World Facing Energy Crisis Say Oil Producers

[chlamor]

World Facing Energy Crisis Say Oil Producers

The world is about to face an energy crisis because the demand for oil keeps growing even though production is already at its maximum, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said yesterday.

Chavez, whose country is the world’s fifth largest crude oil exporter, said that all OPEC members were “producing at full steam.”

“There’s a worldwide energy crisis around the corner,” Chavez told reporters at the end of the first Summit of South American-Arab Countries in Brazil.

“Especially because the US and other developed countries, but more so the US, have built a way of life based on the wasteful consumption of oil, which is non-renewable.”

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4542302

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. in the mean time, chimp claims that oil will be back at $25 soon

and we are going on a flight to mars too!

[Deja Q]

5. And we're giving prosperity to the other nations of the world!

At least we're not letting them bask in "the untamed fire of freedom" yet... :nuke: :scared:

[aneerkoinos]

15. No

US "Giving prosperity"?!?!?!

No, perhaps you are just becoming unable to rob so much of remaining wealth...

[MasonJar]

24. I love your dog picture. What a genius you have for a dog!

[thecrow]

7. Sounds like he took that flight already! n/t

[truthisfreedom]

27. chimpy makes all kinds of bizarre claims. he's a freaking windbag.

on a bicycle. and he's out of the loop, all the time. didn't even know his own home was about to be "airplaned" even though it was all over the news. pedaling along in blissful ignorance of everything, all over the earth...

man, if i had an hour and a half to blow every day biking, i'd be in heaven. leader of the free world? we're one pretzel away from world peace. one pretzel.

"doo-dee-doo-dee-doo" squeak-squeak-squeak-squeak-squeak-squeak-squeak...

[bunny planet]

45. Yup.

[VegasWolf]

49. "Soon! I'll be back very SOON, Ira!" Remember, Romancing the Stone! n/t

[sinkingfeeling]

2. Well, Duh!!

[Deja Q]

3. Hmm, if Chevron or Marathon or Shell execs said this, I'd say in return

"YOU allowed the problem and YOUR greed hardly stopped yourselves."

Generation X = Generation Screwed.

[PATRICK]

10. Chavez, small wonder

This is what all the others have been dancing around with smoke and mirrors up to the present day. Glad to see him granted at least the equal say in the club although it is not noted by the journalists why the other producers are not as honest.

[Coventina]

4. And the band played on....

Eve of Destruction.....

[iamjoy]

9. Tax Deduction

(for Hummers and other fuel guzzling cars)

[Coventina]

85. Love and Rockets?

:thumbsup:

(and good point as well)

[donsu]

6. thank the Fates and Muses that sane Venezuelians own the 5th

largest crude oil supply.

and I'm sorry they have to defend themselves from our criminal bushgang.

[thecrow]

8. I have noticed a lot of this recently

It seems like one oil producer had the guts to say this and now they are all saying it.
Why don't people listen?

[shoelace414]

11. It hard work

so lets do nothing about it.

[Coastie for Truth]

12. Predicted 50 years ago by Shell Geologist Hubbert

and more recently by Kenneth Deffeyes (Hubbert's Peak : The Impending World Oil Shortage, Beyond Oil : The View from Hubbert's Peak) and David Goodstein (Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil) - as well as Avery Lovins and Stan Ovshinsky.

BUT NOBODY WAS LISTENING

so we just kept giving tax deductions for Hummers, and refused to raise CAFE, and through zoning and planning mistakes - we killed transit and encouraged every more remote suburbs and ever more personal vehicle commuting.

and then oil broke $50/bbl -- and stayed there

STILL NOBODY WAS LISTENING


and then GM and Ford were downgraded to "Junk Bond" status.


AND STILL NOBODY WAS LISTENING

Check out Kunstler's CD "The End of Suburbia: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of the American Dream" - but guess what --->

STILL NOBODY WILL BE LISTENING

[cliss]

16. Don't be too sure, Coastie.

I'll grant you the first 3 Nobody's....but the fourth one...

Well, people will be listening. But only after it's almost too late. They will wake up in the 11th hour, when gas is moving toward $5.00 per gallon, and there are large hordes of people hitchhiking to get to work. Cars will be abandoned all over the place because people couldn't afford to fill the tank.

[Coastie for Truth]

17. No - we will still be in a state of denial

* until our total "energy" costs (automotive fuels, home heating oil/gas, electricity) have doubled to tripled in price;

* until at least one of the "Big Three" is purchased by a foreign auto maker -- and another defaults on its pension/retiree health care obligations;

* until businesses in the "outer ring" of the remote exurbs can't find customers or employees;

* until residential construction in the "outer ring" of the remote exurbs stops (due to lack of sales and lack of construction financing);

Then, maybe they "will be listening" - and we will see an economic, residential, and business return to the inner cities and the old, inner ring of 1920's era "street car" suburbs, at which point "pedestrian friendliness" will be desirable again.

