Quote:
Originally Posted by licker
Jim-
Do you think the tipping point has not been reached yet? What do you think the tipping point is?
I've never disagreed that taking preventative and mitigative actions are a bad thing, but I'm curious to hear about what you think can be done (not should be done, CAN be done) on a global level, and how one determines the tipping point.
Clearly many proposed actions are nonstarters for the developing world.
|
I do believe that we've been teetering close to it for some time now. As advanced as our science is, however, we can only estimate oil reserves in various regions, we can never gauge them. Sometimes they run low faster than we expected, sometimes they last longer than we expected, sometimes we drill and get nothing, and sometimes oil spurts up in someone's yard.
Honestly, I think that at a certain point, we can no longer look at the "world supply" as a whole entity with any sort of global responsibility. The problem that we are having now, and will increasingly experience, is that we are pushing closer and closer to our theoretical production limits, and demand is increasing much more quickly than development of new refineries.
I learned a long time ago, that often you cannot even rely on your best friends for help, at times. But what we are doing now, in regards to oil manufacture, is relying on our enemies for help. Besides that, a developing Russia is consuming more and more of their oil output, while China's industry continues to expand at breakneck speeds, and the US has a hard time cutting down on usage even when prices double to consumers.
This is the problem, as I see it. As the Admiral pointed out, the problem is not whether or not we are at the "tipping point" -now-, but whether or not we can have an adequate solution to the problem, by the time we reach it. It's rather impossible to say how much longer we can hold out, but it does seem that we are increasingly approaching the limit, and full saturation of demand vs supply. If we have 10 more years of oil market stability (generous? conservative? who knows?!), and it will likely take 10 years of concerted effort to move our society beyond total reliance on oil, then that means that we needed to start today, to avoid serious turmoil 10 years from now.
Now, all things being fair, I would project that critical point to come somewhere in the next 8-15 years most likely. If you would like, later I might take some time and dig up oil consumption figures, drilling estimates, etc, and refine that - but without collecting notes, or recording citations, that is the window I've seen implied indirectly by much of the data that I've come across over the last several years. And bear in mind, that 8-15 year estimate would -only- be if the world remains relatively stable in general. If Venezuela suddenly shuts its borders and stops exporting oil, for example, it could cause massive economic instability.
Also, I feel it is worth pointing out - any conversion will necessarily take some time, and not be a complete conversion immediately. There is nothing saying that we cannot implement massive scale solar+wind+etc that mostly services the south, and remain oil dependent for power in the north for a few more years. If we did manage to cut our oil consumption by 40-50% in the next decade (NOT going to happen under current plans), it would give us a lot more breathing room to hammer the rest out in an effective manner.
Also bear in mind that current PV cell costs are relative to smaller scale manufacturing efficiencies, and use of new materials. If we were to base our energy supply on solar, it would only make sense to put a lot of resources and effort into developing largely automated, on site, materials reclamation PV cell fabrication facilities. That is to say, that the amount of energy required to dismantle and recreate a solar panel is entirely insignificant to the total output over the lifespan of the panel. So there is no reason not use a fraction of that energy, to minimize the needed upkeep and replacement costs inherent in the system. With a bit of creative redesigning, it's likely that any particular material in existing top-output solar designs that is not easily recyclable, could be replaced to make the system more efficient in the long term. Even if efficiency of the panels went down 10%, or even say 20%, it would still be worth it if 100% of the material involved could be recycled, and that recycling process become largely automated.