Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Does Peak Oil (and other peak resources) matter less than Chris usually seems to indicate?

Login or register to post comments Last Post 7492 reads   17 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 17 total)
  • Sat, Mar 05, 2016 - 05:15pm

    #1
    bhami

    bhami

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 19 2009

    Posts: 2

    count placeholder

    Does Peak Oil (and other peak resources) matter less than Chris usually seems to indicate?

Here’s an interesting recent article:

https://aeon.co/opinions/doing-more-with-less-the-economic-lesson-of-peak-paper

It points out that we are already past peak paper, coal, and steel, and we passed peak oil usage per world capita in 1979!

–Bruce

  • Sun, Mar 06, 2016 - 12:58am

    #2
    Luke Moffat

    Luke Moffat

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 25 2014

    Posts: 365

    count placeholder

    Data

What immediately jumps to mind is the lack of data in the article. But let me have a go on the basis that oil use is down and run with the theme that energy use per capita is down on a global scale as the author suggests. Look at interest rates and debt since 1979. Interest rates are down and debt is up – we're not using enough energy to grow the economy to keep interest rates at a steady level. So we have to continuously lower interest rates to keep the debt affordable.

But as the author offers no meaningful data it's hard to see how he has reached the following conclusion;.

"Contrary to what Peak Oil alarmists claim, these developments do not imply a reduction in living standards or an end to the process of economic development."

Really? Kids can't afford to buy the houses that their parents live in and the world is mired in debt.

Hang on, I just read the author's bio;

[quote]

John Quiggin

is professor of economics at the University of Queensland. 

[/quote]

ah, he's a professor, of economics no less! OK, ignore me. It's all amazing

 

 

  • Mon, Mar 07, 2016 - 01:49am

    #3
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1612

    count placeholder

    Talk is cheap

Body count please.

And does anyone think the body count is going to go down before globe energy resources are controlled by the hedgemon? whom ever that my be.

My money is on the "Clathrate Gun" going off first, if it hasn't already.

Beware the ides of August.

  • Thu, Mar 17, 2016 - 02:55pm

    #4

    LesPhelps

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 30 2009

    Posts: 475

    count placeholder

    Wow, What a Profound Outlook on the Future!

I suppose we are going to feed, clothe, house and transport ourselves with information?

Here's a bit of reality, data if you wil:

World Peak Oil arrived around 2005, with the exception of fracking.  Fracking was and is largely capitalized with "Monopoy Money" brought into existance by a wave of the Fed's magic wand.  I wonder what the fracking industry would look like today if investors had to capitalize it with money they had actually earned by creating something of real value?

As Chris frequently points out, the fracking industry is in dire straights.  The chart above gives you an idea what the world oil situation may look like when fracking volume declines.

Below is a non-government look at GDP growth.

Notice that GDP growth goes negative in 2001 and pretty much stays that way.  What do you think that says about the real start and duration of recession.  The only way you can easily refute the above chart is if you think the government reported inflation numbers are real.

Finally, here is what world population is doing while oil production is following the above path.  What do you suppose is going to happen when, either the fracking industry hits the reality wall, or regional war increases in the middle east to the point that production is affected?

Here's a real confidence builder.  This is an example of the people the voters are sending to Washington.

If you can't read it, the book is "The Post American World."

The above picture was run, in the New York Time I believe, when Obama was first running for President.  He was elected anyway.

I doubt the Clinton email scandal is going to change the outcome of the coming election.  Voters are too busy posting selfies to their Facebook page to do basic research on their candidates.

 

 

  • Thu, Mar 17, 2016 - 04:15pm

    #5

    pyranablade

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 08 2010

    Posts: 208

    count placeholder

    Why Les Phelps?

It appears that you are judging a book by its cover.

The Post American World (?)

Do you think the USA empire will continue on past our ongoing collapse? And should it?

I'm especially surprised that your comment is posted in a thread about Peak Oil – which we agree is real.

We Americans are more "doomed" than the citizens of any other country because we as a nation are more dependent on fossil fuels (especially oil), than any other nation. The Romans and other empires fell because they conquered too much, became too complex and relied too much on their military might. We now have large military bases around the world – they are there largely to ensure that the oil and other resources get sent to the USA Empire. Americans consume 1/5 of the world's resources every year but we make up much less of the world's population. It will take endless war to keep America where it is. We are already no longer dominant. Isn't it a good thing that some people recognize this and write books about it?

  • Thu, Mar 17, 2016 - 04:53pm

    #6

    dcm

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 14 2009

    Posts: 107

    count placeholder

    economics and the real world

There's a reason economists take a lot of hits. Taking a quick peak at some of his prior work along with this, it appears, like many academics, he equivocates the discovery, development and use of fossil fuels with other resources (and other chapters in history). The problem is the physical world cares very little about academics and runs….well on real things. It not only runs on things, its many many systems work on multiple principles of balance and distribution and competition.- physically, chemically, biologically….. Its not the biggest stretch of logic to think that digging up and burning an amazingly condensed energy source that took millions of years to form, and just as important, has been sitting inert in the ground for millions of years, and then burning it into a closed, global environment just might cause some systemic imbalance. It also might not be a stretch to assume that the very very unique 150 year chapter of using this stuff would mistakenly and dangerously create distorted economic philosophies of infinite growth along with a very very dangerous dependency on this energy (and its destructive forces) to do all of the worlds work. As Chris wisely points out again and again, the next few decades will be nothing like the last. This moment in human history was perhaps inevitable. The only real question is how quickly we see the cliff and how intelligently we hit the brakes and turn the wheel.

  • Fri, Mar 18, 2016 - 01:22pm

    #7

    LesPhelps

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 30 2009

    Posts: 475

    count placeholder

    pyranablade wrote:It appears

[quote=pyranablade]

It appears that you are judging a book by its cover.

The Post American World (?)

Do you think the USA empire will continue on past our ongoing collapse? And should it?

I'm especially surprised that your comment is posted in a thread about Peak Oil – which we agree is real.

[/quote]

Yes, no and I agree the Obama post was a non sequitur to the rest of my comments.

Regarding the article in question, it dismissed the Hubbert Curve and the Club of Rome with a verbal flick of the wrist.  It was ludicrous.

We will and should loose world dominance.  However, I'd rather we not elect people to government office who are intent on speeding the process along, but, as you said, that's another topic.

  • Fri, Mar 18, 2016 - 01:54pm

    #8

    pyranablade

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Nov 08 2010

    Posts: 208

    count placeholder

    Population

Thanks for your reply Les.

And your chart of population is relevant to the thread because it was started by somebody who asserted that  

we passed peak oil per capita in 1979!

In the face of exponential population growth, I'm not sure that peak-oil-per-capita is such an important stat. 

  • Mon, Mar 21, 2016 - 02:02pm

    #9

    LesPhelps

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 30 2009

    Posts: 475

    count placeholder

    Overshoot

In a population overshoot event, per capita applies to every resource.

  • Wed, Mar 23, 2016 - 03:18am

    #10
    MarkBahner

    MarkBahner

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: May 25 2012

    Posts: 53

    count placeholder

    Human population is not growing exponentially

In the face of exponential population growth, I'm not sure that peak-oil-per-capita is such an important stat.

Human population hasn't been growing exponentially essentially since approximately 1960. That is, the percentage by which human population increases has been falling since approximately 1960. (There have been a few years where the percentage growth seemed to be constant…indicating exponential growth…but then the percentage began falling again.)

 

 

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 17 total)

Login or Register to post comments