Population growth, China, etc.

[Admiral Valdemar]

A resource war by a strong nation against a weak one.

I don't think I adequately expressed my point. See, strong nations will surely fight resource wars, but they will not fight them against other strong nations, because even if you win the war, you'll take more damage than you get out of pillaging the loser. Nobody's going to invade Russia for their oil any time soon, for obvious reasons.

So what we're more likely to see is wars much like Iraq fought over the weaker victim's resources, with all the strong nuclear-armed countries carefully dancing around one another while the mid-sized countries scramble to become strong and nuclear-armed enough to join the dance.

That kind of context makes an all out World War Three "nukes fall, civilization dies" scenario possible, but not particularly likely, in my opinion.

Only if your definition of war covers soldiers and bombs. We're already fighting over resources with Russia and China, and it will get worse. Only a fool thinks he can fight off the rest of the world with brute force, which is why the Chicoms and Russians aren't trying to rival American firepower, but surpass their economic grasp. Which is where the fight has been intensifying as of late, and the Americans aren't as fit here as they would be in a straight up conventional war.

You don't seriously think we're going to share these vital resources, do you? It's as simplistic a view as thinking I meant America would literally waste petroleum in order to... get petroleum by marching on every oil rich state or, hilariously, nuking people and expecting to carry on regardless. Sure, they're doing some of that in Iraq now, but that wasn't the intention, as Mike pointed out. Best laid plans and all that jazz. It's those "unknown unknowns" that can lead to a proper conflict, otherwise it's easier to buy out your competitor, or if you can't and they're able to be conquered with an appreciably high energy return on energy invested, then invade.

Yes. Look, I am not saying this is anything better than a horrible prospect. But I'm not as certain as you are that it's going to be transcendently worse than other eras in history that civilization survived, that many individuals survived, and that we in the history books look back on as "wow, glad I'm not living then" rather than "this is when it all came to an end."

So? Where did I say it would be worse than the past? It may be the same as the past, which by the way, IS a nightmare.

Put it this way. Every First Worlder (one could say it applies to even the more impoverished states around, like Pakistan or most of Africa too) has been living, relatively, like an emperor compared to mediaeval peasants. The loss of cheap, abundant energy, which has fuelled world growth for over two centuries will return many people to the way of life they would've had pre-industrial revolution. Now you tell me how you'd feel being taken from a seat of privilege and thrown into the gutter. Try telling the people who have seen our way of life, not as a blip in the grand scheme of human history, but as something they expect from now on, that they're getting it no worse than others before them have had.

That is where the problems are. Everyone is used to having TVs, one or two cars, suburban McMansions, highspeed Internet, weekly grocery shops at Wal*Mart etc. I've already experienced first hand what happens when you remove that safety net, if only for two weeks. Ordinary people panic and the MI5 mantra of "Society is only ever three meals away from anarchy" rings true.

I don't need to be right about Mad Max FER REAL!!1! or any of that crap. I just need to show that global energy is getting a) more expensive; b) starting to decline and c) that economic growth and living standards are directly tied to these things. That the world's worst recession happened to occur around the same time energy and food hit historic price spikes isn't a coincidence. It's a symptom of a system that has played itself out and is now crumbling. It will mean major life changes are made and discomfort that will, more than likely, lead to rash geo-political and social changes, but that's what makes life so interesting, no?

We've squandered the inheritance. Now it's time to work for our living.

[Simon_Jester]

Only if your definition of war covers soldiers and bombs.

Yeah, I know, because that's the kind of war that ends in "nukes fall, everyone dies."

That is the only outcome I feel even faintly confident in saying is more extreme than what the 21st century collapse will cause. Anything less horrible than that could quite easily happen; I do not intend to deny it. For that to happen... I think things would have to stretch a bit. Still definitely possible, but one of the low-order probabilities.

So? Where did I say it would be worse than the past? It may be the same as the past, which by the way, IS a nightmare.

You know, I could be saying it without actually intending to contradict you...

I mean, that is a possibility worth considering, you know?

[Admiral Valdemar]

Yeah, I know, because that's the kind of war that ends in "nukes fall, everyone dies."

That is the only outcome I feel even faintly confident in saying is more extreme than what the 21st century collapse will cause. Anything less horrible than that could quite easily happen; I do not intend to deny it. For that to happen... I think things would have to stretch a bit. Still definitely possible, but one of the low-order probabilities.

I'm hoping if that has to happen, it's a damn long way from now. Even the energy drop off I hope is a long way from now, or if it's now, at a slow start rate before ramping up. One can hope.

]You know, I could be saying it without actually intending to contradict you...

I mean, that is a possibility worth considering, you know?

Perhaps. It doesn't change that many people will do all they can to carry on with BAU anyway, since what we live like now is all they've known and all they expect to know. It couldn't possibly be analogous to having a lump sum in your bank account you dipped into all this time, and now find exhausted while you still have a piss poor McJob. Since many people think living from credit card to credit card is somehow sane, I await with some eagerness the reality check they'll get when TSHTF, I confess.

[Simon_Jester]

I'm hoping if that has to happen, it's a damn long way from now. Even the energy drop off I hope is a long way from now, or if it's now, at a slow start rate before ramping up. One can hope.

Well, an energy dropoff almost has to be slow to start; it's not like you wake up one morning, check the fridge, and find out that somebody took the last carton of oil in the middle of the night.

At a guess:

We're going to be looking at a gradual, steady decline in production, at which point prices go from "supply and demand" regime to a "charge what the market will bear" scarcity regime. So prices go through the roof and people start panicking and funding alternatives a lot harder. Certain areas (like commercial air travel) will crash in a hurry because they're fuel-intensive and can't afford a bidding war for petroleum products against other industries; others will hold out longer.

I'd expect to see something like what happened a few years ago, when gas prices in the US "suddenly" shot up to around 4$ a gallon, only more so, and not going away. Getting worse with time, in fact.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Well, an energy dropoff almost has to be slow to start; it's not like you wake up one morning, check the fridge, and find out that somebody took the last carton of oil in the middle of the night.

Well, quite. What I mean by a rapid crash, is where the decline is over several percent. Recent reports are putting the decline rate, globally, at around 8-11%. If that's the case, then NO amount of renewables will replace what we're losing, since not even new megaprojects in oil can keep us at present rates, nevermind grow our output. If that becomes the case, then our economy will be spending pretty much all it can just keeping the current game going, with little to spare in transition expenditure.

This, by the way, is geological decline as an average. It doesn't include declines in exports as a country tries to keep itself stocked, rather than other buyers. So you could easily see double digit decline rates from some nations (like as happened to Indonesia and the UK and now with Mexico).

At a guess:

We're going to be looking at a gradual, steady decline in production, at which point prices go from "supply and demand" regime to a "charge what the market will bear" scarcity regime. So prices go through the roof and people start panicking and funding alternatives a lot harder. Certain areas (like commercial air travel) will crash in a hurry because they're fuel-intensive and can't afford a bidding war for petroleum products against other industries; others will hold out longer.

I'd expect to see something like what happened a few years ago, when gas prices in the US "suddenly" shot up to around 4$ a gallon, only more so, and not going away. Getting worse with time, in fact.

Remember, you need to keep the current system going to fuel transition. You can't make wind turbines or PV cells without fossil fuels, so you need to account for this cost on top of ones you already have, unless there are usage quotas or enforced efficiency gains.