What is Digg?60 Comments
- digghasnoethics, on 10/10/2007, -4/+19Its funny the way this subject always brings out the eternal optimists. In every other story people tend to assume the worst will happen, or is already happening. However in the case of peak oil we get the shrill cry of "it'll be alright" or "there's no real problem, X will fix it".
Why is that?
We know oil is a finite resource.
We know how dependent we are on it for the operation of our civilisation.
We know know we've been pulling it out of the ground for 100 years, that we have, until recently, being pulling it out faster and faster.
We know we've been discovering less and less to replace it.
We know the rate at which we can get it must peak and decline, and that this will happen soon.
In terms of problems, its the big one. High impact, high probability - no workable fixes after 20 years of looking. So why do people put on the smiley face? Is it too big, too nasty a problem? Do people believe what the government says on this, when they disbelieve everything else?
Why? - pchi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10isohunt shows that this movie is very well seeded.
- hambend, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Desperation did not save the Romans. Nor did it save the Mayans. You should be more careful when using words like "every".
Civilizations do fail, and you're foolish if you think ours is somehow invulnerable. They ride high on the back of some temporary boon like the spoils of conquest, or in our case oil. But inevitably when they run out of countries to invade or fields to drill they find themselves hopelessly overextended and locked into a lifestyle they can no longer sustain.
Both coal and nuclear are non-sustainable and can only delay the inevitable. In fact, if we drew on nuclear energy at the same rate we draw on oil we'd run out even faster. We need sustainable energy, and there's simply nothing in that range that comes close to oil.
I hate to get all "THE END OF THE WORLD IS NIGH" here, but your happy-go-lucky ass kind of struck a nerve. Maybe you're right, maybe we will find some magical source that can provide us with energy equivalent to eighty million barrels of oil per day (and rising) that never ever runs dry.
But if we can't, one way or another we WILL use less energy, either voluntarily or by dying in large numbers. Dammit, there I go again... - trevorjez, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6i have a relative who is a geologist and is paid to find oil. we talked about peak oil last time he was in town. he said it is very real. and that the oil we continue to find is harder to reach and harder to refine.
- rcran, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Saw it, kicked ass.
- frode77, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Your relative knows what he is talking about. Although there are plenty of "oil" left, for example the Alberta tar sands, peak oil is a problem of extraction rates. It's the size of the tap, not the size of the barrel that's the problem. Also, this unconventional oil take more energy to extract and refine, so it's not only more expensive, the energy return is also diminishing. In Norway, production peaked in 2000, and the last numbers that came in showed a decline rate of 16%. The UK peaked in 1999, they became a net importer in 2004. Mexico's largest field, Cantarell, which accounts for half their production has peaked and is showing double-digit decline rates. It's natural that we went for the big easy fields first, with the light sweet crude. Now we're left with the heavy sour crude and the tar sands. Global production has most likely already peaked, and will never recover. The future will not be boring, that's for sure.
- Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7"The oil is not running out, we are just not finding new oil as fast as we were."
No, we're consuming more oil than we discover. If you continue to consume a finite resource at a greater rate than you find it, you're running out. People like you 50 years ago said, at the time when the US was the largest producer of oil in the world, that the US oil reserves would last forever. Then, they dried up. Then, the North Sea wells dried up. How long before the remainder run dry? - lesty420, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5http://btjunkie.org/torrent/A-Crude-Awakening-The-Oil-Crash-2006-DVDRip-XviD-H/4324dca7e7732c80a4744b5e1d9b91611567c25bc3c1
- mt066, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5You can run it on electricity, which can run on coal or nuclear
- hambend, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I like to think I'm capable of panicking over more than one thing at once.
Anyway, I wouldn't worry. We're not going to find another energy source as abundant as oil. Once that runs out, pollution levels will drop along with everything else. That is, as long as we don't all nuke one another over the last few drops. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I have seen this movie.
Oil is finite and demand is skyrocketing, especially in India and China.
In the meantime, no new significant oil fields discovered for decades and the Saudis lie about reserves.
Will be interesting to see all you naysayers wake up when the oil runs out. - mtrip, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6You know how we all thought flying cars were the future? How naive. Bicycles are the transportation of the future, it's just a matter of time till the first world catches up with the third world in that regard. I'm thinking as soon as prices really take off.
- Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"Since when have the oil reserves in the US dried up?"
They haven't dried up once and for all, but they're almost there. US oil production peaked in the 70s and has dropped off dramatically since then. - Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Except shale oil takes more energy to produce than you get out of it, so you lose energy in the process.
- myeyesarered, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I have seen this movie month ago. It was o.k. but generally is one of those typical "documentaries" made for the American public: I shows you facts (a little bit dramatized) and tries to create the "ohhh *****" effect.
If you have a little bit knowledge about oil this movie will tell you nothing new. - Mohonri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Whether it takes more energy or less depends on the particular deposit. In Canada, there are several locations where oil is currently being recovered from shale. And there are more projects planned to continue that trend. The oil companies sure wouldn't be going after it if it wasn't economic to produce.
- Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"And while nothing has emerged as the next big thing, there are people everywhere working on it."
Except once oil hits a certain price per barrel, things will become very difficult. Imagine paying $10/gal for gas or diesel. Then imagine the impact on prices of goods that are shipped by vehicles with diesel motors.
" As this happens, motivation for an alternate source will rise faster and faster."
But those alternate sources take time to develop, and we may well run out of oil before those sources become practical. - BESTenemy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You do you know how shale rock and sand oil is extracted? They boil water in order to extract oil from the thick goo. Where do they get energy to boil water? In Alberta, where they are developing the technology they happen to be siting close to a massive natural gas deposit. They're talking of building a nuclear power plant before the gas runs out, just to be able to provide energy for the facility. Efficiency of oil sand and shale rock extraction is extremely low. It almost ends up being a conversion method, where you sacrifice energy just to convert it to gasoline at the end. It's not an energy solution - just a way to keep our cars and airplanes running on conventional fuel.
We do not have a solution to our energy problem. Only methods to delay the inevitable. - Mohonri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2First of all, we're not going to run out of oil before other sources of energy become viable. "Viable" in this sense means that they're competitive in the areas of price, convenience, energy density, etc. The viability can come from two different directions. First, oil/gas can get more expensive, and closer to the costs of the alternatives. Secondly, the alternatives can get cheaper and better, thus closing the gap themselves. We can see both of these happening now.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2OMG you fall for that CATO bs?
Do you know their history --- say, during Vietnam?!??!
wow - Mohonri, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Since when have the oil reserves in the US dried up?
There are lots more reserves out there. You can thank the numbskulls from California, Florida, and Alaska for the fact that we're so dependent on oil from the middle east. Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama sure don't seem to have suffered for having oil rigs off their shores...
BTW, the US is still the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world - stizmatic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Gotta take the space shuttle out of the clip. Space shuttle was never powered by oil.
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why are you fear mongers burying these people's comments? For crying out loud, they're PERFECTLY LOGICAL RESPONSES.
To quote Jurassic Park, "Life finds a way." It goes without saying, but if it's said by a Chaotician on Jurassic Park it must be true. - grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And delay we shall until the solutions are found.
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's only when people other than hippies do it.
- dralter, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This trailer is the best one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4TdPxOXuYw
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ahh, but according to Wikipedia, "The United States has the largest known concentration of oil shale in the world, according to the Bureau of Land Management and holds an estimated 800 gigabarrels of recoverable oil, enough to meet U.S. demand for oil at current levels for 110 years." I think the end of this thing is going to be figuring out how to extract the oil from shale more efficiently.
- macewan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1much needed as well. thanks for the tip.
- Berkana, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've watched the documentary, and honestly, they make an excellent point. We don't have to run out of oil for there to be catastrophic economic problems. The problem is that even if there is a lot of oil, if its price rises dramatically, our economies will grind to a halt. A 5% reduction in supply resulted in the oil crisis of the '70's. Imagine what would happen to a 10-20% reduction while world demand increases?
The documentary shows just how utterly dependent our infrastructure is on oil. Oil supplies will diminish in the future; there's no doubt about that. The problem is, it will take decades to transition our economy and infrastructure away from oil, and there is evidence that we might not have enough time to make the necessary changes unless we start now and act dramatically, because oil at prices that permit its widespread use will not last another decade, and in that time frame, we are short on time to make a transition while we are still able to do so on an industrial scale. - Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Except the best source of hydrogen is oil, and every other method of refining hydrogen is so energy intensive that you get less energy out than you ever put in, and that's before you start trucking it all over hell since you can't run it through a pipeline like gasoline, which also adds to the waste since you lose about 10% of the hydrogen on the trip. Then, of course, is the trillions of dollars necessary to adapt all the filling stations out there to hydrogen. Hydrogen is an idiotic solution to our energy needs.
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'll be happy when it does. Necessity is the father of invention. By then we will have developed the technologies to live without it. It will be interesting to see all you naysayers wake up when the oil runs out and no one gives a *****.
- 31073, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I did read that (on digg i believe) is there any update on the technology that would allow the extraction?
and btw I've watched enough depressing alarmist documentaries lately, i need a break. - psygnisfive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Uh, no? Oil is a finite resource. There's only so much to go around. And at some point there won't be ANY to go around, no matter how much you're willing to pay.
- xenoploid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Great topic, but it looks like a pretty amateur doc.
- frode77, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is about geology, not economics. The peak of oil discoveries was sometime around 1965, and it has been in a relentless decline ever since. Sometime during the 1980s, we started extracting more oil out of the ground, than what was discovered. How long do you think this can continue? About half the oil produced comes from around 100 giant fields. The biggest of then all, Ghawar in Saudi Arabia has been producing since 1949. The rest comes from around 10000 much smaller fields. The problems is, these giant fields are old, and most of them are in decline. Not only do we have to find new oil to make up for the decline, we also have to meet future demand, which is increasing rapidly. It's time to face some tough realities.