[Gregorian]

21. The ignorant only respond to a crisis

I go one step further, and look at the demand. It's the population. But nobody wanted to talk about that. I've been screaming it out for thirty years now. My home in Palo Alto was ruined by cars and concrete. I left. It's a disaster, and noone is listening. Noone can even equate demand with the number of users.

[aneerkoinos]

30. You are so right

It's the population. In Europe and Japan it's starting to decline very shortly in organized fashion, rest of the world will follow long after, or soon in very unorganized fashion (US may soon follow the example of Russia).

This is the ultimate challenge for all of humanity. There's still a real chance of soft landing, but political reality in US is making that soft landing a very distant dream to people in US and many other places.

What I'm absolutely certain of is that if US sticks to the logic of "we first, fuck others", they have no chance whatever. And look what is happening.

[Gregorian]

31. I feel really stupid bringing it up.

I mean, when people were busy breeding, things looked nice. It's like there is no guilty party. And I am 50, and hardly anyone I know has had children. It's a situation with self-feedback. A very slow system. So why am I screaming? I guess it just sucks, in this respect, to be a baby boomer. But the reality IS that unless we stop procreating right now, we are in deeper than at present, which is already very serious. I guess that's my disclaimer for my sig line. The most important subject is almost not worth talking about. I feel useless and hopeless.

[aneerkoinos]

34. Not black and white

It's all about soft landing.

Population pyramid that goes too top heavy is also a major problem. Stopping all procreative activity is not a solution, it's suicide. Fertility of 1,5 per woman would be ideal for the transition period. It's not the population, it's about humanity and what is good in our civilization surviving the population peak that occurs 40 years after oil peak. Not a small challenge, if you like an understatement. We need to think and plan over several generations and defuse the population problem of overgroth slowly, by sharing, not by abrupt die-off.

Yes, I'm father of two.

[Massacure]

40. The U.S. also has the best chance of surviving it too.

It's funny how the one best off is the one who is driving off the cliff.

Europe doesn't have a vast desert to grow algae for bio-diesel in.

[aneerkoinos]

63. Interesting

Weve got plety of Sahara pretty close, but that is not the point. The point is that there is no Deus ex Machina, no simplistic techincal solutions to the problem.

We allread have enough technology, know enoug to survive, the problem is not lack of technical know how, but how to get society to adopt it full scale.

In this respect US is behing Europe billions of years. There is no US society, only military industrial complex and consumerism. Good effing luck to all of ya, you will need it!

[Eloriel]

57. Heheh. I think your're being an optimist

Let's say they "wake up" with gas at $5 (which would be quite cheap, IMO, considering the circumstances) -- what makes you think that will be "almost" too late, rather than too late totally. Do you know of a viable plan to overcome the end of civilization?

[aneerkoinos]

66. Heh

I have only one realistic, but you won't like it:

US collapsing and the rest of the global capitalist system with it ASAP, and the rest of the world adopting various socialist systems to cope together...

This saddens me, because of all the good people and friends on DU, but I don't other realistic possibility of humanity surviving than US going down, really bad way...

[Eloriel]

95. No, I don't "like" it, but it is more realistic

IMO.

[LynnTheDem]

13. Announced AFTER bush's PRE-EMPTIVE Doctrine strikes on 2 oil-rich

nations.

See! bush DID pre-empt something! The announcement that oil is running out!

:eyes:

rightwingnuts; too criminally stupid for words.

[aneerkoinos]

14. WOW!

Chavez giving the official announcement of imminent Peak Oil. I'm not surprized it's Chavez to say it out aloud first (of OPEC leaders), but I've been wondering why not earlier...

[GirlinContempt]

96. He said it before

but less people were listening even then

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. Aren't there other sources of energy other than oil?

Besides there are so many ways that we can all cut back and use energy more efficiently. It's time to get off our asses and start. Screw Big Oil. There's plenty of oil left if we switch as much as we can to alternatives and conservation. Of course our Fearless Leader and the Oil Companies aren't going to tell us how to do this, we just have to do it on our own.

[endarkenment]

20. coal and nuclear and neither of them will power your car

and both of them have major issues. Oil isn't going to run out tomorrow but it is going to get a lot more expensive, and that price rise is happening now, not some time in the future, and it is going to be permanent, and it is going to change the way we all live.

[RPM]

32. nuclear can power a car...

just use the electricity to charge the batteries on an electric car...

Good luck, however, with an aeroplane.

[aneerkoinos]

33. Not really

Electric cars are not efficient use of energy, but nuclear can power a train and a tram.

[megatherium]

44. electric cars pretty much suck

but they do work. For $6000 you can convert that old VW Golf to run on lead-acid batteries. You'll have a 40 or 50 mile range; enough for your commute (perhaps), and you'll be able to go onto the expressway. Yes, this is pretty crappy for an automobile, but if there is no petroleum, it might suddenly start to looking pretty good.

