All of modern society runs on petroleum. As soon as petroleum ends it’s peak usage modern society will end with it for there is no viable alternative energy to meet current infrastructure and global consumption.
Alternative energy cannot conquer geology or physics.
Maybe now humanity should get use to the idea that the future is one where the world makes a return to fifteenth century living standards.
Modern civilization the failed experiment. A mere blip of history.
So Renaissance Standards? Is that so Bad?
In my opinion, no.
I would like to resurrect the art of highway robbery from horseback.
Explain and defend.
I assume you mean that no alternative energy generation/distribution method can replace hydrocarbons. Why not?
Not sure what geology has to do with it.
I call Shotgun! (Do you get what i’m going for here? If not look up the origin of the phrase.)
No alternative energies can support current global populations or meet the demands of current infrastructures. Geology and physics have everything to do with it.
Sorry kid, I work alone. It is safer that way.
Lol wut
Indeed. Thank god the statists gave up on nuclear power, or they might have had a chance!
Not really. Nuclear energy does nothing for transportation.
It also comes up with too much risk of environmental contamination, breaches, and meltdowns.
Nuclear energy produces electricity, which can, and is, used for transportation. Many other fuels can do the same.
http://www.teslamotors.com/ Faust is right, all you need is the moving electrons.
In fact, the first step to “clean energy” I think would be to transfer as many energy-dependent machines as possible to work 100% on electricity.
I don’t think I can agree with you. We have bicycles now, which is very quick travel and requires no electricity, for homes there is solar and/or wind, as well as thermal in some places and hydro electric in others.
Maybe, people need to seek alternative transportation over alternative energies for transportion, but that’s a different soap box.
Also, maybe the modern human species needs a break from it’s excess.
Once peak gas or petroleum hits, could you safely convert the entire world’s infrastructure to nuclear energy safely without making it glow green worldwide?
Unlikely but considering how suicidal and destructive world governments are I have a feeling they would try anyways.
Cancel that. The world will reach fifteenth century living standards after peak petroleum only if we do not destroy ourselves and the world around us first.
Knowing how romantic technocrats rule the world and all governments they will do everything to protect modern technological continued existence even at the risk of destroying the entire world around us.
I think it would be foolish to become dependent upon any one fuel. I was not suggesting that we convert entirely to nuclear energy.
Once peak oil and gas hits worldwide what would you suggest be the energy replacement for world wide infrastructure?
Solar requires too many components be mass produced by other energy sources. It’s energy output does not come anywhere close to current infrastructure consumption.
If you live in a area where there is not much sunlight it sucks.
Wind energy takes up too much land and doesn’t meet modern energy consumption very well.
Ethanol requires a lot of agricultural land that doesn’t exist with peak top soil and is only seasonal in it’s usage.
Heavy coal usage contaminates the atmosphere and environment where it is peaking globally as well.
Hydro electricity is limiting in it’s usage and damaging to the natural environment.
However you cut the cookie there exists no alternative energies to meet the current demands and consumption of modern infrastructure that is without turning the world into a global wasteland.
I am starting to wonder if the future will be a global wasteland considering those in power will do nothing short of risking the life of the entire planet just to keep modern technological society continuing.
Why not? Modern humanity is nothing short of having technological godlieness currently?
Who wants to give that up?
I hate people who say blanket statements like that, it’s been going on for so long it gets boring. Fusion uses sea water and lithium, two substances that will last for millions of years, or “forever” in the case of seawater pretty much. Ok it’s not perfected yet but every year brings us one step closer. Not only that but only the working parts of the reactor are radioactive, meaning there is no considerable waste fuel (waste products helium and lithium) and no risk of melt down at all, even if you hit it with a 9.6 quake, in fact lithium is reused so it’s actually pretty efficient. Get out more and read about alternative energy sources and stop asserting that technology will not save us from the peak oil problem. How do you know?
Actually in some parts of the world solar is cheaper than using coal or gas, and is becoming cheaper as the systems become more efficient, near the 50% efficiency mark was recently attained in a prototype cell. Also there are new types of cells that use the photoelectric effect that can in theory provide energy from waste heat in solar cels. Not only that but cells have a lifespan of at least 10 years, and are relatively easy to replace, considering their are so many of them that if one goes down on a farm it makes little difference to the power output.
You like so many people put too much faith in technology that it strikes me as arrogant, naive, and borderline on the superstitious. Technology is our salvation! Whatever…
With peak resources coming fast there simply is no time for clinging hope in fusion energy.
I have seen so may reports on the nonviability of fusion energy that I have lost count. Chow!