Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not willing to write off the possibilities in oil shale just yet.
Even with an EROEI of 1, there are benefits to be had from pursuing the technology.
First, we have to look at oil at more than just a raw material for fuel. Oil is an irreplaceable raw material needed for plastics, pesticides, solvents, and a host of other chemicals upon which we depend.
Second, oil shale provides a vector into energy conversion...liquid petrofuels have no suitable substitute in aircraft, ships, and at least for the time being, the majority of vehicles. The possibilities to concurrently develop and use non-portable energy forms--such as nuclear, hydroelectric, or solar-produced electricity-- and convert them into a portable form by processing oil shale into petrofuels (with petrochemical by-products needed elsewhere in the economy) is useful, and in fact necessary at the present time.
All that said, none of it will come cheap. It needs to be expensive, because nothing short of the economic incentives that come with high prices will force us away from the wasteful energy consumption that comes with 4-person families in 5000 sq ft houses, SUVs at 10 mpg, and casual use of air travel that has filled, to the point of hazard, the US skies with half-empty aircraft.
I think peak oil, as a concept, has some validity, but I don't see a sudden drop off a cliff followed by instant anarchy like Kunstler likes to dramatize. There's plenty of evidence in Europe, where gas is already $5-10 per gallon, that high prices are indeed sufficient motivation to become more efficient, but that takes time. That said, however, if our mishandling of the current financial crisis (attempting to prop up a price bubble by any means politically possible) is any indication, Americans might very well try to continue living large right up to the breaking point.
Here's the first mainstream media report I've seen on the wave of Pay Option Arm loan defaults that's coming...lined up right behind the subprime mudslide. Those that keep saying we're nearing a bottom in housing don't know the half of it. The POA default wave hits in earnest in 2009 and continues through 2012.
Option ARMs, next chapter in U.S. housing crisis | Reuters (http://tinyurl.com/yvyp2f - broken link)
All that said, none of it will come cheap. It needs to be expensive, because nothing short of the economic incentives that come with high prices will force us away from the wasteful energy consumption that comes with 4-person families in 5000 sq ft houses, SUVs at 10 mpg, and casual use of air travel that has filled, to the point of hazard, the US skies with half-empty aircraft.
I think peak oil, as a concept, has some validity, but I don't see a sudden drop off a cliff followed by instant anarchy like Kunstler likes to dramatize. There's plenty of evidence in Europe, where gas is already $5-10 per gallon, that high prices are indeed sufficient motivation to become more efficient, but that takes time. That said, however, if our mishandling of the current financial crisis (attempting to prop up a price bubble by any means politically possible) is any indication, Americans might very well try to continue living large right up to the breaking point.
I think you just validated Kunstler's point with these two paragraphs. The US has mis-invested so grossly in a lifestyle that is unsustainable, and so much of the country's wealth is tied up in it (including a whole lot of debt that won't be able to be repaid), that the whole system will likely collapse before Americans can modify their living arrangement enough to make a substantive difference. If you read the constant sniping and utter resistance on this forum to any kind of change that would involve changing of lifestyles, or--horror of horrors--any kind of material sacrifice by spoiled Americans to move toward sustainability, you can't be very optimistic about what kind of place this is going to be in a decade or so.
The other reality that Americans refuse to confront is that every day we continue down our present path, we get weaker, and our sworn (and some unsworn) enemies get stronger. Just yesterday, CBS reported on the hacking into Dept. of Defense computer systems by operatives of the Chinese military. They are said to be "probing" for exploitable weaknesses in DOD systems should a hostile confrontation with the US become necessary. So, while some US Presidential candidates blather about removing most of our military presence in an unstable region that supplies much of the world's oil, it would seem that China is preparing itself for the possibility of fighting World War III. America is setting itself up for a real ***-kicking in the not-too-distant future. Unlike World War II, we may not win this one--"At Dawn, We Slept."
I think you just validated Kunstler's point with these two paragraphs. The US has mis-invested so grossly in a lifestyle that is unsustainable, and so much of the country's wealth is tied up in it (including a whole lot of debt that won't be able to be repaid), that the whole system will likely collapse before Americans can modify their living arrangement enough to make a substantive difference.
I don't necessarily disagree with the direction Kunstler thinks we're going, but I don't see the timing--i.e. rapid descent into anarchy--as a foregone conclusion, at least not just yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover
The other reality that Americans refuse to confront is that every day we continue down our present path, we get weaker, and our sworn (and some unsworn) enemies get stronger. Just yesterday, CBS reported on the hacking into Dept. of Defense computer systems by operatives of the Chinese military. They are said to be "probing" for exploitable weaknesses in DOD systems should a hostile confrontation with the US become necessary.