Now, if you want a better electric car, you can engineer something from the ground up, and you can look at other battery types. GM did this with the EV1. They leased them out in CA and AZ (I think). These things had a 100+ mile range (I think, someone please correct me) and were a total blast to drive (very smooth and quiet, and wonderful acceleration, a trait of electric motors). But GM's real goal was to prove that electric cars aren't good enough. Their goal was to look sincere about it, so they spent hundreds of millions on this project. (They wanted to force CA to change its law mandating zero emission vehicles.) Well, once they proved that electric cars suck, they recalled all the leased vehicles (claiming that they didn't want the legal liability of continuing to support them). It turned out they had a devil of a time getting all the leassees to cough them up. There are still people trying to prevent GM from crushing the remaining copies.

[aneerkoinos]

46. I'm nor sure

but I think energy (and pollution)-wise, horses and donkeys beat the crap out of electric cars. Of course, rail beats donkeys and horses big time. See a pattern here?



And no mattter what, the most basic equation remains: it makes no sense to move around two tons or metal and plastic per person when you could move 200 kg per person. Automobile culture is not sustainable, period.

[megatherium]

59. The days of automobiles may be numbered.

But I think individual mobility, the ability to go at any hour in a personally-owned vehicle, will survive in some form or other, if only electric scooters or somesuch.

But you might be right: a sane future where everyone lives in pleasant livable urban settings, where people walk everywhere or take the electric light rail (or perhaps a segway-like device or a bike). I know people who live in places like Manhattan who do not own a car. I myself once lived in Eugene, Oregon, and got by without a car -- I walked to school and shopping; rode my bike to visit friends; and took the bus if I had to.

[aneerkoinos]

67. Take me

I don't have a car, never had, not even drivers license.

I live 50 meters from subway station if I need to get somewhere, never needed a car, and when boozing, I don't drink and drive but take a taxi.

[Solon]

74. One thing I don't get is this...

While I agree with your vision of the future to an extent, why forget the greatest invention since 1800, according to a BBC poll, the Bicycle? Seriously, electric and small gasoline, or propane, scooters, light rails, and other things are all great, but if you live a mile or 2 from work, isn't it just easier to take the simplest machine to your job, or simply walk? I bought a bike recently, used, for 20 bucks, only needs a seat clip and rear brake, and once fixed, in the next week or two, its going to be my primary mode of transportation around town, even though I already own a 30-40 mpg car. This is not to say that the Bike can replace ALL transportation needs, that's just stupid, but if we're talking about the decline in air travel(Jet engines are Gas(Kerosine) Guzzlers) then think high speed, continental trains, or going 30 miles to work or home, light rail would work for this. But, to be honest, would most people who don't need it, sans the elderly or disabled, rather use the cheapest and simplest machine to travel with, rather than spending 500+ dollars on a scooter?

To put it in prespective, I'm going to use the bike, in conjunction with a backpack, for simple transportation chores, like small time shopping(BOOKSTORES, love books), things like that. I wouldn't use it for grocery shopping though, forget that shit, I need something like the trunk of my car, or I could simply not shop for a week of food, and only shop for a day instead(lifestyle choice). It is, after all, the simple things we can do to live a low energy lifestyle.

[megatherium]

82. the drawback with bikes

is that some climates are not conducive to bikes. Hot, sticky humidity in the south in summer; bitter subzero cold in the north.

Another problem with bikes is not everyone is physically able to ride them, especially older people.

Bikes are inexpensive, as you indicate, which makes them attractive to many people. (And they're enjoyable to ride.) But many folks don't really need to save that much money; they're happy to spend more for transportation. These folks may want to buy a scooter or segway, or even a fully-enclosed vehicle of some kind. There's something to be said for low-technology simplicity; unfortunately, many people would feel impoverished if they were obliged to live that way, and would oppose this politically. We need transportation choices that are sustainable and comfortable for everyone.

[GirlinContempt]

97. What they did

in Cuba during their energy crisis was offer subsidized bikes to all those interested, and then discounted fares on energy-efficient public transit.

[Coastie for Truth]

62. Correct - see my append 61 --- NT

[megatherium]

83. thanks nt

[Coastie for Truth]

61. Not so.

That is the party line from Roger "Squeaky" Smith (The "Roger" of Michael Moore's "Roger and Me" - a real a'hole) and from the comedy team of Rick Wagoner and Bob Lutz. But the two "auto guys" (Lloyd Reuss and Bob Stemple) were actually getting good results from EV prototypes.

1) A generator converts most of heat in the steam into electricity.
2) Electrical transmission lines are remarkably efficient compared to heat engines. (I am a Chem E - not an EE - and besides the arithmetic of transmission lines uses "imaginary numbers" and "Transmission Line Theory" - which is only a "Theory")
3) Battery charging is a 95%-98% efficient process. The loss are "overvoltage" and ohmic.
4) Battery discharging is also about 95-98% efficient.
5) Turning an electric motor is much more efficient the a heat engine.
6) Plus - in an EV you have "regenerative braking" - where, instead of brake fade and brake overheating - you get some electricity back.

