PowerSwitch

Anyone considered this as a possibility?

What if the optimists (such as myself) are right?
What if we build out enough renewables to cover (and more) the utility of the current transport paradigm and create a boom (much like the railways boom of the 19th century)?

Are the doomers still of the opinion that in such a scenario we will inevitably hit some other limit and crash anyway?

What if we build out enough renewables to cover (and more) the utility of the current transport paradigm and create a boom (much like the railways boom of the 19th century)?

*sigh*

You just don't get it, do you?

Yes, there was a railways boom. It followed the "canal-mania" and was the golden age of steam which preceded the golden age of oil.

There cannot be a "boom" which does not involve increased consumption of resources. That's why the canals, the railways and modern oil-based global transport caused booms. The 3rd Duke builds a canal from the mines at Worsley and suddenly the cost of coal in Manchester is cut in half. Everyone's a winner, baby!

UndercoverElephant wrote: You just don't get it, do you?

No I clearly don't get your vision because I don't see limits except in petroleum. We have barely scratched the surface of the available non-petroleum resources globally.

fifthcolumn wrote:

UndercoverElephant wrote: You just don't get it, do you?

No I clearly don't get your vision because I don't see limits except in petroleum.

Right.

So there's no limits in the supply of fresh water or fish in the sea?

Why were the steel and copper prices rocketing before the recession? Also uranium and coal and a few other things, besides? Because we had too much of them?

fc - try reading the following book:

Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Decline in Earth's Resources

http://www.DODGY TAX AVOIDERS.co.uk/Peak-Everything ... 595&sr=8-1

Once they sort out replicator technology (like on star trek) we won't have a problem.

free food, free water, free energy, all whenever you need it.

should be good

We currently consume, by some estimates, something like 40% of available photosynthetic output of the planet, plus any actual renewable energy we capture - on top of burning the equivalent of 400 years of primary plant production every year.

It's very, very difficult to even start to imagine enough renewables to cover our needs, which they will have to do one day. And by then there won't be a tree left; oil has at least given wood a breathing space, though not for long. In a really weird way, I quite admire people who can imagine it.

[quote="Aurora"]

Let's see - Gheghis Khan. Lived in a brutal tribal nomadic culture. Suffered considerable personal loss in his early years, which made him into one very tough cookie. Became a major tribal leader who combined Machiavellian politics with iron military disciple and trained highly skilled and technically advanced cavalry archer units. Had massive ambition and led his army to crushing defeats of major empires to both the east and west, until he headed one of the largest empires in the world of his day. He also became very cultured, adapting the best technology and and artisans from all the societies he invaded. Built a massive city in the dessert steppes.

Came within a months of overrunning Western Europe when he very inconveniently died. His sons immediately abandoned the invasion, started fighting each other over the succession, and the empire crumbled to dust within a century.

If I had to have an F1 team boss, then Gheghis Khan would be a very good choice, as long as you gave him a few years to learn the technicalities.

[Edit]

However, I wouldn't chose Heinberg...

[Edit]

His sexual exploits put the record of the current F1 boss to shame. It has been estimated by DNA analysis that 1% of all male Caucasians are his direct descendant.

[quote="RalphW"]

RGR wrote:
A few years? Maybe to just figure out what a CAR is for.

He lived and breathed horse power. He would figure it out in under a second.

[edit]

A
I agree that the economics might get him stumped. He was a master of logistics. He would be bemused by our economic system.

RalphW wrote:He would be bemused by our economic system.

Aren't all of us

FC as a fellow optimist (well relatively compared to many on powerswitch) the problem I have with your position is that it is very transport focussed. Peak oil is about so much more than transport. I think we will solve many of the transport issues. But that this alone is not enough.



Neil

[quote="Neily at the peak"]