I'm absolutely stunned - the MSM is tackling exactly the questions and themes which have been discussed on this forum for years. Just goes to show how much ahead of the curve people here are!!
"Peak oil" describes the point at which the production of petroleum reaches its final high-point and begins a terminal decline. Given that oil is a finite resource, everyone agrees that a peak is inevitable, but views differ about when it is likely to happen and what the impacts will be. Some experts argue that the peak is imminent and that, when markets finally wake up to this fact, the world will face severe economic consequences. Others – including many governments and energy companies – believe the peak to be decades away and argue that as oil becomes more expensive to extract, the market will naturally redirect investment towards alternative energy sources.
If those concerned about peak oil are proved correct, and a fall in oil production triggered a major economic down-swing, this would likely reduce the global rate of carbon emissions for a period, just as other recessions have done. But even a very severe global recession wouldn't reduce emissions sufficiently to "solve" climate change – and indeed the longer-term impact of the oil peak could be to accelerate rather than decelerate global warming. That's because falling availability of crude oil could boost the production of even more carbon-intensive alternatives such as oil extracted from tar sands or "synfuel" produced from coal.
Yes. World events have clearly reached the point where at least some of these previously-taboo discussions can no longer be avoided. Recent events in Japan will accelerate this process, I think.
Others – including many governments and energy companies – believe the peak to be decades away and argue that as oil becomes more expensive to extract, the market will naturally redirect investment towards alternative energy sources.
The only teensy weensy ickle problem with that argument is that it usually takes decades for new technology to make an effective economic difference and it's not as if we suddenly decide on Monday that oil has become too expensive and we then have a whole new energy system in place by Friday. There is the not insignificant issue of economic collapse and loss of R&D and investment money associated with the expensive oil - inflation - recession sequence. But then, those advocating, and with an interest in the continuation of, BAU know all that don't they?
hardworkinghippy wrote:That video is frightening !
I thought it was fascinating! He obviously totally gets PO really, but just can't accept it. He's desperately trying to convince himself that it's not true, and was getting more and more stressed as he realised what crap he was talking, in his desperation to maintain the illusion of BAU. Was that his psychiatrist in the background? I loved the bit about that well know American authored tome, The Bible. I wonder if he knew it was actually written in a land far far away, that isn't inhabited by good ole boys (apart from a few with hard hats and very big guns).