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's why we figure out how to reach the oil without using any oil at all... Basically a conversion of energy. Anyone want to invent a solar powered oil drill? I'd buy it.
- grinndaddy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes, but when? Land is a finite resource as well. And so is water. Conventional wisdom would tell us that crying that the sky is falling is a fool's cry. Knowing that oil will someday run out is a reason to look for and understand alternatives to oil, not a reason to freak out like this video would have you do.
His point wasn't that oil will never run out - It's that its demand will never exceed it's supply. Sure, it may get to the point that oil costs as much per graham as gold, but it will still be there. - Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It may be economically viable, but the problem is that if we lose more energy than we recover, and we lack enough sources of energy, eventually you start losing, and eventually exhaust what energy you have. No energy means no processing means no more oil.
- minoss, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Talk about fear mongering. I thought digg was against that? Or maybe it's only when politicians do it.
- tomisina, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"In fact if we drew on them we'd run out even faster"... ummm better check that fact bub. Thorium is one of the most common elements and it's easily refinable into http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium... dying in large numbers... mmm sensational scare tactics tasty
- Mohonri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1There's only so much you can put into one movie. If you include global warming in the movie, then people will complain that you didn't talk about conservation of energy. And if you include conservation of energy, then people will complain that you didn't talk about economic growth in industry X or country Y as a result of the situation. Don't take it as a deliberate exclusion of the topic.
- BuddyleeR, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I saw the movie a few weeks ago, and all in all it's packed with information. Even though most of the information you are already aware of if you pay attention to the energy crisis at all, but there are still plenty of facts and statistics in the movie that just blew me away. It's also a very well done movie, simple but informative.
- simonpainter, on 10/10/2007, -7/+8The oil is not running out, we are just not finding new oil as fast as we were. Why must everything be scare mongered before anyone will do anything about it? Why can't we just have strategic long term plans rather than 'last minute' scares and emergencies. You can't fix a problem like global warming overnight, it will take years to work out. Same with 'terrorists'. A little look at the last hundred years will show lessons on how not to piss people off and these lesson, once learned, will take years to put into practice and a generation or so to mend the damage done by those who came before us.
- BESTenemy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Oil and energy is half of our problems. American dollar value is based primarily on growing demand for oil, as it is only being traded in USD. With oil gone, dollar will no longer remain the world's reserve currency and our country will go bankrupt. There are energy alternatives, but we won't be able to afford them, as we waste our wealth on preservation of our vanishing hegemonic power instead of investing into the future.
- Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1" Some sources of oil were once unprofitable but now they are, or soon will be."
It can be profitable, but if you lose energy in the process with no way to replenish the lost energy, you eventually get to a point where you lack the energy to collect and refine the oil.
"And while nothing has emerged as the next big thing, there are people everywhere working on it."
And most of them are 50+ years out, while we may run out of oil in less time than that. - Mothrog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"First of all, we're not going to run out of oil before other sources of energy become viable."
Based on what?
"Viable" in this sense means that they're competitive in the areas of price, convenience, energy density, etc."
They can be competitive in price, but if we lose a major energy source, something has to replace it to continue production. Most alternative fuels aren't there today or on the horizon are energy carriers, not energy sources, and most of them would be wholly incapable of replacing oil. There isn't enough land out there to provide enough ethanol or biodiesel to replace oil, but these are nothing more than energy carriers. Hydrogen energy, without oil, depends on processes of extraordinarily poor efficiency to produce hydrogen. Fission based nuclear power is fine and dandy, except if we use it and nothing but fission reactor to produce power, we'll soon exhaust the fuels for those reactors too. Fusion reactors would provide near limitless power, but they're 50 odd years off. What else is out there?
"First, oil/gas can get more expensive, and closer to the costs of the alternatives."
Again, what alternatives? And how much more expensive can it get without seriously impacting life as we know it?
"Secondly, the alternatives can get cheaper and better, thus closing the gap themselves."
Within the limits of the technology. But again, price doesn't matter if there's no energy to produce the fuels to begin with. - cdegeare, on 02/24/2009, -0/+0Check out http://www.oilstats.info . There's a peak oil calculator that shows exactly how much we use. It's no surprise we're using it all up. The counter moves faster than any human could count.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Empires fall; get used to it.
- deboosher, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I've been meaning to watch this movie. I've seen it at the video store by my house for a while now, but I just haven't got around to it yet.
- sparf, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I can somewhat agree that oil is not "running out", but one must also take into consideration Diminishing Returns. To reach deposits in remote locations, we could use more oil in the act than can be justified by the gains. This, of course leads to conflicts with the local "owners" of easy to reach deposits. The fact is that all of industrialised society has bet the life savings on a horse that's going to keel over on the final lap. There IS No magic fuel to replace the raw horsepower that the petrochemical industry pushes on us, and.. well.. there's just no graceful way out of this for anybody. So we march forward without the posibility of ever changing, hopelessly hooked on fossilized sunshine.
But cheer up! It's our kids that'll have to Really deal with all this! Not us! -
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is