I only taught "thermo" as a TA in grad school and worked for the Primary Vendor on the GM EV1 and EV2.

GM did not want to be "told" by the California Air Resources Board that they "had to" make a zero emission vehicle. They wanted to fight it in court instead of making the vehicle.

[happyslug]

65. HAY, this is AMERICA, Keep those Trams in England.

In the US they are called "Streetcars" Or "Trolleys" (Through the name since the 1970s has been "LRV" for Light Rail Vehicles). The term "Tram" is used in England and the British Commonwealth but rarely in the US.

Now where does the name "Light Rail" comes from? If you check the net all types of definitions are found, from Light rail being a Pantograph system and heavy rail being a third rail system, to the weight of the cars. All of these are WRONG.

The real definition comes from the Rail itself. In the later days of Steam (1900-1960) the large steam locomotives would put a lot of stress on the rail, thus requiring a rail that could take a lot of beating. This became know as "Heavy Rail" often a weight was given on the rail i.e. how much power could the steam engine put on that rail without bending it.

Now diesels (Which are really electric motors power by Diesel Generators) do not put anywhere near the power on a rail, so most railroads today do NOT use as strong as rail as they did in the last days of Steam, but even these Diesel-electric (a more accurate name than Diesel) put a lot of power on the rail so rails that can take a lot of power is still used on regular rail lines and retain the name Heavy rail lines. Large Rail system that use multi car systems are often called "Heavy Rail Systems".

In the same time period Light rails were used on systems with very small steam locomotives, the early diesel-electrics, or the Trolleys and Streetcars of the period. These were Cheaper to produce and buy and unless you were running heavy trains on them would last just as long as a Heavy rail.

The Term "LRV" came into general use to differentiate the new LRVs from the old Streetcar systems. Marketing is everything and calling something (at least in the US) a LRV made it sound much more modern than calling it a "Trolley" or "Streetcar".


Some people's definitions:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~wyatt/modes.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rajvdb/lra/index.html?e_htm/e_de.htm~main
http://thetransitcoalition.us/INFO_Definitions.htm
http://www.apta.com/research/stats/documents/FactBook/OVERVIEW.pdf#search='Heavy%20Rail%20Defined'

[Coastie for Truth]

23. Petroleum has several unique advantages

1) It has a high "energy density" - which has variously been defined as "BTU's per pound" or "BTU's per cubic foot" - that's its big advantage over energy stored in battery.

2) It is relatively easy to store and transport - that's its big advantage over hydrogen - which has a higher "Energy Density" in terms of BTU per pound - but is not that easy to store or transport.

Same issue with natural gas and with LPG

3) We are really expert at getting it out of the ground, refining it, and blending it.

Just that as we slide down the peak oil slope - the oil is harder to find, harder to get out of the ground, and harder to refine

4) The "near oils" (oil shale, tar sands) all have environmental costs above and beyond the environmental costs of petroleum.

"Fischer-Tropsch" gasoline - which is made by a series of chemical reactions with coal is no environmental sweetheart either. The equipment and processes bear some family relationship to making "coke" (metallurgical coal). My family is from the area, I worked in the University's "Fischer-Tropsch" lab in college, and also in a US Government "Fischer-Tropsch" plant, and we got our electricity from Shippingport Nuclear Power Plant -- and I feel safer around a nuclear plant then a "Fischer-Tropsch" plant.

5) Nuclear - considering all of the alternatives ....

6) "The Hydrogen Economy" - hydrogen is not energy. It is a way of carrying and storing energy. It is about 60%-80% efficient.

Two generic routes to hydrogen--
a) Certain thermal-chemical paths from petroleum to hydrogen -- but you also get CO2.
b) Electrolysis of water - you need electricity.

7) Solar - looks good. Consider it as a source of electricity.

8) Wind - It's happening now.

9) Hydro - and variants such as tides -- location specific.

10) Bio-mass

a) As a source of liquid fuels - the research is coming along very nicely, and "it will happen"
b) Some mimicking of the cellular biochemical

Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) <=> Adenosine Diphosphate (ATP)

cycle of living things. Work is being done, and they are getting reproducible results -- but it won't reduce the price of gasoline or electricity this decade.

Right now - conservation, smaller cars, use transit, warmer in the summer/cooler in the windows, as your mother said "Turn out lights when you leave the room!"

[aneerkoinos]

25. Mostly agree

But one thing. I used to oppose fission energy, now I don't see soft landing (by about 2050) possible without utilizing all known methods including fission - only exemption is coal, we really really really can't start using even more coal - climate change is already hitting us badly. With global population expansion until 2050 it is really that bad situation, in order to survive we must postpone the used fission fuel problem until fusion becomes functional, probably around the same 2050. But without fission, there is great likelyhood that around 2050 there is no techological civilization left to develope and utilize fusion energy.

There are areal differences, but only way to think about this is on global scale, and then acting on local scale.

