An Über Doomer in the mainstream media

skeptik · Post by **skeptik** » 06 Apr 2008, 02:20

TEOTWAWKI
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... n0406.html

(link fixed. may require a small amount of bullshit form filling to gain access)

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 06 Apr 2008, 09:25

Duff link.

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 06 Apr 2008, 09:26

All peace and quiet as far as I can see. Link broken? Piece pulled?

murpen · Post by **murpen** » 06 Apr 2008, 10:20

Here it is:
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... n0406.html

bigjim · Post by **bigjim** » 06 Apr 2008, 12:14

Blimey, that's a very negative view he's got. It doesn't have to be that bad yet... does it?

skeptik · Post by **skeptik** » 06 Apr 2008, 15:48

Appologies. As murpen deduced, I clipped the l off the end of the url

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... n0406.html

bigjim wrote:Blimey, that's a very negative view he's got. It doesn't have to be that bad yet... does it?

"Guy R. McPherson is a professor of conservation biology at the University of Arizona."

I think we have an environmentalist with an agenda. A lot of peak oil doomer clich?s are parroted without supporting argument. For example:-

"Oil is necessary to extract and deliver coal and natural gas. Oil is needed to produce solar panels and wind turbines, and to maintain the electrical grid."

So how did the UK industrialise in the 19th century without the use of oil? And how was the UK electric grid maintained until the middle of the 20th largely without oil? - Coal was self supporting and used to power British Industry and the electrical grid. This is just Doomer clich? regurgitated. Coal and natural gas are perfectly good enough energy sources to permit their own extraction and distribution. The UK in the 19th Century largely ran on steam produced by coal. Massive engineering projects were undertaken without either oil or electricity.

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 06 Apr 2008, 16:07

Somedays I think all will be well ... and then I drive to the local town to go shopping and see that 90% of 'stuff' and activity needs oil ....

welshgreen · Post by **welshgreen** » 06 Apr 2008, 16:24

I know how you feel vortex!

stormcentre · Post by **stormcentre** » 06 Apr 2008, 16:31

Vortex wrote:Somedays I think all will be well ... and then I drive to the local town to go shopping and see that 90% of 'stuff' and activity needs oil ....

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 06 Apr 2008, 17:36

skeptik wrote:So how did the UK industrialise in the 19th century without the use of oil? And how was the UK electric grid maintained until the middle of the 20th largely without oil? - Coal was self supporting and used to power British Industry and the electrical grid. This is just Doomer clich? regurgitated. Coal and natural gas are perfectly good enough energy sources to permit their own extraction and distribution. The UK in the 19th Century largely ran on steam produced by coal. Massive engineering projects were undertaken without either oil or electricity.

I think the concern is what scale of industrialisation is possible without oil. The alternatives obviously exist, but nothing like in the scale of what's provided with Crude oil. An obvious question to ask is what scale of industrialisation did we have in 1890 in comparison to 1990.

Vortex · Post by **Vortex** » 06 Apr 2008, 17:37

stormcentre wrote:
Vortex wrote:Somedays I think all will be well ... and then I drive to the local town to go shopping and see that 90% of 'stuff' and activity needs oil ....

That WAS deliberate!

PowerSwitch

An Über Doomer in the mainstream media

An ?ber Doomer in the mainstream media