more scary stuff

[solops]

I'm an engineer. I have worked in the oil and gas industry for 28 years. This column and the linked articles are really interesting. Please don't stop.

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Loser:
Additionally, he mentions 'New Energy' in a positive light. Being heavy on physics myself I've read up on this 'New Energy' and it's a bunch of bunk (I know some of you disagree, feel free to "Bring it!"). He's only mentioning this in such a light so that he can appear sympathetic to the fringers that are his target audience anyway. To me, this draws strongly away from his credibility.

This was also for me the weakest point in his arguments. However, my own little irrational voice pointed out, "So he's a kook, but that doesn't mean he's wrong about the other stuff."

Anybody know where I can get a ten year supply of emergency rations.

[TerranC]

Could anybody more educated on Energy sources tell me what that person that wrote the page loser linked to got wrong and got right? I'm trembling with curiosity, here.

[EvilGenius4ABetterTomorro]

VOICE OVER: In the future the land will become a desert, roads will become battlefields and the hope of mankinds will appear as a stranger.

ZOOM TO CLOSE UP OF A BLACK V-8 INTERCEPTOR

When the "you know what" hits the fan, I'm outta here. Everyone should have a "Bug out" kit ready to take with them when the aliens arrive with their cookbooks, or some other calamity. Not too worried about the Peak Oil thing. There is no better motivator for changing our ways of living then being forced to do it. As much a fan Iam of military power I just hope we don't continue using it to secure other countries oil resources, It's starting to get a little embarrasing. I'd rather be on the moral high ground on military force and it's uses even if it does make for great video.

[rextorres]

Whether this guys a crack pot or not is moot. Civilization's collapse - for whatever reason - is inevitable. When it happens is the real question. This guy just seems to think it's going to happen in the next 5 - 10 years.

Anyway most of the death and destruction will occur in places like china and india where there is already extreme overcrowding and they are already having trouble feeding themselves. One thing going for the US is that we are not overcrowded and we have a food production cushion.

[solops]

We are running out of hydrocarbons, but the process will be a long one. During that process there will undoubtably be shifts in global power as money flows change directions. As far as I can tell, the public hasn't a clue as to the situation, mainly because the press and politicians are so ignorant of the situation. They quite humanly see only the parts of it that directly effect them.

I Subscribed to the Wall Street Journal for many years. I particularly enjoyed the middle column of the front page which often had "in-depth" reviews of situations in industries such as publishing, leather, fresh-produce, fishing, etc. I felt like I was getting a good, "inside" picture of how the world really worked. Then they did an article on the oil & gas business. I was badly shaken by the sheer ignorance dispayed in the article. Then I realised that if the paper was that far off on MY industry, it was quite likely to be equally as wrong about the others and my "education" was so much bushwah. I let my subscription expire as I contemplated world decision-makers making laws and policy on the basis of equally flawed material prepared by well credentialled experts who hadn't a clue as to the reality of the matter...insofar as anyone can wrap their minds around such complex matters. I certainly have not seen any sensible laws or discussion in any country. The best discussions, which often have special agendas, are found in the industry's trade journals. These sources are carefully ignored by the rest of the media. The energy "news" of today was discussed a year or more ago in print in publications such as The Oil & Gas Journal or Offshore Engineer.

Sigh....

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by rextorres:
Whether this guys a crack pot or not is moot. Civilization's collapse - for whatever reason - is inevitable. When it happens is the real question. This guy just seems to think it's going to happen in the next 5 - 10 years.

Well, you certainly aren't the only one that thinks that, but I don't really see why it's inevitable. Sure change is inevitable, soceities are constantly evolving. But that doesn't neccesarily mean a total collapse of civilization is a guaranteed occurance. Something drastic like the collapse suggested here is certainly possible. But inevitable?

[Paul1980au]

You know i think improving technology levels in terms of recycling and energy efficent technologies will slow these problems i mean by banning CFCs the ozone hole is recovering. If it becomes enough of a problem science and commercial opportunities will exist and answers will be found - hydrogen energy technology is the next boom tech and combine biotech, nanotechnology and increasing computing technolgoy to run science simulations etc this will aid in improving the situations.

[Fyron]

The ozone hole was caused by a volcanic eruptions in Antarctica during the 1980s and 1990s! It was most certainly not _caused by_ our pollution. The reason why the hole has decreased in size is because the effects of the 1991 eruption of Mt Pinatubo have slowy been filtered out.

http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20...04volcano.html

http://www.theozonehole.com/ozonehole2001.htm

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/About_BA...eruptions.html

http://randalcarr.tripod.com/pinatubo/

[ February 12, 2004, 01:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[PvK]

Hmm, at those links I see links of erruptions to ozone depletion, but also:

First site (NASA):

"Climate change combined with aftereffects of large volcanic eruptions will contribute to more ozone loss over both poles," Tabazadeh said. "This research proves that ozone recovery is more complex than originally thought."

"... the early and rapid growth of the Antarctic ozone hole in the early 1980s may have been influenced in part by a number of large volcanic eruptions ..."

Second site (ozonehole.com):

"However, man-made chemicals such as CFCs or chlorofluorocarbons are now known to have a very dramatic influence on Ozone levels too. CFCs a were once widely used in aerosol propellants, refrigerants, foams, and industrial processes."

Third site (Cambridge):

"despite the provisions of the Montreal Protocol, the atmosphere will contain enough CFCs that the ozone layer will be at risk of other events of severe ozone loss at mid-latitudes for at least fifty years."

Fourth site looks to be only about volcanoes anyway.

That is, it would be easy to misinterpret what Fryon said, to think that human pollution is not a contributing cause to ozone depletion. It would seem it is a cause, in addition to volcanoes.

PvK