Cruising and the Coming Storm ~ Recession, Depression, Climate Change, Peak Oil

[Cottontop]

Originally Posted by stevensuf

I worked out in the 90s peak oil would be around 2007-2015 given the numbers provided in the early 90s, taking todays published numbers pushes that to around 2042 ish. No huge discoveries in between, something is not right!
.

Well, you got it wrong inthe 90s, and you're wrong again today.

We long ago used up all the $1 per barrel oil. And we've used up the $20 per barrel oil. We've used up most of the $40 per barrel oil.

But there's lots of $100 per barrel oil out there, and at $200 per barrel, it's hard to imagine ever running out.

But not to worry. Solar is coming. The US added more solar capacity than conventional capacity last year. Panel efficiency keeps increasing, with big gains in sight, and batteries are improving rapidly. I expect China and India to mostly leapfrog petroleum and go to solar.

Projecting the future based on the status quo is always a mistake. Expect change.

[Trim50]

Originally Posted by Cottontop

Projecting the future based on the status quo is always a mistake. Expect change.

Really? Show me the numbers and how exactly we will get to a full base load on solar alone. Even if we build a new nuclear plant every year starting today, we won't be able to keep up with increasing supply demand and reduction in oil reserves.

Here are some numbers to consider...
Energy Balance: A Slim Chance for Solar Energy?

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Trim50

Really? Show me the numbers and how exactly we will get to a full base load on solar alone. Even if we build a new nuclear plant every year starting today, we won't be able to keep up with increasing supply demand and reduction in oil reserves.

Here are some numbers to consider...
Energy Balance: A Slim Chance for Solar Energy?

If it was purely based on solar, I would agree with you.Reality is as oil prices rise, alternatives become viable (oil beats just about everything based on price even at $100/barrel). When you add solar, wind, biofuels, improved efficency, etc..., it takes care of itself.

[a64pilot]

Issue is pretty simple I believe, right now the cheapest energy there is comes from fossil fuels, when that changes you will see other means of energy coming on strong as they will make economic sense, and maybe you will see fewer SUV's etc. as energy costs rise, now the payback for efficiency just isn't there.
We all see how it's possible to make a cruising boat almost energy independent, then why wouldn't it be even easier for a house that doesn't have to be able to move?

[Trim50]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

it takes care of itself.

It will not take care of it self and here is why....

Consider these numbers rather than just energy...the Earth's ability to sustain the human population which is projected to reach 10 billion in the next 80 years.

Biocapacity is shorthand for biological capacity, which is the ability of an ecosystem to regenerate useful biological materials (resources) and to absorb wastes generated by humans.

The Global Hectare (gha) is a common unit that quantifies the biocapacity of the earth. One global hectare measures the average productivity of all biologically productive areas (measured in hectares) on earth in a given year. Examples of biologically productive areas include cropland, forests, and fishing grounds; they do not include deserts, glaciers, and the open ocean. "Global hectare per person" refers to the amount of biologically productive land and water available per person on the planet.

There were ~ 12 billion hectares of biologically productive land and water on this planet in 2008. Dividing by the number of people alive in that year (6.7 billion) gives 1.79 global hectares per person. This assumes that no land is set aside for other species that consume the same biological material as humans.

The planet has an upper bound limit, and we actually already surpassed it. In fact, we are reducing its capacity to support life, and almost every life-supporting system on the planet is in a state of decline. The math is simple: the world biocapacity is ~ 12 billion gha. Americans use 7 each. We are 7 billion. If we all lived like them we would need 4 planets. If we consumed 1 gha each, there could be 12 billion of us. Considering that the population is expected to stabilise at 9-10 billion, it is an achievable goal, but we have to re-think the way we live. If we can manage to increase efficiency, and live with less usage of resources, we can fit even 20 or 30 billion, but the gha per capita has to decrease proportionally.

Sources
http://www.wwf.org.uk/what_we_do...
https://www.quora.com/Ecology/Is-the...ation-on-Earth
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/


http://www.footprintnetwork.org/...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco...

[a64pilot]

It will take care of itself, just not maybe in a manner that pleases us is all.

[Cottontop]

Originally Posted by Trim50

Really? Show me the numbers and how exactly we will get to a full base load on solar alone. Even if we build a new nuclear plant every year starting today, we won't be able to keep up with increasing supply demand and reduction in oil reserves.

Here are some numbers to consider...
Energy Balance: A Slim Chance for Solar Energy?

The article you cite proves my point. Written 10 years ago, the author assumes 10% panel efficiency will persist, but in fact panel efficiencies have doubled since then, and a further doubling has been achieved in labs. He is dismissive of lithium, but Elon Musk is betting $5 billion the author is wrong.

Even with all that, the author calculates that 113,000 km2 would be required to produce the world's electricity with solar. He acts like that's a big number, but it's really almost trivial. That amount of space would get lost in the Sahara, the American southwest, or the Gobi.

How much land in the world is devoted to ethanol production? About 100,000 km2. All we have to do is replace the corn with solar panels. (I know, overly simplistic)

Malthusians have always been with us; doom and gloom sells. But until now, they have always been wrong.