[DoYouEverWonder]

26. We will have enough oil

if we do all the other stuff. Plus in the biomass category legalizing industrial hemp will solve a number of problems because it is cheap, easy to grow and versatile. We will never replace oil completely, but we can easily go a long way to conserving what we have left and finding other less polluting sources of energy.

[aneerkoinos]

29. No you won't

There's is not enough agriland to produce biofuel to replace the steadily declining oil production. People will need to be fed, with organic farming.

Only possibility is to build electricity powered mass transit to move people and goods. The age of automobile is soon over.

[Coastie for Truth]

35. For personal transportation

I think we will see "Mini Cooper" and Scion size electric cars - which can be recharged at night when total electricity demand is low.

For vacations, etc. -- we will probably see the rent-a-car companies renting big cars (but gas will be so expensive that you will probably have to save up for a "driving a car" vacation). Right now "Rent-An=RV" is getting popular.

[chlamor]

36. Wholesale changes in EVERY facet of our lives

is the only way. This means using MUCHO MUCHO less. This means growing ALOT more food locally and organically-no petrochemical agribusinees, this means local light rail infrastructure established in the next decade, this means radical restructuring of our energy intensive Academic institutions, this means creating work where we live, this means rethinking how loans are packaged and bundled, this means rent controls/reductions and pay DECREASES-starting at the top, this means the virtual elimination of air travel, this means the gradual reduction/elimination of the tourist industry-which is toxic anyway, this means a return to local economies. This means POWERDOWN and more leisure time.

On Edit:This means reucing the Military budget and fuel consumption by half IMMEDIATELY-The world's largest user of fossil fuels and worlds greatest polluter.
That is where the money comes from for these life affirming projects.

Can we make the transition to an elegant culture of LIFE? You hold the answer.

[Coastie for Truth]

38. Agree on "Big Picture" - Disagree on Some "Details"

1) This means growing ALOT more food locally and organically-no petrochemical agribusinees,

They are doing some work at the "Ag Schools" in the mid west on significantly reducing the "petrochemical" input to agriculture. You don't need petroleum to make fertilizers.

2) this means the virtual elimination of air travel

With the web, web conferencing, web cams, faxes, modems, tele-conferencing, video-conferencing, e-mail, Outlook, etc. -- we have seen significant reduction in business air travel

3) this means local light rail infrastructure established in the next decade...this means creating work where we live, this means rethinking how loans are packaged and bundled, this means rent controls/reductions ... this means a return to local economies

These are "practically" the same issue -- we have to return to a transit based, pedestrian friendly, "village and neighborhood" style of living and working and K-college education and commerce. People are amazed when I tell them that as a youngster I lived with 1.6 miles of my elementary school, junior high school, high chool, churches and temples, neighborhood shopping, and both sets of grandparents, within 3 miles of my college, and within two blocks of transit.

4) this means the gradual reduction/elimination of the tourist industry

I have been seeing ads for "Buy a fuel saving economy car - you can always rent a mini-van for your vacation travel"

We have cut our gasoline cosumption over 60%. By putting up with a warmer condo in the summer and cooler in the winter - we have cut our electricity by about 20% - and we don't "feel" that we are "scrimping" or "suffering."

One of our high points as a family -- after the youngest graduated and was "off my pay roll" - we sold the 3000 square foot + basement house with a two car heated garage, sold the SUV, and moved into a high rise condo, pet friendly, pedestrian friendly, strip mall with "everything" - including a dentist, in the complex, walking distance of transit.

[chlamor]

41. Yep

well thought out so we will iron out the details to suit each community and its unique necessities. The big question in my mind is how to get the local/state gov't to act on these all too obvious issues. so much of what they do/are allowed to do is tied to federal packages/mandates and the intransigence (Read:Bought off) at the federal level is staggering on both sides of the aisle.

We Could have such better lives if we learned to live with less. Alot of people know this but the cultural conditioning is ever present and pushing in the opposite direction.

Well done.

[Coastie for Truth]

42. Two crazy things

1) The switch from CRT's (televisions and computer displays) to flat panel displays - saves a tremendous amount of energy - both in the manufacturing and in life cycle operation.

2) The switch from "film cameras" to "digital cameras" - also saves a tremendous amount of energy and resources (did you ever think of water, and of the sewage treatment, for film based photography compared to digital photography.

An even crazier thing - I use PV to recharge my ubiquitous AA and AAA rechargeables (plus the batteries for radios, cameras, etc.)

[chlamor]

48. I know this is apocryphal

but I won't use cameras for a number of reasons. I applaud your efforts to make real cuts in lifestyle and live with a conscience. I wish we could just use our eyes, ears, nose etc. and Re-Gain our Sense-Abilities without all the mediated experiences. Of course I am talking to/with you in Cyberland.

Peace Coastie

[happyslug]

71. Like the Digital camera, you have to look at the Whole Energy Cycle.

For example I for see books disappearing. The energy costs to move paper to printer and than book to book store and than to the consumer is why more energy intensive than just having the book on line and access through a computer. Yes the Computer uses energy, but computers are using less and less energy and thus it may be more energy efficient to use computers than books.