Chinese hackers screwing around with DoD's networks are everyday noise-level stuff, not breaking news. And I don't think people should confuse the inability to impose social change in a feudal, tribal society (e.g. make the Iraqis play well together and join the civilized world) with the inability to decisively crush another--any other--military in the world in a conventional nose-to-nose conflict. We're a long way from losing that edge. Fielding a room full of chain-smoking hackers isn't the same as putting something in the air that can beat a four-ship of F-22s or the strike package coming in right behind it looking to wreck your homeland.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover
America is setting itself up for a real ***-kicking in the not-too-distant future. Unlike World War II, we may not win this one--"At Dawn, We Slept."
Unlike WW II, nobody may "win" another world war, if it happens. Desperation and nuclear weapons is a combination as-yet untested, but it doesn't take a lot of imagination to foresee the likely consequences. New book..."At Dawn, We Glowed Like Chem Lites at a U2 Concert."
I do so hope that those old "Duck and Cover" drills I did in grade school won't be coming back any time soon. And that "No child left behind" won't mean getting all the kids down to the shelter when the sirens start to wail.
It does kinda put even a 30% housing price decline into perspective, though...
I don't necessarily disagree with the direction Kunstler thinks we're going, but I don't see the timing--i.e. rapid descent into anarchy--as a foregone conclusion, at least not just yet.
Chinese hackers screwing around with DoD's networks are everyday noise-level stuff, not breaking news. And I don't think people should confuse the inability to impose social change in a feudal, tribal society (e.g. make the Iraqis play well together and join the civilized world) with the inability to decisively crush another--any other--military in the world in a conventional nose-to-nose conflict. We're a long way from losing that edge. Fielding a room full of chain-smoking hackers isn't the same as putting something in the air that can beat a four-ship of F-22s or the strike package coming in right behind it looking to wreck your homeland.
Unlike WW II, nobody may "win" another world war, if it happens. Desperation and nuclear weapons is a combination as-yet untested, but it doesn't take a lot of imagination to foresee the likely consequences. New book..."At Dawn, We Glowed Like Chem Lites at a U2 Concert."
I do so hope that those old "Duck and Cover" drills I did in grade school won't be coming back any time soon. And that "No child left behind" won't mean getting all the kids down to the shelter when the sirens start to wail.
It does kinda put even a 30% housing price decline into perspective, though...
One of my great fears is that the US's growing internal self-centered and self-indulgent attitude, combined with its ever-greater reliance on imported resources and critical products (even food) could paint us into a corner that would force us to use nuclear weapons as a "first strike" to maintain our national security. It is clear that most Americans have no stomach for the use of our troops on the ground for any sustained or widespread conflict (or, if Iraq is any indication, even in a relatively limited one). Most any military expert would say that a "conventional" conflict, even with all of our whiz-bang technology, is ultimately unwinnable without those troops on the ground at some point during the conflict. Combine that with the likelihood that any protracted future conventional American military actions may require resources (like oil) that the US no longer has in sufficient domestic supply (unlike World War II, when the US had both the natural resources and manufacturing capability to literally "over-supply" US forces fighting against any foe), and you have a potential scenario under which the use of nuclear weapons could be the only military option for victory. If that does not make the future world one hell of a dangerous place, I don't know what does.
Commercial real estate right now appears to be backing up to the edge of the cliff, and consumer credit could well be lining up to be the next shoe to drop. Or not, what do I know. Those are more in the realm of hunches.
Saw today that a company called "EGG" taken over by Citigroup that issued credit cards, is having them unable to take any more credit, just the ability to pay off the balance without prepayment or closure.
and especially don't forget the $500 trillion in abstruse financial derivatives (heck, the yearly global GDP is only $50 trillion by comparision) created by the banking system courtesy of the Fed and Al Greenspan. George Soros testified at a 1994 House Banking Commitee meeting that "there are so many (derivatives), and some of them are so esoteric that the risks involved may not be properly understood even by the most sophisticated of investors, and I’m supposed to be one of them." At that same meeting, Greenspan described the risk of derivatives as "negligible." The committee chose to believe the testimony of Greenspan and ignore Soros. so Fed policy has gone from too big to fail (Penn Square Bank, Continental Illinois in the 80's) to too big to care. when this monsterous derivative house of cards unwinds, falls, and implodes across the globe (trigger point = mounting bad debt created by the housing bubble?), most folks will exclaim: peak oil? who gives a s*** about peak oil?
Eventually, all of those bad debts and "excesses in economic behavior" will be "worked out," "written off," or whatever more technical term may be invented. HOW that happens is called a "DEPRESSION," and I think that is exactly what we are going to get. The Federal Reserve and the Federal government, in general, are trying to prevent that with window-dressing actions to make people ignore the trouble that is increasingly apparent. Basically, the Feds are trying to keep the Titanic from sinking by telling the band to play louder. Somehow I just don't quite think that is going to work . . .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the half a quadrillion dollar question...