[a64pilot]

As energy gets more expensive, it will will mandate conservation by the common person, they won't be able to afford it any other way. And conservation isn't that hard really, I am certain that I could cut my energy expenditure by 50% and not hurt my standard of living by much, but right now it's cheaper not to conserve, efficiency comes at a $ cost. I'm talking my land based standard, same goes for water conservation.
How much water do most of us use on our boats, why can't we do the same on land? Heck just eliminating flush toilets would cut down on water use enormously.

[Trim50]

I have 800 watts of solar panels on my boat...1 year old and estimated to be 16.5% efficient. The fact is, solar panels DO NOT achieve lable efficiency and they fade 20-30% in the first year. At the equator I was able to get 200Whrs in a single day from my 800 watts of panels....those are real world numbers. The fact remains that it required more energy to produce, package, ship and install those panels than they have produced in the first year of operation.

[woodguy]

I love this picture.

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by dana-tenacity

Then I found this:

The U.S. ranks 46th in freedom of the press
The U.S. ranks 26th in child well-being
The U.S. ranks 24th in literacy
The U.S. ranks 14th in education
The U.S. ranks 44th in health care efficiency
The U.S. ranks 2nd in ignorance
The U.S. ranks 19th in perceived honesty
he U.S. ranks 27th in leisure and personal care
The U.S. ranks 134th in prevalence of slavery
The U.S. ranks 99th in peacefulness
The U.S. ranks 1st in locking people up
The U.S. ranks 24th in freedom from corruption
The U.S. ranks 15th in perceived press freedom
The U.S. ranks 10th in economic freedom
The U.S. ranks 10th in purchasing power of minimum wage
The U.S. ranks 125th in GDP growth per capita
The U.S. ranks 43rd in homicide rates
The U.S. ranks 17th in educational performance
The U.S. ranks 1st in death by violence
The U.S. ranks 1st in breast augmentation

https://rankingamerica.wordpress.com/page/2/

So does that describe a society in decline?

If you are permitted to make up statistics on can of course prove anything...


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[lonesoldier0408]

The scarcity of resources will maintain the status quo in the battle of the haves and the have not's.
The planet will be here long after we're gone.

In the meantime we will be used to fight and protect the rights of the haves to exploit any resources they choose. Until the day that we're deemed suitable as a petroleum replacement. Needless to say, this doesn't work out so well for the have-not's. Remember the gas chambers were ran by those, "Just doing my job."

I'll not change my decision to protect those that I can, however I realized my row boat is only so big.

In the end, the fuel alternatives all seem to start with a fossil fuel. It's the length of time they produce power and how many barrels of fossil fuels not consumed during the period of alternative fuel use which will determine viability. Anything saved will only increase my financial security, even if it's only a mental comfort, as what is saved here is usually spent there. :what:

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by CarlF

Income tax rates are a fraction of the 90% back then.
.

Ummm...........Really?

[oldragbaggers]

Originally Posted by CarlF

Compared to 1961 in the US life expectancy is about 8 years longer. The percent in poverty is much lower. We are much healthier and wealthier in our old age.

Increased life expectancy and health are not synonymous. We just have drugs and therapies that can keep people living with their pain and disease for a lot longer.... but healthier, I think not.

In 1960 only 0.91 percent of the U.S. population (1.58 million people) had diabetes. In 2012 it was 9.3% of the population (29.1 million people), an 800% increase. Of that number about a quarter million of those with Type II diabetes are under the age of 20. Type II diabetes in children was virtually unheard of in the 1960's.

Obesity is epidemic. A recent report stated that in the U.S. alone last year there were 108 million people spending a whopping 20 billion on diet programs. All that excess poundage rarely comes without health problems connected to it. I would dare say that were it not for all of the health problems that come with obesity a lot of people would be very content to remain overweight rather than to subject themselves to the misery and expense of diet programs.

In the United States approx. 78 million people, about one out of every 3, has high blood pressure and only 53% of people have it under control.

Drs are putting stents in patients' hearts daily, over half a million per year. We needs drugs to keep our hearts pumping, and other drugs to keep them from pumping too hard, drugs so we can make it through an hour without needing a bathroom and drugs to have sex. It's not a reflection of our glowing good health that the global pharmaceutical revenues are $300 BILLION per year, or that the platform that got our current president elected was based on everyone's fear of not having adequate health coverage.

We may be living longer, but that has absolutely nothing to do with robust good health. The statistics say just the opposite.

Maybe cruisers have a different perception because cruisers as a lot may be healthier than the norm due to the lifestyle. Perhaps being exposed more to people in the cruising community rather than being surrounded by people for whom their doctor visits and myriad of medications are the hot topic of most any day gives a somewhat slanted idea of the general condition of most people. Robustly healthy, slim, trim, vibrant 70-80 year olds may be common in the cruising community, and if they are then I am exceedingly happy to hear it, but I don't think that reflects the reality in the rest of society.

[Trim50]

Originally Posted by oldragbaggers

We may be living longer, but that has absolutely nothing to do with robust good health. The statistics say just the opposite.

Well said.

I agree that being a cruiser distorts our view of what's happening in the rat race. We live among the healthy few and live a lower stress lifestyle. Our greatest concerns are weather and whether or not Skype will work today so we can talk with the grand kids. Our primary medications are G&Ts at sunset and fresh ground morning coffee.