Another area of energy savings are small generators. I installed one on my bike a few year ago and as I bike I can not tell the difference between when I had the generator and when I did not (I install a "Hub" Generator so it is always generating as I move my Bike). Now I did use Generators when I was a kid, and those cheap generators were a BIG drag when engaged, but the high end generators, you just can NOT feel the difference.

Another area of savings is the perfection of the LED lights, these lights while poor at projecting light compared to other lights sources, is great as an indicator light and uses a lot less power than Halogen and other lights (Even less than florescence but Florescence provides better light PROJECTION, i.e. can be used for lighting to see by as opposed to a light to see). I notice a lot of Large Trucks, cars (Mostly Japanese) and even Street lights using LED lights. Now the cars and trucks are Tail lights, but still a huge savings in lighting.

Thus there are ways to save energy, we just have to make the needed adjustments to be able to save energy.

[chlamor]

75. The Whole Energy Cycle of the computer

now this article was written in 1998 so things may have changed somewhat but for all those changes/reductions I suspect more computers are being used. I'm one of those new users. Also apprx. 300 lbs of ore must be mined for the amount of copper for one computer. Here's more:


The chips start with silica (essentially sand) mined in Washington and heated with carbon in Oregon to form 98 percent pure silicon. That silicon is cooked with hydrochloric acid and hydrogen to form a "hyper-pure" silicon rod 8 inches across. The rod is sliced into paper-thin wafers, which are polished like mirrors and shipped to--where else?--Silicon Valley.

The California "wafer fab," longer than two football fields, houses equipment made by more than 100 companies around the world. It does such delicate work that its air has to be kept much purer than we keep it for people. Outside air contains maybe I million particles per cubic foot; hospital operating rooms stay below 100,000 particles per cubic foot; "clean rooms" in Silicon Valley permit no more than five particles per cubic foot.

Workers wearing gowns, booties, and gloves use ultra-precise machinery to etch minute circuits on the silicon. Micromachines deposit phosphorus and boron in just the right places, then painstakingly thin layers of copper from Arizona, then an even thinner layer of gold. The circuits are built up in hundreds of steps, with cleaning and oxidation in between. To make one computer's chips, which weigh one-50th of a pound, a state-of-the-art plant uses 1,400 gallons of water and generates about 40 pounds of waste.


The finished wafers are packed in unbleached Douglas-fir pulp from Oregon and black plastic foam from Japan and shipped to Malaysia. In Kuala Lumpur, skilled workers earning about $2 an hour cut the wafers into individual chips and assemble them into "packages" mounted on a copper frame, molded into plastic and wired together with gold. Hardly a scrap of the expensive gold is wasted, but at the South African mine each pound of gold extracted piles up a million pounds of cyanide-treated toxic tailings.

Back to California go the chip packages. There they are inserted into circuit boards, the wild mazes you see if you look inside a computer. The boards are made in Texas, out of copper, fiberglass, and epoxy resin. They are plated with copper from Chile, tin from Brazil, and lead recycled from Houston's dead car batteries. This step generates more hazardous waste than any other in the computer's fabrication.

The boards, case, monitor, and other pieces of my computer were transported by ship, truck, and rail to the final assembly plant in California, put together, packed in polystyrene foam and a cardboard box, and shipped another 3,000 miles to me.

The manufacturing of my 55-pound computer generated 139 pounds of waste and used 7,300 gallons of water and 2,300 kilowatt-hours of energy. It will use four times that much energy again during its lifetime--energy that is generated by a nuclear power plant, a coal-fired plant and hydropower from the flooded lands of the Cree people at James Bay.

http://www.swans.com/library/art4/zig003.html

[happyslug]

84. Vast improvement since the time the article was written

And if you want to get into details see how Paper is made. The pollution dumped in the streams exceed what the computer of 1998 was producing.

We have to share information somehow, oral is the least environmental harmful method, but unless strictly controlled subject to mistake in transmission. Pulp paper is "cheap" but at huge environmental costs. Thus you have to look at the WHOLE picture not just one part of it. If you look at the whole picture, computers and the net are less environmentally harmful than books (also uses less energy looking over the whole picture of BOTH).

[BronxBoy]

86. What's PV? n/t

[Coastie for Truth]

89. In this context -> PV= Photo Voltaic

Two broad classes of solar energy--

1. Photo-thermal. Solar hot water heaters, solar space heaters - and some more sophisticated stuff.

2. Photo-voltaic (PV) - light falling on a semiconductor generates electricity.

[BronxBoy]

91. And you are able

to recharge your batteries with it? I want to start to look at uses of solar for my home but most of the sites I've found aren't that friendly to an solar newbie. Any good educationals links would be appreciated

Thanks

[Coastie for Truth]

92. No problem recharging batteries.

I picked up some photo-voltaic battery chargers from Radio Shack - use them for the ubiquitous AA and AAA batteries.

