolysis is inherently lossy. Therefore it's only useful if you have a) a relatively abundant energy source you can use to make the H, b) lots of water (easy), and c) a convenient way to move the H around (tricky as it's a bit small and gaseous and tends to mess with many metals - unless Cella Energy is on to something, and don't die in an unfortunate accident, that is).

Most other methods require hydrocarbon sources anyway.

So I don't see how we will scale up H as a fuel source to be a replacement for our current oil use in less than 15-20 years, unless we abandon growth. If we get moving, it may make up some of the decline, but it's no silver bullet.

beam down some concentrated sunlight to somewhere there is heaps of water to convert to hydrogen.

So, not cheap and not soon.