Also, (stores, haven't looked in the catalog or web site) has photovoltaic battery chargers.

[BronxBoy]

93. Thanks

[LiberallyInclined]

51. extremely doubtful-

the age of the petroleum-powered internal combustion automobile may soon be over, but cars are here to stay.

what kind of "electric powered mass transit" is going to move people and goods all across the fairly vast interior of the U.S.? you might have noticed that we don't really have the kind of rail system they have in europe, and those things can't be built overnight.

[chlamor]

52. The automobile

will gradually fade and of course will not disappear entirely for many years. The moving of people and goods across these great expanses will also decrease out of necessity. there is another cousin issue here which is the copious amounts of water used for much of the current living arrangements we now take for granted. The Oglalla Aquifer is declining and the Missouri River is hurting and the etc. so we will see changes that will gradually (I hope) mandate a return to the local. Let us hope we choose a ceremonious path and do not have the State impose its ways upon us.
Here in the US we are conditioned to the 'Happy Ending'.

Local light rail will take years to put in place as so much has been cannibalized and the only place to find the funds is in the bloated Military Budget. Only grass roots can force this to happen. You are the answer.

[LiberallyInclined]

55. I'm not the answer, because i don't see it playing out that way.

other ways of powering automobiles and trucks will be developed.

"The moving of people and goods across these great expanses will also decrease out of necessity..."

so- i guess that everyone will return to only living along the coastal areas? if global warming eventually causes the sea level to rise- that's gonna be a bad thing.

[chlamor]

58. Nope

Did you see the word Coastal in my post?

And what do you mean return? Never mind.

"other ways" are energy intensive and quite polluting. USE LESS -ALOT LESS

Do some research on all the energy that goes into our transportation system. That includes highway repairs-rubber-extraction processes for all manufacturing etc. those days of endless automobiling are numbered.

The word 'Automobile' means 'To move under the power of ones own feet'-That's its Latin root. Not such a bad concept. Relaxing- slow, so you experience much more, and better for the head, heart and lungs.

[LiberallyInclined]

78. i think what you need-

is a little more real world experience... :hi: keep trying.

as far as "coastal" in your post- I asked you about what type of electric mass transit you envisioned for the vast stretches of the american heartland, and you replied that:

The automobile will gradually fade and of course will not disappear entirely for many years. The moving of people and goods across these great expanses will also decrease out of necessity.

well, if the moving of people and goods across the interior of the US is going to decrease, and cars are going to disappear entirely, it seems to suggest that people are going to have to huddle together on the more congested east and west coasts if they want to participate in society.

[chlamor]

80. How much

of your food do you grow? How much of your heat do you obtain with your two hands?
Real life experience is what that is. Do you know how and practice the skill of saving seed? Thats real life experience. Do you have these experiences? Tell me about some of yours. Lets compare notes.

People need to stay where they are as much as is possible. In the midwest where I grew up in a small farm town getting Real Life experience enough food could be easily grown so as to limit the need for mass transport in the food sector. I could explain this in detail if you would like.

I am open to hearing some of your experiences with primary knowledge.

[aneerkoinos]

60. LOL

Indeed, I have noticed. But never in history of mankind pure wishfull thinking has changed the underlying facts that guide history.

So according to your (and mine) logic, US is ruined and Europa has a chance, and no use doing anything in US, because it's all beyond hope, if automobile culture dies.

Off the cliff in your cars everyone, rather that seek other solutions, how hard they may be? You know what, I believe that of you people...

[chlamor]

64. Americans are psycho-illogically addicted to the rubber wheel

and automobile and seem to have an aversion to the steel rail. You should see the mass advertising that goes into this toxic car culture. Ones entire identity can be centered on your car and your sense of self-worth may depend on how cool you be drivin' down the road.

[aneerkoinos]

68. Just what I said

People are perfectly capable of loving their mythology more than their lives or lives of their children.

Nothing new, check what happened at Eastern Islands. Survival instinct is not universal, with Gringo Americans it seems to be exceptionally poorly developed.

But all the best, anyhow.

UGH.

[chlamor]

72. Thought you might appreciate this

:toast:

"Of all races in an advanced stage of civilization, the American is the least accessible to long views. . . . Always and everywhere in a hurry to get rich, he does not give a thought to remote consequences; he sees only present advantages. . . . He does not remember, he does not feel, he lives in a materialist dream."
--Moiseide Ostrogorski (1902, 302-303)

[aneerkoinos]

76. Our children

We carry the blame unleaching you on.

We carry the blame and seek for no forgiveness.

There are no US-Europe children anymore. Just bastards, oedipalian tings wanting to blind us too.

I know how much the talk about European bastard gets on US muthology about your manifest destiny, and how much you resent Euro condescending attitude towards our bastard sons.

[Massacure]

43. Hemp shouldn't be used for biomass.

Hemp is a hell of a lot better for clothing than cotton and better for paper than wood, but shouldn't be used for biomass.

Algae is much faster growing than hemp, and we are really damn good at growing it. You just need water and plenty of cow shit. I'm sure California wouldn't mind selling all their dung to Arizona were all we would need to do is create an artifical salt lake in the middle of the desert.

[LiberallyInclined]

47. hemp seed oil comes from the seed, not the fibrous part of the plant-

so why shouldn't it be used as a bio-diesel fuel?

Hemp is a very versatile and soon to be an important-again crop.

putting hemp in rotation with other crops, because of it's deep root system, makes tilling the soil that much easier the for the next crop, saving fuel, it also reduces the need for pesticides and fertilizers that are also petroleum derivitave.
also- Cotton farming is one of the nastiest things that can happen to a patch of innocent earth- it's VERY petro-chemical heavy...switching to hemp will also provide a softer and more durable fabric for clothing.

[Massacure]

53. Well we may as well turn the seed into oil rather than wasting it.

But it would be stupid to grow more than we need for paper and clothing because hemp only gives about thirty gallons of oil per acre compared to several thousand with some algaes.

Hemp has valuable properties for paper, clothing, and crop rotation; it isn't a cure all for energy though.

[LiberallyInclined]

54. what are the dangers of mosquito breeding on a large scale algae farm?

just wondering- what with all the concern around possible future avian flu pandemics, is algae farming done in such a way that mosquitos are not an issue anyway?

[Massacure]

56. Lakes usually are usually too rough for mosquito breeding.

That would be especially true on an artificial lake with equipment stirring it up constantly while harvesting the algae.

It wouldn't be any different than a regular eutrophic lake.

[LiberallyInclined]

77. i've seen a lot of algae-ridden ponds-

and there are generally lots of skeeters to be found as well

[aneerkoinos]

73. Hemp seed for food

And smoking sensimilla buds for ego-punishment and spiritual growth. Rest is fiber. To be used well.

First you nead to fuck US federal state, and let every state find the truth independently. As they are slowly doing, but constantly harrassed by the feds.

Best thing that could happen to all the world would be end of US federal state, which has become pure evil with no chance in hell anyone getting it better! Happy happy happy!

[Chicago Democrat]

90. Electric Cars

Electricity has an endless supply. The universe has an endless supply of energy that can be tunred into electricity and stored.

[robertpaulsen]

19. This is a big admission from a top government official.

I figured if anyone in OPEC would spill the beans on the coming of Peak Oil, it would be Chavez. I'm sure this will just deepen Dumbya's sense of denial and make him more determined to oust Chavez.

[hecate77]

22. Save your seeds, make gardens, learn canning

if you don't want to go broke trying to buy food. The first thing to go will be the massive food shipping infrastructure. We will probably be ok out here in California, since we grow so much food out here. I sure wouldn't want to be living in the cold country states, with long winter seasons when this hits.

Better make some greenhouses up there, as well.

It is a little too late to switch back to sane methods of shipment, like rail, since the Repugs have systematically gutted our rail system over the last umpteen years.

[lonestarnot]

69. n put some ponies in yer yard!

[BronxBoy]

88. Amen

We moved from a 100x100 lot to 3 acres and to another state just for the opportunity to grow more of our own food for a longer period of time. We have been trying to plan for a lot of this without acting paranoid. But things are getting scary

[Delphinus]

28. Peak Oil is becoming more mainstream.

I was home early today and saw Roscoe Bartlett, R-MD, on the House floor, speaking again of Peak Oil. Last night, there were various members, all Repubs if I remember rightly, talking about Peak Oil. Bartlett was on last Tuesday - too late for me to see, but there, speaking the truth that we've wasted the last 25 years.

[Coastie for Truth]

39. Bartlett - and Joe Schwarz of MI NT

[MisterP]

70. they're even doing an FX special

if it bleeds it leads, I guess

[Raster]

79. we've wasted the last 25 years???? but isn't it "morning in America"?

Didn't ronnie raygun rip Jimmy Carter's solar panels right off the roof of the White House? We don't need no stinkin' energy conservation!!!

[TrogL]

37. Glad I moved closer to work

and bought a smaller car

[Rex]

50. I'm a teacher and I live a mile away from the school.

I hope that will be some kind of job security in the years to come! Chavez is swinging Bartcop's hammer right now! Swing that ting Hue!
:headbang:

[anitar1]

81. This is nothing new.

I see it every day in one form or another. So we are in crisis. The way I am feeling--bring it on. Let;'s get it over and face the problem. The asshats won't face it until it is a hard fact. When there is nothing to fuel industry, what will they do?

[drduffy]

87. don't say 'bring it on'

until you know what peak oil will probably entail:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7203633?pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1111679935525&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.857

[Realityhack]

94. I can't afford a hybrid and the VW lupo isn't availible here :-(

I can't afford solar pannels either. I offset my CO2 emissions with a terrapass (www.Terrapass.com) but I wish there were more I could do to encourage alternative energy sorces.